Final Victory in the War of Ideas?

A friend of mine believes that this recent election may signal a final defeat for the ideals of conservatism, that no genuine right wing alliance will ever again regain control of the country.

While I fundamentally disagree, I'll grant him certain points.

• On some social issues (homosexuality, immigration, and other types of xenophobia) the conservatives will moderate significantly over the next 10 years.
• Conservative aversion to changes to the patent law may reduce as changes in the software industry make those changes more evidently necessary.
• On environmental issues, the conservatives will drop the issue of whether global warming is an issue, and focus on policies that help the market incorporate environmental cost into their decision making (carbon tax or 'cap-n-trade' vs. arbitrary per-company pollution controls).

There are a few other issues where I wish they would change the party line, but these are the ones I think will actually change. Once these changes are made, the conservative party will have a far more focused platform based on consistent principles. It will still be necessary to find a leader who can articulate those principles well to the masses, but those come in time.

The modern GOP is very different from the 1950's GOP which was far away from the 1900's GOP. Political platforms change to fit the times, but some ideas don't become less correct.

To justify 'spreading the wealth around,' one has to accept that wealth does not belong to the individual who creates it. Is wealth created by the social environment that created the person, or is it the creative and motivated character of the person that creates both the wealth and the social environment? If you claim that the social forces created the person's character, than it becomes one social duty to do everything possible to forcibly improve the social environment. That can and will be used to permit government control of anything that affects the social environment, words, print, businesses that compete with government programs, etc. If you deny the basic premise that a person owns the product of their work, then you deny the basic freedom that a person even owns his/her self.

Long Live the King

Last night, I went with some conservative friends to go bar hopping in DC and enjoy some election night festivities. I should have brought a camera, it went very bad after a while.

Around midnight, when the 'called' Obama states passed the magic number, there was such a roar of exuberance like I've never heard at any sports event. The whole bar, and people outside started singing "Can't stop thinking about tomorrow, yesterday's gone, yesterday's go-o-o-one." I expected excitement and even intense partying, this was not that.

There was a disshevelled lady sitting outside crying her eyes out on the phone with somebody saying things like, "It's actually happened!" The way she would if her child had just survived a near death experience.

I don't think this guy is even a celebrity anymore, he's graduated to 'hero.' To those of you who support his policies, I suggest you should be concerned. Passionate politics makes for passionate opposition, and the only limit on passion is the ability to through one's life away. I would be concerned about support like that from my own party, for the kind of backlash it can create.

He is a fantastic speaker, spectacularly ambitious, diplomatic, and calm. He's 47 years old, and his political carrer only started in 1997. In 11 years, he has risen from state senate, to the Presidency of the most powerful nation on earth. What does an ambitious man with those skills do after that?

Competitive Alternatives

I'm really bothered that in all debate around the topic centers on the concept that if one is against this bailout, then one is in favor of 'doing nothing.' I have not heard a single serious alternative even floated about how to fix this problem.

I want to hear more about capital requirements. The Chinese have lowered theirs while theEuropeans have raised theirs. Here is my proposition.

Complicated Proposition

The fed should decrease the reserve ratio from 10% to 8%.  That would change the liquidity multiplier from 10 to 12.5. There are 6.3 trillion in time deposits, which probably means there's 630 Billion in base deposits. Reducing the reserve ratio by 2 points would instantly create 1.58 Trillion in liquidity. The danger here is that doing this could inflate the dollar by a lot. To limit that, announce that the reserve ratio will rise by 1 tenth of a percent each quarter until the ratio is back at 10%.

Simple Proposition

The same thing just explained in more detail for the many who  don't follow all the terms  in the complicated version. Follow the link.

Bankruptcy, Not Bailout

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/29/miron.bailout/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

I have been sent this link by 2 friends that do not know each other, but know me very well. Jeffrey Miron makes some amazing points.

• The implicit backing of the federal government for Freddie and Fannie encouraged them to take on far more risk than a free market would have allowed.
• "Worse, beginning in 1977 and even more in the 1990s and the early part of this century, Congress pushed mortgage lenders and Fannie/Freddie to expand subprime lending."
• "The fact that government bears such a huge responsibility for the current mess means any response should eliminate the conditions that created this situation in the first place, not attempt to fix bad government with more government."
• "If financial institutions cannot make productive loans, a profit opportunity exists for someone else. This might not happen instantly, but it will happen."
• "Further, the current credit freeze is likely due to Wall Street's hope of a bailout; bankers will not sell their lousy assets for 20 cents on the dollar if the government might pay 30, 50, or 80 cents."

Read the article. He makes many more points that fill in the blanks, but I figured 5 was a good synopsis.

Bring On the Shorts

Bloomberg is reporting that 2 companies, Diamond Hill Investment Group and JMP Group Inc. have opted to let their shares be short sold. I know very little about these companies, but I do know that what they've done takes guts and is the truly moral thing for any company in their position to do.

The regulators are giving the financial companies unfair exemptions instead of letting the market run its course and are protecting the weak at the expense of the good. 

Congratulations to the leadership of these 2 firms in standing up for what capitalism is all about, free and fair competition with transparency and justice for all.

IED video from Iraq

I've recently found this video of an IED explosion. This is the kind of thing that our troops have made such great strides at reducing and eliminating in Iraq.

Obama's Technology policy

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/technology/

It reminds me of the proverbial candidate for class president who promises CocaCola in the water fountains.

The list of expensive stuff he wants to do is only offset by his increases in taxes that will shrink the economy. He hasn't mentioned a single program that he wants to stop, just programs he wants to start and expand.

Rudy Giuliani Defines Freedom

Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do and how you do it.
-Rudy Giuliani

Compare that to:

You cannot build character and courage by taking away a man's initiative and independence.
-Abraham Lincoln

Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes.
-Mahatma Ghandi

If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom.
-Dwight Eisenhower

'Not for Resale' free stuff

Universal Studios sent out a bunch of free promo CD's with a 'promotional use only' label to selected listeners. These CD's arrived completely free through the mail.
Troy Augusto, who decided to disregard that label and sell the disc on Ebay, is now fighting a lawsuit from Universal. The record company claims that the promotion use label identified the product as in part their property, and that they retained all rights of sale. Augusto claims that since the discs arrived in the mail with no action on his part, they were gifts and therefore his property.

The major significance is the challenges this case could pose for the 'first sale doctrine.' Universal wins, could a car manufacturer place a limit on the number of resales for the car? I could do a whole new post on that idea.

EFF has counter sued Universal on Augusto's behalf.

Constitution? What Constitution?

Bush administration claimed that the 4th amendment doesn't apply to them.

For at least 16 months after the Sept. 11 terror attacks in 2001, the Bush administration believed that the Constitution's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures on U.S. soil didn't apply to its efforts to protect against terrorism.

That view was expressed in a Justice Department legal memo dated Oct. 23, 2001. The administration on Wednesday stressed that it now disavows that view.

I'm embarrassed to say that I'm rusty enough on the Constitution that I had to look this up.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

So far this is just an echo chamber post, Hat tip to MRogers @ slashdot. But I can't think of any commentary that won't sound like whining.

The Advent of Generation Why

Quite a bit of research has been done on the workplace integration of Gen-Y.

There are those who say that Gen Y will be good for the workplace:
Five Ways Generation Y May Reinvent IT
Generation Y: They've Arrived at the Workplace with a New Attitude
Gen Y Myths Debunked

There are others who say that Gen Y poses new risks:
Beware a Generation of Risk Takers
Has Generation Y overdosed on self-esteem?
Generation Y: Too Demanding at Work?

I was born in 1983, which puts me squarely in Generation Y. While I won't speak for others close to my age, I do value entrepreneurship and flexibility in my career. I'm always confused by companies that expect to retain me indefinitely, unless they offer unlimited growth within their ranks in the form of easily expanded higher positions to make room for quality people. A 5% raise with a fancier title in my current position is not a promotion, it is a retainer.

Reagan on the role of Government

Hat tip to Brian Hollar @ Thinking on the Margin
Who gave "(HT Stephen Bainbridge via Instapundit)"

Project Lifeline, Legislating Reality After The Fact

I recently stumbled a wonderful new project by our wonderful government called Project Lifeline.

Thanks to this wonderfully brilliant contribution by our governing officials, banks will actually spend 30 days negotiating with borrowers to resolve their loans before foreclosing on them. This is such a great idea in fact, that banks have been doing this voluntarily for years with no government involvement at all!

This is basically the banks borrowing the governments credibility (imagine!) because for some reason people trust banks less than they trust our 'fiscally responsible' government. When the banks call the homeowners asking them to refinance, people avoid the calls like the plague.

Second Life CIA

Concerns Over Online Economies as Breeding Grounds For Terror

U.S. intelligence officials are cautioning that popular Internet services that enable computer users to adopt cartoon-like personas in three-dimensional online spaces also are creating security vulnerabilities by opening novel ways for terrorists and criminals to move money, organize and conduct corporate espionage.

The CIA has created a few virtual islands for internal use, such as training and unclassified meetings, government officials said.

The CIA owns islands in Second Life! I'm glad I pay taxes.

Most virtual worlds are proprietary of some sort. World of Warcraft is owned by Blizzard Entertainment, Second Life is owned by Linden Labs, combined they constitute an estimated 22 Million users total, maybe 6-12 million of which are active more than once a week. For the time that they spend in these worlds, very few of their decisions are in any way affected by the laws of their respective real world governments. While the company has full access to all the data regarding chat, text, exchanges, etc.; the government can request that access.

Second Life gets more media attention because of real money that gets exchanged in that world on a daily basis. 18 Million Linden$ ($67 Thousand) was exchanged in Second Life this January. It is illegal, however, to exchange real money in World of Warcraft (it still happens though).

Video Game Tax in New Mexico

New Mexico Proposes Video Game Tax to Punish Staying Indoors

But a coalition of groups, led by the Rio Grande chapter of the Sierra Club, is sold on the idea that outdoor education programs can inspire children in a way that video games and television cannot.

The coalition wants state lawmakers to create a No Child Left Inside Fund with a 1 percent tax on TVs, video games and video game equipment. The fund would help pay for outdoor education throughout the state.

Joseph Henchman says:

The fundamental purpose of taxes is to raise revenue necessary for programs, not micromanage people's decisions with subsidies and penalties. If a tax targeting video games is justified, it should be on the basis of actual negative externalities, not the whims of social engineers picking things they don't like at random.

For myself, I can say without ambiguity that I vastly prefer this type of policy to efforts to ban certain types of video game content. One advantage is that a direct tax creates a disincentive to hurt the industry.
More ambiguously though, I agree with the philosophy of government given by Mr. Henchman. While it's appealing to think that Parks'n Rec would be paid for by Gamestop, as a service, parks and rec should be paid for by people that use it, not by people that don't. People should want more outdoor activities, government should try to 'make them want' more outdoor activities.

Hat Tip to Joseph Henchman @ Tax Policy Blog

Educational Duties to the Future

Video clip of Richard Dreyfus on liberal education.



Any Questions?

Hat Tip to Brian Holler at Thinking on the Margin.

Immigration Regulations

On the other side of this argument are the well reasoned arguments of Samuel Huntington in Who We Are. My personal perspective is more along the lines of how immigration restriction restricts freedom, here explained by Don Boudreaux.

Huntington's point about culture is true, immigrants will change a culture, and ideal characteristics that attracted the immigrants are likely to be watered down or eliminated. But immigration is the very freedom that allowed those settlers to create this nation in the first place and removing that freedom seems very wrong to me. A wall on the border, for it's own sake seems like a perfectly reasonable project to me, but not for the purposes of keeping immigrants out. The great wall of china was built for real security reasons, I have no problem with that. I'd support the wall, if open immigration were in place on a very permanent basis.

Hat tip to Ampersand at Alas, a blog.

Anon vs. Scientology

A hacker group called Anonymous, has declared war on the 'church' of Scientology. So far they seem to have successfully executed a DoS attack on the Scientology website, and a prank on the church's hotline.



Various Media outlets have picked up on this.
Australia Wired The Register National Post

Anon has responded to media coverage of the 'war.'

I fight the urge to support Anon in this solely because of the quality of their videos. But really I don't see what they're going to do. They can't cause any real harm by pulling pranks like a DoS or phone line redirects. They'd really have to cause financial messes, like stealing money from the 'church' and sending it to the FBI, then send an email politely asking them to spend the money investigating the 'church.' That would be impressive, because it's really hard to do. So until they show themselves to actually be serious in this, I have to write them off as a bunch of kids playing important on YouTube.

Libertarian Solution to a Political Conflict

A Libertarian Solution to Evolution Controversy: No More Public Schools

When you force people to teach a subject in a way they don't want it taught, and the school system is a political beast, which our public schools are, you're going to see the curriculum you have in mind corrupted by the political process. People campaigning for strong teaching of evolutionary biology in public schools are ignoring that this is what's purportedly been going for the last 50 years. There are no states with a theistic presentation in their classrooms. Real science is what's supposed to be taught; yet when you look at polling data, the ones who see a non-theistic, purely naturalist explanation are in the minority.

The particular libertarian speaking there is strongly pro-evolution, and is trying to resolve the debate about whether to allow the intelligent design curriculum to be taught in public schools.
A lot of people feel very strongly that EVERYONE should be well educated. I rather agree with that, education expands the human experience and gives them the tools to provide high quality services to the people around them throughout their lives. It preserves the knowledge base for a growing economy.
Many people assume however, that the ONLY way to do this is through a ubiquitous government run public education system. The argument for 'school choice' is that you could use the same tax dollars used to fund the public education system to provide limited credits that can be used to pay tuition at all sorts of educational institutions. This would make the market for education more competitive, raising quality, lowering price, and vastly simplifying the content debate.

I am in favor of school choice from kindergarden through the fourth year of college.

Stimulus Schimulus

Russ Roberts: Don't Jump the Gun on Stimulus Plans

The money has to come from somewhere. If you raise taxes to fund the plan, the people who are taxed are poorer and they'll spend less. If you borrow money to fund the plan, the people who buy the government bonds have less money to spend and that offsets the stimulus. It's like taking a bucket of water from the deep end of a pool and dumping it into the shallow end. Funny thing—the water in the shallow end doesn't get any deeper.

But you do spend time and effort moving a bucket full of water.

There's also other factors. If I told you I was going into debt JUST to consume more stuff, see more movies, eat out more, etc. Would you say that I'm doing my part to improve the economy, or would you tell me I'm ruining my finances because I'll have to pay that interest for years since I'm not using the money improve my productivity. Well, the stimulus package consists of taking on debt in the HOPES that people will consume with the money.

Forcing debt on the tax payers in hopes that they blow it on useless crap? Why won't Keynes just go away?