This is Senator Whitehouse (D-RI) explaining the political landscape as it relates to health care reform:
Really, with politicians like Sen. Whitehouse at the helm of our federal ship I don't see why people are so worried about the impending government "takeover" of the health care system. Clearly, this is a class of people that were born to usher us into a new era.
Ace has more.
Stossel: Life, Death, and Pork.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
A story about Government
"Tax collectors ended up with just 25,000 euros, way below the 800,000 euros in the costs of staff charged with collecting the payments..."
Germany should consider themselves lucky, probably. Dieter Engels, head of Germany's Federal Accounting Office, had this to say:
"While the financial and customs authorities are too lax on some occasions, they go overboard in others," Engels said.
"This has led to somewhat grotesque results in coffee taxation."
And so it goes...
Avatar
Yes, I saw it - in the IMAX 3D theater. Yes, the visuals are quite amazing. I can't speak for the regular (non-3D) film but the 3D version has quite a few scenes that visually (CGI-wise, it's mostly all computer done) are head and shoulders above anything else in film at the moment. Based on that alone I do recommend you see it in the 3D theater. Anywhere else and you are taking your money in your own hands because... (possible spoilers)
Keynes vs. Hayek
The Right Coast points out an interesting segment on the competing economic ideas of our time.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Links
You don't say: Report says 'imprudent spending' at Postal Service.
Teacher's Unions fight against reform: UTLA files suit over charter schools
The biggest lie?
The Wall Street Journal explains the surreptitious nature of our current political climate.
"And tidings of comfort and joy from Harry Reid too. The Senate Majority Leader has decided that the last few days before Christmas are the opportune moment for a narrow majority of Democrats to stuff ObamaCare through the Senate to meet an arbitrary White House deadline. Barring some extraordinary reversal, it now seems as if they have the 60 votes they need to jump off this cliff, with one-seventh of the economy in tow.
Mr. Obama promised a new era of transparent good government, yet on Saturday morning Mr. Reid threw out the 2,100-page bill that the world's greatest deliberative body spent just 17 days debating and replaced it with a new "manager's amendment" that was stapled together in covert partisan negotiations. Democrats are barely even bothering to pretend to care what's in it, not that any Senator had the chance to digest it in the 38 hours before the first cloture vote at 1 a.m. this morning. After procedural motions that allow for no amendments, the final vote could come at 9 p.m. on December 24."
Remember this? Via Naked Emperor News:
Healthcare costs shouldn't matter?
Kirsten Powers, writing for the NY Post, breaks it down for us. Comparing the Iraq War to some unnamed future "Health Insurance" reform she says:
“Just like the Iraq war debate where everyone was up in arms about how it was going to cost us billions of dollars a year. . . . Oh, wait -- that never happened.
Why? Because the people who supported the war -- at the time the majority of Americans and Congress members -- believed that our very lives were at risk and that invading Iraq was imperative to protecting American lives.
Anyone suggesting that we should consider costs is met with complete derision. Cost doesn't matter when American lives are at stake, was the mantra.”
I hope that Kirsten is being a bit tongue and cheek with this argument. As a quick aside though, I'm not sure what she was watching or reading in early 2003 but plenty if people were worried over the possible cost of the war. Even on the right (9). Further, even if she is correct - that any sort of cost benefit analysis was met with derision - that does not excuse the sloppy reasoning she is employing here. Just because other people were able to "get away" with poor logic during past discussions does not mean we should allow arguments that are similarly weak to stand today.
She implies that cost shouldn't matter at all since Americans "will die" if we don't pass health insurance reform. Clearly even a bit of reflection proves her wrong. Obviously there is a point at which it becomes too expensive; at some point we simply can't afford it. What she probably means though, is that the costs being thrown around are low enough or acceptable enough so that the “cost” shouldn’t enter into the discussion when the more important “ethical” issues should be what concerns us. However, there is nothing but red on the federal government’s balance sheet and indeed we have reached the so-called “debt ceiling” and Congress has moved to raise it in the last few days. Here is a chart of the costs associated with the health care bill:
$2.5 trillion is nothing to sneeze at either. Especially when government programs never seem to actually meet their initial budget and indeed continue to expand and grow enormously as time passes. Quick, name a large government program that has been cut, ever. Medicare costs were $3 billion in 1965 when first passed. The 2010 budget allocates $453 billion for Medicare and in 2008 Medicare actually cost more than it received in revenue. Not that this is any great surprise really, we all knew this day would come. But we've been putting off doing anything about it for who knows how long by using the very same feeling (logic) that Kirsten is using here.
At the end of the day, we had all better hope that Kirsten is right - that the costs don’t matter - because you can be damn sure that Washington will act that way regardless.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Joe Biden is an idiot
"the president has made something exquisitely clear to each of the generals: He said do not occupy any portion of that country that you are not confident within 18 months you're going to be able to turn over to the Afghans. Do not occupy what you cannot turn over."
If true that's extremely troubling. And it should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that if it is true you should keep your trap shut about it.
Joe Biden has become a parody of himself. During his laughable debate with Palin it was clear Biden has no idea what's going on. The supposed foreign policy expert showed a glaring lack of knowledge on basic statistics and facts. Seemingly unfazed by his own ignorance he lept from one mistake to another, rattling off numbers as if when Joe said something, it had to be true. The whole time he had this insolent smirk on his face as if he knew damn well he was the smartest guy in the room and it was just, well, beneath him to be humble about it. As it turns out, he was just making stuff up. "Homogenizing", as it were. Post election hasn't been much better. He's always been kind of a liar and a jerk but with his promotion to VP his comments can't be as readily dismissed as eccentricity by left-er pundits: "Oh, that's just Joe being Joe!" or ignored by an empathetic media. Instead we are forced to deal with the Vice President of the United States telling our enemies (and friends) exactly when, and to what degree, we will be jumping ship.
This is the guy supposedly handling economic oversight effort. Nobody messes with Joe, am I right?
And what does it say about Obama that he chose this guy to be his VP?
Blue on Blue
Howard Dean says kill the healthcare bill.
“This is essentially the collapse of health care reform in the United States Senate. Honestly the best thing to do right now is kill the Senate bill, go back to the House, start the reconciliation process, where you only need 51 votes and it would be a much simpler bill.”
Monday, December 14, 2009
Obama grades himself on his first year: B+
Obama rattles off the list of things he believes earns him the grade. Hit the links after the jump and see if you agree.
American Innovation: How California closed the gap with France in the wine industry
Is a health insurance mandate unconstitutional?
Randy Barnett, posting at The Volokh Conspiracy, discusses this issue. He posts a video of Orrin Hatch giving a speech on the subject, which I highly recommend:
Here is the memorandum by Randy over at the Heritage Foundation that goes into more detail.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Stereotypes
Tom Smith at The Right Coast links this article about a Mom who is worried about the fact that she and her sons have different interests. I know, I know, quite the shocker. The boys seem to have become interested in space and astronomy and she wonders how she should handle it given her ...disinterest, let's say. He covers the silliness of the whole thing pretty well but this gem by the Mom at the end of her article caught my eye:
Talk about your stereotypes. I cringed when I read it - how insulting to mothers. Aside from all the practical inventions that arose from our push into space, there's also the huge advances in the sciences: physics, math, astronomy etc. that have come directly from the space program. Our knowledge of the world and the universe has increased immensely because we have pushed at the limits of our current understanding of how-things-work. And I have no doubt she would have written the same thing 50 years ago, advances be damned. At least she seems to realize the irony of worrying about her sons thinking women don't like science when she wants to throw future scientific advances away for... social security.
Sigh.
Never mind the fact that NASA's entire budget is about $20 billion and the annual budget for Social Security is $644 billion. That's about 3% if you're keeping score at home. Not to mention the unfunded liability of Social Security, which is $17.5 trillion.
Mmm, yeah, not as much as you might think. You'd be amazed how fast those great social programs can suck down the cash. Almost like... black holes...
To cleanse the unscientific air: NASA's Alien Eyes
Or check out the gallery at Hubble.
Maybe he'll be a rebel astronomer, and someday reform NASA, or call for an end to manned space missions so that the money can be used to fix Social Security? A mother can dream.
Talk about your stereotypes. I cringed when I read it - how insulting to mothers. Aside from all the practical inventions that arose from our push into space, there's also the huge advances in the sciences: physics, math, astronomy etc. that have come directly from the space program. Our knowledge of the world and the universe has increased immensely because we have pushed at the limits of our current understanding of how-things-work. And I have no doubt she would have written the same thing 50 years ago, advances be damned. At least she seems to realize the irony of worrying about her sons thinking women don't like science when she wants to throw future scientific advances away for... social security.
Sigh.
Never mind the fact that NASA's entire budget is about $20 billion and the annual budget for Social Security is $644 billion. That's about 3% if you're keeping score at home. Not to mention the unfunded liability of Social Security, which is $17.5 trillion.
Just think what we could do on this planet with all the time and energy we spend trying to reach other ones.
Mmm, yeah, not as much as you might think. You'd be amazed how fast those great social programs can suck down the cash. Almost like... black holes...
To cleanse the unscientific air: NASA's Alien Eyes
Or check out the gallery at Hubble.
Link roundup
Good for her
Jenny Sanford files for divorce
The sad, jilted wife standing next to the remorseful politician during "the press conference" was always so tiresome to me. At the risk of sounding callous while linking a story about the breakup of a marriage, I am glad someone finally said no to that nonsense.
Tom Bevan at RCP echoes my own thoughts:
The sad, jilted wife standing next to the remorseful politician during "the press conference" was always so tiresome to me. At the risk of sounding callous while linking a story about the breakup of a marriage, I am glad someone finally said no to that nonsense.
Tom Bevan at RCP echoes my own thoughts:
After watching her graceful, grounded and dignified handling of the press mob in this clip, I'm starting to think Mark Sanford is the one who should go into seclusion on Sullivan's Island and let his wife take over running the state.
Just do your job
NYT: Houston Is Largest City to Elect Openly Gay Mayor.
Congratulations to Ms. Parker. However, quotes like this make me nervous:
Err, well, ok if you say so. Call me old fashioned but I don't need you to transform my life.
Robert Pule at the Lake County Independent Examiner takes the words right out of my mouth: "If we are all equal then when can we start acting like it?"
Also, this quote stuck out at me in the NYT article:
Really? Really? This is worthy of quoting in the NYT?
Congratulations to Ms. Parker. However, quotes like this make me nervous:
"This election has changed the world for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered community. Just as it is about transforming the lives of all Houstonians for the better, and that's what my administration will be about," Parker told supporters after Locke conceded defeat.
Err, well, ok if you say so. Call me old fashioned but I don't need you to transform my life.
Robert Pule at the Lake County Independent Examiner takes the words right out of my mouth: "If we are all equal then when can we start acting like it?"
Also, this quote stuck out at me in the NYT article:
“It’s a huge step forward for Houston,” said one of the volunteers, Lindsey Dionne, who is lesbian. “It shows hate will not prevail in this city.”
Really? Really? This is worthy of quoting in the NYT?
Stop changing the rules
As Summers put it, bankers need to recognize that "they've got obligations to the country after all that's been done for them."
He says no major bank would be intact without the government's bailout of the financial sector, and now they need to do all they can to get credit flowing again.
Only politicians and bureaucrats have the audacity to demand that you do your duty for the country in order to solve problems they themselves helped cause in the first place. True, the bailout saved many financial institutions - but how many were driven to the point of needing to be saved by federal pressure to promote fast and loose credit policies under the guise of "affordable housing" needs?
Next they'll be telling us that more "Land Use" restrictions are part of the so-called "green" stimulus.
Environmental idiocy: only have one child.
Diane Francis, writing out of the Financial Times waggles her finger at human (Western) civilization, warning us that we are overpopulating the earth and we had all better start snipping and tying right quick. We should take a lesson from China and one child, she declares, should be the global rule of law lest we find ourselves with an "unsustainable" global population of nine billion by 2050. Well, we had a good run folks - smoke 'em if you got 'em I suppose.
What would we do without all of these wackjobs? I mean seriously, what would we blog about?
First, it turns out she's, well, being a tad hypocritical and has two kids.
...our two babies, Eric and Julie...
Yeah, who couldn't see that coming?
Second, she's kind of preaching to the wrong crowd here. The developed countries only constitute 18% of the world's current population. From the UN World Population Prospects 2008:
Second, she's kind of preaching to the wrong crowd here. The developed countries only constitute 18% of the world's current population. From the UN World Population Prospects 2008:
Note that Europe will likely be smaller in 2050. Indeed, in 2050 the UN predicts that the developed nations will only constitute 14% of the global population.
Clearly, if we are to dramatically change the level of global population it's not going to come from the Developed countries. Fear not though, I'm sure Diane's idea will go over swimmingly in Asia and Africa. The fate of the world is at stake, after all. I am very confident. Yep.
Third, I'm not sure why she thinks 9.1 billion is unsustainable. You hear this all the time, that in such-and-such year the human population will be unsustainable and billions will die in a sudden, massive famine but I haven't seen anything substantial and convincing on the subject yet. Chicken Littles have been predicting global starvation since well, people began eating. Or at least writing about eating. And yet, somehow the human ability to adapt, invent, and create has allowed us to stay a few steps ahead of the ever-impending-doom-of-mankind. The next Norman Borlaug was just born in India or the Philippines and 80 years from now his or her great grandchildren will be laughing about people like Francis and their silly, primitive ideas. Clearly, Francis does not put much stock in human capital.
Fourth, the UN predictions actually say that 2050 is roughly peak global population.
"In the medium variant, fertility declines from 2.56 children per woman in 2005-2010 to 2.02 children per woman in 2045-2050."
2.02 is below replacement rate and it's around this point or not soon after that the UN predicts the global population to peak and then actually start declining. And really, the only reason that it's going to take that long is because people are living longer and longer - not that they will be having more children.
Maybe Diane can propose a lifetime quota instead. 70 years and you're outa here. It's for the good of the planet! Ladies first though Diane, eh?
h/t NRO.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
I always did kinda like Stephen King
A great gift for the troops of the Maine Army National Guard, $13,000 so they could go home for the holidays:
A happy holidays to you and yours, Steve.
Stephen and Tabitha King had no problem donating money to ensure that the 150 members of Bravo Company of the 3rd Battalion, 172nd Infantry Unit could come home for the holidays.
A happy holidays to you and yours, Steve.
Great news!
Our Political Class has not learned a damn thing:
In a bad case of déjà vu, it’s being reported that “regulators will be bringing pressure on banks to make greater efforts to serve poorer communities after an FDIC survey showed that more than a quarter of U.S. households have little or no financial activity through banks.”
State schools admit they do not push gifted pupils because they don't want to promote 'elitism'
This is in the UK but I'd wager the same type of thinking goes on here as well. You never know though - maybe we just can't be bothered.
"As many as three-quarters of state schools are failing to push their brightest pupils because teachers are reluctant to promote 'elitism', an Ofsted study says today."
For the record the UK stomped us in the 2006 PISA tests:
Science:
UK raw score: 515
Upper/Lower rank: 12/18
US raw score: 489
Upper/Lower rank: 24/35
Math:
UK raw score: 495
Upper/Lower rank: 22/27
US raw score: 474
Upper/Lower rank: 32/36
The reading scores for the US were thrown out in 2006 due to a printing error on the booklets.
The reading scores for the US were thrown out in 2006 due to a printing error on the booklets.
Hmm, I wonder if we could get some of our state run schools to say they were holding students back?
h/t Instapundit
h/t Instapundit
Recession for ye, not for me.
Newsweek:
"A Shining Anomaly on a Hill
The increase in government jobs—courtesy of stimulus planning and spending—is turning Washington, D.C., into a boomtown."
"A Shining Anomaly on a Hill
The increase in government jobs—courtesy of stimulus planning and spending—is turning Washington, D.C., into a boomtown."
"Since October 2008, the D.C. metro area, with a population hovering around 6 million, has cut slightly more than 23,000 jobs (roughly 0.4 percent of the population), half as many as the metro area of the next closest city, Seattle, which cut 50,000 jobs (about 1.4 percent), and one ninth of New York's 220,000 (about 1.1 percent)."
Gotta love the headline too. The editors at Newsweek just can't help themselves.
What made Tiger cheat? Capitalism!
"Elin Nordegren is a nice, decent Swedish girl, the daughter of a nice Swedish socialist politician and the product of a nice socialist country. It’s a place where no one is allowed to enrich himself at the expense of other people, where everyone has access to free, quality health care, where no one lives in poverty, and where money does not play a decisive role in the social contract. No one suffers because he doesn’t have money, and no one is allowed to accumulate wealth without paying his fair share back into the social arrangement that permitted him to make a fortune in the first place."Holy crap. To his credit, at least he realizes this statement causes "American conservatives" to go "numb with terror." Hopefully statements like these cause more than just conservatives to ponder the wisdom of various politicians who bemoan the United States' lack of "progress" compared to the European State. If Progress means I have to listen to hacks like Siegal lecture me on my economic and personal freedom: count me out. Of course, I'd say the American "rich" pay a might bit more than their "fair share". Perhaps Lee missed this: US has the most progressive tax system in the entire OECD. A Progressive tax is a tax that increases in rate as the taxable amount increases. Put simply, the more income you earn, the higher your tax rate, not just the total amount you pay in taxes. That includes... what was it? Oh yeah, Sweden. By far in fact. Sweden has one of the least progressive tax systems in the OECD. In the US, it's not the rich that aren't paying their "fair share", it's everyone else. Here we see that the top 25% of income earners paid ~70% of all federal taxes in 2006.
Anyways, his column goes round and round the idea that greed in Tiger's professional life led to greed in his um, bedroom life. He meanders to the conclusion that perhaps equality in other areas will lead to fidelity in the bedroom. Or something like that: equal fidelity, at least, if not absolute.
"Adultery happens in Sweden, too, of course—the caricature of guilt-free sex in Sweden is proverbial—but in that good, socialist country the CF is an EF (“E” for “everybody”)."How... stirring. At this point Lee is satirizing himself, surely. What's that you say? You can't keep your pants on? Well, the government is here to help! We shall simply impose equality of results on your society and Wa-La, you are now a good person! Don't you feel so superior? Yet another problem solved by smart, important people telling their lessers what to do. We just need a handful of wise, societal engineers to tell us what's what and we'll be off to the fidelity races!
Ironically, it turns out marriage as an institution hasn't been doing so well in Sweden over the last couple decades. In the late 90s Sweden had one of the lowest marriage rates in the industrialized world. And their divorce rate isn't so hot either. It's not as high as the US's but it's still hovering around the 40% mark. Most point to the declining marriage rate as being primarily driven by the liberal cohabitation laws in Sweden which result in cohabitating couples receiving economic benefits equal to that of married couples. Regardless, the point here is that Sweden isn't some marriage utopia. That said, fidelity is, of course, a slightly different matter. Worry not though, dear citizens, Lee has his eye on the prize.
At least he managed to not blame Bush. Not that the thought didn't cross his mind, I'm sure. But hey, you can only throw so much chum in the water, right?
h/t: Hot Air.
Why Most Journalists Are Democrats: A View from the Soviet Socialist Trenches
Barbara Oakley talks about the lack of elephants in the newsroom.
Stockholm's bunnies burned to keep Swedes warm
So I'm really not sure what to say about this. Swedes burning rabbits to keep warm? This is one of those stories you think is a hoax at first... but it seems to be true.
Fools for Communism
Here's an older article over at Reason.com by Glenn Garvin on just how terribly pundits and journalists on the left understood communism. While I'm certainly not a fan of the "chattering class", as he puts it, it is still quite stunning when laid out in front of you how different their reality is from ours.
On a semi-related note, I recently had the ... honor of hearing a short speech by Dan Rather. While straining my ability to keep respectfully quiet in a public forum in front of an invited guest, he claimed that - and make sure you're sitting for this - that Journalismtm and perhaps more specifically, Newspaper Journalismtm, was in a crisis. What was to blame for this tragic turn of events? New technology and outdated business models? A loss of credibility from say, overzealous anchors, reporters, or producers pushing stories that they maybe didn't quite fact check enough? Nay, dear reader, it turns out to be the Corporations that have turned this once great and storied profession into a petty, for-profit, entertainment circus. And of course, like any good Journalist always does, Dan Rather had a solution: the government should bail out or subsidize the newspapers.
And there you have it.
On a semi-related note, I recently had the ... honor of hearing a short speech by Dan Rather. While straining my ability to keep respectfully quiet in a public forum in front of an invited guest, he claimed that - and make sure you're sitting for this - that Journalismtm and perhaps more specifically, Newspaper Journalismtm, was in a crisis. What was to blame for this tragic turn of events? New technology and outdated business models? A loss of credibility from say, overzealous anchors, reporters, or producers pushing stories that they maybe didn't quite fact check enough? Nay, dear reader, it turns out to be the Corporations that have turned this once great and storied profession into a petty, for-profit, entertainment circus. And of course, like any good Journalist always does, Dan Rather had a solution: the government should bail out or subsidize the newspapers.
And there you have it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
