Iraq and Egypt

One of the last arguments used to justify the US invasion of Iraq and the consequent US occupation (after the argument for WMD was found to be fabricated and the flimsy argument that it was a national security concern also proved untrue) was that it was the right thing to do on moral grounds. Saddam Hussein was a thug and a dictator that didn't allow his people freedom so the altruistic US had to do something, right? At the time I wondered why he would get this attention considering that there was a world full of tyrannical dictators guilty of the same behavior. The reason, of course, is that it didn't have anything to do with taking a moral stance. It was entirely based on political motives and most likely had a lot to do with the nice little oil reserves sitting under the sand. The media had to create a warm fuzzy story to appease the American populous and to justify war though and we ate it up.
Contrast this story with the current events in Egypt, where we have a leader who employs torture and tyranny just as capably as Saddam was doing.
According to US embassy cables that were released by Wikileaks (like it or not, they're out in the open now), we learn that the US was aware of police brutality. Those cables describe it as "routine and pervasive" under the Mubarak regime. According to these State department records "Torture and police brutality in Egypt are endemic and widespread. The police use brutal methods mostly against common criminals to extract confessions, but also against demonstrators, certain political prisoners and unfortunate bystanders." Lest the world get too clear a view of this mess, the Egyptian government has tried to implement a near blackout of the internet and media.
Why then is the US taking such a different stance? Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said that the U.S. government would to continue to work with the Mubarak regime and and that his regime was "demonstrating restraint" and Joe Biden had defended Mubarak as a personal friend.
It's time to quit meddling in the political affairs of other nations and propping up leaders solely based on their willingness to accept our foreign aid and do our bidding.

State of the Union

Here's what I heard in the state of the union address...

INNOVATION

• Increased federal funding of biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology.
• Eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies.
• Mandate that by 2035, 80% of America's electricity will come from clean energy sources.

EDUCATION

• Increased federal control, monitoring, and regulation of education through "Race to the Top".
• Lower unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that went to banks, and use the savings to implement tuition tax credits worth $10,000 for four years of college.
• Work to provide amnesty for illegal aliens who get degrees.

INFRASTRUCTURE

• Double federal funding of infrastructure projects including high-speed rail.
• Work to simplify the system. Get rid of the loopholes. Level the playing field. And use the savings to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years – without adding to our deficit.

HEALTH CARE

• Work with congress to improve and modify health care legislation but won't compromise on clause for pre-existing condition.

FISCAL POLICY

• Freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years.
• Develop a proposal to merge, consolidate, and reorganize the federal government in a way that best serves the goal of a more competitive America.

FOREIGN POLICY

• Keep fighting wars
  

A lot of that is all well and good. It sounds fine on the surface but the problem is that it ignores fundamental principles of freedom and economics. Despite the best of intentions, the federal government has proven that it cannot improve economic productivity and job creation by manipulating prices and attempting to direct technology innovation that isn't demanded by free markets. It cannot improve education through centralized planning and control. It cannot provide a more efficient, fair, and affordable system of health care by simply mandating additional coverage to those who cannot afford it.
The vision that President Obama painted is one that we all share. It is the path to get there that remains in question. I propose a path of freedom, individual responsibility, decreased federal control of every facet of our lives and an adherence to the principles in the constitution.

Bribing your children

This is why bribing your children doesn't work in the long run...



A wise old gentleman retired and purchased a modest home near a junior high school. He spent the first few weeks of his retirement in peace and contentment. Then a new school year began. The very next afternoon three young boys, full of youthful, after-school enthusiasm, came down his street, beating merrily on every trash can they encountered. The crashing percussion continued day after day, until finally the wise old man decided it was time to take some action.

The next afternoon, he walked out to meet the young percussionists as they banged their way down the street. Stopping them, he said, “You kids are a lot of fun. I like to see you express your exuberance like that. In fact, I used to do the same thing when I was your age. Will you do me a favor? I’ll give you each a dollar if you’ll promise to come around every day and do your thing.” The kids were elated and continued to do a bang-up job on the trashcans.

After a few days, the old-timer greeted the kids again, but this time he had a sad smile on his face. “This recession’s really putting a big dent in my income,” he told them. “From now on, I’ll only be able to pay you 50 cents to beat on the cans.” The noisemakers were obviously displeased, but they accepted his offer and continued their afternoon ruckus. A few days later, the wily retiree approached them again as they drummed their way down the street. “Look,” he said, “I haven’t received my Social Security check yet, so I’m not going to be able to give you more than 25 cents. Will that be okay?” “A freakin’ quarter?” the drum leader exclaimed. “If you think we’re going to waste our time, beating these cans around for a quarter, you’re nuts! No way, dude. We quit!” And the old man enjoyed peace and serenity for the rest of his days.

Not much of a change - part II

One thing about the mid-term elections that I am happy about is the election of Rand Paul as senator of Kentucky. Good job Rand, my hearty congratulations to you. Sen Elect Paul understands economics and has a good chance of affecting positive change. The rest of the re energized republicans and tea partiers don't seem to have much promise.

It's only recently that I've been able to recognize why the tea party movement doesn't move me. It's because although they say the right things much of the time, they suffer from the same problem that pervades politics: debating the merit of intentions instead of outcomes. They know what they want but have no idea how to get their because they don't understand economics, cause and effect, and the nature of mankind.

I have to think that the Obama administration has the best of intentions. So do the Republicans. So do the independents. I'll be darned, it looks like everyone has good intentions but we're still getting bad results. What we should be talking about is what is possible and correct within the context of economics.
No one seems to believe that debts have to be repaid. We pay lip service to it but it's always with this attitude that "someday" will never come or if it does it will be someone else's problem. Perhaps so, we might be able to kick the can down the road far enough that we'll all be dead and gone before we have to pay the piper. If if it isn't profoundly obvious that this attitude is grossly immoral then I don't know what to tell you. I not only see it as immoral but believe that the piper will have to be paid much sooner, in my lifetime.
I believe that "stimulating the economy" in the sense of getting things going by spending borrowed money is a fallacy. It doesn't improve our situation at all. It only delays the present danger we're facing. The only way an economy can be stimulated is by production; producing real goods and services. In our debates and discussions we have come to substitute money for productivity. Money is only a means of accounting for productivity (goods and services).
No matter how you look at it bad debt has to be borne out by society. The most efficient means to account for bad debt is through bankruptcy and other existing financial tools. The repercussions of bad debt are contained as narrowly as possible, by distributing the burden of debt to the lenders (the folks who signed up for the risk of lending money in the first place). Otherwise moral hazard compounds the problem and makes it more likely to happen again, and the people who can least bear the burden end up carrying it. In other words, let banks fail. Let the automotive industry fail. Let any business fail that isn't producing adequately. Our business climate will allow the assets and talent to quickly reorganize and start producing again while the worthless elements get eliminated.

This shouldn't be a discussion of what people deserve and what they should have. This should be a discussion that accepts the reality that economics is a natural science. We can't violate it's laws anymore than we can demand that gravity doesn't affect some people. What goes up will come down and in this case, no matter how high you throw the debt, it will come back down on your head.

Not as smart as you think - Medical Edition

How to brand a disease -- and sell a cure
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/10/11/elliott.branding.disease/index.html?hpt=C2

It should come as no surprise to anyone to learn that corporations employ manipulation, half-truths, and outright lies to gain market share and increase revenue. We learn quickly in life to be wary of unscrupulous sales people. This article strikes a nerve though. Why does this bother me so much? Not because I'm surprised by it. Quite the contrary, I know this happens all too often, but it bothers me still the same because it takes advantage of a fundamental human flaw in how we reason. Not only is it manipulative, it does so with reckless disregard for one of the most vulnerable, significant aspect of life: our health and well being. It also stands as a warning to all of us, to reflect on why we make the choices we do and to question our rationale constantly.

Sad but true

I can't believe that "Idiocracy" is not just a stupid movie, it's the sad but true tale of what is really happening in America. I can't believe this is the way the story ends. We value illusion and form over substance and reality. The American electorate is truly Obama's dream come true. If we elected leaders based on principles, capability, and integrity he wouldn't have had a chance but he knows that in 2012 he can depend upon the gullibility of the masses who believe his grand illusions of hope and change. Two days ago Obama told a crowd in Austin "I'm pretty good at politicking". Obama's proudest trait is his ability to make empty promises.

Not as smart as you think

I have a habit of thinking about objectivity vs subjectivity and the frailties of the human mind. It is both frustrating and fascinating to see how profoundly irrational we all are. David McRaney has done us a huge favor by cataloging and explaining some of the most well known misconceptions about human thinking.