The Best Judge of How to Spend Your Money

While defending the current stimulus plan, Paul Krugman makes a ridiculous argument.

[W]rite off anyone who asserts that it’s always better to cut taxes than to increase government spending because taxpayers, not bureaucrats, are the best judges of how to spend their money.

Here’s how to think about this argument: it implies that we should shut down the air traffic control system. After all, that system is paid for with fees on air tickets — and surely it would be better to let the flying public keep its money rather than hand it over to government bureaucrats. If that would mean lots of midair collisions, hey, stuff happens.

Claiming that government provides a level of consumer protection that wouldn’t be there in a free market is an argument as common as it is false. Here’s a newsflash for you; it’s in the best interest of an airline to not have midair collisions. Shocking I know.

Left to their own devices, airlines and airports would create their own system to track and manage air traffic. And I bet it would be more efficient and cheaper than the government model. Planes won’t start running into each other without the FAA, elevators won’t start plummeting to the basement without goverment inspectors, and canned goods won’t be full of E. coli without the FDA.

I trust the people who’s livelihood, and in fact lives, depend on the safe delivery of their products and services, not the government.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Children of Hamas

I must have been sick on “army crawl day” in grade school. When people tell you that both sides in the middle east conflict want peace, show them what Hamas is teaching their kids.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Next Right Same as The Old Right

I was hoping that the post “Putting the ‘Next’ Into ‘Next Right’: Retooling vs. Restructuring” would offer a proper defense of capitalism. This is the issue that lost McCain the election and the Right needs to be “retooled” to understand and explain the moral right to free markets. Unfortunately, I found the same consequentialism that is the Right’s default defense for capitalism. Here’s their explanation of the first of the three pillars of conservatism.

Fiscal Conservatism

Philosophical basis: The marketplace is a more efficient allocator of resources than the government; hence when deciding how resources should be allocated, the bias should always be in favor of private-sector decision making. Free markets build wealth, create prosperity, and raises standards of living for all; hence markets should be kept as free as reasonably possible. Moreover capitalism and free markets do a great job at preserving individual liberty [moreover!], as those participating in the marketplace aren’t requied to obey the will of the majority (e.g. if 90% of the population prefers Pepsi but I prefer Coke, I can still buy Coke if I so desire); hence regulations that restrict choices in the marketplace should be kept to a minimum.

Moreover? When defending a free marketplace, individual liberty deserves and demands better than a passing “moreover.” The “philosophical basis” for fiscal conservatism is individual liberty. It’s not a happenstance side benefit. A moral right to the product of one’s labor is the basis for capitalism and fiscal conservatism. The above is a very weak “ends justifies the means” defense of capitalism; it works better for everyone, so it is the moral choice. Weak ideology like this will continue to lose elections and leave a vacuum to be filled by government which assumes the moral authority to fix break things.

And I take issue with this line discussing the second pillar, Social Conservatism.

[I]ndividual liberty is only beneficially meaningful when it is conjoined with a moral people.

Protecting individual liberty is what makes a people moral. The two can’t be conjoined because they can’t be separated in the first place. The first is what defines the second as such.

When the post gets to the third pillar of National Security, I want to agree that we should “[u]napologetically defend the ideals upon which this nation was founded,” but based on what we’ve gone over above, the writer doesn’t understand what the ideals this nation was founded on actually are.

The post finishes with some questions for the audience. The first question shouldn’t even have to be asked, ironically, because the answer is the same as the unknown ideals (that is, unknown in this post) which inspired our founding fathers to create this nation, and is what the “next” right still needs to be retooled to defend.

Q. What is the philosophical basis for the brand of conservatism that you wish to see adopted?

A. Reason and Individual Rights.

I don’t understand why these precious ideas need to be rediscovered and are so hard for some to defend, but that’s why I’m throwing my hat in the ring for the next election.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

MSM Still Dying

The internet has already overtaken newspapers and the protracted demise of the medium is given another nudge as internet giant Google ends its print ad program.

In the last few months, we’ve been taking a long, hard look at all the things we are doing to ensure we are investing our resources in the projects that will have the biggest impact for our users and partners. While we hoped that Print Ads would create a new revenue stream for newspapers and produce more relevant advertising for consumers, the product has not created the impact that we — or our partners — wanted. As a result, we will stop offering Print Ads on February 28. For advertisers who have campaigns already booked, we will place their ads through March 31.

With advertisers pulling out, newspapers are dropping like flies. A list of the dead or dying includes the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, the Rocky Mountain News, Tucson Citizen, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, the St. Paul Pioneer Press, the Miami Herald, the San Francisco Chronicle, the New York Daily News, and the New York Observer. Will cash infusions be enough to keep the New York Times going?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Former French President Fails to Surrender to Poodle

He never stood up to “unpredictable animals” prone to “frenzied fits” and “vicious, unprovoked attacks” before. I wonder why he started now? Maybe it’s never too late to become a calm, assertive leader.

Former French President Jacques Chirac was rushed to a hospital after being mauled by his pet dog who is being treated for depression, in a dramatic incident that rattled the ex-president’s wife.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Just a Theory in Mississippi

Representative Chisim of Mississippi has proposed “an act to require the state board of education to include certain language explaining that evolution is a theory in the inside front cover of certain public school textbooks.” Check out the PDF here or there.

The State Board of Education shall require every textbook that includes the teaching of evolution in its contents to include the following language on the inside front cover of the textbook:

“The word ‘theory’ has many meanings, including: systematically organized knowledge; abstract reasoning; a speculative idea or plan; or a systematic statement of principles. Scientific theories are based on both observations of the natural world and assumptions about the natural world. They are always subject to change in view of new and confirmed observations.

This textbook discusses evolution, a controversial theory some scientists present as a scientific explanation for the origin of living things. No one was present when life first appeared on earth. Therefore, any statement about life’s origins should be considered a theory.

Evolution refers to the unproven belief that random, undirected forces produced living things. There are many topics with unanswered questions about the origin of life which are not mentioned in your textbook, including: the sudden appearance of the major groups of animals in the fossil record (known as the Cambrian Explosion); the lack of new major groups of other living things appearing in the fossil record; the lack of transitional forms of major groups of plants and animals in the fossil record; and the complete and complex set of instructions for building a living body possessed by all living things.

Study hard and keep an open mind.”

If you want to make sure that people know that evolution is a just a “theory (love the scare quotes btw),” you’d better be willing to explain what theory means to the scientific community.

In everyday use, theory means a guess or a hunch, something that maybe needs proof. In science, a theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It’s a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations. It ties together all the facts about something, providing an explanation that fits all the observations and can be used to make predictions. In science, theory is the ultimate goal, the explanation. It’s as close to proven as anything in science can be.

In a science textbook, the word theory does not have many meanings. It has a specific and profound meaning. Evolution is not “a controversial theory some scientists present as a scientific explanation for the origin of living things.” It is a decidedly uncontroversial theory (in the full scientific meaning of the word) that nearly all scientists support because “[i]t has been tested and scrutinised for over 150 years, and is supported by all the relevant observations.” It’s so uncontroversial to scientists that the National Academy of Sciences calls it a fact.

Scientists most often use the word “fact” to describe an observation. But scientists can also use fact to mean something that has been tested or observed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing or looking for examples. The occurrence of evolution in this sense is a fact. Scientists no longer question whether descent with modification occurred because the evidence supporting the idea is so strong.

I’ll finish with Ed Brayton, who tears apart another part of the proposed disclaimer.

[T]he notion that if no one witnessed an event, any and all claims about the event are equally valid is breathtakingly idiotic. I doubt Mr. Chism would apply the same “reasoning” to, say, forensic medicine. We convict people and even put them to death for crimes committed with no eyewitnesses. Let’s imagine a hypothetical crime and apply Chism’s “logic.”

A man is arrested for the rape and murder of a woman. His semen is found inside her body, his fingerprints are found on the murder weapon. But no one else was present to see him do it. Therefore, according to Chism’s argument, any statement made about the crime should be considered a theory and be given equal time and equal presumed validity. Pure idiocy.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Vietnam Thinking

William McGurn says that Bush’s Real Sin Was Winning in Iraq.

Mr. Bush’s disfavor in Washington owes more to his greatest success. Simply put, there are those who will never forgive Mr. Bush for not losing a war they had all declared unwinnable.

Here in the afterglow of the turnaround led by Gen. David Petraeus, it’s easy to forget what the smart set was saying two years ago — and how categorical they all were in their certainty. The president was a simpleton, it was agreed. Didn’t he know that Iraq was a civil war, and the only answer was to get out as fast as we could?

“Americans must be clear that Iraq, and the region around it, could be even bloodier and more chaotic after Americans leave,” read the [New York Times] editorial. “There could be reprisals against those who worked with American forces, further ethnic cleansing, even genocide.” Even genocide. With no hint of irony, the Times nevertheless went on to conclude that it would be even worse if we stayed.

This is Vietnam thinking. And the president never accepted it.

Bush’s legacy will be that he didn’t surrender his beliefs when everyone around him clamored that Iraq was unwinnable. It takes a strong will to avoid the four types of conformity, especially when your convictions are based more on a gut feeling than on reason. We can thank Bush for expecting victory from the outset of the war and counting on our superior armed forces to carry out the mission.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Washington Is Killing Silicon Valley

This WSJ article from before the holidays shows the effects only government can have on an industry.

According to the National Venture Capital Association, in all of 2008 there have been just six companies that have gone public. Compare that with 269 IPOs in 1999, 272 in 1996, and 365 in 1986.

That’s quite a change and here’s the reason for the decline.

From the beginning of this decade, the process of new company creation has been under assault by legislators and regulators. They treat it as if it is a natural phenomenon that can be manipulated and exploited, rather than the fragile creation of several generations of hard work, risk-taking and inventiveness. In the name of “fairness,” preventing future Enrons, and increased oversight, Congress, the SEC and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) have piled burdens onto the economy that put entrepreneurship at risk.

Many in government assume that the producers will keep on producing independent of the shifting rules imposed on them. This is not the case. Rules and regulations meant to keep businessmen honest take the honest men out of business.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Don’t Go Nowhere Y’all

Did you see the Grammys tonight? I did. After grabbing a quick bite and watching last night’s 24, I flipped over to ABC to find the self-love so typical of celebrity and so typical of award shows. P Diddy, Sting, Mary J.; everyone was there to pat themselves on the back and get screen time. The announcer, in hip-hop character, implored “don’t go nowhere y’all.” So I didn’t. I watched a bit longer and to my surprise, newly inaugurated President Obama strolled onto stage. This isn’t the Grammys that I remember…

Of course, this wasn’t an award show. This was the Neighborhood Inaugural Ball hosted by the President himself. He slow-danced with his wife, and picked up the pace with the commoners filling stage, all under the adoring eyes celebrities giving a bit of credence to one of McCain’s attack ads.

If you ask me, a president should avoid events like this as a matter of principle. A president shouldn’t share the stage with P. Diddy, nor seek the approval of Shakira. Celebrity worship as it applies to musicians and actors is sickening enough. Its encroachment into politics is nothing new, but with Obama it’s at a level never before seen and the President is embracing it with open arms.

The expectations for this presidency are high and this unfounded fame will backfire. The house of cards is getting bigger by the day.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Riding the Bike at 15° Below

It was a chilly day to ride the bike into work. And I had to walk through snow for nearly a mile of the 8 mile journey. But it gave me a chance to try out a mask I got for snowboarding which worked well, and the scene was so nice I had to stop and take this pic.

That’s water vapor rising from Lake Michigan to the left and the Hancock Center straight ahead. This was the first time I’ve worn ski goggles while riding btw.

Chicago Lakefront Path at 15° Below

Chicago Lakefront Path at 15° Below

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment