Analytics

Sunday, May 28, 2017

Post #3232 M

Quote of the Day

Every truth has four corners: 
as a teacher I give you one corner, 
and it is for you to find the other three.
Confucius  


Tweet of the Day

Once again, one of my tweets went viral ("Thanks to Trump").






















Image of the Day


via Cato Institute
via LFC on FB

Thomas DiLorenzo on Myths of the Great Depression




Towards Intellectual Free Expression




Facebook Corner


A continuation of an exchange with a young married relative with a college degree. It really doesn't surprise me that he, like some of his cousins, is a political "liberal" (I happen to be one of those libertarians who want to reclaim the term, which is commonly used to describe Statist progressives; there is nothing liberal about government at the point of a gun.) I often reprint the opposing comments, but I usually redact identifiable information about relatives in the blog. I'm somewhat surprised because I know his mother had been active in a Republican wives' club, and he went to one of the more conservative Texas universities. I knew he didn't like Trump but in years we've been "friended", I've never seen him otherwise express political comments personally or through Facebook and I've posted probably hundreds of comments.

You should be able to infer the themes from my responses. Basically, he is arguing income inequality, that redistributed income for lower-income is spent more efficiently in the economy than low-propensity-to-spend well-to-do. He is not happy with outsourcing and offshoring. He wants all sorts of government interventions, including more active involving in education. He uses the leftist pejorative of "trickle-down economics" to describe my point of view, and when I talk about the need to radically downsize government and the grossly overcompensated public sector, he shoots back a not-so-subtle reference to the fact I've worked as a government contractor. He later sent me a private email after I indicated that I was done with the conversation, arguing that I was an ideologue and he didn't like the verbal shots I made along the way. I recently read a libertarian make a similar point about us needing to play nice with others, to make friends and influence other people. Let me be frank; I don't suffer fools easily. And I particularly don't like people copy and pasting partisan talking points. I don't mind people disagreeing with me (well, of course, we would like to believe we can convert a Statist to a free market perspective, but few people have the ability to overcome their intellectual biases) [Since I started this write-up and specifically noting the conversation was over, he decides to add a thinly-disguised shot on my earlier reference to the Gini coefficient, specifically referencing Piketty in the process. Commence ass-kicking.]

Clip 1:

I don't care about income distribution; it's a non-issue from an economic standpoint: the fact is that arguing over a more "equitable" slice of the pie is irrelevant when the pie is growing. A smaller slice becomes bigger with the economy. The fact is the matter is that investment is the crown jewel of a growing economy, and we have an economy that is biased in the direction of spending, against working and investing. We tax interest income which is de facto capital under the current Federal Reserve scheme. The mortgage interest rate deduction also inflates the value of property and is relevant only to high middle-income and above.

 You apparently believe in the economic nonsense perpetrated by the likes of Piketty, whose research has been widely discredited and I'm not going to waste my time here refuting it. I'm a free market guy, and it's no secret that top-heavy government is responsible for mediocre economic growth we've seen this generation. THE FACT IS THAT OVER TWO-THIRDS of government outlays ARE FOR INDIVIDUAL BENEFITS, which is NOT the purpose of government. Government is highly inefficient and is self-serving.

 I will simply point in passing that the Gini coefficient (look it up) has been essentially flat (on an apple to apple basis) since the mid-60's. This basically disproves your "the rich are getting richer at the expense of the poor" nonsense, socialist claptrap. I will also point out that the purported shrinking middle-class has been more of merging into the higher class, that many of the studies you revere are NOT longitudinal studies (looking at compensation of the same person over time): we have had significant migration among quintiles. Not to mention these studies you implicitly reference look more at wages, not total compensation (not to mention the stolen income transfers you are defending). You also ignore the higher standard of living resulting from economic-liberal (as in free markets, not socialist schemes) policies like free trade and market innovation/competition; many of America's "poor" enjoy cars, air conditioning, cellphones, TV, appliances, etc. There's actually a serious obesity problem with maybe 6% of income involving food purchases. I could go on and on; I have gone on in significant detail in over 3200 posts in my political blog.

 Oh, and for that little shot referencing current or past government gigs: first, I'm not a civil servant who makes far more, especially when you factor in benefits. For all practical purposes, I haven't accumulated any employer matches to retirement over my work career or qualified for any kind of pension system. Second, I've worked for clients across industries and different levels of government. For example, all the years I worked in Texas, except when I was teaching at UTEP, were for private-sector clients. Government especially on the federal level has high barriers to entry, e.g., background or clearance which have to be sponsored. Over 10 years in Maryland, I never got a gig which included a clearance opportunity. Did you ever wonder why the DC metro area includes some of the wealthiest counties in the US and is so politically "progressive"?

Clip 2:

Nope, you've got the cart before the horse. Investment is the fuel behind production of goods and services. When the well-to-do invest, it not only provides employment opportunities, but makes possible more price-efficient and/or new goods and services available to the masses. Investment makes possible roads and other infrastructure which goes far beyond the 1%. While billionaires like Gates, Buffett, and Ellison are billionaires multiple times over, they have also created millionaire employees and investors by doing what they do best.

 You are so boxed in by "progressive" propaganda, you have no clue about real economics whatsoever. The percentage of manufacturing jobs has been going down since Obama was in diapers (not adult ones). Counterproductive, economic clueless policies like minimum wages hurt job seekers and spur on substitute labor, including self-serve kiosks making their way into fast food joints. Each and every "progressive" policy you favor results in counterproductive unintended consequences. As for offshoring, etc., that's part of the law of comparative advantage--didn't you take any econ courses at A&M, because you're flunking Econ 101 in this thread? The point is freeing up American labor and wringing inefficiency out of our economy is to the BENEFIT of all American residents.

 No, we don't need the current left-fascist government to micromanage education resources. At best, under the public education system basically ruled by corrupt crony unions, we've had stagnant achievement, despite spending multiples per student 4 decades back.

 The ONLY way to restore this government and country is to RADICALLY DOWNSIZE AND DECENTRALIZE GOVERNMENT, REASSERT ECONOMIC LIBERTY. A free market, including open immigration. By Friedman's Law, anything that government does, the private sector can do better with half the resources. We will continue to see consumer demand rise from the efficiency made possible by a free, competitive market. The answer is NOT the Statist agenda of my brainwashed nephew. I don't need some left- or right-fascists making decisions better left to 320M consumers.

 And with that, I'm closing this conversation; I'm officially bored and disappointed my nephew doesn't have the intellect to look past the propaganda he was taught in public schools.

Clip 3:

Trickle-down theory is a "progressive" pejorative and absolute bullshit. Unless you mean the "trickle down" theory of Statists, where "progressive" bureaucrats get their cut of money stolen from taxpayers.

Clip 4:

 I've now lost my patience with your inability to read plain English. I don't suffer fools gladly. If you had done a simple search in my blog, you would have noticed, e.g., https://rguillem.blogspot.com/2016/04/miscellany-41716.html

 The first thing you weren't intelligent enough to realize is that I specifically wrote "APPLES TO APPLES"; now WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? Basically, the Gini coefficient is traditionally based on HOUSEHOLD INCOME. Now a SMART person would know since the 1960's that the traditional household has deteriorated, and so this exacerbates or distorts the Gini coefficient, because the unit of measure has changed. You have to normalize it on an individual basis. Incomes are collected on an individual, not household or family basis. If and when you normalize it on an individual basis, you find it's been nearly 0.52, give or take 0.01 since 1960. (See chart below.) The reason it increased from 1947-1960 is because of a highly regulated economy under left-fascist FDR, one of our worst Presidents who unnecessarily extended the Depression with his economic illiterate interventions, like wage-price controls. If you're more interested in reading about this, consider https://finance.townhall.com/columnists/politicalcalculations/2013/12/05/the-major-trends-in-us-income-inequality-since-1947-n1757626

 Now stop copying and pasting leftist propaganda and start reading from a critical perspective. For you not to wonder how a changing unit of measure changes the analysis is lazy-ass thinking.

 I've finished my commentary on this thread. I've spent too much time having to teach you stuff I picked up on my own. 
Courtesy of Townhall

Choose Life: Announcing the Good News


Adorable sweetie!




Family






 Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Steve Kelley via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists


Neil Diamond, "Red, Red Wine"

Posted by at
Labels: , , , ,