We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Friday, March 22. 2019
Tasting 114-Year-Old Wine With the Rothschilds at Château Lafite
Hudson Yards Is Manhattan’s Biggest, Newest, Slickest Gated Community.
Bill de Blasio 2020: The campaign no one wants
Ten Years after Climategate, the Global Warming Fraud Is on Life Support
OBAMA JUDGE DEMANDS TRUMP BELIEVE IN GLOBAL WARMING
Trump Tax Reform Hits Home in Wealthy New York Suburbs
Same people who say Tax The Rich
" Female economists are at some notable points less convinced of market solutions and have more trust in the government in serving the public interest."
I think that might be generally true. Why?
‘Seattle is Dying’ Special Shows a City Gripped by Homelessness and Drug Abuse
Tales from the Illinois Exodus–Part One
The Crying of Lot 330 - San Francisco’s leaders prepare to site a large homeless shelter in the heart of the city.
Students say offensive speech is not free speech
That offends me deeply. They are idiots.
Betsy DeVos Strikes a Blow for Religious Freedom
New Zealand Bookstore Bans Jordan Peterson’s Self-Help Book “12 Rules for Life” Following Mosque Attack
Continetti: Democrats Want to ‘Change the Structure’ of the United States to Win Elections
Ocasio-Cortez Attends Event Encouraging Eliminating Private Ed, Boycott of Standardized Tests
BETO O'ROURKE: I DON'T TAKE PRO-ISRAEL MONEY FROM JEWS
2020 Democrats to skip AIPAC
The Democrats are about to hand a guaranteed 2020 election victory to Donald Trump on a plate
McCain’s Key Role in Fueling Post-Election Trump-Russia Hysteria
Makes sense for Trump to be angry, but shut up
ISIS caliphate has officially crumbled and last stronghold liberated
The Pushback Plan: How Taiwan Can Win Diplomatically Against China
Tracked: Mar 24, 09:40
Tracked: Mar 24, 10:01
Tracked: Mar 24, 10:18
Tracked: Mar 24, 10:33
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Bill de Blasio 2020: The campaign no one wants
Is there a Democrat campaigning for President that anyone really wants?
It is just scary just how anti-American the Democrats are. They are basically the marxists we fought against in the Cold War. And they are now trying to destroy our country. Ironic, in that marxism has largely been discredited and only exists in 5 countries.
In this world and especially in our country women are far more often the recipient of "free stuff", welfare, being taken care of and excused for not being able to take care of themselves. They grow up expecting it. They resent the hell out of it which usually presents itself by putting down men, but never the less they expect it and demand it. So it does not surprise me at all that women economists look to the government to provide and to solve all problems.
This is exactly the philosophy of the left today. Not just women on the left but men as well. Hickenlooper recently encountered this reality when he failed to bow to the leftist identity politics and bow to the inevitability of a women as president. Never mind that none of the women running should be elected just put a women in that office and give us all more free stuff.
"McCain’s Key Role"
It goes so far beyond the election. If you look at McCain's actions since he has been in politics there is only one word that comes to mind; "traitor". In fact the new building they are going to name after him is already the "traitor McCain building" in my mind. Look at the entirety of McCain's political career without regard to the fact he is a veteran and a former war prisoner and you cannot deny he has always been a traitor. A traitor to conservatives, a traitor to Republicans and a traitor to his country. Just for the record I feel the same about Susan Collins and a dozen or so other Republicans. it isn't JUST McCain.
As far as Trump's role in this controversy I can only say that he is the only one being honest here.
With regard to female economists. Off the top of my head, I can name only one who is supportive of free markets/Austrian viewpoints. Veronica de Rugy.
There is, of course, Deirdre McCloskey, arguably the single best economist out there at the moment, certainly in terms of economic history if not theory. But Deirdre was a man, so I'm not sure she gets to fall 100% into the category as most of her learning and adoption of the systemic beliefs was done as a man.
However, I watch and listen to my own wife and the reasons this claim is probably true (that women don't always go for free markets) follows along with her behaviors.
She believes the market works. She says this unquestioningly.
However, when the market doesn't do what she expected, if she loses, she tends to overreact. "There's something WRONG"
Unlike JP Morgan who famously, upon being asked what the market would do, replied "it will fluctuate", she instead thinks something needs to be fixed.
In reality, the market is almost ALWAYS right (assuming it isn't being rigged - and even then, it's 'right' insofar as it does what it was rigged to do until it simply can't support the rigging anymore). It's "right" for that moment in time...it is sending a signal.
Most people don't understand markets just send signals, they think there's some way to predetermine outcomes. But that's what rigging is all about.
So my wife, while she supports the market, also supports rigging it as long as we know what it's going to do and it favors a majority of people.
That rigging, of course, eventually breaks down...and a majority of people get hurt badly. Usually not the ones who benefited from the rigging in the first place, and certainly not those who DID the rigging (politicians).
Still, rigging the system is a 'feel-good' solution. Moral hazard is ignored and set aside until it rears it's ugly head, and then someone says "there was nothing wrong with what we did - there needs to be a NEW law to prevent the people who engaged the moral hazard from doing so next time. That will fix everything." Until even that new law doesn't work anymore and the rigging breaks down further.
I believe women tend to be inclined more toward a comfortable, utopian-style solution. I'd argue most people want that kind of solution, but realize it's unrealistic. Women, however, probably like it more simply because it's comfortable.
I lean on a few ideas when it comes to markets:
I prefer uncomfortable truths to comfortable lies.
I don't want to immanentize the eschaton.
I don't let my feelings get in the way of a good decision.
Finally, I lean on almost everything Bastiat wrote. Mostly
“Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.”
Markets require a value exchange with the assumption that both sides come out ahead or somehow benefit in the exchange. Win-win tends to be the exchange outcome in most market solutions. If it wasn't, we wouldn't have progress.
Gender differences in economic expectations:
This probably can be explained by evolutionary psychology. We're primates, with the normal differences (aggression etc) that male and female primates have, but we're separated from our closest kin by about 7 million years. During that time gender specific division of labor became part of our nature. The reason is sort of straighforward: the combination of upright posture (which helped mental development) and mental development itself required that the young be born very much undeveloped, requiring extensive care over a long period of time. The presence of several young severely crimped the femaale's ability to hunt and forage, so that duty was taken up by the male (another evolutionary adaptation*)
Development of this pattern over so long of time altered expectations, females (and children) became somewhat dependent on external resources and this became part of our makeup. I grew up in the '50s and early '60s when division of labor was far more traditional than now. Even then, I noticed that many stay-at-home women remained very industrious (kids, house, etc), where as guys without jobs tended to almost always degenerate into lazy slobs. I suspected even then that male and female minds handled this situation very differently.
* In humans, sex and resources have a functional exchange relationship. Adaptation in action.
jay: The presence of several young severely crimped the femaale's ability to hunt and forage, so that duty was taken up by the male (another evolutionary adaptation*)
Not sure that is quite correct. In many primitive cultures, females of the species typically do the foraging, which entails extensive knowledge of plants and their properties, for nutrition and for healing. The grandmother phenomenon allowed for the accumulation of this knowledge across generations. Young females are also known to trap and hunt.
Generally, there is less specialization in primitive cultures. The development of settlements and warfare probably accelerated the trend towards specialization.
Sounds like you're saying man is a strictly materialistic animal, Dad. Don't humans think, reason, and have what they call souls, and don't they range along philosophical ideals, because if they do then there's a entire universe of constructs stretching back thousands of years that explain human behavior more than picking bananas and rutting.
Or maybe humans never did any of that advanced civilization stuff and act more like simple robots. You're welcome? Sure! Gee whiz and we note you didn't address the point.
"In many primitive cultures, females of the species typically do the foraging, "
Not sure you can make blanket statements. Tribal societies often have far more rigid rules about 'men's' duties and 'women's' duties. Warfare, defense, hunting is either strictly or mostly male (which also makes sense, loss of a male does not damage the tribe as much as loss of a breeding age female). Men have separate social order from women (this occurs in other primates as well)
jay: Not sure you can make blanket statements.
We didn't make a blanket statement. You said "The presence of several young severely crimped the female's ability to hunt and forage". We pointed out that in many primitive cultures, the female of the species do the foraging, and is a specialty which entails extensive knowledge of plants and their properties, for nutrition and for healing. This makes sense especially if hunting is largely a male activity, as the males may leave the group for extended periods while they track and hunt their prey.
I think you've highlighted two interesting facts: (1) women seem to be more motivated by external resources and (2) men seem more inclined than women to decompensate in the absence of a well-defined formally paid job--but I'm not sure how you're urging us to connect them. Don't they pull in different directions a bit?
Another odd thing: They claim rights to use any photos you take, for any purpose.
What a weird article in the NYT about the huge new development on the old railroads. Page after page of unfocused bile and snark, then one paragraph of plain information that sounds like pretty good news: "As a feat of engineering, it rests on a new $1 billion platform, which decks over a stretch of infrastructure that for generations acted as a kind of Nowhereland on the West Side. Nowhereland is now making way for what promises to be 16 new buildings, including some 4,000 new apartments, a school, parkland and upward of 55,000 jobs. Slightly more than 10 percent of those apartments will be subsidized housing (some 430 apartments), with more such housing underway or already built by the developers off site — 1,309 subsidized apartments in total." Then right back to drlpping venom in every line, without quite explaining what the problem is supposed to be. It reads like sour grapes from someone who didn't manage to get on the gravy train.
Subsidized housing. It is forever. If you get a subsidized apartment you can stay in it until you die. If you later earn more money, inherit money or acquire it in anyway you keep that secret and live in subsidized housing forever. It is like winning the lottery. It costs, nation wide, about $200,000 to create a subsidized unit. After that it costs on average nation wide about $1200 a month to subsidize it. Additionally there are lost taxes; property taxes, if the unit is privately owned the owner is allowed some income tax write offs. It is extremely expensive to create "affordable" housing. BUT it does not solve the problem. Each instance of subsidized housing that lasts forever and costs a fortune solves ONE persons housing needs. But it spawns 10 or 100 more. So every politician in the nation demands we have more "affordable" hosing built at tax payers expense, subsidized at taxpayers expense and often even the utilities are paid for by the tax payer. But each additional unit of "affordable" housing is a lure to the next "rent seeker" who wants to win that government lottery of free stuff. Ironically each "affordable" housing unit takes housing off the public market forever making the problem of insufficient housing worse. It is a self fulfilling prophecy that costs the taxpayer billions every year and that costs goes up every year. It doesn't FIX anything, costs so much it is unsustainable and every study shows this and every politician knows this. Yet they persist.
I couldn't agree with you more about subsidized housing, and I'm sure there are a lot of arguments that could be made against this new NY development. They just aren't arguments made in this strange article, which is almost 100% emotive.
I'd bet money that, if the author has a problem with the "subsidized housing" part of the project, it's that there isn't enough of it.
"Female economists are at some notable points less convinced of market solutions and have more trust in the government in serving the public interest."--It's not a view I share, despite my XX status, but it seemed funny that the authors worried about making economics "value free." Economics is the study of how people make choices about how to use scarce resources. Choices are going to involve values. Choices of other people will involve values that other people hold dear, not the ones we would choose for ourselves.
Of course I'd like to see academics base their studies on the facts they observe rather than the ones they wish to see, but if they're going to study the choices of human beings, they'll see patterns that includes values like trust in government and concern for public interest.
Hudson Yards Is Manhattan’s Biggest, Newest, Slickest Gated Community.
But...but...but....WALLS ARE IMMORAL! until proogies need them to keep the hoi polloi away! (Same goes for guns = BAD! Unless wielded by large brutish men protecting the Elites and their Hollywood buddies!)
Female economists favor government solutions...that should surprise no one. Most women shop for security in their life and are more willing to sacrifice liberty for that security. The less well off they are the more government programs they vote for and the less likely they are to marry...they marry the government. They look at the government as the source of power as well. Insisting on the right to vote the first important goal was to get alcohol banned. Then they moved on to no fault divorce while keeping the kids and getting support. Look at any policies that women politicians support. For the founding fathers it was "provide for the national defense and promote the general welfare". Where is the money spent now? This will be the lightning round......
I think that is exactly right.
Because of the time involved in child rearing, I believe women are hard-wired to trade freedom for security.
Elites dislike standardized testing...Yea, they can't get their thumb on the scale of social justice. Students say offensive speech is not free speech....the students are offensive, there are not PC qualifiers to speech. AOC eliminating private ed...must maintain the monopolistic government propaganda machine.
Ten Years after Climategate, the Global Warming Fraud Is on Life Support
The scientific evidence for anthropogenic global warming is stronger now than it was ten years ago.
There are now 40 years of satellite measurements of atmospheric temperature and this is how that plots up for the Lower 48 States
The contiguous United States is only about 1.6% of the Earth's surface. Notably, even a cursory look at the graph shows a positive trend in temperature anomaly.
As it is the annual change in concentration that is supposed to be driving global warming
That is incorrect. It is the accumulated emissions that determine the climate forcing. Notably, even a cursory look at the graph shows a positive trend in the percentage annual change in atmospheric CO2 concentration.
And so it has come to pass. January-February had record cold over North America.
North America was the only continent that showed cooling during February. Global temperatures were well above the base period in both January and February.
Scientific evidence is what we say it is as is everything else we make up.
Don't make us post our outdated graphs and dubious studies again in any case..
As for Hudson Yards, the 19th century elite Parisians all hated the Eiffel Tower.
It's an elitist thing, objecting strenuously to mega projects.
About those tax changes. “People hope for the best and don’t pay attention.” As a drill sergeant said, “If you’re looking for sympathy, it’s in the dictionary between s**t and syphilis.”
SgtBob: About those tax changes.
The tax cuts were obviously meant to reward friends and punish enemies, i.e. cronyism. In any case, the didn't even provide much of a stimulus to the economy.
Trump's own economists now agree: GOP tax cuts are failing to spark growth
That's because a stimulus works properly only when there is excess resources and capital. A stimulus at the peak of the market cycle only exacerbates the problems inherent to working near capacity, with government borrowing competing against private borrowing, and government projects competing for human and material resources.
"The tax cuts were obviously meant to reward friends and punish enemies".
A stupid and false statement on it's face.
The tax cuts went to 95% of taxpayers so Trump has a LOT of friends.
What you and the left REALLY mean is you want the IRS to become another arm of the welfare state and you want more welfare doled out of the IRS. You use semantics (lies) to call this welfare (free stuff) tax cuts and tax credits. We should end the EITC and return the IRS to collecting taxes and not giving out free stuff.
We'll just ignore 3.1% GNP growth rate in 2018 along wlth the 3.4% annual growth in real wages.
Also the ridiculously low unemployment numbers in any case...
But what has Trump done lately?
Hudson Yards Is Manhattan’s Biggest, Newest, Slickest
Gated Community. Is This the Neighborhood New York Deserves? I wouldna know, and I wouldna care. NYC deserves nothing.
Obama Judge Demands Trump Believe in Global Warming: Sorry, Judge! 'Twas the Obama admin what did it. Go after THEM.
Illinois: The Ill part is ever so true!
Betsy DeVos Strikes a Blow for Religious Freedom: YAY. Long overdue.
"Beto": Doesn't want money from Jews. Bummer for him.
Watch "Seattle Is Dying", if you can stomach it, or if you care...
Basically, being "homeless" needs to be re-criminalized. It seems to me the most effective way is to arrest them for violating environmental laws. Since most of those are strict-liability crimes (no criminal intent required), it should be easy to convict them for violations of the Clean Water Act, failure to have proper waste disposal permts, NPDES or Section 404 permits, etc. And where is their government-approved Operating Manual for their individual wastewater systems???? For the Clean Water Act, you are looking at fines of $50,000 per day plus 3 years incarceration for the first offense, 6 years for each succeeding offense.
Anyway, that's my modest proposal for dealing with the situation. Simply recast the drug, assault and robbery charges into crimes against the environment, and they will probably end up in prison for life instead of being back on the streets the next day.
Re: Trump and free speech at the Universities
Did you notice that the assumption is automatically made that Universities should receive Federal research dollars? Actually, most of the grants given to universities are a complete waste of money. They're usually used to discover how many lesbians can dance on the head of a pin.
I would make all grants subject to a referendum. Put each grant before the voters, and let them decide "Yes" or "No."
This would have the effect of reducing grant out-lays by about 80%. And taxes could be reduced accordingly.
But our hopelessly corrupt government would never let that happen; because they feed like pigs on tax money.