He that goes a borrowing goes a sorrowing.
Benjamin Franklin
Obama, meet Benjamin Franklin--yeah, that dude on the hundred-dollar bill
Roger Pilon/Cato, "Is Religious Liberty an “Exception” to Government Rule?", Thumbs UP!
There are a few pieces where I wish I had written them--like in Pilon's op-ed on this week's Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby. This is the long-awaited confrontation over the controversial birth control mandate--including abortifacients, which many (including myself) see as the taking of an unborn child's life. It's not unlike how the Communist Chinese, at least in the past, charged families for the bullets used to execute their loved one. What a female worker does with her post-tax income is her own business, between her God and herself. But making a religious business owner a party to the transaction is a matter of conscience.
I have been pounding on the theme that the Statists continue to treat the Bill of Rights as thinly defined exceptions to Statist domination. Of course, we believe in the free market, that an employer needs to provide a competitive compensation package, which may or may not include some form of health insurance. Let's consider auto insurance; we don't have coverage for ordinary expenses like gas, oil changes, tire or battery replacement, etc. I suppose some company could market an all-inclusive auto service bundle. Just because you might not be able to get say, Lasik, Botox, cosmetic surgery in your health plan is not a prohibition on these services out of your own pocket. Maybe these services might require, say, $25/month. So instead of paying that $25 to an insurer, you get the difference in take-home pay. So let's say the birth control mandate costs $40/month. Hobby Lobby would simply let that drop through to your paycheck. You have lost nothing, whether you get your birth control through your health plan or on your own. There is no "free lunch"; you don't get both the $40 and the "free" birth control. I am not encouraged by Pilon's description of the 3 feminist ideological "progressive" justices whom obviously are more interested in the god of political correctness than liberty principles or sound economics.
Boudreaux on Righties Gone Mad
In my recent troll-stomping on Facebook, I've routinely described "progressives" as economic illiterates. I repeated the same about certain conservatives whom have recently aligned themselves with pro "raise-the-minimum-wage" progressives, arguing that businesses are basically being subsidized by social welfare net benefits to low-wage workers. Why do I use the term "economic illiterate"? Government policy is almost always counter-productive; it impairs the efficient workings of the free markets, and its resources drain from the real economy. I basically note that free market economies are more likely to grow and generate jobs, which presumably "progressives" would like to see: when the economy grows, so do jobs (and tax revenues).
On the contrary, Boudreaux argues that the former GOP gubernatorial candidate is economically literate, which is not to say that it's "good" economics. If you understand what he's saying, he's being consistent with me (we both believe in the free markets), but to understand his point, you need to understand that key support for minimum wage came from the textile industry in the Northeast; the South, with an ample supply of blacks willing to work for lower wages at local mills than workers in the Northeast. So while the Northeast "progressives" put lipstick on a pig, pretending to be concerned about "exploited workers" in Southern mills, their real intent was to lower the cost advantage of Southern mills. Fewer Southern mill jobs meant more unemployed blacks. With friends like these, who needs enemies?
What Boudreaux is saying is that a comparable thing is going with the anti-immigrant conservatives: a considerable number of unauthorized visitors are low-wage. If you raise labor rates, there are fewer jobs for aliens, and frustrated jobless aliens will leave on their own.
I'm not sure the populists of either side are that devious; I think some of them are gullible true believers in the cover story. Of course, the end result is the same.
Pushing-on-a-String Knee-Jerk Regulatory Madness
Facebook Corner
(Drudge Report). White House extends deadline again; To rely on 'honor system'...FLASHBACK: We Lack 'Statutory Authority' to Extend Deadline to Sign Up for Obamacare..
When you draw the Communitarian Chest card in Government Monopoly, it allows you to roll genuine Barney Frank dice for how many months you get to defer ObamaCare enrollment, plus collect $200 from the player with the most money.
(Illinois Policy Institute). In February, Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s office proposed an ordinance that would force popular ridesharing services such as Uber and Lyft to severely change the way they do business, if not shut down entirely. We pointed out some of the proposal’s many serious problems, and Chicago aldermen reported thousands of people emailing them asking them not to ruin ridesharing in Chicago. It’s time for people who support ridesharing, competition, innovation and freedom in Chicago to make their voices heard once again.
Is it a matter of blocking a new free market, the state not getting a cut of the profits or a safety matter since these new sharing / car services are not regulated?
Oh, yeah, with all the violence in Chicago, Mayor Dead Fish knows the pushing-on-a-string #1 safety concern is innovative services which have grown by reputation and word of mouth? Csn you say 'cronyism' where traditional vendors are using the government to crush the competition when they can't cope with the new business model introducing disruptive change?
(Cato Institute). "One needs to be careful to avoid the trap of falling for the propaganda spread by Russia’s current regime."
Nobody is being fooled by a self-serving thug leading a corrupt government, He's got an anemic economy; can you say "Wag the Dog"? He's never been more popular....Putin's intervention is morally unacceptable. And let's not forget the USSR's own bitter experience dealing with Afghanistan.
But the US is not the world's policeman, it is not in a position and lacks the resources and moral authority to intervene yet again.
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of Nate Beeler and Townhall |
Bon Jovi, "Always"
