Category: folly

Procrastinators’ Weekend

Usually, April 15 is the deadline date, in these United States, to file taxes or apply for an extension. This year it is April 18.

Why? Many of us think of the Fifteenth of April as Tax Day. It seems strange and arbitrary when it is jiggered with. And kind of annoying.

But a postponement of taxes could be a postponement we might all appreciate as a tiny (ever so slight) reprieve.

So, again, why this year’s three-day extra leeway?

First off, it is regularly postponed when the day falls on a Saturday or Sunday.

Could it be that the “Nothing Gets Done on Friday” Rule has been acknowledged by the fine folks at the Internal Revenue Service?

No.

People in Maine and Massachusetts celebrate Patriots Day on April 18, so their tax day is set another day later, April 19.

Which begs the question. Why the 18th in the first place?

Well, because of Emancipation Day, usually celebrated in Washington, DC, on April 16.

Because the 16th settles on a Saturday this year, and because the day is a traditional day off for federal workers, the holiday shifts a day in advance, to this Friday, the 15th. So, Emancipation Day — commemorating the signing of the Emancipation Act by President Abraham Lincoln — trumps Tax Filing Day.

Apt, since it might seem cruel to Americans to have Tax Day, marking the subservience of a whole population to its government, fall on something called Emancipation Day.

After all, consider: holding them on the same day? Hmmm. Might get people thinking.

Bigwigs in DC don’t want that.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Common Sense Needs Your Help!

Also, please consider showing your appreciation by dropping something in our tip jar (this link will take you to the Citizens in Charge donation page… and your contribution will go to the support of the Common Sense website). Maintaining this site takes time and money.

Your help in spreading the message of common sense and liberty is very much appreciated!

Tags Fed Up With Taxes, slavery, tax, Tax Day

folly general freedom ideological culture nannyism national politics & policies too much government

The Hypocrisy Gap

wage gap, pay gap, sexism, Equal Pay Day, illustration

You may have missed it. I wasn’t so lucky. This past Tuesday was “Equal Pay Day.”

“[T]he typical woman who works full-time earns 79-cents for every dollar that a typical man makes,” President Barack Obama said, repeating what we have already been told ad nauseum about the “wage gap” between men and women.

The “detailed calculation” used to determine this “gender wage gap”?

“Experts” simply added up all the money earned by all the men and all the women (subcategoried) and then divided by the number of men and women, respectively. No accounting for

the actual jobs performed,
hours worked,
education,
risk,
work history

. . . or any other factor.

Using this statistic make sense if all people — brain surgeons and taxi drivers alike, having worked every day for the last 40 years or re-entering the workforce after decades away — should earn the exact same amount.

Communism.

It is already illegal to pay a woman less than a man for the same work. Yet, on the WhiteHouse.gov page entitled, “This Is Why Today is Equal Pay Day,” the prez says “we must rid our society of the injustice that is pay discrimination.” The website insists that, Obama “has made equal pay a top priority.”

Then, why does a pay gap exist between the men and women working for Mr. Obama? According to the Washington Post, “The White House has not narrowed the gap between the average pay of male and female employees since President Obama’s first year in office . . .”

The good news? Equal Pay Day is over.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Common Sense Needs Your Help!

Your help in spreading the message of common sense and liberty is very much appreciated!

Tags Equal Pay Day, equal protection, gender pay gap, sex equality, wages

folly free trade & free markets ideological culture moral hazard national politics & policies

Cranks for President

Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders, cranks, nuts, populists, illustration

Some of us who think of ourselves as populists — or just ordinary people, hence “outsiders” — are having a hard time this political season. The two most talked-about outsider candidates, billionaire Donald Trump and socialist Bernie Sanders, make for strange populists.

A billionaire as a “man of the people”? Not very plausible. It is his lack of a self-censor, his free-wheeling, stream-of-conscious grade-school-level discourse, that impresses many folks. Definitely not scripted.

A socialist as populist? Socialism, long associated with elitists, would put the State into every area of everyday life. Most folks with horse sense resist that.

But Trump and Sanders do have something in common. They rely upon common misconceptions about everyday market life. They both fan the flames of conspiracy theories about prices.

When the price of fuel was spiking a few years ago, Bernie Sanders warned us: “Forget what you may have read about the laws of supply and demand. Oil and gas prices have almost nothing to do with economic fundamentals.” It’s all greed, you see: arbitrary power.

But, as Daniel Bier reminds us at The Freeman, believing that businesses are superpowers out to screw us with ever-rising prices, unhampered by supply and demand, is not just socialist silliness, it’s Billionaire Trump silliness, too — four years ago, the developer not only trumpeted the idea that we simply threaten OPEC for lower prices, but suggested we actually seize foreign oil fields.

This is not common sense. It’s crankism.

It’s the kind of thing folks say when they’re drunk.

Maybe on power.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Common Sense Needs Your Help!

Your help in spreading the message of common sense and liberty is very much appreciated!

Tags 2016 Presidential race, Bernie Sanders, cranks, Donald Trump, populism, Presidential campaign 2016

folly free trade & free markets moral hazard nannyism national politics & policies responsibility

Auto Destruct

car, automobile, auto, loan, bubble, illustration

Just when you thought it safe to go back into the loan market. . . .

Yes, you guessed it: a bubble may be about to pop.

There are actually several, but here’s one you might not expect: the automobile loan market.

Though less regulated and tampered with than the housing market, auto loans aren’t immune to “moral hazard” and other government-induced dangers. The Fed’s low interest rates are almost certainly stimulating the new car market. “Subprime” car loans are way up and so are delinquencies. Do the bankers making these decreasingly solvent loans expect a bailout?

As Eric Peters notes at his immensely fascinating automobile website, the average car loan is now $32,000, “a record high.” And then there’s the “ever-increasing duration of new cars loans. They are now on average six years long — and seven year loans are becoming pretty common.”

Why? “In order to spread out payments (now averaging almost $500 a month) that have become simply too much to manage for most people.”

But then of course car prices are rising. And not just because of simple inflation. It’s the result of government regulations, mandates, and . . . general craziness. Many buyers now finance used car purchases, too, as Mr. Peters explains. That used to be fairly uncommon. The used-car market has been unduly affected by government insanity as well. Remember Cash for Clunkers? Politicians boasted about their managed destruction of millions of used autos.

What they really achieved was a tighter-than-ever supply of usable older cars.

Cruising toward the auto-destruct of the auto-loan markets.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Common Sense Needs Your Help!

Your help in spreading the message of common sense and liberty is very much appreciated!

Tags bubble, housing bubble, loans, moral hazard

folly general freedom ideological culture nannyism national politics & policies Popular

Extremist Against Charity

Bernie Sanders, charity, welfare, government, against charity

Vermont’s favorite son, Senator Bernie Sanders, has a long history of saying strange things, comments that cast a shadow on his current spin that the socialism he favors is a “democratic” one.

He really is (or has been) quite extreme, extremist.

How extreme? He is against charity. You know, private aid provided to alleviate private suffering.

Steve Hayward at PowerLine has unearthed a New York Times piece from way back in Bernie’s mayoral days, about something he said addressing a United Way crowd:

“I don’t believe in charities,” said Mayor Sanders, bringing a shocked silence to a packed hotel banquet room. The Mayor, who is a Socialist, went on to question the “fundamental concepts on which charities are based” and contended that government, rather than charity organizations, should take over responsibility for social programs.

How telling is that?

What many of us have long suspected about anyone calling himself a socialist is that, in his heart of hearts, he really is against any degree of freedom.

The free society alternative, on the other hand, is the common sense policy: we all do the good that makes sense to us, each act or operation judged by our differing metrics, investing our time and money as we see fit.

This allows for innovation and speedy adaptation to changing needs.

Bernie, on the other hand, figures everything has to be centrally organized and taxpayer-funded. That’s not merely a good definition of socialism, it’s creeping totalitarianism . . . and not the least bit charitable.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Common Sense Needs Your Help!

Your help in spreading the message of common sense and liberty is very much appreciated!

Photo credit: Marco at Flickr

Tags 2016 Presidential race, Bernie Sanders, charity, Presidential campaign 2016

crime and punishment folly ideological culture responsibility too much government

Pincher, Pinchee

police, crime, law, rights, pinch, juvenile, illustration

Limited government sports several rationales. The need for it pertains on many levels. One such level we don’t think about enough? This: Not every rights violation warrants calling in the law.

Take the strange case of Breana Evans, 12-year-old assailant, charged with misdemeanor battery.

What did she do?

She pinched the gluteal posterior of a boy she did not know.

Now, pinching the butt-end of strangers is a breach not only of decorum (to the extent that this standard we call “decorum” even exists any more), but of a pinchee’s rights.

Yet it was a mere pinch.

And the boy did not press charges.

The school’s “resource deputy” did not arrest her; she was merely suspended from school.

It would have remained a minor matter (so to speak) had not the boy’s mother “insisted to police that he was the victim of battery, and so they had no choice but to arrest Breana,” as Robby Soave explained over at Reason. “She was Mirandized and put in a patrol car. They took her mugshot and booked her into juvenile detention.”

The escalation of the dispute over carnal rites and personal rights into a matter fit for the police is, it seems to me, a grave result of a sort of cultural hysteria about all sorts of things. The willingness of some adults to push children through our harsh, bureaucratic, and often ruthless criminal justice system is sad to behold.

It is more indecent than a pinch.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Common Sense Needs Your Help!

Your help in spreading the message of common sense and liberty is very much appreciated!

Tags assault, child, children, crime, law, public schools, rights

Accountability folly government transparency incumbents local leaders responsibility term limits

Incumbent Upon Heaven

Markwayne Mullin, term limits, lies, Oklahoma, politicians, lie

Many who pledged to limit their terms in Congress have gotten elected and, then . . . actually kept their word. Yet, with the temptations of power, combined with the acute narcissism of politicians, not a few have flung their honor aside to break their promise.

Four years ago, Oklahoma Congressman Markwayne Mullin was a challenger, “who pledged repeatedly . . . not to serve more than six years in the House.” Okie voters limited their congressional reps to three terms (six years) via a ballot initiative back in 1994. Of course, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down that and 22 other state-imposed congressional term limits laws just a year later.

NewsOK.com reporter Chris Casteel asked Rep. Mullin if this coming term would, as Mullin vowed, be his last.

A simple yes or no question, eh?

Well, the incumbent’s response was less than unequivocal, “leaving open the possibility that he may run for a fourth term,” Casteel reported.

“Our position on this has not changed,” read Mullin’s official statement. “However, Christie and I will continue to seek the Lord’s guidance and do what is best for our family and the 2nd District of Oklahoma. The only election I am focused on right now is in 2016.”

Hmmm. Do you recall the Lord ever guiding anyone to break his word to the people?

What a dodge!

Mullin is like a burglar announcing, “I’m not sure if I’m going to rob your home when I get out of jail. That’s too far off in the future. But I’m seeking spiritual advice about it.”

Come to think of it, incumbent politicians and burglars have quite a lot in common.

But not Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Common Sense Needs Your Help!

Tags Markwayne Mullin, oklahoma, politicians, sneaky politicians, term limits, U.S. Term Limits

folly ideological culture moral hazard national politics & policies tax policy

Rebranding the Odious?

tax, taxes, charity, IRS, I.R.S., Alain de Botton, branding, rebranding, illustration, folly, Common Sense

Being a clever person is hard work. Many of the truly clever things about everyday life have already been said. New and innovative cleverness? A rare thing indeed.

But if you are in the business of being clever, that puts you in a pickle, if “being relevant” and “worth our attention” is part of your cachet.

Take Alain de Botton, a very clever man who has written at least one brilliant book . . . and several not-so-brilliant ones. He has tackled Proust, Epicureanism, and is now deeply into religion.

Well, maybe not so deeply.

He wants politicians to follow the lead of religious leaders, who, he asserts, are masters of rebranding. (I had thought that was for marketing specialists.)

Recognizing that the word “tax” is an odious one — few people really like paying their taxes — de Botton says that politicians should follow what “religions do” and “rebrand ‘tax’ as ‘charity.’”

Charity, he notes, is a “much more appealing word.”

Well, yeah. That’s because charity is a word for love. It is all about deep concern, sympathy, etc., and “acts of charity” are expressions of love and concern.

And the only way that acts of charity can be determined to be expressions of concern is that they are voluntary. Taxes, on the other hand, are not voluntary. They are taken by force (try not paying them — force will find you).

Forcing people to “be charitable” will automatically scuttle that very purpose.

Trying to rescue politics from the stench of compulsion should not be done with rebranding, but by limiting government.

The less government, the less force.

And more scope for charity.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Common Sense Needs Your Help!

Tags branding, charity, Fed Up With Taxes, image, marketing, propaganda, tax, tax policy

folly general freedom ideological culture meme national politics & policies too much government

One-Party Socialism?

Bernie Sanders, Democratic Socialism, Che, democracy, meme, illustration, Common Sense

As the President of the United States noodles around Cuba, opening up relations and trade for the first time in half a century, one obvious obstacle to progress sticks out: Fidel Castro is still alive, and his brother, Raoul, still runs a one-party state.

It is worth reminding Americans how desperately socialism in Cuba requires repressive one-party rule. Sometimes folks forget. As Bernie Sanders pushes a “democratic socialism,” we should wonder where he and his Sandernistas stand on Cuba’s brand of socialism, i.e. without the democratic part.

Months ago, an old 1985 video surfaced of Bernie Sanders, then mayor of Burlington, Vermont, back from trips to Nicaragua and Cuba. Frankly, I agreed with his opposition to U.S. intervention in Central America. But Bernie also praised the Cuban government, asserting that Cubans were not “against Fidel Castro” because “he educated their kids, gave their kids health care, totally transformed society.”

He did not mention what Fidel didn’t give, indeed, would not allow: opportunity, progress, autonomy, freedom, democracy . . . the list is long.

Cubans who speak out are arrested, imprisoned.

Bernie did add: “Not to say Fidel Castro and Cuba are perfect.” But failed to make any mention of the total political repression of democratic activity.

The necessity of violence to establish socialism should be obvious. Even Bernie’s so-called “non-violent” supporters engage in raucous, invasive protests against Trump, and litter Twitter with indecent talk of assassinating the Republican front-runner.

What would they do with official power?

Are they committed to democracy as a process, really? Or to their programs alone?

Programs that rely upon mass expropriation and strong-arming governance. No matter what Sanders says about “love.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

A healthy democracy depends on the spreading of good ideas. If you liked this post, please share it with friends by clicking on any of the social media icons below.

Common Sense Needs Your Help!

Tags Bernie Sanders, Cuba, Democratic Socialism, socialism

Accountability folly national politics & policies responsibility subsidy too much government

Another Capital Atavism

pork, government waste, Streetcars, public transit

Had I ever heard of the zoopraxiscope before, I’d forgotten it by the time I read Randal O’Toole’s recent critique of the latest Washington, D. C., public transit debacle, the new streetcar system. So I had to look it up.

It was an early “motion picture” projector.

In other words, an “atavism.”

According to O’Toole, “Streetcars were technologically perfected in the 1880s, so for Washington to subsidize the construction of a streetcar line today is roughly equal to . . . Los Angeles subsidizing the manufacture of zoopraxiscopes.”

O’Toole, a transportation specialist, argues that the new system, barely in place, but already on the hook for more subsidy to build more lines, is grossly inefficient.

As well as atavistic.

“Rather than build five more miles of obsolete line,” he concludes, “the best thing Washington can do is shut down its new line and fill the gaps between the rails with tar.”

Drastic?

Well, is it any more drastic or extreme than debuting a mass system without a fare system in place? That is, without even having decided on which payment system to use?

Unfortunately, the inefficient clunkers are unaccountably contagious. “Following Portland’s example, Atlanta, Charlotte, Cincinnati, Kansas City, and several other cities have opened or are building streetcar lines,” O’Toole explains. “Most of these lines are about two miles long, are no faster than walking, and cost $50 million or more per mile while buying the same number of buses would cost a couple million, at most.”

Politicians idolize such schemes so much that we, the taxpayers, are forced to be iconoclastic.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

A healthy democracy depends on the spreading of good ideas. If you found this article useful, please share it with friends by clicking on any of the social media icons below.

Common Sense Needs Your Help!

Tags government waste, mass transit, Randal O'Toole, streetcars, trolleys