'What to Expect When You’re Free Trading'

Here is a good Op-Ed by Steven E. Landsburg published in The New York Times.

I wish he went into more detail, but he still underlines the main conflict in “protecting” American jobs; that no matter which way you cut it, if the government is involved, it involves force.

Sadly, because of the general ignorance of basic economics, no candidate can go on the record and say that it’s not worth it, and wrong besides, to keep American jobs at the cost of freedom and greater prosperity; not that any candidate would say this, even if they could.

Very few recognize that “keeping jobs” involves forcing decisions out of people, decisions that they would presumably not prefer; after all, the only reason the government would need to protect a job would be if it no longer provide the best value to other people.

When politicians talk about “protecting America’s workers” they are talking about holding up a market that people no longer desire, or useful has expired.

In New Jersey, there is a law that says that person cannot pup their own gas (I don’t know if this is still on the books.) This was instituted under the same backwards logic as the protectionist policies above. What few realize is: sure, you have more jobs at gas stations, but at the price of more expensive gasoline.

Most people, given the choice, would prefer to save money and pump their own gas; but by law they can’t.

By spending money on a service they didn’t want, they take money away from where it should have gone; that is, precisely where that person wanted it to go based on there own desires.

Little controls like this add up, and eventually, billons are lost in investments that never happened, or products that were never bought; industries that were never born.

Imagine what would have happened to this country if the government tried to protect carriage makers, at the cost of the automobile or the train; or the steam engine, at the cost of internal combustion; or tried to protect domestic electronic manufactures from foreign competition, at the cost of satellite and pharmaceutical research (and they ARE connected.)

What’s ironic is that these policies produce little of the benefits they promise, and many times result in a lower standard of living.

I hope people realize this before the government controls all our decisions in the name of “protecting America’s workers.”

“An Idea Is A Greater Monument Then A Cathedral”

While the movie Inherit the Wind has very little to do with the trial it was based on, it still expertly demonstrates and dramatizes the underlining battle of ideas that went on there.

Art can be seen as a reflection of culture; a collage of its dominant ideas and conflicts. Watching the clip below, I'm surprised how different movies where back then; sure, they lacked the subtlety and finesse of modern movies, but there was little of the vagueness and that certain evasive relativism that’s hard to define.

While movies are more technically brilliant then they ever where, in many ways they are much more cowardly; even those movies which are supposedly “cutting edge” or “controversial” stink of this same vagueness, the same fear, the same unwillingness to commit to anything they say. In the end, they only end up being offensive, and even at that they mostly fail.

A movie about a child molester (The Woodsman) ends up saying nothing, even committing to a solid picture of the character. A movie that explores racism without ever exploring racism (Crash.)Vague pseudo-philosophical rhetoric that attempts to be “deep” (The Matrix sequels.) And a movie that plays with, but never commits to, the idea of fate and God (I am Legend.)

All these movies are a testament to our time, to the post-modern, anti-ideas that have become almost entirely dominant.

Well, below is a movie that has none of that vagueness, whose characters declare exactly what they believe in, and why.

I have to say, it’s refreshing:



There is another good clip here.

Brilliant Video on Economics: A tribute to Milton Freidman

This is great; I don't even have to say anything, it speaks for itself.

Without further ado:



I also found this at Café Hayek.

Another Reason to be Happy and Optimistic

It seems, counter to what many would claim, wealth in this country is growing, not decreasing; and despite the proclamations of Lou Dobbs and the like, the middle class is doing quite well.

Just read at this quote from Walter Williams:

"Controlling for inflation, in 1967, 8 percent of households had an annual income of $75,000 and up; in 2003, more than 26 percent did. In 1967, 17 percent of households had a $50,000 to $75,000 income; in 2003, it was 18 percent. In 1967, 22 percent of households were in the $35,000 to $50,000 income group; by 2003, it had fallen to 15 percent. During the same period, the $15,000 to $35,000 category fell from 31 percent to 25 percent, and the under $15,000 category fell from 21 percent to 16 percent. The only reasonable conclusion from this evidence is that if the middle class is disappearing, it's doing so by swelling the ranks of the upper classes."

I found this at Café Hayek.

“New Math” Put In Its Place

When I lived in Nevada, I suffered through this “revolutionary” math systems with my sister’s homework.

The process was cumbersome, complicated, and unintuitive. Often, “new math” didn’t produce the correct answer; a ton of special rules needed to be created to solve the flaws in the process (though, for the record, I am in favor of teaching different base systems; but not as a replacment for base 10.)

Well, I’m glad people are starting to catch on, and are realizing that a new system is not necessary a better one.

Below is an entertaining video that lays down the convoluted process of “new math” subtraction. I love it when he says, “In the new approach, as you know, it is more important to understand what you are doing then to get the right answer.”



It is connected to the dryer but more informative: Math Education, an Inconvenient Truth

-Ryan

P.S.---I also like this guys rendition of the elements Here.

Police Force

Let me just say that I generally have a good opinion of police offices, but this guy sickens me.



It’s clear from the video that his use of force was unnecessary, and didn’t help the problem besides. The officer violates some basic arresting etiquette, such as telling the driver what he was charged with, and that he intended to arrest him. I heard that, many times, those with criminal-like pathologies join the police force, watching this video makes me believe it.

The use of force was completely unjustified; he calls the driver over, and then tasers him; it was clear that it wasn’t necessary, as the driver was argumentative but generally cooperating.

As Nicholas Provenzo at the Center for the Advancement of Capitalism said:

“The police officer was not clear about his intention to place the driver under arrest. The driver, albeit confused and mildly agitated, thought he was negotiating his citation throughout the encounter. The police officer did not refute this mistaken, yet not dishonest premise. The police officer did not indicate the offense the driver was charged with, or that any further discussion or debate should be saved for a judge. Lastly, the police officer did not in any way indicate that the driver's signing of the citation was not an admission of guilt, but instead allowed the officer to release the driver without arresting him.”

He continues:

“Knowledge of this incentive would likely have led to marked change in the driver's reaction. Instead, the police officer used his weapon to subdue a man who presented no immediate physical threat to him. I say his actions fit the definition of unreasonable to the letter.”

He also makes a good point on the practical use of force by officers:

“Furthermore, as part of the practical aspect of policing, the officer's conduct escalated the situation rather then subdued it. If I were his superior, I'd fire him for recklessness and unprofessional conduct.”

I agree with Mr. Provenzo. Beyond being unreasonable, the officer showed absolutely no tact in dealing with the situation; that alone disqualifies him to wear the badge.

I hope in the near future, this officer finds himself without one, as well as any officer like him.

For contrast, here is an officer that handles himself professionally in a much more stressful situation:

The Real Meaning of Christmas

Here is a writer who attempts to trace back the “real” meaning of the holiday.

Grocery Reform

Richard Ralston makes a case for National Grocery Reform.

He says:

“One of the great scandals of our age is the fact that America spends more on food than any other nation. Many political leaders are now calling for urgent reform to bring spending on food under control. Even worse, while the result of this uncontrolled spending includes the fact that many Americans are overweight, some Americans do not have enough to eat.”

What he proposes is a drastic change to the America’s Food System:

“To achieve savings by eliminating the profits of food manufacturers, the U.S. Department of Agriculture will assume ownership of all of these firms, purchase all crops from farmers (until such time as agriculture can be reorganized into government operations) and manufacture an appropriate amount of food.”

Of course, this food utopia can’t be built without a little sacrifice, he continues:

“In spite of the efficiencies and cost reductions that government management will achieve, there is some concern that food might not be affordable for everyone. And food is surely a "right," as it is necessary for human survival. Therefore all groceries made available in government commissaries will be free of charge. This will be financed by an increase of 15 percent in income taxes, except for those making over $80,000 a year, whose taxes will be increased by 75 percent. Because the supply of food is not unlimited, a fixed amount of ration coupons will be distributed to insure that each consumer can obtain an equal amount of food.”

Ralston makes some good points; it certainly makes as much sense as anything else being said today.

You can read the full article Here, or at Americans for Free Choice in Medicine.

These brilliant ideas have implications elsewhere, as Ralston admits in his own article. I’ll let him have the last word:

“Rumor has it that the clincher for those proposing socialized grocery plans was stated recently by one of the presidential candidates: "The ideal thing about these proposals is that if we can somehow get this to work for groceries, we can apply it to health care."

The World’s First Stand-Up Economist

Who said that economists have no sense of humor?



You can see this guys other videos at his website Here.

What’s caused by Global Warming? Just about everything.

Check out This List to find out more.

Each item on the list is a link to an actual site or article that makes the claim.

I wish Global Warming were more well-known when I was in high school, I could blame my failed history tests on it.

Creation Museum

Visit This Site to see some pictures of the Creationist Museum.

Did you know that there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that life existed more the six-thousand-years-ago?

Oh, how facts and the scientific method deceive us all!

Real Life: The New Multiplayer Videogame

Have a hard time deciding what to buy your friend for Christmas, look no further then this brand new game:

Real Life

According to this review, Real Life is:

“….the most accessible and most widely accepted massively multiplayer online role-playing game to date. Featuring believable characters, plenty of lasting appeal, and a lot of challenge and variety, real life is absolutely recommendable to those who've grown weary of all the cookie-cutter games that have tried to emulate its popularity--or to just about anyone, really.”

You can do just about anything in this game, but make sure that it is your cup of tea before you buy, the review also says:

“Real life can occasionally feel like a chore. Some players legitimately dislike it, despite having attempted and even excelled at numerous career paths. Others externalize their frustrations by harming other players or, in some cases, even harming themselves. These players do have access to various support forums, and often end up whiling away the time by engaging in various available minigames or other competitive activities.”

Even so, Real Life is the game to beat this holiday season.

Conformity at Its Funniest

Elevator Candid, Must See... - video powered by Metacafe

Brainwashed For Hate

I’ll let this video speak for itself.

Technology: The Latest and Greatest

TIME magazine recently published this years best inventions; As you can see, the iPhone toped the list.

What struck me was the number of “green” items on this list, which would be just fine, except many do not belong there. According to the “how we chose the list” video, the editors chose things that 1) filled needs, or solved problems, that have not been before, and 2) must be real. Many “green” items were not built yet, and many others seemed insignificant or impractical.

I would hope that technical brilliance would play a larger role. If a person came up with a transporter device that ran on baby polar bears, it should still make the list.

Also, the list sometimes confuses the best inventions with the most marketable ones; things can be brilliant and currently unusable. Just look at the world’s first nanoradio, which will greatly improve our ability to build microscopic machines (which has enormous practical applications.)

One other thing that irked me was that, on the “Best Inventors” list, they did not include Heron of Alexandria, who invented the first steam engine over two-thousand years ago; or another Greek thinker, Galen, who invented medical techniques that weren’t rediscovered until the 19th century.

Ah Well, I guess I should just be happy that intelligence and technological progress are being rewarded at all.