Category: too much government

Categories
crime and punishment general freedom too much government

The Right to Ignore Leviathan

Ignore Leviathan

Charles Murray, author of Losing Ground and other controversial books, has a suggestion. For business people. Pillars of the community. Fine, upstanding citizens.

Civil disobedience.

He’s suggesting, says John Stossel, that we ignore the parts of government that don’t make any sense, all the nonsense in the big books of the regulatory state.

Murray’s done this in his latest, intriguingly titled book, By the People: Rebuilding Liberty Without Permission. Stossel discusses it on reason.com:

Murray says, correctly, that no ordinary human being — not even a team of lawyers — can ever be sure how to obey the 810 pages of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 1,024 pages of the Affordable Care Act or 2,300 pages of Dodd-Frank. 

What if we all stopped trying? The government can’t put everyone in jail.

This is a provocative idea, even if not new.

Henry David Thoreau spent a night in jail for not paying the poll tax, a tax that helped pay for the Mexican war he so despised (and was right to despise). Thoreau eloquently argued for civil disobedience in such cases; Herbert Spencer did something similar, in his 1851 Social Statics, with the chapter “The Right to Ignore the State.”

It is a risky tactic, of course. Thoreau was, after all, incarcerated for that night. You could wind up spending more time in the hoosegow.

Still, it could be worth it. Civil disobedience has good effects. Stossel cites “historian Thaddeus Russell [who] reminds us that many freedoms we take for granted exist not because the government graciously granted liberties to us but because of lawbreakers.”

It’s another path for citizen-initiated reform.

And it’s Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Ignore Leviathan

 

Categories
national politics & policies porkbarrel politics too much government

That’s What They Want

More money for infrastructure!

The political class sings monotone, striking one note ad nauseam.

The song is “Money.”

One night an Amtrak train crashes, with fatalities; early the next morning a crowded chorus argues for amped-up spending on “infrastructure.”

Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) pled to the MSNBC lens, “Is it going to take more of these crashes and deaths to wake up the members of Congress who keep wanting to slim down the budgets going into infrastructure?”

Of course, no dollar amount is high enough that, if thrown at the problem, could guarantee no future accidents. Politicians want to toss the maximum moola at it, nonetheless.

Meanwhile, Baltimore smolders — and not because the Orioles won a World Series, but rather at the hands of rioters using protests sparked by the death of a man in police custody as their cover. To many, the tragic events call not so much for justice in court, or enacting law enforcement reforms, but for more “investment” in “urban areas” to solve the persistent problem of urban poverty.

“There’s been no effort to reinvest and rebuild in these communities,” President Obama claims.

Isn’t Obama the country’s head honcho? Did he not make any effort?

That’s funny, because an analysis by the Free Beacon finds that the City of Baltimore raked in $1.8 billion from the 2009 stimulus bill alone.

Doesn’t that count?

“Today, government spends 16 times more . . . than it did when the War on Poverty started,” wrote Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield in their Heritage Foundation paper, The War on Poverty After 50 Years. “But as welfare spending soared, the decline in poverty came to a grinding halt.”

But why quibble about results?

Just send more money.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

More money for infrastructure!

 

Categories
term limits too much government

Is He Serious?

Gov. Rauner

Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner ran for his state’s highest office while simultaneously spearheading a wildly popular initiative — a proposed constitutional amendment to place state legislators under term limits.

Unfortunately, the amendment was blocked from voters. An appeals court ruled it outside the scope of the state’s initiative process, and the cowardly state supreme court dodged the case.

Meanwhile, Mr. Rauner’s campaign as an outsider — opposed to both Chicago and Springfield political machines — earned him the governorship.

Most politicians would cry crocodile tears for term limits and claim, aw shucks, there’s just no way to get them enacted . . . especially with the Malevolent Monarch, Mr. Michael Madigan, the state’s longest corruption-serving Speaker of the House, as term limits enemy #1.

But Rauner isn’t backing off. “Rauner has at least one non-negotiable item on his wish list for the spring legislative session,” writes Matthew Dietrich of Reboot Illinois in the Huffington Post: “passing legislative term limits.”

Rich Miller of Capitol Fax reports that “Democrats were shocked,” when an “administration official . . . more than implied that if the [term limits] constitutional amendment isn’t passed by May 31st, then the governor would not support any revenue increases to patch next fiscal year’s massive $6 billion hole.”

“Would the governor really threaten to crash the entire government over a term limits bill?” asks Miller . . . answering, “Yep.”

Goodness, Gov. Rauner is absolutely serious about enacting the reform the people of Illinois know is Step 1 in fighting the state’s rampant corruption: term limits.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Gov. Rauner

 

Categories
crime and punishment responsibility too much government

J’accuse, Chisholm

Crybaby Bully

Shouldn’t we imprison anyone who dares criticize the conduct of abusive public officials?

Panic not. You haven’t slipped through a portal into another dimension.

This is still Common Sense. I’m still Paul Jacob.

Interpret the initial interrogative, above, as my sardonic paraphrase of somebody else’s sentiment — that of a power-abusing official who bemoans any chastisement of his lousy actions. Who even threatens to prosecute persons voicing such criticism.

The man is John Chisholm, a Milwaukee D.A. who intimates that Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker should be investigated for blasting Chisholm’s churlish tactics against political opponents. These tactics include late-night raids motivated solely by political animus. (I’ve reported on these doings.)

Scott Walker told Iowans that “if the government can do that against people of one political persuasion, they can do it against anybody. . . . [I]t was really about people trying to intimidate people . . . [A] political witch hunt.”

Responding, Chisholm suggested, with blunderbuss subtlety, that “the Iowa criminal code, like Wisconsin’s, has provisions for intentionally making false statements intended to harm the reputation of others.”

Chisholm, you bum. You knave. You vile excrescence. Not even you dispute that your office’s raids directed against people like my colleague Eric O’Keefe occurred. Thus, you’ve no hint of a basis for a slander claim. You did the dirty deeds we’re deriding. Cheer and hug you for it, should we? (Eric has sued to block Chisholm’s secretive “John Doe” raids.)

All this does sound like the Twilight Zone. Unfortunately, it’s part of a new normal. Not one we need accept, however.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Crybaby Bully

 

Categories
Common Sense national politics & policies too much government

Chimps, Chumps, and the Minimum Wage

Unemployment Chimp

It’s time to talk minimum wage laws again!

Confession: I tend to understand some issues on the level of logic — of, even, common sense. A prohibition (which is what a minimum wage law is, forbidding payment at a rate below the “minimum”) doesn’t spur productivity, and it’s from increased productivity that we get general higher wages and wealth and progress itself.

Sure, there are “studies” that indicate otherwise. But, we don’t conduct field studies amongst chimps arranging their bananas to prove 2 + 2 = 4. If an experiment of chimp-arranged bananas comes up with 3, I look for the chimp with the banana-eating grin.

Anyway, there’s this new study about employment from 2007-2009, when the economy went into the toilet, and right after the national minimum wage was upped from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour.

The study’s authors look at employment broadly. They pride themselves on their careful assessment of “the minimum wage from an anti-poverty perspective” and “its effects on the broader population of low-skilled workers. . . .”

Off the top of my head, I marvel that anyone can distinguish one cause for unemployment (financial crash) from another (minimum wage law), but the authors make a pretty convincing case.

Their conclusion? “Our best estimate is that these minimum wage increases reduced the employment-to-population ratio of working age adults by 0.7 percentage points. This accounts for 14 percent of the total decline over the relevant time period.”

So, yes, they say, the last minimum wage hike led to higher unemployment.

Which is what I would suspect. Because of, you know . . . Common Sense.

I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Unemployment Chimp

 

Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies too much government

The Rise in Unrest

political, politics, Brothers' Keeper, Obama, race relations, crime, police abuse, drug war, arrest, collage, photomontage, illustration, James Gill, Paul Jacob, hope, arrest, inner city, Baltimore, riot

On Monday, pushing an expansion of his “My Brother’s Keeper” initiative, President Barack Obama gave a talk about the recent rise in racial discord.

Does he ever ask himself, “Under whose watch?”

When the financial system melted down in 2008, candidate Obama — not without some justification — blamed President Bush and the Republicans. Why shouldn’t he and his party be today held somewhat responsible for rising racial unrest?

Wasn’t his very status as the First Black American President supposed to continue the healing process between blacks and whites?

In his talk, Obama recognized the “sense of unfairness, of powerlessness, of not hearing their voices, that’s helped fuel some of the protests. . . .” Well, sure. But there would be no occasion for this were inner-city blacks not treated unfairly in the first place.

The president wants to spend more money on education, for example, despite the high levels of per-student public ed funding in hot spot Baltimore.

It is quite clear that other programs have done the most damage. We still have a War on Drugs, which is unpopular enough that it turns cops “racist” perhaps even against their wills — as I’ve explained before, police tend to focus their unpopular policing against drug use to the classes of society that have the least direct political power, most especially against inner-city blacks.

But even more bedrock: we see protests and talk about inequality during economic downturns. Obama should learn from Bill Clinton’s initial presidential campaign: It’s the economy, stupid.

Or put more bluntly: It’s your stupid economic policies.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Brothers' Keeper

 

Categories
Common Sense national politics & policies too much government

The Ultimate Result of Campaign Finance Regs

Last Thursday I tried to be magnanimous. Of campaign finance regulation proponents, I wrote, “I suppose a reasonable person could blanch at rich people giving money to political causes . . . if they objected to all super-rich donors.”

My expectation of reciprocity was dashed at the non-reciprocal gambits of the Koch-hating campaign finance regulation advocates. It all really does come down to how they hate having others spend lots of money . . . against their causes.

Hardly democratic, that. Sorta ‘live and don’t let live.’

But they could (and will) defend themselves. They could say something like this: “We don’t like our billionaires having to give so much either. We’d like to cap our billionaires’ giving, too!”

It’s tough to have to keep up with your opponents’ spending, a pain having to give and give to get what you want and want.

We’d all like to get our way without having to spend time and money. But that doesn’t seem to be the way the world works — everything has a cost.

I sympathize. Economists call the problem of political campaign spending a “Tullock auction,” which sports no rational upper limit on spending, because winners take all.

Still, to bitch about your opponents’ spending but never your own gives away your game.

And we all know what the ultimate progressive game is: tax-funded elections. Tightly controlled, with more and more intrusions into how citizens assemble and cooperate to promote their candidates and causes.

So if the promotion, debate, and decision process is to be government-funded, government-controlled, we might as well call it Socialism and be done with it.

Could such a system be biased, just possibly for the pro-government growth side?

All mysteries solved.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

govFundedElections

 

Categories
general freedom nannyism too much government

Wealth Versus Disaster

Nepal Earthquake

Poverty kills.

In “The Tragedy of Nepal,” aerospace engineer Rand Simberg explains why industry-deniers striving to block economic progress in the name of blocking “climate change” do no favor to the poorest countries of the world.

Human beings cannot prevent disasters like the earthquake that recently struck Nepal. We can, though, mitigate their destructiveness . . . by being as economically free as possible and, therefore, as rich as possible.

And thus able to afford more durable — even antifragile — structures and infrastructure.

The same capital-intensive achievements that protect us when Mother Nature is quiescent also protect us when she’s at her worst. Buildings are more likely to withstand a quake when constructed of the best possible materials and designs. But the most robust safeguards can be the norm only when we are free and wealthy enough to engage in the industrial processes required to produce them.

This is a familiar point. But it bears repeating because it is not familiar enough to discourage foes of a vague threat called “climate change” — nothing new in earth’s history — from also ranging themselves against industrial production.

Industry-deniers assert that we can manipulate climate trends for the better if only we radically curb our carbon-emitting impact on the atmosphere. But attempts to enact this fantasy will only make it ever harder to grapple with vagaries of nature commonplace long before the rise of civilizations.

Human survival requires the opposite policy. It requires full freedom to build nature-transforming industries — and buildings, and all the other man-made bulwarks of our lives and future.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

 

Printable PDF

Nepal Earthquake

 

Categories
nannyism responsibility too much government

A Progressive Non-Solution

Baltimore Riots and Taxes

Urban African-American poverty is a problem, as is, increasingly, rural and urban white poverty. What can we do?

Not what folks at The Nation suggest: by increasing progressivity in local taxation, adding progressivity to fines (making the poor pay less and the rich more), and the like. That’s the gist of what Brad Lander and Karl Kumodzi write about in their article “How Cities’ Funding Woes Are Driving Racial and Economic Injustice—And What We Can Do About It.”

Though they call their solution “forward-looking,” it is not that time element that makes their views “progressive.” It’s their obsession with tax rates. What makes a progressive a progressive seems to be little more than a reliance on progressive rate taxation.

Embarrassing.

The three big examples of failed cities the authors give are the urban community of Ferguson, near St. Louis; Detroit, Michigan; and now Baltimore, Maryland, currently undergoing “protests” and conflagration.

Typical for Nation writers, they see the problem as not the poverty, culture, and behavior of black individuals in neighborhoods where few work and 70 percent grow up in fatherless families, but not taxing whites enough.

Meanwhile, Detroit and Baltimore have been run as “liberal” Democratic enclaves for years. Yet “blame the rich” is the approach. The authors want to double down on old, failed policies. More taxes. More government.

Now, government is to blame, of course: “welfare” programs encourage the break-up of the nuclear family; horrible public schools; minimum wage laws that hit low-skilled population hardest; and the Drug War.

The authors are right, though, that the cities’ desperate regressive burdens on the poor are no answer. Less taxes, less regulation, less subsidy, less policing for profit, more freedom — those are the better solutions.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Baltimore Riots and Taxes

 

Categories
crime and punishment privacy too much government

Are They Reading This?

Stingray, surveillance, privacy, invasion, collage, photomontage, illustration, editorial, listening, spying

You’re a nice person, Gentle Reader; I’m glad to communicate with you in a public forum and listen to your responses.

But we both expect limits to this mutual access. If we’re not legitimately suspected of being criminals, we expect to go about our business without strangers intruding upon us at will. We have a right to boundaries.

More and more, though, the borders of the privacy we rely upon are routinely violated by government employees who trawl our lives at random. We often have no idea of the existence or extent of the intrusions until long after the fact.

The latest disturbing practice we’re getting a smidgen of info about is the secretive use by police agencies of so-called “sting ray” devices, which simulate cell towers to track cell phone data and location.

For years, obeying FBI demands for secrecy, prosecutors have been dropping cases rather than report how the devices are deployed. In a Baltimore murder trial, though, Detective Michael Dresser testified that his department has used the device 4,300 times. He assures us that officers await judicial permission . . . unless the circumstances are too urgent.

That’s nice. But without a lot more transparency about how and when the sting ray is deployed, I don’t have much confidence that such scrupulousness is par even in Baltimore, let alone all other locales. It’s hard to give government agencies the benefit of the doubt when the track record is so lousy.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

stingRaY