Category: free trade & free markets

Categories
free trade & free markets general freedom

Tough Medicine, Tough Luck

Don’t get sick in Union, Missouri. Not if you need Sudafed in a hurry.

Union is the second city in the nation to require a prescription for sales of medicine containing pseudoephedrine. This is an active ingredient in Sudafed, a drug that good-hearted and responsible people might take to relieve nasal congestion.

However, pseudoephedrine can also be used to make methamphetamine, a very popular and very strong (and very illegal) psychoactive drug.

The reasoning seems to be that if something used in a good thing can also be used in a bad thing, you can’t trust people to use the good thing without erecting blocks to said usage.

If applied consistently, such a regulatory principle would mean you’d have to get a prescription for 80 percent of the stuff in your home. Did you know that if you gargle with detergent, it can be injurious to your health? No wonder you need a doctor’s prescription.

Over at the Show-Me Institute’s blog, Sarah Brodsky notes that when sufferers have no good alternative to Sudafed, they must call in sick, “find time to go to the doctor’s office . . . or go to work unmedicated.” She adds that unmedicated allergy sufferers aren’t exactly at their best.

But hey. The important thing is politicians pretending to do good by making it harder for us to do good for ourselves. Right?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

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

Gross Jobs

The president says he’s creating jobs. I’m skeptical. I guess there are some things government can do to ensure that jobs get created, out there in the bill-paying, profit-making world. But these do not include spending trillions of borrowed money.

And neither do they include simply giving more money to state and local governments.

The truth about Obama’s much-ballyhooed job creation is that more than half of his alleged new jobs turn out to be government jobs.

Government jobs don’t count, Mr. President.

Remember, many things governments do actually drain us. Jobs in the marketplace, on the other hand, serve real consumer demand, make us all better off. They also help pay the taxes for those government jobs. Employing more people in government means needing more real jobs to pay for the government ones.

And how much work do politicians cause us to engage in just to unbury ourselves from their silly, wealth-extracting regulations? I know, I know: Every time they add on some new complication to the tax code, jobs emerge in the accounting and tax-consulting industry. But this doesn’t exactly make us better off, does it? Not on net.

This lesson applies generally. Here’s the bottom line. Government can borrow and tax to spend to create “gross jobs.” Sure. But on net, after balancing the collective books, we’re not better off.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

Derailed

You gotta love trains. You gotta, you might say, since we all pay for them.

In taxes, subsidies.

The federal government’s Amtrak system loses $32 for every passenger — averaging all the routes. According to a recent Pew study, most lines of the system ran at a loss last year, many at a huge loss.

The Acela line, in the Washington, DC/Boston corridor, makes a profit of $40.50 per passenger, when depreciation costs are figured in. But most lines aren’t so solvent.

On the other end of the country, the Cascades line loses over $32 per passenger and the Coast Starlight squanders $100 more.

But these losses pale besides the Sunset Limited, from L.A. to New Orleans, which loses a whopping $462.11 per passenger.

Many of these routes should just be closed. People pay the full costs of car rides and plane rides, in droves, right now. There’s no reason to throw more money on “the problem” of routes that already suck up big bucks.

Were all routes sold off, line by line, private enterprise would abandon some — and make the rest profitable. Or go broke trying. But it wouldn’t be your dime going for the losses, unless you choose to invest in a post-Amtrak rail line.

Instead of this, the Obama administration threw a dozen billion bucks at high-speed rail.

That way we can go faster — go broke faster.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

Bernanke’s Pseudo-Semi-Solution

I’m not convinced. I’m not persuaded by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s recent comments about how we must start trimming the nose hairs of the federal government’s runaway deficit spending.

Bernanke has been a great enabler of economic disaster. By pumping so much easy credit into the economy after the Great Internet Bubble popped early in the decade, Bernanke and his predecessor made it easy as pie to pile up all the bad housing loans that produced the Great Housing Bubble late in the decade.

His new solution? Massive new multi-billion bailouts of bad economic actors. More and faster pumping of the money supply. More and faster enabling of bad investments and bad debt by working to keep federal-fund interest rates vanishingly low.

Now Bernanke wants America to reduce its sky-high deficits — $1.42 trillion for fiscal year 2009. He says we need a “clear commitment to reduce federal deficits over time.” Sure Ben, sure. I don’t disagree. But talk is cheap. Especially vague, general talk that your own actions persistently belie.

Bernanke seems to have some inkling that the fantasy economy can’t persist forever. He has, alas, no real idea of how to return to reality. He’s the guy who blows up a dam and then wants to lay down some twigs to stop the flood.

Stop blowing up the economy, Ben.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

A Regulatory Assault Taxis Into Law

When the politicians in our nation’s capital aren’t the butt of jokes for, say, not paying their taxes or behaving scandalously, well, they’re causing even more trouble.

One of their favorite areas of official mischief-making is assaulting — er, regulating — the city’s taxicabs. Last week a number of cabbies went on strike, protesting a proposed system, not dissimilar to New York’s taxi regime. The new scheme would require cab owners to buy a very expensive medallion to operate each cab.

Larry Frankel, one of the strikers quoted in the Washington Post, said, “We are here to protect our rights as owners and operators.”

The protesting cabbies object that this is not just another expensive regulation. This one threatens their very livelihoods. It’s almost designed to favor large companies over driver-owned cabs.

Which seems almost universally the case with regulations: They protect big interests from competition.

District Council member Jim Graham, who introduced the bill to “medallionize” taxicabs, said he feared the city would be “overrun” with taxis. There are 8,000 already, with 300 adding on every month.

Why, some day there could be more cabs than politicians and lobbyists combined! Imagine the disaster: Folks getting across town too easily or, worse yet, too inexpensively.

Just another bit of ill-thought-out regulation. It is par for the course in our nation’s capital. It makes you proud to . . . live somewhere else.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

News Flash: After this commentary was recorded, the FBI arrested a top aide to DC City Councilman Jim Graham on charges of accepting cash bribes and free trips in exchange for pushing the taxicab legislation discussed here. (See this news coverage and this article in the Washington Post.)

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

Over 50 and for Freedom

Say you’re a senior citizen. You’re concerned about the rising costs of medical services, but are not ready to surrender your care to well-meaning but naive advocates of ever-greater government. What to do?

Many seniors belong to AARP, a kind of combination consumer group and political lobbyist association for people age 50 and over. Fifty seems kind of youngish to me to be a senior citi — ow! crick in my back! — but okay.

Members get discounts and also get AARP spokesmen pretending to represent them on political questions. AARP supports a big-government overhaul of medical services. However, they’ve discovered that the issue is touchy. So they have taken pains to dispute President Obama’s recent claim that AARP endorses any particular bill.

Some AARP members fear that Medicare benefits are at risk. Other AARP members and former members just like their freedom.

Thank goodness AARP has competition. There’s a group called 60 Plus, and now a new outfit, the American Seniors Association, is offering a special deal to all seniors who submits a torn-up AARP card with their application.

ASA’s president, Stuart Barton, is blunt: “President Obama must think the American people are idiots. . . .” if he thinks they’ll buy “the idea that health care rationing, restrictions and regulations being debated in Congress will save money and result in better preventative medicine.”

You know what? I’m not even going to wait until I turn fifty. Sign me up.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

Privatize the Post Office!

Weeks ago, in the debate over whether to euthanize what’s left of freedom in American medicine, President Obama made a stunning concession about the so-called “public option” being proposed. Hoping to assure attendees of a townhall meeting that private insurers would not be threatened by the public option, he said, “if you think about it, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? . . . It’s the post office that’s always having problems.”

Yes. The post office. The “public option” in mail delivery: chronically in financial trouble; chronically over budget; chronically being bailed out by taxpayers.

So, don’t worry, everybody! Government expansion into our medical delivery system will be just as lumbering and inefficient as the post office is in our mail and package delivery system.

Er, good point, Mr. President.

Some might argue that under the proposed public option, direct private competition will in fact be allowed, whereas direct competition with stamped-envelope postal delivery is not allowed. But, as many supporters have conceded in unguarded moments, the Democrats’ reform is intended to be a transition to a single-payer system. Moreover, the medical reform bills pending in Congress are bulging with new mandates and price controls for private insurers that will hamper their ability to compete — something UPS and FedEx don’t have to contend with.

The president has done us a favor. He’s reminded us why we should privatize postal delivery.

Health care too.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

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

The Wrong Job

I’ve criticized the cash-for-clunkers program; I’ve argued against the notion that government should spend our tax dollars to create jobs.

Now the two come together. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is hiring 1,100 people to process the paperwork associated with the clunkers program.

Will these be long-term jobs? Well, sure, just as long as there is a powerful need in our country for processors of ten-page government forms to facilitate the forking over of $4,500-a-pop subsidy payments.

Maybe these United States can lead the world in such work.

Thank goodness the feds so botched up the program it didn’t cost us as much as it could have. Dealers across the country quit the program early, scared Uncle Sam wouldn’t pay back what they had fronted to customers.

Or, at least, not fast enough. Turns out auto dealerships have certain cash-flow concerns that our solons fail to fully appreciate.

Also not appreciated by Congress is the fact that taxpayers will have to hand over their hard-earned money to pay for all these deals. More billions. Money that taxpayers could have put to more productive use.

Our federal government shouldn’t be in the car business. It shouldn’t be in the car finance business, either, much less subsidizing car purchases.

The only productive jobs our current office-holders should create is by stepping down and giving someone else a chance.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets national politics & policies

Cargo Cult Auction in Progress

State and local governments are lurching into insolvency because of their previous profligate spending. In the current economic downturn they are now turning to lobbyists, to beg money from Washington. Money they should be spending on services they now spend in a sort of cargo-cult frenzy, hoping against hope for a bailout.

Funny thing is, they may actually spend more on lobbyists than they will get, in total, from the central government.

That’s what happens when the government gives away HUD grants, for instance. Cities around the nation spend more money preparing grant applications than they actually get in federal money. It would be better had HUD never existed. But, once in play, most cities cannot stop themselves from bidding for HUD’s handouts.

Yes, I said the word “bid.” From an economic point of view, that’s what the grant-writing and lobbying businesses are: bidding auctions in that most peculiar market for “free money.” Economist Gordon Tullock showed why this kind of auction is so different from trade auctions. There’s no theoretical upper limit. It’s crazy.

And it’s how federal government handouts work in our society.

How much better to not bid in such auctions at all. How much better if the federal government were prevented from giving away taxpayer funds to state and local governments entirely . . . better simply to follow the limits in the Constitution.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

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

The “Confidence” to Accept a Free Lunch

Does the alleged “success” of the cash-for-clunkers program prove consumer confidence is on the rebound?

Cash-for-clunkers is the new handout program for car owners and car dealers. Bring in an old car with lower mileage than the latest models, and the government gives you $4,500 toward a new car.

It took about a nanosecond to dole out the first billion dollars. So Congress tossed another two billion into the pot.

Alan Greenspan, former Federal Reserve chairman, was at the controls when the Fed’s massive credit-for-clunky-mortgages program helped create the housing bubble. So he’s an expert. He’s been in the news lately saying that although he has his doubts about the  clunkers program, its “success” shows renewed “confidence in the economy.”

Question: If the government simply threw bags of cash at people, and people stooped to pick up this cash, would this also prove “confidence in the economy”?

Observation: The clunker subsidies comes from somebody. Because the recipients didn’t directly drop by, directly put a gun to our heads, and directly compel us to write out a check for $4,500, we’re not supposed to notice. But if you had just been forced to turn over $4,500 to subsidize somebody’s new car, you’d probably say your household economy had just taken a hit.

Your confidence might even be shaken.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.