Richard Epstein at the Hoover Institution looks at whether government can require companies or the States to give things away for free. The idea is nothing as crazy as one might think. There’s an argument that it can already mandate behavior as a condition for receiving government money, a subject which has recently created tension between the administration and the Catholic Church. Epstein says, “that mandate requires all religious institutions that partake of the health-care benefits under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) to supply—against their moral beliefs—contraceptive, sterilization, and abortion services to all persons whom they treat at their facilities in order to continue receiving government benefits, some fraction of which have been raised by tax revenues from persons of similar religious beliefs.”
But giving away money is just a specific kind of behavior. If government can mandate behavior, why can’t government mandate that kind of behavior? Epstein says that is exactly what it is trying to do. “But now bitten with the statist bug, he just announced that all insurance companies who participate in programs funded through the PPACA will be required to offer the same suite of women’s health-care services for free.”
Government has always promised to give away something for nothing. But the accepted way of doing this was by collecting money through taxes and redistributing it through programs. This had the virtue of requiring a spending bill that had to pass the people’s representatives in Congress. Because otherwise, why if government could just require a company or state to hand things out then they could mandate anybody into bankruptcy. Epstein says:
The proper procedure for distributing free goods … is by way of taxation, which requires the Congress to step up to the plate to make the necessary fiscal appropriations. Circumvent that process and there is no reason why the government will not use its fiat to drive these companies into bankruptcy.
But suppose it was really important to give stuff away for free because it promoted fairness. Shouldn’t the government use whatever power it had to force others to ‘help’ those deemed deserving? Ok, maybe the better word is ‘persuade’ as it sounds so much better.
And the government could be very persuasive because Federal programs have become so extensive that very few could risk offending the administration by refusing a ‘request’. Therefore they would comply ‘voluntarily’ with requests even if under considerable duress.
This is actually how it is done and Epstein explains how the doctrine of persuasion developed. It began, as many things did, to protect the children. “The federal government wanted to impose a minimum drinking age for alcohol. But the Twenty-First Amendment, which repealed prohibition, explicitly withheld from Congress the power to regulate the manufacture and consumption of alcoholic beverages.”
So Congress looked for a way around and found it in highway funds. “To get around that direct prohibition, Congress passed legislation in 1984 to withhold 5-percent of the highway funds allocated to a state if it did not raise its minimum drinking age to 21.” The case came before the Supreme Court, which found that such hardball tactics were not coercion but “encouragement”.
Rehnquist also stressed that the small 5-percent withholding meant that this case involved only “encouragement” not “coercion.” Would the same logic apply if a thief told his victim “you need to give me only 5-percent of the money in your wallet”? And what is the point at which encouragement becomes coercion? In effect, the states are at the mercy of the federal government. They can forego the revenues, but they can never escape the taxes.
Now that they had their stick, government used it. And there was no practical defense. As Epstein noted, once the taxpayer paid his taxes into government coffers he was the mercy of the the men who held the purse strings, obliged to jump through whatever hoops were held up to get any of it back. If he angered government by refusing a ‘request’ it would take the money collected from him elsewhere. So if government wanted you to give away stuff for “free”, you had to do it if you ever wanted to see any of your money back again.
Epstein says that Obamacare has turned this stick into a club. States that didn’t provide the suggested health services could opt out but …
The kicker here is brutal but effective. The states that do not sign on to this program will lose all their federal payments for existing Medicaid recipients, which for a large state like California amounts to $25 billion per year. The state residents will, however, continue to pay into the program. Whatever the merits of the government’s financial projections, it is clear that opting out is impossible for many states.
The proper way to evaluate this program is to ask, therefore, whether a direct mandate that the states spend these additional sums for the various classes of Medicaid recipients would be consistent with the equal sovereignty of the states.
Yet whatever the Constitution said, the operation of the actual power meant that the effective answer is probably that government cannot really really force you to do things, but actually they can. It’s a neat way, Epstein argues, of avoiding the need to pass unpopular tax measures and debate spending bills. Just tell the deserving fellows to eat off the arm and watch whoever is mandated provide. Not everyone will be happy to do this.
If the deal is as good as the federal government claims it is, we would not see 26 states in open rebellion, as there are today. The way to avoid all these difficulties is to have the government pick up the entire tab for these Medicaid expenditures and to pay the states the costs needed to cover the programs.
The use of taxation requires the Congress to bear full and open responsibility for the funds that it appropriates. The conditional grant allows Congress to shift that burden down to the states, without having to confront explicitly and annually the revenue costs that it imposes. Right now, it is anyone’s guess exactly how this game will play out.
But who said life was fair for the people who had to find the money? And in fact, isn’t that the whole point of Obamacare? To make things fair?
How to Publish on Amazon’s Kindle for $2.99
The Three Conjectures at Amazon Kindle for $1.99
Storming the Castle at Amazon Kindle for $3.99
No Way In at Amazon Kindle $3.99, print $9.99
After 2008 when the entire finance industry misbehaved, there is the argument in the air that the government must do SOMETHING. Somehow, they just can’t seem to hit the reckless financial industry as a target (other than a little light rent-seeking), but the moral outrage helps motivate everything from Obamacare and porkulus to you name it. Better to keep the moral outrage than to address the exact cause and dissipate it, huh.
Anyway, the federal government has been dictating outcomes, behavior, speech, and even thought since the civil rights act. Again, the pattern was a belated realization that the government SHOULD have acted to promote civil rights better for decades or century(s) earlier, but you can’t change the past, and so onerous behaviors are accepted for the present, in ineffective and for that reason bottomless compensation.
Funny, ain’t we?
look it up the “politics of generosity”
And of course it is also noticeable that for every thing the federal government mandates for the populace they make sure they and theirs are exempt from them……of course that has been going on for thousands of years. Gods of the Copy Book Headings and all that.
The opportunity costs of refusing the money include having it go to your competitor. Some years ago Congress appropriated funds to build a new West Side Highway in NYC. New York said No. They did not want no stinking highway. The money did not languish in the Treasury. Other states fell over themselves submitting proposals to use it. Politicians let it be known that they would never come to the city’s aid because they were offended by the arrogance of declining offered pork.
The good news is that a SCOTUS ruling is a fragile reed to base any policy on. Mandates do not have the authority of the Constitution behind them. They lack even the enabling gloss of an Act of Congress. They merely reflect the opinions of as few as five people. They can be reversed a any time by another decision of five old justices.
By convention judges usually respect precedent. Nothing compels them. If three years from now a new Court decides to throw out Mandates and incidently undermines the logic behind Marbury v Madison and the misuse of social science in Brown v Board of Ed, my argument being not with the outcome but the methodology, then what could the NYT do about it?
Last time I looked something like 2,300 companies have received waivers from Obamacare implementation. Granting or withholding such waivers, and others for other government measures, is also a form of coercion: “treat us right and we’ll grant you a waiver.” It’s not far (and perfectly in keeping with Chicago politics) for waivers to be granted in future in return for campaign contributions. When we reach that stage we will see the perfection of government corruption. If Obama is re-elected, I feel certain this will come to pass. Even if he is not, the chances are pretty good he’ll move us down that path in the 11 months left to him.
The Democrats taking huge D.C. Debt Dumps on future generations of Americans is a great argument in favor of contraception. Our Democrat Plantation masters are enslaving future generations to satisfy their current lust for spending. They can borrow on the good faith and credit of the yet to be born, even though they are poor credit risks themselves (many are tax cheats). As a result people might stop having children as they will be the debt slaves of the Democrats.
At that point the Democrats will want to control contraception so as to “encourage” child bearing rather than curtail it. After all, with every new child they can borrow more money and have another life to boss around.
Reparations has been in the cards from the get-go. Mean-spirited, bitter clinging and all that.
The good thing is that these monsters always go too far. I remember the Southie riots in Beantown in the early ’70s. There’s modern liberalism for you.
The bad thing is that this time, the Southie riots will be nationalized.
It’s surprising how many people have failed to notice that our President declared war on America last week.
Dire Straits Money for Nothing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWXDjiKVs2U
I want my, I want my MTV
I want my, I want my MTV
Now look at them yo-yo’s, that’s the way you do it
You play the guitar on that MTV
That ain’t workin’, that’s the way you do it
Money for nothin’ and your chicks for free
Now that ain’t workin’, that’s the way you do it
Lemme tell ya, them guys ain’t dumb
Maybe get a blister on your little finger
Maybe get a blister on your thumb
{Refrain}
We got to install microwave ovens
Custom kitchen deliveries
We got to move these refrigerators
We got to move these color TV’s
The little faggot with the earring and the makeup
Yeah, buddy, that’s his own hair
That little faggot got his own jet airplane
That little faggot he’s a millionaire
{Refrain}
I shoulda learned to play the guitar
I shoulda learned to play them drums
Look at that mama, she got it stickin’ in the camera
Man we could have some
And he’s up there, what’s that, Hawaiian noises
Bangin’ on the bongos like a chimpanzee
Oh, that ain’t workin’ that’s the way you do it
Get your money for nothin’ get your chicks for free
{Refrain}
Now that ain’t workin’ that’s the way you do it
You play the guitar on that MTV
That ain’t workin’ that’s the way you do it
Money for nothin’ and your chicks for free
Money for nothin’ and chicks for free
I want my, I want my, I want my MTV
What’s the difference between a general practitioner and a specialist? One treats what you have, the other thinks you have what he treats.
Don’t understimate the ingenuity of Rahm Emanuel (Tweedledumb)!! He has found a way to relieve the ordinary citizen of the duty of being the tax collector of the welfare state by eliminating the middleman. He is now planning on garnishing the state income tax refunds of those who have outstanding fines for parking violations etc. So all those taxpayers who STILL have not received their tax refunds for returns due 4/15/11 now can allow him to try and collect the money from Gov Quinn (Tweedledumber), who is so far in debt he cannot pay bills over one year old, directly, while leaving the citizens in peace.
BRILLIANT!!
If you rule, not govern, but rule.
If you are bound by neither, law, Constitution, nor custom.
If you may tax and spend, unaccountable to anyone.
If you may appoint satraps whose absolute writ is backed solely by your decree.
If your reign is best characterized by, “Let it be written, let it be done!”
Then mandating “contributions” by the plebs and the Kulaks may be done with impunity …. right up until the moment when it cannot.
That length of time is measured by the nature of the population.
Târgovişte
Subotai Bahadur
For hdgreene @ 6: BAD IDEA.
Illegal immigrants will smother (out vote) your children and you will have given away their birth right, no ?
When government pays a woman to have a child, does the government own that child? When you’re bought, you’re a slave, right?
Another way to increase the birthrate, of course, is to remove the profit from contraceptive drugs and devices. Make them “free.” The current O plan, as stated, is to make insurers give these things away, so it seems that the insurers will be required to go before the pharmaceutical manufacturers. Of course, that’s just the plan today. At any moment, another whim may manifest.
Then give them all the lie.
THE FROG
Take a pan of red hot water
Take a frog and drop him in
And he’ll leap out in an instant
With a silly smirking grin
For the frog knows that to cook him
You must take it nice and slow
Put him in some nice cold water
And then turn the heat on low
Just as frogs can’t tell they’re cooking
And will sit there as they die
So do people take the goodies
From the government supply
Until much too late it happens
That a thought will cross some minds
That the pot that holds the goodies
Is the pot that holds all kinds
Of the things the Leftists want you
To believe are yours by right
And so happily you sit there
As your country fades from sight
Down the Lefty driven rat hole
While your children in despair
Cry for want of all the freedom
That was lost without a care
So be careful what you sit in
For the Left will on the sly
Turn the heat on oh so slowly
And sit back and watch you die
I support the Home Invasion Protection Act of 2013. Under it, every homeowner’s and renter’s insurance policy provides a free gun and a monthly supply of ammo. For cities like New York, where gun ownership is restricted, the coverage is not explicitly written into the policy, but if you contact your insurance company they have to provide the gun and ammo every month.
hdgreene…
You’ve evidenced classic muddled thinking WRT the Federal purse.
It’s an entity that is ABOVE the law — it writes it.
It also never dies; but it can collapse — which is the real end game — there is no other.
——
How many times to I have to say it: for a Fiat Power able to Command/Demand Resources/ Obedience … SPENDING equals TAXATION.
In mathematical terms that equivalence is termed an IDENTITY.
Whether the tax is collected by debasement of the fiat currency or by financial repression or by withholding… the Federal accounts are squared up in THE PRESENT.
THERE IS NO DELAY.
The taxes imposed by 0bama’s squandery are NOT BEING DELAYED UNTO the next generation.
You must get through your head that the Federal Government is completely unlike any other economic entity.
It gets to make the rules now — and then change them in the future. You can’t sue it. It’s sovereign.
It doesn’t run its books like any other entity — to include state governments.
It even supersedes ALL OTHER NATIONS — because it uniquely issues the only universally recognized international money — the US Dollar.
If that were not true then America would have LONG SINCE been racked by a massive financial crisis — since our accounts are virtually identical to Weimar Germany, circa 1922. We even use the EXACT SAME mechanism for floating public debt/ Central Bankism.
—–
Should 0bama’s reign extend it will terminate with extreme prejudice as the entire world financial system implodes. Once the Wan makes America just like any other country — our fiat will be just like any other fiat — and thus — the Federal Government will be reduced to penury — just like the Confederate States of America and just like the Colonies before the Constitution/ Articles of Confederation era & the Revolutionary War.
“Not worth a Continental” — ring any bells?
——
We are in a Global Financial World War — and we already have a ‘libertarian’ ( in financial affairs ) monarch.
For as all can see, his policy is to ‘let it be.’
It’s Laissez-faire unto anarchy.
Darth Soros is wafting overhead — riding the thermals — until the stench of fiscal decay permits this vulturous caricature of humanity to swoop down — shorting all the way — to gorge upon the life capital of this plundered nation.
——
The tell of an incompetent: they can’t tell incompetence — in others — or in themselves.
Thusly, the Wan plays pick-up ball with the NBA all stars — and the FLOTUS critiques the national diet.
——–
In sum: don’t worry of tomorrow — today’s already worth screaming about.
Do not worry that the government might steal your 401K — they’re ALREADY DOING SO: haircut by haircut.
That’s what Financial Repression is all about.
——-
BTW, Harding is the President who’s policy ought to be adopted.
( c.f. Grant’s Interest Rate Observer )
Wretchard posts a great piece illustrating how out of control the federal government is and an entire string of BCer’s let loose a torrent of scorn for the federal government.
Yet these very same people all wear their rose colored glasses and insist that somehow all the wars and the crony MIC created by and for this same federal government are legitimate. US foreign policy and overseas bullying is the WORST example of this federal take over of the country. And to think they accuse Ron Paul of being a flake.
Ideology apart, a big (unintended?) consequence of social engineering is the creation of endless complexity in society and in personal life. This complexity presents itself in the form of barriers, hurdles and choke points that throttle personal goals and actions. By smothering individuals in a web of regulations and processes that make life miserable, social engineering takes away personal freedom.
Shrink government; live free.
Today’s Laugh – You’ve got to read John Kass in the Chicago Tribune!! http://tinyurl.com/7vw5gje
Then for some background on Obama’s Chicago read http://tinyurl.com/6pgy94v and http://tinyurl.com/7mrw5r4
Oy Vey!
ConfedrateH @ 17 – Relax Dude! Today’s invasion plan is to have Syria’s neighbors, Turkey, Iraq, Jordan and Israel send armed peacemaking troops into the nation to divide it into four sectors, ala Berlin during the Cold War. We sell them the military equipemt, they use it to keep the peace in their own ‘hood.
We, the USA, sit back and make things that actually work, and get the jobs that come with customer satisfaction. Meanwhile, Putin sulks as all the hot Russian babes want to make their babies in the USA, not this planned new USSR!
So far as I can see there are two institutions with the Constitutional authority, organization, public reach, and money to take on the overrreach of the Federal government – the individual States and the Catholic Church.
The argument goes that we might not be in this mess at all if these two institutions had been more diligent in asserting their authority over their home turf to begin with so why should we expect that things will be any different now? It’s a fair question.
The short answer is that it is now or never. Either this is a federal republic or it is not. Either the American Catholic Church is an independent arbiter and champion of individual human rights or it is not. The pitch is on the way. You either swing and make contact or go sit on the bench for another 100 years.
I think that the energy is out there to take on the Long March and put God, Family, Work and Community back in the hearts and minds of Americans.
Something for nothing. Hell yes. Just check how many ‘emergency rooms’ were in major hospitals in the 70s and 80s. Then Congress decreed that no one could be turned away from such creatures. Today you’ll only find emergency rooms in state or state university medical facilities. Now lots of ‘urgent care’ store fronts have opened up thanks to the lines at those far fewer emergency facilities, but they’re not subject to the same federal dictates that closed legions of emergency rooms which became the black hole of unrecoverable and uncompensated expenses for private sector.
Or another way to say that, Peter:
Rev 3:16: So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
I think it never occurred to Obie, as an atheist, that there really might be some people who believe in something greater than themselves, enough to risk everything earthly on its behalf. It won’t take that many, by the way, to get the job done.
Josh #1: Good point! And to that I add that such behavior is used to justify still worse behavior and responses and so on, ad infitum.
The Government has always restricted individual behavior and required specific actions with no monetary compensation, but that was always contingent upon certain behavior on the part of the individual. Drive a car, fly an airplane, operate a business, and you were required to do certain things. And, by the way, the government has no problem with simultaneously requiring and forbidding certain actions.
Obamacare takes this to a whole new level. The act of living, of simply drawing breath, now is considered to be behavior that the Federal Government proposes to mandate certain actions.
I wonder if there is a “critical mass” of regulations at which point further regulation and additional mandates simply cause less compliance? And do absurd laws and impossible mandates breed an overall contempt for the law? Or rather, do people realize that they themselves must be responsible for assessing and judging which laws to comply with because no one else is? Or is it both?
Within the USAF I came to realize quite early that I was the authority for managing my own and my subordinates’ workload and regulatory burden because no one else would do it. They could issue commands and directives but could not issue intelligence and judgment. I have come to realize that this is true for the government in general.
“But now bitten with the statist bug…
That might be the reason for the contraception mandate. He might also have been driven by political calculation to fire up the Christian-hating elements of his base (which seems to be happening) and/or return the culture war to the front burner as a way to distract people from the economy. The leftist press and Fox News already suggest the reaction to the mandate is a distracting ploy invented by the GOP because the economy is good: a questionable assumption to say the least.
Does anyone recall a time past when an arm of the federal government (not just a crank in Congress) deliberately fomented animosity toward a segment of American society? I can recall the Red Scare, although there were in fact people who wanted Communist revolution, as opposed to the current bogeyman of looming theocracy. Although we hear it said every four years, I now think this election is truly pivotal.
OT but the Traitor is Chief is a busy man:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration is weighing options for sharp new cuts to the U.S. nuclear force, including a reduction of up to 80 percent in the number of deployed weapons, The Associated Press has learned.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NUCLEAR_WEAPONS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
@19. MachiasPrivateer
@19. MachiasPrivateer
“We sell them the military equipemt, they use it to keep the peace in their own ‘hood.”
Yeah right. In WWI and WWII Britain was desperate to get the US sucked into the war, just as Israel is now. Lend lease was not sufficient, nor are billions in military aid for Israel every year. Just another case of history rhyming and once the firing starts US soldiers will be dying to keep the elites rich and in power. Besides there is almost certainly US forces on the ground in Syria and Iran already.
RE 17. ConfederateH
“US foreign policy and overseas bullying is the WORST example of this federal take over of the country.”
A quick read of the constitution reveals that foreign policy (aka bullying other countries for the good of our country), raising armies, and making war are among the core enumerated powers of the federal government. The “federal take over” of this arena was complete in 1789.
Now you can quibble over who and how we bully and if we need to take preventive/preemptive military actions against jihadi terrorists. But that is a policy question, not a constitutional question. In fact, if the feds would just stick to bullying other countries and leave citizens alone we would have no constitutional complaint whatsoever.
The other commenters that you disparage are discussing actual constitutional questions – the constitution did not give the fedgov the power to set drinking age or mandate health care coverage. So the fact that the fedgov does so is a live constitutional question.
I’m very much reminded of Andy Cuomo, HUD, and Smith&Wesson- an obvious end-run meant to drive a business into bankruptcy-by-compliance.
23-RWE
“I wonder if there is a ‘critical mass’ of regulations at which point further regulation and additional mandates simply cause less compliance?”
The answer is yes, there is a critical mass where compliance disappears. How can you comply when everything you do is subject to obscure and contradictory regulation?
It’s called the tipping point, and we’re at or have passed it already.
The routine abuse and hubris demonstrated by those in power (“do as I say, not as I do”) encourages even the most law-abiding citizen to question the legitmacy of the laws. Plus, as the recent financial and economic fiascos have demonstrated, those who do follow the rules are least likely to be bailed out and most likely to pay for the transgressions (and mortgages) of those who don’t.
O/T: Didn’t Richard Epstein know/work with Obama at the University of Chicago?
His analysis of Obama’s weak grasp of money and the economy has in the past been very insightful, and as I recall, his predictions about Obama’s policies and actions were right on target.
b @ 16: We are in a Global Financial World War — and we already have a ‘libertarian’ ( in financial affairs ) monarch.
For as all can see, his policy is to ‘let it be.’
War with whom? The banksters? Ourselves?
I don’t know that permanent trillion dollar porkulus is letting things be, though Obambus seems to have no comments on record about the banksters generally, other than that if they are rich they should pay more taxes. And hey, remember Obamacare?
But “libertarian” ha, very funny. If this is an example, then what it shows is that “libertarian” is often or always a matter of “I don’t know wtf I am talking about so I just say the hell with it.” Yes, sure, in theory one can have a deep understanding and great faith in something, say capitalism, and want to just leave it alone to work, but is that what Obambus is doing with the economy?
–
But while we’re talking money for nothing, what is with S&P raising their rating for California? OK it was from red alert to puce, but on what basis exactly, the bs unemployment number “improving” towards 10%? Looks like it was just a bogus favor so the new bond issue is priced better, total wack job.
This loss of religious liberty is a very serious issue.
Never fear. We have Rick Santorum on our side.
When we need a clear, erudite defense of the Constitution, what do we get from Rick: “we need a national conversation on contraception”. Rick seems to angling here for some Right Wing Nanny State Police action in the Bedroom.
Hey that’s just great, Rick. When Clarence Thomas, In Lawrence vs Kansas, opined that sodomy laws “constitutional but silly”, Rick disagreed. He thought the sodomy laws were not only constitutional, but served a very necessary purpose. Some good ol’ 1920′s style moralizing police control is just the ticket for Rick. Santorum is like a poster child for all the Left’s Intrusive Religious Nutter Stereotypes of the Right, and his overbearing image will be painted on all conservatives before long if he is the nominee.
When we need a clear argument against Buraq’s grossly unconstitutional power grab, we get an argument from Santorum that undermines all the good conservative argument against it. Santorum’s comments muddles all the bright line constitutional boundaries and unwisely conflates good constitutional arguments with fascist ones. This guy is just not serious.
Too many in the Republican Party have gone insane. In this time of dire need, first we get the Progressive Romney, and now the Religious and Big Government Nanny State Fascist Santorum.
“Yes, sure, in theory one can have a deep understanding and great faith in something, say capitalism, and want to just leave it alone to work”
They used to call it Laissez-faire. f course the new communist dictionary has other terms for it. To control the conversation one must control the language. Alan Greenspan was a libertarian. But like all men having a political philosphy in itself will not save you from the hubris of your own actions. Where I think Greenspan went off the rails is he was willing to overlook criminality in order to maintain status quo and economic momentum. That isn’t libertarianism, it is foolish. It takes a lot to get within the attention spot light of the SEC and the FTC (unless you just happen to be unlucky). Speculators and malifactors could have been prosecuted with the laws we have but they were largely ignored… TBTF, chronyism, et al.
Unsk, Republicans have a pathological need to lose in similar ways as do the Palestinians. In order to maintain their entrenched status quo they must be a minority party and to achieve this they must first ensure that they are not in a majority power, ie: they must lose. There are of course two or more kinds of conservatives, fiscal conservatives (constitutionalists)and social conservatives (nanny state religious zealots). The best way to spend our way into oblivion and to destroy the nation is to pull down fiscal conservatives and the best way to do that is to engage in the “national conversation on contraception”. It is not a minor detractant, it is poison to the party and will guarantee socialism and state agression against individual liberty. It is the best case for a third party that I can think of.
Josh:
2008 when the entire finance industry misbehaved, there is the argument in the air that the government must do SOMETHING. Somehow, they just can’t seem to hit the reckless financial industry as a target (other than a little light rent-seeking), but the moral outrage helps motivate everything from Obamacare and porkulus to you name it. Better to keep the moral outrage than to address the exact cause and dissipate it, huh.
Josh,this gets at the heart of two different but related things, the inherent impatience that is the American tragic flaw, and the willingness well intentioned but intemperate citizens to screw all businesses in order to tell themselves that they’ve done something about the ones that are actually a problem.
Impatience as an American non-virtue has a fairly long pedigree. The “we have to do SOMETHING” has resulted in things like Prohibition. Letting one’s anger at what you call the banksters run unchecked is currently a highly corrosive thing. Much like Roman citizens killing a poet who had the same name as a scoundrel in Shakespeare’s version of Julius Caesar, we are now faced with a public which has adopted the outlook that every business person from the banksters down to small shop owners like myself is equally guilty of evil doing and equally in need of a financial hit, a regulatory caning, and eternal impugn meant as an evil subhuman.
In the name of “doing SOMETHING”.
Never mind that less than a hundredth of a percent of the private sector had anything at all to do with financial misdealings. Never mind that passing reams of expensive regulations actually benefits the big evil players and makes live harder for the little guys relative to the big ones. Never mind that there are legitimate Constitutional issues with imposing all of this on some citizens (business owners) but not on everyone else.
Laws exist for prosecuting the bad guy bankers. Use them as necessary. But the ginning up of anti-business hatred has got to stop. The rage against individuals and certain companies is justified. The general rage and guilt by association directed at the entire private sector will, if not dissipated very soon, destroy this country. Count on it.
Circumvent that process and there is no reason why the government will not use its fiat to drive these companies into bankruptcy.
The Mob calls this “busting out the joint.”
That analogy has been used repeatedly in posts here at BC.
34. Annoy Mouse
Unsk, Republicans have a pathological need to lose in similar ways as do the Palestinians.
I found a marvelous episode of something called “Battlefield Detectives” about the battle of Agincourt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uy7DT_FTms0&feature=related
One of the conclusions of the episode was that the French found a way to lose despite all their advantages and an, originally, good battle plan. Even before the video was finished I concluded that the French knights at Agincourt must all have been Republicans.
Josh @ 31 said:
“… what is with S&P raising their rating for California? OK it was from red alert to puce, but on what basis exactly, the bs unemployment number “improving” towards 10%? Looks like it was just a bogus favor so the new bond issue is priced better, total wack job.”
Josh’s comment piqued my curiosity. California is flat on its back with its arms and legs pointed straight up. I did some googling and found the following:
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/02/sp-improves-outlook-for-california-bond-rating.html
Key quote:
“In a 15-page analysis, S&P said that the state’s new majority-vote budget requirement is a major reason why the state now has a positive outlook. Voters approved the requirement in 2010 in Proposition 25, which also docks pay if lawmakers submit a late budget.”
That has a ring of truth but it is a very slender straw to be grabbing at. California is still broke and very business unfriendly. Companies are still packing up, fleeing the state and taking their potential tax revenue with them. If you drive around the former Dot-Com areas in the Silicon Valley, most of the buildings are empty with “for lease” signs displayed. There are lots of shopping malls where most of the shops are vacant. California’s politics is still controlled by socialists. We have not yet hit bottom and there is no reason for optimism.
Don Rodrigo @ 37 said:
“Even before the video was finished I concluded that the French knights at Agincourt must all have been Republicans.”
Arguably, Obama is the worst President we’ve had since James Buchanan. The 2012 general election should be a cake walk for the Republican party. Instead, they are going to nominate Romney and hand the election to Obama. I guess there are good reasons to call the Republicans the “stupid party”.
——————–
By the way, you can almost see people holding their breath in concern about the economy. The funny business in Europe and Greece could explode at any moment. The baloney with Iran could explode at any moment. The never ending money printing by the Fed and market manipulation by the PPT could fold up at any moment. The triggering event could be something as simple as the Athenian police refusing to battle with the rioters and the mob taking over the Greek parliament building. It feels like Sarajevo just before Princip cocked his pistol.
#34
If you think that we can have economic liberty without also having religious liberty then you are either way smarter than me or you think that history began in 1968.
The separation of morality and economics is compartmentalization worthy of Bill Clinton.
The reason Dan Quayle was ridiculed was because he was a conservative Republican, not because he said or did anything wrong or foolish. He was right about the plural of potato and turns out to have been spot on about Murphy Brown. Yet the cynics who dominate American culture destroyed him because he spoke the truth about their dissolute, deteriorated world view.
Santorum is, of course, absolutely right if he said we have to have a conversation about birth control. It’s at the root of all of our problems. The fact that no so few of us are thoughtful or mature enough to have that conversation is not his fault.
Now, it may not be the smart political thing for him to bring up, but it’s pretty clear what we get for leadership when our politicians avoid talking about or dealing with the truth because it’s not politically expedient.
What you guys are saying is essentially that we don’t deserve good leaders. That may well be true, but smugness in the face of such tragedy is as 6th-grade as John Stewart and SNL.
#39 I am pro-life. I am a firm supporter of religious freedom, and though I am not particularly observant, I value my Christian heritage and traditions. That said, social conservatives have pushed the pro-life position before and that and socially conservative issues are a millstone around the Republican Party. It makes a poor plank in the platform in my opinion because it polls poorly. Wymin have the right to murder babies with their body in ways that other killers are not allowed to practice with theirs. We have lost that battle for now. Men must allow to let their babies be killed or have to pay for their upbringing without parental rights for the life of the child. It is a woman’s choice. We can accomplish nothing with Marxist deHumanist’s in the White House so if we care to control anything we need to prioritize. YMMV
I am not saying that we must lie or ignore the issue but we need to gather the public trust before we can win them over on such issues. Whether or not it is structurally possible to win over the minds indoctrinated with Marxist Educator’s drivel is quite another thing.
BTW, I am not that smart and there are a lot of people who would gladly attest to that.
I am very happy to see the dust-up between the Administration and the Catholic Church. Even better that Obama has already foreclosed on any further discussion because that will force the Catholic Bishops to actually do what they are supposed to – never compromise principle.
The problems we face are cultural. The rotten political expression is a symptom of a rotten culture and not the cause. Unless and until there is a brouhaha in the public square about whether we are all something more than sentient fornicators it will not matter who wins the next 10 elections.
“…it will not matter who wins the next 10 elections”
Sometimes it seems that even the church is lukewarm when if comes to upholding moral standards in the public. It is like they are afraid to offend the moderately religious and need to appeal to a secular congregation to pack the pews. Rotten to the core.
When you’re down a run in the last of the 9th you pinch hit the guy on the bench most likely to hit the Lefty, even when you don’t like his pedigree.
To continue the baseball analogy, this team of Catholic Bishops is not what they were fielding even a few years ago. Are they up to the task? I don’t know, but I don’t see anybody else out there who has a better shot at seeing this through to the end.
Maineman #40:
“It’s at the root of all of our problems.”
Really? The Left says that the right to abortion is the one that is so important that none of our other rights have any meaning without it, so I guess that is sort of the same thing.
Rather, it is clear that the right to abortion is an essential element of the Left’s main argument: Lifestyle Protection. In their view, Society must ensure that people do not have to suffer any of the consequences of their own actions; people must be able to define their own lifestyle and have everyone else accommodate them. And that is the root of all our problems.
The compelling thing about the “moral” aspect of Conservatism is that it is inexorably linked to Fiscal Conservatism. If you tell people the skies the limit relative to their own lifestyle choices then the pressure for one government program after another to enable that very behavior will be immense.
RWE @ 45 said:
“Really? The Left says that the right to abortion is the one that is so important that none of our other rights have any meaning without it….”
It’s the “Red Button” for you. AGW is the “Elephant in the Room” and more important than the Right to a Free Abortion (/Sarc).
We have so much. Stumble into an emergency room and they will try to fix you. Try to starve yourself, they will stuff food stamps into your hand.
There is no clamor for better medicine, a faster car, cheaper microwave oven. The chief complaint is that it is all not free. That we allow someone through diligence, initiative, industry, and perhaps good fortune to improve their condition. To accumulate wealth.
Others for various reason, some of which may not be within their control, have drifted in the opposite direction toward destitution. No equality in the race of life, once we are out of the starting gate.
Is the answer, therefore, to retard the advancement of those who are succeeding, to punish success? Whatever our solution, it should meet the requirement of liberty and justice for all. Not ever increasing enslavement of wages until all are equal and destitute.
There is no way to avoid the adverse effects of penalizing wealth. People make decisions. They respond perhaps like Maurice Micklewhite did when he left his native land to avoid onerous taxes. The wealthy are like that. They can move themselves or their monetary resources in response to confiscatory efforts.
Moreover, giving people free stuff, the fruits of others’ labor, actually does encourage indolence. How many of us would continue to hammer away in boring jobs if sustenance, shelter, clothing, medical care, and entertainment were provided without lifting a finger? Who would climb under your greasy hot car to perform a repair if he did not need the paycheck?
Yeah, keep giving free stuff to get yourself reelected. Hope that the regime changes before it all comes crashing down in a big accounting scandal. Oops, we did that in Houston.
e @ 47: There is no clamor for better medicine, a faster car, cheaper microwave oven
Well, you must not have read my entry! I think the current quality of practice in medicine is abysmal, and that’s in the better places, and that’s just the application of today’s technology, which is a lot better than fifty years ago, but a whole lot short of what it could be, and I hope will be – in another century or three. Don’t even yank my chain on this one. Some of the problem is cost, way overburdened doctors and nurses and yes the malpractice suits and liability, but there is so much malpractice around, I can’t really get exercised about the lawyers. The rest is a complex science and technology that half the doctors don’t really get, and most of the rest simply aren’t given time to engage.
Y’know half the doctors are below average in skill level, they ought to pass a law or something. Sorry, that’s my favorite joke in the world, I think.
As for the cars and ovens, the marketplace has been at work on those and they are already optimized for current conditions. We need some of those microcars for city use, electric or hybrid or otherwise, but there too the market will speak when it’s good and ready. Microwave ovens? Mmm, …. I’m pretty much OK with those!
Ah, the fair society. When socialists use the word “fair” they mean equality of result. Equality of opportunity terrifies socialists because that would mean unequal results and unequal results are just not fair.
For a progressive the dream is to have everyone turn out to be equally mediocre. Only they, the progressive elite, are able to organize and bully people into becoming mediocre human mud, regardless of their innate capabilities. For the triumph of enforcing nurture over nature, the progressive elite deserves to be far more equal than the mediocre majority they created.
Of course, in spite of the progressives, some reactionary people always find sneaky ways to be excellent and outstanding. Since the uniformly mediocre majority can’t compete with the diversely excellent, the end result is greater inequality than you would have without the progressives. Case in point: rotten public schools where “fairness” is everything produce graduates who are unable to compete with the graduates of good private schools. Unequal capabilities caused by progressive educational policies lead to unequal results.
Can’t have that – it’s the same as and just as bad as creating equal opportunity for everyone. The only fair solution is to steal money from some and give it to others so that equality of result is enforced. Of course this wrecks the economy, destroys wealth, dumbs down society and ensures there will be ever diminishing amounts of money to redistribute. The doctrine of the fair society produces slow national suicide.
I’m not even sure that social justice exists. Isn’t there only justice and injustice?
Josh, could it be that the marketplace for medical practice has also optimized for current conditions? Meaning that the distortion of the market has produced exactly what concerns you refer to. Just like distortion of the housing market provided fertile ground for fraud & manipulation by those with skills and resources. Those that walked away with enormous wealth.
Compare the system with, oh say, before polio vaccine was available. I’m trying to understand your view here, but I keep coming to the conclusion that we’re a lot better off than China.
e @ 50: Josh, could it be that the marketplace for medical practice has also optimized for current conditions?
Hoist on my own petard, arrrrgh!
I suppose I’d have to concede some of that, but I think there is clear room for better medical technology better applied, where all in all that is not the case for automobiles.
I am just appalled at what I see and hear in actual hospitals.
And then I correlate that with what I see in my own technology field, IT, where probably 80% of the practitioners do more damage than good. The conclusions I come to are not pretty.
49. stevesmith
The following quote appeared in today’s Wall Street Journal:
What do you call it when someone steals someone else’s money secretly? Theft. What do you call it when someone takes someone else’s money openly by force? Robbery. What do you call it when a politician takes someone else’s money in taxes and gives it to someone who is more likely to vote for him? Social Justice.
~ Thomas Sowell
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell122711.php3
Maineman : “Santorum is, of course, absolutely right if he said we have to have a conversation about birth control. It’s at the root of all of our problems. The fact that no so few of us are thoughtful or mature enough to have that conversation is not his fault.”
I would submit we need to have a national conversation on what it is to be a parent, the responsibilities of parenting, pre marital sex, abortion, adoption, and not just birth control and contraception. Contraception is just one part of that conversation, and frankly not a very important part of it.
That said Santorum’s comments came amidst the unacceptable, unconstitutional mandatory inclusion of contraception funding within the Obamacare Insurance scam. His contraception comments were at best a diversion away from the real issue of religious freedom. But in reality his comments only gave high octane fuel to Buraq’s Jihad against the First Amendment. Those comments will be used to incite all the Leftards in the media to paint the conservative campaign to preserve our rights of Religious Freedom as nothing more than a smokescreen to take away their rights.
This incident shows that Rick Santorum cares very little about our First Amendment rights and much more about his own religious pet peeves. As President he would have to take an oath to defend our Constitution, which I doubt very much that he would try any harder than our current Traitor in Chief to honor.
Speaking of Huey Long!
1) The Indonesian-American “Giver” Barack Hussein Obama II Soweto intends to stiff the residents of the Gulf Coast out of $200 million in wetland restoration money that has already been collected!!! http://tinyurl.com/7eamvrd
2) This is despite the proof that the local people are fully vested in the “Entitlement Society” http://tinyurl.com/7k8fpmr
3) It really does seem like Divine Intervention (AKA Karma) is taking place in a federal court in the Big Easy! What next, might the court actually apply the letter of the law (in obeisance to the Rule of Law!) and limit BP’s exposure to that contained within the limits of the words written into the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 plus voluntary compensation BP has paid to those injured by the Gulf Oil Spill?
Curious minds NEED to know!
SYRIA – UN General Assembly passes non-binding resolution, government attacks on civilians continue. Putin’s Russia dithers. China leans toward voting “Present” in the Security Council!
http://tinyurl.com/7wquf95
I guess it’s time for more pitchforks and torches outside the Kremlin. All you hot Russian babes looking for a future for yourselves and your unborn children, you know what to do!! Bang your pots and pans as your parade around the Kremlin singing
Bye, Bye Mr. Putin Pie!! http://tinyurl.com/adu8qd
Whether the tax is collected by debasement of the fiat currency or by financial repression or by withholding… the Federal accounts are squared up in THE PRESENT.
THERE IS NO DELAY.
The taxes imposed by 0bama’s squandery are NOT BEING DELAYED UNTO the next generation.–blert@16
+1
ALL COSTS ARE PRESENT COSTS. “Costs” are the opportunities foregone, i.e., lost opportunity costs. Each dollar spent by government is a dollar that cannot be spent on business investment or private consumption.
We are being impoverished right now, not at some indeterminate future date.