Wax Mop at Kuro5hin.org writes about "supply-side economics."#

Also, if the government did what Reagan (and George W. Bush) recommended and went into deficits to finance one of these tax cuts, and no economic growth occurs, then the government is in a really bad spot. They have to raise taxes back to sustainable levels, and then raise taxes again in order to get the money to pay for the debt, and then raise taxes even higher to pay for the interest on the debt. Or, they can do what Reagan did, and just roll the debt over by issuing more debt. This is sort of like paying off the Master Card bill with the Visa. It works great as long as you can always get another credit card to lend you more money. When the last credit card company decides not to give you a card, then you are in trouble.

George Herbert Walker Bush called supply-side economics "voodoo economics" because all of supply-side theory was based on a hope that the rich would invest those tax cuts and not just stick them in the bank. George W. Bush ignores his father's opinions about the wisdom of his economic policy, however, and is a big supporter of supply-side economics.

It's very funny how you have two groups arguing about who to steal from and they call the group that says to "Stop Stealing" extremists!

The Binary Circumstance on Tall Poppy Syndrome and its roots.#

I noticed when in San Francisco that there is a similar attitude toward successful gays; you are only allowed to enjoy success if your success is shared with the gay community at large. I call it the "ghetto mentality." Those who suffer from the ghetto mentality have the luxury of blaming others for their failure, while denying that they survive only through the acheivements of others. This does not only apply to the poor, blacks or gays, it is really a function of collectivist thinking. There are plenty of people at the top of the socio-economic ladder who envy and try to sabotage the success of others.

Brad DeLong wonders what the hell is wrong with Cheney, who still believes Iraq had WMDs.#

Is he off in a private little world all his own, surrounded by aides who don't dare tell him that he believes things that are not true? Is he mentally unbalanced? Or is he too old for the job?

The fact that he is saying things like this at this stage--where all they do is erode everyone's confidence in his judgment--is very worrisome.

François-René Rideau writes about the ridiculous idea that the Constitution is so how more right than other laws.#

Le Droit ne peut pas reposer ultimement sur un document écrit par l'homme; l'idée en est aussi vaine et farfelue que celle d'une théorie mathématique sans axiomes. Il y a des axiomes du Droit, qui ne dépendent pas de la volonté de l'homme, mais de la Nature de l'univers [...]

"la Constitution est comme une ceinture de chasteté dont la femme elle-même posséderait la clef." À vrai dire, même les pères fondateurs de la Constitution américaine n'avaient pas plus confiance que ça dans la pérennité de leur oeuvre, et disaient explicitement qu'une future révolution serait nécessaire pour rétablir la liberté quand le régime qu'ils fondaient serait devenu trop oppressif -- d'où d'ailleurs leur insistance à garantir que les citoyens soient armés, et pas l'État. On voit qu'ils ont eu raison dans leurs préventions, mais qu'ils n'ont pas réussi dans leurs précautions.

(This is probably a flawed translation, I'm just learning French so don't get too attached to it or offended by it--or if you do, direct complaints at me not Faré.)

The Rights [of Man] cannot rest ultimately with a document written by man; the idea is as vain and eccentric as a theory of math without axioms. There are axioms of the Rights, which do not depend on the will of man, but on the Nature of the universe. [...]

"The Constitution is like a belt of chastity given to a women who possesses the key." To tell the truth, even the Founding Fathers of the American Constitution did not have more confidence than that in the perenniality of their work, and said explicitly [ed--See Benjamin Franklin's comments to this effect.] that a future revolution would be necessary to restore freedom when the government they created would have become oppressive -- which is why they insisted that the citizens be armed, not the State. It is seen that they were in their reservation, but they were not successful in their precautions.

François-René Rideau writes about the nature of anarchy and how many critics of libertarianism don't understand it.#

The statists believe that they are above society, and can modify the intrinsic rules of nature by their edicts. They think of themselves as gods, above society, or at the very least as superior humans above the rest of the crowd, apt to rule the inferior and not to be ruled. In a way, legislation is the ultimate blasphemy, the ultimate disrespect for other human beings; it is the delusional hubris of trying to go against the laws of nature. But the sanction of blasphemy is not an angry god sending minions to punish you. The sanction of blasphemy is that your stupid actions have consequences that bite you where you don't expect it; and you don't expect it precisely because you don't understand the law of nature that relates causes to consequences. For instance, statists neglect the costs of compulsion, and its corrupting power upon both those who exert it and those who are victim of it; they achieve some Good they can see and control, but at the cost of a greater, uncontrollable and largely invisible Evil. By legislating more, creating surveillance councils, regulations, inquisitive administrations, they believe they can reintroduce Control; but only at the cost of yet greater and uncontrollable Evil.

Dave Pollard, in an unusual lapse of reason, promotes massive public ownership of the media.#

What's the answer? The usual solutions to deal with this problem are to boycott the overpriced, overhyped brands and the goods of socially and environmentally irresponsible corporations and oligopolies, to educate ourselves on alternatives by belonging to organizations like Consumers Union, and to pledge to buy local.

These are good ideas, but they are not enough, by themselves, to reach a tipping point to bust the oligopolies, make expensive and deceptive ads unprofitable, and squeeze the hidden inflationary cost of exhorbitant ads out of the price of the products we buy. What we need to do is to take back the airwaves, to realize that the media bandwidth is a public resource and it should be owned by, and for the interests of, the people, not corporations and advertisers. As the owners of the airwaves, we should allow them to be used only for public purposes. As radical as it may seem to those of us in North America (it's not a radical idea elsewhere in the world), advertising should be prohibited on our airwaves -- it is not in our best interests.

Your interests != What you spend your money on. Do you really think people are stupid, if so then why do you expect them to agree with you about the sanctity of their (or just your?) airwaves?

Randall Parker links to a story about Arizona's Dual Enrollment Program. I did this in Massachusetts, but then the program was cut from the budget. I think it's a great way to free yourself from high school.#

Michael Feldman learns he doesn't have a real job from the Daily Telegraph.#

London's Daily Telegraph today published a scathing indictment of the Dowbrigade's chosen profession. Within the much maligned and downtrodden field of Education, the teaching of English to Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL or ESL or EFL) is held in particularly low repute. Reading this article filled the Dowbrigade with self-loathing, and made us realize we are really the lowest of the low, the scum of the earth, and a member of a peripatetic and pariah-like Fraternity of the Damned. Who knew?

Alex Tabarrok links to Learning Freedom in Captivity, a story about U.S. POW camps and re-education.#

At first, the U.S. POW camps for captured Germans were dominated by Nazi's who threatened and even killed anti-Nazi "traitors." But as American thoughts turned to the post World-War II era the camps were cleaned up and a reeducation plan was begun. In other countries, this might have been a euphemism for torture and forced labor but in the U.S. camps it meant libraries filled with books that the Nazi's had banned and open discussion sessions led by professors from Harvard, Brown, Cornell and elsewhere. The story is told in The Washington Post Magazine article, Learning Freedom in Captivity.

R. J. Pestritto on people who are against homeschooling in New Jersey.#

The Anti-Homeschoolers are at it again, this time in New Jersey, where a state legislator wants to bring in the state health department to examine homeschooled children and to require, in direct contravention of federal law, annual testing of homeschooled students.

Isn't it good to see that a state government is finally on to the real problem in our education system: children who far exceed their cohorts in academic achievements and who generally come from stable and morally serious families? This in contrast to the examplary record of the public education establishment.

Chris Clark writes about getting into university and how he can afford it.#

You might be thinking "Wow, how the hell does Chris plan to dedicate a goodly portion of his time tostudy with his already hectic life as a bartender—cum—total—stud… what with all the rent and bills and whores to pay?" and you might be right, but for one thing: I've moved back in with my parents.

The Binary Circumstance grabs some quotes from Nobel Prize winners about school.#

It is, in fact, nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of instruction have not yet entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry; for this delicate little plant, aside from stimulation, stands mainly in need of freedom; without this it goes to wreck and ruin without fail. It is a very grave mistake to think that the enjoyment of seeing and searching can be promoted by means of coercion and a sense of duty. -Albert Einstein

In a prison they may torture your body; but they do not torture your brains; and they protect you against violence and outrage from your fellow-prisoners. In a school you have none of these advantages. -George Bernard Shaw

This is why I want to start a school that isn't a prison.