Category Archives: Progressives

You can almost hear Art Laffer saying “I told you so”

Posted on by
1

After 67% tax increase, Illinois continues to be in a precarious fiscal position.

Topinka says this is extremely disappointing, since a year ago, the state sharply increased income taxes (by 67 percent) and corporate taxes.

“After the largest tax hike in our history, the state continues to be in this precarious fiscal position with persistent payment delays, and frankly, the situation is unlikely to significantly improve in the near term,” she said.

You can almost hear Art Laffer saying “I told you so.”

Obama rejects Keystone XL pipeline and economic growth

Posted on by
2

If anyone needed further proof Obama wants to strangle our economy to create even more dependency, his killing of the Keystone XL pipeline is it.

“The rushed and arbitrary deadline insisted on by Congressional Republicans prevented a full assessment of the pipeline’s impact, especially the health and safety of the American people, as well as our environment,” Obama said.

“As a result, the secretary of state has recommended that the application be denied. And after reviewing the State Department’s report, I agree.”

This is complete BS.

Rather than send the oil from Canada via pipeline to us here in the states, Canada will send oil via pipeline to the Pacific, load the oil onto tankers and ship it overseas to China. How is this protecting ‘the environment?’ All this will accomplish is keeping energy prices high, unemployment high, and in turn, keep the economy depressed.

Remember what they said in Pravda:

Energy is the key stone to any and every economy, be it man power, animal power, wood or coal or nuclear. How else does one power industry that makes human life better (unless of course its making the bombs that end that human life, but that’s a different topic). Never in history, with the exception of the Japanese self imposed isolation in the 1600s, did a government actively force its people away from economic activity and industry.

Even the Soviets never created such idiocy.

And only wealthy countries can afford to worry about ‘the environment.’

Even China is losing Manufacturing Jobs

Posted on by
4

According to economist at ASI, mass employment in factory’s is going the way of the horse and buggy:

It’s a consitent trope from those over on the mouth breathing left, that everything would just be better if we did more manufacturing in the UK. More specifically, that if we just had more manufacturing then everyone would be employed. Which would be so nice, wouldn’t it?

The problem with this is that mass employment in manufacturing just isn’t coming back. Ever.

Manufacturing output in the UK kept going up until 2005 or so (with variations for recessions, to be sure). Manufacturing output in the US is still going up and I don’t think anyone needs to be reminded that manufacturing output in China is rising. However, rising output does not mean more jobs. Not necessarily at least.

Not only are increases in productivity curbing growth within the manufacturing sector. As pointed out last may here at MCT, manufacturing as a percentage of the US and global GDP has steadily declined over the last 40+ years.

As a result, even China has lost manufacturing jobs

Yes, China is losing manufacturing jobs. The world as a whole is losing manufacturing jobs. The cause is exactly the same thing that led to the loss of agricultural jobs 80 to 90 years ago: increasing productivity in that activity.

Remember this the next time a politician rants about ‘creating more manufacturing jobs here in the US.’ Because, the only way this will happen is if the government creates subsidized works projects. Like Solyndra.

World Economic Forum cite “Severe income inequality” as largest global risk

Posted on by
2

The Global Risks 2012 report should warm the heart of Democrats, #OWS losers and your typical socialist here in the states:

“Severe income inequality” is the biggest global risk, according to a panel of experts assembled by the World Economic Forum.

The group points to “chronic government debt” as another problem threatening the world during the next 10 years.

The report also worries about “the dark side of connectivity” with its threat of “devastating cyber-attacks”.

Global warming, failure of regulation and population growth are identified as three other top risks.

Of course, the response to these so called threats (global warming? really?) will be a call for higher taxes and more government intervention and regulation of the economy.

The report issues a stark warning that many of the safeguards put into place just are not good enough to cope with risk.

“We have to avoid using yesterday’s solutions to address today’s risks,” warned David Cole, chief risk officer of re-insurance giant Swiss Re. The aftermath of the Japanese tsunami, for example, had shown how past policies and institutions could fail to protect people in a more complex and interdependent world.

“We’ve seen examples of over-regulation, like the response to the Icelandic volcanic eruptions, or under-regulation, such as the sub-prime or eurozone crisis,” Mr Cole said.

Safeguards should be “anticipatory rather than reactive” and regulations should be “made more flexible to effectively respond to change”.

“Anticipatory safeguards.” How nanny state can you get?

Remember, Europe’s bad ideas always seem to find there way over here sooner rather than later.

Drive as if every other driver is drunk, mad or incompetent. Or all three

Posted on by
Reply

Do drivers licences make us safer?

Via my favorite economic writer:

Exploiting an interesting natural experiment, the authors of that paper are able to show that we should abolish driving licences. The various States of Mexico found that bribery was impossible to avoid when attempting to gain a licence. So, to varying degrees, they changed their issuance system, some deciding simply not to have them any more. So, of course, death rates from car accidents went up, didn’t they?

Erm, actually, no, they didn’t. Those places that didn’t bother with licences any more, allowing absolutely anyone at all to get in and drive, saw no change in such death rates any different from those that had now (well, hopefully) incorruptible issuance systems.

Yes, the death rate on Mexican roads is indeed appalling: but it’s no worse in those areas that demand licences than it is in those that don’t nor vice versa. Thus drivers’ licences are not needed and we can abolish them.

You could almost call this a reverse Peltzman Effect, where removing regulation makes people more cautious in their behavior.

The basic lesson of driving is always to drive as if every other driver is drunk, mad or incompetent. Or all three. And as it turns out, when we really do recall this because no one has to take a test then we do adjust our driving habits to take account of their madness or incompetence.

Too true.

Who does Treehugger.com think they are kidding?

Posted on by
Reply

The Treehugger web site is one of my regular stops on the web. It is an endless source of material to illustrate the foolishness of the radical environmental movement.

Being a frequent reader of Treehuugger, I’m used to the slant and spin they put on stories. However, when I saw this story, my jaw dropped.

Lights out in Michigan.

 
City officials are taking bold money-saving steps. Highland Park MI is cutting off and hauling away three quarters of its street lights: see Darker Nights as Some Cities Turn Off the Lights, a story published by New York Times.

Who does Treehugger think they are kidding? Highland Park (a very liberal city near Detroit) doesn’t care about the environmental aspect of removing lights. the truth of the matter is highland Park can’t afford to pay their electric bills, and the utility cut a deal with the city to reduce their $4 million unpaid electric bill:

Crews have removed about 1,400 streetlight poles from Highland Park as part of a settlement that allowed the impoverished Detroit enclave to avoid paying $4 million in unpaid bills going back several years.

DTE Energy Co. has replaced about 200 lights with newer models on street corners, but most neighborhoods remain without streetlights, The Detroit News reported today. The Detroit-based utility said work is expected to be finished by Oct. 31.

DTE spokesman Len Singer said the utility began removing light poles in August rather than just cutting off the power, to avoid lawsuits and confusion. The utility is under no obligation to power communities that don’t pay their bills but wanted to maintain some service, he said.

Yep, the evil power company has been working to help Highland Park resolve its problem for years.

Sydney under siege from heavily armed robbers terrorising shopkeepers, pub staff and residents

Posted on by
2

It doesn’t matter if you’re robbed by a man with a hammer, knife, meat cleaver, machete, ax, sawed-off shotgun or hand gun if you are un-armed. You are a victim.

Via The Truth About Guns:

Welcome to Australian gun politics, courtesy the hive mind at wikipedia: “Self-defense is not accepted as a reason for issuing a [gun] licence, even though it may be legal under certain circumstances to use a legally held firearm for self-defense.” The chances of having a legal gun around the place with which to defend yourself? “Currently, about 5.2% of Australian adults (765,000 people) own and use firearms for purposes such as hunting, controlling feral animals, collecting, and target shooting.” So not very high then. Infinitesimal in urban areas. Where the crime is. Duh. Clock this from the scribes at dailytelegraph.com.au: “SYDNEY is under siege from gangs of heavily armed robbers terrorising shopkeepers, pub staff and residents . . .

Meat cleavers, machetes, sawn-off shotguns and axes are among the weapons used in recent weeks as thugs smashed their way into so-called “soft targets” – mostly service stations, bottle shops and licensed premises – demanding cash, wallets, jewellery and mobile phones.

Details of more than 50 of the most violent incidents have been released by police this month.

However they are just the tip of the iceberg, with as many as a dozen more reported every 24 hours according to logs of the police encrypted radio network . . .

The surge in the number of hold-ups is a major concern for police because it bucks a downward trend that has seen the lowest rates for armed robbery in years.

Also alarming is the increase in gangs and lone bandits hitting multiple targets in a single night.

The above is the result of the Liberal dream of fewer guns in the hands of law abiding citizens, thanks to Australia’s aggressive firearm buy back program started in 1996.

An extensive study was performed by the British Journal of Criminology in 2006 and measured the effectiveness of the program after a decade had passed.

Via the Sydney Morning Herald:

HALF a billion dollars spent buying back hundreds of thousands of guns after the Port Arthur massacre had no effect on the homicide rate, says a study published in an influential British journal.

The report by two Australian academics, published in the British Journal of Criminology, said statistics gathered in the decade since Port Arthur showed gun deaths had been declining well before 1996 and the buyback of more than 600,000 mainly semi-automatic rifles and pump-action shotguns had made no difference in the rate of decline.

The buy back program had no effect.

“Homicide patterns (firearm and non-firearm) were not influenced by the NFA, the conclusion being that the gun buyback and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia,” the study says.

In his first year in office, the Prime Minister, John Howard, forced through some of the world’s toughest gun laws, including the national buyback scheme, after Martin Bryant used semi-automatic rifles to shoot dead 35 people at Port Arthur.

Although furious licensed gun-owners said the laws would have no impact because criminals would not hand in their guns, Mr Howard and others predicted the removal of so many guns from the community, and new laws making it harder to buy and keep guns, would lead to a reduction in all types of gun-related deaths.

One of the authors of the study, Jeanine Baker, said she knew in 1996 it would be impossible for years to know whether the Prime Minister or the shooters were right.

“I have been collecting data since 1996 … The decision was we would wait for a decade and then evaluate,” she said.

The findings were clear, she said: “The policy has made no difference. There was a trend of declining deaths that has continued.”

Flash forward to 2011 and continue with the TTAG story .

Via The Telegraph.au:

Four men armed with knives, machetes and pool cues are wanted over the robbery of a hotel at Taree West on Wednesday in which a 54-year-old employee was assaulted and locked with two patrons in a store room as assailants ransacked cash registers.

In two separate incidents last week, knife-wielding men robbed a convenience store at Griffith and a Bulahdelah service station, while at Berkeley in the Illawarra two men threatened a shopping centre security guard with meat cleavers before escaping with money and cigarettes.

Again, if you are un-armed, it doesn’t matter if the man robbing you has a pool cue or a machete. You are at a distinct disadvantage and a victim.

Of course, the Sydney police have what they think is helpful advice.

It comes as police urged shop keepers, hotel staff and the public caught in the middle of a hold-up to do whatever the assailants asked – not to be a hero and not to make sudden movements.

Don’t make any sudden movements. Got it.

To replace coal in 2020 Britain would burn 60m tons of wood (biomass) 5X the timber they could produce

Posted on by
Reply

Radical environmentalists are still spinning their wheels trying to solve global warming (a problem that is nonexistent) with so-called solutions that produce less power and destroy the environment in the process.  Ironic, since they are environmentalists and their goal is to protect the environment.

All the bad green ideas begin in Europe and work their here and the next push (after solar and wind power) to come from Europe is Biomass.

Via the ASI blog:

It is really quite marvellous how all of these various things we’re supposed to be doing to save the planet are exactly the things we used to do which damaged the planet so badly. As Matt Ridley points out when talking about what we’re supposed to do to keep warm when we can’t burn coal or oil:

To replace coal, the government projects that by 2020 Britain will be generating electricity from burning up to 60m tonnes of biomass, mainly wood, about five times the timber harvest that Britain could conceivably produce.

Now “five times the harvest we could possibly produce” means that we would be over using that resouce. Denuding these islands of trees in fact. Which is what we actually did do all those centuries ago and what impelled us to go and conquer a quarter of the world in order to gain resources (no, really, we did things like go to war against Denmark so that we could have access to the Baltic timber to replace what we’d burnt) and also to start digging up coal in the first place.

Because there was no wood left, see?

Boneheads.

Interesting Graphs: Unemployment in The Obama Era

Posted on by
4

First up is the now famous projected unemployment rate with and without stimulus legislation / spending graph with actual results plotted.

While this is damming to the liberal spending agenda on its own, it doesn’t tell the entire underemployment story.

Via American Enterprise Blog:

The real unemployment rate. The official (U-3) unemployment rate is 8.6 percent. But the labor force has been shrinking as discouraged workers have been disappeared by government statisticians rather than counted as unemployed. But what if they weren’t? What if the Labor Department added those folks back into the numbers? 

You get this:

So much for Liberal economic policies.

h/t Instapundit.