Questions and answers to the news of the week. 11/30/10

DOES FEDERAL SPENDING WORK?

Using standard statistical analyses that introduce variables to control for business-cycle fluctuations, wars and inflation, we found that over the entire post World War II era through 2009 each dollar of new tax revenue was associated with $1.17 of new spending. Politicians spend the money as fast as it comes in—and a little bit more. We also looked at different time periods (e.g., 1947-2009 vs. 1959-2009), different financial data (fiscal year federal budget data, as well as calendar year National Income and Product Account data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis), different lag structures (e.g., relating taxes one year to spending change the following year to allow for the time it takes bureaucracies to spend money), different control variables, etc. The alternative models produce different estimates of the tax-spend relationship—between $1.05 and $1.81. But no matter how we configured the data and no matter what variables we examined, higher tax collections never resulted in less spending. - Steven Moore

WHY LIBERALS ARE SAD PEOPLE

Utopians will always be less happy than those who know that suffering is inherent to human existence. The utopian compares America to utopia and finds it terribly wanting. The conservative compares America to every other civilization that has ever existed and walks around wondering how he got so lucky as to be born or naturalized an American. - Dennis Prager

THE AIRPORT SECURITY ANSWER

What do the Israeli airport-security people do that American airport-security people do not do? They profile. They question some individuals for more than half an hour, open up all their luggage, and spread the contents on the counter — and they let others go through with scarcely a word. And it works…Will America be undermined from within by an administration obsessed with political correctness and intoxicated with the adolescent thrill of exercising its new-found powers? Stay tuned. - Thomas Sowell

RACISM AND SEXISM HYPOCRISY

The highlight of the news video is, of course, the portion featuring a black female student who tells us that we still need diversity centers because of the persistence of racism and sexism. But she made the statement while wearing big black sorority letters emblazoned on her blouse. In other words, while lecturing us on the persistence of racism and sexism she was touting her membership in an organization that limits its membership to blacks and women. The hypocrisy of asking the public to fund “solutions” to the “problems” she is exacerbating is simply staggering. - Mike Adams

THE KEYNESIAN LIE

policymakers are committing what economist Friedrich Hayek called the “fatal conceit” in micromanaging the economic cycle. Hayek hated policy intervention of any kind…Hayek was associated with the Austrian school, which argued that the private sector should be left free to carry out the task of any readjustment in a downturn. Faith in the market’s purging power served the U.S. well in the 19th century, when the economy emerged stronger after each recession, but was taken too far in the policy mix of tight money and high taxes that led to the Great Depression and the rise of the Keynesians. Keynes would probably never have supported big government deficits during boom times, such as those that led to our current debt crisis. Likewise, Friedman would probably not have backed the new Fed use of monetary policy as a tool to engineer expansion rather than merely cushion the pain in a downturn. The systematic perversion of Keynes’s and Friedman’s thought is now resulting in a fall in their fortunes, leaving Hayek triumphant, once again. -Ruchir Sharma

Wisdom and insight- The best of the week. 11/15/10

I did not write that man is inherently evil. I wrote that he is not basically good. And, yes, that does make the world sad. So do disease, earthquakes, death and all the unjust suffering in the world. But sad facts remain facts. A distinguishing characteristic of liberals and leftists, … is their aversion to acknowledging sad facts. – Dennis Prager

In 1920, when the top tax rate was 73 percent, for people making over $100,000 a year, the federal government collected just over $700 million in income taxes — and 30 percent of that was paid by people making over $100,000. After a series of tax cuts brought the top rate down to 24 percent, the federal government collected more than a billion dollars in income-tax revenue — and people making over $100,000 a year now paid 65 percent of the taxes.-Thomas Sowell

People behave differently when tax rates are high as compared with when they are low. With low tax rates, they take their money out of tax shelters and put it to work in the economy, benefiting themselves, the economy, and government, which collects more money in taxes because incomes rise. High tax rates that very few people are actually paying because of tax shelters do not bring in as much revenue as lower tax rates that people are paying.- Thomas Sowel

l Nothing raises the ire of cynical liberals more than a happy-go-lucky, totally unburdened, freethinking and self-assured conservative woman who has everything she wants and then some. And without anyone's help…Liberalism, after all, needs to imagine an unhappy populace. Passing sweeping entitlement programs and convincing voters that big government is the answer only works if people are frustrated with their stations in life.-S.E. Cupp

If we truly want our Constitution back, Charlie Rangel needs to be impeached for “high crimes and Misdemeanors,” not given a slap on the wrist. -Dean Kalahar

The nation's founders would be horrified by today's congressional spending that consumes 25 percent of our GDP. Contrast that to the years 1787 to the 1920s when federal government spending never exceeded 4 percent of our GDP except in wartime.- Walter Williams

Can a bi-partisan Balanced Budget Amendment pass? It almost did already. Aug. 4, 1982, by a vote of 69 to 31 in the Senate, two more than the two-thirds vote required for approval of a constitutional amendment. The Senate vote was bipartisan: 47 Republicans, 21 Democrats and 1 Independent voted for the amendment. In the House of Representatives by way of a discharge petition the vote was 236 to 187, it did not meet the two-thirds required by Article V of the Constitution. The House vote was again bipartisan: 167 Republicans, 69 Democrats. Source: Walter Williams

On the question as to what % of GDP should the federal government spend, Walter Williams said: “if 10 percent is good enough for the Baptist Church, it ought to be good enough for Congress.”

Obviously, some of the central bank's governors have been encouraged by Congress to think of themselves as more than mere bankers - as wizards of social control, even regulating society's reservoirs of self-esteem.-George Will

(Paul) Ryan, incoming chairman of the House Budget Committee, says the Fed thinks it can adroitly "put the cruise missile through the goal posts." But how adroit can Fed management of the economy be? No complex economy can be both managed and efficient, meaning dynamic. To think otherwise is what Friedrich Hayek called "the fatal conceit." That conceit can be fatal to the Fed's independence.-George Will

Does anyone find it alarming that for the first time in the nine-year war, the U.S. military is deploying heavily armored battle tanks to Afghanistan? Did you not assume tanks were being used- IN A WAR!-Dean Kalahar

G.M. will never buy back and sell off all of the shares that Uncle Sam owns because it has a stronger incentive to keep them in the game – and know they will always get bailed out- with a large enough holding to protect themselves from ever having to really compete. By the way, the government lost $9 billion of taxpayers’ original investment on Thursdays’ partial stock sale. Fell like a tycoon now? -Dean Kalahar

John Tyner, cleverly armed with an iPhone to give YouTube immortality to the encounter, took exception to the TSA guard about to give him the benefit of Homeland Security’s newest brainstorm — the upgraded, full-palm, up-the-groin, all-body pat-down. In a stroke, the young man ascended to myth, or at least the next edition of Bartlett’s, warning the agent not to “touch my junk.” Not quite the 18th-century elegance of “Don’t Tread on Me,” but the age of Twitter has a different cadence from the age of the musket. What the modern battle cry lacks in archaic charm, it makes up for in full-body syllabic punch. Don’t touch my junk is the anthem of the modern man, the Tea Party patriot, the late-life libertarian, the midterm-election voter. –Charles Krauthammer

Last week the Food and Drug Administration announced that it will soon require tobacco warning labels to be much bigger and more graphic…The proposed warnings include one containing an image of a man smoking through a tracheotomy hole in his throat; another depicting a body with a large scar running down the chest; and another showing a man who appears to be suffering a heart attack. Others have images of a corpse in a coffin and one with a toe tag in a morgue, diseased lungs and mouths, and a mother blowing smoke into a baby’s face. Apparently the theory behind such fulsome antismoking propaganda is that while everyone knows tobacco is unhealthy, some people need to have their noses rubbed in that fact as pungently and unpleasantly as possible. But when did it become the job of the federal government to treat American adults the way mothers and fathers treat children? ..There will always be some people who smoke, just as there will always be some people who drive recklessly or overeat or drink to excess. Should the manufacturer’s sticker on every new car be required to include images of horrible collisions and mangled motorists? Should packages of high-calorie junk food depict rolls of flabby cellulite or a patient undergoing bypass surgery? Should beer and wine bottles be covered with grisly pictures of ruined livers or passed-out drunks?..There always seem to be good reasons for giving them (government) just a little more authority, for agreeing to surrender just a few more personal choices, for letting yourself be treated just a bit more condescendingly. But it comes at a price. Smoking is unhealthy, no question about it. The loss of freedom and self-respect is more hazardous by far.-Jeff Jacoby

Notable and quoteable

I did not write that man is inherently evil. I wrote that he is not basically good. And, yes, that does make the world sad. So do disease, earthquakes, death and all the unjust suffering in the world. But sad facts remain facts. A distinguishing characteristic of liberals and leftists,” … “is their aversion to acknowledging sad facts.” – Dennis Prager


In 1920, when the top tax rate was 73 percent, for people making over $100,000 a year, the federal government collected just over $700 million in income taxes — and 30 percent of that was paid by people making over $100,000. After a series of tax cuts brought the top rate down to 24 percent, the federal government collected more than a billion dollars in income-tax revenue — and people making over $100,000 a year now paid 65 percent of the taxes.-Thomas Sowell


People behave differently when tax rates are high as compared with when they are low. With low tax rates, they take their money out of tax shelters and put it to work in the economy, benefiting themselves, the economy, and government, which collects more money in taxes because incomes rise. High tax rates that very few people are actually paying because of tax shelters do not bring in as much revenue as lower tax rates that people are paying.- Thomas Sowell

"Best of"- Keeping it simple

If the government pays people not to work and taxes people who do work, is it really so difficult to see why employment is so low?- Arthur Laffer

The mother of all supply-side reforms is incentive pay for politicians...In business, firms align the incentives of decision makers with the incentives of shareholders to ensure that they take the best course of action. Washington must begin doing the same by creating an incentive structure that pays elected officials according to factors such as stock market performance and economic growth. – Arthur Laffer

“Green” President Obama, who lectures us on protecting the environment through things like cap and trade legislation, will not agree to the free trade deal with South Korea because Korean built cars and trucks have better fuel and environmental standards than US cars and trucks. In other words, the President is pro-environment only as long as it does not diminish his power and relationship with unions. Hypocrite. –Dean Kalahar

If it is the first responsibility of the Federal Reserve to protect the dollars that Americans earn and save, is it not dereliction of duty for the Fed to pursue a policy to bleed value from those dollars?… Bernanke is not just risking inflation. He is inducing inflation.-Pat Buchanan

We shouldn't be playing around with inflation. It's not for nothing Reagan called it 'as violent as a mugger, as frightening as an armed robber and as deadly as a hit man. The Fed's pump-priming addiction has got our small businesses running scared and our allies worried. The German finance minister called the Fed's proposals 'clueless. When Germany, a country that knows a thing or two about the dangers of inflation, warns us to think again, maybe it's time for Chairman Bernanke to cease and desist. We don't want temporary, artificial economic growth bought at the expense of permanently higher inflation which will erode the value of our incomes and our savings. -Sarah Palin

When it comes to the increasing sex, violence and profanity in entertainment media, the social libertines are indifferent. They insist that children will hardly be warped or ruined by the media they consume. They chortle at the paranoia of Hollywood critics. Their mantra: If you don't like it, just turn the channel. But if the issue isn't indecency, but instead, say, obesity, so many of those titans of "tolerance" suddenly become the censors. -Brent Bozell

Anti-bullying campaign is just “hate crime” legislation for kids

By Dean Kalahar

November 9, 2010

The anti-bullying campaign is once again upon us. It kicked off on October 20^th, with the official LGBT day of wearing purple to raise awareness against bullying. What was notable is how many eagerly joined the cause and wore purple. After all, who would not be in support of what seems to be a simple cause. Since, the bandwagon mentality of conventional morality failed to address bullying with any critical or objective analysis; it might be prudent to look at the subject more closely.

We all have stories of being bullied or being the one bulling. It has and continues to be a part of growing up, and some might say is a “right of passing” in learning the tough lessons and the sometimes brutal meaning of life. Everyone surely has a story of childhood “bullying,” so why did we turn out ok after suffering such torment?

For generations kids got through the trials and tribulations of the “crosses we have to bear” without a lot of fanfare or psychological effects. In days gone by life, and the taunting that comes with it, made kids stronger, more whole, and well adjusted. Today, we live in a therapeutic world where everything has to be safe, warm and fuzzy. And although living without bullying seems at face value to be the correct ideal, without it, something would just seem to be missing in the maturation process. Maybe it’s time to stop shielding kids from the process of being kids who turn into productive adults and ask some questions.

Is the anti-bullying campaign actually hurting our children? Where is all this anti-bullying rhetoric coming from? Are we being bullied into believing bullying is bad?

Those who fight against bullying hold a invalid worldview of man, believing he is, by his nature, good and perfectible. Sure it would be a wonderful ideal if everyone would love his fellow man. But in the world of reality, human nature has a brutal side and all the hope in the world for man to alter his universal nature is a waste of time at best and arrogant at worst.

So what should we do regarding our children’s safety and security? First and last, we have laws against assault and battery, and no one is suggesting we ignore them and do not teach alternative methods of dealing with conflicts. But protecting kids from the human condition does little to actually prepare them for life dealing with the human condition. In fact, science is beginning to look at bullying with an evolutionary light.

Bullying is seen as abusive and gratuitous when resources are abundant and warfare unnecessary, but aggressive human behavior always lies just under the surface. Research may show that hyper-aggressive males, no matter how grotesque and unfashionable they seem, would not exist if they did not confer some evolutionary advantage on their species. For example, Baboon behavior shows that when resources diminish, baboon bullies become prized members of the troop in helping to drive others from limited food supplies. In other words, natural instincts and economic realities tied to self reliance may drive us to behave in certain ways, including aggressive bullying, that saves lives.

Other research shows that similar behavior patterns of bullying exist in wolves and chimpanzees, among other animals. This leads researchers to believe that there might be some social benefit from a pattern that seems wholly destructive. One hypothesis is that bullying exists because there is some social or personal benefit. If there was no benefit, then there would be no purpose for it. Evolutionarily speaking, the trait for bullying could only survive if there was a benefit, to either life span or reproduction that makes it useful to the person carrying it.

In The Moral Animal, Robert Wright states, "Throw a bunch of hens together, and, after a time of turmoil, including much combat, things will settle down.” Disputes over food will become brief and decisive, as one hen simply pecks the other, bringing quick deferral and forming a simple, linear hierarchy, wherein every hen knows its place. Why would this "pecking order" be useful? It provides a hierarchy that keeps members of a group from continually vying for power and control. It keeps the stronger members from wasting energy and keeps the weaker members from continually being hurt when they lose in a struggle.

Whether good or bad, we could say that this creates a certain amount of order in a social group-whether it's animals or children. But this only explains how it benefits a social group and doesn't explain why bullying continues even after hierarchies or "pecking orders" have been established. For this, we must examine the possible personal benefits of bullying.

In the article, "Words That Wound," the author states that, "Theories...vary on why children become bullies, but most agree that bullies gain power and enjoy the control they have over others." It seems that bullying is mostly about having power and control over others. This may have effects on the status of an individual bully, and it may also affect the way a bully feels about himself. In the book, Developing a Social Psychology of Monkeys and Apes, the author states that, "Dominance has not been a negligible issue in primate studies. Higher or lower rank is thus as influential in social interactions as they are in human societies.”

Continuing, the author states that, "Control, in monkeys and apes, is used to improve mating and feeding opportunities or to anticipate and avoid the aggressive actions of others." Although mating and feeding are probably not applicable to the social hierarchies of children, these observations from the animal kingdom may apply to the way dominance and bullying work for them.

Scientists hypothesize that the personal benefits for a bully include higher self-esteem, better access to resources and, as with the monkeys and apes, avoidance of the aggressive actions of others. Lastly, some suggest bullying helps an individual actually avoid the aggressive actions of others, by being aggressive himself or herself.

The subject of bullying within a culture is a dynamic question that must not be taken lightly. Sound research and children’s safety concerns should be priority one. But we must not jump to conclusions regarding bullying just because it feels or sounds like it is bad. In addition, questioning why the campaign is being pushed so fervently needs to be asked.

The LBGT is the group responsible for promoting the “wear purple” anti-bullying campaign. Why is only an acronym given to a group promoting the demonstration? LGBT is an acronym referring collectively to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. The same group that promotes hate crime legislation and special victim status is using the anti-bullying message as a generic form of “hate crime” legislation on children. They do this in order to push an agenda of universal acceptance and extra-legal standing in society.

Controlling genuine assault and battery on children is a fundamental issue, and laws are already in place to protect all citizens. Indoctrinating children to push a sensitive and controversial adult issue, however, is disingenuous and disgraceful. What would be ironic, if it was not so disturbing, is those who pretend to want to protect kids by promoting an anti-bullying agenda will not think twice about “bullying” those who dare to offer a counter argument and expose their agenda.

Sources:
Jeremy Smith & Todd Nadenicheck, Biting the Underdog
Michael Brown, Gay Is Good Or Bullying Is Bad? A Teachable Moment.
Dr. Christopher Bailey, The Benefits of Bullying,