Man needed one moral constitution to fit him for his original state; he needs another to fit him for his present state; and he has been, is, and will long continue to be, in process of adaptation. And the belief in human perfectibility merely amounts to the belief that, in virtue of this process, man will eventually become completely suited to his mode of life. Progress, therefore, is not an accident, but a necessity. Instead of civilization being artificial, it is part of nature; all of a piece with the development of the embryo or the unfolding of a flower. The modifications mankind have undergone, and are still undergoing, result from a law underlying the whole organic creation; and provided the human race continues, and the constitution of things remains the same, those modifications must end in completeness.
Author: Redactor
On April 23, 1985, Coca-Cola changed its formula and released New Coke. The American response was overwhelmingly negative, and the original formula was back on the market in less than three months. A great demonstration of consumer sovereignty.
Marathon Men
Prior to identifying the Boston Marathon bombers, upstanding members of the inane wing of the left intelligentsia fell all over themselves to express their earnest hope that the malefactors would turn out to be male right-wingers.
When the bombers turned out to be a couple of American lads who just happened to hail from Chechnya by way of Dagestan, and were Muslim, to boot, the disappointment was palpable. The burning desire to demonize white male tax protestors (read “Tea Party”/”militia” types) morphed into a defense of Islam and Muslim Americans at large . . . which is good, but why the defense of one set, but hatred for the other?
Now the “moral” conversation has switched to debating whether the surviving malefactor (the elder of the two brothers was killed in a shootout Thursday night), whose first name is Dzhokhar, should have been Mirandized (he was not) or even Guantanamoed (he hasn’t been so far).
Such is the state of ethical debate, today.
The story has overwhelmingly dominated the news. Why? Folks in general, including those on the inane left, like to hate bad guys. We’re fascinated by the story — more so, say, than the Texas fertilizer plant explosion that occurred the same week — because of the human element, the intent.
The malign intent.
But what the exact intention of these malefactors was, I don’t really know. What did they hope to accomplish? What could they achieve for Chechnya by killing Americans near a marathon finish line?
Once again folly and evil find intimate connection.
Maybe in some of our reactions, too.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Vancouver, Washington, Mayor Tim Leavitt enthusiastically supports a bridge project that would carry light rail trains from Portland, Oregon, into his town. “There is no more important opportunity for our city and our region than completion of the Columbia River Crossing,” he intones.
Transportation activist Margaret Tweet is more cautious. “Precious little discussion is held on the true transportation needs of our region by the government agencies that propose costly solutions,” she writes.
Back in 1995, Clark County — which includes the city of Vancouver — held a vote on a measure to fund the extension of Portland’s light rail to Vancouver. It was defeated. As if fearing repetition of this, today’s city “leaders” chose not to risk a similar negative vote. According to them, they alone should decide this expensive, controversial public works project.
So a group of citizens led by Larry Patella filed an initiative petition to gain a vote to forbid the city from spending any money to facilitate the Columbia River Crossing project. But their petition fell 32 signatures short of qualifying.
Then it was discovered that 606 people had signed the petition more than once. By state law, the county threw all the duplicates out.
So, seventy-five plaintiffs, including 44 folks who mistakenly signed the petition twice, sued to have their signatures count . . . just once. And last week a judge overturned the rule on duplicate signatures.
Is the initiative a go? Maybe not. Vancouver City Attorney Ted Gathe has issued a legal opinion saying the citizen-initiated ordinance is outside the power and scope of the initiative process. The city council seems poised to use the attorney’s opinion as an excuse to again block a vote of the people they serve.
Allegedly serve.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Over at Townhall.com, the weekend Common Sense column goes west. You go there, and then come back here to be steered in the right direction:
- Mayor Leavitt’s State of the City speech
- Paul Krugman’s New York Times op-ed (quoted)
- John Charles speaks on the subject
- Cascade video comparing light rail w/ bus service (hilarious)
- “High Capacity Light Rail and $ Million Buses, Warranted in Clark County?” by Margaret Tweet
- Court case ruling on duplicate signatures
- “Proposed light-rail ordinance won’t appear on ’13 Vancouver ballot,” The Columbian article on City Attorney opinion
- Columbia River Crossing: Facts You May Not Know (CRC Facts Forum)
Immanuel Kant
Reason does not work instinctively, but requires trial, practice, and instruction in order to gradually progress from one level of insight to another.
Video: A Tad Too Costly
The minimum wage hurts people. Maybe not smart people like yourself, but real people with real hopes, dreams, and human feelings. Jeff Tucker tells the tale:
Immanuel Kant
Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made.
How economical are electric cars? It’s hard to know. We don’t have a free market setting in which to judge the question.
Their obvious advantage? They don’t pollute.
But, skeptics remind us, their electricity does have to be first produced, and the most likely additional source? Coal. Dirty coal.
In any case, electric tech’s progress (or lack thereof) remains fascinating. When I wrote about the Tesla Motors electric sports car back in 2006, I was enthusiastic. But since then the car has not exactly “taken off,” and the company has received a huge, huge hunk of money in the form of loans from the Department of Energy in 2009, so it looks like just another Solyndra-like boondoggle.
But wait: It turns out that the company has faced an uphill battle: government.
The states heavily regulate auto dealerships. You know, “for the consumer” (read: for a few privileged dealers). Indeed, this regulation at the state level has plagued America’s auto industry for years. And dealers, privileged by these protectionist laws, really, really hate Tesla Motors’ marketing model: direct-to-customer.
In Colorado, car dealers got the law changed to prohibit direct-to-customer auto sales.
I hope Tesla sues to overturn the state dealership laws as illegal under the Constitution — after all, they do precisely what the interstate commerce clause was designed to prevent.
More likely, though, Tesla will seek and get an exemption from the Energy Department. And American mercantilism will continue.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Note: Image is anachronistic, and later appeared no this site to illustrate a very different Tesla story.
David Ricardo
The demand for money is regulated entirely by its value, and its value by its quantity.