Showing posts with label Thomas Sowell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Thomas Sowell. Show all posts

Saturday, April 21, 2012

The Best of Thomas Sowell

Please stand for this month's reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas. 

Economist Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, is now of an age where his quotations are being compiled into "best of" lists.  Just as the collection of books loosely known as "Bible" now come in the "Stock Car Racing Bible" and the "Mossy Oak Camouflage Bible", I suspect that we'll soon see the quotations of Saint Thomas in specialty editions like "Thomas Sowell For Voters Who Just Don't Understand Why The Economy Isn't Better", or "The Complete Quotations of Saint Thomas on Why Cash For Clunkers Was Totally F'ed Up" or even "Thomas Sowell: What The Hell Were You Expecting When You Elected That Chicago Machine Dumbass?" with the really good parts in red letters. 

But Saint Thomas grows old.  His words come more slowly these days.  There was one embarrassing two week period (probably because of problems with his blood pressure medication) where he supported the horrific Newt Gingrich. 


We speak of Saint Thomas with reverence, all the same.  Those of you in the back, stop fidgeting and remain standing.  After the scripture reading, you can sit through the sermon. 

(Ahem...)

Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, has had his life and work examined by John Hawkins of Townhall.com, and these are reported to be his best quotes.  Please read along from your Order Of Worship:

25) "Since this is an era when many people are concerned about 'fairness' and 'social justice,' what is your 'fair share' of what someone else has worked for?"

24) "Imagine a political system so radical as to promise to move more of the poorest 20% of the population into the richest 20% than remain in the poorest bracket within the decade? You don't need to imagine it. It's called the United States of America."

23) "Four things have almost invariably followed the imposition of controls to keep prices below the level they would reach under supply and demand in a free market: (1) increased use of the product or service whose price is controlled, (2) Reduced supply of the same product or service, (3) quality deterioration, (4) black markets."

22) "What sense would it make to classify a man as handicapped because he is in a wheelchair today, if he is expected to be walking again in a month and competing in track meets before the year is out? Yet Americans are given ‘class’ labels on the basis of their transient location in the income stream. If most Americans do not stay in the same broad income bracket for even a decade, their repeatedly changing 'class' makes class itself a nebulous concept."

21) "There are few talents more richly rewarded with both wealth and power, in countries around the world, than the ability to convince backward people that their problems are caused by other people who are more advanced."

20) "The poverty rate among black married couples has been in single digits ever since 1994. You would never learn that from most of the media. Similarly you look at those blacks that have gone on to college or finished college, the incarceration rate is some tiny fraction of what it is among those blacks who have dropped out of high school. So it’s not being black; it’s a way of life. Unfortunately, the way of life is being celebrated not only in rap music, but among the intelligentsia, is a way of life that leads to a lot of very big problems for most people."

19) "The first lesson of economics is scarcity: there is never enough of anything to fully satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics."

18) "Each new generation born is in effect an invasion of civilization by little barbarians, who must be civilized before it is too late."

17) "The vision of the anointed is one in which ills as poverty, irresponsible sex, and crime derive primarily from 'society,' rather than from individual choices and behavior. To believe in personal responsibility would be to destroy the whole special role of the anointed, whose vision casts them in the role of rescuers of people treated unfairly by 'society'."

16) "No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems — of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind."

15) "Life has many good things. The problem is that most of these good things can be gotten only by sacrificing other good things. We all recognize this in our daily lives. It is only in politics that this simple, common sense fact is routinely ignored."

14) "There is usually only a limited amount of damage that can be done by dull or stupid people. For creating a truly monumental disaster, you need people with high IQs."

13) "Civilization has been aptly called a 'thin crust over a volcano.' The anointed are constantly picking at that crust."

12) "We seem to be moving steadily in the direction of a society where no one is responsible for what he himself did, but we are all responsible for what somebody else did, either in the present or in the past."

11)” For the anointed, traditions are likely to be seen as the dead hand of the past, relics of a less enlightened age, and not as the distilled experience of millions who faced similar human vicissitudes before.”

10) "It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong."

9) "Intellect is not wisdom."

8)” The charge is often made against the intelligentsia and other members of the anointed that their theories and the policies based on them lack common sense. But the very commonness of common sense makes it unlikely to have any appeal to the anointed. How can they be wiser and nobler than everyone else while agreeing with everyone else?"

7) "Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good."

6) "Experience trumps brilliance."

5) "The problem isn't that Johnny can't read. The problem isn't even that Johnny can't think. The problem is that Johnny doesn't know what thinking is; he confuses it with feeling."

4) "One of the consequences of such notions as ‘entitlements’ is that people who have contributed nothing to society feel that society owes them something, apparently just for being nice enough to grace us with their presence."

3) "Weighing benefits against costs is the way most people make decisions — and the way most businesses make decisions, if they want to stay in business. Only in government is any benefit, however small, considered to be worth any cost, however large."

2) "In short, killing the goose that lays the golden egg is a viable political strategy, so long as the goose does not die before the next election and no one traces the politicians’ fingerprints on the murder weapon."

1) "There are no solutions; there are only trade-offs."

Thus endeth the reading from the Gospel According to Saint Thomas.
The Man hath spoken. 
You may be seated while the Sepulchre's Cathedral Choir performs "Song Of Wisdom". 



You are dismissed. 

Monday, October 24, 2011

Quotation of the day

Our quotation of the day is from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas Sowell, via a commentary from Cafe Hayek.

One of the sad signs of our times is that we have demonized those who produce, subsidized those who refuse to produce, and canonized those who complain.


Yep.  That nails it. 


Saturday, April 2, 2011

Thomas Sowell on Buyer's Remorse

Please stand for this month's reading from the Gospel According To Saint Thomas. 

Economist Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, has written an epistle to those who are disappointed in Barack Obama:

Many people on various parts of the political spectrum are expressing a sense of disappointment with Obama. But I have not felt the least bit disappointed.

Once in office, President Obama has done exactly what his whole history would lead you to expect him to do....  Disappointing? No. Disgusting? Yes. The only disappointment is with voters who voted their hopes and ignored his realities.

When Dr. Sowell descends from the moutain to address us, we should measure his words carefully.  There isn't necessarily anything wrong with Barack Obama.  Obama is a human.  He is fallible. 
So is Ron Paul. 
So is Rand Paul. 
So is Gary Johnson, great governor from New Mexico. 
So is Senator Jim Webb, decent Democrat of Virginia. 
The candidate that I worked hardest to elect, the Libertarian Party's presidential candidate Bob Barr, is extremely human.  Way human. 

Ron Paul occasionally throws in some earmarks for his Texas district. 
Rand Paul is opposed to same-sex marriage. 
Gary Johnson has completed Iron Man Triathlons, and its all I can do to finish a 10K.  This irks me. 
Jim Webb had great ideas on gun rights and ending the Drug War.  But he was against free trade. 
Bob Barr was severely criticized for licking whipped cream off of strippers.  (Everyone knows that people of taste and refinment would have covered them with Jello Shots.)

These people shouldn't be our leaders, except in dismantling the machine that we've allowed to take over our lives.  Americans shouldn't need inspirational leaders providing their infrastructure, running the court system and defending our borders.  We need some dull, uninspiring functionaries who don't want to build empires, we need some lazy, drab, civil-service lifers who want to put in 6 hours a day for 40 years and then retire. 
Electing a president should be no more important to you than picking a new lawn service.  If the president really matters, then your government has gotten to big.   More Americans work for the government than work in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined.

Please stand again for a second reading from the scriptures: 

Many people on various parts of the political spectrum are expressing a sense of disappointment with Obama. But I have not felt the least bit disappointed.

Once in office, President Obama has done exactly what his whole history would lead you to expect him to do.... Disappointing? No. Disgusting? Yes. The only disappointment is with voters who voted their hopes and ignored his realities.

The man has spoken.


Thus endeth the reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas.
You may be seated.

Sunday, January 2, 2011

An awkward question about economists

Here's economist Walter E. Williams on "Fair" trade, with some editing by The International Liberty Blog


The primary issue is whether or not a politician should have power and control over what you can purchase, or at what price:

At first blush, the mercantilists’ call for “free trade but fair trade” sounds reasonable. After all, who can be against fairness? Giving the idea just a bit of thought suggests that fairness as a guide for public policy lays the groundwork for tyranny. …Last summer, I purchased a 2010 LS 460 Lexus, through a U.S. intermediary, from a Japanese producer for $70,000. Here’s my question to you: Was that a fair or unfair trade? I was free to keep my $70,000 or purchase the car. The Japanese producer was free to keep his Lexus or sell me the car. …The exchange occurred because I saw myself as being better off and so did the Japanese producer. I think it was both free and fair trade, and I’d like an American mercantilist to explain to me how it wasn’t. Mercantilists have absolutely no argument when we recognize that trade is mostly between individuals. Mercantilists pretend that trade occurs between nations such as U.S. trading with England or Japan to appeal to our jingoism. …That’s nonsense. Trade occurs between individuals in one country, through intermediaries, with individuals in another country. Who might protest that my trade with the Lexus manufacturer was unfair? If you said an American car manufacturer and their union workers, go to the head of the class. …it’s never American consumers who complain about cheaper prices. It’s always American producers and their unions who do the complaining. That ought to tell us something.


I think Williams once said that he goes to his mailbox every morning to see if he's gotten a government check for not raising pigs.  He never has gotten one.  But lots of millionaire farmers get them every year, millionaire farmers who are no better at not raising pigs than Williams is. 
Even if you're a vehement supporter of corporate welfare, you've got to admit that is funny. 

On a (slightly) related note, "Basic Economics" by Dr. Thomas Sowell has now gone into a 4th edition. 

I have quoted, mis-quoted, mangled, highlighted, posted, and fallen asleep with this book so many times that I'm not going to burden this post with an excerpt.  Just hit the Thomas Sowell label down below. 
The man is brilliant AND readable.  My new copy of the 4th edition (on my truck seat at all times) is already starting to look like it's been owned by 3 different students with too many highlighters. 


This gets me to Glenn Loury, now comfortably situated in Brown University's economics department. 
Loury started his career as a conservative but now calls himself a progressive.  
Loury once had a domestic violence problem, and a Bolivian Marching Powder problem.   (I think he's a libertarian, but hey, Brown U. doesn't hire many of those.  There are some things that an academic just can't admit.) 

Go here to read what Loury had to say about Obama's race speech, the one Obama had to compose after the Revered Wright incident.  Like most of my blog topics, I came across this one while looking online for something else.   
I don't agree with a lot of it, but it is readable.  There is a structure to the sentences.  It flows.  You can see a pattern from paragraph to paragraph. 

So here's my point.  Or my question....
Why are the most readable (and therefore best) living economists all black?  

Sunday, December 26, 2010

My Christmas gift to you....3 letters by Don Boudreaux

Don Boudreaux of the Cafe Hayek blog has been typing a lot.  Think of this collection as my Christmas gift to you.    Sorry it is late. 


Here's a letter he wrote to The Boston Globe on your "right" to the services of doctors and nurses and pharmaceutical companies and hospitals....

Ronald Pies, MD, asserts that every individual has a “right” to “basic health care” – meaning, a right to receive such care without paying for it (Letters, Dec. 26).
The rights that Americans wisely cherish as being essential for a free society require only the refraining from action. Your right to speak freely requires me simply not to stop you from speaking; it does not require me to supply your megaphone.
Not so with a “right” to “basic health care.” Elevating free access to a scarce good into a “right” imposes on strangers all manner of ill-defined positive obligations – obligations that necessarily violate other, proper rights. For example, perhaps my “right” to basic health care means that I can force Dr. Pies away from his worship service in order that he attend (free of charge!) to my ruptured spleen. Or perhaps it means that I have the “right” to pay for my health care by confiscating part of his income. If so, how much of his income does my “right” entitle me to confiscate? Who knows?
And if Dr. Pies is planning to retire, do I have the “right” to force him to continue to work so that the supply of basic health care doesn’t shrink? If Dr. Pies should die, am I entitled – again, to keep the supply of basic health care from shrinking – to force his children to study and practice medicine?
Does my right to basic health care imply that I can force my neighbor to pay for my cross-country skiing vacation on grounds that keeping fit is part of basic health care?
Talking about “rights” to scarce goods and services sounds right only to persons who are economically illiterate, politically naive, and suffering the juvenile delusion that reality is optional.
Sincerely,

Donald J. Boudreaux
Here's one written to the L.A. Times, on jury nullification in relation to the marijuana wars:

Reporting on the increasing number of jurors who refuse to return guilty verdicts against defendants charged with possessing marijuana, you quote a government prosecutor who tells jurors “We’re not here to debate the laws. We’re here to decide whether or not somebody broke the law” (“Juries are giving pot defendants a pass,” Dec. 25).
This prosecutor is mistaken to assume that the law is simply that which the state declares it to be. A great advantage of trial by jury – an advantage applauded by the likes of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison – is to enable the community’s evolved sense of law and justice to moderate, or even to nullify, government’s criminal statutes. As Edward Gibbon observed, “Whenever the offense inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigor of penal law is obliged to give way to the common feelings of mankind.”
Fortunately, more and more people understand that punishing a peaceful person simply for smoking pot is horrible.
Sincerely,

Donald J. Boudreaux
And finally, here's an open letter/bitchslap to the president of the Sodexo Foundation:

Mr. Stephen J. Brady, President
Sodexo Foundation
Gaithersburg, MD

Dear Mr. Brady: 
Your foundation’s website says that “Forty-nine million people in the United States are at risk of hunger.” While this statement’s meaning is vague, I assume that you intend to suggest that 49 million people in America are so poor that they are at serious risk of suffering malnutrition.
Yet today’s New York Times reports on a recent poll by the Pew Research Center that finds that the number of Americans who consider themselves to be middle-class is nine in ten (“So You Think You’re Middle Class?” Dec. 23). That’s 277 million (out of a total of 308 million) Americans who don’t think of themselves as being poor. Even if we assume that every one of the 31 million other Americans thinks of himself or herself as being, not rich, but poor – and even if we further assume that every last one of those 31 million people is “at risk of hunger” – your figure of 49 million ‘at-risk-of-hunger’ Americans seems impossible to square with the Pew survey results.
Are there really 18 million people in America who are so unaware of their own circumstances that, even though you classify them as being “at risk of hunger,” they classify themselves, not as poor, but as middle-class? Seems dubious, to say the least.
While I applaud your efforts to extend a helping hand to needy Americans, you should do so honestly. In fact, hunger is not a problem in America – not for 49 million people; not even for 31 million people. In fact, no modern American this side of mental insanity or criminal captivity comes close to starving to death.
Our society’s elimination of one of history’s most consistent killers – starvation and malnutrition from too little food – is complete. This victory should be celebrated rather than obscured by claims, such as that which adorns your website, that are somewhere between inexcusably obscure and blatantly false.

Sincerely,

Donald J. Boudreaux
Why does Dr. Boudreaux go to the trouble of writing all of these letters?  Why should he bother?  He has tenure.  He's got it made.  
He probably does it because he knows that we have a great system, and he doesn't want Messiahs, Nannies, Busybodies, Saviors, Prohibitionists and other pests to start jacking around with it.
He knows the cause of health, wealth, and having time to enjoy them.    
Is Free Market Capitalism perfect?  No. 
But Utopia is not an option.  Never has been, never will be.   

Teachers and writers like Don Boudreaux, Thomas Sowell, Milton Friedman and F.A. Hayek have done more for the good of humanity than all the government programs that have ever burdened the world.  

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

"The Liberty Papers" on The Law Of Unintended Consequences

Good stuff here on The Law Of Unintended Consequences. 
It all reminds me of Thomas Sowell's life mantra:  "All government programs should be evaluated by the incentives they create, not by their stated goals." 

Go here to see their Top Ten Posts, selected from their 5 years of blogging.  Good stuff from The Liberty Papers.  Worth bookmarking for later reading. 

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Thomas Sowell on tax cuts

Please stand for this month's reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas....

Economist Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, has given us an assortment of new scriptures to ponder.

As Saint Thomas has grown old, his offerings to his disciples have become shorter, but no less pithy. We should treasure them, ponder them, and hold them in our hearts.

In this reading, The Good Doctor has arisen from his pallet to straighten out the issue of perverse incentives, tax cuts, and the issue of why people hire people and bother to be productive in the first place. 
We know that it has become tiresome for Saint Thomas to be bothered with stamping out ignorance in his old age, and value his contribution all the more because of his patience. 

Please remain standing until the end of the reading from the scriptures:

The first big cut in income taxes came in the 1920s, at the urging of Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon. He argued that a reduction of the tax rates would increase the tax revenues. What actually happened?

In 1920, when the top tax rate was 73 percent, for people making over $100,000 a year, the federal government collected just over $700 million in income taxes-- and 30 percent of that was paid by people making over $100,000. After a series of tax cuts brought the top rate down to 24 percent, the federal government collected more than a billion dollars in income tax revenue-- and people making over $100,000 a year now paid 65 percent of the taxes.

How could that be? The answer is simple: People behave differently when tax rates are high as compared to when they are low. With low tax rates, they take their money out of tax shelters and put it to work in the economy, benefitting themselves, the economy and government, which collects more money in taxes because incomes rise.

High tax rates which very few people are actually paying, because of tax shelters, do not bring in as much revenue as lower tax rates that people are paying. It was much the same story after tax cuts during the Kennedy administration, the Reagan administration and the Bush Administration.

The New York Times reported in 2006: "An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year."

Expectations are in the eyes of the beholder-- and in the rhetoric of the demagogues. If class warfare is more important to some politicians than collecting more revenue when there is a deficit, then let the voters know that.


The man has spoken.


Thus endeth the reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas.

You may be seated.

We do not ordinarily show videos on pull-down screens here at the Chapel of Saint Sowell, but in this case, as an aid to worship, we have included the following:
This is a video of someone who just....doesn't....get it.  If you have children in The Chapel who can't view this type of material without laughing, please take them to the nursery now. 

This is why Our Gospel must be spread throughout our land, the world, even to D.C. and The New York Times. 
 


Thank you all for attending our services this morning. Let's all go to Luby's !

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

We are in the Redneck Divorce stage of American history

There is no better metaphor out there. 
We are in the Redneck Divorce stage of American history. 


Our politicians know what is coming.  They aren't going to be able to keep blowing money on useless enterprises any longer.  That cozy lobbyist/manufacturer/politician relationship that began on that drunken night at the Tractor Pull so many years ago?  That threesome is over.  That comfy arrangement where the Democrats and Republicans take turns driving the 1958 Ford pickup in the same direction down the bad gravel road, with the Charlie Daniels Boxed Set blaring through a boom box hooked to a tractor battery in the back?  They know it's going to end soon, and that before long the bank is going to repo the pickup, the boom box and the battery. 

I am qualified to use the term "redneck" because I've studied redneck behavior for years.  (Instead of saying redneck, I experimented with the politically correct phrase "Unevolved American".  It became tiresome, and I dropped it.)
Also, if you scratch through the thin veneer of British mini-series, Brahms and books that has built up on my upper spine, you'll see red.

Hello, my name is Whited, and I am a redneck.
Hello Whited !  
It's been 29 days since my last relapse.  I had all these beer bottles on the seat beside the dogs, and my wife and daughter were in the back of the truck with the goat, and I didn't see all the cops when I decided it would be fun to throw some bottles at that mailbox ..... 

When rednecks get divorced, in the Year Of Our Lord 2010, the following things happen:

1) Lots of stuff gets destroyed out of spite.  If the courts say she can't have it, she's not about to let him enjoy having it, by God.  Coon dogs are taken to the pound.  Guns are given away to relatives.  Cars and trucks are sold for a dollar. 

Or.... Someone comes up with a program called Cash For Clunkers, in which 625,000 vehicles are destroyed.  One trillion dollars is taken out of the private sector, giving us the worst economy since Franklin Roosevelt started taking money out of the private sector.  Somebody halfway passes Cap'n'Tax, with no other objective than to punish people who make things and hire people.  We are in the hands of redneck leaders who are destroying things, the economy, and us.  Out of spite.  There is no other explanation.     


2) During every spat leading up to the redneck divorce, one spouse or the other will move out of the trailer and move back in with a brother, sister, or Mama 'n' them.  The spouse that moves out will always, always, always call Child Protective Services and report the other spouse for child abuse.  Always.  This will continue until every kid produced by the relationship has turned 18.

In the last 40 years, we've had Watergate, Monicagate, Iran-Contra, and scores of other little mini-lawsuits and investigations.  If you think those have become tiresome, just wait until the Republicans take over Congress. 


3) Before every redneck divorce, as soon as both sides know that it really is over, there is a mad rush to max out every credit card.  Whoever spends the least, loses.

If you need an explanation of that one, go away.  Go back to watching kitten videos on YouTube.

Pics came from here and here and here,   For those who don't believe it's possible for Barack Obama to be a redneck, please check out Black Rednecks And White Liberals by the great Thomas Sowell.

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Thomas Sowell on the people "who drove the car into the ditch"

Please stand for this month's reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas....




Economist Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, has given us new insights into those "who drove the car into the ditch", as our president keeps claiming has happened. 

Another political fable is that the current economic downturn is due to not enough government regulation of the housing and financial markets. But it was precisely the government regulators, under pressure from politicians, who forced banks and other lending institutions to lower their standards for making mortgage loans.


These risky loans, and the defaults that followed, were what set off a chain reaction of massive financial losses that brought down the whole economy.

So it doesn't matter who was driving the car when it inevitably went into the ditch?  Perhaps we should question those who dug the damn ditch that was running across the middle of the interstate?  Give us more, O Saint Thomas, give us more....

Was this due to George W. Bush and the Republicans? Only partly. Most of those who pushed the lowering of mortgage lending standards were Democrats-- notably Congressman Barney Frank and Senator Christopher Dodd, though too many Republicans went along.

At the heart of these policies were Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who bought huge amounts of risky mortgages, passing the risk on from the banks that lent the money (and made the profits) to the taxpayers who were not even aware that they would end up paying in the end.

However, anyone who reads the scriptures of Saint Thomas would've seen this coming from afar.  As the good Doctor Sowell has pointed out many times, the stated goals and objectives of any policy do not matter.  All that matters are the incentives that are created.  In this case, Fannie and Freddie were incentivized to take insane risks because they knew that someone would be there to bail them out if things went badly.  That someone would be....you. 
You have their undying gratitude. 
Let us continue with the next verses:

When President Bush said in 2004 that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be reined in, 76 members of the House of Representatives issued a statement to the contrary. These included Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters and Charles Rangel.

If we are going to talk about "the policies that created this mess in the first place," let's at least get the facts straight and the names right.

The current policies of the Obama administration are a continuation of the same reckless policies that brought on the current economic problems-- all in the name of "change." Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are still sacred cows in Washington, even though they have already required the biggest bailouts of all.

Why? Because they allow politicians to direct vast sums of money where it will do politicians the most good, either personally or in terms of buying votes in the next election.

The man has spoken.

Thus endeth the reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas.
You may be seated.

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Thomas Sowell on the motivations and incentives of politicians

Please stand for this month's reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas....

Economist Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, has given us an assortment of new scriptures to ponder.
This month, Saint Thomas gives us a variety of new observations to ponder, mostly on the perverse desires of those who would gain control over every aspect of our lives:

No statement is more unnecessary than the statement that the government should "do something" about some issue. Politicians are going to "do something," whether or not something needs to be done, and regardless of whether what they do makes matters better or worse. All their incentives are to keep themselves in the public eye.

Let us continue with a later next verse:

One of the few advantages to the country in having Congress overwhelmingly in the hands of one party is that the lack of need to compromise lets the leaders of that party reveal themselves for what they are-- in this case, people with unbounded arrogance and utter contempt for the right of ordinary people to live their lives as they see fit, much less the right to know as citizens what laws are going to be passed by their government. The question is whether voters will remember on election day in 2010.

The man has spoken.
Thus endeth the reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas.
You may be seated.
Those of you interested in other lessons from this sermon series from the writings of Saint Thomas may go here.

Sunday, November 8, 2009

September 11th as Architectural Reform

During the unpleasantness of last November, I signed up as a supporter on all the political websites (Demoblican and Libertarian). and I still get mail from both. President Obama left this gem in my inbox sometime last night.

Whited --

This evening, at 11:15 p.m., the House of Representatives voted to pass their health insurance reform bill. Despite countless attempts over nearly a century, no chamber of Congress has ever before passed comprehensive health reform. This is history.

Where to begin, where to begin..... Let's start with the way we use the word "reform". If you destroy something, are you reforming it? Were the 9-11 attacks "Architectural Reform"? In 1941, did the Japanese Air Force carry out a policy of "Naval Reform" at Pearl Harbor? Did Jack The Ripper carry out a policy of Prostitute Reform? Yes, this is history.

But you and millions of your fellow Organizing for America supporters didn't just witness history tonight -- you helped make it. Each "yes" vote was a brave stand....

Brave? Person A takes money from person B to give to person C, so that C will support A in the next election? That's bravery?

.... backed up by countless hours of knocking on doors, outreach in town halls and town squares, millions of signatures, and hundreds of thousands of calls. You stood up. You spoke up. And you were heard.

Speaking of knocking on someone's door, reaching out in a town hall, and making a few thousand phone calls, Joe Cao of Louisiana was the only Republican who voted for this abortion, mostly because it won't allow federal funds to be used for abortions. Please contact Joe, and let him know how you feel about him voting to give government control of the medical industry (because it will keep government out of the abortion industry).
Thank God for Louisiana. Their politicians make those of Texas and Mississippi look like the Founding Fathers.

So this is a night to celebrate -- but not to rest. Those who voted for reform deserve our thanks, and the next phase of this fight has already begun.

Like I said, hit the link. Thank Joe.

The final Senate bill hasn't even been released yet, but the insurance companies are already pressing hard for a filibuster to bury it. OFA has built a massive neighborhood-by-neighborhood operation to bring people's voices to Congress, and tonight we saw the results. But the coming days will put our efforts to the ultimate test. Winning will require each of us to give everything we can, starting right now.

Please donate $5 or whatever you can afford so we can finish this fight.

I suggest you hang onto your $5.00 and start hoarding penicillin.

Tonight's vote brought every American closer to the secure, affordable care we need. But it was also a watershed moment in how change is made.

I just woke up the Sepulchral Wife, half the neighbors, and all 12 dachshunds, banging my head through the refrigerator door. Can ANYONE name something that our government has voluntarily made more affordable? (Note: spreading the costs around to people still in diapers doesn't count.) Your share of the national debt is already near $40,000.00 Your share of the unfunded future liability is somewhere between $350,000.00 and $400,000.00

Safe. Secure. Affordable. As long as you die within 5 years. Everyone after that is screwed.

Even after last year's election, many insider lobbyists and partisan operatives really thought that the old formula of scare tactics....

Here's Thomas Sowell, on the use of scare tactics: What is so wrong with the current medical system in the United States that we are being urged to rush headlong into a new government system that we are not even supposed to understand, because this legislation is to be rushed through Congress before even the Senators and Representatives have a chance to read it?

....D.C. back-scratching and special-interest money would still be enough to block any idea they didn't like. Now, they're desperate. Because, tonight, you made it crystal clear: the old rules are changing -- and the people will not be ignored.

Here's some more from The Good Doctor Sowell: All this makes a farce of the notion of a "public option" that will simply provide competition to keep private insurance companies honest. What politicians can and will do is continue to drive up the cost of private insurance until it is no longer viable. A "public option" is simply a path toward a "single payer" system, a euphemism for a government monopoly.

In other words, the D.C. back-scratchers and special interests are buzzing around this thing like green flies swarming over a fresh cow patty. (That additional commentary is mine, not Dr. Sowell's)

In the final phases of last year's election, I often reminded folks, "Don't think for a minute that power concedes without a fight," and it's especially true today. But that's okay -- we're not afraid of a fight. And as you continue to prove, when all of us work together, we have what it takes to win.

Yep. Anyone robbing Peter to pay Paul will always have the support of Paul. And Joe Cao. Here's Cao going home to read what he voted for. This YouTube is actually on his website:

Please donate to OFA's campaign to win this fight and ensure that real health reform reaches my desk by the end of this year:

https://donate.barackobama.com/History

I'm tempted to hit the link and send the damn fool some money. If he sends out emails this funny for free, no telling what I can get for $5.00.

Here's Jerry Pournelle: With Detroit a ruin and manufacturing industries on the ropes, small business is the only possible engine of recovery from what they don't call a Depression; so the Congress is going to add an 8% tax on employing people. We already have the longest period of increasing unemployment since the Great Depression; I presume we are going for a really big record setting period of increasing unemployment.

What incentives people have to invest and create new jobs in this environment is pretty murky now; with the health bill there will be fewer incentives to invest in new jobs in the US. The incentives are now to the job black market -- hire illegal immigrants who don't have to have health insurance -- or to export the job if that can possibly be done.

Let's keep making history,

President Barack Obama

Monday, August 24, 2009

Thomas Sowell on Global Cooling, Barack Obama, and Velcro

Please stand for this month's reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas....

Economist Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, has given us an assortment of new scriptures to ponder.
As Saint Thomas has grown old, his offerings to his disciples have become shorter, but no less pithy. We should treasure them, ponder them, and hold them in our hearts. I'll begin with his observations on the weather:

New York and Chicago have both recently had their coldest June in generations. If they had had their hottest month, it would have been trumpeted from the media 24/7 by global warming zealots. But the average surface temperature of the earth has not changed in more than a decade, according to the Cato Institute.

This, of course, is true. But as we have often said from this very pulpit, "What profiteth a man from cooling, when the fear of warming hath been shouted from the rooftops?"
Let us continue with the next verse:

Different people have very different reactions to President Barack Obama. Those who listen to his rhetoric are often inspired, while those who follow what he actually does are often appalled.

And yet The False Prophet Of Change still has the support of those who would close the abomination of Gitmo, those who would have us beat our swords into plowshares, and those who would preach marriage to the sodomites (not that there's anything wrong with that).
Saint Thomas continues with another verse:

With Velcro and other modern adhesives available, can't someone design a boxing glove that doesn't require fights to be stopped in the middle of a round so that loose tape can be repaired? Often the break in the action changes the whole tempo of the fight and can affect the outcome.

We must remember that Saint Thomas's ways are not our ways. If he says we need Velcro inside boxing gloves, let us develop Velcro boxing gloves. He's been right about everything else.

The man has spoken.

Thus endeth the reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas.

You may be seated.

Those of you interested in other lessons from this sermon series from the writings of Saint Thomas may go here.

Thursday, May 21, 2009

The Forklifts Revisited

Dear Taxpayers,
About a week ago, I thanked all of you for purchasing me some new forklifts.
I love them, love them, love them.
The explanation and justification for your generous purchase can be found here.

In short, I'm accustomed to running warehouses with stuff like this:

But becase of something called the "Texas Emissions Reduction Plan", and the brilliant "Low Emission Propane Forklift Initiative Program", my employer, Jukt Micronics, got $9,000.00 rebates on 19 forklifts that look like these:

The idea is that the new lifts meet higher emissions standards than the old ones.

(Let's see....$9,000.00 x 19 forklifts = more money than I'll make all day long. So I can't thank you enough. Seriously. Especially the little people who dug deep to make this happen for me. These things are nice.)

The goal of this program is to emit less Nitrogen Oxide into the environment. But what if an unscrupulous factory or warehouse owner had a lot of old junk forklifts that he ran no more than 20 or 30 hours per year? Or perhaps his old environmentally harmful ones didn't run at all?

OMG....he or she could still apply for the rebates offered through the Texas emissions reduction plan and get brand new forklifts from the taxpayers even though he or she didn't really have a use for new forklifts and then sell the brand new machines later at a huge profit ! ! ! (This is not the case at my workplace, BTW.)

So how do the administrators of the program (sponsored by the Texas Railroad Commission) determine that a factory or warehouse has a genuine need for new forklifts?

They ask how many hours my old forklifts ran per year and this determines the amount of money you give me, and then my new forklifts are expected to run for a comparable number of hours. Every year, they inspect the hour meters. The number of hours I'm burning propane determines the size of our rebate, and whether or not we get to keep all of your money.

I repeat....they do inspections. They look at the hour meters on the dashboards.

If we don't run our forklifts for enough hours per year, we don't qualify for the total rebate.

Let's assume that burning propane on a forklift can actually influence the weather. If that's the case, my employer is now being rewarded for burning more propane, not less. (I assure you, we are now running the living shit out of these forklifts. We're burning propane as an entrepreneurial activity.)

As an Anthropogenic Global Warming Skeptic, I'm enjoying this more than you can imagine.

As a small-government libertarian, this next part makes me downright giddy. It gets better.

We have multiple shops and warehouses all over Tarrant and Johnson counties. There are forklifts in all of these places. Some of these shops are open for only one shift and others are open 24 hours a day. The forklifts in the busy shops will easily qualify for the rebate, but some of the others might not.

So once a month, I fire up three semi-tractors and go from shop to shop, warehouse to warehouse, moving your gift forklifts to places that are busy enough to ensure they qualify for the full emissions reduction rebate ! !

So....what does this mean to you?

Well, are you trying to save the earth by driving a Prius? Taking the bus? Riding a bike? Thanks to the Texas Railroad Commission's program, I eliminate any good that you supposedly do. Heck, on the days that I use two Mack trucks and a Freightliner to move the forklifts from shop to shop, I bet I negate the environmental efforts of entire subdivisions.

Once again, thanks for the forklifts. This year for Christmas, I'll get you some new recycling bins, a DVD of Al Gore's "Earth In The Balance" and a Moped.

Dr. Thomas Sowell has said it over and over. Programs and policies should be judged and evaluated in terms of the incentives they create, not their stated goals and objectives.

Pics of old forklift came from here. Pics of new Yale forklifts came from here.

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Thomas Sowell on Empathy

Please stand for this month's reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas....

Economist Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, has examined Obama's desire to appoint a new supreme court justice who has "empathy" with certain groups, and declared that it is a dangerous concept:

Would you want to go into court to appear before a judge with "empathy" for groups A, B and C, if you were a member of groups X, Y or Z? Nothing could be further from the rule of law. That would be bad news, even in a traffic court, much less in a court that has the last word on your rights under the Constitution of the United States.
Appoint enough Supreme Court justices with "empathy" for particular groups and you would have, for all practical purposes, repealed the 14th Amendment, which guarantees "equal protection of the laws" for all Americans.
We would have entered a strange new world, where everybody is equal but some are more equal than others. The very idea of the rule of law would become meaningless when it is replaced by the empathies of judges.


Agreed. The man has spoken.

Thus endeth this week's reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas.

You may be seated.

Our next scripture reading is from NickM of the Feline Enumerators, who recently stated that:

The state is not about protecting groups. It is certainly not about protecting groups arbitarily (and crudely) defined by our Lords and Masters. If it ought to be about anything it should be about protecting the rights of the individual through the Common Law and nothing else. We emerged from tribalism and through the PC mob we are returning to tribalism....

These two epistles come to us from opposite side of the world, within the same week. This is proof of their divine inspiration.

Please be seated as the choir sings the choral benediction, a John Spivey anthem entitled, "There Ain't No Such Thing As Group Happiness".

You are dismissed.

Friday, May 1, 2009

Why I Am A Libertarian, Part 2

Because of reconnecting with old friends on Facebook, I'm doing a series of posts about what makes someone go from political near-apathy to rabid Libertarian.

If you hit the "why I'm a libertarian" tag at the bottom of this post, or read a random dozen of any others, you can tell that I've got some Father issues. Not in the godawful late 1980's men's movement sense, where grown men go into the woods and sit in a circle and hit drums and read the poetry of Robert Bly while crying that their fathers didn't love them.
My issues are more basic than that - my father left shoes that are too big for me to fill. I can honestly place my right hand on a copy of "The Revolution" by Ron Paul, and swear that my father was the best man I've ever known. A near saint.

Now that we have that background established.... sometime in the early 1960's, the government started giving a combination tax write-off/cash subsidy to farmers whose land was "terraced". Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring, the book credited with starting the environmental movement, had just been released and conservation was in the air. The idea was that terraces - created by flattening sections of hillsides - would prevent soil erosion.
This is what terraces look like in Chinese rice fields. Flattening large section of the hillside prevents cultivated land from washing away during rains:

My father and uncle were among the first rice farmers in the Mississippi Delta. People predicted that the irrigation would poison the ground (false). People predicted that the water would produce mosquitoes that could carry off kittens (true). My family did well with it, despite the naysayers.

Then they learned about the terrace subsidy.

One of my little brother's students took these pics of the farm a few years ago. This is the view from the east:

See that ditch to the right of the road? By our standards that was The Grand Canyon.
Here's what we saw when we looked north:


See that slight ridge running from left to right in this picture, halfway between the cameraman and the treeline? That's what we called a hill.

Our farm needed terraces about as much as the center tennis court at Wimbledon needed terraces.

One day, my father and uncle contacted The County Agent (think Hank Kimball from the Green Acres TV show) about the 18-inch high levees that ran through their rice fields. These levees were used to keep water spread evenly over each field. Imagine a topographical map of the Nevada Salt Flats, with a levee representing each change in elevation. Not many levees were needed.

They asked the County Agent if the levees in their rice fields could be counted as terraces.
"Yep", the county agent said. "Those fields are terraced. Here's your paperwork to apply for some money."
The government money we received for our (ahem) terraced rice fields went a long way toward paying for the farm. We've never properly thanked the taxpayers for this gesture, and I'd like to do so now.
Thanks, suckers ! !

For the next twenty years, any time my father started ranting about gubmint giveaways, my mother would remind him of the terraces. He'd try to claim that counting levees as terraces was different, because he worked hard to grow all that rice.

My point is this: In order to get a huge amount of government money, the most saintly man I've ever known was willing to claim that his Mississippi Delta flatland had terraces. And the government's representative helped him do it.

Here's a summary of the problem, as stated by Dr. Thomas Sowell: "What counts in assessing a social or economic policy is not the stated intentions of promoters, but the incentives created and the actual end results produced."

Thanks again for all that money ! !

Picture of rice field irrigation from here, a site worth looking through whether you're interested in rice or not. Pics of the Guanxi rice field came from here.

Saturday, April 4, 2009

Adventures In Price Setting

This if from "The Turning Point", by Nikolai Shmelev and Vladmir Popov. Shmelev and Popov were economists in the former Soviet Union, a resume stain that I hope they've been able to overcome.
I've seen references to this story for years, but had no idea as to the original source. Its about what happens when government gets into the price-setting business instead of allowing prices to fluctuate on their own. This story happens to be about fur. .

"When Alice eats or drinks something in Wonderland, she either begins to shrink or becomes enormous, and she can't get back to her normal size. In actual fact Goskomtsen (the Soviet price-setting bureau) finds itself in a similar situation. It systematically either underestimates or overestimates the atual cost of a product and cannot "hit the nail on the head". At best, it is able only to correct the most obvious price disproportions several years after they appear.
In 1982, for example, to stimulate production of goods made of inexpensive fur, purchasing prices on moleskin were raised from 20 to 50 kopecks per pelt. State purchases increased, and now all the distribution centers are filled with these pelts. Industry is unable to use them all, and they often rot in warehouses before they can be processed. The Ministry of Light Industry has already requested Goskomtsen twice to lower purchasing prices, but the "question has not been decided" yet. and this is not surprising. Its members are too busy to decide. They have no time: besides setting prices on these pelts, they have to keep track of another 24 million prices. And how can they possibly know how much to lower the price today so they won't have to raise it tomorrow?"

Well, they could stay out of it altogether, and let vendors try to sell fur for as much as possible, and let customers try to purchase it for as little as possible, and the Invisible Hand will determine at what price the transaction will take place.

On a related note, here's what has happened when California's government put a .05 cent bounty on aluminum cans. The idea was to conserve, be green, and save the earth. Instead, people are flocking to California with their aluminum.




Thomas Sowell says it over and over and over, and we still don't get it. Programs and policies should be judged and evaluated in terms of the incentives they create, not their stated goals and objectives.

Monday, December 8, 2008

Thomas Sowell on what The Road To Hell Is Paved With

Brothers and Sisters, we will begin our services today with a brief reading from National Socialist Radio , and a few words from Henry Waxman about the Wall Street Bailout legislation.

"I wish we would have made the language tighter. I was aware at the time that it wasn't as clear and direct as I would have liked it," says Rep. Henry Waxman (Mommy Party - CA). "And to find now that it might be used for extravagant pensions or bonuses or dividends or any other purpose is inconsistent with what Congress intended."

Please add Brother Henry Waxman to your prayer lists, as we all wish him a speedy recovery.

Now please stand for this month's reading from the Gospel According to Saint Thomas, in which we gather here to read words by, or about economist Thomas Sowell, who is the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead:

"Economics is a study of incentives and their consequences, not intentions and their goals."

"What counts in assessing a social or economic policy is not the stated intentions of promoters, but the incentives created and the actual end results produced"

"Economics is a study of cause and effect, not intentions and hopes."

I invite the congregation, during our moment of quiet time, to compare and contrast the statements of Brother Waxman and Saint Thomas.

You may be seated.


At the close of our services, after you have repented of your addiction to bailouts, subsidies, quotas, and giveaways, after you have dropped your opposition to NAFTA and stopped supporting rent control, and basically gotten right with God, I invite you to cautiously visit this site, at http://tsowellusa.ytmnd.com/ . If you have speakers on your computer, turn them up.

Please remember that Saint Thomas is not divine. He is, of course, saintly but not godlike. We violate the First and Second Commandments when we set up online shrines and altars to someone who is, according to rumors, human.

Next week our guest speakers will be a group of missionaries who are trying to put a copy of Saint Thomas's "Basic Economics-3rd edition" on the nightstand of every room in every Motel 6 in the United States.

You are dismissed.

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Thomas Sowell On Obama's Plan To "Jolt" The Economy

Please stand for this month's reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas....

Economist Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, has proclaimed that there is no need to go forth with President-elect Obama's plan to "jolt" the economy.

I seldom quote Saint Thomas directly, out of fear that I will be struck dead from on high for publishing a typo. I truly am not worthy of this task. But I'll try....

What we are talking about is a golden political opportunity for politicians to use the current financial crisis to fundamentally change an economy that has been successful for more than two centuries, so that politicians can henceforth micro-manage all sorts of businesses and play Robin Hood, taking from those who are not likely to vote for them and transferring part of their earnings to those who will vote for them.

Children, these are our memory verses for next Sunday morning. Please be prepared to recite them during Bible drill. Do you want more? Of course you do....



Whatever the merits of trying to shore up some financial institutions, in order to prevent a major disruption of the credit flows that keep the whole economy going, what has in fact been done has been to create a huge pot of money-- hundreds of billions of dollars-- that politicians can use to give out goodies hither and yon, to whomever they please for whatever reason they please.
And here's the most curious verse in the entire epistle that Saint Thomas has given us....


Much as we may deplore partisanship in Washington, bipartisan disasters are often twice as bad as partisan disasters-- and this is a bipartisan disaster in the making.
We don't deplore partisanship in Washington, do we? No. We love it. But Saint Thomas's ways are not our ways. We must trust him and his word, and rest assured that this is not a mistake in Holy Scripture.

There is no reason for our government to be transferring all this wealth from the poor to the rich. None whatsoever.

The man has spoken.

Thus endeth the reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas.

You may be seated.

Monday, October 6, 2008

Thomas Sowell And The Financial Crisis

Please stand for this month's reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas....
Economist Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, has stated that the blame for the current economic crisis can be laid at the feet of Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.

Fact Number One: It was liberal Democrats, led by Senator Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, who for years-- including the present year-- denied that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taking big risks that could lead to a financial crisis.
Please excuse Dr. Sowell for his misuse of the word "liberal".
Those of us who favor minimal government interference in the public and private sector are liberals. I am a liberal. Ron Paul is a liberal. Dr. Sowell is a liberal.
(Liberty, Liberal, Liberate, Libertarian - all from the same root word.)
Dodd and Frank are impostors, and technically should be called "statists".
Dr. Sowell has probably grown tired of having to make the proper distinction.

It was Senator Dodd, Congressman Frank and other liberal Democrats who for years refused requests from the Bush administration to set up an agency to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
It was liberal Democrats, again led by Dodd and Frank, who for years pushed for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans, which are at the heart of today's financial crisis.
Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. So did Bush's Secretary of the Treasury, five years ago.
Yet, today, what are we hearing? That it was the Bush administration "right-wing ideology" of "de-regulation" that set the stage for the financial crisis. Do facts matter?
We also hear that it is the free market that is to blame. But the facts show that it was the government that pressured financial institutions in general to lend to subprime borrowers, with such things as the Community Reinvestment Act and, later, threats of legal action by then Attorney General Janet Reno if the feds did not like the statistics on who was getting loans and who wasn't.
Is that the free market? Or do facts not matter?
Therefore, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank should be sentenced to twenty years of involuntary servitude, driving potential home buyers from place to place and trying to sell them distressed "properties". All sales commissions would be contributed to our national debt payments.
Dr. Sowell has spoken.
Thus endeth the reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas.
You may be seated.

For those wanting further devotional readings, copies of the following are available in the narthex of The Sepulchre:

"Frank's Fingerprints Are All Over The Financial Fiasco", by Jeff Jacoby of The Boston Globe. The Globe is Congressman Frank's hometown newspaper. Jeff Jacoby is a libertarian demigod. This piece is highly recommended to those wishing to affirm their faith, or to assist in the spiritual formation of the young.

"The Devil's Kitchen" has written that "Yes, It's Still Largely The Fault Of The State". I recommend this post to the congregation here at The Sepulchre with a few misgivings....The Devil's Kitchen is a British blog, and is therefore far removed from our economic concerns in the U.S. However, Mr. Kitchen is usually entertaining and always accurate. And the language used by his commenters makes you people look like a Masterpiece Theatre presentation.

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Thomas Sowell and Tim Russert

Please stand for this month's reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas....

Economist Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, has proclaimed that the loss of Tim Russert was the loss of a national treasure, since there is no replacement journalist of comparable objectivity, intelligence, and diligence on the horizon.

Despite being a huge fan of "Meet The Press", I had vowed not to write anything about Russert's premature departure. I thought that we spend too much energy lamenting the loss of people who happen to be on television, and not enough time enjoying the company of those who aren't.

Dr. Sowell has shown me the error of my ways in this case. Tim Russert seems to have been the real thing.

Therefore, I recant my earlier mistaken opinions about the value of Tim Russert. These opinions are now abhorrent and are an anathema to me. (I think I remember those phrases from an old movie about the Inquisition.)

The man has spoken.

Thus endeth the reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas.

You may be seated.