Red Clay Citizen

Schofield Silliness #375

Rob Schofield closes his latest screed about transportation in the Triangle with some fantasyland thinking:

Happily, the group is not without promising models close to home. Just this week, Charlotte unveiled its new light rail system to rave reviews. While the system will undoubtedly suffer growing pains, it was clear from the enthusiastic response of Queen City residents that North Carolinians hunger for new and modern approaches. Any committee that calls itself the 21^st Century Transportation Committee ought to take at least some steps to tap into that hunger.   

Rave reviews? How about customers for rave reviews? But it really doesn't matter if they meet their targets, Charlotte's still got some 'splaining to do.
-Max Borders

Contrast: Detroit and Bangalore

Interesting contrast ... OK, so what the hell are we to make of Durham?
-Max Borders

Xenophobia, Children, and Profit

From our friends on the left...

Here are three predictable counter-narratives (read: lies) to the shite-storm the Civitas Institute managed to stir up:

1. People who think that illegal immigrants should not receive publicly subsidized higher education are hateful, racist, nativist xenophobes.

(False. One can agree that the legal immigration system should be fixed and streamlined, but breaking the law at the periphery is not the way to fix it. That is neither xenophobia nor racism, but respect for the rule of law. Personally, I say "come one, come all" -- but legally.)

2. Eighteen-year-olds in community colleges are "the children."
(False. Eighteen-year-olds are adult free agents. Did I even need to write this?)

3. Community colleges are "profiting" from allowing illegal immigrant attendees to pay out-of-state tuition.

(False: If even 70 percent of the TOTAL cost (capital expenditures and all) of community college system was covered by tuition, we might say that some costs are being offset. The real number is around 12 percent. The system is subsidized by TAXPAYING CITIZENS by more than 85 percent! That's about as close to profit as the Soviet shoe factory.)

Ultimately, the lefties are fighting the wrong battle here. Let's reform the law -- not break it. And remember, you are talking about our citizen's resources here. If you're attempting to make some sort of argument about civil disobedience, why not just go light up a spliff on HIllsborough Street in front of a cop to prove your point? (And - by the way - if you care about this issue so much, why not start your own private, non-profit community college for the undocumented?)

I think immigration is good on net -- probably as much or more than the most compassionate lefty. But the rule of law is nothing to be toyed with.
-Max Borders

Good News in Healthcare

People are adopting consumer-driven health plans -- like hotcakes apparently. Check out this this report (pdf). Greg Scandlen, the author concludes:

"As a result, health care costs for CDH plans are rising at one-third the rate of PPO/HMO plans and enrollment is growing at the fastest rate of any benefit innovation of our lifetimes -- faster than IRAs, 401-Ks, or HMOs."

There is a revolution in the making folks. But CDH is only a component of the broader reforms we need. So the question is: can it happen before they socialize healthcare?
-Max Borders

Climate Change: Technology or Regulation?

If (and that's a big if) man is causing global warming... and if such warming would actually result in negative or catastrophic consequences, should we allow for technological solutions that will arise from prosperity and innovation, or should we regulate ourselves into an economic recession?
-Max Borders

Community College Costs - For the Record

OK, let's get this straight: Illegal immigrants paying $7000-plus tuition is not making N.C. community colleges profitable. 

Tuition comprises only 12% of the community colleges budgets. It's like imagining away the costs of building the buildings, paying the light bill, buying the land, etc. etc. So whether any illegal immigrant that attends a community college is being subsidized to the tune of 85% or 90%, neither affects the fact of his being subsized. People who are arguing that illegals make colleges "profit" are being dishonest.
-Max Borders

Affordable Housing: Even the Regulators Think There's Too Much Regulation

I stumbled across an interesting document from 2002 produced by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Entitled "Barriers to Minority Homeownership," it details some of the primary obstacles facing low-income minorities seeking to buy a home. Primary reasons given deal with a lack of capital for downpayment and access to credit - no surprise given that we're talking about low-income people.

Of greater interest was point number 4, "Regulatory Burdens." Read the following points and tell me where you have heard them before:

• "The high cost of housing often results from a web of government regulations. Federal, state, and local codes, processes and controls delay and drive up the cost of new construction and rehabilitation.
• In some states, developers report that excessive regulation adds 25 to 35 percent to the cost of a new house.
• communities with the most restrictive land use and zoning regulations often have affordable housing shortages."

I'll give you a hint, it ain't from the "smart growth" advocates on the left. It never ceases to amaze me how they can call for more open space, zoning regulation, impact fees and building regulation and then complain about the lack of affordable housing.

Another "Told Ya"

Chris Hayes was right about Bruton Smith back in October.
-Max Borders
(Update: Here's my take.)

Poll for "Political Junkies"

Glad somebody noticed. If you're a political junkie, you may also enjoy this month's DecisionMaker poll, which the media have largely ignored (probably because they prefer polls that tell them (pdf) what they want to hear).
-Max Borders

Immigration: Fitzsimon Follies #462

OK. Suppose we agree with Chris Fitzsimon's proposition that our immigration system is broken and the children of immigrants should at least get to go to public school. It's not hair-splitting to say that college is a privilege, not a right -- and that it's not 'public school' here on earth. It's also true that many undocumented college students are not sons and daughters of illegal immigrants at all (which is a red herring anyway), but border jumpers themselves. (Fitzsimon omits this fact like a cheating husband omits his whereabouts last night.)

So constant reference to "the children" doesn't obscure the fact that we're talking about extending heavily tax-subsidized higher education privileges to people who are here - because of their parents or not - in violation of the law. Respect for the rule of law is nothing to take lightly. Fitzsimon takes it very lightly, much in the same way he takes the truth lightly.

But the more critical aspect here is that the community college system is extending the privileges and goodies of tax-paying citizens to people who may- or may not be taxpayers -- and are certainly not citizens. Such cosmopolitanism makes the concept of citizenship totally meaningless. And while Fitzsimon wants to streamline the "citizenship process," his suggestion is that we suspend what it means to be a citizen (and shower its benefits on everyone) until the INS or Congress gets its act together. Absurd and dangerous.

(And by the way, this issue has nothing what-so-ever to do with the Supreme Court's decision to admit children of illegals into public schools. I know the difference between a third-grader and a college sophomore. So do our readers.)

One, like myself, might agree that we need comprehensive immigration reform. One might even agree, like myself, that something that is close to amnesty is in order (visitor visas, work visas, whatever) -- not being one who thinks it is pragmatic or wise to deport 12 million people and being one who does have a severe case of the Ellis Isle mentality. But accepting your tired and huddled masses is quite different from extending government freebies. To throw public resources at people by virtue of the fact that they came here without permission is dangerously akin to saying that we owe those who trespass on our yards tea and biscuits.
-Max Borders

18-and-up are "the Children"?

Perhaps the most salient among Chris Fitzsimon's recent distortions are his reference to "children" in community colleges. I guess children drive, vote, have sex and attend college now. It's almost self-parody the way they throw around the term now.

We'll return to this and other questions after I get some coffee. Till then, the open question: should young adults feel that Fitzsimon is condescending, mendacious, or both?
-Max Borders

How the Left Teaches Independent Thinking

BabyPolitico. Cradle to grave welfare. Cradle to grave propaganda.

-Max Borders

So Much for Going Green

Well, green environmentalism that is...

The State of NC has awarded $12.7 million over the next 10 years to the Shaw Power Group to add 556 jobs in Charlotte.

What exactly does the Shaw Power Group do you might ask?

Well, they are a company that builds and constructs those nasty greenhouse gas emitting, global warming causing (allegedly) coal-fired power plants.  And is the principal contractor for the $1.8 billion Duke Energy's Cliffside coal power plant that environmentalists have been fighting for years and years to try and stop.

So let me get this straight... the General Assembly passes legislation mandating production of renewable energy yet the Department of Commerce gives money away to a company that builds coal-fired power plants?

One more thing... Aren't "incentives" supposed to be used to recruit or entice businesses to parts of the state that are struggling economically and that can't recruit business otherwise?  Last I checked, Charlotte wasn't really hurting for economic growth.

Just chalk it up to one more ridiculous incentive giveaway.  When will it stop?

Gyping Charlotte's Light Rail

Look out. People may just start gyping Charlotte's Lynx system. It seems they have some sort of honor system that will be policed by the occasional ticket checker (according to this article):

Smith said he wasn’t sure what to do with his ticket once he bought it.  “In other cities like Chicago, Boston, there are turn styles you pass through so you get on.  I was kind of confused how I would get on, how they would make sure I would pay.”

We're told there will be random ticket checkers on trains, but we didn't actually see any.  If you get caught without a ticket you’ll get kicked off and pay a $50 fine.

OK, let's see: If you pay $1.30 per trip, that's $2.60 per day for the average commuter. Now, if you figure you'd get checked once a month (and slapped with a $50 fine), it's still worth it for commuters to try, since you'll pay $52 per month otherwise. I imagine people will ride it and see what frequency they get checked. If it's less frequently than once per month, they may just start gyping it. (Nevermind that if they had to pay full market cost of their ride, they'd be paying orders of magnitude more.) Still, I'm just saying...

(Update: MeckDeck on ridership blues and one commuter's choices.)
-Max Borders

Illlegals & College: Crediting Civitas & Luebke

Let it be known that Bob Luebke of Civitas broke the recent spate of stories about Community Colleges being forced to accept illegal immigrants. I realize the media don't usually credit a press release, but Dr. Luebke deserves credit for the legwork the press didn't do in this case.
(Stories: here, here, here, and here.)
-Max Borders

Cheshire Fat Cat

Once this story disappears, the grin will still be there.

-Max Borders

(Update: A couple of people wrote to ask what the heck this is. It's Bruton Smith, the guy who just got $80 million not to leave Concord and take his race track with him.)

Climate Change Wisdom

Those interested in climate change will find much to think about in this report.
-Max Borders

Nascar Nausea

A story that goes basically like this:

Nascar Mogul (Bruton Smith): "I want to build a dragway"
City Council (Concord, NC): "Nope"
Nascar Mogul: "Well, hell, I'll leave and take Concord Speedway with me."
CIty Council: "Ok, ok. Wait. Sorry, we--"
Nascar Mogul: "Well?"
City Council: "How does $80 million sound?"
Nascar Mogul: "Peachy."

We've just bribed a billionaire. Now we can all safely watch cars turn left.
-Max Borders

Charter Schools: Uncharted Potential

After much debate, the Blue Ribbon Commission on Charter Schools recently recommended to amend the cap to allow up to six new charter schools to open each year. This was a step in the right direction.

Charter schools are publicly funded institutions run by nonprofit organizations. By design, they have more operational flexibility than traditional schools. Another important difference is that, unlike traditional schools, parents choose to enroll their children in charter schools. An application to one of these schools is a sure sign that a parent believes in the school. Seats at some charter schools are so coveted that enrollment decisions are determined by lottery. Currently, there are approximately 5,100 students on charter school waiting lists in North Carolina.

Still, everyone is not sold on charter schools. A widely circulated June 2007 study by the North Carolina Center for Public Policy Research (NCCPPR), claimed that some charter schools do not perform as well as traditional public schools. A careful review reveals that the methodology of this study is flawed. NCCPPR compares all charter schools to all traditional schools in North Carolina. This approach fails to take into account the striking demographic differences between students at the two types of schools, as well as the relatively short period of time many charter schools have been in operation. As statistical comparisons have been refined to include such factors, more studies, like those of Harvard’s Caroline Hoxby, are showing charter schools to be equal to, or to outperform, comparable public schools.

No doubt, further studies could contribute to the ongoing debate about the effectiveness of charter schools. But while the academicians refine their analytical methods, thousands of children are left waiting for better educational opportunities. We have enough evidence to take action. Whom should we trust? The analysts or the parents?

Kyle Ward

The Life Expectancy Proxy

Here's a good article giving Paul Krugman, et al, a sound drubbing on the suggestion that we need to socialize medicine because Canada - who spends less per capita on healthcare (read: rationing) - has a population that lives longer on average.

Life expectancy is a terrible proxy for evaluating a healthcare system, particularly when we can point to a host of other factors -- like, oh dunno, unhealthy American lifestyles, gang violence, ethnicity makeup, etc., to explain why we don't live as long. So don't fall for the life expectancy line, especially given that we're only talking about a four-year differential between the US and the leader (Japan) and a two-year differential between the US and Canada. (The numbers.)
-Max Borders

Testing Progressive 'Principles'

I recall an old Ali G episode where Ali asks an animal rights activist/moral philosopher if he would eat a chicken to save the life of a chicken. If there is any such animal as a progressive principle, such will be tested in the coming months and years with commitments to environmentalism.

In this post, I highlighted a rare overlap between progressives and free-marketeers (MFs) -- that is, neither of us likes corporate welfare. But what happens when progressive hostility towards corporate welfare runs smack into Green fetishism? In other words, will progressives be silent on incentives if they go to support companies that recycle? Quite the conundrum.

(My guess is that recycling has become such a religion for progressives that they'll escort the pigs to the trough without a peep of protest.)
-Max Borders

Post-Tryptophan Titter

...from the crazy kids over at Bureaucrash. "Consume Nothing Day."
-Max Borders

Naomi Klein Again

Professor Boudreaux has yet another excellent response:

"Although reviewed in the Washington Post Book World's "Economics" section, Naomi Klein's book is to economics what Spiderman comic books are to arachnology."

Dear Editor

In her new book, Naomi Klein reveals what she sees as a smoking gun in the hands of the late Milton Friedman.  It's true that Mr. Friedman wrote that "only a crisis - actual or perceived - produces real change" ("Doing Well by Doing Ill," November 25).  From these words Ms. Klein draws the fantastically mistaken conclusion that Mr. Friedman was summoning capitalists to wreak havoc upon an unsuspecting world.  Unfortunately, reviewer Shashi Tharoor's defense of Mr. Friedman - that he should not be read literally - also misses the point.

Ms. Klein's mistake is the sophomoric one of confusing description with prescription.  Mr. Friedman's claim was descriptive.  It is of the same genre as the claim made to my family years ago by a physician who shared our frustration at my overweight father's refusal to eat a healthier diet: "It'll likely take a heart attack to convince him to eat less and exercise more."  If Ms. Klein had heard this statement, I suspect that she would have warned us that my dad's doctor was prescribing for him a heart attack!

Don makes blogging easy.
-Max Borders

Thanksgiving Lessons of Economics

Enjoy and learn. (Happy Thanksgiving and hope you're eatin' was good.)
-Max Borders

A $70 Million Bluff

In a political power play that would make even the toughest poker superstar envious, Bruton Smith played his hand and the taxpayers are the ones who will be paying.

Feeling disrespected by the Concord City Council in rejecting his plans to build a drag strip next to the Lowe's Motor Speedway, Smith threatened to close down the speedway and build a new one somewhere else in the greater Charlotte area.  Many, including yours truly, said that we should call his bluff and not give in and throw taxpayer money at him to not move (or maintain the status quo).

Well, guess what?  Smith backed down on his threat to move and cashed in on the City, County and State's offer of $70 million to stay where he is.

He gets $70 million in taxpayer money to do nothing!

Once again, the threat of moving (but not actually doing so) has cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars.  It was warned that the Goodyear deal set a very bad precedent and the slippery slope from it was dangerous to the state.  Now we are seeing the results.

The sooner we can put an end to this practice the better.

Stem Cell Research: Some Good News

All too frequently this blog is filled with bad news and enough evidence to convince anyone we’re all running off the rails. So once in awhile it is certainly nice to report some good news. On Tuesday, researchers in Japan and Wisconsin reported a major breakthrough in stem cell research that provides researchers the advantages of embryonic stem cells but bypasses all the ethical objections. Researchers successfully reprogrammed skin cells to mimic embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cells were produced without ever destroying a human embryo. While many specifics are yet to be worked out and the benefits might be years away, the breakthrough is significant  Those on all sides of the stem cell research issue including  politicians, stem cell scientists  and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops are lauding the work of researchers.

Opponents of embryonic stem cell research and all those who value the protection of human life at its earliest stages should welcome this news.  These developments will help to chart a path for this research to move forward in an ethical manner... Something to add to your list of things for which to give thanks on Thursday. 

Serious Debate

Holiday/Christmas music should be played when...? Weigh in.

Why Can't Planned Parenthood Turn a Profit?

The N&O is reporting today that Elizabeth Dole, along with 12 other Republicans, is seeking to cut federal funding for the abortion provider Planned Parenthood. According to the article, Planned Parenthood receives $300 million in federal funding each year. Of course, the N&O neglected to mention that the taxpayers of North Carolina are also funding Planned Parenthood. In FY2006 alone, Planned Parenthood received more than $389,000 in state subsidies. According to the Office of the State Auditor, Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina received $184,250 in state funding; Planned Parenthood Health Systems received $136,078 in state funding; and Planned Parenthood of Pender County received $69,023.

All this raises an interesting question: If Americans are as committed to defending "choice" as Planned Parenthood says they are, why can't Planned Parenthood turn a profit? Why do they need state and federal funding to survive?

Apparently, they don't. On the one hand, Planned Parenthood is a very profitable enterprise. For FY2006, the pro-abortion organization reported a gross income of more than $900 million and an annual profit in excess of $55 million. This annual profit, however, includes more than $300 million in taxpayer support. Viewed in a different light, PP's net profit is a net loss of $250 million.

In any case, the fact remains that if Americans are really committed to subsidizing abortion then Planned Parenthood should be able to make it on its own. And if Planned Parenthood can't make it without federal and state subsidies, then clearly Americans aren't buying what PP is peddling -- and so shouldn't be forced to support an industry that is not only abhorrent, but not even profitable.

Cass Sunstein: Risk, Cost, and Emotion

Interesting interview (podcast) with Cass Sunstein on low-risk, worst-case events, collective action, and what to do or not do about them. Thanksgiving is tomorrow -- you've got nothing better to do.
-Max Borders

Doing Better Redux

A commenter on my last post on "Doing Better" pointed out that there are some pdf excerpts of the booklet to the right of the screen. He says that I might just agree with some of the ideas in there, and he was right. But not without caveats:

• Idea 1: Broaden the sales tax base. (Disagree. "Broadening" means hiding taxes and death by a thousand cuts. The fewer the taxes and narrower the base, the more transparent they are.)
• Idea 2: Modernize sales taxes for new economy. (Agree as long as extending taxes to services is revenue neutral -- i.e. reduces the burden on goods. Not sure about taxing the Internet just yet.)
• Idea 3: Raise cigarette taxes for public health. (Disagree. This is a largely regressive tax and it reeks of social engineering. If more people smoke, you get more revenue but more unhealthy people. If fewer people smoke, you get fewer smokers but less revenue for other public health issues. Dumb idea, which they admit. Still, they're happy to force people to stop smoking, revenues be damned. Nanny statist.) 
• Idea 4: Enact a state Earned Income Tax Credit. (Agree if this replaced social welfare programs. Negative income tax is an ok idea if it stands alone, but not if it adds to the status quo.)
• Idea 5: Modernize state income brackets. (Disagree This is a "soak the rich" tax and works against investment and growth.)
• Idea 6: Deal with hidden income tax increases. (Not sure about this one. Sounds ok on its face.)
• Idea 7: Rethink tax relief based on age alone. (Not totally hostile to this. But it leaves an already screwy senior entitlement system in place.)
• Idea 8: Eliminate corporate tax loopholes. (Disagree. We should stay away from corporate taxes. In fact, they should be banned wholesale. They make industies less competitive at home and abroad and the costs of such taxes just get shifted back onto consumers.)
• Idea 9: Enact a property tax circuit breaker. (Like this alright, except for the "ability to pay" bit. Let's shield everyone from excessive property taxes. People who "can pay" may want to support a charity or put a kid through college.)
• Idea 10: Strengthen accountability. (Sounds ok. We could add some measures to this.)
• Idea 11: Conduct performance reviews. (Sounds ok. I'd add internal financial incentives for bureaucrats to find cost-saving measures and enhanced quality.)
  
  I probably didn't give the attention to the booklet that it deserves, but stuff like this is worth extended discussion and blogging. I know the BetterSouth.org folks would appreciate it. That said, beware of the Lakoff-like 'taxes are our friends' thrust of the document. Further comments and thoughts are welcome. (Thanks to Greg Flynn for pointing these excerpts out.)
  -Max Borders

Taxes are the Price of our Freedom?

Here's a quote from the Center for a Better South's booklet "Doing Better: Progressive Tax Reform for the American South." (Full disclosure: I haven't read the booklet. Ain't gonna. It costs $10.) But here's a quote from the Introduction:

Nobody likes taxes. But taxes get a bad rap. Like them or not, taxes are not something that should be vilified because of their very nature. Instead, people might consider looking at them in another light -- as the necessary price we pay to keep our democracy alive. Taxes are the price of our freedom. Imagine what we wouldn't have if taxes didn't fuel government programs and services.

Sounds like a leaf taken straight from the George Lakoff bible of selling socialism to dummies.

But taxes are neither "membership fees" a la Lakoff, nor are they merely the price of freedom. If all we were buying was our freedom, we'd have police protection, a standing army, and maybe - maybe - some roads. The marginal rate would be around 10 percent. But when I "Imagine what we wouldn't have if taxes didn't fuel government programs and services," I imagine a world without subsidized dependency, bureaucracy, special interest capture, inefficiency, waste, government-induced poverty, useless functionaries, and nannies breathing down our necks at every turn.
-Max Borders

Free Markets Save Lives

This article reminds us of why free markets are so important.

"Wealthy populations live longer and are healthier than poor populations because higher incomes open the door to literally thousands of opportunities to improve health and safety that are not available to the poor"

At the extreme end of the spectrum is Sub-Saharan Africa, a region plagued by poverty, famine, disease and very short life spans.

"Most Sub-Saharan Africans do not have access to childhood vaccines, bed nets or clean water.  This lack of resources reduces life expectancy to a level far below that of rich countries.  Princeton University economist Angus Deaton says poverty is the leading cause of mortality in developing countries."

The best remedy for this tragic situation is a healthy dose of economic growth and wealth creation.

"World Bank economist Lant Pritchett and former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers studied the relationship between income and health worldwide and found that infant mortality falls as income rises.  According to their research, a developing country would avert one death per 1,000 live births if the average income were raised 1 percent.  In 2005, for example, over 30,000 infant deaths would have been prevented in Sub-Saharan Africa if incomes were raised by about $5 per person per year."

Of course, the best way to spur such life-saving economic growth is not via government intervention and large welfare programs as the left would have you believe, but from greater economic liberty.

"Not one Sub-Saharan African country ranks in the top quartile of economically free countries.  Decades of political corruption, government-controlled monopolies, high inflation, excessive regulation of businesses, and stringent import and export restrictions have led to Africa’s current economic state.  Adopting economically freer policies would increase the rate of economic growth in African countries and thus raise incomes."

Even the redistributionists at the World Bank have begun to recognize this.

"Huge developmental gains would be possible for some of the world’s poorest countries if their governments reform restrictive tax policies that make it impossible for ordinary firms to operate legally, a World Bank report argues today."

Unfortunately, it is hard to be optimistic about a region where the nations tax their businesses at twice the rate of profit.

Progressive "Realism"

Here we have a leftish type at NC Policy Watch demanding more aid so that low income can afford to pay for heating -- what with energy being so costly.

Here we have a leftish type at NC Policy Watch writing in support of measures that will increase energy rates.

Just like with affordable housing and open space, it's another example of how environmental silliness works at odds with concern for the poor. That's the eat-cake/have-cake logic of the left. I guess we MFs just don't understand all the nuances of the Rube Goldberg-style government they're trying to build.
-Max Borders

Low Marks for the Commission on Testing and Accountability

“We’re testing more but we’re not seeing the results. . . .We’re not seeing the graduation rates increasing. We’re not seeing remediation rates decreasing. Somewhere along the way testing isn’t aligning with excellence.”  Those are the comments of Sam Houston, chairman of the Blue Ribbon Commission on Testing and Accountability. Earlier this week, the commission agreed on a draft report saying North Carolina is spending too much on testing. The report will recommend several exams be discontinued including the fourth, seventh and tenth grade writing tests and that the number of end of course exams be cut from 10 to 5.

While, it’s always good to evaluate testing procedures and I understand Mr. Houston’s frustration, I don’t understand his logic. Mr. Houston says, “Somewhere along the way testing isn’t aligning with excellence.” Shouldn’t RESULTS align with excellence?  Testing is the mirror for measuring those results. Scrapping the tests implies that doing so somehow improves performance. It doesn’t. Yes, excellence should always be the goal. But testing is a means --- a very necessary means --- for getting there. Believing we’re better off by testing less is foolish thinking.

Government Failure and MFs

Josh Hendrickson clarifies "market fundamentalism" (MF) and explains why it's not so much that MFs believe markets don't fail (although we have to define failure), but that government fails abysmally, and that fretting about inequality is poorly framed fetishism:

Those who are concerned with income inequality often present their argument as though there are two choices. One can either side with the market fundamentalists whose "blind faith" claims that the market will work itself out or they can side with "realists" who believe government intervention is necessary to correct for this market failure. However, this is a false dilemma. As Arnold Kling so eloquently explained, there are many of us who concede that markets fail, but we are much more concerned with government failure. And there is certainly reason to believe that the government will fail to equalize economic outcomes. For example, the most frequent solution to income inequality, and the one advocated by Krugman in nearly every interview about his book, is higher taxes on those at the top of the income scale. While this may give the appearance of lessening inequality, in actuality it does very little. Essentially, it is equivalent to twisting the ankle of the fastest runner in the world in an attempt to make other runners faster. In no way does this make other runners faster.

Indeed, if ever there was blind faith, it is with letting government bureaucracies attempt to solve problems, "equalize" society, and plan utopias -- all which ignore the knowledge problem. MFs shun government action precisely because we have neither blind faith nor hubris. We stand humble before the inherent complexity and pluralism of a society in which knowledge-for-problem-solving is a local phenomenon.
-Max Borders

Red Clay Pulse? A Transpartisan Truth

Progressive Pulse and Red Clay Citizen don't agree on much, but we definitely agree on this:

Goodyear might not be a pioneer in showing other US tire makers how to make a profit without handouts but it sure is showing other corporations how to get their fair share of public greenbacks. The slope is now officially slippery and other giant corporations will be sliding down in short order no doubt.

Bravo to Elaine Mejia for this post and kudos to the Pulse for their stand on this issue. We may battle it out on our little corner of the blogosphere, but whenever we can find areas of agreement, we'd do better to turn, momentarily, from our bickering to cooperating on issues where there is overlap.

Thus, a transpartisan message to our leaders: Stop giving away our money to corporations. It's wrong no matter how you try to justify it.
-Max Borders

Suppose Al Gore is Right

Even if Al Gore is right, we are confronted with a rather stark set of choices:

First, no climate mitigation strategy as yet proposed will make a dent in warming (that's assuming it's anthropogenic). Second, wealthier nations tend to fare much better and to adapt better when confronted with any sort of extreme weather conditions, climate change, or related effects. [Note: even Bangladesh fared better during Sidr, for example, than it would have thirty years ago.] So, this comes down to draconian mitigation vs. local adaptation, even if the greenhouse effect is occuring and it's caused largely by humans.

I highly recommend this article and others by Indur Goklany (pdf) on the question of adaptation, opportunity costs, and other strategies to deal with climate change. I prefer Goklany's work to that of Lomborg, for example. While the latter has done more to quiet the alarmism, the former is more nuanced and not as concerned with offering centralized (UN-style) solutions to problems around the globe.
-Max Borders

Buses Ain't So Great Either

I had hoped to respond with a link to reader's email on Friday, in light of a piece I did for the N&O on light rail. The trouble is, every time I write for them, their circumlocution office fails to put my pieces on the Web. I'm not sure why I'm not Webworthy, but beggars can't be choosers, I suppose. I won't wax conspiratorial, but will chalk it up to bureaucracy.

In any case, if you read "Buses, Not Trains" in the paper on Friday, you'd have thought I was making an argument for buses, not trains. Unfortunately, that was the N&O's title. I merely wanted to contrast buses with trains to give people an idea of just how big a fetish light rail has become in the eyes of those ensnared by smart growth groupthink. Anyway, here's a reader's response on the problem of buses, too:

In the article "Buses, not trains" in the Nov 16, N&O, Max Borders quotes Randall O'Toole: the "majority of light-rail systems consume more energy per passenger mile than the average passenger car."

This is true for many (most?) bus systems as well. According to the 2005 National Transit Database (the most recent data), the Triangle Transit Authority used 455.7 gallons of diesel for 2474 actual miles and 7257.7 passenger miles (all in 1000s). This equates to 5.43 actual mpg and 15.93 passenger mpg. And it's diesel pollution too, which is far worse on health than gasoline.
-Max Borders

"C" is for Contemptible Cow

Boundreaux today:

Although de rigueur among "progressives," Jim Salvucci is mistaken to describes bourgeois values as "empty" and consumerism as "mindless" (Letters, November 17).  Bourgeois values encourage hard work, sobriety, thrift, honesty, and self-reliance - all which earn their practitioners the ability over time to enjoy greater material comforts and amusements.  What is truly empty is the value that counsels A to live off of the wealth given to him by B and which B confiscated from C.  And what is truly mindless is the notion that society progresses as greater numbers of us live as A's or as B's, and all the while thinking of C's as being nothing more than contemptible cows to be milked for the "general good."

-Max Borders

Rove is Right

Whether you agree or disagree with the tactics and influence Karl Rove has had on American politics over the past seven years, he is right on the money with his recent assessment of the Presidential race:

And asked about how he sees next year’s general election playing out, Rove made no bones about his prediction (or preference?) that Clinton will be the Democratic nominee. In order for Republicans to win, he said, the party must “articulate a strong and positive and optimistic agenda,” warning, “It’s not enough to simply say, ‘I’m not her.’”

Too often I hear Republican candidates and party operatives claim that 2008 is going to be a good year for Republicans simply because Hillary Clinton is going to be on the ballot and that she will guarantee record turnout for Republicans hell bent on keeping her from being elected President.

To them I say, heed Rove's warning.

Transfer Tax = Property Tax?

In his weekly column, NC Insider reporter Scott Mooneyham asserts that the transfer tax is no different than the property tax and that buyers will just roll the payments into their mortgage much like they do with property taxes now.

A real estate transfer tax was no more or less a "home tax" than the property tax. Just as property taxes are rolled into the overwhelming majority of mortgage payments, transfer tax payments would have been folded into the price of the home and become a fraction of the monthly mortgage payment. The cost would have been foisted on buyers, not sellers.

Mooneyham misses the boat on this one by a wide margin.  He falsely assumes that the transfer tax can always be passed on from seller to buyer in the price of the house.  In the current buyers' market, there is no way the seller will be able to recoup this tax.  The seller will have to eat it out of his equity.

Also under his scenario, the transfer tax would be rolled into the principle portion of the mortgage payment, not the escrow account that other items, such as property tax and homeowners insurance, are paid into.  Thus, a homebuyer would then be paying interest on the transfer tax for the next 30 years, making the effective cost of the transfer tax double its original charge.
(Hey wait, maybe I like his argument, that makes the case for the transfer tax even easier to fight... It's not a 0.4 percent tax -- by the time you pay interest on it over the life of your loan, you're really paying closer to 0.8 or 1 percent.)

But let's just assume for one minute that he is correct, that the transfer tax will be passed on from seller to buyer.  That just means that the seller will raise his price 0.4 percent to account for having to pay that tax.  So why then, is it the same people who advocate voraciously for " more affordable housing" are the same ones who advocate for the transfer tax.  The transfer tax would only make housing less affordable, artificially inflating the cost of housing at least 0.4 percent.  (Even more if you consider that the transfer tax would be paid 4 times on newly built homes - from original land owner, to developer, to builder, to new homeowner.)

Any way you slice it the transfer tax is bad.  And thank goodness voters in 16 counties saw how damaging it would be to to the equity in their homes.  Now as long as we don't fall under the spell of the re-education programs, the idea of this tax can be dead and buried.

Holiday Gifts for Smart Lefties

Government's End - Jonathan Rauch
A stunning distillation of public choice -- or why government expansion and special interests go hand in hand.
Fatal Conceit - F.A. Von Hayek
A must read for anyone who believes society can be planned, shaped or engineered by elites for "the good."
The Mystery of Capital - Hernando de Soto
How property rights protect the poor and can pull them out of poverty.
The Best Laid Plans
A giant antidote to smart growth, town planning and other municipal fetishes.
Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid - M.K. Pralahad
Why we should stop thinking of the poor as victims, and instead as resilient, creative entrepreneurs.
The Future and Its Enemies - Virginia Postrel
Unpacks the disturbing trend towards preference for stasis over dynamism.
White Man's Burden - William Easterly
Why foreign aid is doomed to perpetual failure.
Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance - Douglass North
It's all about getting the rulesets right.
Moral's by Agreement - David Gauthier
A contractarian theory deriving the liberal (original sense) state and the free individual.
The Improving State of the World - Indur Goklany
How trade, progress and globalization is good for the world (including the environment).
Anarchy, State & Utopia and A Theory of Justice (together!) - Robert Nozick, John Rawls respectively
Titanic political theory from two great minds - compare and contrast.

Leave your own recommendations in the comments...
-Max Borders

School Choice is a Civil Rights Issue

...according to this post from Michael Strong.
-Max Borders

More of that Illness Known as Krugmania

Prof. Boudreaux takes Paul Krugman to task on another effort in inanity:

Paul Krugman asserts that Social Security faces no financial crisis ("Played for a Sucker," November 16).  His evidence?  Peter Orszag's and Philip Ellis's statement that the largest fiscal problem confronting Uncle Sam is the projected growth in health-care costs.  Mr. Krugman's logic is as compelling as would be that of a physician who concludes that tuberculosis isn't a serious illness because pancreatic cancer is even more lethal.

In 2005 testimony before Congress, the eminent economist Thomas Saving - appointed by President Clinton to serve as a Public Trustee of the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds - acknowledged that Medicare and Medicaid are in worse financial shape than is Social Security.  But Mr. Saving also warned that Social Security's financial condition is precarious.  Speaking for the Trustees, Mr. Saving said that action to fix Social Security's coming insolvency "should not be deferred any longer than necessary for due deliberation and decision."
-Max Borders

The Wright Stuff

Under the Dome blog has stuff on the corruption investigation of Thomas Wright, a state legislator from Wilmington. Dan Kane's full story here. (Boy are we startin' to look like Louisiana. The gubernatorial candidates betters start talkin' and actin' like Bobby Jindal.)
-Max Borders

General Assembly: Welcome to the Swarm

Attention bloggers, media, and concerned citizens: This is your chance to start the digging. If you want a one-stop-shop on the North Carolina state government - particularly the General Assembly - you have found your site. Campaign contributions, Personal Financials, bills and more. Come. Play. Scrutinize 'em till they can't stand it no more...

Welcome to the new Citizen Legislature.

-Max Borders

(PS: We want this to be useful to everyone in making state government more transparent. If you find bugs or something you need, please contact us.)

Light Rail Math: You Call This "World-Class"?

Randal O'Toole blogs today about Seattle voters rejection of a massively expensive light rail system. Light-rail advocates in Charlotte and the Triangle should pay attention to this alarming stat:

"The average urban freeway lane costs about $10 million per mile. The average light-rail line costs about $50 million per mile and carries only a fifth as many people. Seattle’s proposed lines were going to cost $250 million per mile, making them 125 times more expensive at moving people than a freeway lane."

Let me repeat...the light rail system would be 125 times more expensive at moving people than a freeway lane.  Now, the numbers that O'Toole uses may be off a little bit, but even if they are within reason we can draw some conclusions for NC.

For example, the South Corridor line in Charlotte cost $463 million to build 9.6 miles of track (2006 estimates). That comes to $48.2 million per mile. Conversely, for the same amount of money, Charlotte could have built eleven and a half miles worth of four-lane highway for the same amount of money. This calculation does not even take into account a comparison of future operating and maintenance costs between the two - a comparison that would make light rail look even worse. So the opportunity cost of the light rail line (which most people will never use) is a new four-lane highway that covers even more miles. Which do you think would ease traffic congestion more? The planners in Charlotte chose light rail.

Is this the kind of cost/benefit analysis we can expect from a "world-class city"?

Now think about your daily commute. If you could choose between a completely new, additional four-lane highway to drive on, or a goofy train system that you have to drive to, pay to park, pay for fare, wait until the next train comes along, have multiple stops and then most likely have a sizable walk to the office - which one would you choose?

 

News & Observer, MSM: Justified Bias

This article by Ted Vaden is one of the strangest, most epicyclical articles I've ever read about the media's (and Vaden's paper - the N&O's) bias towards Democrat candidates. Please, read it all -- an effort in sophistry stretched so gossamer that it makes the case against itself. But if you're short on time, here's my summary of it:

The media are biased towards Democrats because people are jazzed about Barack Obama, even though HIlary is the frontrunner. Oh and we're biased towards Hilary Clinton and John Edwards, because John Edwards is from North Carolina and Hilary is the frontrunner and because people are jazzed about Barack Obama. Oh and we quoted a libertarian candidate for governor so that absolves me of writing the most convoluted explanation for bias you've ever heard. I'm shocked that you would even question it.

From Vaden we finally get:

"The paper should be aware of that and make sure the Republican nomination battle is getting as much attention overall as the Democratic race. After all, one of these people will end up being president."

GIuliani and Clinton are locked in a dead heat right now. But you wouldn't know it from watching the MSM on TV or reading the N&O. So much for objectivity in journalism -- if ever there was such a thing.
-Max Borders

Urban Legends About Illegal Immigration: Part I

Just today I received one of those "urban legend" emails claiming that "the Senate voted this week to allow illegal aliens access to Social Security benefits."

After a little digging, it seems that the Senate has done no such thing -- at least not this week. In May of last year, however, they did consider an amendment that would have prohibited former illegal aliens from obtaining Social Security credit for funds deposited into the Earnings Suspense File while using a STOLEN or phony social security number. As Snopes explains, the Senate tabled the amendment by a vote of 50-49.

Nevertheless, the amendment -- and the very idea of illegal immigrants receiving Social Security benefits -- set off a firestorm across the Internet that apparently continues to burn even a year later. My favorite response to the purported legislation was cooked up by one Donald Ruppert of Burlington, Iowa. Apparently, Ruppert sent the letter that appears below to Senator Tom Harkin:

Application to become illegal

(Actual letter from an Iowa resident and sent to his Democrat Senator)
The Honorable Tom Harkin
731 Hart Senate Office Building
Phone (202) 224 3254
Washington D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Harkin,

As a native Iowan and excellent customer of the Internal Revenue Service, I am writing to ask for your assistance. I have contacted the Department of Homeland Security in an effort to determine the process for becoming an illegal alien and they referred me to you.

My primary reason for wishing to change my status from U.S. Citizen to illegal alien stems from the bill which was recently passed by the Senate and for which you voted. If my understanding of this bill's provisions is accurate, an illegal alien needs to have been in the United States for five years. If he then wishes to become a citizen he needs only to pay a $2,000 fine and income taxes for three of the last five years. I know a good deal when I see one and I am anxious to get the process started before others figure out the advantages.

Simply put, those of us who have been here legally have had to pay taxes every year so I'm excited about the prospect of avoiding two years of taxes in return for paying a $2,000 fine. Is there any way that I can apply to be illegal retroactively? This would yield an excellent result for me and my family because we paid heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.

Additionally, as an illegal alien I could begin using the local emergency room as my primary health care provider. Once I have stopped paying premiums for medical insurance, my accountant figures I could save almost $10,000 a year.

Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be that my daughter would receive preferential treatment relative to her law school applications, as well as 'in-state' tuition rates for many colleges throughout the United States for my son.

Lastly, I understand that illegal status would relieve me of the burden of renewing my driver's license and making those annoying car insurance premiums. This is very important to me given that I still have college age children driving my car.

If you would provide me with an outline of the process to become illegal (retroactively if possible) and copies of the necessary forms, I would be most appreciative. Thank you for your assistance.

Your Loyal Constituent,
Donald Ruppert
Burlington, IA

Now, whether Donald Ruppert sent this letter -- or whether there is even a Donald Ruppert of Burlington, Iowa, is beside the point. The letter expresses a sentiment that many Americans feel very strongly about. As the media continually notes, "passions" about illegal immigration run high in America, as if to suggest that anyone who is passionate about illegal immigration is illogical. These passions, however, are logical reactions to an immigration policy that is not only illogical, but absurd.

In short, these people believe that it is illogical to reward illegal behavior. They believe instead that illegal behavior should be punished as such. This simple dictum is the basis of the rule of law. Without this rule, democracies crumble, to be replaced by oligarchies and, ultimately, tyrannies.

Stay tuned for Urban Legends Part II, where we will discuss whether various Hispanic leaders want to reclaim the southwestern United States for Mexico.

Until then, I sure wish someone would secure the border ...

This Perfect Day

Professor Boudreaux on the late Ira Levin:

"Rosemary's Baby" and "The Boys from Brazil" are indeed the two most popular novels written by the late Ira Levin ("'Rosemary's Baby' Author Ira Levin Dies," November 14).  But his best work, in my opinion, is his little-known 1970 novel "This Perfect Day."  In this work, Mr. Levin describes the horrors unleashed by a collectivist mentality that deifies the state as the creator of all that is orderly and good in society - a mentality that, as a result, empowers government to crush liberty and individuality.  "This Perfect Day" should rank with other collectivist-dystopian works such as Orwell's "1984" and with Huxley's "Brave New World."