Report: U.S. Makes $4 Billion From Bailout Banks - Political News - FOXNews.com

Report: U.S. Makes $4 Billion From Bailout Banks - Political News - FOXNews.com: "The U.S. government has hauled in about $4 billion in profits from large banks that have repaid their obligations from last year's federal bailout, The New York Times reported Sunday.

Last September, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson pressed congressional leaders for legislation authorizing a $700 billion financial bailout of some of the nation's largest financial institutions, which were in danger of collapsing. The bill was signed into law in October."

So the profit rate is only 0.57% on banks that have repaid -- which appears to exclude any banks that haven't repaid. It will be interesting to see the overall rate once all have paid back (or failed).

Obama Defends Health Care Plan to Town Hall Skeptic - Political News - FOXNews.com

Obama Defends Health Care Plan to Town Hall Skeptic - Political News - FOXNews.com: "He cited examples in which people have lost their insurance, including when going from job to job and because of pre-existing conditions."

Government regulation promotes the loss of insurance between jobs so why don't they just fix that?
Technically you can't lose insurance because of a pre-existing condition -- it is just more expensive to buy new insurance.

Job Market Could Lag Behind for Years, Study Forecasts - Political News - FOXNews.com

Job Market Could Lag Behind for Years, Study Forecasts - Political News - FOXNews.com: "According to their forecast, the unemployment rate will be at 10 percent through 2011. Three years after that, the jobless rate will have dropped only to 8 percent. And a decade from now, that rate will still be floating above 6 percent.�"

Can the Free Market Wage War? - David Gordon - Mises Institute

Can the Free Market Wage War? - David Gordon - Mises Institute: "Tariffs, and similar measures designed to strengthen the nation, 'should not be considered as measures of production policy.' They aid some citizens at the expense of others; they do not help the economy as a whole."

"The first step which led from the soldiers' war back to total war was the introduction of compulsory military service. … The war was no longer to be only a matter of mercenaries; it was to include everyone who had the necessary physical ability. … But when it is realized that a part of the able-bodied must be used on the industrial front … then there is no reason to differentiate in compulsory service between the able-bodied and the physically unfit. Compulsory military service thus leads to compulsory labor service of all citizens who are able to work, male and female."

"On the basis of such [anticapitalist] reasoning the [Léon] Blum government nationalized the French armament industry. When the war broke out and it became imperative to place the productive power of all French plants into the service of the rearmament effort, the French authorities considered it more important to block war profits than to win the war."

What Health Care "Reform" Would Mean For Montana | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

What Health Care "Reform" Would Mean For Montana | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: "First, the legislation making its way through both the House and Senate contains an individual mandate — a requirement that every American buy health insurance. And not just any insurance but insurance that includes all the benefits government thinks you should have. That insurance could be more expensive or include benefits that people don't want, or are morally opposed to such as abortion.

That doesn't just affect those without insurance today. The bills now before Congress say that while you won't be immediately forced to switch from your current insurance to a government-specified plan, you'll have to switch to satisfy the government's requirements if you lose your current insurance or want to change plans. And, for the 70 percent of us who get our insurance through work, those plans will all have to satisfy the government's benefit requirements within five years."

Junk Food, Taxes, and the Market Solution - Sascha Baghestanian - Mises Institute

Junk Food, Taxes, and the Market Solution - Sascha Baghestanian - Mises Institute: "So it seems to be easy to explain why people love fast food: it contains a lot of meat, it is designed to taste well, and it is getting ever cheaper. But how can a good that is potentially hazardous get cheaper and cheaper? Shouldn't the market accommodate for the hazard, so that people who are willing to take the potential risk for the sake of pleasure have to face higher costs in terms of higher insurance premiums?

That's where the public medical plans come into play. Since the government distorts the health insurance markets, it releases the insurance seekers from their own responsibilities.

The standard health insurance premiums for overweight people (and smokers) are certainly below a potential free market price. The most obvious proof for this is the public health deficit — which a profit-oriented insurance company could not run year after year without being outcompeted by other companies. Clearly, on a free market in health insurance, obese persons would have to pay even higher premiums than they do now."

'For the sake of argument, let us also accept the government's assumption that an increase in taxes would affect behavior and reduce the consumption of burgers and pizza.

Who would be the most negatively affected by such a tax hike?'

'In the fast food industry, where 70% of total costs is attributed to labor, it's pretty clear who is going to be affected: the people who are standing behind the counter, asking several-hundred times a day, "For here or to go?"'

'What about the consumer? The government gave him the illusion that the side effects of his actions would be costless. He is certainly not the one who should be blamed for this situation. It is government overregulation that caused this mess and deserves the blame.'

The Case against National School Standards | Andrew J. Coulson | Cato Institute: Commentary

The Case against National School Standards | Andrew J. Coulson | Cato Institute: Commentary: "But averages don't take tests. Kids do. Even if students' average academic potential were the same in Texas and Vermont, the individual children who make up those averages would still be all over the map. To claim that all the children in a single large family could progress through every subject at the same pace is a stretch. To claim this of every child in a whole neighborhood is preposterous. To claim it of every child in a nation of 300 million people is the premise of national standards.

Children are not interchangeable widgets. It does not serve their interests to feed them through learning factories on a single, fixed-pace conveyor belt. Some pick up reading quickly and easily fly through ever more challenging texts. Others find reading a chore, progressing more slowly even when encouraged by supportive families and talented teachers. To demand a single pace for all students in all subjects is to simultaneously tie together the laces of the fleet and kick out the crutches of the slow.

Not only is it impossible to create a single set of standards that would serve every child equally well, such standards would fail to significantly improve our schools. High external standards have never been the driving force behind human progress.

The tremendous leap in Olympic athletic achievement of the past 40 years was not achieved because the organizing committee told competitors to start swimming faster or jumping higher. It happened because Olympic athletes are competitors.

The same thing is true across every sector of our economy. Cell phone makers have not relentlessly improved their products because of national mandates. They've done it to attract customers away from their competitors. Amazon did not diversify its business and create the Kindle because a consortium of Internet vendors demanded it, but because Amazon sought to beat its competition.

The progress we've seen in one industry after another, just as in athletic pursuits, has been the result of competition - something that our education system has sorely lacked. At the dawn of the 21st century, three quarters of American children are still assigned to schools based on where they live, by bureaucrats who have never met them. Stellar public schools cannot grow and take over less successful ones. Ineffective public schools have little fear of losing students to competitors because they have no real competitors - they enjoy a monopoly on $12,000 per pupil in public spending."

Who Are the Uninsured? | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

Who Are the Uninsured? | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Only about 30 percent of the uninsured remain so for more than a year, approximately 16 percent for two years, and less than 2.5 percent for three years or longer. About half are uninsured for six months or less. Notably, because health insurance is too often tied to employment, the working poor who cycle in and out of the job market also cycle in and out of health insurance."

Bipartisan Visa Program Could Fix Nation's Illegal Immigration Mess | Daniel Griswold | Cato Institute: Commentary

Bipartisan Visa Program Could Fix Nation's Illegal Immigration Mess | Daniel Griswold | Cato Institute: Commentary: "The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act legalized 2.7 million illegal immigrants and expanded enforcement, but it did nothing to legalize future flow of workers for an expanding economy. The result was predictable failure.

In the early 1950s, Congress and President Eisenhower faced a similar challenge. The U.S. Border Patrol was making 1 million apprehensions a year. Congress and the president responded with more vigorous enforcement, but also a large increase in visas for temporary workers.

The result: Apprehensions at the border fell by 95%. Given the choice, low-skilled immigrants from Mexico chose by the millions to enter legally rather than illegally."

Banana Republics | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary

Banana Republics | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Who's right? It's hard to say. Philip Giraldi of the American Conservative Defense Alliance may have put it best: 'there is no clear good and bad in what happened in Honduras.'

Without question, the Honduran constitution bars amendment via referendum of eight constitutional provisions, including term limits. However, does that provision apply to an advisory measure which does not directly address presidential tenure? Still, the Supreme Court made a clear and presumptively valid ruling, which bound the president. The National Congress and military should have ensured that the law was respected. Was his forcible removal by the military necessary? Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution states that anyone attempting to change the term limit 'will immediately cease in their functions.' Was it legitimate for the Court to decide that that is what he intended on doing in the future, even if he was not doing so today? If so, presumably he lost his office automatically. That still didn't necessarily warrant the military's bedtime arrest and exile, however.

What were Zelaya's plans? His intentions might have been malign, though Honduras is one of many countries where economic and political elites tend to help each other at the expense of the poor. Moreover, his critics had reason to worry that Zelaya hoped to follow the precedent created by Venezuela's Chavez, who has steadily dismantled legal restraints on presidential power and tenure, and eliminated protections for civil and political liberties. Nevertheless, suspicions alone provide a dubious basis for removing a president. Especially since Zelaya was constrained by the very institutions which removed him from power as well as his lack of popularity. Assume that his ouster was valid. His arrest and exile remain dubious. The latter certainly is extra-constitutional if not expressly illegal."

Long-term Cost Is Steep | Tad DeHaven | Cato Institute: Commentary

Long-term Cost Is Steep | Tad DeHaven | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Unfortunately for proponents of government spending as a panacea, there can be no 'success' without failure. The reason is simple: the government can't spend money without taxing it out of the economy first, or issuing debt, which begets future taxes. When the government taxes something, the result is less of that something. One of the chief rationales politicians give for raising taxes on cigarettes is that it'll result in less smoking. Why would the result be any different for taxes on economic productivity?

In other words, the government can spend billions of dollars 'creating' jobs -- technically a success -- but the cost of those jobs in terms of reduced economic productivity is a failure. And that failure equals lost jobs or jobs not created that otherwise would have been in the absence of the taxes the government needed to 'create' those jobs in the first place."

'As President Barack Obama inadvertently admitted last week, "UPS and FedEx are doing just fine . . . It's the post office that's always having problems."

The Bush administration oversaw one of the most massive increases in federal spending in history. Yet here we are in the midst of the second recession since Bush took office, and a deep one at that. If government spending results in economic growth shouldn't the Bush years have been an economic boom?'

The Era of Big Government Initiatives Is Over | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary

The Era of Big Government Initiatives Is Over | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary: "President Lyndon Johnson pushed the Great Society through Congress at a time when three-quarters of Americans told pollsters that they trusted the federal government to do what is right 'most of the time' or 'just about always.' Today, that number's around 30 percent."

When Out of Hope, Feign Change | Michael F. Cannon | Cato Institute: Commentary

When Out of Hope, Feign Change | Michael F. Cannon | Cato Institute: Commentary: "The definition of a cooperative is a health plan governed by its enrollees. Since a government chartered co-op won't have any enrollees at first, it will be governed by — guess who? — the Secretary of Health and Human Services, just like any other government program."

'In June, Sebelius told Bloomberg.com, "You could theoretically design a co-op plan that had the same attributes as a public plan." In July, President Obama himself told Time magazine, "I think in theory you can imagine a co-operative meeting that definition" of a "public option."'

'So even if Democrats promise that someday the new program will become a co-op, what they mean is: "We're going to create that new government health program, just as we intended all along. But we will turn it over to the members in, oh, five years or so. We promise."'

'President Obama keeps saying you'll be able to keep your current health plan, even though the Congressional Budget Office says that isn't true. The president says a new government program wouldn't drive private insurers out of business, even though his allies expect it to do just that. He says he wants choice and competition, yet proposes insurance regulations that would drive most private plans out of existence. He doesn't want the government to take over the health sector, just like he didn't want to take over General Motors. The administration pretends to distance itself from a new government program by embracing...another new government program.'

The Broken Windshield Fallacy | Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar | Cato Institute: Commentary

The Broken Windshield Fallacy | Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar | Cato Institute: Commentary: "The economic argument says that scrapping cars creates artificial scarcity, thus boosting demand for new auto sales in a recession. Leave aside that scrapping clunkers also raises the prices of used cars, thus penalizing poorer consumers. More importantly, there is evidence that the scheme triggered far fewer additional car sales than assumed. Consulting firm Macroeconomic Advisers estimates that in the U.S. 'roughly half of the 250,000 in new sales would have occurred in the months following the conclusion of the program, and the other half would have occurred during the program period anyway.' So all the scheme did was to transfer, rather than create, wealth by unnecessarily bribing people to make long-planned acquisitions.

But even where the subsidies may have caused genuine new sales, more money spent on cars simply means less money is available for other items. The German Retail Federation, for example, complains that the cash-for-clunkers program is 'sucking out spending' as retail sales fell 1.3% in May and 1.8% in June. For the overall economy, therefore, the net result is probably zero. The idea that destroying items of value will boost the economy might be called in this context, the broken windshield fallacy."

"The energy required to manufacture a car accounts for as much as 45% of its lifetime energy consumption. So replacing old cars with new ones requires a big up-front energy investment. And crushing old cars and converting them to steel consumes more energy than exporting them.

What is the Condition of U.S. Savings? - Frank Shostak - Mises Institute

What is the Condition of U.S. Savings? - Frank Shostak - Mises Institute: "For instance, John the baker has produced ten loaves of bread and consumes two loaves. The income in this case is ten loaves of bread, and his savings are eight loaves. Now, he exchanges eight loaves of bread for the products of a toolmaker. John pays with his real savings — eight loaves of bread — for the products of the toolmaker.

One may be tempted to conclude that the overall income is the ten loaves that were produced by the baker, plus the eight loaves that were earned by the toolmaker. In reality, however, only ten loaves of bread were produced — and this is the total income."

"Obviously, then, counting the amount of dollars received by intermediary producers as part of the total national income provides a misleading picture as far as total income is concerned.

Yet this if precisely what the NIPA framework does. Consequently, savings data as calculated by the NIPA is highly questionable."

"Out of a given money income, an individual can do the following: he can exchange part of the money for consumer goods; he can invest; he can lend out the money (i.e., transfer his money to another party in return for interest); he can also keep some of the money (i.e., exercise a demand for money).

At no stage, however, do individuals actually save money.

In its capacity as the medium of exchange, money facilitates the flow of real savings. The baker can now exchange his saved bread for money and then exchange the money for final or intermediary goods and services.

What is commonly called "saving" is nothing more than exercising demand for the medium of exchange (i.e., money). This means that people don't actually save money but rather exercise demand for it. And, when an individual likewise exchanges his real savings for money, he in fact only increases demand for money. The money he receives is not income; it is a medium of exchange that enables the individual to secure goods. In the absence of final consumer goods, all of the money in the world would be of little help to anyone.

Consider the so-called helicopter money case: the Fed sends every individual a check for one thousand dollars. According to the NIPA accounting, this would be classified as a tremendous increase in personal income. It is commonly held that, for a given consumption expenditure, this would also increase personal savings.

However, we maintain that this has nothing to do with real income and thus with saving. The new money didn't increase total real income."

Veto of the Texas Seed Bill - Grover Cleveland - Mises Institute

Veto of the Texas Seed Bill - Grover Cleveland - Mises Institute: "And yet I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan as proposed by this bill, to indulge a benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds for that purpose.

I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the government, the government should not support the people.

The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood."

"It is here suggested that the Commissioner of Agriculture is annually directed to expend a large sum of money for the purchase, propagation, and distribution of seeds and other things of this description, two-thirds of which are, upon the request of senators, representatives, and delegates in Congress, supplied to them for distribution among their constituents.

The appropriation of the current year for this purpose is $100,000, and it will probably be no less in the appropriation for the ensuing year. I understand that a large quantity of grain is furnished for such distribution, and it is supposed that this free apportionment among their neighbors is a privilege which may be waived by our senators and representatives.

If sufficient of them should request the Commissioner of Agriculture to send their shares of the grain thus allowed them, to the suffering farmers of Texas, they might be enabled to sow their crops; the constituents, for whom in theory this grain is intended, could well bear the temporary deprivation, and the donors would experience the satisfaction attending deeds of charity."

Obamacare's Bait & Switch | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

Obamacare's Bait & Switch | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Obama has stopped talking about 'health-care reform.' The new poll-tested phrase of the day is 'health-insurance reform. Specifically the president says he wants to protect people with 'pre-existing conditions.'"

"But if that's what the president wants, he could already have a bill through Congress, with significant Republican support. In fact, even the insurance companies have agreed to it.

But the 1,017-page bill making its way through the House devotes all of six pages to insurance reform — 30 pages, if you count all the definitions and supporting provisions, still less than 3 percent of the bill."

"prohibiting insurers from charging more to older and sicker customers amounts to a tax on the young and healthy who must pay higher premiums to subsidize their less-healthy counterparts. And letting people buy insurance after they get sick means healthy people have little incentive to buy insurance.

Put the two together and, as the Congressional Budget Office has warned, the young and healthy are much more likely to simply do without insurance.

As the healthy leave the insurance pool, the proportion of sick in the pool grows ever greater, leading to higher premiums — which in turn causes the healthiest remaining individuals to leave in what amounts to an insurance death spiral."

I Am Finally Scared of a White House Administration | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary

I Am Finally Scared of a White House Administration | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary: "President Obama's desired health care reform intends that a federal board (similar to the British model) — as in the Center for Health Outcomes Research and Evaluation in a current Democratic bill — decides whether your quality of life, regardless of your political party, merits government-controlled funds to keep you alive. Watch for that life-decider in the final bill. It's already in the stimulus bill signed into law."

'there is a July 29 Washington Times editorial citing a line from a report written by a key adviser to Obama on cost-efficient health care, prominent bioethicist Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel (brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel).

Emanuel writes about rationing health care for older Americans that "allocation (of medical care) by age is not invidious discrimination." (The Lancet, January 2009) He calls this form of rationing — which is fundamental to Obamacare goals — "the complete lives system." You see, at 65 or older, you've had more life years than a 25-year-old. As such, the latter can be more deserving of cost-efficient health care than older folks.'

'Here is what Obama said in an April 28 New York Times interview (quoted in Washington Times July 9 editorial) in which he describes a government end-of-life services guide for the citizenry as we get to a certain age, or are in a certain grave condition. Our government will undertake, he says, a "very difficult democratic conversation" about how "the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care" costs.'

'As the Washington Post's Charles Lane penetratingly explains (Undue influence," Aug. 8): the government would pay doctors to discuss with Medicare patients explanations of "living wills and durable powers of attorney … and (provide) a list of national and state-specific resources to assist consumers and their families" on making advance-care planning (read end-of-life) decisions.

Significantly, Lane adds that, "The doctor 'shall' (that's an order) explain that Medicare pays for hospice care (hint, hint)."'

'"Remember that legislation itself is only half the problem with Obamacare. Whatever bill passes, hundreds of bureaucrats in the federal agencies will have years to promulgate scores of regulations to govern the details of the law.

"This is where the real mischief could be done because most regulatory actions are effectuated beneath the public radar. It is thus essential, as just one example, that any end-of-life counseling provision in the final bill be specified to be purely voluntary … and that the counseling be required by law to be neutral as to outcome. Otherwise, even if the legislation doesn't push in a specific direction — for instance, THE GOVERNMENT REFUSING TREATMENT — the regulations could." (Emphasis added.)'

Lawmakers Override "Frankenstein Veto" in State Budget | Scott Walker for Wisconsin Governor

Lawmakers Override "Frankenstein Veto" in State Budget | Scott Walker for Wisconsin Governor: "Governor Doyle acknowledged the veto was in error. He blamed it on employees in his budget office working too fast."

Maybe he and his staff just aren't competent enough or government is too big to manage.

Editorial: Balanced budget requirement being bypassed | Scott Walker for Wisconsin Governor

Editorial: Balanced budget requirement being bypassed | Scott Walker for Wisconsin Governor: "That said, a budget with a $200 million hole is not balanced. According to the WTA, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau covered the budget shortfall by simply adding a line that says $100 million in 'other' revenues will flow into the state during each of the next two years. How?

The WTA poses several questions in response to this maneuver.

'First, what prevents any legislature or governor from developing a budget deficit and then, to balance it, 'plugging' into the budget an unspecified promise of future cuts or transfers sufficient to produce an ending surplus?

'And, if the governor can promise $200 million in future lapses this year, why can't a future chief executive or legislature promise $500 million to cover a $500 deficit? Or $1 billion to avoid a $1 billion shortfall?'"

Give True Account of Health Plan's Cost | Michael F. Cannon | Cato Institute: Commentary

Give True Account of Health Plan's Cost | Michael F. Cannon | Cato Institute: Commentary: "First, Congress should ensure that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office includes all new state and private-sector spending, as well as new federal spending, in the total cost of each bill.

In 2006, Massachusetts snuck a health care boondoggle past the voters by pushing 20 percent of the cost on to the federal government and 60 percent onto private individuals and employers, according to data from the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation"

"House Democrats kept the (on-budget) cost of their plan to a mere $1.2 trillion by delaying implementation until the second half of the 10-year budget window."

"It costs Massachusetts about $6,700 to cover each previously uninsured resident, or about $27,000 to cover a family of four. Democrats should justify why they want to tax us that much when the average employer-sponsored family policy costs just $12,680."

Obama Kills Health Competition | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

Obama Kills Health Competition | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Obama has repeatedly said that one of his 'reform' goals is to increase 'competition and choice' in the US health-care system -- but the policies he's pursuing would actually reduce competition and give consumers fewer choices. Meanwhile, he's ignoring reforms that would bring more choices and competition."

"To truly create more choice and competition, Obama should tear down the regulatory barriers to choice by letting people buy insurance from states other than the one in which they live.

Though few realize it, it's illegal to purchase health insurance across state lines. This effectively creates insurance cartels in each state"

"Ironically, one group has this ability today: big businesses. The federal ERISA law (the Employee Retirement Income Security Act) lets larger companies ignore state mandates and avoid uncompetitive state markets: They can create their own plans, and their employees can take that insurance anywhere in the country."

Congressman Ron Kind : On the Road - Blog : Immediate Need for Health Care Reform: June 22, 2009

Congressman Ron Kind : On the Road - Blog : Immediate Need for Health Care Reform: June 22, 2009: "In a tough economic time, reforming the health care system will save money, create jobs, and help put us on a path toward recovery."

Since the system will cost at least $200 billion per year after it is fully ramped up, there is no way that it will save money or help the economy.

Moms Stage Breast-Feeding Protest at Florida Fast Food Restaurant - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

Moms Stage Breast-Feeding Protest at Florida Fast Food Restaurant - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com: "The manager of a central Florida fast food restaurant says she made a 'doozy' of a mistake when she suggested a breast-feeding mother cover herself earlier this week."

I am all for breast-feeding but just because it is good doesn't mean that it should be on display.

Congressman Ron Kind : On the Road - Blog : Affordable Health Care for Wisconsin: July 28, 2009

Congressman Ron Kind : On the Road - Blog : Affordable Health Care for Wisconsin: July 28, 2009: "In order to increase access to affordable coverage we must make sure no one is denied coverage, specifically due to pre-existing conditions"

That would just increase costs.

Congressman Ron Kind : On the Road - Blog : More Cash for Clunkers: July 31, 2009

Congressman Ron Kind : On the Road - Blog : More Cash for Clunkers: July 31, 2009: "The incentives are not only spurring growth for the auto industry but by getting money flowing into the economy, helping it down the path to recovery. "

The government has to take from others to give to some so it is a net loss.

Obama and the Post Office - Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. - Mises Institute

Obama and the Post Office - Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. - Mises Institute: "Writing in The State and Revolution in 1917, Vladimir Lenin summed up the economic aim of socialism as follows: 'To organize the whole economy on the lines of the postal service….' "

"A student raised a question about the government's provision of health services and its impact on private services.

How can a private company compete against the government? My answer is that if the private insurance companies are providing a good bargain, and if the public option has to be self-sustaining, meaning that taxpayers aren't subsidizing it, but it has to run on charging premiums and providing good services, and a good network of doctors, just like private insurers do, then I think private insurers should be able to compete.

They do it all the time. If you think about it, UPS and Fed-Ex are doing just fine. It's the post office that's always having problems … there is nothing inevitable about this somehow destroying the private marketplace. As long as it is not set up where the government is being subsidized by the taxpayers so that even if they are providing a good deal, we keep having to pony up more and more money.

Now, these comments are nothing short of incredible. The post office has been on the loser list for many decades. Most recently, it has been included on the GAO's high-risk list, increasing its debt to $10.2 billion and incurring a cash shortfall of $1 billion."

What Black Parents Are Still Telling Their Children | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary

What Black Parents Are Still Telling Their Children | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary: "In Nassau, along with 30 hours of training on cultural diversity in the police academy, a much more enduring practice is 'data collection program that requires officers to note the race and ethnicity of motorists they stop on the road.'

Detective Lt. Kevin Smith adds that this data is periodically studied to determine if the police department engages in racial profiling.

Furthermore – and I hope other police departments will take notice – Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy told Newsday: 'Last year, for the first time, we completed a pilot program where we collected statistics to help identify a baseline for traffic stops and to red-flag officers who differed significantly from peers when making these stops.'

What then? 'We shared,' said Levy, 'these data with individuals who were above the norm, sought an explanation, and then possibly referred those individuals for additional training.'

This postgraduate education for police officers, if extended nationally and to police on the streets as well, could eventually lead to fewer war stories among black males about the humiliation, and worse, of 'driving while black.'"

Inhumanity of the Minimum Wage - Paul Poirot - Mises Institute

Inhumanity of the Minimum Wage - Paul Poirot - Mises Institute: "If a minimum wage is set high enough to have any effect, that effect must be a closing of the market to those persons least capable of earning a living. For the minimum wage denies such persons the right to offer their services for what they are worth. The law says in effect, 'If you are not worth the legal minimum wage, you are not worth anything.'

This, of course, is arbitrariness of the very worst kind. It is difficult to visualize a greater injustice than this among supposedly civilized human beings — the strong ganging up to deprive the weak of their limited means of helping themselves.

Setting a minimum wage, below which no man may sell his services, is like setting a floor price for potatoes. The higher the floor price, the less demand there will be for potatoes. Those growers of potatoes who are least skilled in the arts of production will have been forced out of the market arbitrarily. And so will those buyers who can least afford to pay the price for potatoes."

What to Do About Pre-existing Conditions | John H. Cochrane | Cato Institute: Commentary

What to Do About Pre-existing Conditions | John H. Cochrane | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Health care and insurance are service-oriented, retail businesses. There is only one way to reduce costs in such a business: intense competition for every customer. The idea that the federal government can reduce costs by negotiating harder or telling businesses what to do is a triumph of hope over centuries of experience."

"But what about pre-existing conditions?

A truly effective insurance policy would combine coverage for this year's expenses with the right to buy insurance in the future at a set price. Today, employer-based group coverage provides the former but, crucially, not the latter. A "guaranteed renewable" individual insurance contract is the simplest way to deliver both. Once you sign up, you can keep insurance for life, and your premiums do not rise if you get sicker. Term life insurance, for example, is fully guaranteed renewable. Individual health insurance is mostly so. And insurers are getting more creative. UnitedHealth now lets you buy the right to future insurance—insurance against developing a pre-existing condition.

These market solutions can be refined. Insurance policies could separate current insurance and the right to buy future insurance. Then, if you are temporarily covered by an employer, you could keep the pre-existing-condition protection."

"How do we know insurers will honor such contracts? What about the stories of insurers who drop customers when they get sick? A competitive market is the best consumer protection. A car insurer that doesn't pay claims quickly loses customers and goes out of business. And courts do still enforce contracts."

DiceWars Corral

I like to play DiceWars and today I was able to make a corral -- I took all spaces except I left 1 space for each computer player.

State by state average of CO2 emissions per KWH produced

D.C. has by far the highest (3.6) pounds of CO2 produced per KWH so if they don't have the political will to fix that why should we think they have the political will to actually pass a climate bill that is helpful?

Data from http://www.sterlingplanet.com/content/State_Electricity_and_Emissions_Rates.pdf

Auto Dealers Paid for Just 2 Percent of 'Clunkers' Claims, Congressman Says - Political News - FOXNews.com

Auto Dealers Paid for Just 2 Percent of 'Clunkers' Claims, Congressman Says - Political News - FOXNews.com: "In the letter, Sestak said only 2 percent of claims have been paid and that four of every five applications have been 'rejected for minor oversight.'"

Not surprising for a government-run program.

How 10 digits will end privacy as we know it | Security - CNET News

How 10 digits will end privacy as we know it | Security - CNET News: "A study of 1990 U.S. Census data revealed that 87 percent of the people in the United States were uniquely identifiable with just three pieces of information (PDF): five-digit ZIP code, gender, and date of birth. Internet surfers today spew considerably more information than that."

"Database dossiers, too, carry surprising amounts of identifying information, even when specifically anonymized for privacy. Researchers at the University of Texas at Austin last year studied a set of movie-rating profiles from about 500,000 unnamed Netflix subscribers (PDF).
Knowing just a little about a subscriber--say, six to eight movie preferences, the type of thing you might post on a social-networking site--the researchers found that they could pick out your anonymous Netflix profile, if you had one in the set."

"Scientists at ETH Zurich recently showed how to identify microchips uniquely using radio waves (PDF)--and consequently to see through the disguise of pseudonyms. Their experiments showed that thanks to manufacturing variations, microchips, laptop Wi-Fi cards, and other devices can't help but emit physical "fingerprints"--essentially God-given serial numbers."

Gov. Jim Doyle won't seek re-election - Jonathan Martin - POLITICO.com

Gov. Jim Doyle won't seek re-election - Jonathan Martin - POLITICO.com: "With Doyle retiring, a slew of Wisconsin Democrats are likely to consider the race. That list is topped by Lt. Gov. Barbara Lawton, who has already indicated she would run if Doyle does not and who would be the state’s first female governor.

By next year, though, Lawton may be running as an incumbent.

In addition to Lawton, other potential Democratic gubernatorial candidates include Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, Rep. Ron Kind and state Sen. Joe Erpenbach."

Social-networking ban for sex offenders: Bad call? | Safe and Secure - CNET News

Social-networking ban for sex offenders: Bad call? | Safe and Secure - CNET News: "If the law had no negative consequences, I would give it a pass. After all, who cares about the rights of people who have been convicted of sex offenses? Well, I do. Not because I think they're wonderful people but because it's in all of our interest that, if they're not in prison, they be integrated into society to the extent that they can function and be able to find and hold appropriate jobs. Keeping these individuals away from the very types of sites that can help them in their careers is counterproductive to the goal of rehabilitating them."

"Not everyone on every state sex offender list is a danger to children." ... "Citing a report from Human Rights Watch, the article says 'at least five states required men to register if they were caught visiting prostitutes. At least 13 required it for urinating in public (in two of those states, only if a child was present). No fewer than 29 states required registration for teenagers who had consensual sex with another teenager. And 32 states registered flashers and streakers.'"

"Another reason to question this law is that it can lead to more than one false sense of security. To begin with, the most dangerous sex offenders aren't necessarily the ones who are registered but the many who haven't yet been caught and convicted. And if we focus exclusively on predation, we're likely to lose track of the most dangerous aspects of youth online behavior, which are mostly either kid on kid--such as bullying, harassment, and impersonation--or self-imposed risks such as sexting or posting information that could be embarrassing later in life."

Money Matters Online: Growing up in communist Poland

Money Matters Online: "Most of the time grocery stores—if you could even call them that—stayed virtually empty with the exception of a few basic items like bread and milk. Once a week there would be a delivery of items such as meats, sugar, and flour to the stores. And, as word got out, you’d see long lines forming in front of the stores with people hoping to “catch” something.

Because the system was corrupt, being a grocery clerk was a lucrative and quite powerful position. Clerks would hoard much of the food for themselves, their family members, and close friends.

And, many who stood in those long lines would walk away empty-handed, hoping for better luck next time. Since I lived in a rural area, small farms were the salvation of many people.

You may find it humorous, but toilet paper was a hot commodity in those days. When our family members from big cities came to visit, they brought us rolls of toilet paper and we sent them back with items like meat, eggs, and flour."

This shows stark examples of government run vs. free market.

Muslim Woman Banned From Parisian Public Pool for Wearing 'Burquini' - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News - FOXNe

Muslim Woman Banned From Parisian Public Pool for Wearing 'Burquini' - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News - FOXNews.com: "Officials say the outfit is unhygienic and potentially harmful to other swimmers."

How?

Is the GM Volt mileage claim legit? | Green Tech - CNET News

Is the GM Volt mileage claim legit? | Green Tech - CNET News: "In the EPA model GM has followed, those first 40 miles equate to 'infinite mileage,' since it was charged from the grid and no gasoline was burned. But to consider electricity as infinite fuel efficiency can be misleading given that some energy--be it coal, natural gas, or nuclear--went into the delivery of electricity to charge the batteries."

So then the Tesla gets an infinite number of miles per gallon! :-/

Special Front Sight Wednesday Blog: What the Gun Grabbers Hate to See…

Special Front Sight Wednesday Blog: What the Gun Grabbers Hate to See…: "The school, which sits in the middle of a prairie, was too far from law enforcement for police to come in time to fend off would-be attackers. The students and staff would be safer if on-site, trained staff members were equipped to handle a crisis at a moment’s notice, they decided."

House Dems Hide Cost Of Health Plan | Michael F. Cannon | Cato Institute: Commentary

House Dems Hide Cost Of Health Plan | Michael F. Cannon | Cato Institute: Commentary: "The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the House Democrats' legislation would spend $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years. Yet that cost estimate is based on a tried-and-true budget gimmick that members of Congress use to hide how much of your money they want to spend.

In reality, the Democrats' health care bill is at least 50% more expensive than the $1.2 trillion estimate suggests.

President Obama and his fellow partisans want the federal government to guarantee medical insurance coverage to all Americans. According to estimates by the left-leaning Urban Institute, providing health insurance to all of the uninsured would cost just under $2 trillion over the next 10 years."

"A standard trick for making new government programs appear less expensive is to have them take effect not in the first year, but later in the budget window.

If Congress launches a $100 million program in year one, its 10-year cost will be $1 billion. If Congress launches the program in year six, the 10-year cost is just $500 million. Delaying implementation just cut the cost of the program in half, right? Not quite. The program would still cost taxpayers $100 million per year.

That budgetary gimmick lets Congress appear thrifty. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., acting chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, recently said he was "very confident we can meet the president's goal of having a fully-paid-for 10-year program on health care right around $1 trillion." Of course he can! Covering the uninsured costs $2 trillion? Heck, we'll do it for half that price!"

Sotomayor and the Second Amendment | Robert A. Levy | Cato Institute: Commentary

Sotomayor and the Second Amendment | Robert A. Levy | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Technically, the Maloney panel could not overrule a previous panel of the same court. In effect, Sotomayor's panel said, 'Maybe Presser is still good law, or maybe Presser has been superseded by the Supreme Court's later incorporation cases. We three judges cannot make that decision – first, because another panel of this court has already followed Presser and, second, because the Supreme Court and not an appellate court must say when earlier Supreme Court cases are superseded.'"

"Which panel got it right? Most likely, it won't matter – because the Supreme Court will review one or more of the three Second Amendment cases; and precedent will not bind the high Court. We should have an answer shortly. Either way, the decision of the Second Circuit panel, including Judge Sotomayor, was well within the bounds of responsible judging. Perhaps the Second and Seventh Circuits were correct. Perhaps the Ninth Circuit panel had the better of the argument. It's a close call –not the kind of call on which confirmations ought to turn (or even focus).

Finally, some gun rights advocates criticize Sotomayor's Maloney opinion for stating that the right to nunchakus in the home is not a "fundamental right." But that statement had nothing to do with the Second Amendment. Instead, it concerned a different claim by the plaintiff under a doctrine known as substantive due process, which pertains to unenumerated constitutional rights, not those expressly listed in the Bill of Rights. Unless an unenumerated right is "fundamental," the courts will be highly deferential to legislative restrictions. Only if the right is "necessary to [our] regime of ordered liberty" or "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition" will a right be deemed fundamental. The Sotomayor panel decided that the statute in question, regarding the unenumerated right to a nunchaku, not the enumerated right to keep and bear arms, did not meet those criteria."

Playing Good Cop, Bad Cop | Jagadeesh Gokhale and Kent Smetters | Cato Institute: Commentary

Playing Good Cop, Bad Cop | Jagadeesh Gokhale and Kent Smetters | Cato Institute: Commentary: "It has become clear that this health care 'reform' effort is being driven by something other than the real and urgent need to reduce the nation's growing health care costs. The Congressional Budget Office recently declared that the administration's proposed mechanism for controlling health care costs--a Medicare Advisory Committee 'on steroids'--would likely be ineffective.

What, then, explains the enormous political push to cover the uninsured? The customary justification for extending such coverage is that so many Americans simply cannot afford health insurance. Partly, this is the result of government regulations that cause segmented insurance markets. Moreover, in most insurance markets, those facing a low risk of loss prefer to forgo insurance coverage at average premium rates. It's no surprise, therefore, that a large segment of the uninsured are young individuals that are much less likely to experience health problems.

One explanation of the drive toward mandatory health insurance is the need to reinforce funding for Medicare, which is rapidly running out of revenues. The young will consume relatively few medical services, but their mandated coverage would provide a rationale for additional taxes. This is very similar to how Social Security's finances were buttressed repeatedly--by expanding coverage to additional occupations and population groups. It's the reason why the leadership of retiree lobbies is maintaining silence despite the possibility that the new program will introduce cuts in Medicare benefits."

"Note that, according to the proposed legislation, mandatory health insurance coverage will commence in 2013. Calculations based on information from the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services indicates that the program's true "10-year" net cost would become almost $2 trillion through the year 2022."

So in order to make it look cheaper they make it ramp up slowly so the first 10 years are much cheaper than later decades.

"Taking an even longer view, we calculate that the permanent program would add $13.6 trillion to the federal government's total unfunded obligations in today's dollars. That is, the government would need to have that amount in the bank today, invested at interest, to fully finance the new program's subsidy costs as they come due. Social Security and Medicare actuaries estimate that these two programs' unfunded obligations under today's policies exceed $100 trillion (not billion) in today's dollars."

End the Fed? A Not-So-Crazy Idea | George A. Selgin | Cato Institute: Commentary

End the Fed? A Not-So-Crazy Idea | George A. Selgin | Cato Institute: Commentary: "[T]he US spent nearly half the years between 1854 to 1913 in recession, as opposed to just 21 percent of the time since the Fed's establishment in 1913. Who would want to go back to those bad old days?

But consider: the US economy has actually grown less rapidly since 1914 than it did before. And inflation has been much worse, despite both the Civil War, which featured the nation's worst inflation, and the Great Depression, which featured its severest deflation!

What's more, the frequent downturns before 1914 were due, not to the lack of a central bank, but to foolish government regulations. Topping the list were bans on branch banking, initiated by state governments and then incorporated into federal banking law. The bans propped up thousands of undercapitalized and under-diversified banks – banks unfit to survive major local shocks, let alone macroeconomics ones. They also caused bank notes – competitively supplied counterparts of today's Federal Reserve notes – to trade at discounts whenever they traveled far from the solitary offices of banks that issued them."

"But the Federal Reserve plan proved to be a poor substitute for deregulation. By granting monopoly privileges to the Federal Reserve banks, it allowed them to inflate recklessly: By 1919, the US inflation rate, which had cleaved close to zero ever since the Civil War, was close to 20 percent! Yet the Fed was also capable of failing to supply enough money to avert crises. The first downturn over which it presided – that of 1921 – was among the sharpest in US history. Still it was nothing compared to the unprecedented monetary contraction of 1929-1933.

Would asset currency have been any better? Canada's was: Between 1929 and 1933, for instance, 6,000 US banks failed, and a third of the US money stock was wiped out. In contrast, and despite a fixed Canadian-US dollar exchange rate, Canada's money stock shrank by just 13 percent, and no Canadian bank failed."

Congress In Fantasyland | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary

Congress In Fantasyland | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary: "If Congress suddenly required every car and truck in America (all 250 million of them) to be immediately destroyed and replaced with new cars and trucks that got better gas mileage, would the country be worse off or better off? Those members of Congress who voted for the 'cash for clunkers' program would probably say 'better off,' even though a perfectly good auto and truck stock would be destroyed.

The congressional clunker caucus would say millions of workers would be employed to replace all of the existing cars and trucks. Yes, that would be true, but everyone else would be poorer. Those who had to buy a new car would have less money to spend on everything else, which would mean fewer jobs in the rest of the economy -- more autoworkers but fewer farmers, teachers and medical researchers -- not a good trade-off.

Congress would likely respond by proposing a tax credit for the purchase of the new car. The tax credit could only be paid for by higher taxes now or in the future, which means people would be worse off because of the dead weight loss of collecting taxes in addition to the amount actually collected.

Members of Congress would then say that we are saving gasoline by having a more efficient auto fleet -- which ignores the fact that building a new car takes far more resources, including petroleum, than could possibly be saved by the gain of additional miles per gallon.

Congressional "logic" could also be applied to housing.

Why not knock down all houses built in America before 2000 and replace them with new and more energy-efficient houses? Wait -- we already evidenced the results of that experiment -- it happened in New Orleans. Rather than the government directly knocking down the houses, Hurricane Katrina did it for us. Are the people of New Orleans better off or worse off because of Katrina? Are all of the American taxpayers who footed much of the rebuilding cost -- hundreds of billions of dollars -- better off or worse off because of Katrina?

Many in Congress argue that the reason New Orleans is still a mess is because of federal, state and local government mismanagement and corruption. Yes, but now don't they want the government to run the health care system? And these folks are telling us that their new medical system will cover more people, will cost less, give us better care and not add to the budget deficit -- hmmm. Fantasyland!"

"It is also not mathematically possible to take care of all the new spending by increasing taxes on the top 5 percent of taxpayers (those making $160,000 or more annually) who already pay 61 percent of the federal tax (or $676 billion per year). Most of these people are now paying close to the revenue maximizing rate, which means that any increase in their tax rate is unlikely over the long run to bring in much more tax revenue.

Quite simply, upper-income people have options. History shows that when tax rates are raised, many will choose to work less (leisure is nontaxable), retire earlier than they had planned and save and invest less in taxable, productive activities. Those making more than $160,000 per year would need to have their taxes roughly tripled to take care of just this year's deficit. (One merely has to look at the tax evasion practiced by the chairman of the congressional tax writing committee, the secretary of the Treasury and the former majority leader, et al. at today's tax rates to know that they and their colleagues, as well as most everyone else, will find either legal or illegal ways to avoid paying the tax.)"

De-fund the Detroit Public Schools | Adam B. Schaeffer | Cato Institute: Commentary

De-fund the Detroit Public Schools | Adam B. Schaeffer | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Detroit is planning on spending almost $1.3 billion in 2009 on this abject failure. That's $13,500 for each student. How much more money and how many more young lives is Michigan willing to sacrifice to this diseased system?

The money for success is there, but we need to give it to parents to spend on good schools of their choice, rather than the politicians and bureaucrats that have created this mess.

With that kind of money, private schools will rush to open seats and expand capacity to accommodate them. With that kind of money, new private schools would have plenty to spend on start-up costs and deliver a good, honest education.

Michigan needs a donation tax credit program to fund private school choice for Detroit's children, like the successful programs that Pennsylvania, Florida, Arizona, Georgia, Rhode Island, Iowa, and Indiana already enjoy."

"Ten gold-standard studies, which use a method similar to medical drug trials, have analyzed the impact that school choice has on the performance of students who are offered a choice.

The results are decisive; nine out of ten studies find statistically significant positive impacts on at least some students. None finds a negative effect.

School choice also helps the kids who remain in public schools. There are 17 studies that analyze the impact of private school choice on public school performance, and again the conclusion is solidly in favor of choice. Sixteen out of those seventeen studies find that choice actually improves public schools. None finds a negative impact.

And on top of all the academic success, in state after state, study after study, we find that school choice dramatically eases the massive burden on tax payers that has been imposed by inefficient public school districts.

A fiscal analysis of the Cato Institute's broad-based education tax credit program demonstrates that it can save states billions of dollars. Illinois, for instance, could save more than $5.1 billion over the first ten years."

'Teachable Moment' Missed Lesson on Free Speech | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary

'Teachable Moment' Missed Lesson on Free Speech | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary: "There's a fine line between disorderly conduct and freedom of speech. It can get tough out there, but I tell my officers, 'Don't make matters worse by throwing handcuffs on someone. Bite your tongue ..."

"An arrest he said is justified when:
'The set of circumstances ... will lead a reasonable and prudent person to believe that a crime has or is about to be committed and that the person in question is involved in a significant manner.' Handcuffs are not warranted, he added, by anything short of that."

"In May of this year, the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) reported, based on police data, that New York City Police Department officers 'stopped and interrogated New Yorkers 171,094 times between January and March' - and more than 151,000 of those individuals were sent on their way without charges. Approximately 89,000 of those stopped were black, 56,000 were Latino, and 16,000 were white.

Donna Lieberman, the head of the NYCLU, added: "These New Yorkers' personal information is now stored in an NYPD database."

'The NYPD is, in effect, building a massive database of black and brown New Yorkers,' said NYCLU Associate Legal Director Christopher Dunn. Based on what information on those who are not charged? Their color!"

When there are no charges then the info should be deleted.

Obama and the Continuing War on the Poor - Paul A. Cleveland - Mises Institute

Obama and the Continuing War on the Poor - Paul A. Cleveland - Mises Institute: "A mentor of mine, Clarence Carson, published a book in the 1970s entitled The War on the Poor. He took his title from Lyndon Johnson's so-called 'war on poverty.' Carson noted that actual wars are waged against real people rather than circumstances, and that if the government were engaged in a war it must be against some identifiable group of people. In his book, he identified the poor as that group by analyzing the economic impact of the various policies that Johnson pursued. In each new initiative of the Great Society, the effect of those policies was to raise prices on various products and cause the poor in America to suffer for the sake of a few special interests."

"[T]he failures of past policies are generally not pointed to as a reason for doubting current political promises."

"Whether we look at Obama and the Democrats' cap-and-trade legislation or their health care reform or their pork barrel stimulus bill, in each case they intend to raise prices and increase taxes on us all. While a few corporate interests will benefit grandly from such nonsense, the vast majority of us will be made poorer. The saddest part of all of this is that no one seems to care that the economic results will be most heavily felt by the weakest among us. The gross immorality of this oppression and tyranny should be evident to anyone who would but casually look at the situation."

"In this world there are only a few ways for each of us to obtain the things that we desire. We can produce the things ourselves starting from scratch, produce something valued by others and use that in trade for what we want, take the things from others by force or fraud, or receive them as gifts of charity. Only the first two of these are economic. Theft and charity cannot be universalized, because each can be achieved only by the prior production of others."

Expanding Double Jeopardy | David Rittgers | Cato Institute: Commentary

Expanding Double Jeopardy | David Rittgers | Cato Institute: Commentary: "n legal terms, this law achieves its aims through federal authority over interstate commerce. If someone assaults you by throwing a cell phone at you, what Congress has done is enabled the prosecution of the thrower as a function of the fact that the cell phone was made in Japan, and therefore must have crossed state lines."

"An equally striking feature of the law is that the federal power to prosecute is not dissipated even if the defendant is found guilty by the state. It explicitly says, in fact, that federal charges should be pursued if the state verdict 'left demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence.'"

"The protection against double jeopardy was put in place to prevent retrying a politically unpopular but evidentially elusive defendant until he was found guilty. Congress apparently sees this as a glitch, rather than a virtue, in the American criminal-justice system.

The power to reprosecute is not one we should grant to any government, much less one with a politicized selection of who will be haled into court. For evidence, look no further than the Duke lacrosse non-rape case a few years ago. If the trial had gone to court and ended in acquittal, would we now be in federal court for a second round? The recent Department of Justice decision not to prosecute members of the New Black Panther Party who engaged in voter intimidation last November illustrates the flip side of this coin. Decisions to prosecute or not based on race undermine the rule of law."

Foreclosure Levels Unlikely To Fall | Mark A. Calabria | Cato Institute: Commentary

Foreclosure Levels Unlikely To Fall | Mark A. Calabria | Cato Institute: Commentary: "The vast majority of mortgage defaults are being driven by the same factors that have always driven mortgage defaults: being 'underwater,' that is, you owe more on the mortgage than the home is worth, combined with a life event that results in a substantial income decline, such as a job loss. Until both of these pieces are addressed, foreclosure levels are unlikely to fall.

All efforts addressing the foreclosure crisis implicitly assume that the current wave of foreclosures is almost exclusively the result of predatory lending practices and "exploding" adjustable rate mortgages, where upward shocks on the rate reset cause mortgage payment to become unaffordable. This was true of former Treasury Secretary Paulson's HOPE NOW and of FDIC Chairwoman Sheila Bair's IndyMac models. The Obama administration's current foreclosure efforts are based on the same mistaken belief.

If payment shock were driving the defaults, then we would observe most defaults occurring around the reset of the mortgage rate, specifically just after the reset. But that is not the case. The vast majority of defaults occurred long before the reset. It could be that this is due to such loans being "unaffordable" from the time of origination. According to analysis done at the Boston Federal Reserve, though, the borrower's initial debt-to-income had almost no impact in terms of predicting subsequent default. Additionally, if payment shock were the driver of default, fixed-rate mortgages, where payments did not change, would display default rates significantly below that of adjustable rate mortgages. Differences in performance between these different mortgage products largely disappears once differences in owner equity and credit score are taken into account."

"The question then is, what exactly it is that homeowners with no equity are losing in the event of a foreclosure?"

"According to Freddie Mac, speculators make up about 40 percent of those foreclosed upon. An additional 50 percent of foreclosures are likely due to job loss, eliminating the income a borrower would need to put forth a repayment plan under Chapter 13 of the bankruptcy code. Combining speculators and the unemployed reveals that cramdown will do little to help at least 90 percent of borrowers currently in foreclosure."

Section 1233 of the Health Care Bill — Cranach: The Blog of Veith

Section 1233 of the Health Care Bill — Cranach: The Blog of Veith: "Patients may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to white-coated authority. Once they’re in the meeting, the bill does permit “formulation” of a plug-pulling order right then and there. So when Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) denies that Section 1233 would “place senior citizens in situations where they feel pressured to sign end-of-life directives that they would not otherwise sign,” I don’t think he’s being realistic.

What’s more, Section 1233 dictates, at some length, the content of the consultation. The doctor “shall” discuss “advanced care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to”; “an explanation of . . . living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses” (even though these are legal, not medical, instruments); and “a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families.” The doctor “shall” explain that Medicare pays for hospice care (hint, hint).

Admittedly, this script is vague and possibly unenforceable. What are “key questions”? Who belongs on “a list” of helpful “resources”? The Roman Catholic Church? Jack Kevorkian?"

USAA app lets iPhone users deposit checks | Apple - CNET News

USAA app lets iPhone users deposit checks | Apple - CNET News: "In the latest twist on electronic banking, customers of financial services firm USAA will now be able to deposit checks directly through their iPhones.
USAA on Tuesday updated its iPhone app to allow customers to deposit checks wirelessly. By taking a photo of both sides of the check using the iPhone's built-in camera, customers can send an image of a check directly to USAA where it can be verified and deposited."

Video Games and Violence - Art Carden - Mises Institute

Video Games and Violence - Art Carden - Mises Institute: "Separate empirical studies by Winai Wongsurat and Todd Kendall have shown that increased access to pornography actually leads to reductions in the rates of divorce and rape. Wongsurawat cites the availability of PO boxes, which increase access to pornographic magazines but do not have an independent effect on crime, to identify the effect of pornography on sex crimes and divorce. Kendall looks specifically at the diffusion of internet pornography and shows that access to the internet and (presumably) internet pornography is associated with reductions in sex crime. Kendall's hypothesis that this is a causal relationship is strengthened by the fact that the effect is strongest for crimes committed by the group whose consumption of pornography is most likely to be affected by access to the internet: young males who live with their parents."

Not exactly something that I want to hear but we must remember that good intentions can have unintended consequences.

Campaign For Liberty — Lessons Learned and Re-Learned

Campaign For Liberty — Lessons Learned and Re-Learned: "A classic case of good intentions meeting bad incentives. People who took advantage of the rebate were, for the most part, going to buy another car this year anyway. We just robbed $4,500 from Peter to pay 20% of Paul's new car. Worse yet, Peter hasn't been born yet, we just added the bill to his crushing debt burden.

The way the rules were written, the worst polluting cars did not qualify for the rebate.� They are still out there spewing smoke and guzzling gas.� For many classes of vehicles, the change in fuel efficiency gained from the $4,500 could be as little as 2 mpg. You can improve your fuel efficiency more than this by driving differently - you should ask for $5,000."

"Before we give government control of health care, we should remember Cash-For-Clunkers, as well as Katrina, Sub-prime loans, TARP, Superfund, and a thousand other debacles that did more harm than good and cost multiples more than we were told they would. If the government can't run a used car lot, we probably shouldn't let them try their luck at brain surgery."

Ben Bernanke Was Incredibly, Uncannily Wrong - Lilburne - Mises Institute

Ben Bernanke Was Incredibly, Uncannily Wrong - Lilburne - Mises Institute: "Bernanke said that the housing boom was fine because it was supported by, among other things, growth in jobs, incomes, and in the economy in general. But that very growth itself was supported by the housing boom! For example, most of the job growth was in the housing sector. Witness Bernanke's amazing levitating economy: its housing sector is held up by economic growth, which is held up by its housing sector. And it's just as ridiculous that he denied the existence of a housing bubble by pointing to low mortgage rates. The low rates were a chief cause of the housing bubble, and were a direct result of his actions as Federal Reserve chairman."

"What is the worst-case scenario, if in fact we were to see prices come down substantially across the country?
BERNANKE: Well, I guess I don't buy your premise. It's a pretty unlikely possibility. We've never had a decline in house prices on a nationwide basis. So what I think is more likely is that house prices will slow, maybe stabilize: might slow consumption spending a bit. I don't think it's going to drive the economy too far from its full employment path, though."

"ERNANKE: You can see some types of speculation: investors turning over condos quickly. Those sorts of things you see in some local areas. I'm hopeful — I'm confident, in fact, that the bank regulators will pay close attention to the kinds of loans that are being made, and make sure that underwriting is done right. But I do think this is mostly a localized problem, and not something that's going to affect the national economy."

"February 2007
BERNANKE: We expect moderate growth going forward. We believe that if the housing sector begins to stabilize, and if some of the inventory corrections still going on in manufacturing begin to be completed, that there's a reasonable possibility that we'll see some strengthening in the economy sometime during the middle of the new year.
Our assessment is that there's not much indication at this point that subprime mortgage issues have spread into the broader mortgage market, which still seems to be healthy. And the lending side of that still seems to be healthy."

"Overall, the U.S. economy seems likely to expand at a moderate pace over the second half of 2007, with growth then strengthening a bit in 2008 to a rate close to the economy's underlying trend."

When we was so wrong we shouldn't expect his future predictions to be right.

House Pencils in Millions for Jets the Air Force Did Not Request - Political News - FOXNews.com

House Pencils in Millions for Jets the Air Force Did Not Request - Political News - FOXNews.com: "In the 2010 defense spending bill, the Air Force originally requested money for one C-37 and three C-40s as part of its effort to replace its aging fleet. But the House Appropriations Committee added an extra $132 million for two more C-37s and $200 million for two more C-40s, according to an aide to the panel. "

"Tom Fitton, president of the watchdog group Judicial Watch, said members of Congress are abusing the military by using their jets too often for travel. He said that except for trips to war zones, members should fly commercial and expense it. He surmised the latest funding for more jets reflects members' personal interest in being able to fly in style."

"Though lawmakers killed additional funding for the F-22 fighter jet -- at President Obama's request -- they kept in funding for unrequested C-17 cargo jets, a controversial new presidential helicopter fleet and an alternative engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. They did cut funding in other areas.

Ellis Brachman, spokesman for the House Appropriations Committee, said budgeting for such items is part of Congress' "normal oversight responsibility" to make sure the military has everything it needs."

Senate Deal: Change a Few Names | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

Senate Deal: Change a Few Names | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: "The proposed bill is forthright on still containing many of the worst aspects of ObamaCare. It would mandate that all Americans buy insurance — and not just any insurance, but a specific government-designed set of benefits, even if that package was more expensive or contained benefits that you didn't want."

"The compromise would have no specific mandate for employers to provide insurance. But any employer who failed to do so would have to pay the cost of all subsidies that the government provides his or her workers to help them pay for insurance on their own.

It is hard to see how this is different from any other employer mandate — except that it will hurt low-wage workers most."

"It will ultimately be the worker who pays the subsidy's cost. The government will be giving the worker a subsidy with one hand, and taking it back with the other. Does that make sense for any reason other than 'compromise?'"

Hate Crime Bill Goes against Constitution | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary

Hate Crime Bill Goes against Constitution | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Said McCain: 'Our legal system is based on identifying, capturing and punishing criminals, and not on using the power of government to try to divine biases.' In opposing what James Madison condemned as 'thought crimes,' McCain added: 'Crimes motivated by hate deserve vigorous prosecution, but so do crimes motivated by absolute wanton disregard for life of any kind.' No matter against whom.

Leahy's bill, like the counterpart 'hate crimes' measure of House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., that passed in the House this past April, violates the 14th Amendment's equal protection under the laws for individual Americans by setting up a special collective class of victims whose assailants, when convicted, will be given extra punishment for crimes perceived to be based on gender identity, sexual orientation or disability, among other biases. Those who attack the elderly, police or those of the poor who are not among the 'protected classes' would not get lengthier 'hate' sentences than the law provides for the ACT itself. Doesn't this make lesser citizens of their victims?"

"But the White House Web site points out that the House bill cites a hate crime is based on actual or PERCEIVED hate against a victim. Both bills include constitutional violations of double-jeopardy prosecutions by making it easier for the federal government to prosecute a defendant in a hate-crime case when the state says it cannot convict or chooses not to prosecute."

James Madison wrote to Thomas Jefferson: We have "extinguished forever the ambitious hope of making laws for the human mind."

Vote No on Sonia Sotomayor | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary

Vote No on Sonia Sotomayor | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary: "In trying to assess how Justice Sotomayor would behave, we should consider the president's expectations. Then-Sen. Obama, who voted against both John Roberts and Samuel Alito, emphasized the 'quality of empathy.' While most cases can be decided on the basis of case law and precedent, said Sen. Obama, there remain five percent which 'can only be determined on the basis of one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world words, and the depth and breadth of one's empathy.' Alas, this latter category, however few in number, accounts for most of the important issues about which we most care and which most divide us."

'She also believes that judges are to change the law. For instance, she complained: "The public expects the law to be static and unpredictable. The law, however, is uncertain and responds to changing circumstances." Of course, changing the law cannot be left to legislators: "Our society would be straightjacketed were not the courts, with the able assistance of the lawyers, constantly overhauling the law and adapting it to the realities of ever-changing social, industrial, and political conditions."

Indeed, "A given judge (or judges) may develop a novel approach to a specific set of facts or legal framework that pushes the law in a new direction."

After all, she contends: "change — sometimes radical change — can and does occur in a legal system that serves a society whose social policy itself changes. It is our responsibility to explain to the public how an often unpredictable system of justice is one that serves a productive civilized but always evolving society." As she declared in a videotaped talk, the "Court of Appeals is where policy is made" and where "the law is percolating."'

'No one would disagree that as society changes, so must laws and practices. That is why the Constitution allows amendments and legislatures exist. Our political system leaves most decisions on "change" up to the legislative and executive branches. Turning a group of nine jurists, irrespective of how diverse and empathetic, into a continuing constitutional convention puts all liberties at risk.'

'The issue is not whether one believes abortion should be legal. But Roe does not deserve to be called constitutional law. Rather, it is an act of judicial usurpation, unsupported by constitutional purpose, original intent, and legal precedent. For a nominee for the high court to embrace Roe suggests that they will not carry out their duty to faithfully interpret and apply the Constitution.'

WORLD Magazine | Bureaucracy mountain | Jacob Parrish | Jul 31, 09

WORLD Magazine | Bureaucracy mountain | Jacob Parrish | Jul 31, 09: "The Yucca Mountain project, which is 25 years and $13.5 billion in the making, was on track to begin safely storing at least 77,000 tons of radioactive nuclear waste. But now experts say 155,000 tons of spent radioactive fuel rods will instead remain in already crowded temporary storage facilities beneath nuclear power plants across the country."

"Since the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act, energy companies and consumers have been required to pay over $29 billion into a fund that the government promised to use to construct and operate a permanent nuclear waste repository by 1997. Energy companies already have grown weary of government delays and are threatening to stop their payments. By burying the site that was supposed to bury nuclear waste, the government would be in complete default of its 1982 agreement."

What? The government takes money for a project and then goes back on its word? No way!

"One alternative to storing spent fuel rods is to recycle them, as France and Japan do, using them a second time to create nuclear energy. Experts say this would cut 155,000 tons of waste to only about 5,000 tons needing to be stored, however, the waste would then be 50 times more radioactive."f

Mob Rule or Democracy in Action? Health Care Debate Focuses on Opponents Over Substance - Political News - FOXNews.com

Mob Rule or Democracy in Action? Health Care Debate Focuses on Opponents Over Substance - Political News - FOXNews.com: "Democrats are stepping up their campaign against opponents of health care reforms, depicting town hall audiences protesting a Democratic-sponsored bill as angry mobs duped into hostile actions by special interest groups.

The Democratic National Committee released a Web video and e-mail on Wednesday blasting opponents of the 10-year, $1 trillion plan.

Titled 'Enough of the Mob,' the ad warns that the 'right wing extremist base' is back after losing the presidential election, a series of legislative battles and the confidence of Americans.

'Now, desperate Republicans and their well-funded allies are organizing angry mobs -- just like they did during the election,' the ad says. 'Their goal? Destroy President Obama and stop the change Americans voted for overwhelmingly in November.'

The ad goes on to dismiss the protests as 'mob activity straight from the playbook of high-level Republican political operatives. They have no plan for moving our country forward, so they've called out the mob.'"

iPS cells as alternative to embryonic stem cells — Cranach: The Blog of Veith

iPS cells as alternative to embryonic stem cells — Cranach: The Blog of Veith: "In papers published online Thursday by two scientific journals, separate teams of researchers from Beijing and Shanghai reported that they had for the first time created virtual genetic duplicates of mice using skin cells from adult animals that had been coaxed into the equivalent of embryonic stem cells.

The findings were welcomed by supporters and opponents of human embryonic stem cell research as a long-sought vital step in proving that the cells could be as useful as embryonic cells for studying and curing many illnesses. . . ."

Multimillion Dollar U.N. Strategy Shows Little Effect in Bangladesh - United Nations - FOXNews.com

Multimillion Dollar U.N. Strategy Shows Little Effect in Bangladesh - United Nations - FOXNews.com: "Bangladesh is the only country where researchers compared results between areas that implemented the U.N. strategy with those that did not. In research published in the medical journal Lancet on Friday, experts found the program had no major impact on saving children.

U.N. officials could not say how much the program in Bangladesh cost, but said millions have been spent on its implementation around the world.

'It's remarkable the program has achieved so little,' said Philip Stevens, a director at the International Policy Network, a London think-tank. 'And it's baffling that it has been rolled out globally without any evidence that it works.'"

Where have you been Mr. Stevens? Have you ignored everything the U.N. has done? This is normal for a U.N. program (just like any other bloated bureaucracy).

Running on Empty, 'Clunkers' Program Highlights Government Incompetence, Critics Say - Political News - FOXNews.com

Running on Empty, 'Clunkers' Program Highlights Government Incompetence, Critics Say - Political News - FOXNews.com: "'This is not good for economic growth,' said Dan Mitchell, a senior fellow in economics at the Cato Institute. 'You're simply getting people to use existing income to spend on cars. Getting people to spend more of their money on cars mean they will have less money to spend on other things.'

Economic growth, Mitchell argued, is not getting people to spend more money on products, it's getting them to have more income. Mitchell also believes the program is counterproductive for the auto industry down the road because the acceleration in car purchases will precede a 'big downturn in the future.'

'Giving someone a shot of heroin is not good for their long term health,' he told FOXNews.com.

The program, Mitchell added, shows that the government is 'incompetent.'"

'"It's hard to say they're incompetent when the program is creating jobs, stimulating the overall economy and reducing emissions. Where's the loss here?" he said. "You can say it's not administered as well. But this is like picking at gnats when you look at the big picture."'

The loss is the billion dollars it cost to do those things!

Raul Castro Says Cuba to Cut Spending, Communism Secure - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News - FOXNews.com

Raul Castro Says Cuba to Cut Spending, Communism Secure - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News - FOXNews.com: "The former defense minister who took over the presidency last year called state spending 'simply unsustainable' and said the cash-strapped government would reorganize rural schools and scrutinize its free health care system in search of ways to save money."

The communist realizes that spending needs to be cut but our government doesn't. :-/

Obama Officials Don't Dismiss Possibility of New Taxes - Political News - FOXNews.com

Obama Officials Don't Dismiss Possibility of New Taxes - Political News - FOXNews.com: "Administration officials say they hope to see positive economic growth before the end of the year, and credit the $787 billion Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed in February with preventing recession from going into depression.

The legislation -- opposed by all but three Republicans in the House and Senate -- was intended to help save or create 3 million to 4 million jobs. But since that time, the jobless rate has grown to 9.5 percent, higher than the administration predicted even without a stimulus package."

If your predictions are proved completely wrong then maybe you should rethink your theory!

Geithner: Smaller Federal Deficit Vital to Sustaining Economic Recovery - Political News - FOXNews.com

Geithner: Smaller Federal Deficit Vital to Sustaining Economic Recovery - Political News - FOXNews.com: "Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said a smaller federal deficit is vital to sustaining an economic recovery. But Geithner isn't saying how exactly the Obama administration plans to achieve that.

He said in an interview airing Sunday on ABC's 'This Week' that it will take hard choices to lower the deficit 'very dramatically.' He said overhauling the health care system and lowering costs are keys to getting the deficit under control.

Geithner was asked in the interview whether he would rule out new taxes. He said the country needs to understand the administration will do 'what's necessary.'"

A smaller deficit is vital to vital to a stronger economy but the administration has been working in the opposite direction! All estimates say that the health care reform will cost tons of money so it won't reduce the deficit. Taxes won't help the economy either.

The Trade Collapse | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary

The Trade Collapse | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary: "If the U.S. trade deficit were to disappear, do you think that would be a good or bad thing? For years, many in the media and the political world wailed about the U.S. trade deficit, but it is rapidly disappearing — and the consequences are going to be disastrous.

The table shows the U.S. trade deficit dropped 52 percent between January and May of this year, as compared to the January-through-May periods of the two previous years. During the same interval, exports of goods and services dropped 19 percent and imports dropped 28 percent. The U.S. trade deficit might disappear within the next year.

Over the past several decades, many foreign countries — notably Japan and China — exported much more to the United States than they imported, and as a result, they accumulated several trillion U.S. dollars. Most of those dollars were, in turn, invested back in the United States. Foreign individuals, companies and governments bought U.S. government securities. They invested money in U.S. real estate, often spending funds to renovate old hotels and shopping centers. They invested money in the U.S. stock market and in new high-tech start-ups."

"When trade expands because of fewer trade barriers and growing global demand, it is a win-win situation for both exporters and importers. The world's consumers have access to more goods and services at lower prices (which means they have a rise in their real incomes), and the world's producers have many more customers and thus are able to expand production and create jobs."

Criton M. Zoakos, noted: "In Europe, the U.S. and Japan, massive financial bailout programs ... have committed approximately $35 trillion of public funds to support financial asset prices at pre-crisis levels. ... All of these governments won initial public approval for these stupendous bailout commitments by claiming that they were needed to restore credit flows to 'businesses and households' and save jobs. However, the fact is that nine months after approval of these plans, and the commitment of $35 trillion, lending to non-financial businesses and to households has declined in the United States (by 5.5 %), Britain (by 5.6%), Eurozone (by 0.4%) and Japan (by 3.4%)."

State-Of-The-Art Health Care For Everyone? | William Poole | Cato Institute: Commentary

State-Of-The-Art Health Care For Everyone? | William Poole | Cato Institute: Commentary: "A nation cannot afford state-of-the-art health care for everyone. The current effort to expand health care insurance is designed to make the same health care available to both those with extensive insurance and to those currently uninsured. This effort ignores the fact that resources to make such care available to everyone do not exist.

For every major category of goods, higher income families spend more than lower-income families. Health care is not an exception."

"Let's assume that the highest income group can afford state-of-the-art health care, which we would like to make available to everyone. Based on these data, that would increase national health care outlays by 70%. To achieve this outcome, the nation would need many more physicians, nurses, medical technicians, hospitals, medical schools, MRI machines, drugs and so forth. It would be easier for the space program to send astronauts to Mars than to increase the scale of the medical establishment by 70%.

Providing today's state-of-the-art health care for everyone is simply impossible. Moreover, relentless and highly desirable technical improvements keep pushing the health care frontier outward. An ambitious goal, like sending astronauts to the moon, may be desirable, depending on a calculation of benefits and costs. An impossible goal, like state-of-the-art health care for everyone, is foolish."

"There are only two ways to say no. One is through bureaucratic processes that approve some insurance claims and deny others. The second is for society to put the decision in the hands of families and their physicians. Their decisions will necessarily be based in part on what families can afford. Higher income families can afford insurance policies that cover a wider range of ailments and treatments. From their own resources, they can pay expenses not covered by insurance. In some cases, families and their physicians may choose not to incur certain expenses the family could otherwise afford, choosing instead to leave larger bequests to children and grandchildren.

It is surely true that there are ways to improve the efficiency of existing health care resources. However, it is a pipe dream to believe that the nation can get 70% more health care from existing resources."

Not Enough Healthcare to Go Around | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

Not Enough Healthcare to Go Around | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: "If a treatment can save our lives or increase quality of life, we want it. Therefore, in the long run, the only way to spend less on healthcare is to consume less healthcare. Someone, sometime, has to say no.

Take just one example. If everyone were to receive a CT brain scan every year as part of an annual physical, we would undoubtedly discover a small number of brain cancers earlier than we otherwise would, perhaps early enough to save a few lives. But given the scan's cost, adding it to all annual physicals would quickly bankrupt the nation."

"The real debate, therefore, is not about whether we should ration care but about who should ration it. Currently, that decision is often made by insurance companies or other third-party payers. Obama and congressional Democrats want to shift that decision-making power to the federal government. Some, frustrated by the insurance-based rationing of the current system, naively believe that putting the government in charge would mean unlimited access to the care they need and desire. When Michael Moore, in Sicko, showcased emotional tales of people denied experimental treatment by insurance companies, he implied that a government-run system would certainly pay for it.

The reality, however, is that every government-run healthcare system around the world rations care."

"Free-market healthcare reformers, on the other hand, want to shift more of the decisions (and therefore the financial responsibility) back to the individual.

People should have the absolute right to spend their own money on whatever they want, including buying as much healthcare as they want. And, if they are spending their own money, they will make their own rationing decisions based on price and value.

That CT scan that looked so desirable when someone else was paying may not be so desirable if you have to pay for it yourself. The consumer himself becomes the one who says no.

Of course, as a compassionate society, we may choose to help others pay for some care. That's a worthwhile debate to have. But our resources are not unlimited. Choices will have to be made. And, therefore, the real question should be: Who will make those choices?

The only way to spend less on healthcare is to consume less healthcare."

Does Inequality Still Matter? | Will Wilkinson | Cato Institute: Commentary

Does Inequality Still Matter? | Will Wilkinson | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Income inequality can rise and fall for all sorts of reasons. Twenty-somethings just starting out and retired seventy-somethings both earn a lot less on average than peak-earning fifty-somethings. As the age profile of the population shifts, income inequality figures shift, too. So what? Consider another example. A generous immigration policy can widen the income gap in this country while at the same time reducing world poverty. That's good, if you ask me.

Income inequality can also rise as a side-effect of injustice in our socio-economic system. But injustice should be rooted out because it is wrong, not because it widens the income gap as a side effect. If, just to take a wildly hypothetical example, the government has unjustly dumped loads of taxpayer money on Goldman Sachs, such a narrow allocation of public funds for private use should concern us for its own sake — not because Goldman's bountiful bonuses are likely to exacerbate income inequality."

Report: Obama Daughters Featured in Controversial Food Ad - Political News - FOXNews.com

Report: Obama Daughters Featured in Controversial Food Ad - Political News - FOXNews.com: "While the ad is part of a campaign to petition Congress to require healthier foods in schools, Politico newspaper reports that 'targeting' the Obama girls is no way to win friends at the White House.

'This is not the way to win the heart of the president,' Brookings Institution Governance Studies Director Darrell West told Politico. 'It's dangerous to target Obama's daughters because many people view family members as off limits for political advocacy. That's especially relevant in this case because his daughters are so young.'"

It's not about the girls -- its about the choices her father makes and how that affects them.