Author: Redactor

Categories
ideological culture initiative, referendum, and recall media and media people

What the Media Misses

The big news story last week became the media’s non-coverage of the Ron Paul campaign. After Jon Stewart of The Daily Show successfully brought out the full nature of the media prejudice, it became the story.

That’s how bias backfires. Trying to keep Ron Paul out of the headlines led to putting Ron Paul in the headlines.

How easily a conspiracy of silence turns into a deafening noise.

Media bigots think they are doing a public service when they pick winners and throw out losers before almost anyone has even heard from the challengers. They consider it their job.

Undoubtedly they look at Ron Paul’s platform and say to themselves “This guy doesn’t fit into the normal left-right spectrum, or even neatly into his own party. That makes him unelectable. So we won’t talk about him.” This points to media’s true power: establishing what’s worth talking about.

Trouble is, by rushing to judgment against Paul, they miss the day’s major story: Paul’s appeal transcends usual party lines. It’s not just a tiny cadre of libertarians on his side, it’s conservatives and liberals and exes of both persuasions; it’s centrists who’ve never heard anyone talk about the Federal Reserve before; it’s peaceniks who are serious about ending America’s wars.

It might even be that strong core of American society that still respects honesty and consistency.

The media has missed this elsewhere, too: In repeated recalls and initiatives around the country.

Cover the big story, folks. Not just your own spin.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets ideological culture tax policy

Greed and Bigotry on the Campaign Trail

On the video page featuring Mitt Romney’s notorious “corporations are people” comment — the one I clicked to, anyway — every comment was negative, with jokes like “Did you hear that S&P downgraded the Tea Party credit grade to KK+?” and economically illiterate whoppers like “Corporations do not help anyone except those who own them or do what they say.” It’s saddening to see ignorance and bigotry so self-righteously maintained by everyday Americans.

Yes, bigotry.

For Romney was right: Corporations are made of people. Those who roil with hatred for corporations, singling them out for more regulation or greater taxation, are attacking actual living, breathing people, who, as Milton Friedman pointed out, are made up of three classes of just plain folks: the owners, the shareholders, who are people; the corporation’s hired workers and managers, who are people; and served customers, that is, people who have chosen, sans duress, to buy stuff from the corporations.

Economist Steven Horwitz, writing in the Buffalo News, cited one study that estimated that “45 percent to 75 percent of the burden of a corporate tax increase is borne by workers,” and noted that, if profits fall, fewer dividends would go to stockholders.

And “stockholders” are often nothing other than workers’ retirement funds.

Yeah, soak the older people. That should make corporation-haters feel good.

Setting aside “some other people” to hate is exactly what anti-corporatists are doing. It’s bigotry. And it’s ugly . . . and de-humanizing.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

Millions for Chickens

The U.S. government doesn’t have all that much money. A few weeks ago, the big “funny” news story was that Apple, Inc., had more cash on hand than did the federal government. As August began, the big unfunny news story was the debt ceiling deal, wherein our leaders raised the debt ceiling in return for . . . increased spending.

So, in this environment you might think that boondoggle market-fixing programs would be anathema. But you would be wrong. Our beloved federal government announced on Monday its plan to buy $40 million of excess chicken products.

Prepare yourselves, kiddies. It’s not government cheese that will be pushed on you, soon.

You may remember similar buy-out programs from years gone by. I have this vague recollection of vast storehouses of frozen chickens, and the precarious value of same.

Why the buy-out? To prevent well-connected business folks at Tyson (or similar businesses) from having to brace themselves against lack of demand, pulling back on the number of chickens raised.

Our government: Protecting big business and assuring the needless slaughter of birds. What strange boasting rights.

Amusingly, in the article that prompted this commentary, the author uses the relative pronoun “who” to refer to the birds in question.

Birds aren’t people, and require a “that” . . . the “who” in the story are our ninnies in government, though “who” suggests owls, and our D.C. (“dumb cluck”) folks aren’t wise enough to merit such comparison.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

Liberals Against Fracking

Fracking — not just for Battlestar Galactica nerds any longer.

Colloquial for “hydraulic fracturing,” fracking is a process of forcing water deep into oil shale to bring up natural gas. Combined with horizontal drilling (that is, and I’m not making any of this up, drilling somewhat sideways to avoid topside damage), fracking promises to be the next big breakthrough in energy development.

Just so long as government doesn’t mess it up.

Well, there’s debate about this. Gasland, a recent documentary, cited numerous examples of contaminated well water. And yet, last week Judge Nancy Freudenthal reversed federal government regulations against fracking, dismissing Gasland-promoted harms as “speculative.”

Anti-factual? Anti-science?

Not according to science writer Ronald Bailey, who has argued that fracking itself is harmless. Things can go wrong in any industrial process, and in cases where substantial damage has occurred because of negligence or incompetence, major judgments against energy companies have been awarded to their victims.

Just as things are supposed to go, in a free society.

But folks leaning to the left prefer the “precautionary principle,” at least when it comes to business. “[T]he new reality,” according to a Washington Examiner editorial, is that “those who are now seeking to stop history — or at least the development of new energy technologies — are liberals, led by President Obama.”

Had the Examiner used “progressive” instead of “liberals,” the irony of today’s Progressives being against progress might have unearthed one of this age’s sadder political truths.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
media and media people political challengers

The Ron Paul Problem

Prior to the Iowa Straw Poll, its credibility and repute were proclaimed throughout the land. The Washington Post characterized it as “arguably the first major vote of the 2012 presidential contest.”

Then came Saturday’s results in Ames: Michelle Bachman and Ron Paul finished first and second, respectively, with Paul only 152 votes and less than a percentage point behind Bachmann, no other candidate coming anywhere close.

So, mainstream analysts now call it a three-way race — with Mr. Paul not one of the three!

A story in USA Today postponed mere mention of Congressman Paul till the 13th paragraph: “Candidates Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Herman Cain are also seeking the Republican presidential nomination.”

On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” GOP strategist Mike Murphy laments that “If 75 people had changed their minds, [Ron Paul] would have won the Iowa straw poll, which would have kind of shaken up the race and it would have put the straw poll out of business forever.”

Out of business? Forever? What sort of electoral contest should or would be abolished if a certain candidate wins?

Murphy’s statement generated neither rebuttal nor even any notice from the folks on the program.

“One reason the bipartisan establishment finds Paul so obnoxious is how much the past four years have proven him correct — on the housing bubble, on the economy, on our foreign misadventures, and on our national debt,” wrote Washington Examiner columnist Tim Carney.

In other words, time to ignore him.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
too much government

The Ceanneidigh Case

“You don’t have a paycheck, you don’t file taxes, you have no income.”

You can’t say that welfare caseworkers aren’t helpful. A man calling himself Ted Ceanneidigh walked into a Maine welfare office and presented his problem. He worked for himself. He had a lucrative, cash-only business and didn’t pay taxes. He had plenty of money and drove a Corvette. He showed his business card, which incorporated a certain well-known leaf as a distinctive symbol (and it wasn’t Canada’s maple leaf). Interestingly, he said he operated his parents’ fishing business, though that was going under — all they knew was that the boats were going out and money was being placed into their bank account. He was requesting the state’s subsidized medical assistance, though he had enough money to be able to afford private insurance —but that, he said, “doesn’t matter.”

That’s when the Maine civil servant advised Mr. “Ceanneidigh” to keep his income hidden. And offered him government assistance in medical care. After all, it made a sort of bureaucratic sense: The man couldn’t show a paycheck, didn’t file taxes. Obviously no income!

This was a setup, of course, a private “sting” operation organized by the Maine Heritage Policy Center. You can watch the video on YouTube.

It showed something interesting: The narrow focus of Health and Human Services caseworkers. They are there to give out “welfare.” Even to criminals. Even if it bankrupts the state.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

The Costs of a Good Cause

Costs are what we give up for what we want. Focus only on a transaction, and that McChicken sandwich “costs” only a bit over a buck. But ultimately that McChicken costs you what you give up in your budget because you purchased it: a candy bar, a chocolate milk, or a tune on iTunes.

Nearly everything has costs, often hidden.

Take Michele Obama’s anti-obesity campaign. The Hunger-Free Kids Act, the legislative kicker of the First Lady’s cause, withholds money from schools that don’t provide a rigorous well-balanced menu. Kids must take a variety of fruits and veggies with each meal. Must!

The regulation will cost local school districts about $7 billion to comply. Cash-strapped school districts. It will also cost quite a lot in thrown-away food, as kids are “required” to take food they don’t intend to eat.

And then there’s the cost in reduced nutrition.

It appears that kids like flavored milk products. You know, chocolate milk, strawberry-flavored milk, etc. But high fructose corn syrup (which was foisted on our population by the federal government in the first place, via huge subsidies to corn farmers in general and Archer Daniels Midland in particular) is now a no-no. Flavored milks are on the way out.

The cost of cutting them?

Well, kids get 70 percent of their milk from flavored milks. Take away their chocolate, and . . . the result, for many, will be no milk at all.

That’s how a pro-nutrition regulation can end up reducing nutrition.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

Wisconsin’s Kumbaya Moment

With all our divisive politics, who would’ve thought it would take a spate of recalls in Wisconsin to bring folks together in democratic unity.

Whether we root for the blue team, the red one or seek a third color — green or something — we can all celebrate that an election was held Tuesday.

It was a special recall election of state legislators — made all the more special because it was called by citizens.

Miffed at Democrats for leaving the state to block a quorum in the senate or incensed at Republicans for passing legislation removing collective bargaining for most unionized state workers, Wisconsin voters didn’t just have to sit there and take it. Empowered by their state’s recall law, they gathered hundreds of thousands of voter signatures.

Six incumbent Republicans were on Tuesday’s ballot. Four held their seats and two were defeated by Democrats, who fell just one seat short of grabbing the majority. Two incumbent Democrats still face recalls next Tuesday.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee told supporters:

Last night, we stood in a crowded square outside the state Capitol in Madison. Teachers, fire fighters, police officers, moms, and dads chanted, “This is what democracy looks like.”

Republicans and Tea Party leaders declared victory in maintaining the majority. Gov. Scott Walker, perhaps the subject of a recall next year, told the MacIver Institute, “I’ve had great confidence in the voters.”

It’s a Kumbaya moment! At least, as close as we’re likely to get.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies too much government

Default by a Thousand Cuts

Alan Greenspan half-smilingly argues that U.S. Treasury bonds will never be defaulted because “we can always print money.” How reassuring.

It’s one thing to pull money out of the proverbial magic cookie jar and place it in bank ledgers (“high-powered money,” or QE1, QE2) while people are substituting consumption with saving, fearful of the near-term prospects (increasing their “demand for money”). It’s quite another to do that while people expect prices only to rise. Massive increase in the supply of money (“printing money”) while people anticipate inflation (lowered “demand for money”) can lead to runaway inflation, hyperinflation.

America hasn’t experienced that since the Civil War. But Germany has (after World War I), as has Zimbabwe (just recently). It can ruin a whole way of life.

After Germany’s hyperinflation, Nazism arose.

Greenspan may have been trying to make a subtle point, but the blunt point remains: Default is likely, for inflation itself serves as a form of default. Under Greenspan’s scenario, the Federal Reserve, conspiring with Treasury, would, by “simply” printing money, pay debt with decreased-value dollars.

The ancient Chinese had a perverse form of torturous execution: Death by a thousand cuts. Inflation is like that, it’s torture for almost everyone, default by a . . . gazillion devaluations.

The only way around this is to make very different cuts — in federal spending.

That’s not torture, that’s the road to recovery.

It’s unlikely, of course, because, to politicians and insiders, cutting spending seems like torture.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

Voters Ruin Everything

William Endicott, former deputy managing editor of The Sacramento Bee, thinks the problem with California legislators is their “Let the people decide” attitude. In a recent op-ed, Mr. Endicott argued that the initiative process allows politicians to shirk their responsibilities, to let decisions be made by voters at the ballot box.

It’s an awfully convoluted notion: to make legislators actually do their jobs, citizens must back away and give those known to shirk their responsibilities a monopoly on legislative power.

Funny, in Congress and in the 26 states where voters lack the initiative, politicians happen to be shirking their responsibilities like it’s going out of style. There’s just not as much voters can do about it.

But Endicott’s argument doesn’t really concern legislators at all. It is about the voters of California, who have (to paraphrase him) ruined everything.

He writes: “Outcomes too often have been decided not by reasoned debate but by emotional appeals, mind-numbing and misleading television commercials and direct mail, all of which do more to confuse than to enlighten.”

So Endicott looks for legislators to “crack down on signature gatherers” and “make it more difficult to qualify a measure.”

In other words, democracy was swell, but that new-fangled TV is too much for gullible voters. Let’s hit the kill switch on direct democracy and put all our hope in our brainy, courageous legislators.

In other words, Californians: Shut up and pay your taxes.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.