In the Vicinity of Beijing's 4th Ring, or More Properly, What America Should be Shooting For

I think what was most disappointing was simply the quality of the questions students asked during the Q&A. The first one was “In your dealings with President Obama, what have you found to be his best quality?” And it was simply downhill from there. Now, if this man was addressing a group of third graders, that question might have been appropriate (maybe), but among a group of college students and academics it’s simply absurd. Consider the situation. Here you are, a college student (or professor, or whatever), with an opportunity to discuss anything, from the anemic job market, the depressed housing market, a rapidly nuclearizing Iran, a debt-to-GDP ratio north of 100%, or the impeding collapse of the post-World War II world order, and you essentially ask, “Why is the President soooooo awesome?” I think this little episode perfectly encapsulates what is wrong with American higher education today. Instead of thinking critically about events around it, the academy is so radically self-absorbed and out of touch and so obsessed with its own ideology, it’s simply laughable. Is this really all that the best and brightest of North Carolina is capable of? Maybe it was a fluke, or maybe some rogue from Duke snuck in, but it was kind of embarrassing.

Secretary Donovan, when he wasn’t answering inane questions from the audience, also did a fair amount of pontificating. Apparently, the administration is convinced that we can educate ourselves out of this recession. If only we spend (a lot) more on higher education and push as many people as we can through the system, we’ll all be happy again. Color me a skeptic, but the plan he described, where the federal government subsidizes education through new tax credits, etc., guarantees low-interest loans for all comers, and then requires those borrowers to make only bare minimum payments on those loans, seems awfully similar to American housing policy circa 2008 (which incidentally, HUD bears a lot of responsibility for). I suppose if the idea is to create a giant education bubble, such that when it pops, everyone forgets about the housing problem because the education bubble is so much bigger, then this is a great idea. But if the idea is to generate genuine economic growth, this is certainly not the way to go.

And what’s a State of the Union talk without some mention of trains? Aren’t those things amazing? If only we had more of them, those pesky Chinese wouldn’t even be able to touch us. Actually, the best part of the Secretary’s little speech was when he was talking about China’s impressive infrastructure and how the Chinese are just light-years ahead of us in this regard. He clearly has no idea what he’s talking about. If he did know what he was talking about, he would know that, even in the (very crowded and polluted) major cities (i.e. places like Beijing), you can’t drink the tap water or flush toilet paper because the sewer systems are so old and so out of date. He would also know that electricity is also a problem, and that you actually have to buy surge protectors to insulate your electronic goods from regular power surges. Indeed, even China’s much lauded trains aren’t much to write home about. When they’re not falling off bridges, many of China’s trains are (very) overcrowded, smelly, and generally a very hellish experience. And their highway system isn’t anywhere nearly as well developed as ours. Now, don’t get me wrong, China’s quite a charming place, but the U.S. is definitely winning the infrastructure game.

Shiny!

There was also a fair amount of green energy hype. The Secretary informed us that while there might be a few Solyndras along the way (who doesn’t mind a little government corruption after all), we can’t expect the government to make the right choice every time when it comes to deciding which business to support. This, of course, is the whole point! The government can’t make these decisions, because they are infinitely complicated and not something that some bureaucrat hiding in the basement of a federal building can make. Such choices are properly left to the market, which is a better evaluator  of risk and profit than the government will ever be. When the government tries to make these decisions, you end up with Solyndra. Solyndra isn’t merely a side effect of government intervention in the market, it is its natural conclusion.

All in all, this event was pretty disappointing. The questions were childish, and we got the same old, same old from the administration. It’s simply too bad that what could have been a really interesting event on the future direction of the country devolved into a Why Barack Obama is the Greatest Thing Since Baked Bread event.

And it’s not like a $100 billion cut from a federal budget that exceeds $3 trillion was all that big to begin with. Congress has been effectively arguing over pennies for the last few days, and now we’re supposed to congratulate them for cutting 1/3 of the pennies they originally promised to cut? But you can also take a longer view of this. Paul Ryan just proposed a what will likely be a highly controversial budget plan that makes some serious cuts and adjustments to many of the long-term fiscal problems that plague this country. Given the GOP’s rather unimpressive performance on what’s effectively a rounding error in the Ryan plan, I’m not getting my hopes up about this. Ryan’s plan proposes to cut approximately $6.2 trillion over the next ten years. But if the Republicans can’t even hold the line on $100 billion, how can we expect them to hold the line on $6.2 trillion? Rather than being a victory for Boehner and the House Republicans, I think this episode shows that when they’re pushed hard enough, the Republicans cave.

That's right, it's not even diet.

If one reads today’s column in the Daily Tar Heel, you would think that drinking soda is some sort of gross evil. We’re told that foreigners think we’re fat and what we really need is a fat tax and, we should only be allowed to drink water. What’s really ironic is that this column comes from the same author who advocated pot legalization. So, what gives? Clearly this isn’t about my health. What investment does Ms. Dugan have in whether I drink soda or not?

The answer isn’t all together clear. She tries to argue that this fat tax will result in some sort of tax windfall that will alleviate our national debt problem. However, she also clearly demonstrates that she knows nothing about economics. Claiming that we are a cash-strapped economy (with Helicopter Ben printing cash like a madman, a cash-strapped economy we are not) and ignoring the more obvious consequences of discouraging consumption, Ms. Dugan clearly fails to understand the most basic consequences of raising taxes in a recession (or emerging recovery or whatever you want to call it).

Simply put, it’s none of her business what I choose to drink. If I put on 100 pounds because I drink 12 cans of soda everyday, that’s my problem, not hers. What it boils down to is personal responsibility. Ms. Dugan apparently feels like I have none. I, of course, beg to differ. I love drinking Coca-Cola. Ms. Dugan apparently does not. If I try to force her to drink Coca-Cola (i.e. force my personal preferences on her), than I am clearly in the wrong. But if she tries to force her personal preferences on me (i.e. not drinking soda), she sees herself as some sort of moral crusader. This is completely illogical. If she wants to go live her life as a starving, miserable, deprived human being, fine. Just leave me alone.

Beautiful

Surpassing even the 1994 Revolution, last night’s 60+ seat conversion in the House and 6+ conversion in the Senate is a loud and clear message from the American people that the Obama Agenda is not what this country needs nor wants and a return to sanity and clear-thinking is what is desired.

A special shout-out goes to the North Carolina General Assembly, where the GOP picked up not one, but two chambers. With 31 seats in the state senate (a veto-proof majority) and 66+ seats in the state House (depending on the returns in 4 still-outstanding races, also a possible veto-proof majority), conservatism will finally make itself heard in the halls of North Carolina state government, after wandering in the wilderness for over 100 years. That is change I can believe in.

I’ll also give a special shout-out to Bob Etheridge who, when he’s not wandering the streets mugging unsuspecting college students, apparently thinks it’s still Halloween and is pretending to be Al Gore. You sir, do your state, district, and party proud.

The first argument, simply put, says that the American people want the government off their backs. As Newt Gingrich argued, there is a growing realization that centralized planning leads to dictatorship. The relationship between government power and individual liberty can properly be described as a zero-sum game, such that an increase in government power necessarily entails a decrease in individual liberty. On this point, John Ashcroft made an interesting distinction. He described proper security measures as only those measures that enhance individual liberty and allow an individual to exercise a maximum level of liberty. Properly understood, a government does not grant rights, it only acts as a guarantor of rights. What is unique about this concern regarding the size of government is that it has the ability to unite the various disparate factions within the conservative movement. Social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, the Ron Paul people, etc. all agree that the government needs to be smaller. If the Republican Party can provide small-government candidates (as it is in the process of doing), it can take advantage of this coalition.

Another common theme was concern over the massive levels of spending and the level of intrusion into the private sector by the federal government. Glenn Beck described this concern as part of his argument having the right to fail. The main thrust of his argument on this point was that individuals and businesses have a right to and ought to be allowed to fail. Failure creates an opportunity to learn from one’s mistakes, such that after “hitting bottom” you can pick yourself up and go forward a stronger and smarter person/business. The massive spending and intervention undertaken by the federal government to prop up failed businesses and people only undermines the soundness of the American economy, it also robs people of their right to fail and prevents them from learning from their mistakes. Good examples of this are the zombies that are GM and Chrysler. The bailout mentality of the federal government and its increasingly expensive and wasteful welfare programs is only serving to bankrupt and impoverish future generations of Americans while at the same time robbing them of the ability to improve their situation. A flurry of federal dollars has clogged the economic engine of the United States. The people understand that Washington needs new leadership to slash spending and bring the budget back into balance.

The final major theme of the conference was what several speakers referred to as American Exceptionalism, or the idea that in the face of a world history dominated by tyrants, monarchs, and dictators, the American idea of individual liberty and self-determination stands out as an exception to the historical norm. We are now faced with a situation where those liberties are under assault. We are also faced with the very real possibility that the standard of living and general welfare of the rising generation of Americans will be worse than the generation that preceded it. With every bill that comes out of Congress, the Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumvirate continues its assault on the liberty and prosperity of the American people. However, recent elections in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, as well as the emergence of the Tea Party Movement have demonstrated the people’s will to remain the exception to the rule and their will to fight the Democrats’ agenda.

The major themes at CPAC, concern over the size and scope of government coupled with a renewed desire to fight the Democrat agenda of poverty and misery, are also those themes that are best resounding with the American people. With its renewed strength in bearing the mantle of conservatism and renewed courage in fighting the Democrats’ agenda, the Republican Party has demonstrated that it is willing to listen to and heed these concerns. If they stay on the path they are on, the Republicans are poised to win big in the upcoming mid-term elections.

Consider the first scene where the man is arrested for requesting plastic bags at the supermarket. This past spring the General Assembly considered a bill that would have banned the use of bags statewide, while imposing a rather hefty fine on those who persisted in using them.

And then there’s the shot where they arrest the man for throwing away batteries. Incidentally, a law in California prohibits the disposal of common batteries. And for those of you who thought composting was optional, think again. Then there’s the shot where the man is arrested for using the wrong light bulbs and the ban on the disposal of plastic bottles, already mentioned on this blog. The ad also highlights the preferential treatment given to “green” cars and mentions the growing popularity of Styrofoam bans.

On first glance, the ad comes across as funny and harmless. It is an ad after all. However, a closer examination, given the facts mentioned above reveals a more disturbing trend in the green movement, an increasing tendency to regulate and codify a certain life style. That this fact is now beginning to be reflected in commercial advertising further underlines the point.

What is perhaps most interesting is the closing scene of the commercial, where the Green Police proceed to arrest the two local policemen. Over the past few years, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has grown into an extremely powerful regulatory and enforcement agency. With its recent attempts to impose a cap-and-trade scheme on the country over the objections of Congress, the EPA has reached a new peak that allows it to run over state, local, and (apparently) federal governments. This new understanding is reflected in the ad, where the Green Police (read EPA) arrest the two local cops for using Styrofoam cups.

In short, the green movement has reached a dangerous level of absurbidity, with the events in the commercial closely mirroring those in real life.

Pork

The allocation of North Carolina’s share of the pork from the $787 billion stimulus bill has begun! In fact, in February the governor appointed North Carolina’s very own czar to dictate the allocation of the $6 billion given to the Old North State. Czar Dempsey Benton is the director of the Office of Economic Recovery and Investment and charged with properly distributing the stimulus dollars.

This raises some interesting questions. There does not appear to be any sort of legislative check or any check at all on Czar Dempsey. The governor unilaterally created his office and, he was unilaterally chosen by the governor without input from the General Assembly or the citizens of North Carolina to be the director. This is a most undemocratic move and one of questionable constitutionality. This is also a rather troubling state of affairs, given that he has unchecked control over $6 billion of taxpayer money. Moreover, given the state government’s blatant corruption and waste in areas that are “checked and balanced,” consider how much greater is the opportunity for corruption and waste in an area that is not subject to these safeguards. It is a circumvention of the legislative process and flies in the face of the basic founding of this country.

There is already some evidence of waste in the Czar’s kingdom. He has allotted $76,000 to an urban forestry project in Durham. The project involves removing 29 trees along a downtown street and replacing them with 103 new ones, with a projected cost of $575 per tree planted. The costs associated with this project are unusually high, particularly the costs associated with the planting of the new trees. The trees typical for such a project usually run at about $100 each. So, then the remainder of the budget must be spent on labor, leaving labor costs at about $475 per tree, which is ridiculous.

Cooked Pork

What this illustrates is the danger and cost of giving one person so much power and removing the legislative branch from the picture. Czar Dempsey is running about the state spending money on a whole slew of pet projects at exorbitant costs to taxpayers.

Of course, the irony of the whole situation is that this supposed “stimulus” has accomplished nothing. The latest statistics from the Labor Department indicate an increase rather than a decrease in unemployment. The official statistic has risen to 9.8%, but when factoring in those who have given up looking for work (discouraged workers) or are involuntarily working part-time the statistic is 17%. Unemployment among the young (ages 16-24) alone stands at 25.9%. We have been asked to surrender our traditional forms and modes of government in return for nothing.

There are two main types of toilet paper: “soft” paper taken straight from trees and “recycled” paper derived from recycled newspapers, magazines, etc. The longer wood fibers in the virgin wood create the soft texture of the soft paper that is not possible with the shorter wood fibers in the recycled paper. In the process of making the soft paper, trees are felled and directly processed as toilet paper. This wanton destruction of trees, of course, is an issue for Greenpeace.

However, a reality check may be in order. Last year, the toilet paper and facial tissue industry made up 5% of the US forest-products industry. In the “away from home” market (public restaurants, gas stations, etc.), recycled paper comprised 75% of the market. In the “at-home” market, soft paper made up 95% of the market.

So, there is a significant demand for the soft paper. This is also a fairly lucrative industry. Last year Quilted Northern made $144 million off its Ultra Plush product alone. However, the Environmentalists would prefer to restrict your freedom and make the choice about what kind of toilet paper you buy for you. They are currently lobbying the industry to move completely over to recycled paper, cheating you the consumer out of your freedom to choose. Of course, all of this is being done in the name of “saving the environment.” We need to preserve these valuable “carbon scrubbers.” In the words of Obama, the toilet paper industry is contributing to the onset of an “irreversible catastrophe” that will result from the destruction of the world’s forest, an increase in pollution, fire and brimstone, etc.

What’s interesting is recent data from a study by the University of Helsinki that suggests that trees may in fact be contributing to air pollution. A reaction between the gases emitted from trees, nitrogen oxide, and sunlight creates lower-level ozone, a commonly recognized pollutant. This study may rehabilitate Ronald Reagan’s famous quote, “Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do.”

So then, it appears that Greenpeace’s attempt to further restrict the market and control your life is in fact, based on faulty science. The science completely repudiates their main claim to directing your life. The Free Market and Science have spoken. There is a great demand for soft toilet paper, whose manufacture, at best, has a debatable impact on the environment. I, for one, am not willing to sacrifice my freedom to choose just to satisfy the whims of Greenpeace and its pseudo-science.

Posted in CRDaily ]]> http://crdaily.com/2009/09/24/2985/feed/ 0 mseelingerjr http://crdaily.com/2009/03/06/6-weeks-in/ http://crdaily.com/2009/03/06/6-weeks-in/#comments Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:05:07 +0000 crdaily http://crdaily.com/?p=990 ]]> Here’s a thought-provoking graphic about where our nation is headed.

US Economy, 2008-2009