Proof of Republican Recklessness Toward Increased Regulation

I stole this from LJ at AreWeLumberjacks?

He also includes two video links that help to explain how banks and investors trashed the housing market. On one hand, you hear policy makers decry regulation. And yet, today, you hear those same policy makers advocate for greater regulation. (But not for the GSE's.)

I love coincidence. It hardly ever occurs.

A Question On State Expenditures

If Oregon has a population of 3,747,455, and ten percent of that population was on food stamps, that would mean that Oregon has 374,745 Oregonians on food stamps.

I mean, that's a lot of food stamps. One out of every ten of us on food stamps. Amazing.

That is, until I received a press release from the Office of the Senate President. The economic future of our state is in a dire pass.

We currently have 535,000 Oregonians on food stamps. That's 14 percent of Oregonians on food stamps. Plus we have 22,000 families on assistance. And we have a 9.9 percent unemployment rate.

And what is the legislative agenda for Oregon? Green energy. Bike paths. Increased taxes. Man Made Global Warming.

At what point does the referee stop the match?

Meetin' Tonight

Can we do anything about the generational give-away in the Stimulus Bill? The party in control of the party has recognized that there are no limits to what they want to do. Will we be able to replace David Wu next year? Will we be able to replace Brad Witt or Debbie Boone next year? Will we be able to elect a Republican governor? Will we replace Betsy Johnson?

These are important races. How can those of us who live in rural counties get the resources from our taxes without representatives in the house and senate who vote our interests?

The Stimulus Bill is a huge boondoggle for a state like ours. It includes $334-million for surface transportation. And already the Enviros are squealing about bikes, walking trails and light-rail.

It's being presented as a "generational opportunity." They are calling it "smart, sustainable transportation." These guys live in a world all their own.

Do you want true progress? Do you want to see us build a real future for our kids? It's going to involve fighting back against the hippies. Tonight's meeting is a good place to start. You'll get to see your neighbors and friends talking about land-use issues with a guy who knows a lot about land-use law. And the direction your current representatives, and your governor, want to take the state.

There is a lot of structural impedence to restoring our property and land-use rights. Starting in your communities' schools, grade school kids are indoctrinated about "the environment", "man made global warming" and "sustainability." Before your kid can graduate from high school, they have to perform "community service." And they haven't even been convicted of a crime.

The meeting is hosted by Oregonians In Action, and will be held at 7pm this evening at the Masonic Hall, 1572 Franklin, in Astoria. Dave Hunnicut (OIA Executive Director) will provide updates on Measure 49/37, Land Use Issues, Water Laws & Legislative activity. He will also cover updates on the latest court decisions affecting your property rights and a summary of legislative bills in the 2009 session.

If you are the victim of conflicting land use laws, whether they are federal, state or local--county or city--you need to know your rights. And you need to get involved. Bad law needs to be repealed, but more importantly, we need to make sure the current legislature and congress don't pass even more bad laws.

So, call a bud, better yet, have a few with your buds, and come to the meetin'. And bring your checkbook. Fifty bucks is free, since the state will let you take that cash off next year's tax bill. Oh, and that tax bill is going to be a doozy.

See you tonight.

When Life Begins: A Thousand Points of LIght

George Bush (41) motivated me. George Bush (43) not so much.

The difference was in President Bush's idea of a "Thousand Points of Light." GW gave us "Compassionate Conservatism." Wildly different sources.

A "Thousand Points of Light" reflected what was the dominant theme of conservatism in the '80's. Problems weren't going to be solved by a central government. Problems were going to be solved by the thousands of individuals doing the right thing.

By 1994, I had raised hundreds of thousands of dollars in my local community. Yet, by 1998, I discontinued my efforts to help local folks. A feeling of entitlement had set in. I think the last time I spent any time or effort in trying to benefit the "community" was back in '97. After doing a good thing, I didn't hear a single thank you. Now my rule is, if you want a thing you should have "please" in your request. If I decide to help you I expect a "thank you." Or, you can do it yourself.

So I don't ask to help my neighbors, their kids or the local deadweight, anymore. I guess if I felt a need to be a community leader I'd have to take the sullen apathy of my friends and neighbors with good cheer. I don't. I get phone calls and letters--and e-mails--asking me to give. And I don't. Well, I do, but I choose those for whom my blessings flow.

But let's get back to the intellectual starting points of 41 and 43. The "Thousand Points of Light" were ridiculed by SNL and the intelligentsia of the time. Without doubt, both 41 and 43 had styles of speech that were easily parodied. But a significant difference was in the approach that 41 took for solving problems. He relied upon the goodness and willingness of Americans to work to achieve for themselves and their neighbors a sense of a better life. Forty-three had a tangential shift from the ardour of his father; since we are all good, let's use the combined intensity of federal spending to achieve the good things endorsed by his father, his church, his friends and family.

Surely, the increase in benefits to the retired community by 43 were ill-advised. Not to say I wish we could afford it...I have a mom who has benefited from the increase in benefits she has received under 43. But, we would have "made do." My sisters and I all remember that one of the responsibilities my mom had, as well as her six sisters, was to make sure that a check was sent each month to her mom. To make sure Gramma could get by. Now? I think mom is pretty much set. She lives about a half mile from my younger sister. My other sisters--and I--will pretty do what is necessary to make sure that she lives out the rest of her life with as much quality, care and compassion as is possible. We haven't talked about what to do with my mom's care in her declining days, but her oldest sister died recently at 100 years of age. And mom is only 83. So, chances are, she will outlive me.

So, the pressure is off. Mom is taken care of. Although I don't think she is, or has, actually taken the time to take a look at what the benefits are of the current trillions of dollars spent by Congress to make our lives better effects will be on her life.

One of the distasteful effects of government spending in excess is the inflationary pressure it puts on prices. I listened to Arthur Laffer today responding to a question about inflationary pressure and was put off with his response. Arthur Laffer, fercrisakes.

The question was asked how the recent explosion in fiscal expenditures would affect us. And he failed to make the case. The case is this: too many dollars will end up chasing too few goods. You can't add excess stimulus to an economy that is basically in good shape, with the exception of some large banks that went stupid.

Under previous financial implosions, from the LDC lending crisis(pdf), to the S & L crisis, federal policy has always been to let failure occur. Yesterday I heard Fed Chairman Bernanke express his view that now, there are banks "too big to fail." Bullshit.

There is a palimony suit in the future for our elected officials. They have become so endeared to the elitists within large organizations--especially unions--that they no longer take the time to think about their actions. It is true that none of the legislators who voted for the trillion dollar Stimulus Bill read it. None. And they passed the bill.

Why?

There is a stronger belief that centrally achieved results are easier than non-centrally achieved results. And there is a strong sense of hubris. These guys and girls actually believe they are charting a course for our nation. And yet nothing could be further from the truth.

We find out where we are after the fact. For all of you with a good idea, you've been successful in the face of daunting challenges. And you've persevered. Looking back, it's pretty amazing, isn't it? And yet the spirit of challenge is being replaced--today--by a spirit of central authority. But you and I know that central authority never has been, nor will it ever be, the reason for your success or failure. You know that your hard work and luck will be the things that you can rely upon. And you've tried to instill your believe in hard work and dedication in your children.

Only, if you examine it, you'll find out that your children are exposed to the belief of strong central authority in your public schools. Just look at the webpage for Astoria's school district. Rather than talking about a "Thousand Points of Light", hard work and dedication, your schools are telling your kids that they need to be "citizens of the earth, embracing responsibility for self, family, community, and democracy."

We no longer teach our kids about independence and self-worth. We teach them to be a part of a community. Community is fine, but; wouldn't you rather wish your child could be successful?

Oregon has particular challenges. Hippies have infiltrated every echelon of government. And they make some major bank. When they're done they have the best retirement plan in the nation. Who wouldn't want to work for the state?

Well...some of us. Some of us who hate the bullshit. And the incredible stupidity that you'd have to adopt to become one of the Borg. I, to date, have not been assimilated. But, they're working on your kids. Want a quick test? Just ask them when life begins.

They can't tell you.

$68,131.00

“Amazingly,” said Ferrioli, “the average public employee is compensated at a rate of $68,131 a year, including benefits.”

(Full statement here.pdf)

No Title

Pretend as you will.

(Do yourself a favour. Take your favourite clock and set it on end. Either right or left, but start looking at the time at a 90 degree angle. The first five, ten times you look at your clock you won't be able to tell the time. At some point, you will. If you hear a thing enough times, chances are you will start to believe it. It isn't like time, where the time is or isn't the time. And that's a key difference between advertising that is truthful and helpful, and advertising that is manipulative and hurtful. Good advertising reflects an expectation of offered service and value. Bad advertising reflects an expectation of offered service and value that isn't met by the advertiser. There are no laws against bad advertisers--there are some--but the words caveat emptor should still be held close to your heart. After enough repetion you will begin to see things the way they are presented. Honest advertisers never let you down. They understand that marketing, versus simple advertising, is a promise. Your expectations will be met. Life isn't like that. You've heard the cant. You've heard the refrain of those who wish to woo you again and again. Begin to think. Please. Have you simply become accustomed to a face? Or are you really in love?)

Thursday Evening Meeting

There is an aggressive voice in Oregon for Oregonians who believe in work, investment, jobs and growth. It is Oregonians in Action, and is organized and run by folks like Rachel Barnes, Dave Hunnicutt, Frank Nims, Bill Moshofsky and Ross Day.

Some people believe that there is a contract that exists between We the People and our elected representatives. And that elected officials have an obligation to respect that contract. That contract is represented in part by the rules that governed land use at the time we purchased that land. And that if politicians attempt to abrogate the contract between the People and its government through changes in land use laws, then those politicians--using public funds--must make reparations to the folks who were the victims of this abrogation.

On Thursday, February 26th, at the Masonic Lodge Hall at 1572 Franklin in Astoria, Dave Hunicutt will be available for you to ask questions about the current status of land use laws in the state of Oregon, and the current status of battles taking place over Ballot Measure 49.

If you feel like your government is turning its back on you, or has turned its back, please come to the meetin'. It starts at 7pm, and if there's any kind of a crowd, parking in that neighborhood can get tight quickly.

There are people in our community that want to see growth and development. We want jobs and a sense of self-worth...independence. We don't need government to take care of us. We want government to get outta the way.

And bring your checkbook. Contributions to OIA-PAC can be used as full dollar for dollar credits against Oregon income taxes up to $100 per couple or $50 per single taxpayer.

Make a contribution. Make a difference.

Third Answer On Western Climate Initiative

On the 17th, I wrote The Four Questions. I answered the first two here and here.

The third question was:

"3.Would it deliver measurable and recognizable environmental benefits – measured in terms of reduced future global temperature – to consumers who will pay the costs of these programs and who often view the efficacy of government mandates through the lens of costs versus benefits?"

For those of us who are witnessing the attempt to destroy the private banking system--in the words of Chairman Bernanke, they are too big to fail--it's important to ask why a recently discovered area for public policy concern should be managed better than the banking system. There is a sharp cleft among policy makers. One side believes that the best determinant of outcomes for markets should be decided by the markets. It's what we refer to as Free Market Forces. The other side is populated by an elitist class that asserts that if it is given enough control, it can determine the outcomes that would eventually be delivered by the market, without having to wait for the market to determine that outcome. The Free Market side is aware of the chaos that exists in free markets, but winners and losers are determined by merit. The elitist side hates chaos...and anything that asserts itself as free from control. It is this same, elitist mindset that is advocating intrusive controls over the mechanics of the free market, in order to "deliver measurable and recognizable environmental benefits."

What governments hate more than anything is any type of challenge to its monopolistic powers. Think, for a minute, about the costs of things that you use in your daily life. In particular, take a look at your phones and phone service and reflect on the benefits that have accrued to you as a result of ending the monopoly of the phone company. (If you're under the age of thirty, maybe you don't remember that in the United States we had, except for some small local phone services, one major phone company; Ma Bell.) Costs for phone services have dropped dramatically in the past thirty years. Not only is my phone mobile, but I can call anywhere in the country and not pay long-distance charges for that call. What I used to pay for phone service 30 years ago is about twice what I pay now.

As another example, take a look at what has happened in the past ten to fifteen years with Internet Service Providers. There are some real players in the internet market. And they are keeping costs for consumers down, while increasing the amount of service available to the user.

In both these cases--sure, it's telecommunications at essence, but the product differentiation is still there, and there are players in phones that don't necessarily cross over into net--it is the lack of central authority over the products of these markets that have continued to improve the quality and level of service while forcing costs down. Compare these markets with a well-defined government enterprise: the United States Postal Service.

You know that the price of mail is going up soon. And you know that competition for mail service is against the law. The USPS is too big to fail. Thirty years ago it cost ten cents to mail a postcard. In May the price is going up to 27 cents. If the USPS was in charge of my phone service, my costs today would be triple what they were 30 years ago. Instead, they are half what they were 30 years ago.

Is there a value to relying on the government to provide basic goods and services? Can you think of a single government service or program that requires less money today than it did when the service or program was started?

I received a note today from a reader in China. "The video on your blog of Al and Global Warming was amazing! So... entertaining! Gad's are the American people being taken or what??"

I replied with the story of the Pied Piper of Hamlin. Somehow there is an idea that getting government to do a thing comes without a cost. It doesn't. You always have to pay the piper.

Post: I watched a presentation the other day by a professor from the Scripps Institute. Scripps is a big name in marine research. It is painful to watch at times, but worth the watch, just to get to minute :54. The link is here. Are there "measurable and recognizable environmental benefits" to these government mandates? It's laughable, really. They don't even hear the words come out of their own mouths. And these are the elitists who are going to save us. Serially.