Results 1 to 5 of 5
#1 Different Decisions -- by Thomas Sowell
06-07-2011, 03:20 PM
- Join Date
- May 2011
by Thomas Sowell
Two unrelated news stories on the same day show the contrast between government decisions and private decisions.
Under the headline "Foreclosed Homes Sell at Big Discounts," USA Today reported that banks were selling the homes they foreclosed on, at discounts of 38 percent in Tennessee to 41 percent in Illinois and Ohio.
Banks in general try to get rid of the homes they acquire by foreclosure, by selling them quickly for whatever they can get. Why? Because banks are forced by economic realities to realize that they are not real estate companies.
No matter how much expertise bank officials may have in financial transactions, that is very different from knowing the best ways to maintain and market empty houses.
Meanwhile, there was a story on the Fox News Channel about schools that are using their time to indoctrinate kindergartners and fourth graders with politically correct attitudes about sex.
Anyone familiar with the low standards and mushy notions in the schools and departments of education that turn out our public school teachers might think that these teachers would have all they can do to make American children competent in reading, writing and math.
Anyone familiar with how our children stack up with children from other countries in basic education would be painfully aware that American children lag behind children in countries that spend far less per pupil than we do.
In other words, teachers and schools that are failing to provide the basics of education are branching out into all sorts of other areas, where they have even less competence.
Why are teachers so bold when banks are so cautious? The banks pay a price for being wrong. Teachers don't.
If banks try to act like they are real estate companies and hold on to a huge inventory of foreclosed homes, they are likely to lose money big time, as those homes deteriorate and cannot compete with homes marketed by real estate companies with far more experience and expertise in this field.
But if teachers fail to educate children, they don't lose one dime, no matter how much those children and the country lose by their failure. If the schools waste precious time indoctrinating children, instead of educating them, that's the children's problem and the country's problem, but not the teachers' problem.
Sex indoctrination is just one of innumerable "exciting" and "innovative" self-indulgences of the schools. There is no bottom line test of what these boondoggles cost the children or the country.
Incidentally, conservatives who think that schools should be teaching "abstinence" miss the point completely. The schools have no expertise to be teaching sex at all. We should be happy if they ever develop the competence to teach math and English, so that our children can hold their own in international tests given to children in other countries.
Schools are just one government institution that take on tasks for which they have no expertise or even competence.
Congress is the most egregious example. In the course of any given year, Congress votes on taxes, medical care, military spending, foreign aid, agriculture, labor, international trade, airlines, housing, insurance, courts, natural resources, and much more.
There are professionals who have spent their entire adult lives specializing in just one of these fields. They idea that Congress can be competent in all these areas simultaneously is staggering. Yet, far from pulling back – as banks or other private enterprises must, if they don't want to be ruined financially by operating beyond the range of their competence – Congress is constantly expanding further into more fields.
Having spent years ruining the housing markets with their interference, leading to a housing meltdown that has taken the whole economy down with it, politicians have now moved on into micro-managing automobile companies and medical care.
They are not going to stop unless they get stopped. And that is not going to happen until the voters recognize the fact that political rhetoric is no substitute for competence.
June 7, 2011
06-08-2011, 05:23 AM
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
www.DiscoverTheNetwork.org Date: 6/8/2011 4:21:42 AM
Nominally libertarian website that features many views consistent with those of the radical left
“[W]hat we have alive in the U.S. is an updated and Americanized fascism.” -- Lew Rockwell
Considers the U.S. government “fascist”
Lewrockwell.com is the website of Lew Rockwell, self styled libertarian writer and "full-time gadfly against the conventional wisdom." Rockwell describes the content of his site as "unapologetically idiosyncratic." Among its many columnists and commentators, who hail from all points along the political spectrum, are Michael Moore, Ted Rall, John Pilger, Dennis "Justin" Raimondo, Frank Rich, Robert Scheer, Alexander Cockburn, Karen Kwiatkowski, and Cindy Sheehan.
In the view of Rockwell and many of the contributors to LewRockwell.com, the U.S. government is the world's most oppressive regime. "We are talking about the greatest centralized power on the globe, the world's largest, most well-armed, and most dangerous government, the only government to have ever used nuclear weapons against civilians and the government that has invaded more countries than any other in modern times," wrote Rockwell in June 2004. A year later, he wrote, "Americans need to face the reality that most of the world sees our nation as the new evil empire, and many people in the Gulf region are dedicated to making sure that the Iraq War is the last hurrah for American militarism."
LewRockwell.com believes that the U.S. is in the grip of a fascist government. Rockwell refers to his political opponents as "fascisti," and to supporters of American policies as "storm troopers of the regime" and proponents of "red-state fascism." Stressing that this is "not just rhetoric," Rockwell urges his readers to "recognize that fascism is a reality, not just a smear term."
In July 2004, Rockwell wrote, "I have this in common with NPR, Michael Moore, the Black Caucus, and assorted other grasping, complaining, anti-capitalist victim lobbies: a burning desire to see George Bush's fingers pried loose from the levers of power." In a December 2004 column, Rockwell lamented that "what we have alive in the U.S. is an updated and Americanized fascism," the solution for which "requires that we face the reality of the current threat forthrightly by extending more rhetorical tolerance leftward and less rightward." "What is the most pressing and urgent threat to freedom that we face in our time?" he wrote. "It is not from the left."
Believing that the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was "wholly unwarranted" and that the American-led war to oust Saddam Hussein was "a malevolent hoax," Rockwell has called Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9-11 a "must-see" movie. LewRockwell.com accordingly ran several flattering reviews of the film. With the presidential election in the offing, Rockwell encouraged readers in a September 2004 column to "look left." There they could "find fascinating war revisionism, courageous defenses of the innocently detained, principled stands for constitutional rights, well argued exposes of the high and mighty." Rockwell derided the "supposedly rightist president who wages war, cuts taxes, and shovels other people's money at corporate fatcats."
In September 2005 LewRockwell.com gave space to an article by Cindy Sheehan, in which she opined that the "aggression on Iraq is illegal, immoral and appallingly unnecessary," and called on supporters to become "extremists." In November 2005, Sheehan was a featured speaker at a benefit conference for LewRockwell.com.
06-08-2011, 05:24 AM
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
Imagine that...a Faux Conservative spamming us with leftist drivel from Lew Rockwell.
What's next? Musings from antiwar.com?
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
- Lawrenceville, Georgia
06-08-2011, 03:00 PM
- Join Date
- May 2008
You ever heard of an ad hominem?
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|