“The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.”
Categories
Some “unintended consequences” aren’t.
The order of the market is an unintended consequence of market participation. By buying and selling, we’re just trying to get what we want. But we also send signals that help other folks accommodate our values and plans, which then allows markets to form some semblance of orderliness.
In government, on the other hand, laws get advanced to help this person or that, or whole groups of people. But economists often note that the actual consequences of many policies are at great variance with their advertised benefits. These often negative outcomes we term (following F.A. Hayek) the “unintended consequences.”
It’s worth noting that sometimes politicians do intend those hidden, bad consequences.
Economist David Henderson brings up an instance of this:
One insurance agent I spoke to speculated that politicians and other government officials who support these regulations not only understand these effects, but also like them. Why? Because they cause more people to go without insurance and thus create a demand for government-provided insurance.
Henderson then cites a provision of Obamacare, now kicking in: Regulations mandating medical insurance companies to spend a prescribed percentage of premiums “on actual medical care.” The result will be, almost certainly, the demise of whole hunks of the health insurance industry.
Thereby increasing political demands for government-provided insurance.
Some of the folks who concocted this regulation, and some who voted for it, certainly knew the likely result. And welcomed it.
Politicians are not equally clueless.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Categories
John Jay – Georgia v. Brailsford, 1794
“The jury has the right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy.”
Categories
Jay born; PA ratifies US Constitution
On Dec. 12, 1745, John Jay was born. He later became the first Chief Justice of the United States.
On Dec. 12, 1787, Pennsylvania became the second state to ratify the U.S. Constitution, five days after Delaware became the first.
Categories
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
“Patriotism means unqualified and unwavering love for the nation, which implies not uncritical eagerness to serve, not support for unjust claims, but frank assessment of its vices and sins, and penitence for them.”
Categories
Alexander Solzhenitsyn born
On Dec. 11, 1918, Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn was born in Stavropol Krai, Russia. His books The Gulag Archipelago and One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich helped raise global awareness of the Soviet Union’s forced labor camp system. Solzhenitsyn was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1970. He was expelled from the Soviet Union in 1974, but returned to Russia in 1994 after the Soviet system had collapsed.
The seeds of disaster can often be found in good intentions — a simple regulatory requirement designed to avoid disaster — as explained by economist Lawrence White:
Categories
Ernestine Rose
“Carry out the republican principle of universal suffrage, or strike it from your banners and substitute ‘Freedom and Power to one half of society, and Submission and Slavery to the other.’”
Categories
Wyoming first to grant women the vote
On Dec. 10, 1869, Wyoming territorial legislators passed a bill to make it the first state or territory to grant women the right to vote. At the time, men outnumbered women by a margin of six-to-one in Wyoming.
On Dec. 10, 1778, John Jay was elected president of the Continental Congress. Jay, who would later contribute to the Federalist Papers and be named the first chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, had resigned the Congress in 1776, opposing complete independence from Great Britain and refusing to sign the Declaration of Independence.
Categories
Into Each Life…
Government is the chief social institution to regularly reduce itself to absurdity.
And by “reduce itself” I do not mean “diminish in size.” I mean “descend the moral ladder.”
Today’s absurdity has been building up for some time. An increasing number of states regulate and even outlaw the collection of rainwater for personal and industrial use:
As bizarre as it sounds, laws restricting property owners from “diverting” water that falls on their own homes and land have been on the books for quite some time in many Western states. Only recently, as droughts and renewed interest in water conservation methods have become more common, have individuals and business owners started butting heads with law enforcement over the practice of collecting rainwater for personal use.
Mike Adams, writing in Natural News, explains the rationale (very weak, even nonsensical) and rightly extrapolates the real meaning of such regulation: “It’s all about control, really.”
Yes. The “governmental mindset” is what you get in when you run for office, and run and run and run for re-election. Just as, if you have a hammer, problems tend to look like nails, for legislators (and their aides and allied bureaucrats) everything looks increasingly like a “government issue” demanding more government, and certainly more laws.
And so it is with rainwater. Politicians want every scarce good that they “provide” to belong to the government from start (clouds and rain, in the case of water) to finish (your kitchen sink, perhaps your gullet). So of course they want to prohibit you from collecting rainwater. That rain must dribble into public drains, enter creek and river, seep into the watershed, and be siphoned off in municipal wells and sold back to you.
Collecting rainwater is like not paying taxes! It’s unthinkable. For a politician.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.