Miscellany: 10/31/14

Quote of the Day
The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter.
Winston Churchill

Chart of the Day: The College Student Loan Bubble Under Obama

Courtesy of mygovcost

Image of the Day

The Fascist Dems Are Trying to Intimidate People to the Polls
Courtesy of Liberty Vital

Frightening Government Spending



Democrat Voter Fraud Goes Beyond the Cemetery



Reason Halloween Parody



Am I Continuing To Shift My Perspective?

I've noticed my readership numbers have been lighter than usual the last couple of weeks at least on some days, particularly yesterday's post, which depending on lagging hits would be the lowest read post in several weeks. As I've written before, I don't write this blog for the hits; I do appreciate when others seem to respond to certain posts, but I do have a seemingly eclectic set of positions which few others seem to concurrently hold: I am pro-markets, pro-liberty, pro-life, pro-immigration, pro-traditional marriage and family, for instance. The faithful reader probably knows I'm not just battling liberal/progressive trolls, but over the past week I've actually been taking hits from conservatives calling me in effect a liberal, an Obama apologist. (Anyone following this blog who confuses me with a social liberal or thinks I'm a secret Obama supporter is not paying attention. However, even Obama can't be wrong 100% of the time.)

There is, broadly speaking, a divide that divides American politics that Tom DiLorenzo and others have discerned: the philosophical split between Hamilton and Jefferson. Hamilton was in favor of a strong central government and protectionist/mercantilist policies while Jefferson believed in more decentralized government, strong individual rights, and free markets/free trade: as Rothbard observed, "Even though he himself had done much to prepare the way for war with Great Britain in 1812, Jefferson was disillusioned by the public debt, high taxation, government spending, flood of paper money, and burgeoning of privileged bank monopolies that accompanied the war. He had concluded that his beloved Democratic-Republican Party had actually adopted the economic policies of the despised Hamiltonian federalist."

As Wikipedia notes about the Second Party System (Democrats and Whigs):

The Democrats represented a wide range of views but shared a fundamental commitment to the Jeffersonian concept of an agrarian society. They viewed the central government as the enemy of individual liberty. The 1824 "corrupt bargain" had strengthened their suspicion of Washington politics....Jacksonians feared the concentration of economic and political power. They believed that government intervention in the economy benefited special-interest groups and created corporate monopolies that favored the rich. They sought to restore the independence of the individual--the artisan and the ordinary farmer--by ending federal support of banks and corporations and restricting the use of paper currency, which they distrusted. Their definition of the proper role of government tended to be negative, and Jackson's political power was largely expressed in negative acts. He exercised the veto more than all previous presidents combined. Jackson and his supporters also opposed reform as a movement. Reformers eager to turn their programs into legislation called for a more active government. But Democrats tended to oppose programs like educational reform mid the establishment of a public education system. They believed, for instance, that public schools restricted individual liberty by interfering with parental responsibility and undermined freedom of religion by replacing church schools. 

Whigs favored economic expansion through an activist government, Democrats through limited central government. Whigs supported corporate charters, a national bank, and paper currency; Democrats were opposed to all three. Whigs also favored more humanitarian reforms than did Democrats, including public schools, abolition of capital punishment, prison and asylum reform and temperance. Whigs were more optimistic than Democrats, generally speaking, and more enterprising. They did not object to helping a specific group if doing so would promote the general welfare. The chartering of corporations, they argued, expanded economic opportunity for everyone, laborers and farmers alike. Democrats, distrustful of concentrated economic power and of moral and economic coercion, held fast to the Jeffersonian principle of limited government.

By the 1850s most Democratic party leaders had accepted many Whiggish ideas, and no one could deny the economic modernization of factories and railroads was moving ahead rapidly.

The key point is that that we started seeing blending of Federalist/Whiggish ideas--and more importantly, centralist/authoritarian means. This is why the libertarian perspective that I've sometimes highlighted in my FB Corner segments that the issue isn't so much between Democrats and Republicans but between libertarians and authoritarians. On the conservative side, the authoritarian side can manifest itself in many ways: e.g., immigration enforcement, deference to law enforcement or the TSA, etc.

I've grown increasingly critical of Bill O'Reilly in the blog, but he recently managed to hit three points where I substantively disagree with the authoritarian conservatives: immigration, ISIS and Ebola quarantine. I'm not going to review the first 2 topics which I have outlined in several posts, but quite frankly I've been hinting at my position on the third in terms of images and the like; I have not liked the hysteria over the Maine nurse who was quarantined by  Chris Christie and then  under observation of Maine troopers ensuring other people kept a "safe distance" away from her. I have posted multiple unpopular FB posts on the topic (continued below) and I could have taken a hit from readers who are pro-quarantine. I recently responded to one troll who called me an "idiot" and when I returned fire, he hypocritically accused me of an ad hominem attack. (Now I've found myself going after trolls quite bluntly, but they tend to be strident progressives spamming the thread. But what I've noticed when Reason, Cato Institute, or Judge Napolitano publishes a more libertarian view of the big 3 issues above, the anti-immigrants, neocons, and health Nazis promptly flood the comment threads, not with reasoned disagreements  but hostile, judgmental talking point, and the wolf pack will attack anyone mildly supportive of the thread owners' positions.

The bottom line is that I find myself increasingly alienated from so-called right-wing authoritarian allies. It doesn't make me want to flip to the leftist authoritarians... I'm like a man without a party.

Facebook Corner

(continued from yesterday's Judge Napolitano's thread on the Maine nurse then under quarantine)
Are you really willing to gamble the lives of you and your family and ...well hell let's just say ANYONE that woman comes into contact with ...or even indirectly (ie if she sneezes) and someone in her area has a compromised immune system. For instance a child with some form of cancer. There is a MYRIAD of possibilities with this disease for unchecked spread. A NURSE should know that and you'd think a NURSE would want to take EVERY precaution to avoid that happening. Even if it means sitting around the house a little longer to make ABSOLUTELY SURE she's NOT infected. She MADE THE CHOICE to go over there and expose herself to this.
To the new troll: yes, I am fully comfortable with the nurse being in public. She has tested negative multiple times, she is asymptomatic, I do not know how long she served in West Africa, but if she was there any length of time over 3 weeks, it attests to the effectiveness of related protocols up to that time, and it is highly unlikely she would have knowingly exposed herself just prior to returning to the States. Keep in mind that Ebola has been an issue for some time and we had multiple flights from West Africa over that period. One person, Duncan, was diagnosed from all those flights, and he was asymptomatic during that flight; none of the people he was in contact with before he checked into the hospital has been diagnosed. The nurse is highly competent; she knows her own life is at stake if she develops symptoms, and she has professional ethics and knows better than expose others: the fact she went to help other people in need speaks volumes of her character and concern for others. Quite frankly, we need more people like her.

You need to stop being influenced by the irrational hysteria being whipped up by fear-mongers. Lots of other healthcare volunteers have served and returned without issue; why are you persecuting this poor lady? Because she returned after Duncan? Do you honestly think people wait to get exposed just before returning to the States? Not everybody in West Africa has developed the infection; you can't assume everyone who has been there is infected and somehow got infected unless they can prove otherwise. It's unreasonable and unfair.
Better safe than sorry, especially when the potential benefit so clearly outweighs the potential harm.
Says the troll who is willing to sacrifice another person's liberty for his own arbitrary sense of safety...

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Gary Varvel via Independent Institute

Courtesy of Bob Gorrell and Townhall

Courtesy of Gary McCoy via Thomas Striker on FB

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Linda Ronstadt, "Get Closer"

Miscellany: 10/30/14

Quote of the Day
I am in earnest; 
I will not equivocate; 
I will not excuse; 
I will not retreat a single inch; 
and I will be heard.
William Lloyd Garrison

Image of the Day

Via Brendan Riley Bachman on FB

Tweet of the Day

Don't let anyone tell you politicians create jobs.You know, that failed theory, trickle-down government.That has failed rather spectacularly
— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) October 31, 2014

Don't let any demagogue tell you putting conditions on employment helps the unemployed. Government eats the seed corn of economic growth.
— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) October 31, 2014

Phony Democrats in "Independent" Clothing

Via NTU

Democrat Dirty Tricks in Delaware



First Nominations for Economic Illiterate of the Year

Yes, I've invented a new annual mock award. Hillary Clinton's recent "You Didn't Hire Them" stump speech instantly qualifies (see my two latest tweets above). But it's difficult to imagine this Female-President-in-Waiting can top Argentina's Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner's megalomaniac delusions. Let me quote Simon Black:

Argentina’s new ‘supply law’, or Ley de Abastecimiento, due to take effect in December next year.
Under this new law, the government will have the honorable burden of defending consumers from greedy producers.
Companies are now prohibited from setting their prices too high, generating too much profit, or producing too little.
And unlike the country’s astronomically high taxes (which at least have defined numbers and penalties), the new supply law doesn’t even say what is meant by too high, too many, or too little.
It simply reinforces the government’s unchecked power to arbitrarily audit, fine, shut down, and expropriate production of private companies.

More Reunions











Facebook Corner

(Judge Andrew Napolitano). If the government wants to confine you, you do NOT have to prove you are worthy of freedom.
The government has to prove you are worthy of confinement!
More -- http://goo.gl/0l53vF
It's utterly immoral and shameful how many anti-scientific right-wing authoritarians are willing to sell out our Constitutional rights. The real Ebola crisis is all of you fascists, politically exploiting the situation to attack a woman who is not ill, merely smeared by association because of a media-induced public hysteria, without a modicum of common sense by political whores trying to capitalize on mass stupidity.

This excerpt is from a financial newsletter that wants to remind you idiots of a few inconvenient truths:

" News stories focus on the people infected with Ebola. Let's think about the people who weren't infected.

--The four people who stayed in a small Dallas apartment with Thomas Eric Duncan while he was sick with Ebola were not infected.
--None of the people who flew on Frontier Airlines with nurse Amber Vinson on Oct. 13 has shown up as infected. Their 21-day incubation period will end Nov. 3.
--None of the people who rode a New York subway or visited the same bowling alley and restaurants as Dr. Craig Spencer has shown signs of infection so far.
--Other than the two Dallas nurses, no worker in the other U.S. hospitals treating Ebola patients has caught the disease yet.

Furthermore, the survival rate for non-African Ebola patients is very high, at least so far. I believe the two Spanish priests are the only Western fatalities to date."

This is from the New England Journal of Medicine:

"The governors of a number of states, including New York and New Jersey, recently imposed 21-day quarantines on health care workers returning to the United States from regions of the world where they may have cared for patients with Ebola virus disease. We understand their motivation for this policy — to protect the citizens of their states from contracting this often-fatal illness. This approach, however, is not scientifically based, is unfair and unwise, and will impede essential efforts to stop these awful outbreaks of Ebola disease at their source, which is the only satisfactory goal. The governors' action is like driving a carpet tack with a sledgehammer: it gets the job done but overall is more destructive than beneficial... 

"Therefore, an asymptomatic health care worker returning from treating patients with Ebola, even if he or she were infected, would not be contagious. Furthermore, we now know that fever precedes the contagious stage, allowing workers who are unknowingly infected to identify themselves before they become a threat to their community....Notably, Duncan's family members who were living in the same household for days as he was at the start of his illness did not become infected.

"Hundreds of years of experience show that to stop an epidemic of this type requires controlling it at its source. Médecins sans Frontières, the World Health Organization, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and many other organizations say we need tens of thousands of additional volunteers to control the epidemic. We are far short of that goal, so the need for workers on the ground is great. These responsible, skilled health care workers who are risking their lives to help others are also helping by stemming the epidemic at its source. If we add barriers making it harder for volunteers to return to their community, we are hurting ourselves."

Instead of listening to know-nothing buffoons like Bill O'Reilly and acting like jerks, get yourself educated on the topic, and keep in mind FEAR-MONGERING NEVER LEADS TO GOOD PUBLIC POLICY AND IS A THREAT TO OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
Dude, that incessant and mindless bunch of "Liberal" garbage you just upchucked there is precisely the reason that QUARANTINE is necessary. You quote this and that, claim things to be factual and almost all of it comes from "Liberal" owned media. This is a tactic the "Left" has used for years. Blah blah blah until people forget the real problem, then sweep it under the rug. First of all, 80% of the crap you posted is not founded in truth (I tried fact checking it). It is speculation and most of it is outdated. Secondly, the "Left Wing" liberal retards in this country are the exact reason why the world hates and disrespects us so wholeheartedly right now. No spine, no truth and no regard for the very constitution this country was founded on. It just pisses me off when some Liberal P.O.S. with a vocabulary decides to spew his rhetoric about something he really has no clue about. Lets just put you into quarantine with Kaci and hope (for your sake) she isn't contagious. What do you think about that scenario? Wise up you lying liberal retard. The Left Leaning Mainstream Media are the FEAR Mongers and this post you just put forth feeds the fire. The public needs to know our government will do ANYTHING to keep us ALL safe. I don't care which way you lean, we all deserve to be safe from a potential epidemic of which there is NO CURE !!!
Listen, fear-mongering right-wing authoritarian fascist (no, [I'm referencing an interim commenter] he's not a real conservative--I am. I'm a Constitutional conservative.) It's an absolute FACT that you can count all those who have been diagnosed with Ebola from all West African flights into the US on one hand, the only people who have caught the disease here were medical professionals after Duncan checked himself into a hospital, and at least one of those 2 have been declared now free of the infection. Inconvenient truth to your crackpot conspiracy.

I stand behind my sources and the New England Journal of Medicine. Just because you believe in crackpot sources who feed on your scientific illiteracy and tell you what you want to hear or are in a state of denial doesn't "disprove" the facts I've stated. Your "fact check" sources and $5 will buy me a cup of joe at Starbucks. The facts are on my side. FYI: I'm not a social liberal. I am a fusion libertarian-conservative like Ron and Rand Paul and Justin Amash. I've also published peer-reviewed empirical research.

(Reason). Congressman Jared Polis thinks libertarians should vote for Democratic candidates, because Democratic nominees are increasingly more supportive of individual liberty and freedom than Republicans. Do you agree?
What a load of crap... This President had a supermajority in 2009-2010 and what did he do? Scrap the Patriot Act? Expedite our exit from Iraq before Bush's schedule or get us out of Afghanistan? Reform all but bankrupt entitlements? Tackle drug law reform? No--they created two reforms, ObamaCare and Dodd N. Frankenstein that imposed a crippling blow to an already struggling economy. This President has more than doubled the publicly held federal debt and we have had one of the slowest job recoveries in American history--on top of Bush's pitiful record of a net gain of 1M, mostly local/state government. Even if we've had a modest pickup lately, we have the lowest labor force participation rates in decades--while the Dems push for more business mandates on labor and push for a minimum wage increase with sky-high unemployment among the low-skilled/inexperience workers in urban areas. One of the few bright spots has been in oil/gas production where federally-controlled areas have largely not participated because of environmental restrictions/policies.

Tech innovation actually thrives because of lighter regulation by government; in fact, it's the Democrats trying to impose regulations on the Internet. It's the Democrats who are trying to regulate political speech by a Constitutional amendment. It's the Democrats largely responsible for our convoluted tax system (built up over decades since the 1930's) and the $1.8T regulatory empire. And it was under Democrat Administrations that we fought the 4 bloodiest wars in the last century, and our casualties in Afghanistan have more than doubled under Obama, and drone attacks, along with Obama-approved kill lists, including American citizens without due process, have grown on steroids.

(Reason). Should libertarians vote Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or none of the above? Share your thoughts in the comments!
I would advise libertarians for the most viable candidate that reflects their views in a substantive manner. In most cases, that's going to be a Republican in a tight race, because for the most part Democrats are the government of the Regulatory Empire, Excess Taxation, and Unsustainable Spending and Liabilities. There is no longer such a thing as a classical liberal Democrat like Thomas Jefferson or Grover Cleveland. Let us remember not a single vote for ObamaCare was cast by a Republican, almost none for Dodd N. Frankenstein, and it was the GOP that stopped the Senate Democrats' attempts to pass a constitutional amendment to let the Congress regulate political speech.

Bottom line: Democrats, not Republicans, run on expanding the State. The fact is only one political party that nominates and elects people like Ron and Rand Paul and Justin Amash. Now if it's not a close contest, vote for one of the perennial losers that the Libertarian Party nominates. But if you let a "Progressive" Democrat into office who will tax and spend your child/grandchild's inheritance, stop looking for others to blame.

Proposals

I think I'm running low on fresh videos; I try to avoid repeats of embedded videos, but keep seeing ones I remember from past weeks. So don't be surprised if I skip this segment on an occasional or an extended basis. As I've mentioned before, I think of myself as very creative, I own a number of books on the topic, and I love to see the innovative ways guys (or the occasional lady) choose to pop the question; I don't think my own relatives have done their own videos, but even if they did, I wouldn't identify them. No, I will not cover gay commitment proposals; as a Christian libertarian, I accept the right of association, even if I do not personally agree with the gay lifestyle--that's different than promoting it.









Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Michael Ramirez via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Linda Ronstadt, "I Can't Let Go".

Miscellany: 10/29/14

Quote of the Day
When the conduct of men is designed to be influenced, 
persuasion, kind unassuming persuasion, should ever be adopted. 
It is an old and true maxim that 'a drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall.' 
So with men. 
If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his sincere friend. 
Therein is a drop of honey that catches his heart, which, say what he will, 
is the great highroad to his reason, and 
which, once gained, you will find but little trouble in convincing him of the justice of your cause, 
if indeed that cause is really a good one.
Abraham Lincoln

Image of the Day

Courtesy of Sen. Coburn (R-OK)

Tweet of the Day

Iowa voter: "I want to see a lady up here for a change. I want to see change." Change is the allowance in your pocket after Hillary's taxes.
— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) October 29, 2014

I can just hear Alan Grayson now: "The GOP's plan for SSDI reform is for the disabled to hurry up and die." And the next ad with Paul Ryan?
— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) October 29, 2014

Congratulations, World Champion Giants!

Madison Bumgarner pitched in relief, as I hinted in yesterday's post, and picked up his third win of the Series with an unbelievable final 5 scoreless innings in relief, following a Game 5 shutout; his only real threat came 2 outs in the ninth when an outfielder error got the hitter to stretch a single into three bases. It was only fitting that his most prolific hitting third baseman, Sandoval, caught a popup in foul territory for the final out. Tip of my hat to the Series MVP...

Yes, I did root for the Royals, who put up a valiant effort in the 3-2 loss. But as a natural lefty, I identify with the SF southpaw. There are 5 positions lefties play--pitcher, first base and the outfield. (Playing the other 4 infield positions typically require lefties to pivot to the other side in fielding and throwing; I am unaware of any lefty who has played those positions in the major leagues. Someone actually ran a query:

Using the always helpful baseball-reference.com, I ran a search for infielders (2B, SS, and 3B) who threw with their left hand since 1900. Here are some of the more interesting results:
When looking at players with at least five games played at any one of those three positions, only two players show up: Mike Squires and Hal Chase.
Decreasing the number to three [games] doubles the list, adding George Sisler and Don Mattingly.
If we drop the criterion to just one game played, the list "swells" to 14, including names like Lou Gehrig and Terry Francona.)

When I played teen baseball (my high school didn't field a baseball team), I had only a few prize plays: throwing out a runner trying to score from second on a base hit while playing right field; a backhanded spear of a line drive down the right-field line (the crowd applauded that one; the funny thing was I didn't even realize I caught the ball--I was trying to figure out where the ball went and eventually found it in my glove); a Willie Mays like running basket catch of a pop fly into shallow center field; and at first, tagging out the base runner the first time a pitcher ever threw to me at the position, and my unassisted double play on a soft line drive in the gap to right field. One of my coaches flirted with the idea of making me a pitcher; I had a lot of pop and accuracy from my natural sidearm motion. He wanted me to come down over the top; he quickly dropped the idea of using me; I don't think it ever got to the point of pitching batting practice. A shame, really, because for some odd reason most people I pitched informally to had a devil of a time trying to hit my sidearm pitches, and I was also playing around with a slider and knuckleball. I was even more unusual than that, because I can also throw right-handed (I occasionally played pickup games where only right-hander gloves were available) even harder--in fact, I've always thrown a football right-handed. I've mostly batted right-handed in games; I never had the talent to make it to the major leagues, but could you have imagined it if I had? A switch-pitching, switch-hitting freak show...

Facebook Corner

(Reason). Kaci Hickox, the nurse who escaped New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's clutches on Monday, now faces a threat of confinement by Maine Gov. Paul LePage.
The way right-wing authoritarian, anti-Constitutional trolls are trolling this thread is unconscionable. Just a reminder that from all the flights from West Africa this "contagion" of the number of diagnosed cases from passengers and everyone they've met can be counted on one hand. It's utterly disgusting that two GOP governors, who benefited from Tea Party political support, have publicly sided with irrational fear-mongering stoked by irresponsible national media coverage. The fact the fascists are still persecuting this poor woman who shows no symptoms and has repeatedly tested negative of Ebola is abominable.
What is even a greater tragedy is that you are so stupid and ill informed that you concluded that the governor of NY is a Republican. Idiot.
(edited) The [troll] didn't even read the blurb or recognize the picture of Maine's GOP governor--he thought it was Cuomo...

(LFC). "It is arguable that these Koch-funded organizations have done more for many so-called 'progressive' causes than progressives themselves. Koch funding has helped produce countless writers who have blown the lid off rampant police abuse, exposed horrific injustices from the War on Drugs, and repeatedly criticized the foreign policy blunders of both Republican and Democratic administrations."
The Koch money check is in the mail, right?
 I haven't gotten mine yet. Unfortunately, libertarians think you should earn your own money...

(Cato Institute). Here's how we can save Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI): http://bit.ly/1zBhM0E
The politicians will likely do the kind of "reform" they always do, e.g., use the already diminishing retiree trust fund to replenish SSDI. Expect politicians to clamp down easier eligibility since I believe the 1980's? Not likely. You will see the predictable response from the Democrats that we are cutting back at the expense of the truly disabled. And they'll cut a commercial of Congressman Ryan dumping a wheelchair-bound disabled person off the cliff. And the GOP will fold like a cheap suit because it's just easier paying off the marginally disabled than having to fight off Democratic smears. I can just hear Alan Grayson now: "The GOP plan for saving SSDI is for disabled people to hurry up and die."

Free Range Kids Mom Talks Halloween



Welcome the Vets Home (Let's Hope Permanently)









Proposals









Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Henry Payne via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Linda Ronstadt, "Hurt So Bad". Great backing guitar work...

Miscellany: 10/28/14

Quote of the Day
I like a man who grins when he fights.
Winston Churchill

Image of the Day

Detroit Police Are Kid-Nappers

From Reason:

The couple, David and Sky Brown, were running a small, unofficial farm on their property near Detroit's west side. They possessed three baby goats and six chickens....Nevertheless, animal control agents, as well as two city police officers, showed up to the Brown residence last week to take the animals. City regulations prohibit residents from having unrestrained farm animals unless they are in the care of a trained professional.The officers refused to let the couple move the animals to a safe place outside of the city, Sky said, so she begrudgingly obeyed orders to place her goats in crates in the back of a city truck as she sobbed.“They are like our babies,” she told me, telling me their names – Idan, Raichel, and Sarai.According to WXYZ, animal control told Brown, "You're never going to see your goats again."

The last time I heard, it took Detroit police nearly an hour to response to an emergency call. But they can spare cops to steal baby goats....

Courtesy of  Detroit Press via NPR

This is not the first time goats in Detroit made the news as a bankrupt Detroit didn't have resources to keep up with abandoned lots, overgrown grass and weeds, etc. From NPR:

Hedge fund manager Mark Spitznagel, who recently tried to revitalize Detroit's Brightmoor neighborhood with a herd of 18 baby goats.
As The New York Times reported, the plan was to direct the goats from Spitznagel's nearby farm in Michigan to graze on overgrown, abandoned lots. He would employ locals to herd and raise the animals, and eventually they'd be sold as meat. But the project met resistance. It's against the law in Detroit to keep farm animals in the city, and Spitznagel's herd was kicked out after two days.
So how hard is it to keep goats in a city anyway? Fans of these weed-munching animals point out that goats are an eco-friendly landscaping option, their meat is a staple in diets around the world and their milk makes for some delicious cheese. It also helps that they're totally adorable.
If you're around San Francisco, you can hire a herd from City Grazing, a landscaping business that employes about 100 goats. They can clear overgrown land, including areas covered in dry brush that could fuel wildfires. And conveniently, goats generally prefer munching on weeds, ivy and even poison oak to manicured lawns, says chief goat officer David Gavrich. Plus, the land that these guys clear off is ideal for growing crops, he says. "Their waste is a fertilizer. It's a nice little closed environmental circle."

World Series Goes to Game 7

Kudos to the Kansas City Royals, with their backs against the wall down 3-2 in the series, who blasted their way 10-0 on way to tomorrow's series finale. (Familiar readers know I'm an American League fan and hence am rooting for the Royals.) Still, regardless of what happens tomorrow, Giants pitcher Madison Bumgarner deserves Series MVP with 2 dominating wins, including Game 5, a complete game shutout. Both teams have superb relief pitchers, and in game 7, it's now or never, so I wouldn't be surprised to see Bumgarner on the mound sometime tomorrow.

Henderson on the Minimum Wage

I haven't embedded a Praeger University video since what I consider to be a really bad one justifying dropping the 2 atom bombs on Japan at the end of WWII. But this video and the following one are well done.



The Racist Charge of "Racism"



Facebook Corner

(CNN Politics) Rand Paul is "changing by the month," says former presidential candidate Ralph Nader. "What he ought to do is go back to his father, sit on his knee and become more like Ron Paul." http://cnn.it/1wyZJDL
Just as George W. Bush was a better politician than his father, Rand Paul is a better politician than his father. I think what Rand is doing is trying is blunt the tedious, repetitious allegations of isolationism; as principled as Ron Paul is and has been, Rand Paul works at building coalitions. Although philosophically I'm closer to Ron's perspective, but to govern, you have to have a governing coalition. But make no mistake: Rand Paul is substantively different than any major potential Presidential nominee in decades. I think the winner in 2016, a change election year, needs to posture himself against the Bush/Obama era, and no other viable candidate does that better than Rand Paul.

(Reason). Rand Paul fleshes out his notion of foreign policy "realism," and defines some limiting principles on taking the nation to war in this hot-off-the-press Reason interview.
I wrote an earlier opinion; here's an excerpt:

I will quibble with a few points, but what I like in particular is what he points to in his last two points: the importance of free trade as an instrument of peace, and how our chronic deficits and unconscionable national debt (not to mention untenable unfunded liabilities) are threats to our national security. Much of our publicly-held debt is held by foreign investors and could risk our ability to finance essential operations, not to mention a risk of crashing dumped Treasury bond prices, igniting recessionary interest spikes. We must have a sustainable budget; we must have competitive tax policies and regulatory reform to promote economic growth. To me, Rand Paul is both posturing against unpopular neocon policies and defining himself against likely 2016 Presidential candidates and a cohesive argument against the expected Dem challenger, Hillary Clinton.

I'm not going to do a comprehensive critique in this post, but I want to give some points where I don't agree with Rand Paul, at least in how he's presenting his arguments. First, at some point he loosely uses "free trade" as some sort of an American carrot in diplomacy. This is crap; free trade is win-win among consumers in two economies. When trade or access to our markets is a diplomatic concession, we are talking about the neomercantilistic whore of managed trade, which unfortunately reflects the reality of global markets today. Similarly, Rand Paul seems to accept the use of economic sanctions, which I regard as a type of warfare, which I oppose; recall the famous quote most attribute to Bastiat: "When goods don't cross borders, armies will." (Actual author: Mallery.)

Second, I disagree with his general discussion of the Afghanistan war, which he supported. At one point in his discussion, he basically discusses the futility of nationbuilding, and yet he seems to ignore that the Soviets and other occupiers of Afghanistan had found it to be a quagmire. As bad as the Taliban was, they did not attack America; I understand the point of a safe haven, but once the Taliban was defeated and Al Qaeda was on the run, I disagree with our occupation and nation building.

Finally, I still find Paul's position for military action on ISIS, which had not directly attacked the US, perplexing and unprincipled. Once we open the door of preventive warfare, you hand the neo-cons an unnecessary concession. At one point elsewhere, he points out the unintended consequences of our drone activities, but what about our ISIS initiative?
Without intending to disagree outright, I'll add:

1. I'd posit that he supports opening trade up as much as possible; this is a true wealth generator for all participants, while at the same time limiting trade with hostile postures also makes sense because it limits their available options, and it's cheaper for us than troops and bombs while having a similar if protracted effect. This makes sense with Iran, for instance, though in the long run it may not be seen as making sense with North Korea.

2. We're not the Soviets. The Soviets came as conquerors and their military at the time was of an especially brutal and uncivilized nature. In contrast, while US troops and assistance were widely received in a positive light after the also rather oppressive Taliban were pushed back, the realities on the ground have created another, though dissimilar, quagmire. Nation building then is only as effective as the people of the nation involved are at coming together. After World War II with many shattered and a number of defeated nations around the globe, few had issues coming together under the US's 'occupation and nation building' endeavors. Germany and Japan today stand as shining beacons in their respective regions, as does South Korea after the Korean war, but in those cases the peoples were rather determined to rebuild what was lost, while neither the Iraqis nor the Afghanis, or the Libyans for that matter share the necessary homogeneity. They're too tribal in nature.

3. If someone attacks your friend, you consider that an attack on yourself. Thus, the IS' attack on Iraqis is something that we can't really let pass, and the reality is that the IS is a significant ideological force to be reckoned with; it's the new communism, and it's a plague that threatens the destruction of peoples and nations across the globe. Note that the IS hasn't 'directly' attacked the US yet only because they lack the means. Their goal is the same as Al Qaeda; the destruction of Israel, of the US who supports them, and the subjugation of the world under an Islamic Caliphate and Shariah law.
1. My comments were made with respect to Rand Paul's address. [Me] "First, at some point he loosely uses "free trade" as some sort of an American carrot in diplomacy." From Rand Paul: "Free trade and technology should be the greatest carrot of our statecraft." He earlier says "President George W. Bush understood that part of the projection of American power is the exporting of American goods and culture." No politician wants to admit access to foreign goods and services also benefit American consumers. He also points out that Bush negotiated 14 free trade agreements and pushes TPP. None of these are "free trade"; they are really managed trade. As free market economists like Boudreaux point out, if you are for free trade, you simply allow it, even unilaterally, because it's to the benefit of American consumers.

[As a brief aside, the last thing Rand Paul should be doing is referencing GW Bush in deferential terms. He needs to posture himself in 2016 against the 16 years of domestic and foreign intervention of Bush/Obama.]

"Limiting trade with hostile postures" is NOT acceptable; this is a type of warfare where consumers are the intended target. Economic sanctions are denounced by every self-respecting libertarian as immoral. Here is Rand Paul on Russia: "I support the sanctions that the U.S. and the European Union put in place against Russia." Here is Ron Paul on Russia: "These sanctions will not produce the results Washington demands, but they will hurt the economies of the US and EU, as well as Russia." As Ryan McMaken writes, "From a free-market perspective, trade sanctions are always immoral and illegitimate because they restrict trade and free choice among individuals. Arguably, they are even worse when instituted for purposes of provoking war, as is the case with the Obama administration and Russia. "

2, It's not clear what your point is: some nation/state-building is more successful than others. Afghanistan has been occupied by many empires during its history. You seem to realize, after the fact, that Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, among others, were too tribal or sectarian; the point is, Bush knew about the risks before occupying Afghanisan and Iraq; for example, his own father had declined to topple Hussein at the end of the first Gulf War for just that reason, and Obama had to know the same about Libya, while his Administration failed to follow the British in withdrawing diplomats from Benghazi before the tragic 9/11 attack. 

But the overall point is that state-building is not a constitutional responsibility; the citizens of a defeated state have the right to form their own government and leaders. We should not interfere in the internal affairs of other states.

3. ISIS is not a credible military threat to the US. You cannot rig a rationale for war based on the empty threats and rants of every anti-American group based in other countries. A rationale of preventive war is a prescription for nonstop, multi-front warfare. Again, Ron Paul has a more orthodox libertarian position: "A new US military incursion will not end ISIS; it will provide them with the recruiting tool they most crave, while draining the US treasury. Just what Osama bin Laden wanted!" No more Whac-a-Mole. I don't disagree that Iraq's neighbors in the region have an interest in containing ISIS, but America's intervention is morally hazardous.

(LFC). On Michigan becoming the fifth state to reject Tesla's direct sales to consumers.
And he is a Republican! Shows that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between the two major parties, both sellouts to cronies and those that finance their campaigns.
No. This is a Republican governor up for a tight reelection in a state whose economy is heavily dependent on the auto industry. I agree in principle Snyder should have vetoed the bill, but let me point out only one legislator from either party voted against the bill. Note the bill did not ban Tesla from sales, but Tesla has to work through dealerships. I agree that Tesla should have the right to sell directly rather than to sell through corrupt crony Big Dealers, but the courts haven't done a good job protecting economic liberty since Carolene Products.

(Judge Andrew Napolitano/Fox News). Do you think local officials have the right to lock you up if they believe you could have Ebola? Watch what Judge Andrew Napolitano had to say on 'The Kelly File' and weigh in.
Judge Napolitano has it spot on. This has been fear-mongering run amok, at the expense of individual liberty, almost like the Salem witch trials redux. There but for the grace of God... The anti-scientific public panic is unconscionable; out of all the recent airflights from West Africa, how many passengers and/or the people they've met since then have tested positive for the disease? You can count them on one hand. I'm not arguing that we shouldn't be prudent, but most of the comments in this thread are utterly shameful, anti-liberty, and uncompassionate.

(Drudge Report). REPUBLICANS VOW: WE'LL STOP OBAMA'S 'UN-AMERICAN' AMNESTY IF WE WIN SENATE...
All Priebus is doing is losing credibility. There will be more than enough Democrats in either chamber to sustain an Obama veto. Setting false expectations will come back and bite you on the ass.

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Henry Payne via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Linda Ronstadt, "How Do I Make You". Linda Ronstadt brought her rocker chick credentials; I absolutely love the driving percussion in this hit--in my top 5 favorites, along with "You're No Good", "Dreams to Dream", "Love is a Rose", and "Don't Know Much".  Honorable mention for "Someone to Lay Down Beside Me" and "Somewhere Out There". I prefer more original hit material, although I admit Ronstadt did spectacular remakes. But would you believe the "Very Best" Ronstadt CD I have playing in my car doesn't include 3 of these songs, including today's selection?

Miscellany: 10/27/14

Quote of the Day
Posterity! 
You will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom! 
I hope you will make good use of it!
John Adams

Tweet of the Day

Krugman is just frustrated that Amazon sells discounted used book copies of certain Nobel laureate economists. http://t.co/c9JDizNDp8
— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) October 28, 2014

Hillary's arithmetic adds to the national debt, subtracts from economic growth, multiplies our long-term liabilities, divides the classes.
— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) October 28, 2014

Image of the Day

Via the Libertarian Catholic

Pope Francis on "Gay Marriage" and the Secular Assault on the Family: Thumbs UP!
Via ChurchMilitant.TV

Don Boudreaux Takes on the Economic Lunacy of Hillary Clinton

I was so annoyed about what I call Hillary Clinton's "You Didn't Hire Them" speech I sent a quick, unacknowledged email to the Cafe Hayek blogger over the weekend, one of my favorite free market economists, Don Boudreaux, who frequently takes on clueless politicians. In a recent post, he found the relevant quote self-evidently absurd:

Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs.  You know that old theory, trickle-down economics.  That has been tried, that has failed.  It has failed rather spectacularly.  One of the things my husband says when people ask him what he brought to Washington, he says I brought arithmetic.

Speaking as someone with two math degrees, the Clintons don't know anything about arithmetic or economics: Hillary's policies add to the national debt, subtract from economic growth,  multiply our long-term liabilities, and divide the classes. But Boudreaux thinks (and I concur) an earlier soundbite on the minimum wage (which I didn't hear until now) is even more galling:

Don’t let anybody tell you that raising the minimum wage will kill jobs.  They always say that.  I’ve been through that.  My husband gave working families a raise in the 1990s [by signing a bill that raised the national minimum wage].

Only Keynesian hubris can equate ordering businesses at the point of a gun to give unreimbursed money to a certain class of workers with a "raise". Bottom line, businesses only hire people to the point they are productive, expected to provide a net benefit. Three cooks, for example, won't make an egg boil any faster. Increasing the cost of a worker does not help the company earn more revenue; the company may not have the ability to raise prices in a competitive market. Market prices for labor under equilibrium of demand and supply do a far better job of valuing similar labor than some economically illiterate populist political whore picking some number out of his ass and taking credit for extorting companies and prospective workers; the reality is that he has arbitrarily prohibited a worker, whose skills don't provide net benefit to a company at that ill-conceived line in the sand, from gaining mutually satisfactory gainful employment.

Civil Asset Forfeiture Abuse: IRS Targets Small Business Owner's Cash Deposits

While my Dad was assigned to a South Texas air base during my high school years, we went on a rare family meal out to a Tex-Mex restaurant in Mirando City, Lala's Cafe. It was seemingly out in the middle of nowhere. Yet when we entered the restaurant, it was clear that we were in for a tasty meal: it was crowded, and delicious smells filled the air. I recall there was a wall of photos of famous patrons with the cafe's owner, including an assassinated President. The food was spectacular, well worth the wait. To this day, I prefer diners and cafes to high-class restaurants, although I now have to watch the carbs in comfort foods. As I recall, the original owner personally saw to each plate prepared in her place, and I have the greatest respect for hard-working small businessmen. (Rumors were that she had turned down the opportunity to open up restaurants is major metropolitan areas like Houston.)

Carole Hinders, an Iowa Mexican food restaurant owner, has a cash-only operation, but the IRS bureaucracy decided she was making too many cash deposits, which in their paranoia meant that she was trying to bypass regulations requiring reporting deposits of $10K or higher, so last year they seized her $33K bank account. Typically under civil forfeiture, the tables are turned: the burden of proof is on the victim of the State, and quite often the victims, who don't have the legal resources to take on a system that can print its own money and get foreign investors to pay its bills, give in to legalized extortion. One of my favorite organizations, the Institute for Justice, is representing the grandmother's case.



Best Madonna Cover Ever



California's Unconstitutional Prison System



Independent Institute Rates the Presidents



Facebook Corner

(LSF). Falling prices are the ultimate evil in Keynesianism, and companies who lower their prices are the scourge of humanity.

"Amazon is not, at least so far, acting like a monopolist, a dominant seller with the power to raise prices. Instead, it is acting as a monopsonist, a dominant buyer with the power to push prices down."
Krugman is just frustrated that Amazon sells discounted used book copies of certain Nobel laureate economists.

(The Libertarian Catholic).  See Image of the Day.
Marriage is also a social and legal status, not only a sacrament. If it's not legally recognized, there are legal rights you are not entitled to.
The point is, as I've said in this group before, the State did not invent marriage; it was a preexisting social construct. To the extent the legal system supports the social context is one thing. However, when the law attempt to impose socially experimental policies in the private sector, it can have adverse effects on the social order.

Personally, I don't give a damn what activist gays, the political correctness police, or the fascist Statists call their mix-or-match mutated construct of "marriage". But the true libertarian, contrary to above commenters, does NOT use the State to impose its failed policies on the local community, and he supports the right of free association, including those communities who support the traditional concepts of marriage and family. For fascist judges to impose mutated constructs on the local community is unconscionable. This is not an issue of outlawing voluntary relationships, it's about the fascist State overwriting community values. If gays want to migrate to States that accommodate mutated concepts of marriage, fine; that's part of the free market system. If they want to persuade fellow citizens to change social norms, go ahead. But there's no contradiction in saying as a libertarian, I want to live in a state supporting traditional values.
(separate)
 Comment to the troll OP: no self-respecting libertarian would ever agree to the idea that the State "confers" rights; this concept is a variation of "positive rights"--things a State must do for me vs. things a State can't take away from us. You already have the right to contract; for example, you can always agree to leave your estate to your purple Martian lover and vice-versa. If someone I love is prohibited from visiting me in the hospital, it's a violation of my right of association. Ir's one thing if the State prohibits my right to contract or association with others, but it's nonsense to argue the State provides those rights; it merely recognizes them.

Proposals









Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Glenn McCoy and Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Linda Ronstadt, "Tumbling Dice"

Miscellany: 10/26/14

Quote of the Day
It's better to light a candle than to curse the darkness.
Chinese proverb

Image of the Day

Hillary Clinton: Economic Illiterate
Via Independent Institute

Santana's Awesome Rendition of the Star Spangled Banner, Game 4 of the World Series



Choose Life



Political Potpourri

From the WSJ:

Some 52% of likely voters in the survey said they wanted the election to produce a Republican-led Congress, while 41% favored Democratic control.  Republicans held a seven-point lead on the question at this point in the 2010 election in a Journal/NBC survey.

The poll shows the GOP consolidating, even expanding as we're 9 days until the election. Note that this doesn't necessarily reflect individual races in purple/red states, and it doesn't mean the voters necessarily love the GOP, but it does suggest that the voters are not happy with the Dem-controlled Senate and White House

From Washpo:

In fact, congressional Democrats are facing their highest disapproval rating in at least the last 20 years, at 67 percent. Meanwhile, 30 percent approve of the job congressional Democrats are doing. The poll comes on the heels of a WaPo-ABC poll that showed the Democratic Party in general hitting a three-decade low as far as how people feel about it.

RCP shows 6 of 10 of the lead Senate seats red and a projected 51, down 2 from my last check, but 2 of the blues are virtual ties in Georgia and Kansas, and the other 2 are 2-point leads for incumbents in New Hampshire and North Carolina. I'm not ready to call all 4 of those races for the GOP yet, but at this point I think Roberts (R-KS) will make a remarkable comeback from political near-death down 10 points with some Tea Party types willing to cut a deal with independent Orman if he would caucus with the GOP; one of the polls out today showed Roberts with a 4 point lead. I think in the end that the Tea Partiers will hold their noses over their failed attempt to primary Roberts and vote to kick out Harry Reid. Perdue (R-GA) had been consistently ahead of Nunn until a recent flurry of close polls favoring Nunn, but Perdue has won the last 2 polls. Hagan (D-NC) has surprisingly hung tough and has narrowly won 3 of the last 5 polls, and Shaheen (D-NH) has down slightly better over her last 5 polls, with their male adversaries each winning one 1-point poll. However, neither incumbent has broken 50, and you have to expect most undecideds will probably move to the challenger.

I had higher hopes in Virginia, Michigan and Minnesota (where the Democrats stole a Senate seat in 2008), but the GOP has failed to field a competitive state-wide candidate in MN since Pawlenty. Terri Land (R-MI) is an attractive candidate but with 2 of the last 6 polls given Peters a simple majority, this is tough. Similar stories for McFadden (MN) and Gillespie (VA). With 9 days left, I don't rule out surprises like wiping out a 10-point lead in a wave election (remember Gingrich's upset of Romney in SC in 2012?), but these races seem to have been leveling off.

On a brighter note, it looks like Democratic challenges in Kentucky and a late surprise 3-way race in trying to hold South Dakota from former Gov. Rounds are fading, and most of the recent polls have been shown persistent 5-point or so leads in converting Dem-held seats in CO, IA, AK, AR, and LA.

Facebook Corner

(Reason). To eliminate wage discrimination, smash the corporate state.
Glancing at the comments below, it's clear that a number of commenters have no idea who Sheldon Richman (the author) is, a prominent libertarian author for decades, former editor of The Freeman and VP for Future of Freedom Foundation. I do dislike his use of the term "corporate state" because people will confound it with corporation-bashing, the usual leftist crackpot conspiracies of plutocrats, etc. In simpler terms, think of competing special interests, including businesses and labor groups, which have their vested interests in restrictions of competition and other State-conferred "rights". But no self-respecting libertarian would ever attack the free association of corporations or unions.

The real enemy of liberty is the corrupt, self-serving State and its monopoly on the use of force in domestic and international intervention. Political whores will dress up their interventions (like wage constraints and benefit mandates, occupational licensing, etc.) in populist rhetoric, but explicit (e.g., payroll taxes) or implicit (regulations) costs constrain operational budgets and viable business options, causing unintended consequences, like reduced workhours or workforce, substitution of technology, etc. The private sector often competes for labor in very innovative ways without State intervention, labor pacts, etc.; for instance, my first IT position was at an employer which offered 4-day workweeks and subsidized cafeterias.

(Bastiat Institute). Falling prices are the Keynesian's worse nightmare. The price of USB drive storage has fallen by 99.99% over the past decade. The horror! Of course, the efficiency and automation that the market unleashes tend to make things cheaper over time, and the only thing that can offset this trend is massive expansion of the monetary base by a central bank.
 "Deflation creates the opposite phenomenon: Debt gets more expensive over time, because consumer spending power declines." WHAT?!
I think he's making assumptions of income and debt. The increased real cost of debt service (you're repaying debt with more expensive dollars) offsets the purchasing power of your discretionary income. All things being equal, holding income constant, under inflation your purchasing power decreases and under deflation, your real income/purchasing power increases. He's probably assuming falling nominal income and a high debt burden; the context is that he is arguing you are better off with higher wages under inflation because you're paying off debt with cheaper dollars, and he's trying to argue the reverse takes place under deflation.

I do think that he phrased it badly. He should have simply said that we're worse off because debt must be repaid with more expensive dollars--and we could buy more goods and services with lower debt service costs.
Inflation makes debts cheaper and incentivizes debt: Historically, societies without a central bank, and thus with prices that gradually lowered over time, have far less public and private debt than societies with a central bank.
Remember that there are 2 parties to a transaction, including debt. There is a transfer of wealth from lender to debtor under general inflation, and the effect reverses under deflation. There can be little doubt why a government with a large debt pursues easy monetary policy, and why demand for credit increases as its perceived cost decreases. Other State fiscal policy distortions include things like mortgage interest tax deduction, bank regulations to promote lending to higher risk applicants, and deposit insurance.

Proposals









Political Cartoon

Courtesy of the original artist via IPI

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Linda Ronstadt, "Alison"