Miscellany: 12/31/14

Quote of the Day
If you understand, things are as they are. 
If you do not understand, things are as they are.
Gensha, Zen Master

Image of the Day

Via Libertarian Catholic

Chart of the Day: State/Local Operating Deficit Trend

Courtesty of watchdog.org

Big Brother Claims We Must Ban Gambling to Protect the Integrity of Sports



Just Imagine If the Cops Caught Me Dancing in the Street





Texas vs. Rest of US Post-Recession Job Growth

I've been somewhat silent about recent revision reports hyping annualized growth at a vigorous 5% clip in the third quarter, robust consumer confidence, an uptick in hiring, a declining deficit relative to GDP, collapsing energy prices which are the equivalent of an energy-based tax cut--shouldn't  I simply declare victory or, worse, declare Obama an economic success story?  No. Let me point out that we have a decades-old labor force participation rate, we have record high food stamp enrollment, and much of the recovery has been, e.g., in the health, energy, and financial sectors. I could quibble with some of the adjustments. Clearly the news could be worse than they are, but are they sustainable? A strong dollar and struggling global trading partners suggests that we can't depend on stronger export numbers, and the oil shale revolution, which has recently doubled production from Texas, is taking a heavy toll from the sharp oil correction over the past few weeks. We will likely see production cuts by the spring and summer, which will moderate any job growth in the oil patch. Whereas Texas has a diverse economy which has accounted for much post-recession growth (see Carpe Diem chart below), it will likely take a hit over the coming year (speaking as a former Houston resident who lived through an oil recession).



Facebook Corner

(Cato Institute). "Fully ending the embargo is a strategy more likely to increase freedom and to discourage the delusion that the United States can determine Cuba’s fate."
We need to stop viewing win-win trade and diplomacy as a "surrender" to despots. It is time for the US to call the bluff of the Cuban Communists, which have been using the excuse of the embargo to scapegoat their massive Statist failures. Trade liberalization in China has not simply improved the lot of party members but has brought hundreds of millions out of poverty. It is time for the US to show moral leadership throughout the Americas and not bully other nations with intimidating military and economic tactics.

(Cato Institute). "A single mother with two children who increases her hourly earnings from the Illinois minimum wage of $8.25 to $12 only sees her net income increase by less than $400...This parent would have to increase her earnings all the way to $38 an hour in order to replace the lost benefits and achieve the same standard of living...In 34 states, the parent would have to earn well above the minimum wage to achieve the same standard of living she had when not working."
it's not welfare for folks that don't make enought, it's welfare for businesses that don't pay enough.
Fascist OP trolls should keep their economically illiterate views to themselves. This anti-business ideological nonsense is frankly counterproductive; businesses, unlike the government monopoly, engages in voluntary transactions. It is difficult to believe a more economically perverse policy than to tax productivity, savings and investment; to layer globally noncompetitive high progressive tax rates on top of that is extraordinarily confused; arguing that not many businesses pay that is totally irrelevant; the point is that the layered tax cut is an additional business cost which deters maximizing production. The fact is that tax revenues have often increased to more than make up the difference in lowered rates. (The troll doesn't understand, for instance, why France is quietly dropping its 75% income tax on high earners; among other things, the related revenues don't even make a down payment on an increasing national deficit.)

The way you get away from corrupt, convoluted tax codes is TO SHRINK THE GOVERNMENT, and replace the fascist carrots and sticks of trying to manipulate the economy with low, consistent tax rates (more on the consumption than the production side) and the competitive, transparent marketplace. But stop trying to rationalize the morally contemptible doctrine of stealing even more from the economically successful.

(Reason). Until police learn to accept that criticism of specific policies and actions doesn't constitute a mortal insult, they will continue to have problems maintaining public support.
Gillespie is spot on. Police protesters are not "more equal" than civilian ones. When you hold a position of public trust, you are subject, in fact, to a higher level of behavior. (As the firstborn of 7, I was held to a higher standard by my parents; while playing sports as a youth, I often heard opposing players trying to pull my chain, saying things about my family members. Shouldn't we expect the police, who possess lethal weapons, to maintain at least the comparable level of maturity and discipline? As a former university professor, I've had to deal with all sorts of student disrespect over the years, including an actual temper tantrum during lecture. One has to respond to challenging circumstances professionally.)

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Glenn McCoy via Townhall

Musical Interlude: Christmas 2014

NOTE: This is the last performance for this year's annual holiday series. With the next post, I'll resume my Glen Campbell retrospective.

Auld Lang Syne

Miscellany: 12/30/14

Quote of the Day
No man's life, liberty or property are safe while the legislature is in session.
Judge Gideon J. Tucker

Google knows it's the blogger's birthday:
awesome yet creepy

Chart of the Day

Courtesy of Mercatus Center

I, Nutella via Independent Institute

Image of the Day

Via Libertarian Catholic

Rant of the Day:  Overdue American Criminal Justice Reform by The Economist

The store camera tells a harrowing tale. John Crawford was standing in a Walmart in Ohio holding an air rifle—a toy he had picked off a shelf and was presumably planning to buy. He was pointing it at the floor while talking on his phone and browsing other goods. The children playing near him did not consider him a threat; nor did their mother, who was standing a few feet away. The police, responding to a 911 caller who said that a black man with a gun was threatening people, burst in and shot him dead. The children’s mother died of a heart attack in the ensuing panic. In September a grand jury declined to indict the officers who shot Mr Crawford.

Bits of America’s criminal-justice system are exemplary—New York’s cops pioneered data-driven policing, for instance—but overall the country is an outlier for all the wrong reasons. It jails nearly 1% of its adult population, more than five times the rich-country average. A black American man has, by one estimate, a one in three chance of spending time behind bars. Sentences are harsh. Some American states impose life without parole for persistent but non-violent offenders; no other rich nation does. America’s police are motivated to be rapacious: laws allow them to seize assets they merely suspect are linked to a crime and then spend the proceeds on equipment. And, while other nations have focused on community policing, some American police have become paramilitary, equipping themselves with grenade launchers and armoured cars. The number of raids by heavily armed SWAT teams has risen from 3,000 a year in 1980 to 50,000 today, by one estimate.

Above all, American law enforcement is unusually lethal: even the partial numbers show that the police shot and killed at least 458 people last year. By comparison, those in England and Wales shot and killed no one.

Statistics That Pope Francis and Other "Progressives" Don't Know

• In 2012 alone, average factory wages in China rose 14 percent. In manufacturing, specifically, worker wages have increased 71 percent since 2008. Over the last thirty years, Chinese families living in extreme poverty dropped [by 680 million people] from 84 percent to under 10 percent.
• A study by Yale University and the Brookings Institution finds that in just 30 years - 1981 to 2011 - the world's population living below the extreme poverty line plummeted from 52 percent to 15 percent. The study credits the rise of globalization [international trade] and capitalism as primary drivers of the decline in poverty.

Locavorism: Protectionist Propaganda

I've always loved red crunchy seedless grapes (although I now have to limit fruit consumption for health reasons); years ago, I remember just buying a batch of imported Chilean grapes at the local supermarket when a big fear-mongering story broke out (maybe it was the 1989 scare). The local newcasts tipped us off we could return our product for refund at our local supermarkets. I had no intention of returning my delicious grapes, but I was halfway hoping (to no avail) that my market would have marked down their remaining produce--the shelves had already been cleared. There had been a tip allegedly of two tainted grapes bound for export, but the panic ended up costing thousands of agriculture sector jobs and a $400M hit to Chile's economy.

Locavorism is a movement that hypes the purchase and consumption of local vs. globally produced foods for a variety of reasons (sustainability, less carbon footprint, taste/freshness, local economy boost, etc.) I'm mostly annoyed at the sham rationale for protectionist policy; mercantilism is a lose-lose policy, and it has the impact of increasing one's food costs and thus lowering one's standard of living. This Daily Beast article does a good job of debunking a variety of hyped claims, but their discussion of economic claims is spot on:

Long-distance trade historically has allowed producers the world over the opportunity to specialize in the crops and livestock for which their local area is best suited, resulting in significant improvements in the volume, quality, and affordability of global food production. But local food activists bemoan the fact that purchasing nonlocal items benefits the distant headquarters of large retailers, shipping companies, and mega-corporate farms, whereas money spent on local products would create more hometown jobs as nearby farmers patronize local businesses.

Purchasing more-expensive local items, however, leaves less money in peoples’ pockets. Other producers of other products suffer lower sales as a result. Consumers may have fewer resources available to purchase goods and services other than food made wholly or partly in the locavores’ community. Higher prices always and everywhere mean greater poverty and a lower standard of living for all.

Locavores are further oblivious to the fact that no sustained economic development has ever occurred without significant urbanization, for cities provide a host of economic benefits ranging from a transportation hub to a wide array of suppliers and skills. Urban agglomerations have also always been essential for agricultural advances by offering large and concentrated markets for rural goods. Unfortunately for locavores, as Plato observed in his Republic over two millennia ago, to find a city “where nothing need be imported” has long been “impossible.” If adopted on a large scale, locavorism can only re-create the misery inherent to subsistence agriculture.

No Beer Ice Cream For You!

From Reuters: a political leader even less popular than Obama:

An ice-cream store, Coromoto ice-cream store in the highland town of Merida, listed in the Guinness World Records book for its 863 different flavours ranging from beer to beans has become the latest victim of Venezuela's economic crisis: "We are closed during the season due to shortage of milk."

Venezuelans have been suffering acute shortages of basic goods, from toilet-paper to spare tires, all year due to an economic slowdown, the highest inflation in the Americas, and the impact of strict currency controls.

President Nicolas Maduro's socialist government says foes in Venezuela's opposition and wealthy elite are exacerbating economic problems by hoarding and price-gouging in what he terms an "economic war" against him.

The shortages have annoyed Venezuelans across the political spectrum and contributed to a fall in Maduro's popularity, with one prominent local pollster putting him on 24 percent approval.

 TSA: Federal Panty Raid?

From Abigail Hall of Independent Institute:

This Christmas I flew out of town with my fiancé to see his family. Since we’d be out of town for several days, I checked a bag with the airline. As I went to my bag to retrieve some things before bed, I was greeted by a note from the TSA. The paper stated that my bag had been searched as a part of necessary “security” precautions. I realized some things were missing from my luggage. Those things were my underwear.

In total, a report on TSA theft obtained through the Freedom of Information Act found that the TSA fired over 400 employees for theft between 2002 and 2011. I’ve written elsewhere about problems with the TSA. Not only does the TSA violate your individual liberties every time you fly, it has also failed to catch a single terrorist since it was formed in 2001.

Facebook Corner

(IPI). A group of Chicago unions, including AFSCME Council 31 and the Chicago Teachers Union, have sued the city over a recent attempt to reform two of the city’s four pension funds, effectively locking in bankruptcy for city-employee pension systems.
The bottom line, and I wish IPI would make this clearer, is that the distributions are, and have been unsustainable for some time. Past and current retirees have been hollowing out the reserves, due to corrupt dealings between unions and Democrat officials. And if you think things are bad now, underfunded after Fed policy has pumped up stock values, just wait until a market correction of 20-30% or more.

Let's be clear: there will be no federal bailout of special-interest pension funds. And even Illinois' crazy justice system cannot enforce infeasible future bailouts of unrealistic distributions; I'm not a lawyer, but I don't believe the employees/retirees are entitled to more than their vested/accrued contributions (including employer-matched contributions).
Isn't this article a little like the tail wagging the dog? What happened to the money? Who misappropriated the funds? Not the teachers, not the unions. The teachers paid in their share. What happened to the other 75 cents on the dollar? It's easy to bash the unions, why not going to another level and find out what happened to the money. Wait, nobody wants to work as hard as the teachers who are on the verge of losing the type of pension they had planned for throughout their careers. I'm very disappointed in you Illinois Policy.
So many of the public parasites are mathematically illiterate. No, you did not kick in your "fair share" of a million-dollar plus distribution over potentially 30 or more years of retirement. Even multi-millionaires who paid maximum into social security claim a maximum distribution of under $30K/year. The last statistics I've seen is employees' contributions amount to about 20 months of retirement benefits; assuming an employer match, that's just over 3 years; there is no pension system other than maybe Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme to provide returns to bridge the gap.

Let's be clear: you are not asking for your "fair share"'; you are demanding future generations of taxpayers, with their own bills to pay--including public services--to make up the difference due to unrealistically high distributions and gross underfunding of these corrupt promises between crony unionists and their bought-for Democrat political whores.

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of the original artist via IPI

Courtesy of Bob Gorrell via Townhall

Musical Interlude: Christmas 2014

Kenny G, "Winter Wonderland"

Miscellany: 12/29/14

Quote of the Day
He who thinketh he leadeth and hath no one following him is only taking a walk.
Anonymous

Rant of the Day: Phil Coelho and Jim McClure on the Minimum Wage
HT Don Boudreaux

Minimum wages are extraordinarily damaging to the most disadvantaged of society — the physically and mentally handicapped, the poorly educated, the young and unskilled and those with checkered histories that make them questionable employees. The road to perdition is paved with both good intentions and ignorance; the economics profession has been willful in its ignorance by concentrating on the marginal consequences of increasing minimum wages rather than emphasizing the continuing harm that minimum wages create.
 
Starbucks’ Howard Schultz and other men of good will unthinkingly embrace the belief that higher living standards can be legislated by simply putting floors on wages. This does not create prosperity; it creates poverty and misery. Even worse, the damages it does are concentrated upon society’s most vulnerable. This is a sin.

Chart of the Day

Via Mises.org

Via the Milton Friedman group on FB

Image of the Day

Via Lew Rockwell #sarcasm

Rhode Island Supreme Court Strikes a Blow Against Freedom of Conscience: Thumbs DOWN!

Somewhat over a decade ago, a couple of Catholic firefighters, over their religious objections, were ordered by their Providence managers to drive a firetruck in a Gay Pride parade. The judges paid short shrift to the religious liberty issue and considered the patently political nature of event participation to be a legitimate work task.

Geraghty's Rant on the Police Disrespecting de Blasio At Public Events: Thumbs DOWN!

I have little tolerance for the public displays of disrespect by professionals; as a military brat and a former officer myself, I knew to control my emotions and maintain a professional demeanor, even when I had to defer to superior officers who were jerks; I did so to respect military protocol. I'm sure other military veterans have had similar experiences; turning our backs would have been prosecuted by the military.

Over the weekend, I republished a comment I think I made in a Drudge thread on the police reaction to a de Blasio appearance; many Drudge threads result in hundreds of comments which would take several minutes to scan, but I did seem to me to me that I was the only recent commenter taking exception to the collective demonstration of officer disrespect for the mayor.

When I got this morning's Morning Jolt email from Geraghty, I halfway wondered if he was responding to my Drudge comment when I read his title: "Just What Is the ‘Appropriate’ Way for Police to React to Mayor de Blasio?" It seems to be clearly mocking those of us who believe what the police did was inappropriate, but if you read the piece, he was referring to recent comments by well-known New Yorkers:

NYPD Commissioner William Bratton, Sunday:

NYPD Commissioner William Bratton said it was “very inappropriate” for police officers to turn their backs to video screens showing Mayor Bill de Blasio speaking at an officer’s funeral Saturday.

Rudy Giuliani, Sunday:

Giuliani said, “The mayor is not in any way to be treated with people turning their backs. It doesn’t matter whether you like the mayor or you don’t like the mayor, you have to respect the mayor’s position.”

The reader can read the columnist's rant: basically, his point of view is that you should cut the cops a lot of slack in terms of how they process their grief in the loss of colleagues, and he tries to blame de Blasio for what he believes were accusations of racism in the NYPD in comments following the Garner homicide, unduly disrespectful and triggering a reciprocal response.

No, Jim, I'm not buying your pathetically weak excuses for unprofessional behavior by the cops. If and when the mayor appears on behalf of all the citizens of New York City to pay tribute to an officer slain on duty, what the police should do is listen to him respectfully, not use a solemn occasion to play politics. They don't have to like de Blasio (whom I despise as a pathetic incompetent "progressive") but they should model professional behavior and not react disagreeably, hold their tongue; there's a time and place to exercise one's personal opinion--it's not at a public event.

I've become more and more disenchanted with most recent National Review threads; there are occasional voices of reason, like Delgado:

Imagine if I were to tell you there is a large group of government employees, with generous salaries and ridiculously cushy retirement pensions covered by the taxpayer, who enjoy incredible job security and are rarely held accountable even for activities that would almost certainly earn the rest of us prison time. When there is proven misconduct, these government employees are merely reassigned and are rarely dismissed. The bill for any legal settlements concerning their errors? It, too, is covered by the taxpayers. Their unions are among the strongest in the country. No, I’m not talking about public-school teachers.I’m talking about the police.
For decades, conservatives have served as stalwart defenders of police forces. But it’s time for conservatives’ unconditional love affair with the police to end; respecting good police work means being willing to speak out against civil-liberties-breaking thugs who shrug their shoulders after brutalizing citizens.

On Thursday in Staten Island, an asthmatic 43-year-old father of six, Eric Garner, died after a group of policemen descended on him, placing him in a chokehold while attempting to arrest him for allegedly selling cigarettes. A bystander managed to capture video in which Garner clearly cries out, “I can’t breathe!” Even after releasing the chokehold (chokeholds, incidentally, are prohibited by NYPD protocol), the same officer then proceeds to shove and hold Garner’s face against the ground, applying his body weight and pressure on Garner, ignoring Garner’s pleas that he cannot breathe. Worse yet, new video shows at least eight officers standing around Garner’s lifeless, unconscious body.

It's gotten to the point that my patience and civility is sorely tested by any cop apologist who refuses to concede that in this constitutional system the cop is not the judge, jury, and executioner; his job is to ensure the suspect has his day in court. In no case is it necessary or reasonable to render a citizen unconscious over an allegation of selling loose cigarettes. I'm sick and tired of people trying to blame the victim's health for Garner's death, when there would have been no death without using unnecessary tactics that anyone with a modicum of common sense would know put an obese man's life at risk.What may be even worse is a half dozen cops standing around and watching a fellow cop kill a citizen, the blue wall of silence, putting the brotherhood over constitutional duties to serve and protect.

Reason's Nanny of the Year 2014



Facebook Corner

(Reason). According to the latest poll data, Jeb Bush is now the preferred Republican presidential candidate. Despair, ye foes of monarchy.
As a pro-liberty conservative Catholic who, along with Tom Woods and others, has had no problem disagreeing with Pope Francis' economic illiterate views in his recent exhortation, I am somewhat amused this pseudo-issue, reflecting a totally bigoted and shallow anti-Catholicism, continues to resurface. Four of my younger siblings married non-Catholics, and three of those in-laws have converted to Catholicism over the tenure of their marriages (and the other sibling's 6 children have been raised Catholic). Latinos, like Franco-Americans, identify strongly with the Catholic faith, and Jeb Bush's wife is a Latina.

The Church's teachings and authority are strictly limited to matters of faith and morals and do not extend to politics. In fact, 5 of the SCOTUS justices are Roman Catholic, and despite unambiguous Church teachings against elective abortion and for indissoluble traditional marriage between a man and a woman, this hasn't resulted in SCOTUS rulings consistent with Church teachings.

How many times are we going to go through this nonsense on the Presidential stage? John Kerry in 2004 was Catholic, Vice President Joe Biden is Catholic, and two of the 2012 contenders, Gingrich (a convert) and Santorum were also Catholic, and Mitt Romney had to face similar questions over LDS. Doesn't Reason have better things to do than beat a dead horse?

(IPI). Any welfare system should promote earned success instead of forced dependency.
IPI is right to focus on the principle of Subsidiarity. I would liked to hear more about the tactics to ensure a positive benefit to the recipient who betters himself from a job/career/earnings perspective. E.g., earned income tax credits, certain subsidies, etc.

(Reason). This is why libertarians and conservatives clash over the meaning of the Constitution.
Because conservatives have been corrupted by the Christian Right and neoconservatism.
Nonsense. This is the kind of intellectually shallow analysis I've come to expect from bumper sticker libertarians, i.e., "fiscal conservative, social liberal".

A lot of it has to do with a conservative's aversion to radical change from the status quo. About 20 years ago, I worked under a company VP who eventually ran to replace a retiring GOP Congressman in the Chicago suburbs. His signature position was saving social security. In part, conservatives dislike the chaos of revolt, like Burke unnerved by the French revolution.

(Cato Institute). "Just because the federal government enacts a law against marijuana, it does not follow that all the states have to enact laws against marijuana. And just because the federal police (FBI and DEA) have grown accustomed to having state and local police conduct marijuana raids and arrests, it does not follow that the local authorities can’t stop doing that. So long as the local police are not arresting or threatening to arrest federal agents for trying to enforce the federal law, there is no “conflict.” Thus, the Supremacy Clause does not come into play."
I've given up trying to understand judicial leaps of logic, e.g., in the 1942 Filburn case, where a small farmer's consumption of his own wheat harvest constituted an act of interstate commerce and hence under the reach of federal law.

If we go back to the sheer judicial madness in deciding the Carolene Products case, let us recall the context. The whole purpose of the interstate commerce clause, the inability of states to enact tariffs, etc. was to promote a free market among states. Carolene Products sold a canned filled milk product. Big Dairy disliked the competition, fear-mongered over the "unnatural" product, and prevailed upon Congress to ban its shipment across state lines. Carolene Products could continue to sell in its plant-based states under traditional state regulatory authority, although obviously the prohibition clearly violated free market principles in doing business across state lines. SCOTUS infamously rejected Carolene Products' appeal, essentially giving the tyranny of the Congressional majority broad discretion under the worst footnote in human history, Footnote 4.

Note that Congress didn't try to ban the production of filled milk (which obviously Big Dairy would have preferred). (And, of course, we still had the possibility of Big Dairy trying to influence state legislatures to ban filled milk.) But traditionally regulation of commerce in the state came under state sovereignty, e.g., Nebraska wouldn't have the right to sue a neighboring state to enforce its legal preferences of goods or serviced produced. In theory, the federal government's authority should only come into play in terms of regulating distribution of marijuana products across state lines. (One could anticipate the Statist objection: if, after all, the federal government was allowed to set wheat quotas for farmers, a manifest violation of economic liberty, relevant in the Filburn case, why couldn't they set a quota of zero for the marijuana market?)

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Michael Ramirez via Townhall

Musical Interlude: Christmas 2014

Mannheim Steamroller, "Deck the Hall"

Miscellany: 12/28/14

Quote of the Day
So long as I am acting from duty and conviction, 
I am indifferent to taunts and jeers. 
I think they will probably do me more good than harm.
Winston Churchill

Funniest Politically Correct Holiday Greeting of the Day

Please accept with no obligation, expressed or implied, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.  I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling, and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2015, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great.  This is, of course, neither to suggest nor imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country; also, this is not to imply that "America," as noted herein, is the only America in the Western Hemisphere.  May these heartfelt wishes be received with equal intensity regardless of distribution of individual wealth, documented carbon footprint, or perceived social privilege among the wishees addressed herein.  This wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith, or sexual preference of the wishee.

Chart of the Day: New Year's Resolutions for Promoting a Pro-Liberty Agenda

Image of the Day

Now this is just mean to the Speaker
Via Dollar Vigilante

Michigan Joins the Drug-Screening For Welfare Program States: Thumbs DOWN!

First of all, I am no advocate of welfare programs, and I think recreational drugs are a terrible way to abuse one's body; I certainly don't want tax dollars subsidizing someone's addiction. Michigan tries to pass constitutional muster by using some unspecified (in the news account) suspicion-based criterion, but we already know from Florida and other programs, only a very low (barely significant) percentage of those tested got a positive reading. This may be very good for lab testing companies, but I don't see this as serious, cost-effective public policy.

Twelve Days of Yellen





Entertainment Potpourri

It just struck me this year that I have watched absolutely no network prime television this fall season. American Idol should be starting up again in a couple of weeks; the big news during the off season is that it looks like they are doing away with the results show, which I refused to watch last season. I would hope that they include some train wreck acts during the auditions, one of my favorite features in the early years. I think we are nearing the end of the run; last season's winner, Caleb Johnson, barely sold some 11,000 copies of his debut album, without a single track hitting the hot 100 (assuming his Wikipedia discography is reliable).

The holiday movie season is drawing to a close; Hallmark is still running its holiday movies through this weekend; I'm still puzzled because they haven't played this season, as far as I know, some staples from the past like "A Christmas Visitor",  "Fallen Angel", "November Christmas", "The Christmas Card", "Silver Bells", "Angel in the Family", and others. The one I liked from this season the most is "Angels and Ornaments". I've ventured off Hallmark over the past week-plus; I did manage to catch "It's a Wonderful Life", "Miracle on 34th St." and "White Christmas" a few times, and "Love At the Christmas Table" is always a special treat.

Facebook Corner

(IPI). A single mother with two young children in Cook County could lose about 1/3 of her total social assistance resources if she were to get a raise or find a higher-paying job that increased her pay to $18/hour from $12/hour.

It's time for Illinois to re-evaluate and overhaul the entire safety-net infrastructure.

Morally hazardous status quo. Obviously people respond to incentives, and the welfare cliff drop-off perpetuates a vicious cycle of government dependency. I think the welfare net should be limited-term in nature, and we should look at incentives (e.g., earned income credits) to offset losses in public assistance. Clearly the welfare net needs to be consolidated, streamlined, and made more transparent; IPI's reforms are a good start.

(Lawrence Reed). "Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. [...] We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant" -- philosopher Karl Popper in "The Open Society and Its Enemies" (1945). He was a co-founder of the Mont Pelerin Society with F. A. Hayek, Milton Friedman and Ludwig von Mises.
The problem is the fact that the politically correct have used the same rationale to censor others, including the exceptions of several "liberal" democracies (e.g., Canada) for "hate speech", etc.

(Reason). Once again, good times for liberalism may be on the verge of ending. After Democrats' recent sag in the polls, the party turned once more to President Bill Clinton.
The myth of "Democratic centrism" is much exaggerated. Recall that the top 2 domestic initiatives leading to the landmark 1994 election were HillaryCare and the class warfare tax hikes; government deficits were projected to stretch well into the future. The Congressional leadership wing is dominated by "progressives" and so-called moderates are only useful in occupying seats in place of the opposition. The nostalgia for Bill Clinton is based on two factors: (1) he inherited a strong economy despite of and not because of his policies, and (2) he had a pragmatic side, unlike Obama, for dealing with an opposition Congress. Hillary is not a centrist by her own record and lacks Bill's political charisma (recall the vast right-wing conspiracy nonsense?) What I think might emerge can be seen in the context of Schumer's mea culpa on the 111th Congress on ObamaCare; I could see a more centrist/populist movement splitting off from the Dems and GOP, say a merge of Northeast moderate Republicans and the dying blue dog Dems.
True liberals have left the Democratic Party. They can haul out Clinton zombies all they want. (Bill was HUGE part of the problem and set up our economic woes along with Reagan. anyone still falling for him is uninformed. )
It's hilarious seeing "progressive" trolls reinvent the Clinton Presidency. First, one of the trolls incorrectly fails to note that the Senate was controlled by the Dems with a 50/50 split after the 2000 elections and Jeffords' quick defection from the GOP caucus. The control the GOP had during the Clinton/Bush era was never a supermajority, e.g., they were never able to rollback Clinton's economy-damaging class warfare tax hikes. Second, the scapegoating of the Financial Modernization Act is pure economically-illiterate leftist crap. The banking industry has been among the most heavily--and wrongly--regulated industries in American history (consider, for example, that branch banking is only a more recent phenomenon; other countries, like Canada, had a more resilient banking industry). There were anachronisms hampering the international competitiveness of American firms facing global competitors facing no such obstacles (and hardly laissez faire); these reforms were phased in over a series of steps and had bipartisan appeal, especially in a state with an open Senate seat the First Lady was eying. There were issues of commission in fiscal and monetary policy (i.e., the government is to blame), including government-insured deposits, implicit guarantees of mortgage-backed securities and a history of government bailouts/interventions. A free market would not have made good on Goldman Sach's AIG swaps; if GS had unduly relied on a vendor with inadequate reserves or liquidity for its swaps business, it made a business mistake.

Musical Interlude: Christmas 2014

Trans-Siberian Orchestra, "Christmas Canon Rock". Just perfect... Exquisite arrangement, beautifully blended vocals... An all-time favorite.

Miscellany: 12/27/14

Quote of the Day
What lies behind us, 
and what lies before us are small matters compared to 
what lies within us.
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Chart of the Day: Infrastructure Hype of Obama and Other Spendthrift Statists

Courtesy of FEE

Image of the Day

Via Lew Rockwell #sarcasm

Censorship and the War on Movies

I've sidestepped 'The Interview" kerfuffle (a forgettable comedy flick best known for its death  scene of North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un, shot down by a rocket hitting his helicopter; I believe that a leaked clip of that scene is available here, as of the date of this post ). In a country where our own political leaders are regularly ridiculed, this apparent attack to terrorize Sony for making and trying to release this film and threatening theaters agreeing to show this film is an appalling and unacceptable attempt to infringe on the natural right of free expression. I do understand a cultural sensitivity and the need to save face, but we have an idiom that any publicity is good publicity. Sony's comedy would have bombed at the box office, and reviewers would have panned the flick for free--without any pressure from North Korea; sometimes you give them enough rope to hang themselves. Instead, North Korea gave Sony tons of free publicity for the film  that drew more viewers than would have occurred otherwise; I wasn't about to pay $6 pay per view just to get to a 20-second clip--it's like suffering through "St. Elmo's  Fire" just to hear the hit song.

Somewhat more intriguing to me as a Catholic was Egypt's ban of the latest Exodus  movie from Hollywood. What's interesting is that the Muslim nation's censor did not simply object to the appearance of one of God's prophets, Moses, in a film but that the account is an insult to Egypt's historic past. In particular, there have been claims that Israeli slaves were used to build Egypt's pyramids. The Egyptians claim not only did the pyramids predate the arrival of Abraham, but the workers were well-compensated. I myself am fascinated with poorly documented historical facts behind much of the Bible. I, like any scientist, am willing to go where the evidence takes me. But first, let's deal with the pyramid issue; even when I briefly Googled the issue on Jewish scholars, I find no claim of pyramids; one account I read suggested that the Jews were used for more pedestrian projects like storage facilities. I think the pyramid claim surfaced with certain key English scholars in recent centuries. Now there are interesting questions raised by skeptics about the alleged historical presence of a large-scale Israeli slave population in Egypt; for example, one might expect some mixed marriages between Egyptians and Israelites, and there is scant evidence of this; if the Israelites were key to the Egyptian economy, there's little evidence that their departure causes major economic problems; there are few artifacts establishing the path of the escaping Israelites to the Red Sea.

I will say there are a number of Youtube videos claiming to show contemporary chariot remains (of the Exodus time frame) near the end points of a projected narrow path between the shores of the Red Sea. There has been some interesting speculation on identifying the mysterious Pharaoh of the Exodus and whether he perished in the Red Sea crossing, including a subsequent military campaign by his successor possibly to gain replacement workers.

I understand Egyptian pride and likely distortions in any dramatization of Biblical events, but I think in their place. I would welcome movies that draw attention to historical Egypt and use the occasion of the movie as a teaching moment. The truth stands on its own. Censorship is counterproductive policy.


Facebook Corner

(Drudge Report). Police Again Turn Their Back on de Blasio...
Lack of professionalism. As much as I despise "progressive" de Blasio as a pro-liberty conservative, these men and women are employees of the NYC government and need to respect the will of the majority of residents who voted him into office. There's a time and place for expressing one's opinion as a private citizen and taxpayer--not while wearing your police uniform.

Via Libertarian Republic

This is truly retarded, even for a pseudo-libertarian group. Everyone knows that this fear-mongering is based on a lie: "• Sen. Rand Paul incorrectly claimed "you will go to jail" if you don't buy health insurance and refuse to pay the tax penalty. The law specifically states that those who do not pay the penalty "shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution." Shortly after the law passed, the IRS commissioner at the time said the law precludes jail, but violators will likely face offsets against future tax refunds."
[I  got some pushback to the effect that a lawless Administration doesn't care what's written into law and/or the enforcement policy can be scrapped in a heartbeat by Congress.]
Listen, arguing about a proposed law change won't make it happen. The Dems put that into the law just as in RomneyCare to avoid prosecuting people who can't afford to buy insurance. The GOP wants to repeal ObamaCare. So where is the support going to come for your "fix"?

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of the original artist via Heritage Foundation

Courtesy of Henry Payne via Townhall

Musical Interlude: Christmas 2014

Mannheim Steamroller, "Silent Night"

Miscellany: 12/26/14

Quote of the Day
It is better to know some of the questions than all of the answers.
James Thurber

Tweet of the Day

Which exchange vendor will win the title of ObamaCare's Solyndra? http://t.co/FFKboG8m2B
— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) December 26, 2014

Chart of the Day

Courtesy of Mercatus Center

Guest Quotation of the Day

Once someone approached me and asked a leading question: "Do you know why people hate libertarians?" To which I quickly cut him off, saying: "Because they are economic illiterates?" -Austin Petersen

Image of the Day

Via Devin Manning on FB

QE 4? Not a Prediction, But Knowing the Fed, It's Probable

If the familiar reader has noted, I've been noting with some concern the strength of the dollar in a world where other countries seem to be slipping into a stalled or shrinking economy--of particular note are the yen, euro, and most conspicuously lately the ruble. Ironically the one currency that seems to be holding its own is the Chinese yuan; there is all sorts of speculation about the Chinese slowly building up the second biggest gold reserves, which I think may be the advent of a second world reserve currency, potentially backed by gold--and a potentially serious longer-term challenge for a Fed and US Treasury run amok. Right now the Chinese are trying to muddle through chronic banking problems and a slowing economy.)

But here's my point: assuming ongoing currency wars and beggar-thy-neighbor policies, what political whores notice is a weak currency makes exports cheaper to foreign customers and imports more expensive. For consumers and businesses importing resources or components, this is a dubious blessing, leaving themselves worse off  (higher prices or costs). So while the US may be celebrating its best reported quarterly GDP figure in a decade and more consistent employment, there are some troublesome signs; for example, our exports will take a hit, and a Saudi Arabia-induced oil price war may adversely affect a major growth segment of the post-2008 economy--many of the smaller shale energy companies are in trouble. It's like trying to turn the Titanic; there are contracts for production schedules which may take months to run their course. In the long run, the oil is still ready to be extracted at feasible prices.

To a certain extent, some of these problems can be mitigated by easy money policies, e.g., an imported barrel of oil is more expensive. But how do you get to a cheaper dollar? Well, the strength of  a currency can be improved by raising interest rates. But with Fed interest rates already near zero, it can't get to a weaker currency by cutting rates. There are other tools, though. You  can increase the money supply by buying bonds or other financial securities, say mortgage backed securities or even stocks, like Japan is experimenting with. The law of supply and demand tells you security prices should increase which has an inverse effect on yield. Corporate bond yields should be an offset to Treasury yield.

The bottom line is with two inflation hawks moving off the Fed, Yellen has no intention of raising interest rates which would bolster the strengthening dollar. So I think it's probable we'll see a QE 4 if and when the economy hits a rough patch next year. Do I support it? No. I want a strong dollar and a more restrained/rule-based Fed.

More ObamaCare Kaleidoscope Accounting

I do hesitate to use the term "bailout"  to describe federal money reimbursed to insurance companies for costs due to an unsustainable regulatory regime. We now have an example of a (preferred) non-profit in Iowa in bankruptcy, taken over by the state, despite nearly a $150M loan/other funding from the Administration (which healthcare company will win the title of ObamaCare's Solyndra?). ObamaCare is replete with opaque smoke and mirrors accounting gimmicks and "free" and new benefit mandates, all of which cost real money.

While we are discussing the absurdity of ObamaCare, notice how some economic illiterate ObamaCare advocates are trying to take credit for a recent GLOBAL slowdown in medical costs and certain preexisting trends (fewer new expensive blockbuster drugs, etc). Consider the following excerpt from the Gray Lady:

The economic crisis drove down demand for new medical services, as people lost their jobs and coverage, or simply decided to put off elective procedures like knee replacements. Tougher times also led to policy tightening by federal and state officials — and employers, who have increasingly moved from generous health insurance plans to those that expose their workers to more out-of-pocket costs.

 Many people who are buying individual policies (even modified employer plans) face high deductibles and/or co-pays. Notice this is something those of us promoting free market policies have been arguing for some time: when people are vested more in their own healthcare economic decisions, they will be more frugal than if the apparent cost is "free" or negligible. Of course, you don't need a Statist Frankenstein like ObamaCare to imitate free market results: you simply get the hell out of the way of the free market.



Beito Wins This One: Charity, Yes; Government, No

 This is the first Beito clip I've seen; he wrote a nice history on mutual aid societies, fraternities, etc., which I've referenced in past. One talking point I really despised from Progressive Baldy is the assertion that government takes out all the major components of poverty like old-age. (Note: not everyone qualifies for social security; not everyone social security covers is poor. Moreover, government has never adequately funded social security. Finally (not implying there aren't other responses), social security is morally hazardous, and people have a right to fund their own retirement. Baldy does not address the stagnation of poverty since the 1970's, not to mention a cycle of government dependence.



Facebook Corner

Via Libertarian Republic

I am so sick and tired of leftists, including left-libertarians, bashing corporations, which are entities in a voluntary association. The obvious point of the meme is if straw man corporations control the government, when do they stop? The bigger and more complex the regulatory empire, the more anti-competitive to the entrepreneurs and upstart companies. Corporations are useful idiots for the economic fascists. The corporations, as Ron Paul points, are in nominal private hands, but the real power is in government regulation. If a government program (say, ObamaCare) fails or policy costs skyrocket because of government mandates, the providers become scapegoats.

The fact is that American businesses often have conflicting agendas (consider domestic sugar producers vs. candy makers) and politicians make corrupt bargains (consider farm bill subsidies and the food stamp program--there was an unsuccessful attempt in this Congress to break this link). Austrian economists have generally debunked the concept of natural monopolies in the private sector, while the federal government is itself the biggest monopoly and the only one that can dictate prices and services.

The only way to eliminate the corrupt bargain practices of government, including parasitic crony capitalists, is to shrink the government and rely more on the natural competitive forces of the free markets and transparency of the market and voluntary market transactions.

(Libertarian Republic). If we want to reduce the instances of cops unjustly killing citizens, we could make them more accountable by disbanding their unions and privatizing their duties. - Austin Petersen
Yeah... No. Profit driven law enforcement prolly ain't the answer...
Only an economically illiterate troll could be so dismissive of "profit driven law enforcement". Profits have to do with a competitive, dynamic marketplace and are a reflection of managerial effectiveness. Capitalists take on risk, and profits are a return for taking on risk. What matters is delivering goods and services that attract buyers. Local government has a monopoly on public safety for which taxes are mandated from residents--never mind monopoly police unions. You have little if any incentive at the public manager level to economize, say, by hiring temporary, part-time, seasonal, or contract cops. The public safety market is no different than any market; privatization would look for ways to adopt disruptive technologies, say, displacing the need for perm staffers. This does not mean a compromise of public safety objectives; in fact, streamlining of laws (e.g., decriminalizing victimless crimes) would free up manpower to be more efficiently and effectively used. In any case, the salient issue is revenues minus costs. A business can make a profit without additional revenues or without a compromise in service, simply by controlling costs. There is nothing virtuous about "use it or lose it" city administrators with taxpayer revenues at stake. A private-sector safety concern that payed short shrift to customer expectations would find itself out of business, losing to competitors. Today's police still have jobs even if most crime goes unsolved.


(Reason). Rising inequality does not justify class warfare. Here's why.
Maybe, but "class warfare" doesn't mean changing a tax policy or raising the minimum wage. Class warfare means guillotines. Class warfare means the rich running for their lives. In short, class warfare is warfare. So let's not use it as a term to hyperbolize when we talk about a simple policy proposals to address income inequality through legal, rational means.
"Progressive" economic illiterate OP trolls who actually believe that plundering the economically successful to redistribute to the ethically undeserving is "good" policy. Statist policy is a monopoly with all the undesirable consequences.

Political Cartoon

It's been more difficult finding cartoons I agree with recently...

Courtesy of Larry Wright via Townhall

  Musical Interlude: Christmas 2014

Arthur Fiedler and the Boston Pops, "Sleigh Ride"