Sobering Thoughts |
|
|
Comments on politics, the culture, economics, and sports by Paul Tuns.
I am editor-in-chief of "The Interim," Canada's life and family newspaper, and author of "Jean Chretien: A Legacy of Scandal" (2004) and "The Dauphin: The Truth about Justin Trudeau" (2015).
I am some combination of conservative/libertarian, standing athwart history yelling "bullshit!"
You can follow me on Twitter (@ptuns).
Archives
|
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
The GOP problem in a nutshell From Tyler Cowen: "Trade aside, so far I've yet to see many actual policy proposals from the McCain camp. Mostly I've seen attempts to signal that they won't do anything too offensive to the party's right wing. Very few of these trial balloons seem to be ideas that McCain had expressed much previous loyalty to. I don't even think we should be analyzing these statements as policy proposals. We should be wondering why the Republican Party has given up on the idea of policy proposals." Climate changers can make it up as they go along From the Daily Telegraph: "Global warming will stop until at least 2015 because of natural variations in the climate, scientists have said. Researchers studying long-term changes in sea temperatures said they now expect a 'lull' for up to a decade while natural variations in climate cancel out the increases caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions. The average temperature of the sea around Europe and North America is expected to cool slightly over the decade while the tropical Pacific remains unchanged. This would mean that the 0.3°C global average temperature rise which has been predicted for the next decade by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change may not happen, according to the paper published in the scientific journal Nature. However, the effect of rising fossil fuel emissions will mean that warming will accelerate again after 2015 when natural trends in the oceans veer back towards warming, according to the computer model." Or at least that is what they say today. At least until whatever model their using is shown to be bogus and they have to change their theory to fit the facts. Or the facts to fit the theory. Or a little of both. Being a global warmer means never having to say your wrong. Like Trotsky, the sign of their farsightedness is that none of their predictions have come true yet. Things I'm reading 1. "Where Are They? Why I hope the search for extraterrestrial life finds nothing" by Nick Bostrom in the May/June issue of the M.I.T. Technology Review. 2. "Inequality and Prices: Does China Benefit the Poor in America?" by Christian Broda and John Romalis, an academic paper that briefly examines whether trade with Red China contributes to inequality in the United States (the answer seems to be not that much) but looks more in depth into the question of how much American consumers save with the import of cheaper Chinese goods (a fair bit). 3. "Sunset in America: The end of the age of Reagan" by Sean Wilentz in The New Republic. There they go again, liberals declaring Reaganism and the Reagan coalition dead. Might be true -- probably is -- but such an analysis would be more convincing and more interesting coming from someone who did not wish it were true. 4. Anything for a Vote: Dirty Tricks, Cheap Shots, and October Surprises in U.S. Presidential Campaigns by Joseph Cummins. 5. Dismal Science: The Shortcomings of U.S. School Choice Research and How to Address Them, a CATO Institute Policy Analysis by John Merrifield. Merrifield says that there are too few true education markets to study whether or not school choice helps educational outcomes. Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Anonymous sources Ian Ayres has a great post at Freakonomics on a 2003 policy change at the New York Times and other papers on the use of anonymous sources. Ayres notes: "In 2003 there were only 730 A.P. articles with the phrase, but by 2005 there were 9,451 articles using the phrase." That is some inflation rate. Ayres points to a number of examples, some of them quite silly or inane: "Spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly" appeared in the Herald Tribune and "Spoke on condition of anonymity because he remains an informal adviser" who was quoted in the San Diego Union, both of whom may not speak with any authority. Others are more serious, like the source who didn't want the criminal element to know his (or her) whereabouts. I would wonder about the trustworthiness of the source who was quoted anonymously by the Dallas News because "the discussions were confidential." If the source broke confidentiality, how trustworthy is that source? Ayres finds this promiscuous granting of anonymity troublesome and a sign that journalists cannot "distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate retaliation that might be visited upon an anonymous source." There are really good reasons to grant anonymity: "The strongest rationale for granting a source anonymity is simply to protect the source from illegitimate retaliation or harassment for providing information." But it can also be wrong to grant anonymity such as when sources "misappropriate employer information." Ayres correctly states, "newspapers’ anonymity policies should [not] facilitate employee malfeasance." Preliminary research on 400 anonymous source citations finds that in 40% of such references the "source was trying to avoid legitimate retaliation" (that is the source could "legitimately fired or disciplined for violating their fiduciary duty to their employer") and whereas just 26% of such sourcings were clearly justified. Ayres has a solution: "[F]orce newspapers that use anonymous employee sources to take on the employee’s potential liability for disclosing employer information. An employer who would have been able to sue an employee for an unauthorized disclosure could instead sue the newspaper for damages." The media would cry 'chill' but it would result in more responsible journalism -- and more responsible employees. Blog habits Someone emailed to ask which blogs, if any, do I go to several times daily. Here are the top six, non-baseball blogs I'll check repeatedly: Marginal Revolution Five Feet of Fury The Corner ProWomanProLife Club for Growth Freakonomcis Yeah, so Guy Herbert at Samizdata: "There are plenty of appalling things in the world, but the amount of media coverage is far from a reliable guide to what's important or even real. Really bad things get scant notice if there's no populist hook ... Meanwhile non-stories, virtual risks, and popular panics are underwritten by massive investment in sensational coverage." So does Herbert mean that Miley Cyrus posing near-nude for Vogue is not an important story worthy of serious comment by serious people? Why do I know who Miley Cyrus is? Real rights Ezra Levant on what are real rights and what are phony rights (the latter, such as the right not to offended, are upheld by Canada's human rights commissions): "I know what real 'gay rights' are. They're the same as real 'Jewish rights'. The right to private property. The right to self-defence. The right to free speech, sanctity of contract. The right to be free of violence, etc." I don't know; that sounds awfully fascist. (Note: that was sarcasm.) The future of the EU Mark Steyn and Bryan Caplan bet that at least one country with a population of 10 million will withdraw from the European Union by 2020. Steyn (as well as David Henderson) says that some country will leave, Caplan doesn't think so. Caplan's challenge, Steyn's acceptance and Caplan's clarification of which countries are included (Germany, France, UK, Italy, Spain, Poland, Romania, Netherlands, Greece, Portugal, Belgium, the Czech Republic, and Hungary). I've been giving this scenario some thought in recent days and have to side with Steyn and Henderson on this one. Too many libertarians fail to understand the importance of (tribal) culture which is probably the basis of Steyn's prediction (in America Alone) and why Caplan offered the bet in the first place, although my own musings were spurred by the idea that some countries are annoyed by being robbed of monetary policy options to deal with economic problems when politicians might not want to make unpopular fiscal policy decisions. I wouldn't bet on Germany or United Kingdom, or even Spain or Portugal, leaving. But I reckon the likelihood of an anti-EU nationalist right-wing or socialist left-wing party coming to power in the former Eastern bloc is fairly good. Or the formation of a coalition government in Netherlands or Belgium that is more than a little skeptical of the EU. Or some strange French leader pulling a hissy-fit and leaving for no good reason. All these are well within the realm of possible if not quite probable. But considering the number of countries that need just one reason to bolt, I think I'd side with Steyn and Henderson on this one. Paraphrase of the day Dani Rodrik: "Harvey Mansfield once defined a liberal as someone who wouldn't have anything to do if the NYT did not come out on Sundays." Liberal dilemmas From Andrew Roth at the Club for Growth blog: "A 67-year-old anti-trust law in Pennsylvania is preventing Wal-Mart from selling $4 generic drugs. Instead, over four dozen different drugs have to be sold for at least $9. So...if you're a liberal, what side of the argument do you support? Do you defend Wal-Mart (God forbid) and repeal the law so that people can get their much-needed drugs at 'an everyday' low price? Or do you side with the mom-and-pop pharmacies that supposedly can't compete against the big, bad Wal-Mart?" Monday, April 28, 2008
Private sector health twice as big in France than in US Interesting little fact from a Montreal Economic Institute paper on the private sector within public health care: "Private institutions occupy an indispensable place in France’s hospital landscape. In 2005, there were 1,052 private for-profit establishments in France, 37% of all health care establishments with hospital capabilities. They accounted for 91,191 beds for full hospital care, or 21% of the total. This is about twice as much as the United States, where private for-profit establishments represented 15% of all hospitals and 12% of all beds." The authors make a case for a mixed, universal and accessible system. This is, of course, the way conservatives in Canada should argue for health care reform -- pointing to European mixed model systems which provide a degree of choice. Quebec doctors opposed to C-484 One of my colleagues at The Interim passes on this press release from the Federation of Medical Specialists of Québec which opposes C-484 because, the Federation claims, the Unborn Victims of Crime bill will re-open the abortion debate. Nonsense. As the bill itself states: "(7) For greater certainty, this section does not apply in respect of (a) conduct relating to the lawful termination of the pregnancy of the mother of the child to which the mother has consented; (b) an act or omission that a person acting in good faith considers necessary to preserve the life of the mother of the child or the life of the child; or (c) any act or omission by the mother of the child." In other words, it does not ever apply to medical professionals committing abortions nor, contra the hysteria of some abortion advocates, can it be used against the mother for any reason (procuring an abortion, fetal neglect, etc...). You can send your criticism of the Federation's action to: Federation of Medical Specialists of Québec P.O. Box 216 Place Desjardins Stn MONTRÉAL, Quebec H5B 1G8 Or call or email: Telephone: (514) 350-5000 Toll Free Phone: 1(800) 561-0703 Email: president@fmsq.org The significance of Rev. Wright Philip Klein at the AmSpec blog captures the significance of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright in the '08 campaign: "I've always felt that Wright would not be a make or break issue for Obama, but it will be part of a growing narrative about Obama that will continue to harm his image as a transformational leader and haunt his candidacy. Obama's defenders will continue to say it doesn't matter what Wright said, Obama doesn't agree with his comments. But the problem is that since Obama has such a thin public record, since there are few tangible accomplishments his campaign can point to as evidence of his ability to make positive changes by bringing people together through shared hope, all the American people have to go on are his speeches. But it's hard to take a leap of faith with somebody who you don't know very well. Therefore, when trying to determine who Obama is, this guy who within five years has risen from the obscurity of the state senate to within arm's reach of the most powerful job in the world, his close relationships take on an added importance." Roy Halladay -- the machine Jeff Passan has a decentish write-up on Roy Halladay of the Toronto Blue Jays, that near-extinct breed that both starts and finishes games. Questions for Barack (and his wife) George F. Will's Newsweek column asks the presumptive Democratic candidate numerous questions that many in the rest of the media refuse to ask, including these three gems: "• Telling young people 'don't go into corporate America,' your wife, Michelle, urged them to become social workers or others in 'the helping industry,' not 'the moneymaking industry.' Given that the moneymakers pay for 100 percent of American jobs, in both public and private sectors, is it not helpful? • Michelle, who was born in 1964, says that most Americans' lives have 'gotten progressively worse since I was a little girl.' Since 1960, real per capita income has increased 143 percent, life expectancy has increased by seven years, infant mortality has declined 74 percent, deaths from heart disease have been halved, childhood leukemia has stopped being a death sentence, depression has become a treatable disease, air and water pollution have been drastically reduced, the number of women earning a bachelor's degree has more than doubled, the rate of homeownership has increased 10.2 percent, the size of the average American home has doubled, the percentage of homes with air conditioning has risen from 12 to 77, the portion of Americans who own shares of stock has quintupled … Has your wife perhaps missed some pertinent developments in this country that she calls 'just downright mean'? • You favor raising the capital gains tax rate to '20 percent or 25 percent.' You say this will not 'distort' economic decision making. Your tax returns on your 2007 income of $4.2 million show that you and Michelle own few stocks. Are you sure you understand how investors make decisions?" Should Beijing hold the Olympics every time? Benny Avni writes in the New York Sun that if Red China were to hold the Olympics every time, more of the world would know about the human rights abuses and other activities of Beijing. As Avni writes: "[There] is the mounting pressure over its world behavior affecting China's policies? The government's conditional offer on Friday to talk to representatives of the Dalai Lama could signal a new readiness to negotiate." Freedom for rice! In his New York Times column, Tyler Cowen points out that rice supplies and prices should rise if more rice was traded. Currently, as Cowen points out, "Only about 5 to 7 percent of the world’s rice production is traded across borders; that’s unusually low for an agricultural commodity." Many countries are imposing export bans on rice (and other agricultural products) which makes sense on an intuitive level (why export food when the country doesn't have enough as is), but creates "longer-run incentives" which "are counterproductive." Cowen explains: "Export restrictions send a message to farmers that their crops are least profitable precisely when they are most needed. There is little incentive to plant, harvest or store enough rice — or any other crop, for that matter — as a hedge against bad times." Cowen also notes that many countries have production boards and other forms of state interference, all of which make adapting to changing demand much more difficult. Cowen concludes: "Lately, it’s become fashionable to assert that, in this time of financial market turmoil, the market-oriented teachings of Milton Friedman belong more to the past than to the future. The sadder truth is that when it comes to food production — arguably the most important of all human activities — Mr. Friedman’s free-trade ideas still haven’t seen the light of day." Dallas and the end of the Cold War Writing in the Washington Post, Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch make the excellent point that cultural influences such as TV shows can be just as important as bombs and boycotts in affecting change overseas. I think it is easy to exaggerate the point, but the authors are on to something when they say that those living in communist regimes seeing the fruits of wealth production in the heartland of Texas became less satisfied with lines for food and toilet paper. Two cheers for the bourbon and sex-dripped capitalism of TV's Dallas. First they come for your campaign donations, then they come for your lawn signs ... George F. Will in yesterday's Washington Post on the lack of free political speech in John McCain's America: "Ugly locutions often crop up in the promotion of ugly politics. Consider the threat of 'scrutinization.' It has been made against some residents of Parker North, Colo., who expressed a political opinion without first getting their state government's permission for political activity. Herewith another example of what is being done around the nation in the name of political hygiene, as that is understood by 'campaign finance reformers,' those irksome improvers whose animating ideology is McCainism. Parker North is a cluster of about 300 houses close to the town of Parker. When two residents proposed a vote on annexation of their subdivision to Parker, six others began trying to persuade the rest to oppose annexation. They printed lawn signs and fliers, started an online discussion group and canvassed neighbors, little knowing that they were provoking Colorado's speech police. One proponent of annexation sued them. This tactic -- wielding campaign finance regulations to suppress opponents' speech -- is common in the America of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. The complaint did not just threaten the Parker Six for any 'illegal activities.' It also said that anyone who had contacted them or received a lawn sign might be subjected to 'investigation, scrutinization and sanctions for campaign finance violations'." Sunday, April 27, 2008
Seasteading  I read about Seasteading and I can't help but think about Big Blue Sea. The idea behind seasteading is to create communities (on ships, floating structures, underwater villages, or stabilized platforms) at sea that are beyond the reach of government laws and regulations. As the full 'practical guide', co-written by Milton Friedman's grandson, states, there are, "people seek the autonomy to live under and experiment with different political, social, and economic systems than currently exist. It is this search for sovereignty, for the freedom of self-government, which is the fundamental motivation for seasteading. Utopia is different for everyone, and so there are a wide variety of theoretical new systems and gripes with the old ones." As if libertarians needed any help seeming weirder. Earlier this month, a Seasteading Institute was founded. Fascinating but silly stuff. I can't believe I just spent a few hours reading all about it. Saturday, April 26, 2008
Euthanasia's slippery slope Licia Corbella examines the Dutch experience with euthanasia and finds that, "the experience in Holland shows that when assisted suicide and euthanasia are an accepted practice, a shocking number of people wind up having no choice at all -- ever again." Putting aside the issue of whether or not people have a right to have a doctor kill them, there is simply no way to enact safeguards to protect vulnerable people from being killed (accidentally or not) or to prevent the definition of those who qualify for 'compassionate' killing to expand exponentially. I am generally skeptical of slippery slope arguments but the need to protect the sick, elderly, disabled or other vulnerable people should be of paramount importance in society. They deserve our love, compassion and assistance, not death dressed up as mercy. The problem is that once society and the medical establishment shows such phony mercy to some, it is virtually impossible (because it is considered cruel) to not show similar 'mercy' to others. Religious liberty and property rights attacked Ontario Human Rights Tribunal tells a Christian ministry that works with the developmentally disabled that he must not discriminate against homosexuals in their employment practices. OHRC chairlady Barbara Hall cheerleads the decision: This decision is important because it sets out that when faith-based and other organizations move beyond serving the interests of their particular community to serving the general public, the rights of others, including employees, must be respected." In other words, the rights of religious organizations stops precisely where the state decides. As Kathy Shaidle often says, these issues are not only religious issues, but a property rights issue. Horizons, the ministry in question, should be allowed to conduct their business serving the developmentally handicapped as they see fit. The state sees itself with the infinite wisdom to dictate to all what they should be allowed to do and the limits of the applicability of their religious beliefs. The decision can be read here. Get rid of the adjective in fair trade As part of the 'Common Error' series at the Adam Smith Institute blog, Dr. Madsen Pirie explains that rather than purchasing fair trade goods, "we should help third world producers by buying more of everything they produce." As Pirie explains: "But only a small proportion of the price differential finds its way back to people in poorer countries. The movement is big on heart-warming individual anecdotes, but scores low on the overall statistics. Only a tiny proportion of goods are designated as 'fair trade,' and most of the higher prices paid are swallowed up before they reach the original third world producer." But liberals would never let something as meaningless as facts get in the way of feeling good about oneself through moralizing gestures. Ultimately, the fair trade crowd must ask themselves if the developing world remains poor because Canadians and Americans pay too little for their coffee? I think not. Which report on gas prices got a lot more play? The fear-mongering CIBC World Markets Inc. report that says that gas prices will increase globally, including to $2.25/litre in Canada by 2012? Or the sober-minded TD Economics report that says gas prices in Canada should be back to a buck per litre by the end of the year? In journalism, bad news is the best news and good news is ignorable. Friday, April 25, 2008
What I'm reading A new feature that I'll post when I'm reading new books, lengthy articles and various studies and reports. Sometimes with comments, sometimes without. 1. The Autobiography of Margaret Sanger by Margaret Sanger. I'm not really surprised by anything in it because her racism is well-documented and I've long been aware of the racist and eugenic streak in early 20th century American progressivism. Yet parts of the book are unintentionally funny, such as her ideal that prospective children be allowed to interview their parents before they are born. 2. I'm re-reading "Arctic Meltdown: The Economic and Security Implications of Global Warming," by Scott G. Borgerson in the March/April issue of Foreign Affairs. While I recognize that the Arctic is a region that will spur competing claims by Russia, Canada, Denmark and Norway -- the U.S. is strangely sitting on the sidelines for now says Borgerson -- I doubt that there is really much potential for armed conflict as the author suggests. But that is not to diminish the importance of the area which might be rich in natural resources (there is estimated to be billions of barrels of oil and trillions of cubic feet of gas); it is also becoming increasingly navigable and therefore an important sea route. 3. The Pacific Research Institute and American Enterprise Institute jointly produce the annual Index of Leading Environmental Indicators. I'm scanning the 2008 Report. It shows that the environmental record of the United States is a lot better than generally assumed. It also points out the difficulties in meeting the enviro-zealots' target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050; It would cripple economic growth. 4. "DNA Tests Offer Deeper Examination Of Accused," by Rick Weiss in the Washington Post last weekend. It examines the increased use of genetics as evidence (including determining whether defendants have certain predispositions) in criminal trials. 5. "The Delights of Dullness," in the current Economist looks at Brasil's economy -- the reasons for optimism despite the failure to capitalize on the country's natural advantages in the past and the systemic political problems that persist. And here is their editorial on the issue, "An economic superpower, and now oil too." Thursday, April 24, 2008
Emery & abortion Marc Emery writes for Matthew Johnston's The Western Standard about his vasectomy (when he was 20) and his girlfriend's second-trimester abortion (when they were 17). So you can call Marc either the Prince of Pot or the Sultan of Sterilization. All joking aside, the column is as repugnant as you would imagine it to be. And Emery throws out a silly argument about re-criminalizing abortion (that it would result in the prosecution of 100 million Americans because there is no statute of limitations on homicide) near the end of his three-page 'what I did during my summer' type column. When all else fails, blame racism From a so-called news article in the New York Times: "Is the Democratic Party hesitating about race as it moves to the brink of nominating an African-American to be president?" Me on rising food prices My article on "Food crisis or opportunity" in the May issue of Report magazine was submitted months ago, months before there was daily news coverage of rising food prices. Needless to say, I'm not nearly as pessimistic as the media herd or self-interested global do-gooders. Here is the important point: "The International Food Policy Research Institute says that despite droughts and floods, the food supply is increasing; the problem is that demand is increasing faster. That is a good sign, though, for the hundreds of millions in emerging economies that can now afford a decent meal. It is also good for farmers who have struggled with low prices for more than a decade. Like the prices for most commodities, food prices rise and fall. For now, Canadian farmers will reap the benefits, and consumers will have to pay more at the grocery store. But if history has shown us anything, it is that the pessimists are repeatedly proven wrong because over time markets are self-correcting, and the pain for consumers and good times for farmers will inevitably end. Until the next time." Worrying trend for males in Kinshasa -- and what it means for the future of Africa Headline: "Penis theft panic hits city." The story: "Police in Congo have arrested 13 suspected sorcerers accused of using black magic to steal or shrink men's penises after a wave of panic and attempted lynchings triggered by the alleged witchcraft. Reports of so-called penis snatching are not uncommon in West Africa, where belief in traditional religions and witchcraft remains widespread, and where ritual killings to obtain blood or body parts still occur. Rumours of penis theft began circulating last week in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo's sprawling capital of some 8 million inhabitants. They quickly dominated radio call-in shows, with listeners advised to beware of fellow passengers in communal taxis wearing gold rings. Purported victims, 14 of whom were also detained by police, claimed that sorcerers simply touched them to make their genitals shrink or disappear, in what some residents said was an attempt to extort cash with the promise of a cure." Do development types take into account the weird (primitive) beliefs of the locals when they talk about how to modernize Africa? Just wondering. This reminds me of a talk I heard some years ago by a medical doctor who worked in Africa. He said if any proof were needed of the inherent superiority of the West (of the idea of the West -- not of whites over blacks) one simply had to acknowledge that no one in North America or Europe thinks that having sex (read: raping) pre-pubescent girls, preferably infants and toddlers, will cure AIDS, whereas in much of Africa south of the Sahara, having sex with such a virgin is expected to provide a miracle cure for the symptoms of AIDS. As I implied earlier, it is not merely resource (mis)management, corruption and the lack of property rights that is ruinous to parts of the undeveloped world (and I am deliberately using that phrase in more than once sense). It is customs and ideas. Very primitive ones. Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Two really good columns on politics Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson writes about John McCain's infamous bad temper. He relates several stories (from McCain's autobiographical material and other well-reported incidents) that demonstrate that McCain has a bad temper. But this bad temper is 1) not a concern, contra Senator Robert Smith, that he will lead the US into trouble internationally and 2) not demonstrably a bad thing because it is intricately tied to his moral outrage, which is a political asset for him. Dick Morris and Eileen McGann's New York Post column on why Hillary Clinton won Pennsylvania but that it doesn't actually help her is also worth reading. They note that Clinton won because it was a closed primary (Democrats only) and that Pennsylvania is an atypical state (there are more seniors in the Keystone State than any other state except Florida). But there is an important difference between Pennsylvania and Florida: "Florida's elderly moved there - Pennsylvania's are the folks that are left after the young people moved away." Barack Obama will do much better in the next states, including North Carolina and Indiana, will maintain his lead (if not grow it), get closer to the necessary number of delegates, and force the superdelegates to accept the popular Democratic vote or risk a rebellion within the party. I can come up with possible, if not plausible scenarios where Hillary Clinton can convince the superdelegates to give her the nomination, but they are highly unlikely. Would the safe in safe, legal and rare include not being sexually assaulted? There are dozens of these types of cases, but here is the latest example of an abortion provider providing some unwanted sexual advances -- or as the law likes to call it, sexual assault. The BBC reports: "A doctor at a Norfolk hospital sexually assaulted a 13-year-old patient after telling her she was pregnant, a court has heard. Rashid Sandhu, 30, of Welling, Kent, who denies sexual assault, worked at James Paget Hospital, Gorleston. Norwich Crown Court heard he massaged the girl's breasts with gel claiming to be carrying out an abortion. Police also found more than 100 images of child pornography on Mr Sandhu's laptop computer, the court heard. Jurors were told Mr Sandhu asked the girl if he could take a photograph of her naked body and said he sometimes got a bit 'horny'." Outsourcing American manufacturing? Stats from the US Commerce Department, noted by Daniel Griswold at the Cato-at-Liberty blog, show that Americans still produce lots of things: • 4,522 complete civil aircraft and 12,299 complete civil aircraft engines. • 87 million metric tons of raw steel and 113 million tons of shipped steel products. • 11,260,300 cars and light trucks. • 26,925,715 million computers (digital, analog, hybrid, and other). • 11,966,177 household refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers. • 9,993,990 washing machines. • 7,654,882 water heaters (electric and non-electric). • 7,402,333 dishwashing machines. • 6,004,765 household gas and electric ranges. • 1,399,938 clothes dryers. • 1.93 billion square yards of carpet and rugs. • 11.4 million short tons of chlorine gas, 8.9 million tons of sodium hydroxide, 4.7 million tons of hydrochloric acid, and another 2.6 million tons of commercial aluminum sulfate, sodium sulfate, finished sodium bicarbonate, and sodium chlorate. • 1,537.7 million gallons of paints and allied products at $13.60 a gallon. • $127 billion worth of pharmaceutical preparations (except biologicals). And, as Griswold notes, the bad news for Democrats is that this is a good thing for the US economy: "The real beef of the Democratic candidates and their union allies is that all that stuff was made with fewer unionized workers than in years passed. We can make more and better things with fewer workers because of soaring productivity." Government employs 10% of Canadians Lee Harding at the Canadian Taxpayer Federation's blog: "The welfare state should have peaked in the 70's, writes Business Edge's D'Arcy Jenish. However, it continues to grow. Today 3.3 million work in the public sector in Canada, more than 10 percent of the population. Technology, which allows businesses to do more with less people, failed to make the government any smaller. And, even if programs don't work anymore, they often still continue." As Jenish notes, the public sector grew by 175,000 employees over the past five years: "The feds and the provinces combined accounted for a little over 33,000 of the new hires. The health and social services sectors grew by a whopping 48,517. Local school boards were up by 43,208, universities and colleges by 28,152 and municipalities by 27,519." Part of the reason for this increase in the size of government employment is, Jenish hypothesizes, "Governments believe that they need to keep pace with population growth if they are to deliver adequate public service." Does anyone in the country believe public services rise to the level of adequate? Anyway, were it not for the public service, our unemployment rate would be significantly higher. Tuesday, April 22, 2008
What would Professor Smith think of Earth Day I'm just wondering considering they share the day. Sure, for some it is Earth Day. And for many of those same people, it is also V.I. Lenin's birthday. But April 22 also marks the day Adam Smith was appointed professor at the University of Glasgow in 1752. The Adam Smith Institute marks the day with this blog post which notes that Smith was much more than an economist. Buy Steyn and help the Freedom Five Kathy Shaidle has details and links. Buy your Mark Steyn books on April 23 and proceeds will help defer the legal costs of five bloggers/journalists being sued by Richard Warman. Free Ignorance Steven D. Levitt says the Mumia Abu-Jamal industry has had tremendous success winning supporters in Hollywood and among multiple generations of university students but "has been somewhat less successful in the court room." Thank God. Levitt notes that people who wear Free Mumia t-shirts and others who take up the convicted murderer's cause might benefit from knowing about the case. Levitt takes note of Murdered by Mumia, written by Maureen Faulkner and Michael Smerconish. Faulkner is the widow of Danny Faulkner, the police officer murdered by Mumia Abu-Jamal. He quotes this part recalling Maureen Faulkner seeing a college student at a gas station: "As I pumped gas, a young man, a white kid who looked college age, pulled up behind me. He was wearing a T-shirt that read 'Free Mumia Abu-Jamal,' and it immediately caught my eye. I walked up and asked him where he got the T-shirt. He said he was a student at U.C.L.A. and they had recently held a rally for Abu-Jamal. I asked him if he knew anything about the case in which Abu-Jamal was involved. He said, 'Well, I know that this guy was a Black Panther who was railroaded. Someone else shot a police officer and he was framed for it.' I cringed when he went on with the usual recitation of misinformation being spun by the Abu-Jamal defenders: a peaceful black activist, a social dissident, hostile white police force, F.B.I. surveillance, conned eyewitness accounts, phony ballistics, etc. I heard him out and offered to provide him with the actual facts of the case. He politely declined my offer. Before I left, I suggested that when he wore a political statement on his chest he would be well served if he knew his facts, because you never know when you might run into the widow of the officer. I left him in stunned silence." Releasing Frank Thomas: a typically bad Jays move The New York Sun's Tim Marchman called the weekend release of Toronto Blue Jays DH Frank Thomas the lowest point of J.P. Ricciardi’s tenure as team general manager -- and that's saying a lot. Joe Sheehan at Baseball Prospectus (subscription required) also thinks it is a ridiculously stupid move. The problem with dropping Frank Thomas at this point is making a judgement about a player over a small sample size (two weeks worth of games). They got rid of a player rather dishonestly saying it was because of his play, not the $10 million Thomas would make in 2009 if he obtained a little more than 300 at-bats over the rest of the season. As Marchman notes, "Thomas is hitting .167; to say that he looks done is just to offer a tautology. No one looks good when they’re hitting .167." Do the Jays -- does Ricciardi -- really think playing a third-string catcher, Rod Barajas, at DH is better than playing Thomas. The career on-base percentage of Barajas is about 15 points lower than Thomas' career batting average and at 32 Barajas is not likely to suddenly improve. It is possible considering his age (he turns 40 next month) and size (large) that Thomas has all of a sudden become a useless hitter. But 60 at-bats is hardly enough on which to make this judgement; that's a small sample size. Over those 60 at-bats, Thomas has contributed to a pair of victories over the Boston Red Sox, once with a 5th inning grand slam. But the fact is the decision to dump Thomas, assuming you are buying Ricciardi's rationale, wasn't even based on that small 60 at-bat sample size. A week into the season, as Sheehan points out, Thomas was hitting a productive (if peculiar) 240/296/640 (BA/OBP/SLG) over 27 plate appearances. Since then, he has been awful: 4 for 35, no extra-base hits and 10 walks over nine games. That's a horrible 114/311/114 -- dreadful average and slugging percentage but a slight uptick in on-base percentage. But here's the thing: you cannot assess a hitter over nine games. You especially cannot do it for a veteran with a history of slow starts. As Sheehan notes: "It’s not like he hit .097/.243/.129 in a stretch of 37 PA last April, then went on to hit .285/.382/.500 afterwards. No, wait, that happened. Of course, that’s another small sample size. It’d be something else if, in 72 PA, he hit .154/.236/.323. That would be meaningful. He could never come back from that and hit .289/.403/.575 the rest of the way. What? He did that in 2006? Boy, I don’t know. Keep reading things like this, and you’d think that stretches of ineffectiveness weren’t all that meaningful when put up against Thomas’ career. But that would mean the Blue Jays had made a bad baseball decision, and that doesn’t seem…. No, wait." It was an unimaginably bad decision and one that could land a near-elite bat in the hands of an American League competitor battling for a playoff spot. I'd predict he ends up in the American League West (Seattle Mariners, Oakland A's or Texas Rangers) and not the Jays' direct rivals of the BoSox or Yankees, but it is still a colossal and short-sighted mistake -- and one that is all too typical of the J.P. Ricciardi regime. Gerry Fraley at The Sporting News says releasing Thomas is the right move because it allows them to bring Adam Lind back to the majors and move Shannon Stewart to platoon with Matt Stairs at DH. If the goal is to get Lind onto the major league roster, they could have done that by releasing/trading Stewart, a far inferior bat than Thomas. Paying no heed to the dangers of putting too much value on small sample sizes, Fraley called Thomas 'deadweight' saying that there was no indication that he "was going to break out of the slump" -- ignoring that he has done it before. But neither is there any indication that he wasn't going to break out of the slump either. Ricciardi made a boneheaded move because that is what Ricciardi has done. Ideas matter most From Rupert Murdoch's speech to the Washington D.C.-based Atlantic Council: "As a man who was born in Australia, went to university in Britain, and made my home in America, I have learned that shared values are more important than shared borders. If we continue to define 'the West' or 'the Alliance' as a strictly geographical concept, the alliance will continue to erode. But if we define the West as a community of values, institutions and a willingness to act jointly, we will revive an important bastion of freedom and make it as pivotal in our own century as it was in the last." Pill pushers and Plan B Andrea Mrozek wonders about the wisdom of making Plan B, a so-called emergency contraception pill, more easily available and suggests that teenage girls are likely to utilize the drug even when they are not pregnant, just as a precaution. Perhaps not the best last-minute political push WorldNetDaily reports on a taped interview on Good Morning America: "As Pennsylvania voters go to the polls in a primary widely regarded as do-or-die for Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, the New York Democrat apparently is positioning herself to the right of some Republicans, vowing that if Iran attacks Israel with nuclear weapons, she would respond in kind against Tehran, with the ability to 'totally obliterate them'." In what country is Hillary Clinton running for president? Is it wise for a Democrat to out-neocon the neocons? Happy Earth Day! Let's make it a holiday. Festivities could include beating corporate leaders like a pinata and taking food out of the hands of starving people to recycle as ethanol. Ain't green grand? Green: deadly, vindictive, hypocritical. Consider how much environmentalists want to limit your freedom until it bumps up against their own agenda. As Iain Murray, author of The Really Inconvenient Truths: Seven Environmental Catastrophes Liberals Don't Want You to Know About – Because They Helped Cause Them, notes in today's TAS Online: "Yet Liberals don't always demand coercive regulations in the name of environmental protection, if it doesn't suit them. For example, today, synthetic estrogen is adversely affecting river and lake fish populations. Synthetic estrogen comes from birth control pills in vast amounts, yet is ignored by activists who instead call for controls on chemicals present in much smaller amounts that have much less effect. Why? One environmental activist called it a "personal freedom issue" -- as if liberals never call for restrictions on those." Murray has more on the environmental problems with contraception at NRO. Back at TAS, Murray also warns that many of the government-imposed solutions will make things worse (if history and common sense are any indication). Two recent examples is that ethanol is an inefficient alternative to gasoline and rail creates more greenhouse gases per passenger mile than automobiles. Of course, on Earth Day none of this matters. The whole day, like all of green politics, is about feeling good about oneself. So feel good and be thankful that vanity and pride do not emit carbon dioxide. Monday, April 21, 2008
Stop taxing the poor Tim Worstall, a Fellow at the Adam Smith Institute, writes in the London Times about the idiocy of taxing poor people who receive government benefits: "Fortunately my fellow bleeding- heart classical liberals over at the Adam Smith Institute have a solution: simply take the poor out of the income tax net altogether by raising the personal allowance from its present rate of £5,435 to £12,000, perhaps even £14,000. To tax the dustman to provide the Duke's opera, or the nursery nurse to feed the Navy, as we do, might be objectionable, but to tax the poor so that bureaucrats can give money to the poor is simply ludicrous. We should stop doing it." The call to increase the personal allowance is in the ASI's proposal for a flat tax, "A Flat Tax for the UK -- A Practical Reality." Shouldn't we have to pay for a second bag? The New York Times reports that several of the larger airlines will begin charging for a second checked-in piece of luggage. The article notes: "As the airlines struggle to stay in the black, charges for amenities formerly included in the ticket price are on the rise. Depending on the carrier, travelers now can wind up paying extra for everything from food to curbside check-in to bulkhead seats that offer extra legroom." These are all extra services -- services on top of the flight to the desired destination -- that airplanes offer. It only makes sense that you would pay for them. Yet there might be unintended consequences: "As for the extra-bag fee, even those who say they pack lightly for their trips foresee problems caused by price-sensitive fliers overfilling their carry-on bags and using large amounts of scarce overhead-bin space." Which means it will probably be just a matter of time until passengers pay per pound for the luggage, both of the check-in and carry-on variety. This might create room for a single-fee-for-all-services carrier or division. The point is that if the system airlines adopt is not terribly popular, the market should take care of it. Friends, enemies and dissing the sisters Bryan Caplan examines the issue of why Sylvia Hewlett's Creating a Life: Professional Women and the Quest for Children was not a commercial success: "I really enjoyed Sylvia Hewlett's Creating a Life, but feminists were outraged. (Check out all the 1-star reviews on Amazon). Normally, I'd expect all this negative publicity to be great for sales. All publicity is good publicity, right? But Hewlett's sales were disappointing: A year ago, combined hardback plus paperback sales were only 13,000, despite lots of media coverage. What gives? My best guess: Despite some contrarian views on feminism, Hewlett is a typical liberal intellectual. (She even co-authored a book with Cornel West). The upshot is that she didn't have the social connections to cash in on the outrage of her feminist critics. If Hewlett had been part of the 'vast right-wing conspiracy,' she would have had prominent allies to jump to her defense, and help her sell copies. But not only did she lack these social ties; her book included a detailed wish list of leftist labor market regulations, and ended with a dismissive remark about 'conservative ideologues.' Say goodbye to a plug from Rush Limbaugh, even if the 'feminazis' do hate you. Hewlett's problem, in short, was stepping on the toes of people on her side of the fence. When they cried foul, she was on her own. The lesson: If you want to get all the publicity you deserve, make sure you're friendly with the enemies of your enemies. Almost all publicity can be transformed into good publicity, but you can't do it alone." Hewlett makes an important point but he misses another: Feminists do not allow heterodoxy. Women must speak with one voice, forever and always and those women, including fellow feminists who sing from a different hymnal are kicked out of their church. Drinking coffee efficiently EclectEcon says drink it with a straw. Fewer spills, doesn't obstruct one's view while driving, no unsightly coffee drips down the side of the cup. But doesn't drinking hot drinks with a straw increase chances of burning oneself? Welfare: inefficient and cruel The Daily Mirror reports: "A 'why bother?' economy has been created in Britain which has left thousands with no motivation to work, a report published today concludes. Successive governments have encouraged a welfare culture that has left every family facing a £1,300 bill because the poor stay poor, it claims. The findings by the public services think tank Reform suggest that increased welfare dependency has made it more difficult for those on the lowest incomes to do better. An education system with a 'dismal record' of educating the poorest, and a complex welfare system, have together created a far more divided society than other European countries, it finds... It [the study] concludes: 'The unintended consequence has been a 'why bother?' economy in which a significant minority do not have the capability or motivation to succeed'." The study, "Shifting the unequal state: From public apathy to personal capability," can be here. The take away statistic is that six million British households have no income earner. And because anecdote is the singular of data, check out this Daily Mirror story on the McFaddens, three generations -- and ten people -- living under one roof, drawing about £32,000 a year. Says family matriarch Sue McFadden, "Our neighbours are so snobby - they call us the "Shameless" family and say that we ought to go out to work. But how can we work when we have all these children to look after?" Last year, in a study entitled Working Welfare, the Adam Smith Institute examined welfare reform that worked in the United States in the 1990s and proposed adopting some of the measures in the United Kingdom. Sunday, April 20, 2008
Strange bedfellows WorldNetDaily.com reports that Richard Mellon Scaife's Pittsburgh paper has endorsed Hillary Clinton and that the primary funder of th VRWC has changed his mind about Hillary Clinton: "Richard Mellon Scaife, formerly No. 1 on Bill Clinton's enemies list as the so-called 'marionette' of the 'vast right-wing conspiracy,' today formally endorsed Hillary Rodham Clinton for president – proving, once again, politics makes strange bedfellows. Scaife, who personally funded many of the investigations of the Clinton administration that led to the president's impeachment, used his Pittsburgh Tribune-Review newspaper to express support for Clinton. Clinton faces a do-or-die primary in Pennsylvania Tuesday. Most state newspapers have endorsed her opponent, Barack Obama. The Tribune-Review cited Obama's lack of experience and his widely criticized comments about bitter voters living in small towns. 'In sharp contrast, Clinton is far more experienced in government – as an engaged first lady to a governor and a president, as a second-term senator in her own right,' the paper's editorial said. 'She has a real voting record on key issues. Agree with her or not, you at least know where she stands instead of being forced to wonder.' As surprising as the endorsement might appear, it is not entirely unexpected. Last month, Clinton met with the Tribune-Review's editorial board and Scaife, who also is a principle owner of NewsMax.com. Following that meeting, Scaife penned a personal editorial titled "Hillary, Reassessed," declaring how impressed he had been by the former first lady. 'Her meeting and her remarks during it changed my mind about her,' Scaife wrote." Here's my own conspiratorial take on this development: Scaife relishes the idea of four more years of digging up the dirt on the Clintons and having his media empire disseminate what they find. Against Fed mission creep George F. Will writes in today's Washington Post that the Federal Reserve should keep to its original role and not try to head off a recession: "The Fed has no mandate to be the dealmaker for Wall Street socialism. The Fed's mission is to preserve the currency as a store of value by preventing inflation. Its duty is not to avoid a recession at all costs; the way to get a big recession is to engage in frenzied improvisations because a small recession, a.k.a. a correction, is deemed intolerable. The Fed should not try to produce this or that rate of economic growth or unemployment." Why not? Because it would send the wrong economic signals: "A surge of inflation might mean the end of the world as we have known it. Twenty-six percent of the $9.4 trillion of U.S. debt is held by foreigners. Suppose they construe Fed policy as serving an unspoken (and unspeakable) U.S. interest in increasing inflation, which would amount to the slow devaluation -- partial repudiation -- of the nation's debts. If foreign holders of U.S. Treasury notes start to sell them, interest rates will have to spike to attract the foreign money that enables Americans to consume more than they produce." Gun owners make happy Americans So says Arthur C. Brooks in the Wall Street Journal, contra Barack Obama's fundraising pandering to San Francisco elites. Says Brooks: "According to the 2006 General Social Survey, which has tracked gun ownership since 1973, 34% of American homes have guns in them. This statistic is sure to surprise many people in cities like San Francisco – as it did me when I first encountered it. (Growing up in Seattle, I knew nobody who owned a gun.) Who are all these gun owners? Are they the uneducated poor, left behind? It turns out they have the same level of formal education as nongun owners, on average. Furthermore, they earn 32% more per year than nonowners. Americans with guns are neither a small nor downtrodden group. Nor are they 'bitter.' In 2006, 36% of gun owners said they were 'very happy,' while 9% were 'not too happy.' Meanwhile, only 30% of people without guns were very happy, and 16% were not too happy. In 1996, gun owners spent about 15% less of their time than nonowners feeling "outraged at something somebody had done." It's easy enough in certain precincts to caricature armed Americans as an angry and miserable fringe group. But it just isn't true. The data say that the people in the approximately 40 million American households with guns are generally happier than those people in households that don't have guns." Things are bad for the GOP when... Democrats have a chance to win Indiana. So say Indianapolis Star opinion editor Tim Swarens in the pages of this weekend's Wall Street Journal. He says: "[T]here are some broad trends at work. One of them is that the candidates' campaign blitzes across the state are swelling the voter registration rolls – they are up nearly 10% since 2006. There are about 400,000 new voters, and this despite a purge by the Indiana secretary of state's office of tens of thousands of outdated registrations. About half of these new voters registered this year. They got involved after it became clear that there would be a real Democratic horse race. David Plouffe, Mr. Obama's national campaign manager, gave me this prediction while at a stop in Indianapolis recently: 'We have the organization and the financial ability to stretch the map [in November].' If Mr. Plouffe is being a little presumptuous, it may only be because there is more at play in Indiana than a little excitement surrounding the two Democratic candidates. The elephant in this living room is the state's economy, and the void on the right of a central narrative of how to turn things around. The state has lost some 98,000 manufacturing jobs since 2000. And many of the replacement jobs workers are finding pay less and offer less in health care and retirement benefits than their old factory jobs. Republicans can still perform well here (as President Bush proved in 2004). After all, it is probably unrealistic to expect to hold onto old-economy jobs. But someone has to explain to those who are looking for better paying work just how the new economy will be to their benefit... To win, Mr. McCain needs to fill in the void that follows such a summation of the state's economy. The anxiety is real. Subprime woes can be found everywhere, but Indiana's home-foreclosure and personal-bankruptcy rates are consistently among the highest in the nation. And inflation – represented in the rise of food, gasoline and other essentials – bleeds consumers. November is still a long way off. And it is still a long shot for either Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Obama to win this state... But over the past two years, voters have surprised Indiana incumbents in both parties. In 2006, Republicans took a pounding in congressional races. They had controlled seven of the state's nine seats in the House. After the Democratic wave, they held four. Last year, Indianapolis's Democratic Mayor Bart Peterson, once a shoo-in to win a third term, took the brunt of voter anger. He was ousted from office by voters incensed over sharp increases in local property and income taxes." Gordon on poker Very interesting Q&A at Freakonomics with Phil Gordon, one of my favourite poker players to watch on TV. He talks about strategy (both poker and rock-paper-scissors), his fellow players, the ridiculousness of the US government banning internet poker through the Safe Port Act, and why poker has become popular. But the best sentence, by far, comes from former poker player Mike Roddy in the comment section: "People who can succeed in poker almost invariably would have happier and more affluent lives had they marshalled the discipline to pursue something more prosaic." Green reality vs. green perceptions Nigel Hannaford in the Calgary Herald: "For, if polls are any guide, Canadians seem to love the environment more than they know about it, and are broadly unaware that things are getting better, not worse. For instance, an Environment Canada poll taken last year found 76 per cent of Canadian respondents thought environmental regulations were too weak, and favoured various green levies on manufacturers for the purpose of fighting pollution. On the other hand, a 2006 poll revealed that although 89 per cent of Canadians had heard of the Kyoto Protocol -- it was much in the news in the run-up to the election -- more than two-thirds of them said they knew nothing about it. This despite a widespread belief reported by Leger, that global warming 'will destroy the Earth.' And in 2004, the Fraser Institute noted what it termed 'a strong disconnect between Canadian student perceptions of environmental trends (mostly negative) and the reality of environmental trends (mostly positive).' A certain amount of the Canadian split personality about the environment is just human nature. Some people consider themselves realists, and heaven knows, realists are happiest when the facts are least appetizing. Others just enjoy a good scare; I have often wondered if the gene that makes you like slasher movies doesn't also rev you up when NASA says an asteroid is closing in on the Earth, or Al Gore says we're all going to drown. And, of course, if you're looking for government funds, the tap opens wider to the degree government thinks people are anxious. All of this leads to increased public interest, but not necessarily accurate perception." He then lists some facts about the environment: According to Environment Canada's National Environmental Indicator Series, noxious emissions are decreasing. In the 1990s, mercury to air was cut 77% and sulphur dioxide emissions in Eastern Canada fell by half over the past 30 years. According to the Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators in 2007, between 1990 and 2002 manufacturers used one third less energy to produce each unit of goods and services, 42% more households use of low-flow showerheads than did in 1994 and three times more households use compact fluorescent bulbs. According to Environment Canada's Municipal Water Use Report, per-capita water use decreased six litres from 2001 to 2004. Statistics Canada says technological improvements in vehicles have reduced total carbon monoxide emissions 82.6% between 1974 and 2001 despite an increase in automobiles. And as Hannaford notes, "ambient lead levels in the atmosphere are now too small to be worth measuring." An early Happy Earth Day -- and there is reason to be happy. Canadians are making real progress on the environmental issues that matter. Saturday, April 19, 2008
The ladies at ProWomanProLife.org note a discussion that, frankly, shouldn't be taking place anymore. A letter writer to the Ottawa Citizen says: "Please, isn’t it about time to use the correct 21st century medical nomenclature. A fetus is not a baby any more than a man’s sperm or a woman’s ova is a baby." As Andrea Mrozek says: "Er, actually, there’s a big difference between sperm and a baby, and an egg and a baby. Modern man: You’d think we’d have nailed down the birds and bees by now." Indeed, Andrea gets to something that novelist and physician Walker Percy noted 27 years ago in a column for the New York Times in which he pointed out that the side that denies the humanity of the child to defend abortion is the one who holds a medieval view of pre-born life: "The current con, perpetrated by some jurists, some editorial writers, and some doctors is that since there is no agreement about the beginning of human life, it is therefore a private religious or philosophical decision and therefore the state and the courts can do nothing about it. This is a con. I will not presume to speculate who is conning whom and for what purpose. But I do submit that religion, philosophy, and private opinion have nothing to do with this issue. I further submit that it is a commonplace of modern biology, known to every high school student and no doubt to you the reader as well, that the life of every individual organism, human or not, begins when the chromosomes of the sperm fuse with the chromosomes of the ovum to form a new DNA complex that thenceforth directs the ontogenesis of the organism. Such vexed subjects as the soul, God, and the nature of man are not at issue. What we are talking about and what nobody I know would deny is the clear continuum that exists in the life of every individual from the moment of fertilization of a single cell. There is a wonderful irony here. It is this: The onset of individual life is not a dogma of the church but a fact of science. How much more convenient if we lived in the 13th century, when no one knew anything about microbiology and arguments about the onset of life were legitimate. Compared to a modern textbook of embryology, Thomas Aquinas sounds like an American Civil Liberties Union member. Nowadays it is not some misguided ecclesiastics who are trying to suppress an embarrassing scientific fact. It is the secular juridical-journalistic establishment." Friday, April 18, 2008
The TTC strike Publius at Gods of the Copybook Headings on the impending TTC strike: "Mr. Davis, Brampton Billy as he was once known, gave public sector employees the right to strike, the most expensive "civil liberty" in this province's history. Mr. Davis was fond of saying that the buck stopped with him, even if he never got around to explaining exactly how the buck was being stopped and at what price to the taxpayers. The buck has now stopped at David Miller's desk - the current Premier, a Norman Bates look-alike with Bill Davis pretensions , is of course evading the issue. The Mayor is to be applauded for not immediately caving into union demands. Possessing a well known sense of drama, Mr. Miller is perhaps waiting for Sunday morning, the union's deadline, to cave in. The TTC, for those who dwell in the land beyond Steeles, is not simply the public transit system of Toronto, it is the city's respiratory system. 1.5 millions of the city's 2.5 million residents use it everyday. There is no alternative for most. A week long strike would literally slow the economic growth of the entire country. Knowing this the unions knows the strike will last, if it comes, a day or two, and then either they will give or be forced back to work by the province as an 'essential service.' This is kabuki theater without the grace and elegance imparted by the Japanese. The solution? Let time run back. The TTC was created in 1917 by the city government purchasing several private transit companies, companies that had served the city well for over seventy years, on the grounds of aiding the common good. A state owned transit system would be cheaper and more efficient than a private sector system, so the argument went. The new entity almost immediately hiked rates and cut service. It is a tradition it carries down to this day, as bits of roof fall onto subway tracks and fare collectors collect sky-high salaries with their tokens." My bet is that once union-friendly mayor McCheese returns from Red China, the capitulation will begin. It might not be at the Sunday deadline, but I'll eat my now useless monthly TTC pass if this labour dispute is not 'settled' by midweek and normal service returned on Wednesday morning. Perspective I have a hard time caring about the silly things most politicians argue about and the media covers in Canada and the United States when people in Haiti are reduced to eating mud. (HT: Marginal Revolution) No matter what's wrong/corrupt/not-working etc... in the West, we live relatively well off and relatively free compared to most parts of the world. There are exceptions -- the unborn are at risk everywhere and native Indians live in third world conditions -- but these are exceptions. (Too much ignored exceptions.) To remind readers, most people who live on welfare in North America live better than royalty did a century and a half ago. And as Kathy Shaidle noted in her book Acoustic Ladyland in a column on what she learned at Catholic school, no you're not actually starving. But the people in Haiti are. This all makes phony discussions about distinct society and even tax rates seem a little less important by comparison. Gerson on the Catholic Church Michael Gerson in today's Washington Post: "As the Catholic writer G.K. Chesterton argued, men and women are either created in 'the image of God' or they are 'a disease of the dust.' If human beings are merely the sum of their physical attributes -- the meat and bones of materiality -- they are easier to treat as objects of exploitation. So Catholicism offers a second contribution: It is the main defender of human dignity against a utilitarian view of human worth. And the church has applied this high view of man with remarkable consistency -- to the unborn and the elderly, the immigrant and the disabled. Individual views on issues of life and death vary widely, even within the Catholic Church. But it is a good thing to have at least one global institution firmly dedicated to the proposition that every growing child, every person living in squalor or in prison, every man or woman approaching death or contemplating suicide or trapped in profound mental disability, every apparently worthless life is not really worthless at all. An institution accused of superstition is now the world's most steadfast defender of rationality and human rights. It has not always lived up to its own standards, but where would those standards come from without it?" UN dysfunction From the New York Sun on preperations for follow-up confab for 2001 U.N. Durban conference against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and intolerance: "Neither America nor Israel is represented on a 20-member preparation committee for the conference, which is scheduled to convene Monday in Geneva under the leadership of Libya. The committee will determine the venue, as well as the size of the budget for the conference, though any decision will require the approval of all the member states. America finances just less than a quarter of the U.N. budget. In a signal that the bias that characterized Durban I is likely to be repeated, Iran is leading a drive to deny accreditation to a human rights advocacy group, the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy, according to U.N. Watch. Canada, the only country so far to announce it will not attend, had 'hoped that the preparatory process for the 2009 Durban Review Conference would remedy the mistakes of the past,' the Canadian foreign minister, Maxime Bernier, said in January. 'We have concluded that, despite our efforts, it will not'." The Heritage Foundation's Brett D. Schaefer has a web memo on the problems with Durban II: "There are numerous troubling signs that the review conference will be a repeat of 2001, including: Oversight by the gravely disappointing U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC). The General Assembly placed responsibility for organizing Durban II with the HRC. The council has been a grave disappointment in fulfilling its role as the premier U.N. human rights body. Since its creation in 2006 to replace the discredited U.N. Commission on Human Rights, the Human Rights Council has failed to address ongoing repression in Belarus, China, Cuba, North Korea, Zimbabwe, and many other places around the world. This is hardly surprising, since the members of the Human Rights Council include Cuba, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and other noted human rights abusers. These countries use their influence to undermine efforts by the council to carry out its mandate. While the council has passed relatively mild condemnations of Sudan and Burma, it has saved its strongest criticism for Israel, condemning it in 19 separate decisions and resolutions. Organization by repressive and anti-Semitic governments. The HRC decided that it will act as the Preparatory Committee for Durban II, with Libya as chair, electing 19 other countries to serve on the bureau for the Preparatory Committee that will set the agenda and objectives for the Review Conference. Among the 19 vice-chairs are Cuba, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, and South Africa, none of which has distinguished itself as a champion of equality or human rights during its tenure on the HRC. Libya and Iran are particularly ill-suited to overseeing preparations for Durban II. Both countries are strong supporters of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which has historically been hostile to Israel. Libya is also a member of the League of Arab States, whose Arab Charter on Human Rights calls for the elimination of 'Zionism,' and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has infamously stated that Israel 'must be wiped off the map' and that 'Zionists are the true manifestation of Satan'." Thursday, April 17, 2008
Why only 8.2% of Major League Baseball Players are black This week -- the week that marks the 61st anniversary of Jackie Robinson's first game with the LA Dodgers -- it was reported that just 8.2% of MLB players are black. Mark Kriegel of Fox Sports reports on conversation with black baseball writer Jason Whitlock: "Whitlock offered what, to me, was a striking theory. 'Baseball is a game of fathers and sons in America,' he said. 'You have to be taught the game, and taught an appreciation of the game. There's a crisis in the black community, a total collapse of our family structure and absence of fathers. It's not that surprising we have little interest in baseball.' I'd not thought of this. Though even if I did, as a white guy, I'm not sure I'd feel free to volunteer it in print. As for the question posed on 'Baseball Tonight,' Whitlock brought up Barry Bonds. Until recently, Bonds was the best African-American player in the game. He was taught by his father. Before that, it was Ken Griffey Jr. He, too, had been taught the game by his father." Americans not embracing idea of national health care scheme Rasmussen Reports poll finds: Do you favour or oppose a single payer National Health Insurance Plan overseen by the federal government? Favour: 29% Oppose: 39% Not sure: 31% That 31% unsure number probably indicates a lot of anxiety about individuals' own health care circumstances and costs. But the fact that such anxieties are widely reported and that still fewer than two in ten respondents support a nationalized health care plan as part of the solution speaks volumes about the essential conservatism of Americans. Holy crow, I agree with Warren Kinsella Warren Kinsella says: "Last week in Calgary, I told Tom Flanagan's classes that there was as big a gender split in Canadian politics as there has ever been. Gals, I told the students, don't like Stephen so much - and guys don't like Stephane so much. It's been that way for months. How do the two Steves solve it, one student asked me. I have the same answer as Cherniak: in the campaign. Campaigns matter, and this one will matter for a lot." For all the polls and punditry, campaigns change things a lot. That's why we have them. Recall on the eve of the 2006 election campaign, the media parroted the Liberal line that an election was a waste of time because voters would just return a similar Parliament. Then eight weeks later, Paul Martin's minority government became history. What happened in the intervening eight weeks? A campaign with speeches, news events, issues, debates, gaffes, and other things that focus voters' attention on politics in a way that it doesn't during non-campaign time. Stat of the day -- and does it matter I don't read Harper's but I appreciate Marginal Revolution highlighting this number from the May 2008 Harper's Index: Ratio of the estimated number of fake doctors practicing in Delhi, India, to the number of real ones: 1:1. However, as one commenter to MR noted, what constitutes a fake doctor? Could someone possess a fair bit of medical knowledge but not be properly licensed? And doesn't that person still provide a valuable service to the inhabitants of Delhi? I better leave this post headlineless The BBC reports that male masturbation reduces prostate cancer: "Men could reduce their risk of developing prostate cancer through regular masturbation, researchers suggest. They say cancer-causing chemicals could build up in the prostate if men do not ejaculate regularly. And they say sexual intercourse may not have the same protective effect because of the possibility of contracting a sexually transmitted infection, which could increase men's cancer risk. Australian researchers questioned over 1,000 men who had developed prostate cancer and 1,250 who had not about their sexual habits. They found those who had ejaculated the most between the ages of 20 and 50 were the least likely to develop the cancer. The protective effect was greatest while the men were in their 20s. Men who ejaculated more than five times a week were a third less likely to develop prostate cancer later in life." Two things jump out at me. One, there are always some problems with studies that rely on the recall of participants. Having men discuss how often they ejaculate might be prone to some exaggeration. Two, the positive effect of ejaculation are greater for masturbation that intercourse because, it is hypothesized, of the risk of contracting sexaully transmitted infections that might block the 'flushing effect' or however else this might work to reduce cancer risks; I wonder whether if this study had controlled for sexual partners (married men who remained chaste until marriage) if the results would be any different. I'm not anti-Israel, some of my favourite authors are Jewish Barack Obama discovers a new way of pandering: claiming Phillip Roth and Saul Bellow are two authors that influenced his thinking. Rabbi Leonard Gordon said he found Obama's praise for Roth and Bellow 'inspiring' therefore proving that such adolescent tactics work. Wednesday, April 16, 2008
930 minutes of The Price is Right Four-disc DVD set of The Price is Right covering five decades of the best episodes of the game show. Keith Phipps writes about it at Slate: "Spanning five decades, the episodes in the set suggest that guessing the price of things is an activity Americans will not soon tire of, whether it's Barker or someone else holding the microphone." A few neat things A blog dedicated to the finances of the Florida Marlins. Daft hands on YouTube. Economic geeks from Berkeley do No Dissertation (to the Stones' Satisfaction) and Stronger. A Star Wars PSA against smoking. Pee Wee Herman does a PSA on crack cocaine. Someone mocks Herman's PSA. Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Quote of the day Dennis Prager in a column on how liberalism has changed in recent decades: "Identifying and confronting evil remains the Achilles' heel of liberals, progressives and the rest of the left." Progress LifeSiteNews.com reports: "Governor C.L. "Butch" Otter signed a bill into law on Thursday that makes Idaho the first state to legally forbid individuals from forcing a woman to have an abortion." In 2008 a law is required to protect a woman's right to choose to not have an abortion. Big Brother meets Captain Planet In parts of Sydney, Australia, environmentalist zealots within the government become creepy: "There is revolution going on in waste management, which Big Brother would be proud of. Tucked away under the rim of wheelie bins found in two Sydney councils are small radio frequency tracking devices collecting information on a household's waste habits. Randwick Mayor Bruce Notley-Smith told The World Today they are the way of the future. 'We will be able to find out the weights of the various bins and collect the data, the entire amount, as opposed to the quantity that is recyclable,' he said. The garbage truck reads the data on the bin, weighs the bin, and the data is collated on a computer." This is not merely the garbage police but the latest example of how environmentalism turns into statism. So-called conservatives who embrace climate change theories and want to do something about it, must realize that even by offering free market solutions, they are lending credibility to this insidious socialism. (HT: Lasso of Truth) Could this bring libertarians and conservatives together? Four public policy groups that focus on family issues have released a report that says 'family fragmentation' (divorce and out-of-wedlock births) costs taxpayers $112 billion a year. The costs are incurred as a result of federal, state and local anti-poverty measures (single-parent families are more likely to be poor) and criminal justice and education programs. The authors claim their estimates are low, although the $112 billion number seems a huge number at first glance although in the larger scheme of things -- total government spending or the size of the US economy, it isn't. The takeaway point is that this report quantifies the economic ramifications of the disintegration of family life. The best social program is not, as many conservatives like to say 'a job' but stable families. If libertarians are interested in keeping the cost of government in check, they might want to reconsider the cultural influences on family breakdown (divorce, the contraception mentality, etc...) which they generally support. An executive summary of the report Taxpayer Costs of Divorce and Unwed Childbearing can be found here. A fact sheet is available here. The press release announcing the release of the report today here. See AP's coverage here. Monday, April 14, 2008
Human-cow embryo hybrid From The Niche, a stem cell blog: "Newcastle University says researchers led by Lyle Armstrong have made hybrid embryos containing material from cows and humans. The announcement comes just as the government gears up on whether or not the creation of such embryos should be legal. Newcastle University, which already had approval for the research from UK regulatory authorities, decided to push forward so the research would not risk being stalled by an upcoming vote in the House of Commons, reports the BBC." Comments. 1. Making such hybrids may or may not be legal but the government's regulatory agency okayed it anyway. 2. Researchers get approval before they do make it illegal, therefore thumbing their noses at the government. 3. Human-cow hybrid? Yuck. You'd think for a political strategist, he would understand what motivates voters Warren Kinsella last Friday: "Despite being in week three of a killer cough/cold thing, and therefore at home, I still valiantly did my buddy John Wright's show on CFRB today. Here's what I said, more or less: 'In the US, they are experiencing huge rates of voter participation in the presidential primaries, notwithstanding the fact that the IMF and others are saying they are in a recession that will last into next year. Voters there are excited about their new crop of politicians. 'Meanwhile, up here, we can barely get people out to vote in the March 17 byelections, but we are one of the few nations that will escape a global recession. And voters here are less-than-excited about many of their political choices'." In other words, when things are going badly or perceived to being going badly, people care more about the stakes of politics. In reality, when people are suffering from anxiety over the economy, they seek political answers. When everything is going well, people care less about what Washington might do to/for them. This is common sense and nearly universally recognized. The conclusion that Kinsella draws is that 'bland works' -- a not very insightful insight from a one-time important 'backroom' Grit. Non-issues dominate campaign Hillary Clinton doesn't want to answer questions about the last time she went to church and shot a gun -- at least when she isn't dogged by questions about downing a shot of whiskey. Obama & Clinton on abortion Andrea Mrozek at ProWomanProLife.org: "Obama and Clinton on abortion, here. 'I believe that the potential for life begins at conception,' said Mrs Clinton. 'But for me, it is not only about the potential life, but the other lives involved…' And Obama: Mr Obama said he did not know whether life begins with conception. 'This is something that I have not, I think, come to a firm resolution on… I don’t presume to know the answer to that question,' he said. One position is utilitarian, the other, ill-informed and evasive. But this would be the dividing line in the pro-abortion camp these days, I think. Those who know when life begins and don’t care, and those who maintain life does not begin at conception but rather at some other magical moment, arbitrarily chosen." |
