Common Sense with Paul Jacob

Market Power vs. Political Power

Post author By Redactor
Post date March 4, 2013
1 Comment on Market Power vs. Political Power

Critics of term limits on elected officials sometimes say: “You wouldn’t term-limit a neurosurgeon/fireman/[other indispensable professional] just because he’s experienced, wouldja?”

No. But I am capable of distinguishing between economic power and political power — between voluntary trade and policies imposed by force. It’s all about “opting out”: we are free to decline the iPad, but not Obamacare.

A study reported in Harvard Business Review suggests that CEOs who start out as dynamic entrepreneurs, responsive to market conditions, often grow more conservative over time. Commentators debate whether such waning of entrepreneurial vitality is inevitable. Sure, the Steve-Jobs-like exceptions loom large. Nevertheless, we can readily imagine a CEO stuck in the strategies of yesteryear.

My point, though, is that customers, shareholders and/or other company officers working within a market context can fix the situation when evidence piles up that the formerly right guy for the job is now the wrong one. Every day we hear of failed CEOs being ousted, failed companies closing their doors.

Au contraire when it comes to political incumbents. They often snag re-election despite widespread and intense discontent with their performance. (See the 2012 presidential and congressional election.)

I don’t worry when good persons must leave an elective office before doing all the good they can there. They can do good elsewhere too. I worry when politicians become entrenched in a seat of power for decades, becoming more and more inured to the consequences of their actions — and more and more brazen about assailing our wallets and freedom.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Tags CEO, competition, Harvard Business Review

Thought

Walter E. Williams

We all proposition our grocer in the following fashion: “We’re not going to tell you when we’re going to shop; we’re not going to tell you what we’re going to buy; we’re not going to tell you the quantity we’re going to buy — but we will fire you if you don’t have what we want when we do come into the store.”

Thought

Walter E. Williams

This is why socialism is evil. It employs evil means, coercion or taking the property of one person, to accomplish good ends, helping one’s fellow man. Helping one’s fellow man in need, by reaching into one’s own pockets, is a laudable and praiseworthy goal. Doing the same through coercion and reaching into another’s pockets has no redeeming features and is worthy of condemnation.

links

Townhall: A Gun Out of a Mountain Out of a Molehill

Post author By Redactor
Post date March 3, 2013
2 Comments on Townhall: A Gun Out of a Mountain Out of a Molehill

Over at Townhall, the weekend’s subject is, once again, guns. But it gets worse: we’re talking about fake guns, here. And they’re just as worrisome . . . if you are an “educator.”

Come back here for links, for further reading:

The tale of Joshua’s pastry, on a Fox Facebook page
Katherine Mangu-Ward hazards that the pastry was a Pop-Tart, and also doubts the complete veracity of the youngster’s story
A portion of this column first appeared on Common Sense
“Thou Shalt Not Hug” regarding the real lessons being taught
“Finger guns, toy guns and threats: The fallout of Sandy Hook,” Washington Post
“Mother of Va. boy who was arrested over toy gun criticizes case’s handling,” Washington Post
“The Finger of Terror” on Common Sense

Thought

Murray N. Rothbard

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.

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

Video: Subsidies, USA

Politicians love to throw money around, especially to appreciative donors; and many, many businesses love favored treatment, and know how to show their appreciation.

nannyism too much government

Throw the Bums’ Meat Out?

“Beggars can’t be choosers.”

“Never look a gift horse in the mouth.”

These two maxims of generations past sought to curb ingratitude, a sense of entitlement, or even cultivated taste amongst those dependent on the kindness of others — thus preventing the poor from making the best the enemy of the adequate.

But today beggars and gift-horse recipients have the government to look out for them.

Todd Starnes, writing for Fox News, relates the story of the Louisiana Health and Hospitals Department nixing a generous gift of sixteen hundred pounds of venison to a rescue mission:

“Deer meat is not permitted to be served in a shelter, restaurant or any other public eating establishment in Louisiana,” said a Health Dept. official in an email to Fox News. “While we applaud the good intentions of the hunters who donated this meat, we must protect the people who eat at the Rescue Mission, and we cannot allow a potentially serious health threat to endanger the public.”

Another valiant attempt to “help” those worst off in society.

Sarcasm aside, the Louisiana venison was no random benefaction. The hunters had been officially encouraged to hunt, and to donate extra meat, which then went to a processing plant.

But the government, which is here to help us (or so it is said), stepped in. The bureaucrats could have inspected the meat, but, instead, even went out of their way to throw the meat into garbage bins and douse it with Clorox.

Just so no animals would get sick, either.

A predictable result of the way Americans have chosen to “protect”* the food supply. As in so many other areas, it is always the poor (in this case, the homeless) who are hurt the most.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* The full story has yet to really come out. The beneficent hunters have met with a number of government attorneys and professional backpedallers, and have been promised to be informed of the exact laws/regulations that the venerable venison donors allegedly broke. And this loose-knit diet of dignitaries plans to cook up legislation to “make sure this never happens again.”

Tags Louisiana, venison

Thought

Walter E. Williams

Capitalism is relatively new in human history. Prior to capitalism, the way people amassed great wealth was by looting, plundering, and enslaving their fellow man. Capitalism made it possible to become wealthy by serving your fellow man.

nannyism

A Big Gulp of Tyranny

Little things mean a lot. One, they add up. Two, they often express something big, like love between a married couple — or a bully’s determination to control your every move.

In the case of New York City’s impending ban on Big Soda, the something big is Big Brother’s claim of a right to regulate or outlaw everything that might somehow, someday harm somebody. Never mind how indirect or trivial the alleged harm may be. And never mind that such regulation inflicts far more grievous harm to the individual’s own ability to judge what is good for himself, and to act on that judgment in co-operation with others.

Mayor Bloomberg’s new nanny law prohibits restaurants, bars, and other food-serving establishments from selling sodas in containers of more than 16 ounces. That includes carafes served to tables of four, eight or ten. It includes two-liter bottles of soda that New Yorkers might want to order with their pizza. The law is stupid and tyrannical, and a vicious precedent.

Bold, fizzy action is called for. New Yorkers should defy the prohibition. Set up a test case, with the city imposing a fine on one or more businesses for continuing to sell large doses of carbonation. This would allow, then, the Institute for Justice, the ACLU or some other freedom-minded organization help fight the fine and the law in court.

And let there be protests in front of City Hall, peaceful and principled, with Big Soda served to all.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.