Public influence is the real government of the world.
Categories
Categories
Inventing Objections
The Times published a wispy report on how Samsung has announced not that they are about to release a “smart watch” — a watch with computer functions — but only that they are working on one. Presumably, Samsung hopes to preclude the notion that the company is simply copying Apple, which is rumored to be developing a smart watch.
One reader — call him Mr. X — claims to be “saddened” by this evidence of market rivalry. He feels it’s “sad to witness” both Samsung’s alleged copying of Apple (or of other companies already making smart watches) and Apple’s forthcoming attempt to “force” smart watches on us.
Perhaps unbeknownst to himself, X’s lament implies that the whole market process is a continuous tragedy, only occasionally interrupted when sweeping novelty comes along.
Not so.
How often is a major new product category invented, after all? Farmers sell wheat—must they offer a new strain of wheat for their efforts to be valuable? What about napkin manufacturers? Car makers? Computer makers? Should we shed tears when anybody competes with anybody else in the same decades-old or centuries-old product category?
Inventions are great. But not everything on the shelf must be a brand-new kind of product to be well made and worth getting. Incremental improvements matter too. If companies took X’s complaint seriously, their ability to provide goods and services would be thwarted.
What we want from the “competition” is usually not “the new” but the slightly better, or the substantially less expensive.
Capitalism owes its essence to copycats as well as innovators.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Categories
Josiah Warren
To require conformity in the appreciation of sentiments or the interpretation of language, or uniformity of thought, feeling, or action, is a fundamental error in human legislation — a madness which would be only equaled by requiring all men to possess the same countenance, the same voice or the same stature.
Categories
Josiah Warren
It has now become a very common sentiment, that there is some deep and radical wrong somewhere, and that legislators have proved themselves incapable of discovering, or, of remedying it.
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.
Categories
Jean-Baptiste Say
The best scheme of finance is, to spend as little as possible; and the best tax is always the lightest.
There’s a new report out on the GOP’s future prospects. The findings are grim; the recommendations are predictable and somewhat craven: “On messaging, we must change our tone — especially on certain social issues that are turning off young voters. In every session with young voters, social issues were at the forefront of the discussion; many see them as the civil rights issues of our time. We must be a party that is welcoming and inclusive for all voters.”
Obvious problem? As Ms. Alex Palombo at DailyKos noted, the Republican National Committee’s Growth & Opportunity Report is made up almost entirely of “surface suggestions.”
The deeper reality is that the Republicans have lost so much support in recent years mainly by betraying their one plank that appealed across party lines: fiscal responsibility.
The Republican Party will go nowhere until it gets serious and consistent about the principles of limited government. Sure, that has implications for social issues. I hope the GOP changes its position on gay marriage, which I support. Generally, I think progress on social issues can best be made outside of government.
But mostly what the GOP needs to do to thrive with the young, with women, with minorities, is to focus on the immediate threat to the country’s future, the federal government’s rising debt, continuing deficits and looming liabilities.
Were Republican politicians honest and serious about this, they could gain respect everywhere.
Still, many retain hope in surface tweaks.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Categories
Sheriff Control
If you’re going to advocate gun-backed force to violate the individual’s right to bear arms — the form of people control also known as “gun control” — why not also try to strong-arm opponents of gun control into silence?
Sheriff Terry Maketa of El Paso County, Colorado, went on the Jeff Crank Show, a radio program, to report that Colorado Democrats are using their power to try to silence sheriffs.
Maketa and a few dozen other sheriffs in Colorado had made the trip to the state legislature to publicly testify against a gun control bill. In his view, the legislation “is emotionally driven and has no backing.”
At least two aspects of lawmakers’ conduct in the debate bother him. One is that, contrary to past procedure, only one sheriff was allowed to speak on the bill. Maketa could testify “but [many] who made the trip . . . never had their voice heard.”
After the sheriffs appeared against the bill, the Colorado association representing county sheriffs (CSOC) alerted members that angry senate Democrats were indicating that they wouldn’t act favorably on proposed increases in sheriff salaries unless the sheriffs “reconsider our positions.” The CSOC’s email went on to say that they didn’t believe that supporting Senate Bill 197 would violate the sheriffs’ principles.
Sheriff Maketa finds both the threat and the advice to submit outrageous. Who can disagree, except persons who think we should give up our rights without a peep of protest?
Or give up our protest if the money is right.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Categories
Jean-Baptiste Say
The wealthy are generally impressed with an idea, that they shall never stand in need of public charitable relief; but a little less confidence would become them better.
Categories
Jean-Baptiste Say
The command of a large sum is a dangerous temptation to a national administration. Though accumulated at their expense, the people rarely, if ever profit by it: yet in point of fact, all value, and consequently, all wealth, originates with the people.