Analytics

Tuesday, October 31, 2017

Post #3423 M

Quote of the Day

Hope is the thing with feathers, 
That perches in the soul, 
And sings the tune without the words , 
And never stops at all.
Emily Dickinson  

Tweet of the Day














Image of the Day

A Released Document in the JFK File
via Ron Paul on FB


Remy Is Back With "Trigger" This Halloween Night




Amending the Constitution: A Convention of the States




Stossel On Undue Fears Relative to Risk


Like, say, danger from a refugee



Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Henry Payne via Townhall


Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists


Dolly Parton, "Single Women"

Monday, October 30, 2017

Post #3422 M

Quote of the Day

Hold on to what is good, even if it's a handful of earth.
Hopi prayer  


Tweet of the Day












Big Sugar



Marriage Is a Beautiful Thing




Economic Freedom




Facebook Corner

(Libertarianism.org). "What we classical liberals see clearly, and what modern progressives do not, is that all too often having a majority on their side only renders the progressive movement a tyranny of the majority. A democracy it may be, but it is not a proper government."
How stupid.... the majority is not a tyranny.... all of history has been a cruel oppression of the majority by an oppressive minority. Now the top 0.1% is imposing a neofeudal tyranny over the majority and you people are so invested in your stupid illogical philosophy you're worried about the majority of very good people having a little more say.... you people are pathological....Oh the poor minority.... the top 400 with their combined 1.8 trillion of wealth we really need to be considerate of them and their needs... WTF is wrong with you people?
The "progressive" OP is too ignorant to realize that if the upper 1% were in charge, they would have never implemented such a Draconian tax policy at their own expense and similarly manipulate the rest of the economy, the Gini coefficient would be far higher, less income mobility.

Political Cartoon


Courtesy of Glenn McCoy via Townhall


Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists


Dolly Parton, "But You Know I Love You." Dolly does a rare (for her) remake of a 1969 Top 20 hit from Kenny Rogers (with the First Edition).

Sunday, October 29, 2017

Post #3421 M

Quote of the Day

People who say they sleep like a baby usually don't have one.
Leo J. Burke  


Tweet of the Day
























Image of the Day


via Twitter

Innovation in Driverless Cars




Free Our Children To Grow Up



Political Cartoon


Courtesy of Gary Varvel via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists


Dolly Parton, "9 to 5". Parton's first and only #1 solo hit on the Hot 100, arguably her signature song. She has not hit Top 40 since as a solo artist although she had a duet hit with Kenny Rogers and continued to hit the top of the country charts.

Saturday, October 28, 2017

Post #3420 M

Quote of the Day

A single event can awaken within us a stranger totally unknown to us. 
To live is to be slowly born.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery  

Tweet of the Day












Donald Trump's Despicable Anti-Consumer "Buy American" Policy




Penn Jillette on The Case For Libertarianism





Facebook Corner


via Pro-Life Libertarian

Um. the trespasser was the sperm--and you let him into the room. You could have said, "No sperm allowed".

What Does Freedom Mean To You

I've got some issues here, because this woman seems to think it's okay for the State to redistribute on behalf of less fortunate people. Even if you believe, like I do, in private charitable institutions, the State is an ineffective, expensive way of achieving that goal. The State never likes competition. One of the lessons we saw in the aftermath of ObamaCare is that many hospitals pulled back on charity budgets, anticipating government-supplied or mandated revenues (e.g., an individual mandate).



Political Cartoon



Courtesy of Eric Allie via IPI


Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists


Dolly Parton, "Old Flames Can't Hold a Candle To You"

Rant of the Day 10/28/17


As I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican, I don't really care about inter-party squabbles, and quite frank, even when I became a nominal Republican in the late 80's, it had more to do with my disgust as a former conservative Democrat whose party had been hijacked by "progressives". I never contributed or worked for the Republicans (I did make 2 nominal contributions to the McCain campaign during the 2008 primary which I deeply regret, not because he lost, but McCain made politically naive blunders I still can't understand and cast serious doubt about his executive judgment).

But there have been persistent disingenuous myths over how Democrats in the White House are "good" for the economy (never mind that Carter misery index thing), and I think the following Internet meme was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back:

via Democrat partisan on Twiiter 

First, Presidents don't really have any direct controls over the economy: they can foster growth by reducing taxes (providing an incentive to work, invest and save), spending (including dubious displacement of the free market, international meddling, etc.), the size of the government, and regulations, promoting trade and strong currency, etc. There are a number of things they can do, including implementing an economic liberal agenda, appointing Federal Reserve governors and chairmen (assuming the Fed must exist) who are focused at currency stability, downsizing the international footprint and regime uncertainty.

Second, there are structural factors like the business cycle, which operate across President terms, and exogenous shocks, like energy prices (e.g., Middle East instability). The Fed may increase rates, which pressures profits and stock prices.

Third, there are other branches of the federal government, namely the Congress, which makes the laws, and the courts (which, among other things, famously and rightly struck down key parts of FDR's early New Deal legislation). Let's not forget, after Clinton raised taxes and tried to pass HillaryCare into law, he lost the House (and ultimately the Senate) for his last 6 years of office. After ObamaCare and Dodd N. Frankenstein in the 111th Congress, Obama lost the House (and ultimately the Senate) for his last 6 years of office. So who's responsible: the Congress who puts a spendthrift POTUS in a box, or the President?

Clinton inherited an economy already emerging from a recession, as did Obama. (In the 2007 recession, 14 months of the 18-month recession occurred on Bush's watch.) Moreover, to those of you who take taken a class in macroeconomics, policies like a stimulus (like government spending or one-off tax cuts/rebates) don't have an immediate impact on the economy but could take 6 months or more to propagate through the economy. In fact, of the mid-February 2009 signed ARRA, only $114B was spent in FY 2009 (including months after June), a relatively modest amount in a $15T economy, and much of that was basically aimed at Dem crony political interests in government/education, infrastructure and green energy, not the private sector.

And quite clearly Clinton and Obama won their elections in large part due to voter concerns over the recessions. Presidential terms rarely dovetail with economic cycles. Let's remember that Bush 41 was struggling with the S&L crisis (basically emerging from bad government policy) which had its roots in earlier years, budget wars with a spendthrift Dem-controlled Congress, and a Fed raising rates late in the business cycle.

The IT boom that ignited the 90's decade of growth had nothing to do with Clinton; commercialization actually started in 1992. Bush had basically negotiated NAFTA but ran out of time in office to ratify it. To his credit, Clinton, largely with GOP support, was able to pass NAFTA. . Clinton himself conceded that the era of Big Government was over. Clinton found a way to work with Congress on deregulation, tax reform, and welfare reform. While early in Clinton's Presidency, deficits had been projected through the next several years, we actually saw a string of small budget surpluses for the first time in decades.

It should be clear that I'm not a fan of the fiction that Clinton and Obama are responsible for whatever successes Bush and Trump had. Let's point out that the Nasdaq began its huge correction in the spring of Clinton's last year in office and extended well into Bush's first term. It would take the Nasdaq over 15 years to recover, a crown jewel of the American economy, at least in part due to easy money policies of the Fed and unsustainable demand. In other words, part of  Clinton's final term of office included sales which were accelerated from the early Bush years. (IT customers booked multiple orders to ensure delivery and then cancelled redundant orders; suppliers overestimated demand.) Bush not only faced, unlike Clinton or Obama, bookend recessions but the 9-11 attacks, which crippled the airline and hospitality industries, and the corporate scandals, most of which had their origins during the Clinton years.

I have a lot of issues with Bush's performance. He only tepidly supported GSE reform after the accounting scandals (although Dem Frank's "let's roll the dice" is infamous). He was hyping home ownership at a historical high, despite slow income growth and the Fed enabling a second massive bubble in less than a decade. From a classical liberal standpoint, Bush was a huge disappointment: domestic spending up by record amounts since the LBJ administration, tax stimulus, almost everything he did during the 2007 recession, including TARP. But the progressive talking points of wild west deregulation and ruinous tax cuts are patently absurd. In fact, Bush added to government regulations, and his tax cuts didn't come close to the tax rates of the late 80's. (And there are several studies which show the government taking in about 17% of national income across tax rate changes over decades.)

As for Trump, let's first point out that Obama not only had near-zero interest rates during his entire Presidency (unprecedented), he became (I believe) the first POTUS not to hit 3% growth his entire time in office. I was mildly surprised to see the second straight quarter of  3% growth under Trump, especially given the massive natural disaster hits over the last quarter.

I do think that Trump has been off to a good start on deregulation, and I worry the stock market has gotten ahead of itself, with perhaps unrealistic expectations on tax policy, failed healthcare reform, etc. Nor to mention a massive public debt impairs a country's ability to sustain higher economic growth, a major problem Obama faced. Not to mention that Trump absurdly rejects free trade and immigration, which are strongly pro-growth policies.

I believe that we are near the top, if not at the tipping point of the business cycle; this expansion is over 8 years old and long in the tooth. Trump is not cutting spending, reforming entitlements. His nominee to replace Yellen is unlikely to promote a strong dollar policy. He doesn't understand that most imports are factors of production, and more expensive resources exacerbate costs for American producers, adversely affecting their global competitiveness.

Trumponomics are only a modest improvement over Obamanomics, potentially disastrous if he ignites or exacerbates trade and/or currency wars. He is closer to a market top than a market bottom. If I knew, I would become a rich man; many people in the last decade knew we were in a bubble real estate economy but lost fortunes trying to predict when the bubble would burst.

Friday, October 27, 2017

Post #3418 M

Quote of the Day

I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation 
and is but a reflection of human frailty.
Albert Einstein  

Tweet of the Day




































































The People's Republic of California Golden Fleece Award




Chicago Red Light Scam



Sowell On Race Relations





Political Cartoon


Courtesy of Henry Payne via Townhall


Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists


Dolly Parton, "Starting Over Again"

Post #3417 J

I'm On Their Lists!


Pro wrestler Chris Jericho in his most recent WWE engagements had this annoying gimmick where characters who did something he did not approve of were added to his List. I'm not sure what the repercussion was for being on his List (humiliation?), but nobody wanted to be on it. (It became a critical part of the storyline with his alliance with fellow Canadian grappler Kevin Owens and Owens' eventual swerve turn against Jericho.)

I was a relatively late joiner to Twitter, a few months over 4 years with only sporadic tweets over the first several weeks. (It seems hard to believe that I've published 12.5K tweets since then.) But I've never really looked at other features of Twitter like lists. I don't recall exactly the first time I saw the first time I got a notification that I got added to some list. It may have been either Trump's own account or some follower's account in reference to a tweet mentioning his wealth and I was added to some "I am rich" list.  Actually, out of the hundreds, if not thousands of tweets I've written on Trump, few deal with his wealth; in fact, I have been a persistent critic of the Politics of Envy. If I were to criticize his wealth, it might be in his attempt to identify with the daily struggles of lower/middle-income people like my folks. My folks, raising 7 kids on a low-paid USAF NCO's salary, were in no position to help finance my college. (I had one maternal uncle and one paternal aunt with college degrees (a priest and a nun/sister). Five of their kids graduated from college, and three hold advanced degrees--and the other two hold professional certifications (RN and CPA). Trump had a wealthy Dad who funded his transfer Ivy League education and backed his early business deals. I know what it's like having less than $100 to my name, not knowing how to cover my next rent check in my twenties. Or working for employers who would eventually go into bankruptcy, being laid off, and, unlike Trump, go out of business.

Yes, Trump may have lost his airline and yacht twenty-odd years back, but he doesn't have to worry how to make his next mortgage statement,  he's going to finance his youngest son's college education, how to pay the doctor bills or his next meal. Is this jealousy? No. It's just an observation of reality. Would I like the economic certainty that vast wealth enables? Of course. But as far as his knowing what it's like to be an unemployed WV coal miner, a Baby Boomer racing to retirement without a pension and with retirement assets decimated by multiple severe stock corrections over the past 20 years? I have a brother-in-law, a fellow IT professional who once planned to retire at 50 and had to file for bankruptcy. Trump's claim that he identifies with lower middle-class people, many who voted for them based on this over-hyped image of his business "success", is fraudulent. So to an extent I do have an implicit motive to prick this hype bubble, but it's not motivated by my wanting his wealth. I know his economic illiterate policies against immigration and trade hurt, not help American consumers.

I've made other lists, including another Trumpkin putting me on his Trump Derangement Syndrome list. It's laughable. I've actually tweeted against leftists who do have Trump Derangement Syndrome. Being a Trump critic is different than being part of "the resistance". There are numerous times I tweeted in support of Trump, e.g., his judicial nominees, his deregulation agenda, his termination of Comey, against the Russian election conspiracy nonsense, etc. I have not been supportive of the dysfunctional feminist diatribes, his impeachment critics, and the attempts to identify him with white nationalists or Hitler. It's one thing to categorize me as a Trump critic or skeptic, but I'm not one of those who obsess over Trump in personal terms.

Now, and I haven't started even published a list of my own yet, my understanding is that a Twitter list is functionally like a type of virtual following. Let me give an example. I'm a huge fan on Donald Boudreaux, a free-market economist (Cafe Hayek). My daily digest from Cafe Hayek is perfect. I briefly followed him on Twitter, and my Twitter feed exploded. A little too much Don. I only follow a handful of others who tweet occasionally, far less than I do. But apparently, say if I created a pro-liberty economist list  (something I've been thinking of doing), I could scan their recent tweets on a demand basis.

I don't know how many lists I'm currently on. I do know a tactic to get myself off lists. I'm annoyed if I think the theme is insulting or unfair (I think the other day a left-fascist added me to his white supremacist list, which makes no sense whatsoever applied to a guy who loves his black and brown grandnieces and grandnephews and has himself dated black and brown women, whose references include Jews, blacks, and Hindus). The leftists are simply tagging any conservative they come across as a racist.  All they do is lose credibility like the boy that cries wolf one too many times. There are real racists and Nazis out there. I've occasionally gotten reply tweets from them; I basically tell them to go away, occasionally using more colorful language.

Generally, though, as a writer, I'll take readers however they come; some of my most prolific retweeters have been Trumpkins (I have absolutely no tolerance for Clinton, Obama or leftists of any kind, and that includes personal attempts on Trump). I would probably like being on more complimentary lists like "men I would like to date" or "my favorite libertarian-conservatives".

Oh My Gosh, Is It Already the Christmas Season?

I'm not kidding: a couple of weeks ago,  one of my nieces (the first daughter of sibling #2) posted pictures on Facebook of her 2-year-old son closely examined some Christmas exhibits at their local Costco (I'm not a member). I remember in years past being shocked at seeing holiday merchandise already on sale at Sam's Club closer to Halloween. (It may have been stocked earlier, but I only shop occasionally there.) When I pushed her on the topic, she responded, "You know, Christmas is such a magical time of year; I want him to enjoy it." My niece is a devout Catholic, and I don't need to remind her that Jesus is the reason for the season. Marketers will find any reason to hype any holiday on the calendar day, including Hamburger Day. I don't remember if I ever really believed in Santa Claus; it really wasn't on metaphysical questions over the physical impossibility of globally delivering gifts for children. To me the myth really didn't come across as more believable than other fairy tale I had heard. Oh, I went with the flow, because, let's face it, I liked getting presents, plus it was fun for my younger siblings.

Hallmark Channel started its Countdown to Christmas this afternoon (schedules have varied over past years. sometimes over weekends up to mid-November or so to nearly around the clock (except for maybe 10 AM - 2 PM with certain original daily programming). Now personally I'm prefer a more diversified selection of classics (like Miracle on 34th Century, A Christmas Carol, It's a Wonderful Life) and their own stronger originals from past seasons (like Angels & Ornaments); these tend to be highly recycled romantic/comedies, including the same leading actors, occasionally with fantasy elements (for example, a niece whose workaholic aunt has failed to keep her promises asks Santa for magical help in making her aunt be honest with others).

I have occasionally reviewed (critically) Hallmark movies in the blog, and I'm not going to repeat them here. Hallmark tends to have an obsession with royalty (fairly puzzling given we rebelled against a monarchy), you usually have some politically incorrect protagonist who is, say, a heartless profit-taking businessman or corporation out to crush local businesses or non-GMO farms, often exploiting some innocent consumers. Quite often you'll have obviously loveless relationships that stand in the way of romance between the protagonists. In the end, the locavores, the anti-corporate forces, etc. predictably carry the day. Not exactly the storylines you would expect a libertarian like me to favor.

Sooner or later, I'll start writing what I think are more compelling stories without the predictable progressive theme contexts. Not in a free blog of course.

Thursday, October 26, 2017

Post #3416 M

Quote of the Day

When you get into a tight place and everything goes against you, 
till it seems as though you could not hang on a minute longer, 
never give up then, 
for that is just the place and time that the tide will turn.
Harriet Beecher Stowe  

Tweet of the Day



Image of the Day

Via Justin Amash

Facebook Corner


via Anything Left-Handed

You mean right-handers don't read that as naturally as we do? I also started out my IT career as an APL programmer (and was quite gifted); the syntax is executed from right to left, which was natural for me to follow but difficult for others.


The Alt-Right vs. Conservatism




Cultural Appropriation and Related Nonsense




Types of Libertarianism




The Decline of American Universities




Political Cartoon


Courtesy of Glenn McCoy via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists


Dolly Parton, "Sweet Summer Lovin'"