Quote of the Day
If I wished to punish a province, I would have it governed by philosophers.Frederick II, the Great
Image of the Day: Choose Life; Sibling Love
 |
| Prince George loves his little sister Charlotte |
The Anti-Taxpayer Big Public Sector Unions and Their Corrupt Partisan Benefactors
An Anti-Trade Protectionist Rant on TPP and a Response
A Libertarian Republican post senses that TPP provides the GOP to regain its Reagan blue collar alliance (not in so many words of course); I often disagree with LR. Let me say at the outset whereas I would prefer unilateral free trade and do not see TPP as an authentic "free trade" deal, I still see the agreement as a win-win first step to opening markets for consumers in all those countries with lower tariffs/prices for a greater supply and variety of goods.
The following is excerpted from Scott Paul, President of Alliance for American Manufacturing:
President (sic) Obama campaigned on the idea of a manufacturing revival, not once, but twice. In his first campaign, he promised to get tough on trade with China (although we now have a record trade deficit with China).Now I've frequently cited Mark Perry of Carpe Diem, and let's review a few of his graphs:
He then promised to create 1 million new manufacturing jobs in his second term (our #AAMeter shows he’s falling way short of that goal). And his campaign commercials and personal appearances featured scores of American flags, hardhats, factory backdrops, and the words “Made in America.”
But now that he’s not running for office anymore and pushing a massive Pacific trade deal, his support has waned significantly.
So I differ on why the Obama administration’s advocacy for manufacturing and reshoring has ground to a halt. It begs the question: Does his administration believe that the best days for “Made in America” are already behind us, or was it all just a cynical political ploy?
We can produce more of our own goods – and more for the rest of the world – with the right public policies on trade, taxes, research, training, infrastructure, and energy. Conversely, an America in which manufacturing jobs aren’t front and center for economic policy will grow into a scary place: declining tax revenues, reduced investment in research, career paths blocked for non-college attending young people, and a reliance on strategic competitors (China and Russia) to supply our own military.
If you think that’s a wildly dystopian view of the future, consider this: Following Superstorm Sandy in 2012, it took extra weeks to turn the lights back in some affected areas as we waited for a shipment of electrical transformers from Asia, because they are no longer made in America.
If Democrats really are giving up on a manufacturing jobs revival, I won’t blame Americans for turning the lights out on them.
 |
| Via Roger Kerr |
 |
| Via Kruse Kronicle |
Paul is basically a protectionist at heart, and he seems to be engaging in schoolyard taunting. It's like he's never heard of the law of comparative advantage. No, we don't need some misguided notion of "self-sufficiency" which is little more than a guaranteed government bailout of unsustainable businesses. We don't need to trigger a lose-lose trade war; with provocative rhetoric and posturing. Most importantly, we don't need government getting in the way of business, by engaging in industrial policy, by picking winners and losers in the marketplace, with meddling in business policy, by competing with business for resources and personnel, with excessive taxation and regulations, with feckless monetary policy. Our primary criterion is the best interest of the consumer, who benefits from increased competition, an improved supply and variety of goods.
 |
| Carpe Diem |
Facebook Corner
(National Review). Rand Paul is not so much a proponent of limited government as an opponent of government, period. That's not what conservatives believe.
We really need to question National Review's faux-conservative position in favor of international meddling, contrary to real conservatives in the Old Right, like Robert Taft. Similarly, there's nothing conservative about National Review's knee-jerk defense of Big Brother's voracious appetite for information gathering over innocent Americans without probable cause.
(Rand Paul 2016). This does not give Republicans a fighting chance in 2016.
Those pathetic, morally corrupt anti-immigrants are economically illiterate losers. It goes beyond the fact of economic history that our highest economic growth occurred during periods of liberalized immigration, that it's a win-win policy. It is NONE of their damn business who gets to live where, who hires whom etc. It's fundamentally anti-liberty. The same hypocrites who claim they are "conservative" and against big government believe in Big INS.
(IPI). Every day that the Illinois General Assembly does nothing, the pension liability grows by another $13 million.
Thankfully, the case for immediately aligning all new hires with a self-managed plan is compelling. It is affordable. And it is politically possible.
Self managed plans as in 401Ks have failed most Americans who have them. http://www.usatoday.com/.../social-security.../1891155/
Ah, rhe resident economically illiterate troll is back. I'm not in the mood for your clueless propaganda. The fact of the matter is that there are a number of ultra-low-cost, relatively safe (from a long-term perspective) indexed funds available in most 401Ks (including my current one), and the magic of compounded returns and tax deferral make it a no-brainer.
Tell me, who honestly believes that Illinois public workers can rely on their Democrat political whores to protect their interests and provide for their retirement? I see a system headed for insolvency. You, in your Statist, elitist delusion, simply don't trust public employees to be smart enough to make their own money decisions--compared to what? The idiots whose decisions have put state and local bonds in near-junk bond status?
(Citizens Against Government Waste). More taxpayer money down the drain...
It's a shame that the anti-immigrants continue to spam CAGW threads with their morally unconscionable, economically illiterate nonsense. Just to point out that immigrants are younger and healthier than the US as a whole, and they are net contributors to programs like social security and Medicare. According to SSA actuaries, by 2007 alone, unauthorized immigrants had net-contributed between $120-240B to the trust fund.
(follow-up to yesterday's Cato Institute thread on the Statist overreaction to trans fats. I pointed out that American consumption was already down to fairly modest 1.3 grams per day and argued that it made no sense for the government to intervene when the market was already reaching in that direction.)
Makes a lot of sense, for those untrusting of the free market to sell healthy products.
Only those retarded enough to believe that you build a customer base by killing your customers.
(second comment)
The second point being that the government has repeatedly made the wrong choices (e.g., saccharin, dietary cholesterol, salt).and in fact strongly promoted hard margarine in substitution for ultra-healthy butter. (Guess what's in hard margarine? HINT: Artificial trans fats.). The federal government and some state governments ban interstate shipment or sale of raw milk, which most agree is better-tasting and more nutritious. (My Dad as a youth worked on a relative's farm and swore by it.)
The federal government produces squat. All healthy foods come from the private market, despite the counterproductive policies of government which are often corrupt and anticompetitive, which limit customer choices and supplies. Just to give you one bonehead example, consider the fascist President FDR. In order to slay the deflation bogeyman, he sought to command and control farming output to support farm prices. So ample crops, milk, etc, during the time of the Great Depression which would have been a l ifesaver for those with limited resources, were literally destroyed under the theory they were saving farmers from the free market.
(FEE). Isolationist immigration policies make no sense in light of the enormous economic benefits of free migration, and concerns about immigrants’ economic effect on natives have been shown to be overblown or flatly contradicted by the evidence http://at.fee.org/1G6K7fL
The summary speaks against isolationist immigration policy. I never heard anyone begging for isolationist immigration policy. Uncontrolled immigration however does lead to other resource and planning problems, particularly when non-natural rights are granted by statute.
This is so manifestly absurd; it tacitly assumes a Statist perspective. We don't have interstate walls; you would think that that some states given their social policies would be overrun. But among other things, the competition for resources bids up prices Believe it or not, a lot of people don't want to leave their native homes and cultures. People have limited resources and may not stay in an area with ilmited opportunities and a high cost of living. The fact is during the Great Recession there was a net outflow of unauthorized workers,
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of Gary Varvel via Townhall |
Cat Stevens, "Randy". One of my little sisters is a big Cat Stevens fan, and this is one of her favorite Cat Stevens performances (I agree). I think it's one of Stevens' most melodic compositions. I haven't found a good writeup on the song. Some have speculated it was about a gay relationship because Randy is a popular predominantly male given name. I don't think so because this album was released after his Muslim conversion and Randy/Randi is a popular variant of Miranda. My personal feeling is that he is singing about a secret, forbidden, young love, not taboo in nature, but for example they come from different social classes (say, royalty vs. commoner), religions, their parents and/or friends don't approve, etc.
