Government Solution

Occupy Wall Street? You might as well send them a check.

The only way to get business out of government is to make government smaller. There is no "government" solution to the government problem.

Update: I see comments here and there around the www about how messed up these kids are. I dunno – Wall Street pretty much owns government. Aside from the part the Drug Cartels control. They got the problem right. They got the answer wrong. What they want is smaller government. Something no faction in America favors. They all have their pet projects for improving moral and social conditions that REQUIRE Big Intrusive Government (that would be BIG. And if this were a movie it would be controlled by Mr. Big or perhaps his brother). Ah. Well. Maybe when the kids grow up they will become libertarians.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Conservatives Are Really Progressives?

Right wing (without a doubt) magazine Human Events makes the case using the Ken Burns movie "Prohibition" as a springboard that Prohibition was a Progressive project. I think there is no doubt about that.

But I wonder. Since Prohibition is a Progressive Project why do so many "Conservatives" these days support its modern day variant, "Drug Prohibition" ?

Progressivism in America is not a Party. It is a state of mind.

Progressives On The March

Forbes Magazine has an interview with Progressive Insurance chairman Peter Lewis.

Our marijuana laws are outdated, ineffective and stupid. I’m not alone in thinking this: Half of Americans believe we should stop punishing people for using marijuana. And not coincidentally, more than half of Americans have used marijuana themselves. I am one of those Americans, and I know firsthand that marijuana can be helpful and that it certainly isn’t cause for locking anyone up.

He goes on to say:

I’ve been conducting a great deal of research on public opinion on marijuana. Change in this area is inevitable, much like the movement toward equal rights for gays and lesbians. An ever shrinking fraction of the country resists changing marijuana laws, largely for moral reasons. But change is coming. It’s just a question of when and how we get there.

According to some of my commenters such moralists don't exist. Some one is living in the wrong universe. It might even be me. But I doubt it.

H/T Drug Policy Forum of Texas

Cross Posted at Classical Values

The New Rallying Cry

I'm visiting places around the 'net and what do I see? Lots of "it is all Bush's fault". Bush's opponents had the Congress and the Presidency since early in 2009. Almost total control. And they still didn't have enough time and power to reverse what ever actions of Bush they wanted. It seems they were impotent.

So their campaign slogan for 2012 seems to be:

There is nothing we can do.

I'm inclined to agree and hope to hasten the day when they do nothing some place else.

Welfare Or Darwin

In many places, government workers are mainstays of the Black middle class.

And when government runs out of money?

The Jews did not attach themselves to government. And look at the result. Everywhere they are given a chance.

Look at real Nobels. About .2% of the world population is Jewish. Something like 20% of the real Nobels are to Jews.

We don’t see anything like that among the Blacks. If anything the reverse. They are under represented.

=========

It is in part a result of a changed environment. Ordinary manual labor no longer pays. We saw that coming in the “John Henry – Steel Driving Man” song. That is rather an old song. Over one hundred years old. And now we have microprocessors to replace humans on the assembly line. Engineers design products to be assembled by machine. If the volumes are high enough. And the low volume stuff requires a more skilled worker.

=========

Well there is still trade. Except the licensing Depts of all the Urbans are controlled by the Unions or other entrenched interests. You often have to buy your way into the guild – think Taxi Medallion. Or hair cutting schools.

And then all the paperwork and depts that must be satisfied. And deposits for this or that government “service”.

And you wonder why there is such interest in the dope trade? Simple. You go to the “man” and ask him, “I want to sell dope. How much can you front me?” And if you make a deal you are in business. No paperwork. No regulations to satisfy. All you have to do is find customers and avoid predators (police). Might I add that paying your suppliers on time is a very important business practice in this market.

Well anyway. Engineering and politics have designed low skill work out of our economy. The alternative is welfare or Darwin. Neither pretty choices.

At the margins there are things that can be done – make hiring cheaper is one thing. That helps the low skilled. Eliminate the minimum wage. A neat little way to keep the low skilled and unskilled out of the market.

=====

Fix this? Progressives are going to have to be reduced. Short of war this takes time.

Of course the “Conservative” attachment to the Drug War needs to be reduced as well. But overall the Conservatives are more in touch with reality.

====

From a comment I made at Why Blue Can’t Save The Inner Cities Part I

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Tottering Dinosaurs

My friend Eric has a nice post up on Wisconsin.

Regressive Progressives

Joel Kotkin discusses the Regressive Progressives in a video interview with Instapundit. Towards the end of the video they discuss for a moment this book:

Sprawl: A Compact History

The book discusses the virtues of Sprawl. Here is a review I thought interesting:

I have always been, and will continue to be, a city boy at heart. Bruegmann has given me reason to rethink how I feel about modern-day suburbia. Before this book I would drive through the suburbs thinking "Ugh! How could anyone want to live in this drab, boring, soulless environment?" After reading this book I now think "Boy, I'm really glad all these people live out here so I can afford my nice little townhouse in the middle of the city on my modest salary."

Of course there are other arguments for sprawl and the politics that go with it. A thermodynamic explanation of politics. And the reviewer got it exactly right. Without the harvests of the suburbs and country the city would cease to exist. Neither the city nor the country nor the land in between can exist without flows and interchanges between each other. There is symbiosis although from some points of view any of the components can be regarded as parasitic. And that is when the ignorant get at each others throats for not living "right". When the right way to live depends on the ecological niche.

Things would work so much better if people weren't so good at minding other people's business. Ah. Well. Human nature. Ain't it grand? Not always.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

A Split

Around 1930 or so the Progressive movement split into left and right factions. And they HATE each other. And their end is the same: Power and Control. Pretty cool huh?

BTW Left and Right Progressives brought you alcohol prohibition. Billy Sunday ring a bell?

I found the reviews of this book interesting:

A Fierce Discontent: The Rise and Fall of the Progressive Movement in America, 1870-1920

One reviewer said that the object of the Progressives was:

To change other people; to end class conflict; to control big business; to segregate society

Interesting. So where are we today? Segregation is a totally discredited idea. Good. I'm rather proud to say that I was in on that one.

But we are still engaged in class conflict. That sucks. And big business has taken over government. Here is a prime example. In other words the oligarchs (often called crony capitalists these days) are in control. For now.

But what is the big thing on the right these days? An unquenchable desire to change other people. For some the desire for Power and Control never ends. In modern times it is not sold as a naked power grab. It is couched in "enforcing morality" terms. My friend Eric wrote a very good one on that subject. Does freedom to sin violate religious freedom? Of course that "enforcing morality" bit got us the Alcohol Prohibition Amendment back when left and right progressives were working together hand in glove. Well that one was a total disaster. The left has learned from its mistake. Those on the right are a little slower to catch on.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

The Power To Do Good

What is the common thread between liberals and conservatives today? They are believers in the power of the state to do good. Or in the short hand form statists. Or in the common vernacular fascists.

All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state. Benito Mussolini

I have always been an enemy of the State. Not totally. But nearly so. In accord with our founding father:

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Geo. Washington

Our founders thought the state should be on a very short leash. Chained to the deck with a VERY short chain. Most of what passes for politics today follows from: "there is no limit to the good that can be done by putting a gun to a man's head" liberals and conservatives alike. As a friend of mine likes to say: "we are doomed".

There are only Progressives in politics these days. In the early days of the Progressive movement Economics and Morality were combined. Now a days the movement has bifurcated. We have Liberal Progressives who want the state to "fix" economics and Conservative Progressives who want the state to "fix" morality.

In any case the Progressives are now in control of America left and right. Which is why you see Government "Conservatives" working with the left some times on economics and Government "Liberals" sometimes working with the right on morals. It is the common interest in the power of the state keeps them joined at the hip.

I like the Tea Parties (so far) in that they seem to be more libertarian oriented. And there seems to be an interest growing in libertarian politicians such as Rand Paul.

What encourages me in my war against the statists is that a little over half the country sees the Tea Party in a favorable light.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

I Have A Feeling

Reason Magazine has excerpted part of the Prop. 8 (gay marriage ban) decision from the judge who gave the decision:

At oral argument on proponents' motion for summary judgment, the court posed to proponents' counsel the assumption that "the state's interest in marriage is procreative" and inquired how permitting same-sex marriage impairs or adversely affects that interest. Counsel replied that the inquiry was "not the legally relevant question," but when pressed for an answer, counsel replied: "Your honor, my answer is: I don’t know. I don't know."…

Despite this response, proponents in their trial brief promised to "demonstrate that redefining marriage to encompass same-sex relationships" would effect some twenty-three specific harmful consequences. At trial, however, proponents presented only one witness, David Blankenhorn, to address the government interest in marriage. Blankenhorn’s testimony…provided no credible evidence to support any of the claimed adverse effects proponents promised to demonstrate. During closing arguments, proponents again focused on the contention that "responsible procreation is really at the heart of society's interest in regulating marriage." When asked to identify the evidence at trial that supported this contention, proponents' counsel replied, "you don't have to have evidence of this point."

Evidence is so passe when strong feelings are involved. The "Conservatives" arguing in favor of the ban are nothing more than Progressives in disguise. And lest you think I'm a proponent of gay marriage - no. But I'm not bothered by it either.

There was a day when Conservatives were directed by reason. They had much better arguments than "tradition" And if tradition is so important how do you explain their support for the Progressive supported (back in the day) untraditional Drug Prohibition?

So let me ask. Of the points those who favor the ban suggest "will be proved" [pdf] is there any thing that would actually pass as proof? Or is it as I suspect another version of the Progressive refrain: "I have a feeling". Followed by that other Progressive refrain: "something must be done".

My advice to conservatives? If you really don't like Progressives why not stop following in their footsteps? Why not elevate reason over feelings? That would be a really different brand of politics.

And I found this an especially amusing addendum to the whole controversy. Reagan-Appointed Judge Strikes Down Gay Marriage Ban.

H/T Instapundit

The CAGW Of The Right

I was reading Hot Air on recent Republican poling re: the 2012 Presidential race and came across this comment:

The next president will be a CONSERVATIVE.

To which I replied:

Would that be a pro Drug War Progressive Conservative or a real conservative?

The Drug War is the CAGW* of the Right.

* Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming.

Government As A Moral Enterprise

David Harsanyi has a column up about the shocking lack of faith in America and all the trouble it is causing in politics. You really need to read it. But I want to excerpt a bit from his closing remarks.

...progressives regard government as a moral enterprise. And in church, you gotta have faith.

There are a lot of Progressives who claim to be conservatives. You know. The kind claiming to belong to the One True Culture Club. (Its a joke son)

H/T Instapundit

Palin Climate Change

Sarah Palin has a few words to say about climate change.

There is no shortage of threats to our economy. America's unemployment rate recently hit its highest mark in more than 25 years and is expected to continue climbing. Worries are widespread that even when the economy finally rebounds, the recovery won't bring jobs. Our nation's debt is unsustainable, and the federal government's reach into the private sector is unprecedented.

Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:

I am deeply concerned about President Obama's cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president's cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.

So true. The fact that we now have a politician with a national audience speaking out on this issue is a wonderful thing. There is now a former candidate for Vice President speaking out against former Vice President Al Gore. Wonderful news. Maybe the US Senate will grow a spine and vote down Waxman-Malarkey.

Sarah goes on to say:

Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.

In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.

The ironic beauty in this plan? Soon, even the most ardent liberal will understand supply-side economics.

In other Palin news some one promoting her political career says she is not leading a conservative movement.

During the 2008 election Republican candidates touted their conservative credentials. Often, it seemed that one only had to use the phrase “conservative” to pass muster for the base of the Republican Party. By its definition, conservatism is traditionalism, it is the status quo, it is the antithesis of change. The mistake that many Republicans make is that they have relegated themselves to being so-called Conservatives. Is America’s political memory so short that Republican values would be considered “conservative?”

Sarah Palin stands for energy independence, limited government, free enterprise, and individual liberty. Are these “conservative” values? Let us not forget that in their day and time our founding fathers were radicals fighting those who wanted to maintain the political status-quo; subjugation to the king. Their sense of individual rights and liberty is historically progressive when you compare alternative political systems, monarchies, empires, totalitarian states. Republicans have forgotten their progressive roots and Democrats have cornered the market on their so-called progressive solutions for America.

The Democratic Party now nearly completely in control of the Federal government, is in fact regressive, conservative, and pushing the nation back to its colonial roots; subjugation to the king, who now sits in Washington D.C. It is the Liberals who are out of the mainstream of America, it is they who want to turn over individual liberty to Federal overseers. What have we become as citizens when we allow a virtual monarch to sit in the city named after one of our great liberators? Will we be free citizens or colonists toiling for tribute to send to Washington?

It is not conservative to advocate for personal liberty or to empower the individual to achieve their own American dream.

It is not conservative to advocate for strong national defense. It is not conservative to keep government limited in order to protect the rights and freedoms of the individual.

It is not conservative to allow free enterprise, innovation, and creativity to drive the national economy.

These are not conservative principles, these are uniquely American principles.

I urge Democrats, Republicans, and Independents who believe in these principles to stop calling themselves “conservatives” as if that label separates them from the mainstream of American society. If you agree with Sarah Palin, and advocate these principles then you’re not a conservative, you’re an American. This is not a conservative movement, this is an American movement, and one of the most progressive movements in human history.

Sarah Palin the new Progressive? Talk about taking back the language. And Palin as the leader of a movement? I like it.

I also like Palin in in a swimsuit. And why not? I love women in American motif bikinis. Beauty contest entrants in swim suits don't seem very conservative to me.

Me? I'm not very conservative either. I'm more of the libertarian persuasion. As far as I can tell Sarah governed as a libertarian. In fact the themes she propounds are very libertarian. And libertarian ideals are a very American governing philosophy. Socialism is a European import. My grandparents left Europe to get away from that sort of thing. And I'm not interested in it either.

H/T Watts Up With That

Cross Posted at Classical Values

The Object Of

The object of socialism is to replace a system that only works for some with a system that works for no one. This is called social justice.

It Used To Ba Called Fascism

Private Ownership. Government Control.

Blame The Capitalists

Click to see the full size

Note the "Young Pinkies from Columbia and Harvard" sign on the side of the cart.

H/T ravingdave

Cross Posted at Classical Values

It Gets Progressively Worse

I'm reading No Quarter for a change and I came across a "Progressive" who is unhappy with Obama.

Remember how we (meaning, progressives, liberals, Democrats, fair-minded people) got really upset when the Republican majority used all kinds of tricks to get their way? It made us mad. But now, Obama is thinking of using a little procedural trick that would only require 50 votes to get his energy and health care bills passed. Here’s some more information on this procedure:

Because they can not be filibustered, budget reconciliations only require 50 votes to pass the Senate. Democrats hold strong majorities in Congress, but still come up short of the 60 votes necessary in the Senate to end debate, which makes it easier for Republicans to block legislation. House rules in comparison make it harder for the minority party to stop bills.

Still, using budget reconciliation to pass policy proposals is controversial, even among some Democrats who believe doing so strains Senate rules and tradition.

Take this to heart my Progressive friend: Obama is the most Progressive of Progressives.

He plans to soak (some of) the rich. Carbon taxes will drive energy costs up. And he promises a Civilian Corps (SS) to keep ordinary citizens on the straight and narrow.

Perhaps it is time to rethink your commitment to the Progressive Philosophy. After all the Austrian Corporal was as progressive as they come. And we know how that ended. Or perhaps the Progressive History of the USSR might interest you.

Hayek in The Road to Serfdom explains why progressive politics always ends badly. He wrote it in 1944 when the trajectory was still fresh.

Obama is not an aberration. He is the inevitable end result of Progressive Thought. There is no New Socialist Man. There are just the same greedy bastards. Bad enough in business: but at least there you can set them against each other (you know - competition). The Maker help us when the greedy bastards get unchecked government power.

And we now have the smoothest talking “progressive” greedy bastard we have seen in a long time as head of government with a Congress filled mostly with his minions.

Enjoy.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Democrat Tells The Truth

I was over visiting KOS due to an Instapundit link and came across this gem in the comments.

many of you outraged purists are getting soiled by politics for the first time, for older purists it continues to be about ideals.

We have a dangerous fascist powerhouse in the military industrial complex that we're trying to shove from power. I personally would lie to defeat them.

Lockheed puts out ads that say, "we never forget who we're working for." Right. The permanent war machine.

I don't know about you but I'm working for Barack Obama.

It would seem to me that your product ought to be good enough so you don't have to lie about it. Once you admit the need to lie to your customers you have taken a step down a very dark road. When can the lying stop? When can you start telling the truth? What does it mean for repeat sales when buyers remorse sets in?

This person claims to be an old hand at politics. I'd say he has learned nothing from his experience. Or the wrong things.

Mamet Goes Conservative

This is kind of old news, but I need a post today. So here goes. I used to know David Mamet from his time helping to get the St. Nicholas Theater on Halsted Street in Chicago going. I was actually living in the theater at the time and helped them set up their sound system. I got to watch the play "American Buffalo" from the windows in our 2nd floor "apartment". I have heard rumors that I was the inspiration for the radio engineer in his play "The Water Engine". I knew Bill Macy rather well at the time. In any case, back in the day he and I were liberals. However, it looks like his outlook has changed. As has mine. David is discussing a play he wrote, "November", where the two main characters in it are a conservative and a liberal:

The conservative president in the piece holds that people are each out to make a living, and the best way for government to facilitate that is to stay out of the way, as the inevitable abuses and failures of this system (free-market economics) are less than those of government intervention.

I took the liberal view for many decades, but I believe I have changed my mind.

As a child of the '60s, I accepted as an article of faith that government is corrupt, that business is exploitative, and that people are generally good at heart.

These cherished precepts had, over the years, become ingrained as increasingly impracticable prejudices. Why do I say impracticable? Because although I still held these beliefs, I no longer applied them in my life. How do I know? My wife informed me. We were riding along and listening to NPR. I felt my facial muscles tightening, and the words beginning to form in my mind: Shut the fuck up. "?" she prompted. And her terse, elegant summation, as always, awakened me to a deeper truth: I had been listening to NPR and reading various organs of national opinion for years, wonder and rage contending for pride of place. Further: I found I had been—rather charmingly, I thought—referring to myself for years as "a brain-dead liberal," and to NPR as "National Palestinian Radio."

Yes. We were all children of the 60s back then (1975). What changed my mind? I could see that liberalism (and its core socialism) didn't work. I'm not going to go into detail on all the events that shattered my illusions (the Vietnamese Boat People played a big part), but let me just say that my contact with the real world of business changed my mind about a lot of things. And, if you want to find out what changed Mamet's mind, read the whole thing.

H/T Instapundit

Crooks

Rob Payne is complaining about how big corporations are buying government. He sees this as a big right wing plot. Or at least a corporate plot since they "invest" in both parties. However, they are not the only ones.

The ecology industry has its hands in the pie. The government gives out global warming grants.

In fact any where government money goes a part of it flows back to our Congress Crooks.

The only way to get out of this mess is to restrict government power.

That was the idea behind the Constitution.

However, it is not something the "progressives" want to hear. The truth is that any interest will eventually co-opt government oversight. It happened with the ICC and every other attempt that has been made. The FDA? Tell me about it.

Smaller government is the only hope. An impossible dream to be sure. Perhaps curtailing its growth is possible.