*
A reader at VFR lays it out:
Congress is now moving to admit open homosexuals to the military. We're told that homosexuals are no more likely to engage in sexual misconduct or harassment than heterosexuals. That's debatable, but so what? Heterosexual men in the military don't bunk down and shower with the women. But homosexual men will indeed bunk down and shower with the other males if Obama gets his way. Ditto for lesbians and the other females. There would be universal outrage if heterosexual male soldiers demanded to shower with naked female soldiers, but naked male soldiers are expected to shower with homosexuals who might desire them. Female soldiers are expected to shower with lesbians.
And he sums it up in a way that no one ever has before (at least to my knowledge):
What we're being told, indirectly, is that homosexuality is a more enlightened form of sexuality... Heterosexuals can be barred from situations where sexually improper behavior might result, but homosexuals cannot. Indeed, they have a right not to be barred.
That is all.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Tax Striker vs. Illegal Immigration
Nicholas Stix at the VDARE blog has a good point.
Every single argument that is used against immigration enforcement can also be used against paying income taxes. Likewise, people who seem to insist that deportation should be treated under criminal justice presumptions rather than civil ones (that is, that people should be considered legally here until they are proven illegal) never seem to put the same thinking into filing out individual income tax forms.
While I do not advocate "tax striking" it does seem to me that as a thought experiment it provides a good counterpoint to those who demand amnesty for illegal aliens, and reveals their hypocrisy when they couch their terms in the impossibility of enforcement or in the unconstitutionality of effective enforcement.
That is all.
Every single argument that is used against immigration enforcement can also be used against paying income taxes. Likewise, people who seem to insist that deportation should be treated under criminal justice presumptions rather than civil ones (that is, that people should be considered legally here until they are proven illegal) never seem to put the same thinking into filing out individual income tax forms.
While I do not advocate "tax striking" it does seem to me that as a thought experiment it provides a good counterpoint to those who demand amnesty for illegal aliens, and reveals their hypocrisy when they couch their terms in the impossibility of enforcement or in the unconstitutionality of effective enforcement.
That is all.
Thoughts on Rand Paul
Update: Lawrence Auster says that my assumptions on Rand Paul not knowing this question was going to be asked beforehand are incorrect. I will have to check this out more, as I have been rather busy and haven't had time to check everything out as fully as I should have. More on this as I check it out.
But yes, if he knew this was going to come up he should have %%#&&*^!! well prepared for it.
Original entry:
I pretty much agree with Rand Paul's assessment that extending anbtidiscrimination laws to private business is bad. I do think that Lawrence Auster's distinction (scroll down to the fourth, and as of now, last, comment by Auster ("LA") to see him make his point) between employmenbt and service (i.e. that people could be allowed to discriminate against people in hiring them for a job, but still be legally forced to accept them as customers) has some merit, although I never thought of the issue that way before.
I think that people who criticize Paul for stepping in it are somewhat correct. Having said that, Paul's problem is not, as Unqualified Offerings' Thoreau suggests, that Paul focused on the wrong aspect of racial issues with liberty to deal with. He didn't choose this topic, it was thrust on him. On the other hand, Paul could talk more about issues where his philosophy would disproportionately help black people and emphasize that, as a way of reducing the impact of issues such as this - in fact, it would be a good idea to have done so early on as a "vaccination" against issues like this later.
I think that Lawrence Auster has a much better point, that Paul (a) should have prepared for such questions in advance, and (b) should have avoided hostile forums until he had prepared.
That is all.
But yes, if he knew this was going to come up he should have %%#&&*^!! well prepared for it.
Original entry:
I pretty much agree with Rand Paul's assessment that extending anbtidiscrimination laws to private business is bad. I do think that Lawrence Auster's distinction (scroll down to the fourth, and as of now, last, comment by Auster ("LA") to see him make his point) between employmenbt and service (i.e. that people could be allowed to discriminate against people in hiring them for a job, but still be legally forced to accept them as customers) has some merit, although I never thought of the issue that way before.
I think that people who criticize Paul for stepping in it are somewhat correct. Having said that, Paul's problem is not, as Unqualified Offerings' Thoreau suggests, that Paul focused on the wrong aspect of racial issues with liberty to deal with. He didn't choose this topic, it was thrust on him. On the other hand, Paul could talk more about issues where his philosophy would disproportionately help black people and emphasize that, as a way of reducing the impact of issues such as this - in fact, it would be a good idea to have done so early on as a "vaccination" against issues like this later.
I think that Lawrence Auster has a much better point, that Paul (a) should have prepared for such questions in advance, and (b) should have avoided hostile forums until he had prepared.
That is all.
Friday, May 07, 2010
Thoughts on the Upcoming Movie MacGruber
Aside from the fact that the film is a parody of a TV show that ended 18 years ago, the fact that the TV trailer for the movie contains not one, but two jokes about "number two" gives me grave doubts about this movie.
That is all.
That is all.
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Sorry for Lack of Posts
Sorry. I've been worn out the past few weeks. I will try to get up a few posts this next week. I have big post about Austrian economics that I have saved as a draft, but I haven't added to it for a while.
That is all.
That is all.
Wednesday, April 07, 2010
Finally, a Snappy Comeback
I have finally figured out a snappy comeback to one of Krugman's anti-Austrian fallacies. This makes me happy, because my previous efforts against him took practically a thesis to explain.
But I finally figured out the snappy answer when he asked the question again in a blog post today:
The Austrian view is that unemployment in a slump results from the difficulty of “adaptation of the structure of production” — workers are unemployed as resources are painfully transferred out of an overblown investment-goods sector back into production of consumption goods.
But this immediately raises the question, why isn’t there similar unemployment during the boom, as workers* are transferred into investment goods production?
This is a variation on a question he asked previously:
And now as then, the whole notion falls apart when you ask why, say, a housing boom — which requires shifting resources into housing — doesn’t produce the same kind of unemployment as a housing bust that shifts resources out of housing.
The simple answer:
During the boom, resources are transferred into investment goods production from savings, not from production goods investment. During the bust, there were no more savings, so the transfer had to come from decreased investment.
*It makes more sense if you assume that Krugman meant "resources" here.
That is all.
But I finally figured out the snappy answer when he asked the question again in a blog post today:
The Austrian view is that unemployment in a slump results from the difficulty of “adaptation of the structure of production” — workers are unemployed as resources are painfully transferred out of an overblown investment-goods sector back into production of consumption goods.
But this immediately raises the question, why isn’t there similar unemployment during the boom, as workers* are transferred into investment goods production?
This is a variation on a question he asked previously:
And now as then, the whole notion falls apart when you ask why, say, a housing boom — which requires shifting resources into housing — doesn’t produce the same kind of unemployment as a housing bust that shifts resources out of housing.
The simple answer:
During the boom, resources are transferred into investment goods production from savings, not from production goods investment. During the bust, there were no more savings, so the transfer had to come from decreased investment.
*It makes more sense if you assume that Krugman meant "resources" here.
That is all.
Monday, April 05, 2010
Books on the Austrian Theory
Looking through my bookmarks, I found this old piece by Jeffrey Tucker.
Some interesting reading material, and also a good insight as to why the Austrian Theory can seem like such a light bulb in the darkness of modern economics.
That is all.
Some interesting reading material, and also a good insight as to why the Austrian Theory can seem like such a light bulb in the darkness of modern economics.
That is all.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Real Good Quote
If the crowd is overwhelmingly white, it's not because the Tea Party has a problem with people of color. It's because so many people of color have a problem with limited government.
-Mark Davis
Thanx and a tip o' the hat to James Fulford on the VDARE blog.
That is all.
-Mark Davis
Thanx and a tip o' the hat to James Fulford on the VDARE blog.
That is all.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Why I Oppose Cap-and-Trade
Chris Roach has an excellent post detailing why reducing greenhouse gas emissions the way the government wants us to is likely to be unrealistic and why better approaches are needed, even if global warming is a serious issue.
Meanwhile, I am certain the the environmentalists are still simply confident that somehow if we ban the use of carbon, solar energy will suddenly become cheap and efficient, or else they welcome a return to horse-and-buggy days.
That is all.
Meanwhile, I am certain the the environmentalists are still simply confident that somehow if we ban the use of carbon, solar energy will suddenly become cheap and efficient, or else they welcome a return to horse-and-buggy days.
That is all.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
How Rude of Them to Be Alive When No One Wants Them
Apparently, in an attempt to prevent them from becoming too numberous and taking over, Jordan is rescinding the citizenship of some of its Palestinian people, although the excuse is that it will somehow prevent Israel from preventing them from returning to their homeland when that pesky conflict is finally resolved (any day now).
This does actually point out one of the big problems in the idea of "transfer" as a solution. Who is going to take them, or do you give a damn if the Palestinians topple the current Jordanian government.
It seems to me that no one wants the Palestinians, which leads to the inevitable question of how are they going to be dealt with? I have a feeling that the general feelin throughout the entire Middle East is probably something along the lines of Lord Farquaad's famous statement about Shrek,
Now really, it's rude enough being alive when no one wants you.
Is there any solution?
Of course, there is for the U.S. Stay out of the whole business. This one's not our problem.
That is all.
This does actually point out one of the big problems in the idea of "transfer" as a solution. Who is going to take them, or do you give a damn if the Palestinians topple the current Jordanian government.
It seems to me that no one wants the Palestinians, which leads to the inevitable question of how are they going to be dealt with? I have a feeling that the general feelin throughout the entire Middle East is probably something along the lines of Lord Farquaad's famous statement about Shrek,
Now really, it's rude enough being alive when no one wants you.
Is there any solution?
Of course, there is for the U.S. Stay out of the whole business. This one's not our problem.
That is all.
Monday, March 22, 2010
A Nation of Cowards
Based on recent events, I have decided that on balance, it would be a good thing to add "Nation of Cowards" to my blogroll. It takes a comment by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and turns it around (making it more accurate in the process).
I don't necessarily agree with everything the blogger does (and sometimes he is a little more impolite than I would be, especially in his "moments of racial levity"), but overall I think that his voice is worth hearing.
That is all.
I don't necessarily agree with everything the blogger does (and sometimes he is a little more impolite than I would be, especially in his "moments of racial levity"), but overall I think that his voice is worth hearing.
That is all.
Ban Him from Wal*Mart, Don't Prosecute Him
If the kid who made the stupid declaration in Wal*Mart gets prosecuted, it is a grave injustice.
Don't get me wrong. What he did is despicablke, and Wal*Mart is within its rights to ban him from its property.
But if he wasn't using a non-public phone, I don't see him having done anything illegal.
Wal*Mart has every right to say "go away and don't come back,"* but to get thelaw involved in this way is stupid.
That is all.
*But if the situation were reversed, does anyone think that they would be allowed to ban a black kid for saying things like this against white people?
Don't get me wrong. What he did is despicablke, and Wal*Mart is within its rights to ban him from its property.
But if he wasn't using a non-public phone, I don't see him having done anything illegal.
Wal*Mart has every right to say "go away and don't come back,"* but to get thelaw involved in this way is stupid.
That is all.
*But if the situation were reversed, does anyone think that they would be allowed to ban a black kid for saying things like this against white people?
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Trent Lott- Fired for Being Right (About Strom Thurmond)?
According to Charles Mills, he was.
I find the idea that racial tensions were actually thawing in the South prior to the Brown v. Board decision to be interesting,
On the other hand, I've heard it claimed that vagrancy laws were implemented in the postbellum period largely to re-enslave blacks. Whether or to what extent this was still true in the period immediately preceding the Brown decision I do not know, however. In any case, I suspect that Mills probably would underemphasize the role of such things, while traditional historical interpretation would overemphasize them, underemphasize progress that blacks were making prior to federal intervention, and overemphasize the positive impact on black civil rights that federal intervention had.
(This is, of course because the current zeitgeist is in favor of centralized intervention to secure their goals - federal when necessary, but preferably global).
That is all.
I find the idea that racial tensions were actually thawing in the South prior to the Brown v. Board decision to be interesting,
On the other hand, I've heard it claimed that vagrancy laws were implemented in the postbellum period largely to re-enslave blacks. Whether or to what extent this was still true in the period immediately preceding the Brown decision I do not know, however. In any case, I suspect that Mills probably would underemphasize the role of such things, while traditional historical interpretation would overemphasize them, underemphasize progress that blacks were making prior to federal intervention, and overemphasize the positive impact on black civil rights that federal intervention had.
(This is, of course because the current zeitgeist is in favor of centralized intervention to secure their goals - federal when necessary, but preferably global).
That is all.
Wednesday, March 03, 2010
Homeschoolers as Refugees
Amid the bad news about European persecution of homeschoolers is the good news that the U.S. has granted some German homeschoolers asylum.
Thanx and a tip o' the hat to Karen Kwiatowski on the LRC blog.
That is all.
Thanx and a tip o' the hat to Karen Kwiatowski on the LRC blog.
That is all.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Oy Vey....
The guy I voted for for President recently wrote this column.
I can't believe it.
This is really stupid.
Whatever our beefs with the IRS, ramming planes into buildings is wrong, not just a tragic act. I do not think that it is at all unreasonable to call Joe Stack a terrorist, although I will agree that it does not appear that he is part of any organized movement.
Also, we need to remember that he set his family home and fire, perhaps trying to kill his family.
We should not be looking for excuses for him. What he did was wrong. As satisfying as the idea of hurting some bueaucracy that is frustrating you may be, it is not the answer. Letting "desperation" drive you to killing innocent people is just wrong, no matter how many self-justifying speeches you give.
And Chuck, no matter how much you hate the IRS, this is not an event that should be used as a platform for criticism of the IRS.
That is all.
I can't believe it.
This is really stupid.
Whatever our beefs with the IRS, ramming planes into buildings is wrong, not just a tragic act. I do not think that it is at all unreasonable to call Joe Stack a terrorist, although I will agree that it does not appear that he is part of any organized movement.
Also, we need to remember that he set his family home and fire, perhaps trying to kill his family.
We should not be looking for excuses for him. What he did was wrong. As satisfying as the idea of hurting some bueaucracy that is frustrating you may be, it is not the answer. Letting "desperation" drive you to killing innocent people is just wrong, no matter how many self-justifying speeches you give.
And Chuck, no matter how much you hate the IRS, this is not an event that should be used as a platform for criticism of the IRS.
That is all.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
The Brisco County Olympics
Ever hear that tune they play at the Olympics and wonder what it is?
It's the theme song from the 1993-1994 TV series The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr.
I loved it when I was a freshman in high school (the only year it was on).
See it here.
That is all.
It's the theme song from the 1993-1994 TV series The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr.
I loved it when I was a freshman in high school (the only year it was on).
See it here.
That is all.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Sorry for Lack of Posting
I am getting adjusted to a new job that I started two weeks ago.
That is all.
That is all.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Nothing New Under the Sun
Found from link on WorldNetDaily:
Is Mona Lisa really a self-portrait by Leonardo Da Vinci?
I remember a big brouhaha over this in 1986, so it isn't exactly the new, groundbreaking theory that it is proclaimed to be.
That is all.
Is Mona Lisa really a self-portrait by Leonardo Da Vinci?
I remember a big brouhaha over this in 1986, so it isn't exactly the new, groundbreaking theory that it is proclaimed to be.
That is all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)