Category: too much government

Categories
national politics & policies too much government

Four Percent Off the Top

Suppose you get a 4 percent pay cut.

Suppose you can’t borrow; you can only reduce your spending. Your household budget includes rent, videos, food, saving for a rainy day, and a front-door lock to replace the one destroyed when your home was broken into yesterday. What’s the first thing that pops into your head?

“Well! Better forget that lock!”? No.

Now suppose you head the executive branch of the federal government and want to entrench disastrously high spending. So you want to “prove” that even trivial budget cuts must produce blatant, instant pain. Then, for example, school kids en route to DC find that White House tours have been canceled. Then, for another example, airline passengers find that security delays at the airport drag on longer than ever.

Congress has tasked the Federal Aviation Administration with safely and efficiently directing airplanes on and off the tarmac. The sequester reduces the FAA’s budget by some 4 percent. What to do? What else but furlough controllers for one working day out of ten, inflicting delays in an estimated four of ten flights?

That’s what the Obama administration has done, even though many less destructive budgetary changes are not only possible, but far more preferable.

Much more than 4 percent must be cut from government spending. It won’t be painless. But the Obama administration, consulting a very old, very nasty “insider’s” playbook, seeks to “prove” that the only feasible way to even begin to reform is the least sensible way. False.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies too much government

Unions versus Obamacare

Former friends of Obamacare keep discovering that the law treats them as enemies.

Three years after Obama signed the Affordable Care Act, Kinsey Robinson, president of United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers and Allied Workers International, says that many provisions “were not fully conceived, resulting in unintended consequences . . . inconsistent with the promise that those who were satisfied with their employer-sponsored coverage could keep it.”

Robinson worries that members who now enjoy multi-employer health plans through the union will lose both benefits and employment as Obamacare goes into effect. Small contractors not required to offer insurance coverage under the law will enjoy an unfair bidding advantage. So he now calls for “repeal or complete reform” of Obamacare. (Let’s do the repeal, then restart with the right reforms.)

I’m no fan of unions, which have too often acted to quash competition in the labor market. But as long as unions exist, if they’re going to oppose something, let Obamacare top the list until it is gone.

No doubt many more expressions of shock and dismay await us as people discover the consequences of the law. In 2010, then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared that the health care bill had to be passed so we could learn what was in it; after which, free of the fog of partisan debate, we’d all come to understand at last that lumbering Big Brother is indeed our very best friend.

We’re finding out alright, we’re discovering that with friends like BB, and Pelosi, who needs fiends?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets national politics & policies too much government

Slow Times for a Fast Car

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.

Categories
too much government

A Conspicuous $2.4 Million

Flint, Michigan, has seemed like a hopeless case for a long time. Even before Michael Moore’s Roger & Me, Flint was undergoing deindustrialization. Politicians resisted, promising to reverse the trend. Failure after failure, they still desperately prove themselves interested in trying something, anything, to make the town “seem” vibrant and “cutting edge.”

Most recently, the Flint Mass Transportation Authority has exerted its rhetoric, its dreams, and its grant-writing skills to nab a $2.4 million bus.

The hydrogen fuel cell technology transit bureaucrats have set their eyes upon is quite leading edge, and I guess it seems a bargain, what with the recent drop in prices (“$3.5 million a few years ago,” according to the Michigan Capitol Confidential).

But the town could buy nine diesel buses for the same money, and it’s not as if they’re rolling in dough. Flint has had to order out for emergency management, suffering a tax base plagued by an official (read: underestimated)  unemployment rate of 18 percent.

So, of course, the transit authority hopes to pull in federal “stimulus” funds.

Ask yourself, though: how would a new, expensive bus stimulate Flint’s economy?  Luxury buses running on outré technology don’t exactly inspire businesses to invest in otherwise depressed towns.

As a rule, only rich people can afford leading-edge technology.

Sad to say, folks in government behave like rich people.

Only worse. Folks in government behave like rich people spending other people’s money.

And, now more than ever, the citizens of Flint can’t afford such conspicuous consumption.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
folly too much government

Borrow It Forward

The consequences of borrowing to fund welfare states have been getting more obviously destructive. In the European Union, the fates of governments with still a few years to go to pay the piper are tethered to the fates of even more wildly profligate states.

Yet the solution most EU officials propose, aside from more tax hikes, is to lend and borrow even more. Whole governments go on the welfare roll. The countries delivering the loans in turn “borrow” from their own unwilling citizens.

When will it end?

Maybe never, if the precedent being pondered by the innovative government of Portugal is implemented and gains traction.

A court there has ruled that it’s unconstitutional for Portugal to save money by cutting the salaries of government employees. (Perfectly all right to hike taxes, though.) So the government is thinking of end-running the decision by paying workers part of their salaries in treasury bills instead of the usual funny money.

The logic is stunning. Obviously, we can pay everything we owe just by issuing IOUs! Not since Rumpelstiltskin wove straw into more straw has anybody fashioned something this magical.

Nobody need ever go bankrupt again so long as we all keep issuing IOUs to vendors and creditors. All the bad consequences of bad practices will maybe just disappear through this expedient! Incredible!!!

Maybe I’ll call up my credit-card company to explain how this works. Once I figure it out myself, that is.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
too much government

Spoiled Sports

Americans get riled up by the slightest things.

As numerous Facebook posts pointed out last week, feminists across the country were incensed that their beloved president complimented a prominent woman on her looks . . . yet remained unfazed by that same presidents’ policy of killing innocent women and children with drone strikes. Amongst conservatives, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly got harsh condemnations for using the phrase “thump the Bible,” despite “The No Spin Zone” host’s long service in defense of what he calls “Judeo-Christian” culture, and his lack of any malign intent. And, in sports news, Rutgers Coach Mike Rice got the pink slip for his violent, offensive treatment of his players . . .

But there’s no “but” with this story, except as identified by Nick Gillespie at Reason.com: “there’s another, more subtle and yet more profound way that Division I college sports is abusing most college students at most schools . . . even if they never suit up for a practice or attend a single varsity competition of any sort.”

What is Gillespie driving at? Subsidy. Particularly, subsidies from government-subsidized student payments:

The vast majority of colleges — public and private — massively subsidize varsity sports directly out of mandatory student fees and other school funds. Despite the ability of top-tier teams to earn a lot of revenue via television contracts, ticket sales, merchandise sales, and other activities, most schools still hit up students in both direct and indirect ways.

Gillespie gives us some disturbing numbers: In 2011, Rutgers siphoned off $9 million in student fees and $19.4 million in general school funds while producing about $23 million in non-donation revenue. George Mason University students pay $12 million a year for sports teams that pulled in much less than a million. Only eight Division I schools balk at subsidizing their athletics departments.

I love college sports. It’s sad to think that they are corrupting academic economies, just as pro sports corrupt city and metropolitan economics around the country. All by reliance upon subsidy . . . that sports programs can do without.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
general freedom national politics & policies too much government

Flight to Freedom

One of the more inspiring perennial stories of my youth were of defectors, people who left their Communist-controlled countries to reach freedom . . . on American soil.

Many, many Soviet and Eastern bloc subjects smuggled themselves out of their countries, or “jumped ship” while visiting the U.S. or other Western nations. The list of freedom seekers is long, impressive, and inspiring.

And this isn’t just “ancient history.”

After an international tour, seven members of Cuba’s National Ballet were confirmed by homeland sources as “not having returned.” And a Cuban exile website has informed us that six of the defectors are now in the U.S., while the seventh remains in Mexico, where the troupe had broken free:

“We were intent on seeking a better artistic life and economic well-being for our families,” Cafe Fuerte quoted one of the group, Annie Ruiz Diaz, as saying.

Correspondents say Cuba’s National Ballet has suffered from a number of high-profile defections over the years, as performers stay abroad in search of greater creative and economic opportunities.

But this is only the tip of the proverbial floating mass of frozen water. In truth, thousands of people defect to the United States every year. Leaving their countries of origin, they flee poverty, tyranny, reckless government and outrageous criminality (too often these latter are the same thing), seeking the comparatively peaceful life found under a nation run by the rule of law.

Alas, defection is going the other way, too, as more and more Americans attempt to escape from increasingly burdensome taxation, oppressive regulations, and selective enforcement of innumerable laws.

We honor the heroic defectors from Cuba only by making the U.S. a place that fewer and fewer peaceful folks would be tempted to flee from.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
too much government

Buck-Stop Bus Stop

A million dollars here, a million there, and pretty soon you’re talking about a real bus stop.

At least, that’s the sticker shock in Arlington County, Virginia, just minutes south of our nation’s capital; a bus stop costs a million bucks.

“Is it made of gold?” asked one commuter.

Others called it “ridiculous,” an “outrage,” and suggested someone get “their butt canned.”

Let us properly note, however, that local transportation officials have unequivocally pronounced this state-of-the-art bus stop “an investment in infrastructure to support the [Columbia] Pike’s renewal.” According to Washington Post reporting, “New and densely developed housing is expected to be built in the next 20 years,” along the highway — not to mention a planned streetcar with a $250 million price-tag.

Think Arlington taxpayers are lazy and wasteful? Well, 80 percent of the money for the bling bus stops came from state and federal taxpayers. And county officials are hoping federal taxpayers will fork over 30 percent of the streetcar project, too.

There are so many exasperating elements to this fiasco that it’d be easy to callously ignore the fact that the million-dollar-bus-stop-shelter, as County Board member Libby Garvey put it, “doesn’t seem to be a shelter.” Calling it “pretty,” she added, “but I was struck by the fact that if it’s pouring rain, I’m going to get wet, and if it’s cold, the wind is going to be blowing on me.”

If you don’t like wasting a million dollars on a shelter that doesn’t provide shelter, chill out; the county is only planning to build another 24 shelters, and at a savings — only a smidgen over $900,000 each.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

 

P.S. After news reports, lots of folks apparently refused to “chill out” causing Arlington County officials to abruptly suspend plans, for now, to build 24 more million-dollar “Super Stop” bus stops. Hooray!

Categories
too much government

War Costs Ever Mount

War has costs . . . and prices. The costs include everything we give up to wage it, and everything taken away by the violence: lives, property, and (sometimes) sacred honor. The prices include the monetary expenditures that keep on adding up.

A recent Associated Press story warns us that the “Costs of Wars Linger for Over 100 Years.” The U.S. government is still paying for World War I, costing taxpayers $20 million per year. Spending on veterans of World War II peaked in 1991, while the Vietnam conflict still soaks up taxpayer dollars:

A congressional analysis estimated the cost of fighting the war was $738 billion in 2011 dollars, and the post-war benefits for veterans and families have separately cost some $270 billion since 1970. . . .

We can expect the Iraq and Afghanistan wars to take money for scores of years after the cessation of fighting — and let’s hope it does cease, some day.

How long can we continue to pay? Very:

There are 10 living recipients of benefits tied to the 1898 Spanish-American War at a total cost of about $50,000 per year. The Civil War payments are going to two children of veterans — one in North Carolina and one in Tennessee — each for $876 per year.

This may seem idiotic, but it’s inevitable.

One element of the story, not mentioned in the reportage, is something I hear from friends: The Veterans Administration more than accommodates increasing its rolls not merely of the recent wounded, but from ancient veterans who received no war wounds. It’s part of the natural expansion of bureaucracy.

The price of war just goes on and on, and up and up.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

A Coffin for Special-Interest Regulation

This is a story about monks and coffins, not vampires and coffins. But, since it takes place in Louisiana, you might be thinking “vampires.” And not just because Interview With a Vampire, Fevre Dream, Dracula 2000 and True Blood have all focused on the Pelican State as a hotbed of undead activity.

You see, it also deals with government. And — of course! — a particular kind of bloodsucking.

The brothers of Saint Joseph Abbey, a Benedictine monastery in Covington, Louisiana, began to make hand-make caskets in 2007. The enterprise was designed as a fund-raising effort to help cover educational and health-care expenses. But the state’s Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors swooped in and shut down the operation before one wooden “final resting place” had been sold.

And so the monks sued, arguing that the restriction was arbitrary and “served no legitimate public purpose and existed only to funnel money to the funeral-director cartel.”

Exactly. That’s how these sort of things work. The government allows special interests to regulate markets, and suck as much wealth up as possible. It’s the most common form of vampirism today.

Yesterday, the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found in favor of the monks, ruling unanimously. This is historic. And inspiring.

And, yes, it’s the result of good work done by the Institute for Justice, a free-market legal outfit that represented the monks.

Still, I wonder: Do we owe this eminently just ruling at least in part to the easy-to-empathize-with plaintiffs? Would the ruling have been so favorable had the suit been initiated by ordinary Joes? Or an irascible old vampire hunter? (I say this knowing that the folks at IJ are polite, professional, and, uh, youthful, if not eternally so.)

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Clipart from Clipartheaven.com