Continuation of thread …

I enjoy both “Blackflag” and “rightsaidfred” – they are the types who eventually make their own blogs and join the futility frivolity.

This post is a continuation of a debate down below which went so far down the page that it got annoying to have to scroll down.

Black Flag: If private power is more powerful than government, why do they need government?

MT: Access to the commons, freedom from regulation and taxation.

Black Flag: So, to you private power is a set that includes
(1) those that resist theft; (2) those that initiation violence.

You can’t differentiate more clearly?

Power grows naturally where there are human interactions. Because of our various makeups, each of us tends to specialize and do those things that please us. But there is a small percentage of us for whom that self-pleasing involves collection of wealth and domination of others. These are our sociopaths – the barons of industry, the Mafia dons. They preside over a system of domination – you might call it choice, but the drug runner at the bottom of the pipeline doesn’t have much choice. He merely carves out space for himself to exist in the system.

This is natural and necessary to a degree, as we cannot accomplish large projects without large organizations. So we need an Exxon to supply our oil. But we do not need Exxon to dominate our climate change debate. Wal-Mart comes into being by slim-lining retailing practices, but we should not allow Wal-Mart to set labor standards or trade policies.

To overcome these natural concentrations of power, we need democratic input – that is, each system of domination must be voluntary and must justify itself. But there is no power in the land strong enough to overcome power once it has grown so concentrated as Wal-Mart of Exxon. We need a government that is more powerful than those entities.

Black Flag: So what do these entities exhibit that makes you include them into your definition?

They are victorious in the marketplace, and in an odd corruption of Darwin, should therefore be allowed to prosper unimpeded, or so goes the unspoken logic. In fact, such growth and concentration of wealth and power is a threat to democracy, and needs to be subordinated to democratic governance.

rightsaidfred: I fear that adding a comment to this long and winding thread would be aiding the commission of a crime. That is what underlies climate change denial – fear that growth cannot be unlimited. I haven’t heard anyone claim that growth can be unlimited. Some on the Left want to actively discourage growth, and if we cede too much of the debate, they will pull out their Kim Jong Il playbook and have us all sitting in the dark.

A pox on both houses, and on with real life. (It kind of scares me when you start claiming to have a handle on real life.)

The Kim Jong comment is illustrative of the Randian world-view. Ms. Rand came from Bolshevik Russia, and witnessed the brutal aftermath of that revolution where the desire to be free of monarchy led to oppression by a different set of rulers. She naturally concluded from that that the struggle for human freedom was against government oppression and for the private self.

However, the Western experience has been quite different. Democratic governments, such as they are, tend to be reined in at various stages when they become excessive. The key is that there is a mechanism in place for popular will to be translated into public policy.

However, in a Randian world, the state ceases to interfere with the sociopaths who naturally set about centralizing power and dominating others. So her rules naturally lead us to a different kind of oppression, where we live under the thumbs of social misfits, such as John Galt. In such a system, there is no mechanism to overcome the oppression other than voluntary organizations such as vigilantes or informal unions. Violence is the only effective counter force.

rightsaidfred: Interesting, but I don’t know too many governments that stand down from their relentless interference.

You perhaps missed, then, the last twenty years of the twentieth century?

rigthsaidfred: I will agree there is a “winner take all” component to some aspects of economic life. He with the best operating system gets to install it on all new computers… I’m a bit more concerned about the increased economic power flowing through the few hands in Washington DC. Obama increased the fed budget from a bloated $2.6 trillion to $3.9 trillion. Who’s going to save us from that?

The numbers are indeed daunting, but the entire issue is much more so. The economy spun out of control due to failure of government to regulate business practices and to tax at a high enough rate to remove excess capital from the markets. In addition, we have virtually destroyed our manufacturing base, transferring it to China, so there is not much in the way of physical investment opportunities here in the land of the free.

It’s all kind of a perfect storm. Obama is now carrying out the will of the sociopaths by helping them rebuild the palace that fell.

I sense in your comment that aged nonsense about there being meaningful differences between Democrats and Republicans. In fact, due to changes in policies initiated after the election of Reagan in 1980, wealth has naturally concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, and democratic governance has effectively been thwarted. We now live in what Citibank referred to in a private memo as a “plutonomy“. So criticism of Obama is fine, but do understand that he is but a player in a theatrical system where various actors take turns playing the lead role.

rightsaidfred: …if we controlled our border to keep out illegal immigrants, we would have a labor shortage of blue collar workers and thus higher wages. The wage stagnation of this class in the US leads directly from the entry of unskilled immigrants. Why push for unions, which is an expensive and long term unsuccessful way to raise wages, when border control offers a more natural way to raise wages?

Exactly the point. We do not enforce border control mechanism because unregulated concentrated power wants those borders left open too allow them to avoid labor laws.

Miss South Carolina writes a book

I knew it was in the works – friends said she had been burning the midnight oil, that drafts had gone back and forth between her and the publisher. There were writes and rewrites, arguments over tone and content, and especially about her writing style – she claims to be subconsciously derivative of Hannah Arendt but the publisher wanted something fresh, more in the Sarah Palin style.

Anyway, it finally hit the shelves. I got mine today.

(Forward by Sean Hannity!)

Adventures in free markets

Two things caught my eye in today’s Denver Post:

One, a front page headline about how area libraries are in financial bind, and how they are ignoring “millions of dollars in tantalizing revenue” by not going after past-due fines.

I have a free market solution: run the libraries like a credit card company. When someone has an overdue book, don’t just charge a small fine. Charge a large fine – $25-$50. When the big fines go unpaid, impose even more fines on the fines. Charge 29% interest. When politicians complain that you are abusing their constituents, bribe them. And then send out the dogs – the collection agencies. They will set up repayment schedules that will assure a nice revenue stream for the libraries. What started out as a pittance ends up as a very large financial obligation.

Let the moneychangers show you how to run a temple.

The other article was an op-ed by the mayors of Boulder, Golden, Superior, and a Boulder County Commissioner, “A better highway, not a new toll road.” Toll roads are the private market’s answer to the problem of paying for roads – those who use them pay for them. It makes sense until one realizes that the benefits of good infrastructure are so widespread that its various elements ought too be a public burden … taxes.

There is a lot of economic activity going on the the foothills of Denver/Golden/Boulder, and the area is served by a hodgepodge of linked arteries in various stages of development. A toll road through the area would naturally force drivers to seek alternative routes. So the people who are proposing the toll road want to lower speed limits on alternative routes to ‘encourage’ drivers to use their toll road. In addition, they figure that many people will move over to Highway 93, an alternative route, increasing road wear and congestion there. They offer no remedy for that problem.

That’s private market logic in a nutshell: Force people to use your product and pay your freight, and refuse to pay for externalities.

Which reminds me of another adventure in free markets – there is a toll road between Denver and Denver International Airport, a very nice road and usually uncrowded because there is a non-toll alternative. In order to speed things up a bit, the managers of the road went to electronic enforcement of the tolls. They take your picture at various points, and send you a bill. It is a great idea.

However, there is a problem with rental cars, common on an airport route. The toll road people send a bill to the rental car agencies, who should simply pass it on to their customers.

Enter the free market – the rental car agencies saw a pivot point for a new revenue stream, and decided to impose additional fees on customers who used toll roads – usually in the area of $8.95 a day in addition to the tolls. Further, for those customers who don’t read the fine print, who don’t agree to the $8.95 fee and then use toll roads, are fined as much as $25 a day in addition to the tolls. So now a $100 car rental deal costs people $250-$300. Care to complain? They sort of have you by the balls, which is where any sociopathic business person strives and plots, day and night, to grab us.

Real competition would mean that one company would see the light, and treat tolls as a mere pass-through cost. But what we learn is that there are not so many rental car agencies as appears – there are but two or three and they go by many names. These two or three companies naturally revert to monopoly behavior, and have all agreed to go by the same rules and not undercut or underprice one another.

It is a microcosm of the the vaunted “free market”. Companies hate competition, and buy each other up to avoid it. Then they masquerade as competitors, fix prices, and agree to play by the same rules.

Which reminds me of another adventure. The American market for cell phones is in a primitive state compared to other countries. The companies that operate here all have the same business plan – they want a revenue stream and therefore demand that you use a phone they supply without any innovations by outsiders. They tie these phones to two-year contracts. It is just like Internet service, where the U.S. is behind the rest of the world because large companies are more interested in divvying up the market to protect revenue streams rather than innovate.

I was thinking about an IPhone, but found that the monthly cost was too high and allotment of monthly minutes too small – $69.99 is the advertised price, but there is also a $30 “data” charge, meaning they want $100 a month to rent their phone. That is their business plan – they want $100 a month from you, and no matter how you slice it, if you want their product, it is $100 per month.

I looked at a new product offered through Verizon called the “Droid” – basically an IPhone with a manual keyboard. Verizon advertised the product for $149.99 with a two year contract, and $59.99 per month for usage. I looked through the website for a data charge, and it was not there. This, I thought, is a viable alternative to the IPhone – we could have one portable phone/internet device for the same price that we currently pay for two cell phones.

We went to the Verizon store yesterday, and here is what we learned: The phone costs $259.99 with a two year contract, and the monthly charge is $69.99, and there is a $30 data charge. The monthly cost is ……. $100. Just like Apple. Same product, same price. “Competition” is fiction as companies hire various ad agencies to differentiate their identical products in the minds of users.

Anyway, when we left Verizon, we had turned off one of our cell phones. We are now $25 per month richer.

Thus endeth today’s lesson in the wonders of the free market.

To the good life!

I am thankful for little people. I don’t know who they are, but they make my shoes and clothing, carry away my garbage, and, I am told, even go down in the sewers to make sure that it all flows smoothly. I really, really appreciate them.

I am a member of the Democratic, or “left” side of the two ruling collectives here in our great Republic. We are the ones who really care about little people. We are better people than the Republicans, who abuse them. We of the Democratic collective know more about little people, which is why they support us when we put our leaders before them for the biennial voting ritual.

We care. For instance, we want to keep them educated in the means of social advancement by giving them the necessary education to survive in today’s world. Where once the tools of the important occupations were the broom and shovel, pipe wrench and dolly, today they are the cash register and scanner. Oh yeah – and that thing that makes my lattes – you know – the steam shooter? (?)

Here’s a humorous story: This happened down in New Mexico recently. There is a chain store known as “The Wal-Mart” (NYSE: WMT) where little people shop for Chinese goods, and where other little people perform various important functions. One of the functions is to gather shopping carts from the parking lot and return them to the entrance. They use a machine that pushes them from behind while a little person walks in front guiding them.

Anyway, I suppose you’d have to see the store video to appreciate the humor, but one of these little people got on the cart-pushing machine and tried to escape. He was a portly McDonalds-fed specimen, and was easily run down by another portly specimen, a “security guard”, as The Wal-Mart labels them. Imagine the scene as one blubberous specimen overtook the other!

When interrogated, the escapee claimed to be disappointed at having aspirations of “a better life” where he would be “rewarded” for his “hard work”. It was a clear case of EV, or expectation virus. He was not a breeder, so there were no offspring. The store management euthanized him.

Sidenote: Remember when Roman slaves were executed, and their heads placed on stakes to line the road into the city? How far we have come since those brutal days!

Anyway, EV does pop up now and then, but is largely under control. When brought home from the war of the 1940’s (the one where everybody had to fight, there being a real enemy and all), returning veterans collectively decided they were entitled to a “better life”, as the traitor Roosevelt put it.

The virus was rampant during the fifties and sixties until antidotes were found, and is pretty much wiped out now. The antiviral drug known as “Proctoutsource” was very effective, as was Neo_Nafta and of course, the aged but effective “Rightowork”, still sold over the counter. Non-infected Mexican species of lp’s are also replacing those strains where the virus occasionally exhibits in a latent strain.

Things have settled down, and the breeding stock is kept functional for the productive years in a corn-fed state with heavy doses of television. Tobacco people do a good job of spreading the smoking habit, so that many of them die shortly after their productive years end. And reading, that awful two-edged sword that both infects and inoculates, has been brought under control.

During the height of the pandemic, little people had infiltrated the information delivery system with images of death in one of the foreign conflicts. It wasn’t well understood then, but apparently these images inflamed passions. The TV has been retaken by the ruling parties, and the threat is eliminated. The indoctrination system is working well.

Life is good. The masses are calm, EV under control. Education throws a wet blanket on the land of the free. You can see it in faces … blank stares, passions let free only at sporting events or during election cycles, when the “voting” ritual allows for a grand staging of their “freedom”. (Best damned control word ever invented, IMHO.) Dangerous energies are well under control.

All is well. Let’s be thankful for the little people, but even more so for those great minds among us who have tamed them, removed the threats to our way of life, and made the holidays a time when we can really toast one another with sincere gratitude.

To the good life!

Our fecally challenged republic

I watched a movie made years ago, Gardens of Stone, starring James Earl Jones, James Caan, Angelica Huston, and directed by Francis Ford Coppola. It was a serious movie and well done, with unresolved differences over the Vietnam War exposed and fleshed out a bit. The “Gardens” are, of course, military cemeteries.

I carry one lasting memory from the movie (two, actually, the other having to do with “asexual reproduction”). In the following scene. Sgt, ‘Goody’ Nelson and Jackie Willow, a recruit who wants to go to Vietnam, are at a bar.

Goody: It’s a funny little war, kid. Things have changed.

Willow: Like what?

Goody: Well, to begin with…the peace-loving Vietnamese – if I hear that again, I’ll puke. They’re bellicose. They’ve fought for a thousand years, and they like it.

Willow: Damn right.

Coppola, no stranger to irony, surely knew the absurdity of these words. These were men devoid of self-awareness.

Muslims are a very clean people, and a peaceful people by any standards. They fight their turf wars, they have criminals and rigid religious constructs and extremists, just like us. Many Americans have now done a ‘Goody’ on them, branding them a violent people who give us no choice but to rain hell on them.

Muslims, when they defecate, are advised by the Qur’an to be fastidious, to clean the anal area with water and the hands thereafter to avoid any contamination of other people or food.

Americans wipe the anal area with paper, spreading the fecal matter about, and leaving it to fester until their next shower. Dr. D.A. Cameron surveyed the underpants of 940 Englishmen, and found contamination ranging from colored stains to “frank massive feces”. He was disillusioned of them that “a high proportion of the population are prepared to cry aloud about footling matters of uncleanliness such as tomato sauce on a restaurant tablecloth, whilst they luxuriate on a plush seat in their fecally stained pants.”

I can think of no better image of the Americans who are currently slaughtering Muslims in our latest holy wars.

A dissident voice speaks … somewhere else, of course

Vodpod videos no longer available.

I have very little insight on why we invaded Afghanistan, and await some inspiring insight from some foreign source down the road, long after the goals have been achieved. Meanwhile, in true post-Vietnam fashion, the details are being withheld from the American public, and we are shielded by close control of imagery. If we don’t see pictures, we do not comprehend the violence that we are raining down on those people. We do, of course, hear abut our own trials and travails and casualties. The bastards!

The debate is framed as “should we send more troops” or not. The real alternative, getting out, is not given hearing here in the land of the free.

The above interview aired in Great Britain.

Right wing Christians take credit for Jewish accomplishments

The following viral email has something unusual going on in it – it contains truth. It is about Jewish accomplishments in science, economics and literature – they are far disproportionate to their relative numbers in the human population. Of course, the base goal of the email is to degrade Muslims, and the origin is probably in the basement of some stupid right wing Christian.

I answered this email as follows:

Since this is one of those annoying viral emails, it doesn’t deserve a lot of attention. I will only tell you that you are on the precipice of important information. The Jewish culture has indeed produced scholars, artists and scientists far out of proporttion to their numbers. Some have traced the origins of this phenomenon back to the Ashkenazi Jews of northern and central Europe. But it is much more complicated than that, and further research would be warranted on your part.

Just a few observations:

One, Jewish accomplishments far exceed those of all gentiles, not just Muslims. I don’t know what the point is here.

Two, Jewish people, very, very intellectually accomplished, don’t believe in Jesus. Maybe you should rethink your position on that.

Third, and not unrelated, there are very few Jewish Cy Young Award winners. I can only think of one: Sandy Koufax. There are no Jewish linemen in the NFL.

And finally, there are about 13 million Jews in the world today, yet your Revelations tells us that only 144,000 will survive – 12,000 each from the twelve tribes. Your Jesus is going to slaughter all the rest.

What’s up with that?

Very interesting article here, by Charles Murray.

—————

Here’s the email making the rounds:

How could the picture be ‘painted’ any more vividly? The Global Islamic population is approximately 1,200,000,000ONE BILLION TWO HUNDRED MILLION or 20% of the world’s population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes:

Literature:
1988 – Najib Mahfooz

Peace:
1978 – Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat
1990 – Elias James Corey
1994 – Yaser Arafat:
1999 – Ahmed Zewai

Economics:
Physics:
Medicine:
1960 – Peter Brian Medawar
1998 – Ferid Mourad

TOTAL: 7 SEVEN

The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000. Only FOURTEEN MILLION or about 0.02% of the world’s population.

They have received the following Nobel Prizes:

Literature:
1910 – Paul Heyse
1927 – Henri Bergson
1958 – Boris Pasternak
1966 – Shmuel Yosef Agno
1966 – Nelly Sachs
1976 – Saul Bellow
1978 – Isaac Bashevis Singer
1981 – Elias Canetti
1987 – Joseph Brodsky
1991 – Nadine Gordimer World

Peace:
1911 – Alfred Fried
1911 – Tobias Michael Carel Asser
1968 – Rene Cassin
1973 – Henry Kissinger
1978 – Menachem Begin
1986 – Elie Wiesel
1994 – Shimon Peres
1994 – Yitzhak Rabin

Physics:
1905 – Adolph Von Baeyer
1906 – Henri Moissan
1907 – Albert Abraham Michelson
1908 – Gabriel Lippmann
1910 – Otto Wallach
1915 – Richard Willstaetter
1918 – Fritz Haber
1921 – Albert Einstein
1922 – Niels Bohr
1925 – James Franck
1925 – Gustav Hertz
1943 – Gustav Stern
1943 – George Charles de Hevesy
1944 – Isidor Issac Rabi
1952 – Felix Bloch
1954 – Max Born
1958 – Igor Tamm
1959 – Emilio Segre
1960 – Donald A. Glaser
1961 – Robert Hofstadter
1961 – Melvin Calvin
196 2 – Lev Davidovich Landau
1962 – Max Ferdinand Perutz
1965 – Richard Phillips Feynman
1965 – Julian Schwinger
1969 – Murray Gell-Mann
1971 – Dennis Gabor
1972 – William Howard Stein
1973 – Brian David Josephson
1975 – Benjamin Mottleson
1976 – Burton Richter
1977 – Ilya Prigogine
1978 – Arno Allan Penzias
1978 – P eter L Kapitza
1979 – Stephen Weinberg
1979 – Sheldon Glashow
1979 – Herbert Charles Brown
1980 – Paul Berg
1980 – Walter Gilbert
1981 – Roald Hoffmann
1982 – Aaron Klug
1985 – Albert A. Hauptman
1985 – Jerome Karle
1986 – Dudley R. Herschbach
1988 – Robert Huber
1988 – Leon Lederman
1988 – Melvin Schwartz
1988 – Jack Steinberger
1989 – Sidney Altman
1990 – Jerome Friedman
1992 – Rudolph Marcus
1995 – Martin Perl
2000 – Alan J. Heeger

Economics:
1970 – Paul Anthony Samuelson
1971 – Simon Kuznets
1972 – Kenneth Joseph Arrow
1975 – Leonid Kantorovich
1976 – Milton Friedman
1978 – Herbert A. Simon
1980 – Lawrence Robert Klein
1985 – Franco Modigliani
1987 – Robert M. Solow
1990 – Harry Markowitz
1990 – Merton Miller
1992 – Gary Becker
1993 – Robert Fogel

Medicine:
1908 – Elie Metchnikoff
1908 – Paul Erlich
1914 – Robert Barany
1922 – Otto Meyerhof
1930 – Karl Landsteiner
1931 – Otto Warburg
1936 – Otto Loewi
1944 – Joseph Erlanger
1944 – Herb ert Spencer Gasser
1945 – Ernst Boris Chain
1946 – Hermann Joseph Muller
1950 – Tadeus Reichstein
1952 – Selman Abraham Waksman
1953 – Hans Krebs
1953 – Fritz Albert Lipmann
1958 – Joshua Lederberg
1959 – Arthur Kornberg
1964 – Konrad Bloch
1965 – Francois Jacob
1965 – Andre Lwoff
1967 – George Wald
1968 – Marshall W. Nirenberg
1969 – Salvador Luria
1970 – Julius Axelrod
1970 – Sir Bernard Katz
1972 – Gerald Maurice Edelman
1975 – Howard Martin Temin
1976 – Baruch S. Blumberg
1977 – Roselyn Sussman Yalow
1978 – Daniel Nathans
1980 – Baruj Benacerraf
1984 – Cesar Milstein
1985 – Michael Stuart Brown
1985 – Joseph L. Goldstein
1986 – Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini]
1988 – Gertrude Elion
1989 – Harold Varmus
1991 – Erwin Neher
1991 – Bert Sakmann
1993 – Richard J. Roberts
1993 – Phillip Sharp
1994 – Alfred Gilman
1995 – Edward B. Lewis

Our choice of poisons

I micro-burst or sorts blew through here these past couple of days, in the post below entitled “A Fun Week“. Dave Budge and “Black Flag” had a discussion going on over at Electric City Weblog and it spilled over here. It reminded me of the closing scenes of Blazing Saddles, and Harvey Korman’s words to the cab driver: “Get me out of this movie“.

But it was interesting and I presume nothing. These are two men representing strains of the libertarian ideology, which is well-grounded and with which I am wholly at odds. I believe in human freedom, and that without government, we cannot be free. That, to the libertarian, if I may so presume, is contradictory, as government itself holds in its hands the chains by which we enslave ourselves.

So Dave and Black Flag fought it out, and were at the boundaries of polite restraint, and did not cross it. Here are some notable snippets from the post below – they are not at all linked -just things that made me go “Hmm” as I read through the exchange. Each one could lead to another micro-burst.

Wisdom is the understanding of one’s own ignorance. (DB, citing Socrates)

Man’s fatal flaw is imposing his assumptions on his fellow men. (Black Flag)

You fall into the trap of many libertarian ideologues that ideological purity holds primacy over politics. Fine, but what we have is politics to deal with. (Budge)

Absolutely – randomness does not defile consistency. Do you think a dice is consistent? Does it not provide an ‘answer’ with a range? Every time? Today as it did yesterday, and will tomorrow? (BF)

Yes, but you see Dave, I’m chatting with you, not them – because they’re dead, and hopefully, you’re not. BF

Ayn Rand said that there were no contradictions in nature, and that apparent contradictions could be resolved by changing underlying thought assumptions. I’ve been troubled by one of very large implications for many years now. It was called the “Kirkpatrick Doctrine” and was used as justification for U.S. support of right wing dictatorships. In essence, Ambassador Kirkpatrick said that oppressive left wing regimes like the Soviet Union could not be dislodged because they owned the minds of their subjects by means of indoctrination and thought control. Right wing totalitarian states merely acted to control behavior, and could easily be replaced by democratic societies.

My only problem is this: The leadership of the Soviet Union gave up power without bloodshed.