Inside The Mind Of An Ivy League Liberal: Why A Shrinking Economy Is Good

According to this Lib, we should give up, go green and embrace a shrinking economy. Via Yale Environment 360:

Herman Daly has reminded us that if neo-classical economists were true to their trade, they would recognize that there are

diminishing returns to growth. Most obviously, the value of income growth declines as one gets richer and richer. Similarly, growth at some point has increasing marginal costs. For example, workers have to put in too many hours, or the climate goes haywire. It follows that for the economy as a whole, we can reach a point where the extra costs of more growth exceed the extra benefits. One should stop growing at that point. Otherwise the country enters the realm of “uneconomic growth,” to use Daly’s delightful phrase, where the costs of growth exceed the benefits it produces.

Of course, it is the elites in academia that will measure the costs and benefits, not consumers or the markets. They will decide what is best for us.

The lunacy continues:

Though not widely accepted, the case is strong that growth in the affluent U.S. is now doing more harm than good. Today, the reigning policy orientation holds that the path to greater well-being is to grow and expand the economy. GDP, productivity, profits, the stock market, and consumption must all go up. This growth imperative trumps all else. It can undermine families, jobs, communities, the climate and environment, and a sense of place and continuity because it is confidently asserted and widely believed that growth is worth the price that must be paid for it.

But an expanding body of evidence is now telling us to think again. The never-ending drive to grow the overall U.S. economy is ruining the environment; it fuels a ruthless international search for energy and other resources; it fails at generating the needed jobs; it hollows out communities; and it rests on a manufactured consumerism that is not meeting the deepest human needs. Americans are substituting growth and consumption for dealing with the real issues — for doing things that would truly make us and the country better off.

It is time for America to move to post-growth society where the natural environment, working life, our communities and families, and the public sector are no longer sacrificed for the sake of mere GDP growth; where the illusory promises of ever-more growth no longer provide an excuse for neglecting to deal generously with our country’s compelling social needs; and where true citizen democracy is no longer held hostage to the growth imperative.

Read the rest if you dare. It is truly nauseating.

For a guy who is who is supposed to be super smart and is going to tell us how to live our lives better than we are now, his two main points are dead wrong.

First, he is tring to tell us that our chase for economic growth is turning people into working zombies through increased working hours. This is not true at all. Via Economic History

click for larger version

And it gets better:

click for larger version

The idea that people are working longer hours in an expanding economy is flat out false.

Our intrepid lib professor’s second assertion that we are destroying ‘the environment’ in a ruthless pursuit of an expanding GDP is false as well.

If you are a frequent MCT reader, you know that one theme here is that only wealthy countries can afford to worry about the environment.

Go to any poor or developing nation and look at the condition of the environment. Go to rural China, Africa & Cuba and look at the conditions people live in. They don’t care about the environment. In many cases, they only care about where their next meal is coming from.

A growing economy makes life better for everyone.

Australian Government Tips For Living Green During Winter Months

Something to look forward to from our government in a few months.

AUSTRALIANS are being urged to play board games and snuggle up under a rug with a pet or their families to help cut power bills.

On its LivingGreener website, the federal government urges switching off the TV and heater and finding old-fashioned ways of keeping snug and occupied.

Of course this is being sold by the Australian Climate Change Minister, Greg Combet as “tips on how to save energy & money.” It seems to me that Mr. Cobet thinks the people of Australia aren’t ‘sophisticated’ enough to figure this out for themselves.

It is amazing how romanticized living condition’s in the 1800′s and earlier are portrayed. Look at this picture of a South Dakota log cabin from around 1890:

click for larger image

Sure is a simpler time. No pesky furnace or air conditioning. No energy wasting TV or inefficient incandescent light bulbs. Heck, you can snuggle by the fire and read a book or play a board game to pass the hours.

Back in the simpler times, people didn’t live that long... But they lived green.

Monday Night Links: The Cartographic Land Octopus Edition

Humorous War Map

Via Big Think- Strange Maps Blog:

Real octopi are sea creatures, of course. But the Cartographic Land Octopus – CLO for short – need not worry about being in the right ecosphere. Being fictional, it is not restricted to the sea. It can (and need) do only one thing: instill map-readers with fear and revulsion. But the CLO’s pedigree does stretch back to the ocean. It is clearly descended from an older monstrosity, equally fictional but wholly sea-bound: the Kraken, a giant squid whose enormous tentacles dragged whole ships down to their watery graves.

I suspect it’s those tentacles that explain why the octopus became cartography’s favourite land monster. They turn the CLO into a perfect emblem of evil spreading across a map: its ugly head is the centre of a malevolent intelligence, which is manipulating its obscene appendages to bring death and destruction to its surroundings. This is perfect for demonstrating the geographic reach of an enemy state’s destructive potential. It can even be used on a more abstract level, showing dangerous ideologies insipidly infiltrating and/or strangling the world.

Gator: Why does the truth upset Liberals so much?

Hold the peas: Michelle O’s meal at the Shake Shack

Moonbat Tech: The Uglymobile

Fleece: Iran’s nuclear threat is escalating

theCL: Why Be Libertarian?

The Bitter Americans: Weekend Update

How Communism Works

Fleeing the Final Frontier

CH2.0: “I’m a Democrat” Parody…or is it?

Robot: Valour IT… Have You Made Your Donation Yet?

The Eye: Welcome to the first in an irregular feature of favorite commercials from the past.

WCW: Washington and Madison on Power 

United Nations: Going Green to Cost $76 Trillion – No Thanks

ChrisWy: Abandon all hope ye who enter Newark, NJ 

1942 Propaganda poster by the pro-German Vichy government in France

Hey, how about we actually discuss the DEBT?

MTTM: One Man With Courage Is A Majority

CoF: The Focus Should Be On The Debt and Not The Deficits 

Bunkerville: Indiana law will track users of some cold medicines in real time. 

Jen Kuznicki: Rangel Uses God For Political Gain 

TWN: Google Plus vs. Facebook Video Chat

WWTFT: America Is Exceptional, Not Objectionable

Government Spending Drains Life From The Economy

Obama, in March of 2009 called on governments of the G-20 to increase their stimulus spending. He even had one of his speech writers pen an Op-Ed, that ran in newspapers around the globe. Here is an excerpt:

Our leadership is grounded in a simple premise: We will act boldly to lift the American economy out of crisis and reform our regulatory structure, and these actions will be strengthened by complementary action abroad. Through our example, the United States can promote a global recovery and build confidence around the world; and if the London Summit helps galvanize collective action, we can forge a secure recovery, and future crises can be averted.

Our efforts must begin with swift action to stimulate growth. Already, the United States has passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act — the most dramatic effort to jump-start job creation and lay a foundation for growth in a generation.

Other members of the G-20 have pursued fiscal stimulus as well, and these efforts should be robust and sustained until demand is restored.

And the response? Germany’s Chancellor Merkel did not buy it:

During the hourlong interview, Mrs. Merkel made clear that she was not wavering in her response to the economic crisis, by loosening the German checkbook or encouraging the European Central Bank to follow the Federal Reserve in pumping money into the system.


“On an international level, we must all recognize that after the crisis we need to return again to solid financial policies,” Mrs. Merkel said. “Otherwise, we run the risk of already preparing the next crisis.”


Where long lines of unemployed people are the indelible image from the Great Depression in the United States, it is the wheelbarrows of worthless currency during the hyperinflation of the 1920s that preoccupies Germans. Mrs. Merkel has exerted discreet but stubborn leadership in Europe to prevent the kind of overspending that could lead to inflationary pressure on the euro.


It is not, she pointed out, simply a philosophical difference. Borrow and spend today, repay down the road, is a particularly difficult proposition for a country with a shrinking population, she said.

Czech premier Mirek Topolanek was a bit less diplomatic and called Obama’s plan a “road to hell” and didn’t back down:

Outgoing Czech premier Mirek Topolanek on Monday defended his description of US plans to use vast capital injections to boost growth as a “road to hell”, saying such measures would not work for Europe.

Writing in The Times, Topolanek said his comments to the European Parliament were a “legitimate warning” against the dangers that huge increases in public borrowing or the subsidising of banks and industries could become permanent.

Obama made his call for increased spending by G-20 governments in March of 2009. The G-20 did not follow Obama’s ‘leadership.’ And the results?

click for larger view

Germany, 6% unemployment. Former Soviet Union satellite, the Czech Republic, has an unemployment rate of around 7%. The poster children for government spending, Greece and Ireland have unemployment rates above 14%.

The United States has an ‘official’ unemployment rate of 9.1% and has been hovering there since 2009.

click for a larger view

Remember, the Democrats seized control over both houses of Congress in 2007 and government spending accelerated.

Saturday Morning Links: The Visions of our Future Edtion


I found these great Modern Mechanix and Popular Science magazine covers @  How to be a Retronaut:

Popular Science was first published in 1872, while the Mechanix titles first appeared in 1928.

A Mexican’s Thoughts on Immigration

The War on the Constitution

The Eye: Michele Bachmann’s History v. Barack Obama’s Geography

The man [George Stephanopolous] has gone from advising a president to asking Elmo if he wants a play date with Katy Perry. There is one Rhodes Scholarship that was not wasted, huh?

I couldn’t agree more.

T. Christopher @ RR takes a look at Thaddeus McCotter’s run for President.

Bunkerville: 2000 Years of History

CH 2.0: The Story of our Declaration of Independence

CoF: It’s High Time President Obama Began Earning His Paycheck and All Those Perks He Enjoys So Much

Fleece: When all else fails, imagine a conspiracy

MTTM: Michigan Freedom To Work Video

Some Thoughts on Human History, and Progressives

Deciphering Obama: He really can be both at the same time. Clueless and laser focused.

Robot and Gov’t Mule on a Friday night.

Gator: A tale of two states

WCW: On a national bank…

WWTFT: Thoughts on the Balanced Budget Amendment

WyBlog: Has Fred Upton seen the light?

The venerable 100 watt light bulb just might get a reprieve. Congressman Fred Upton (R-Mich.), Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is finally going to make good on his promise to hold hearings on repealing the idiotic incandescent bulb ban he championed in 2007.

Greek Lawmakers Approve Bill Amid Violent Protests Greek crisis brings us even closer to European empire

Are Some Conservatives Jumping On The Governance By Intellects Bandwagon?

I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.

William F. Buckley, Jr.

One of my daily political blog reads is Ace of Spades. I find myself agreeing with Ace much of the time. However, a couple of days ago, I ran across a post that Ace did about Sarah Palin and her supposed lack of ‘gravitas’ on things more intellectual.

This passage in particular bothered me:

A lot of Palin’s supporters blow this off and essentially offer an anti-intellect defense: Well that stuff doesn’t matter anyway.

Well, for some of us it does. And if Palin could put these questions to rest, but doesn’t, she’s alienating a lot of potential supporters. Some of us can’t just tell ourselves, “I don’t care about what’s in her head, I care about what’s in her heart” or some pablum like that.

So you tell me if it matters. I think it does. 90% of the Palin critics, skeptics, and now outright opponents find little fault with her policy portfolio, or her bio, or her cultural background, or her charisma. (Obviously on the latter.)

For 90% of us it’s this one thing.

So you tell me it doesn’t matter.

I don’t have to tell you it doesn’t matter, history will tell you that what matters. Looking at history, what matters most is core beliefs, principles and adherence to the ideals of limited government.

Take a look at Woodrow Wilson. In the late 1800′s they didn’t grant Ph.D’s like they do today. So, the fact that Woodrow Wilson earned a Ph.D. in history and political science in 1886, is quite an academic accomplishment. No one would doubt his intellect.

What did Wilson accomplish with his superior intellect during time in office? He created the League of Nations (the forerunner to the UN), the Federal Reserve and got us involved in WWI. He also backed a slew of legislation that put new controls on big business and supported unions. The repercussions of Woodrow Wilson’s superior intellect are still being felt today (and not in a good way).

Would any conservative vote for Woodrow Wilson today? He certainly had a lot going on in his head.

Looking at the other side of the coin, would conservatives support someone like Calvin Coolidge who had a solid conservative ideology:

Coolidge’s nickname was “Silent Cal.” He was known for his silence. He believed that the government should have as small a role as possible in the country. He believed that the country’s well-being was best preserved by allowing business to create wealth. His most famous remark was in a speech that he made in 1925 in which he stated: “The business of America is business.”

Wilson had Ph.D. from Princeton University and Coolidge graduated from Amherst College. I think its safe to say, Wilson was ‘smarter’ (in a strictly academic sense) than Calvin Coolidge. However, like most conservatives I would vote for Coolidge every time.

Looking at recent history, Ronald Reagan, who graduated from Eureka College, endured continuous mocking as not being too bright. However, he possessed a strong , conservative world view and ended up a fantastic President.

History demonstrates that it is more important that a President have a conservative world view rather than being perceived as an intellectual (i.e the what is in their heart pabulum Ace spoke of).

Since Reagan left office, we have been subjected to an unbroken string of Ivy League elites setting the tone for our nation. Look at this list: George H.W. Bush (Yale), the skirt chasing Bill Clinton (Georgetown, Oxford – Rhodes Scholar and Yale), George W. Bush (Yale and Harvard Business – MBA) and Obama (Occidental College, Columbia and Harvard Law School), all Ivy League intellects. With all this supposed intelligence and education at the top, is our nation better off? Do we have less government encroaching in our daily lives and work? Is our economy stronger?

The skirt chasing Rhodes Scholar gave us the housing bubble that helped crash our economy.

George Washington had a surveyor’s certificate from William & Mary College.*

*I know this is not the perfect example, since we know from Washington’s writings he was very intelligent. However, he is remembered and revered because of what was in his heart.

Going Green Without Thinking: Using 250 Acres Of Photovoltaic Cells To Power 50,000 Homes


The development of solar cell technology begins with the 1839 research of French physicist Antoine-César Becquerel. Becquerel observed the photovoltaic effect while experimenting with a solid electrode in an electrolyte solution when he saw a voltage develope when light fell upon the electrode.

Environmentalists are trying to save the planet with Victorian era technology. If photovoltaic technology isn’t sufficiently practical after 172 years of development (who would’t want free electricity) what will change in another 10 or 20 years making solar power practical?

Another example of the latest green energy pipe dream coming out of New York City is a 250 acre photovoltaic ‘farm’ that supporters claim will provide power to 50,000 homes. Only during the day. When the sun is shining.

Via the EPA’s very own Greenservation web site:

Under the city’s proposal, 250 of these acres would be leased to a private operator, who would install and run the plants. Although pricey at first, such an arrangement would be attractive to potential developers, since it would likely take just 10 years to recoup construction costs. If all goes as planned, the project could be enough to power as many as 50,000 homes.

………………………………….

Finally, solar energy would provide electricity to New Yorkers when we need it most — during the hot, sunny days of summer. Having lived through the 2003 blackout and the July 2006 Queens power outage, a plan to help keep the air conditioners running through the summer is a plan that gets my support.

Always take the claims of power to 50,000 homes with a grain of salt. Supporters of green energy are notorious for over promising and under delivering.

The idea of dedicating 250 acres of land to cover with photovoltaic cells is a waste of real estate (even if it is a covered land fill). For example, Zeeland Michigan has a natural gas ‘peaker’ power plant sitting on only 30 acres and powering a community of over 800,000 people. Day or night. Rain or shine.

What power source would you want to rely on a hot and humid August night to power your AC?

Music Vids: Peter Gunn Theme

Found this great traditional version of the Peter Gunn theme by Jeff Beck:

YouTube Preview Image

And this rocking version by Gary Hoey

YouTube Preview Image

Some facts about the Peter Gunn theme via (ironically) songfacts.com:

  • This was originally written by Henry Mancini for the TV series Peter Gunn. The show ran from 1958-1961, and used this song performed by Henry Mancini And His Orchestra as its theme. Many artists have since interpreted the theme, with Eddy’s version being the most famous.
  • Eddy produced his signature ‘twang’ sound by means of a Gretsch 6120 with a Bigsby vibrato tailpiece through a 100-watt amp-and a steel water tank for reverb.
  • In 1986 the British techno-pop trio The Art Of Noise covered this with Eddy guesting on guitar. It was a Top 10 hit around the world, peaking at #8 in the UK and won the 1986 Grammy Award for Best Rock Instrumental Performance. It also gave Eddy the distinction of being the only instrumentalist to have had Top 10 hit singles in 4 different decades in the UK.
  • Eddy recalled to Mojo magazine November 2010 why he decided to cover this song: “We were doing the second album, Especially For You. (Saxophonist) Steve Douglas said, ‘Duane, I learnt Peter Gunn last night.’ I said, ‘Well, that’s nice.’ He thought it’d just be good as an album cut but I didn’t think so. So we forgot about it and we got 11 or 12 songs done. Lee and me were sitting there discussing what we could do and Steve wandered over and said, ‘We could do Peter Gunn.’ I thought, ‘What the heck! It’s only an album cut.’ So we figured out the intro, then the riff, and we cut it. It became a single because somebody in Australia in the record company took it from the album and it got to #3. Somebody in England noticed that so they released it as a single. It got to the top of the charts. Finally, Jamie noticed this and said, ‘Maybe we should make this a single in the US.’ So that’s how Peter Gunn came to be.”

The Long Shadow Of The Progressives: Looking Backward

Does this sound familiar?

The year 2011 marks the 123rd year since the publication of Edward Bellamy’s famous utopian novel, Looking Backward, in which the author depicted a happy, socialist America in the year 2000. In Bellamy’s optimistic fantasy, greed and material want ceased to exist, brotherly harmony prevailed, the arts and sciences flourished, and an all-powerful and pervasive government and bureaucracy were efficient and fair.


Bellamy envisaged America becoming socialist by way of consensus rather than revolution. In turn, Dewey, who spent his professional life trying to transform Bellamy’s vision into American reality, saw education as the principle means by which this transformation could be achieved. He spent the years 1894 to 1904 at the University of Chicago in his Laboratory School seeking to devise a new curriculum for the public schools that would produce the kind of socialized youngsters who would bring about the new socialist millenium.

The result, of course, is the education we have today — a minimal interest in the development of intellectual, scientific, and literacy skills and a maximal effort to produce socialized, politically correct, individuals who can barely read.

Today, many years later, the University of Chicago stands as an island of academic tranquility in Chicago’s Southside, surrounded by a sea of social and urban devastation caused by the philosophical emanations from Dewey’s laboratory and other departments. Charles Judd, the university’s Wundtian professor of educational psychology, labored mightily to organize the radical reform of the public school curriculum to conform with Dewey’s socialist plan.

According to Dewey, the philosophical underpinning of capitalism is individualism sustained by an education that stressed the development of literacy skills. High literacy encourages intellectual independence which produces strong individualism. It was Dewey’s exhaustive analysis of individualism that led him to believe that the socialized individual could only be produced by first getting rid of the traditional emphasis on language and literacy in the primary grades and turning the children toward socialized activities and behavior.

Be sure to read the rest.

Did Total Employment Move Sideways Over The Last Decade?

One of my favorite economic web sites, Calculated Risk, posted this a few days ago:

There are currently 130.738 million payroll jobs in the U.S. (as of March 2011). There were 130.781 million payroll jobs in January 2000. So that is over eleven years with no increase in total payroll jobs.

And the median household income in constant dollars was $49,777 in 2009. That is barely above the $49,309 in 1997, and below the $51,100 in 1998. (Census data here in Excel).

Just a reminder that many Americans have been struggling for a decade or more. The aughts were a lost decade for most Americans.

While on the surface it is true there are roughly 130 million jobs in March 2011, just as there were in January 2000. However, these numbers don’t tell the entire story.

click for a larger version

Looking at a graph (frequent visitors to MCT, you know how I like graphs) of employment data from the BLS, you will notice that the US economy added just over 5 million jobs between January 2001 and January 2008. Not too bad.

The real story is how the solid labor market growth experienced between 2003 and 2008 was extinguished once liberal Democrats seized power January 3rd, 2007.

Furthermore, the economic meltdown accelerated when the smart money moved away from equities late 2008. They saw the writing on the wall once it became apparent the liberals were going to expand their power and reach in 2009.

Looking at the BLS graph again, didn’t peak employment occur in 2008?