Maggie's Farm

Quote from the WSJ:

Free enterprise is culturally mainstream, for the moment. Asked in a Rasmussen poll conducted this month to choose the better system between capitalism and socialism, 13% of respondents over 40 chose socialism. For those under 30, this percentage rose to 33%. (Republicans were 11 times more likely to prefer capitalism than socialism; Democrats were almost evenly split between the two systems.)

The government has been abetting this trend for years by exempting an increasing number of Americans from federal taxation. My colleague Adam Lerrick showed in these pages last year that the percentage of American adults who have no federal income-tax liability will rise to 49% from 40% under Mr. Obama's tax plan. Another 11% will pay less than 5% of their income in federal income taxes and less than $1,000 in total.

To put a modern twist on the old axiom, a man who is not a socialist at 20 has no heart; a man who is still a socialist at 40 either has no head, or pays no taxes. Social Democrats are working to create a society where the majority are net recipients of the "sharing economy." They are fighting a culture war of attrition with economic tools. Defenders of capitalism risk getting caught flat-footed with increasingly antiquated arguments that free enterprise is a Main Street pocketbook issue. Progressives are working relentlessly to see that it is not.

Please read the whole thing, because he gets to the heart of the issue.

From VA Tech, via Shibley at Pajamas:

We, the College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences Diversity Committee, use the term “diversity” to mean the desirability and value of many kinds of individual differences while at the same time acknowledging and respecting that socially constructed differences based on certain characteristics exist within systems of power that create and sustain inequality, hierarchy, and privilege.* The College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences is determined to eliminate these forms of inequality, hierarchy, and privilege in our programs and practices. In this sense, diversity is to be actively advanced because it fosters excellence in learning, discovery, and engagement.

* These characteristics include, but are not limited to ability, age, body size and condition, class, color, ethnicity, gender, gender expression, geographical and cultural background, health status, national origin, political affiliation, race, religion, sexual orientation, and veteran status. [Asterisk in original.]

Perhaps it was aiming for satire, but overshot the mark.

Rip It Up, with Gene Vincent. h/t, The Englishman

Does aptitude matter at all? Does ability matter? Does anything matter, except skin tone diversity? As far as I can tell, the anti-test movement in edn is all about skin tone.

Tests are designed to discern and to objectively measure ability and knowledge, to - and here's the word - discriminate the competent from the less so. Crazy thing is that the SAT was introduced precisely to provide objective measures to eliminate favoritism and to reward merit.

Via Driscoll:

On “CNN Newsroom” on April 28, Sanchez interviewed Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., about the departure of Sen. Arlen Specter, Pa., from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party. He asked the senator from South Carolina if Specter was correct in his analysis that the conservative wing of the Republican Party was squeezing out a segment of the electorate.

“You’re shrinking the electorate to an extreme - to a point where a regular Republican can’t win,” Sanchez said, paraphrasing Specter. “What do you make of that argument?”

DeMint explained it was which ideology was best suited to give Americans the freedom to choose in their daily lives that propagated a more prosperous society - both economically and culturally.

“That’s quite the opposite,” DeMint said. “We’re seeing across the country right now that the biggest tent of all is the tent of freedom and what we need to do as Republicans is convince Americans that freedom can work in all areas of their life - for every American, whether it’s education, or health care or creating jobs.”

However, with that response, Sanchez had his Jim Mora moment - when Mora, the head coach of the Indianapolis Colts went into his “playoffs” rant after a 40-21 loss to the San Francisco 49ers on Nov. 25, 2001.

“What the hell does that mean?” Sanchez said. “I mean, the biggest tent is freedom? Freedom? I mean you got to do better than that!”

It may be hard to believe, but that is what we're up against, friends. There are Americans who have no clue about why this nation exists.

Our Bastiat quote du jour, from this site. Fortunately, it's simple French: 

Laissez faire! — Je commence par dire, pour prévenir toute équivoque; que laissez faire s'applique ici aux choses honnêtes, l'État étant institué précisément pour empêcher les choses déshonnêtes.

Cela posé, et quant aux choses innocentes par elles-mêmes, comme le travail, l'échange, l'enseignement, l'association, la banque, etc.; il faut pourtant opter. Il faut que l'État laisse faire ou empêche de faire.

S'il laisse faire, nous serons libres et économiquement administrés, rien ne coûtant moins que de laisser faire.

S'il empêche de faire, malheur à notre liberté et à notre bourse. À notre liberté, puisqu'empêcher c'est lier les bras: à notre bourse, car pour empêcher, il faut des agents, et pour avoir des agents, il faut de l'argent.

À cela les socialistes disent: Laissez faire! mais c'est une horreur! — Et pourquoi, s'il vous plaît? — Parce que; quand on les laisse faire, les hommes font mal et agissent contre leurs intérêts. Il est bon que l'État les dirige.

Voilà qui est plaisant. Quoi! vous avez une telle foi dans la sagacité humaine que vous voulez le suffrage universel et le gouvernement de tous par tous; et puis, ces mêmes hommes que vous jugez aptes à gouverner les autres, vous les proclame inaptes à se gouverner eux-mêmes!

Does your town do recycling? If so, do you know where that stuff ends up? I mean where your junk really ends up.

I challenge any curious readers to find out what ultimately happens to the paper, plastics, beer cans, and glass that are put out so dutifully and virtuously for the garbagemen or recycling pick-ups in your town.

Two or three phone calls ought to do it. "It gets recycled" is not an adequate answer.

For extra credit: Try to find out what you or your town pays for this service, and who profits, if anyone, from your thoughtful donations of your precious garbage. And for your effort spent, as Roger says, "going through your garbage like a raccoon."

The subject picqued my interest because I have noticed that our garbagemen for the past year have been throwing the "recyling" paper and newspapers into their regular garbage truck. My guess is that most "recycled" stuff in the US ends up in landfills, but I do not know for sure. I do know that recycling glass is an economic absurdity, and that recycling plastics is too expensive to be worthwhile: it is just made from a 1/10 teaspoon of oil.

This New Haven firefighter affirmative action case highlights the insanity which ensues when affirmative action hits the courts.

Justice should be blind.

I don't follow the cable talkers much, but Insty linked to a piece about Rachel Maddow, who I have never seen. A commenter on that article named The Abstractor offered these interesting observations:

CABLE NEWS RACE
THU., MARCH 26, 2009

FOXNEWS O'REILLY 3,420,000
FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,987,000
FOXNEWS BECK 2,374,000
FOXNEWS GRETA 2,160,000
FOXNEWS BAIER 1,940,000
FOXNEWS SHEP 1,888,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 1,322,000
CNNHN GRACE 1,300,000
MSNBC MADDOW 1,208,000
CNN KING 1,144,000
CNN COOPER 1,118,000

Glenn Beck just got started on FOX and is pulling more at 5:00pm then some of the primetime greats. He's beating Nancy Grace by 1 million viewers after leaving her network when he had the time slots right next to her. Something about FOX sells and/or something about MSNBC & CNN stinks.

I'll catch hell for saying this here, but there's a marked difference in attitude between right-wing and left-wing pundits that makes the former much more watchable than the latter.

On-air conservatives seem to make more general pleas to the public that what they believe is good and right, and that people will come around to "see it their way", but there's no assumption that the conservative way of looking at the world (which can be intellectually complicated at times) is obvious or that someone is especially evil for opposing that viewpoint. They're like tele-evangelists asking their audience to come to Jesus and that they'll be blessed if they do, but they're not necessarily screaming hellfire and damnation if you don't believe what they do.

Liberal/Progressives pundits, on the other hand, seem to take a lot for granted in what they're proposing, and whom there proposing it to. American conservatives have made some intellectually complex arguments--based on economics, theology, history, philosophy, and observance of human behavior--why they oppose universal healthcare, welfare, affirmative action, taxes on the wealthy, gay marriage, etc. There are virtually no attempts at intellectual counterarguments from liberals based on the intellectual framework of how conservatives frame their arguments. Instead, the entire conservative way of looking at the world is flawed.

E.g. It's wrong for the rich to be taxed, not because investment of tax dollars in society will add to their wealth in the long run, but because they have "enough" or "too much" and they have a moral duty to "pay their fair share". Some even go as far as saying a wealthy capitalist lifestyle is destroying the earth.

E.g. Fundamental Christians aren't wrong on abortion or homosexuality because they're misapplying scripture, they're wrong because scripture is false. (Here's a trick: try quoting to religious anti-abortion people Exodus 21:22, then say it's the reason Orthodox and Conservative Jews don't believe abortion is categorically murder.)

Liberals pundits don't argue (or at least argue enough or earnestly enough) that liberal policies would be good for conservatives, but assume that what liberals believe is categorically good, and anyone opposing them is categorically bad and acting out of bad motives. More to the point, it seems at times that the talking heads on MSNBC are openly hostile to large demographic chunks of the country and want to see these groups fundamentally defeated and removed in some fashion from political power. Most of the TV watching public--righty or lefty--don't want to hear that kind of talk day in and day out.

On Drudge today:

POLS GONE WILD:
*PAPER: Senator's husband cashes in on crisis;
Feinstein sought $25B for agency...
*TARP INSPECTOR GENERAL WARNS OF 'CATASTROPHIC FRAUD' POTENTIAL...
*Key Dem Said to Have Agreed to Aid Lobbyists;
NSA intercepted talk...
*Murtha's Defense Earmarks Draw Questions...
*CONGRESS BATTLES THE BULGE;
MEMBERS BLAME RECESSION FOR BEING OVERWEIGHT...

The Sting, from Krauthammer, hits that nail on the head. One quote:

Notes The Washington Post: "But as his admirable summation of recent history made clear, these pursuits have little to do with the economic crisis, and they are not the key to economic recovery." Obama rarely fails to repeat this false connection. A crisis -- and the public's resulting pliability to liberal social engineering -- is a terrible thing to waste.

If you do not love and admire Charles Krauthammer, raise your hand. (I am sure our readers know that Charles is a paraplegic retired Harvard Psychiatrist, with a second career as Brainy Guy.)

The little known killing fields of Jews (h/t, Jungleman)

Gummint may try to convert TARP funds to equity. No wonder they don't want to let the banks return the money.

It is scientific misconduct. No doubt about it. It's politicized "science."

Drowning the low-lying Caribbean islands? Who cares? The people can go to the People's Paradise of Cuba and be happy. Come to think of it, though, doesn't coral grow?

The ethanol scam.

Is Hollywood "progressive"? Quite the opposite. But knowing no history - or anything else - they think they're cool.

Are Tea Parties a sickness? You put 10 demented ladies going menopausal in pink t-shirts, and it's a front-page protest. Yet half a million good citizens defending American values is a sickness? I think the O would rather chat with Chavez than with me.

Not in my backyard: Uirghur terrorists. How about one-way tickets to Paris? My intuition tells me that they might not appreciate the blessings of America.

Shriver in Am Thinker:

In all my years of watching news coverage in America, I don't believe I have ever witnessed more condescending, amateurish, purely politicized reporting than what just transpired among the liberal MSM covering America's Tax Day Tea Parties.  The Tea Parties represented a very significant news event.

Finally, something that cheered me: Cow farts

Another photo from our walk yesterday. Does anybody have a clue what these yellow flowers are? It was growing in clumps in lawns.

The leaves are a bit pansy-looking and low, and the flower stalks around 6-7" high.

A nice Spring walk this morning on CT's "Gold Coast" waterfront:

A quote from Overcoming Bias a while ago on the meaning of life and the future and all that:

But then won't people be bored?

No; they can play computer games - not like our games, of course, but much more advanced and entertaining.

Yet wait!  If you buy a modern computer game, you'll find that it contains some tasks that are - there's no kind word for this - effortful.  (I would even say "difficult", with the understanding that we're talking about something that takes 10 minutes, not 10 years.)

So in the future, we'll have programs that help you play the game - taking over if you get stuck on the game, or just bored; or so that you can play games that would otherwise be too advanced for you.

But isn't there some wasted effort, here?  Why have one programmer working to make the game harder, and another programmer to working to make the game easier?  Why not just make the game easier to start with?  Since you play the game to get gold and experience points, making the game easier will let you get more gold per unit time: the game will become more fun.

So this is the ultimate end of the prophecy of technological progress - just staring at a screen that says "YOU WIN", forever.

And maybe we'll build a robot that does that, too.

Then what?

The unions own the public schools. Not "the people" and not the parents. It's a darn pity. Betsy with details.

Schools began in America with families chipping in to hire a schoolmaster, and building a log cabin schoolhouse with their hands. And supplying the firewood too, from their woodlots.

- Everybody ought to know this stuff too, which we linked last night: Class: A Guide Through the American Status System. Essential reading for social climbers and social descenders. Not necessary for others.

- Corporate and financial jargon and slang, via Latham & Watkins. Everybody should know these terms. (h/t, Tiger)

- Men and women: The things you do wrong. Villainous. Guys: Go out and kill some meat for her, and you will be rewarded - more likely to get lucky. (But did you know that marriage is now termed "opposite-sex couples"? It makes it sound perverted somehow.)

- Another take on Strunk & White, which is at least worth considering. 50 years of stupid grammar advice

h/t, Insty:

We post frequently on the sickness infecting Western liberal arts education - the spineless relativism which causes them to doubt, or to hate, themselves, and to denigrate everything that is cheerful, loving, grateful, positive, appreciative of their heritage (and of their work itself, which is as "Western" as can possibly be - "Western" to a fault), Judeo-Christian, and freedom-oriented.

Harvard Chaplain supports death penalty for apostates. Ah, the Religion of Death. He's probably not afraid to say that he wants death for me too, as a Christian who will not submit to Islam. That comes next. Not to worry: our flaccid generation will commit cultural suicide when asked to do so.

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. P.J. O'Rourke

The Martini Parties are a spontaneous grassroot national movement of the comfortable, but far from rich, edge of the American middle class.

We believe that all working Americans should pay income taxes, and not just the upper 50%. We're the folks who pay the bulk of the American taxes - lawyers, doctors, dentists, engineers, accountants and financial planners, small businessmen, managers, architects, pilots, ship captains, small-town stockbrokers, insurance agents, corporate VPs, B-school profs, consultants, medium-sized farmers, entrepreneurs, contractors, etc., etc. (The very highly-paid need not join and, of course, most household incomes of over $250 include two working adults.)

Our plan, designed over Easter brunch, is to figure out how to get our taxable incomes under Obama's $250,000 tax increase. It's a contest and a game. Since we already pay most of America's bills, we figure we are already doing our part and paying our fair share of the dues.

So our Yankee-based Movement is this: Get a group of friends together and hire some planners and accountants, and figure out a way to get yourself below the bar - even if it means donating more than 10% of your income to your charities (although they are trying to eliminate those deductions too), increasing your mortgage (although they are trying to reduce that loophole too), putting money in trusts, reducing one's charges for loyal clients - or plain old working less.

Let's all of us prosperous non-wealthy do the Limbo Rock and get under the bar - even if it means that we work less and play more like the lazy Europeans - more boating, golf, tennis, fishin', hangin' out in cafes drinkin', and shootin' and huntin' - and more vacation time with less expensive vacations.

I ain't slaving for 36-43 cents on the dollar (which is where I would end up after Fed taxes, CT income taxes in which the marginal rate covers all income if you make over 250, and property taxes. I am patriotic, but not stupid. I do not want to be a victim of plunder. I also tithe to church and charities, but that doesn't count: it's voluntary.

And if I end up poor, no doubt the government will take good care of me.

Watch this video of une agression dans un bus (h/t, No Pasaran).

The cultural divide is remarkable: the French are too passive to resist, and these immigrants are not fit for civilized society. Quel domage.

This will not end well.