Plunging Towards Gomorrah
Posts tagged Wall Street Journal
RE: Natural Gas
May 12th
Somehow I missed this, but the Wall Street Journal had an op-ed on natural gas on Monday. Amy Myers Jaffe makes a few of the same points I made yesterday, but she also adds a few more. Jaffe argues that increased use of natural gas will make it easier to subsidize sustainable sources and will have a positive impact on geopolitics.
Not only will the shale discoveries prevent a cartel from forming, but the petro-states will lose lots of the muscle they now have in world affairs, as customers over time cut them loose and turn to cheap fuel produced closer to home.
The shale boom also is likely to upend the economics of renewable energy. It may be a lot harder to persuade people to adopt green power that needs heavy subsidies when there’s a cheap, plentiful fuel out there that’s a lot cleaner than coal, even if gas isn’t as politically popular as wind or solar.
It’s a good article and well worth reading. I have a small issue with her assertion about our trade deficit. There’s too much hand-wringing about that statistic, but in terms of energy sources it would be wise to produce much of our own natural gas.
Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act
Mar 1st
I haven’t been paying close attention to the Akaka bill in the House because I didn’t think that something so stupid could pass. However, I often underestimate the stupidity of the Democratic Party. In 1959, 94.3% of Hawaiian voters cast ballots in favor of statehood. Now, 50 years later, this bill basically creates two states based on race. The governor of Hawaii is opposed to the bill that basically adds up to a 1.4 million-acre land grab. Gail Heriot and Peter Kirsanow have an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that explains how dangerous the bill is for the rest of the United States.
First, the Akaka bill privileges what is in fact a race, not a tribe. The very act of transforming a racial group into a tribal group confers a privilege on one race and not others and is thus unconstitutional. Second, while the Constitution implicitly gives the federal government the power to recognize tribes with a long and continuous history of separate self-governance, it does not give the power to confer sovereignty on new tribes, or to reconstitute a tribe whose members have long since become part of the mainstream culture.
The ideas behind the bill could end up in a slippery slope where new tribes are declared all over the country. What’s to stop this from happening? People always follow the money. What I don’t understand is why the Democrats are supporting this bill.
liberals: keep your good ideas to yourself
Aug 14th
What happens if you write an intelligent article on health care? Usually, liberals who want universal health care ignore it. But what happens if you’re the CEO of Whole Foods? When I read the op-ed written by said CEO John Mackey, my first thought was the “progressive” liberals who love Whole Foods are going to be outraged. Sure enough, ABC has all the details:
Joshua has been taking the bus to his local Whole Foods in New York City every five days for the past two years. This week, he said he’ll go elsewhere to fulfill his fresh vegetable and organic produce needs. “I will never shop there again,” vowed Joshua, a 45-year-old blogger, who asked that his last name not be published. Like many of his fellow health food fanatics, Joshua said he will no longer patronize the store after learning about Whole Foods Market Inc.’s CEO John Mackey’s views on health care reform, which were made public this week in an op-ed piece he wrote for The Wall Street Journal.
How awesome is this? Mackey’s op-ed isn’t even controversial. I guess simply being in favor of reform that doesn’t burden future generations with insurmountable debt is unforgivable. Then there’s this amazingly ignorant quote from Michael Lent.
“I’m boycotting [Whole Foods] because all Americans need health care,” said Lent, 33, who used to visit his local Whole Foods “several times a week.” “While Mackey is worried about health care and stimulus spending, he doesn’t seem too worried about expensive wars and tax breaks for the wealthy and big businesses such as his own that contribute to the deficit,” said Lent.
This is a typical ill-informed statement by an “all feeling” yet unknowing liberal. Lent doesn’t mention anything in Mackey’s op-ed, but somehow corporate subsidies and war are in the conversation. As astute political observers would know, U.S. corporate taxes are some of the highest in the industrialized world, hence the reason so many corporations receive subsidies. There’s nothing astute about Lent, however; he’s just another clueless Hipster Dufus.
Real Health Care Reform
Aug 13th
Over the past few weeks there’s been a lot written about what’s wrong with government reform and for good reason. However, there are some common sense reforms that most Americans can agree on; just don’t count on the White House pursuing any of these ideas. None of these ideas are a magic bullet, but they would be steps in the right direction.
Immigration Reform: Illegal immigrants are driving up costs with trips the emergency room and other health care access. I’ve written about immigration in the past. If a person is here illegally we should enforce the law. If people want to move here and become citizens we should create a legal process for citizenship. This seems simple to me. No blanket amnesty.
Tort Reform: High insurance costs are forcing small time doctors out of work. A majority of Americans are in favor of tort reform but unfortunately the Democrats will not stand up to the trial lawyer lobby of their party.
Whole Food’s CEO John Mackey had a great op-ed in the Wall Street Journal yesterday that touched on this subject. Mackey lists many more common sense ideas that would make health care more affordable.
• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying.
• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care.
• Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost. How many people know the total cost of their last doctor’s visit and how that total breaks down? What other goods or services do we buy without knowing how much they will cost us?
• Enact Medicare reform. We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare is heading towards bankruptcy and enact reforms that create greater patient empowerment, choice and responsibility.
• Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren’t covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.
These reforms are not difficult and are less complex than anything Congress is debating. The only problem is that the Democratic Party lacks any interest in a solution that doesn’t ultimately end in a universal single payer system. They may not admit it openly, but a huge health care entitlement would be good for their party.
Jim Geraghty wrote an article titled “Eyes on the Real Prize” today for the National Review that speculates about what the Democrats will do on health care reform. Geraghty thinks that the Demcocrats might just pass this monstrostity no matter what the polls say or despite the predictable politlcal fallout in 2010. This might be their last chance for a decade to push this through Congress.
Come September, it’s quite possible we’ll see quite a few Democrats who got an earful and a half at their town meetings coming out and offering a dramatic justification: “I know this is controversial, I know my constituents have serious worries, but this is the right thing to do and I’ll be willing to accept the consequences.”
There may be other members of Congress who will proudly disregard opinion in their districts. Lawmakers who call their constituents “un-American” and “political terrorists” and compare them to the Klan and Timothy McVeigh almost express pride in disregarding the distant mewling of the unwashed masses foolish enough to elect them. Between the two approaches, enough Democrats could find their cover and the bill could very well pass along heavily partisan lines.
For a nation on the brink of bankruptcy it’s difficult to believe that a change in leadership has meant going from bad to worse. What the Democrats are doing isn’t surprising; however, their motivation to commit political suicide in favor of a health care entitlement is shocking.
sarah palin is gone?
Jul 10th
Back in April I wrote that I wished Sarah Palin would go away. I’ve waited a week to collect my thoughts on her odd decision to step down as governor of Alaska. Who knows what her future plans hold, but she wasn’t going to be a viable choice for president in 2012 even if she remained as governor. Club Soda is going to write more about the press’ unfair coverage of Palin, but she’s been a lightning rod ever since she stepped on the stage during last year’s election.
Today, Peggy Noonan of the Wall Street Journal has a blistering editorial about Palin that reinforces every stereotype that exists about the governor; it doesn’t seem to matter whether or not the assertion is fair. Palin has never said anything controversial. Most of the press around her has been about her family. It seems to many on the left that Palin’s family is a much larger issue for an aspiring politician than President Clinton’s insatiable thirst “for strange.”
If I didn’t know better I would have to think that Palin is one of the most hated people in politics; however, that’s just not the case.
A Pew poll last month found that Americans’ opinions of Mrs Palin were evenly balanced. A hefty 44% took a dim view of her, while 45% took a rosy one. Among Republicans, she scored a whopping 73% approval rating, far outpacing any other plausible contender for the party’s presidential nomination in 2012.
The Economist article beats up on Palin but are her poll numbers really indicative of a troubled politician? Keep in mind the current president has received two years of rosy press coverage and can only manage an approval rating of 51%. Palin shouldn’t be concerned that only 45% of Americans like her.
In the end Palin was defined by her relative inexperience, which is odd because historically that hasn’t been an issue for vice-presidential candidates. For example, Richard Nixon was 39 when he became vice-president under Eisenhower. Lest we forget, President Obama was given the ultimate free pass for his inexperience and he ran for president. When Obama gave an illogical and ignorant answer to a question about the capital gains tax posed by Charlie Gibson during a Democrat primary debate, it surely wasn’t national news. However, when Palin struggled with questions from the same Charlie Gibson she was labeled a moron and a shallow thinker. But at least Obama can pretentiously pronounce Pakistan Pockeestahn!
Politics, much like life isn’t fair and is unpredictable; no one knows what will happen in the future. In 2002, who could have predicted that a member of the Illinois Senate would be the next president? Palin is still very young and has a promising future as a political personality.
global warming world tour: the galápagos islands
Jul 3rd
For a number of years I’ve seen all kinds of problems blamed on global warming. Everything from the spread of fire ants to better growing conditions for poison ivy; it seems like every natural event is tied to man-made global warming. Now there’s a new trend; politicians who take exotic vacations at taxpayer expense to “research” global warming. I made this discovery today in a Wall Street Journal article about the dramatic increase in taxpayer-funded trips abroad. The article singles out both Republicans and Democrats, but it should be noted that in 2006 the Democrats promised to change the Congress and trips have increased 50%.
Last summer, Rep. Brian Baird (D., Wash.) took a four-day trip to the Galápagos Islands with his wife, four other lawmakers and their family members. The lawmakers spent $22,000 on meals and hotels, records show. Mr. Baird, a member of the House Science Committee, said the trip was to learn about global warming.
On the first day, lawmakers toured a breeding center for giant tortoise and land iguanas before dining with scientists, according to an itinerary for the trip. The next morning, lawmakers headed to the Galápagos National Park while their family members had the option of hiking, swimming or shopping. That afternoon, the group boarded a boat to visit a sea-lion colony and search for white-tip sharks.
I know I beat this drum a lot but here’s a Democrat representative using the tired “good intention” defense. Apparently we’re not supposed to question this trip because it was for global warming research. I wonder why he had to travel to the Galapagos Islands, burn up tons of fuel, and throw toxic C02 (at least to some at the EPA) into the atmosphere to supposedly study a “global phenomenon.” Aren’t there examples of global warming in the state of Washington? I certainly wish there was; I’m going to Priest Lake, Idaho in August and for the second straight year I’m going to freeze every time I jump in the lake.
Every summer is different at Priest Lake. Some might say it’s caused by natural weather variations, other might say it’s climate change. I need to visit the Galápagos Islands make a decision.
Also, If global warming is accepted science why does Rep. Baird need to research this issue? This seems crazy to me, but I guess I shouldn’t question Baird who holds a Ph.D. in clinical psychology. I should note he is the chairman of the Energy and Environment sub-committee. That aside, Baird shouldn’t’ be taking exotic vacation trips at taxpayer expense to tour giant tortoises and land iguanas.
obama: fearing fear itself
Feb 16th
During the campaign season Barack Obama’s souring rhetoric offered hope to all Americans. Since being sworn in the new president has become the commander and chief of gloom. The fact is that Obama’s rhetoric isn’t warranted. The nation isn’t facing the Great Depression right now. What the nation needs to hear is that this is a slowdown, they’re common, and it doesn’t require uncommon action. Instead Obama is using the slowdown for partisan political advantage. Let’s face it. The monstrosity that was just passed by Congress could have never been passed without the horrible press coverage of the economy and president’s never-ending gloomy statements. Bradley Schiller has an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that hits the nail on the head.
Mr. Obama’s analogies to the Great Depression are not only historically inaccurate, they’re also dangerous. Repeated warnings from the White House about a coming economic apocalypse aren’t likely to raise consumer and investor expectations for the future. In fact, they have contributed to the continuing decline in consumer confidence that is restraining a spending pickup. Beyond that, fearmongering can trigger a political stampede to embrace a “recovery” package that delivers a lot less than it promises. A more cool-headed assessment of the economy’s woes might produce better policies.
Obama’s policies seem more like Hoover than FDR. When the stock market crashed in 1929 Hoover took an uncommon approach to a common problem. The economy normally contracts around every ten years. Unfortunately Hoover decided government intervention was necessary. Hoover’s policies of higher tariffs, taxes, and interests rates ended up turning a recession into an depression. When FDR became president he basically adopted many of the same politics. Is it any wonder why the depression lasted until the war?
The only thing we have to fear is the government itself. The nation has been on the road to bankruptcy ever since FDR. LBJ’s Great Society pushed us faster towards the brink and no politician has been able to change the course. Now the nation is facing a recession and the current leadership is using it as an excuse to pass the single most expensive project in the history of the nation. The stimulus package costs more (adjusted for inflation), than the Marshall Plan, the Louisiana Purchase, the race to the moon, the Korean War, the New Deal, and the invasion of Iraq. If you throw in the cost of TARP (and the glorious sequel coming soon) the US government will authorize more spending than all of those events combined plus World War II, and the Vietnam War. In other words this is the largest increase in government spending in the history of the Republic. Keep in mind unemployment is still in single digits. What is the justification for this drastic action?
give up your pennies
Nov 19th
Pennies are becoming more expensive. The price of zinc, the metal used to make the penny is souring. With increased demand for zinc in developing countries like China the United States faces a choice, find a new cheaper metal or get ride of the penny entirely. The Wall Street Journal covers the pros and cons of each choice, but from an efficiency standpoint I’m all for the eliminating President Lincoln from coinage.
The National Association of Convenience Stores and the Walgreens drugstore chain have estimated that handling pennies adds 2 to 2.5 seconds per cash transaction. Assume that the average citizen makes one such transaction every day, and so wastes (to be conservative) 730 seconds a year. The median worker earns just over $36,000 a year, or about 0.5 cents per second, so futzing with pennies costs him $3.65 annually.
It might take awhile to win this argument though, Americans for Common Cents (yes, this is an actual group) is a pro-penny lobby paid for by zinc industry. Perhaps Franklin’s famous quote could be changed to “a penny made is a penny earned” at least for the zinc industry.
