On Saturday, a dozen or so local citizens met (including yours truly) to explore the idea of forming a group dedicated to preserving our liberties from the near constant encroachment by government.
Though nothing has been formalized, nor any spokesperson chosen, it is my understanding that we have agreed to a basic concept. We will be issue driven, active and non partisan in an effort to preserve or recover our liberties.
Let me break this down a bit further:
Issue driven: We will focus on issues that affect our liberties. The purpose here is to take on issues and win! It is not about getting anyone elected although if that is a byproduct of our efforts, so much the better.
Active: We do not intend to be a group that gathers to preach to the choir. We want to be active. We want to do things to advance our causes. We want to actively protect our liberties.
Non partisan: We are not affiliated with the Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Constitutional or any other political party. However, we will coordinate with any or all of the above if, on a particular issue, they share our goal of protecting our liberties.
Look for more information on this subject in the not to distant future and consider helping us take on issues that should matter to us all.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Friday, May 08, 2009
Congratulations John Dickert
I know, I am several days late. I always seem to be out of town on election day. Anyway, congratulations are due to John Dickert. As I may have mentioned in a previous post, I have known John since grade school. I believe him to be a person of good character and I do not doubt his enthusiasm for Racine. These attributes will serve him well.
No doubt John will now have many new "friends" jockeying for position and influence. I won't be among them. But John can count on me to offer a fair and impersonal critique of his moves in office.
I am pleased that among John's first comments was a nod to businesses. I would happily advise him on ways to make Racine a more business friendly environment. For starters, a recognition of the effects of high taxes and overregulation would be helpful. And the election is over, you can stop the demogoguery about "slumlords" and recognize that they are small businesses providing a valuable service under very difficult circumstances.
Good luck John and remember the unions tried to defeat you. You owe them no special consideration.
No doubt John will now have many new "friends" jockeying for position and influence. I won't be among them. But John can count on me to offer a fair and impersonal critique of his moves in office.
I am pleased that among John's first comments was a nod to businesses. I would happily advise him on ways to make Racine a more business friendly environment. For starters, a recognition of the effects of high taxes and overregulation would be helpful. And the election is over, you can stop the demogoguery about "slumlords" and recognize that they are small businesses providing a valuable service under very difficult circumstances.
Good luck John and remember the unions tried to defeat you. You owe them no special consideration.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Pay to Play?
I was watching the Chris Matthews show the other day as he and his liberal guests were analyzing the Arlen Spector defection. It was assumed that in return for a challenger free Democratic primary Spector must have agreed to push Obama's impending health care plan.
Didn't that used to be called "Pay to Play?"
Didn't that used to be called "Pay to Play?"
Going Green
I heard a radio advertisement for the Racine bus system. Ride the bus, go green, save the environment etc... was the essence of the ad. The only problem is that riding Racine's bus system is NOT environmentally friendly. A huge bus transporting one or two passengers is terribly inefficient and wasteful.
Go green. Run away from the bus!
Go green. Run away from the bus!
Sunday, May 03, 2009
On Stimulus and Job Losses
The 1st Congressional District Democrats have elected a new chairman, one Mark Pienkos.
From the Racine Post:
"Refering to yesterday's news that Chrysler's engine plant will close as part of the auto company's reorganization, Pienkos said, "Kenosha is losing jobs. Paul Ryan needs to answer for that."
"It all comes down to his stimulus vote," said Pienkos, a school superintendent. "Paul Ryan voted against this bill, against the 500,000 people per month who are losing their jobs."
Now wait one second Mr. Pienkos. Ryan's vote on the stimulus package matters not. It passed without his vote. The (mislabeled) stimulus package passed and was supposed to save or create millions of jobs. If it isn't working, as you suggest, wouldn't it make more sense to blame the people who voted for a very expensive stimulus bill that isn't stimulating?
From the Racine Post:
"Refering to yesterday's news that Chrysler's engine plant will close as part of the auto company's reorganization, Pienkos said, "Kenosha is losing jobs. Paul Ryan needs to answer for that."
"It all comes down to his stimulus vote," said Pienkos, a school superintendent. "Paul Ryan voted against this bill, against the 500,000 people per month who are losing their jobs."
Now wait one second Mr. Pienkos. Ryan's vote on the stimulus package matters not. It passed without his vote. The (mislabeled) stimulus package passed and was supposed to save or create millions of jobs. If it isn't working, as you suggest, wouldn't it make more sense to blame the people who voted for a very expensive stimulus bill that isn't stimulating?
Thursday, April 30, 2009
More Clarity Needed
Mayoral candidate John Dickert has a letter to the Racine JT editor today wherein he seeks to clarify his position about inpecting Racine properties when they sell. Dickert states that the proposed ordinance would not be aimed at residential properties. Instead, his plan "deals with the multifamily slum properties that seem to be growing in Racine." However, Dickert adds "I have made it very clear that if you are a good landlord or tenant, you will not be affected by my proposal."
I want more clarity. Who will decide which landlords are good and which are bad? I want to see the ordinance that tries to define a "good" landlord or a "slumlord."
I want more clarity. Who will decide which landlords are good and which are bad? I want to see the ordinance that tries to define a "good" landlord or a "slumlord."
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
On Advancing a Freedom Agenda
What is the best approach to take in advancing a freedom agenda in Racine? Is it to elect leaders who will protect and expand the freedoms that have been gradually taken from us? Or is grass roots issue driven activism a better idea?
I am beginning to think that the latter is a better idea. For starters, let us face the facts. We have elected exactly zero individuals who are looking out for the freedom of individuals in Racine. Our alderman respond to political pressure only with little if any regard for the rights of individuals. It is easy, politically, to disregard the rights of individuals, one victim at a time.
An active and committed group could provide political support, one issue at a time, to those individual victims of government excess. If a group, looking out for the rights of individuals, began to have success here and there, it could be a force to be reckoned with. Additionally, members of such a group could then run for office and point to actual achievements. And the electorate, seeing exactly what a candidate has pursued and accomplished, will have a better idea of how a candidate may perform in office.
Or, to put this all another way, I am beginning to think that we have to create the demand for better representation, one issue at a time.
I am beginning to think that the latter is a better idea. For starters, let us face the facts. We have elected exactly zero individuals who are looking out for the freedom of individuals in Racine. Our alderman respond to political pressure only with little if any regard for the rights of individuals. It is easy, politically, to disregard the rights of individuals, one victim at a time.
An active and committed group could provide political support, one issue at a time, to those individual victims of government excess. If a group, looking out for the rights of individuals, began to have success here and there, it could be a force to be reckoned with. Additionally, members of such a group could then run for office and point to actual achievements. And the electorate, seeing exactly what a candidate has pursued and accomplished, will have a better idea of how a candidate may perform in office.
Or, to put this all another way, I am beginning to think that we have to create the demand for better representation, one issue at a time.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Community Organizer Needed
In my last thread I wrote that at some point we will need to fight for our freedom here in Racine. And Colt has invited me to do just that, regarding Racine's new liquor license policy. I have had a few days to mull this over.
My concern with a political fight in Racine is that the Racine aldermen respond only to political pressure. Forget about reasoned arguments, appeals for property rights, individual rights, the constitution etc.... it is all about pressure. On the alcohol licensing issue it seems that we would be facing the seemingly odd alliance of Focus on the Family and the Tavern League, both of whom apparently supported this ordinance. Can we get a large enough mob - remember this has nothing to do with sound arguments - to influence the city council? If we can't get a big enough, angry enough mob organized, we will just embarass ourselves.
What we need is a first rate community organizer. Any volunteers?
My concern with a political fight in Racine is that the Racine aldermen respond only to political pressure. Forget about reasoned arguments, appeals for property rights, individual rights, the constitution etc.... it is all about pressure. On the alcohol licensing issue it seems that we would be facing the seemingly odd alliance of Focus on the Family and the Tavern League, both of whom apparently supported this ordinance. Can we get a large enough mob - remember this has nothing to do with sound arguments - to influence the city council? If we can't get a big enough, angry enough mob organized, we will just embarass ourselves.
What we need is a first rate community organizer. Any volunteers?
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Liquor Lunacy
Racine's new liquor ordinance requires license applicants to prove that their establishment will "substantially improve the tax base."
Yes, the city has outlawed moderate and incremental improvements to the tax base. If you aren't going to sell a *!%#load of liquor, don't waste their time.
Rather than have would-be business owners prove that they will generate enough taxes to sate the insatiable, our aldermen should have to prove that vacant commercial properties generate more in taxes than those buildings housing viable businesses.
And a slightly tangential point. Note that the purpose of business, as evidenced by this ordinance, is to generate funds for the city. For all you saps like me that thought you were self employed, hah! You work for them now.
At some point we will need to fight for our freedom in this city.
Yes, the city has outlawed moderate and incremental improvements to the tax base. If you aren't going to sell a *!%#load of liquor, don't waste their time.
Rather than have would-be business owners prove that they will generate enough taxes to sate the insatiable, our aldermen should have to prove that vacant commercial properties generate more in taxes than those buildings housing viable businesses.
And a slightly tangential point. Note that the purpose of business, as evidenced by this ordinance, is to generate funds for the city. For all you saps like me that thought you were self employed, hah! You work for them now.
At some point we will need to fight for our freedom in this city.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
City Council Power Grab
I don't even know where to begin in criticizing Racine's new liquor ordinance. But let us start with the facts. The ordinance, which passed last night with only aldermen Shields and Coe dissenting, pertains only to establishments that sell liquor for off premises consumption. In other words, it does not apply to bars and restaurants. New establisments would need to be at least 1000 feet from another establishment and 300 feet from any place predominantly attended by those under the age of 21, including schools and churches. The total number of such establishments shall not exceed 60, though there are presently 66 in the city. And finally, license applicants "will have to show that they will substantially improve the city's tax base and have a greater impact than simply adding another convenience store" according to the JT article on the subject. A two thirds vote of the city council would be needed to circumvent the new rules.
Or, in other words, do not even think about opening a convenience store or grocery store in the city of Racine without seriously sucking up to the city council.
The first casualty of the new ordinance is one Caroline Chun who had wanted to open a convenience/liquor store on 6th Street. Start grovelling Ms Chun.
6th Street was at one time the recipient, or victim, of the city's attempt to create an arts district. The city's micromanagement of 6th Street as the Heart of the Arts has been an obvious failure. But their latest venture, called the Vacant Building Initiative, is off to a great start.
Or, in other words, do not even think about opening a convenience store or grocery store in the city of Racine without seriously sucking up to the city council.
The first casualty of the new ordinance is one Caroline Chun who had wanted to open a convenience/liquor store on 6th Street. Start grovelling Ms Chun.
6th Street was at one time the recipient, or victim, of the city's attempt to create an arts district. The city's micromanagement of 6th Street as the Heart of the Arts has been an obvious failure. But their latest venture, called the Vacant Building Initiative, is off to a great start.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Free Campaign Advice
John Dickert has a plan. Like most people, I suspect, I don't know what it is nor am I inclined to find out. But I know it is a ten year plan.
If I were Bob Turner, I would immediately announce an eleven year plan. I would then denounce Dickerts short term strategies while stressing the importance and superiority of a long term vision for Racine.
If I were Bob Turner, I would immediately announce an eleven year plan. I would then denounce Dickerts short term strategies while stressing the importance and superiority of a long term vision for Racine.
On Racine's Tea Party
In my ten or so years living in Racine as an adult, I have been to countless rallies, town hall meetings, council meetings, listening sessions, public hearings etc... but Saturday, at Racine's Tea Party, was the first time I felt a connection to and general agreement with the fellow attendees. It was a good feeling.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Downward Spirals
I was listening to a pro-KRM/RTA radio program the other day on WRJN. One of the interviewees argued that local transit is in a downward spiral. Costs have gone up and local revenue is down. This is followed by service cuts and fare increases, which results in fewer riders and less revenue, which is followed by service cuts and fare increases etc...
OK, if liberals can understand this spiral, why can't they understand the tax increase spiral. Government takes our money to provide services that we don't need. Because they take so much, we have little left to spend or invest. With less investment, we have less growth, less jobs and more "need" for government "help". So government comes to the rescue, taking more and more from the productive and rediricting the money to the people in need. The productive become less so, tthey either create less wealth to tax or they get frustrated with diminishing opportunity and they leave for a friendlier economic climate. Meanwhile, word gets out that Racine government will take care of your needs. More needy people show up. More productive people head out, less tax revenue is generated etc...
I agree that there is a downward spiral with respect to transit. I think it reflects the fact that the vast majority of people don't want it. But there is also a downward spiral in Racine with respect to taxes. Why don't liberals seem to understand the downward spiral caused by high taxes?
OK, if liberals can understand this spiral, why can't they understand the tax increase spiral. Government takes our money to provide services that we don't need. Because they take so much, we have little left to spend or invest. With less investment, we have less growth, less jobs and more "need" for government "help". So government comes to the rescue, taking more and more from the productive and rediricting the money to the people in need. The productive become less so, tthey either create less wealth to tax or they get frustrated with diminishing opportunity and they leave for a friendlier economic climate. Meanwhile, word gets out that Racine government will take care of your needs. More needy people show up. More productive people head out, less tax revenue is generated etc...
I agree that there is a downward spiral with respect to transit. I think it reflects the fact that the vast majority of people don't want it. But there is also a downward spiral in Racine with respect to taxes. Why don't liberals seem to understand the downward spiral caused by high taxes?
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Informed Decisions
The Regional Transit Authority wants you to make an informed decision about transit, or at least that is what their flyer says. You be the judge.
According to the RTA, KRM will raise property values and create 4,700 construction jobs with a $560 million impact on the local community. KRM will reduce traffic congestion and reduce pollution. Furthermore, the RTA suggests that KRM will provide property tax relief.
This sounds great I have to admit.
Now I invite you to make an informed decision about smoking crack. When you smoke crack, you are the life of the party. You will feel energized and euphoric. Crack smokers tend to lose weight. Smoking crack is an environmentally friendly activity compared to eating hamburgers. Crack smoking creates jobs and valuable business experience for young entrepreneurs. And recent studies suggest that sustained crack usage will often completely eliminate problems associated with old age.
Make an informed decision and enjoy some crack today!
According to the RTA, KRM will raise property values and create 4,700 construction jobs with a $560 million impact on the local community. KRM will reduce traffic congestion and reduce pollution. Furthermore, the RTA suggests that KRM will provide property tax relief.
This sounds great I have to admit.
Now I invite you to make an informed decision about smoking crack. When you smoke crack, you are the life of the party. You will feel energized and euphoric. Crack smokers tend to lose weight. Smoking crack is an environmentally friendly activity compared to eating hamburgers. Crack smoking creates jobs and valuable business experience for young entrepreneurs. And recent studies suggest that sustained crack usage will often completely eliminate problems associated with old age.
Make an informed decision and enjoy some crack today!
Closing Gaps
The easiest way to close achievement or wealth gaps is to discourage achievement and wealth.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
KRM BS #2
Tim Sullivan, chief executive of Bucyrus (Milwaukee Journal commentary, Sunday, April 12) wants to hire "the best talent from within our communities" to help his growing company. His problem though, is that "a large portion of the region's employable population are unable to work in South Milwaukee because they can't get to work."
I am not buying the claim that a large percentage of the best talent in our communities can't get to South Milwaukee for a job. Perhaps they are just not that interested in a job that doesn't pay well enough for them to afford a car.
I am not buying the claim that a large percentage of the best talent in our communities can't get to South Milwaukee for a job. Perhaps they are just not that interested in a job that doesn't pay well enough for them to afford a car.
KRM BS
Racine Mayor Tom Friedel has made the preposterous claim that KRM will "connect our residents with the nearly one million jobs that currently exist within one mile of the proposed KRM stations."
Here is the problem. According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (via Milwaukee 7 web site) there were only 640,000 jobs in all of Racine, Kenosha and Milwaukee counties in 2007.
To KRM supporters: Does the end, a train, justify the means, lying?
Here is the problem. According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (via Milwaukee 7 web site) there were only 640,000 jobs in all of Racine, Kenosha and Milwaukee counties in 2007.
To KRM supporters: Does the end, a train, justify the means, lying?
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Turner vs Dickert
What is the difference between Democrat John Dickert and Democrat Robert Turner?
The most obvious difference is that Dickert is white and Turner black. And based on the election returns from the primary, it sure seems as though Dickert won the white vote while Turner won the black vote.
But besides race, what separates these two in the minds of voters?
I don't know, but I will suggest some possibilities and I hope others will chime in with their ideas.
Turner has held elected office for a long time. This can be an asset or a liability depending on what he did or didn't do in office. My guess is that Turner has done some things for some constituents or he wouldn't keep getting reelected. But who are they and what has he done for them? One vague clue is the rumor that unions will be plowing a sizeable amount of cash into the Turner campaign.
As for John Dickert. First, full diclosure. I have known John since grade school. I like John Dickert personally and so far as I am aware he is a good and decent person. My issues with Dickert are purely ideological, as they would be with Turner. Dickert has embraced just about every big government and big private sector scheme mentioned in Racine over the past few decades. Examples: Imaginarium, KRM, Point Blue, and some may recall the effort to turn the YMCA into a college for animation that would produce 20,000 jobs with a trillion dollar economic impact etc... OK, lets just say that Dickert can get caught up in grandiose schemes to save Racine. On the plus side for me at least, Dickert has had to earn some of his keep in business so he is not reflexively anti-business like so many on the left.
If I could, I would vote for John Dickert. And then I would hope that he would fail to grow the size of government.
The most obvious difference is that Dickert is white and Turner black. And based on the election returns from the primary, it sure seems as though Dickert won the white vote while Turner won the black vote.
But besides race, what separates these two in the minds of voters?
I don't know, but I will suggest some possibilities and I hope others will chime in with their ideas.
Turner has held elected office for a long time. This can be an asset or a liability depending on what he did or didn't do in office. My guess is that Turner has done some things for some constituents or he wouldn't keep getting reelected. But who are they and what has he done for them? One vague clue is the rumor that unions will be plowing a sizeable amount of cash into the Turner campaign.
As for John Dickert. First, full diclosure. I have known John since grade school. I like John Dickert personally and so far as I am aware he is a good and decent person. My issues with Dickert are purely ideological, as they would be with Turner. Dickert has embraced just about every big government and big private sector scheme mentioned in Racine over the past few decades. Examples: Imaginarium, KRM, Point Blue, and some may recall the effort to turn the YMCA into a college for animation that would produce 20,000 jobs with a trillion dollar economic impact etc... OK, lets just say that Dickert can get caught up in grandiose schemes to save Racine. On the plus side for me at least, Dickert has had to earn some of his keep in business so he is not reflexively anti-business like so many on the left.
If I could, I would vote for John Dickert. And then I would hope that he would fail to grow the size of government.
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Natural Born Tyrants
Several local second graders have all the answers to Racine's problems. The following are a sampling of their proposals, if they were mayor of Racine.
"If I was mayor, I would take all the smokes away from the stores and say no more smoking."
"If I was the mayor, I would make sure the gas prices were low..."
"If I were mayor, I would help people with problems and give free ice cream. Chuck E. Cheese will be free, and no smoking or you are going to jail."
"I would ban people from smoking in Racine. I don't want anyone to die if I was mayor. I want to take care of people."
Now my point here is not to poke fun at second graders. Rather, it is to poke fun at grown up liberals, if there is such a thing, because their political philosophy hasn't matured from the well intentioned, utopian thinking common among children. No wonder liberals keep wanting to lower the voting age.
"If I was mayor, I would take all the smokes away from the stores and say no more smoking."
"If I was the mayor, I would make sure the gas prices were low..."
"If I were mayor, I would help people with problems and give free ice cream. Chuck E. Cheese will be free, and no smoking or you are going to jail."
"I would ban people from smoking in Racine. I don't want anyone to die if I was mayor. I want to take care of people."
Now my point here is not to poke fun at second graders. Rather, it is to poke fun at grown up liberals, if there is such a thing, because their political philosophy hasn't matured from the well intentioned, utopian thinking common among children. No wonder liberals keep wanting to lower the voting age.
Monday, April 06, 2009
Collusion or Partnership
A friend was telling me recently about an article that he read about the failure of the free market. To bolster his case perhaps, he noted that Henry Ford was once working with legislators to undermine the efforts to build railroads. If true, Ford was not engaging in free market activity. Rather he was colluding with government to protect his industry from competition. Or, to use more modern lingo, Ford and government officials were forming a public-private partnership.
Prediction for Mayoral Race
Certain to be wrong, but here it is anyway:
1) Dickert
2) Harding
3) Turner
4) Karas
5) Helding
6) Plache
7) Spangenberg
8) Shakoor
9) Hill-Driver
10) Fay
11) Charon
1) Dickert
2) Harding
3) Turner
4) Karas
5) Helding
6) Plache
7) Spangenberg
8) Shakoor
9) Hill-Driver
10) Fay
11) Charon
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Campaign Fun
I love local politics and I support Jody Harding for Mayor of Racine. Yesterday I ventured out for the first time, knocking on doors for Jody. I didn't even do this when I ran for Racine County Executive a few years back. So I was a bit apprehensive.
Some observations. The people were very nice, mostly. One lady admitted that she was confused as there were so many choices. I set out to help her. I asked what part of the political spectrum she was on. She said that she was a public school teacher and therefore liberal. I noted that she had many options, ten in fact, and that JH was probably not for her. I suggested John Dickert.
I met a retired city employee who seemed to enjoy talking. He indicated that it made little sense financially to continue working for the city. I suspect that he will get another job elsewhere and really rake it in for a while, enjoying a salary and a pension.
Not everyone was nice. One man congratulated me, sarcastically, when I introduced myself and indicated my support for Jody. He wouldn't take the informational flyer but he did take the time to tell me that I had interrupted a dinner, that he had guests, and that he was voting for Pete Karas. Another member of the tolerant left.
Some observations. The people were very nice, mostly. One lady admitted that she was confused as there were so many choices. I set out to help her. I asked what part of the political spectrum she was on. She said that she was a public school teacher and therefore liberal. I noted that she had many options, ten in fact, and that JH was probably not for her. I suggested John Dickert.
I met a retired city employee who seemed to enjoy talking. He indicated that it made little sense financially to continue working for the city. I suspect that he will get another job elsewhere and really rake it in for a while, enjoying a salary and a pension.
Not everyone was nice. One man congratulated me, sarcastically, when I introduced myself and indicated my support for Jody. He wouldn't take the informational flyer but he did take the time to tell me that I had interrupted a dinner, that he had guests, and that he was voting for Pete Karas. Another member of the tolerant left.
Media Lovefest for Obama
I caught a bit of Larry King and Chris Matthews last night as they and their guests discussed the Obama trip to London. All of them couldn't stop themselves from gushing at how beautiful Michelle Obama was, how brilliant were her fashion choices, how heartwarming it was to see a couple so obviously in love etc... and Chris Matthews couldn't quite catch himself in time... yes, he was starting to get that tingling sensation running up his leg again.
I wanted to puke. These people should be embarrassed to present this lovefest as news. And MO is not that good looking. BO is handsome, but MO, not so much. It would be fascinating to show and contrast the TV coverage of BO's first European trip with GW's first trip. Did they gush about how much the Bushes love one another, the attractiveness of Laura, her brilliant fashion decisions etc? Somehow I doubt it, but their must be some explanation other than media bias.
I wanted to puke. These people should be embarrassed to present this lovefest as news. And MO is not that good looking. BO is handsome, but MO, not so much. It would be fascinating to show and contrast the TV coverage of BO's first European trip with GW's first trip. Did they gush about how much the Bushes love one another, the attractiveness of Laura, her brilliant fashion decisions etc? Somehow I doubt it, but their must be some explanation other than media bias.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Responding to Incentives
I know of a married couple that intends to sell their house. And they are smart. They intend to wait until this summer, when some new government incentives (and disincentives) kick in. As I understand the program, first time home buyers will be eligible for an $8,000 tax break as well as 4% interest rates.
All righty then. Our government will soon be implementing a program that give advantages to first time buyers, coupled with disadvantages for those who have previously purchased a home.
So what should a home seller do? Well, the home sellers that I know intend to target first time home buyers in their marketing efforts. Now these folks don't really care whether the buyer of their home is a first time buyer or a hundredth time buyer. What they want is to sell their house for as much as they can. And they think that they can get the most out of first time buyers. And in my view, they may well be correct.
The net result of this new government favoritism toward first time buyers? First time buyers will be able to bid up the price on homes because they have a significant, government provided subsidy. This will artificially drive up the price of homes. Thus second time home buyers will have to pay more for a house.
Why the government should punish people because they have owned or currently own a home is beyond me.
All righty then. Our government will soon be implementing a program that give advantages to first time buyers, coupled with disadvantages for those who have previously purchased a home.
So what should a home seller do? Well, the home sellers that I know intend to target first time home buyers in their marketing efforts. Now these folks don't really care whether the buyer of their home is a first time buyer or a hundredth time buyer. What they want is to sell their house for as much as they can. And they think that they can get the most out of first time buyers. And in my view, they may well be correct.
The net result of this new government favoritism toward first time buyers? First time buyers will be able to bid up the price on homes because they have a significant, government provided subsidy. This will artificially drive up the price of homes. Thus second time home buyers will have to pay more for a house.
Why the government should punish people because they have owned or currently own a home is beyond me.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
On Elitism
A very good question was posed to me recently that I didn't have an answer for. It was, wouldn't you want elites to run the country?
I guess my answer would depend on the meaning of elite. If by elite we mean people of extraordinary ability, then perhaps so. If we mean people of exceptional character, then perhaps so. If by elite we mean people that graduated from the right school and associate with other elites, then perhaps not.
I want elites in the private sector. I want someone who is certain that he can cure cancer or design an I-phone that I will purchase. In the private sector, elites will succeed and become wealthy by producing something that others will want or need. If they fail, it is their problem. Well, it used to be only their problem.
The public sector is a different matter. Elites by their very nature, are not humble. They think they know better than the common folk. They think they can direct our lives better than we can. They will be inclined to think they have all the answers. They will grow the size and scope of government while diminishing the liberty and responsibility of the electorate. The problem as I see it is that while someone might just be elite enough to know how to cure cancer or design a great I-phone, there is nobody elite enough to direct the lives of millions of people.
Being elite and therefore lacking in humility, they may think they can. They can't, but they will try. And they will fail. And this is why elites are dangerous people to elect.
I guess my answer would depend on the meaning of elite. If by elite we mean people of extraordinary ability, then perhaps so. If we mean people of exceptional character, then perhaps so. If by elite we mean people that graduated from the right school and associate with other elites, then perhaps not.
I want elites in the private sector. I want someone who is certain that he can cure cancer or design an I-phone that I will purchase. In the private sector, elites will succeed and become wealthy by producing something that others will want or need. If they fail, it is their problem. Well, it used to be only their problem.
The public sector is a different matter. Elites by their very nature, are not humble. They think they know better than the common folk. They think they can direct our lives better than we can. They will be inclined to think they have all the answers. They will grow the size and scope of government while diminishing the liberty and responsibility of the electorate. The problem as I see it is that while someone might just be elite enough to know how to cure cancer or design a great I-phone, there is nobody elite enough to direct the lives of millions of people.
Being elite and therefore lacking in humility, they may think they can. They can't, but they will try. And they will fail. And this is why elites are dangerous people to elect.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Question of the Day
Every few months, Racine Horlick social studies teacher and social activist Al Levie is in the news. This time he led a hundred or so public school students (during school hours) and many adults to Madison, to lobby for drivers licenses and in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, er, undocumented immigrants.
Can a teacher properly teach a subject AND lead his students in partisan political lobbying on the same subject?
Can a teacher properly teach a subject AND lead his students in partisan political lobbying on the same subject?
Friday, March 20, 2009
Redefining Racism Part 2
Kevin Lockett (see comments on most recent post) is an advocate for the new definition of racism (prejudice plus privilege plus power) as it acknowledges "the history of racism and the power structure in this country" and it acknowledges that racism is not just an individual problem but also a collective problem. Read his own comments please, but as a shortcut I have tried to accurately depict his viewpoint.
I have a few issues with his argument. First, there is the the problem of circularity, ie using the word racism in the definition of racism. Secondly, his definition mistakenly focuses on this country only, though racism is a phenomenon that can and does exist in most if not all countries.
It seems to me that the most charitable explanation for the redefinition (including the power element) is to accomodate or account for the differing expressions of racism. I do understand this argument. A great example is anti-semitism. This could range from a mildly harmful attitude to death in a gas chamber. But the range of actions that might flow from a mindset (anti-semitism or racism) is not sufficient, imho, to justify changing a definition and confusing an already difficult issue.
Why not change the definition of love or compassion? Certainly people and nations have varying degrees of power or ability to respond lovingly or compassionately to a problem. Take the problem of AIDS in largely black sub Saharan Africa. Should we change the definition of compassion such that it acknowledges the history of concern that Americans have demonstrated for the plight of Africans suffering from AIDS? Aren't we, US citizens, more loving than those loveless Ecuadorians?
So my point is that if we are to change the definition of bad attitudes, like racism, to reflect the varying ability of people or nations to act on said bad attitudes, then we should do the same with good attitudes.
Maybe then, Kevin Lockett will rejoice in the news that he lives in the most loving and compassionate nation that has ever existed.
I have a few issues with his argument. First, there is the the problem of circularity, ie using the word racism in the definition of racism. Secondly, his definition mistakenly focuses on this country only, though racism is a phenomenon that can and does exist in most if not all countries.
It seems to me that the most charitable explanation for the redefinition (including the power element) is to accomodate or account for the differing expressions of racism. I do understand this argument. A great example is anti-semitism. This could range from a mildly harmful attitude to death in a gas chamber. But the range of actions that might flow from a mindset (anti-semitism or racism) is not sufficient, imho, to justify changing a definition and confusing an already difficult issue.
Why not change the definition of love or compassion? Certainly people and nations have varying degrees of power or ability to respond lovingly or compassionately to a problem. Take the problem of AIDS in largely black sub Saharan Africa. Should we change the definition of compassion such that it acknowledges the history of concern that Americans have demonstrated for the plight of Africans suffering from AIDS? Aren't we, US citizens, more loving than those loveless Ecuadorians?
So my point is that if we are to change the definition of bad attitudes, like racism, to reflect the varying ability of people or nations to act on said bad attitudes, then we should do the same with good attitudes.
Maybe then, Kevin Lockett will rejoice in the news that he lives in the most loving and compassionate nation that has ever existed.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Redefining Racism
Martha Barry, racial justice programmer at the YWCA of Greater Milwaukee, defines racism as "prejudice plus privilege plus power to oppress." The mission of the YMCA of GM is to "eliminate racism and empower women."
Let's take a look at that definition of racism. Prejudice plus privilege plus power. Prejudice alone does not make one a racist according to Barry's definition. One must also have privilege and power.
So what is privilege? Can a black person have privilege? Can a woman? Do all white people have privilege? Where does it come from? Can it be transferred to someone else? Can it be eliminated? Who should eliminate it? Can privilege be eliminated without the use of power? Since power is a component of racism, and racism is bad and should be eliminated, should we elimate power? Given the association of power to racism, why would the YWCA want to empower women?
As for me, I will stick with Webster's definition of racism which is "the assumption that the characteristics and abilities of an individual are detirmined by race and that one race is biologically superior to another."
By redefining racism, Barry by definition lets members of certain races off the hook for being racists. The goal of the YWCA seemingly is to shift power from one race to another. If successful, would this end racism? Aren't we just changing who the racists are? Or are we to assume that a newly empowered and privileged race, lets say black people, would be less likely to be racist than whites?
Perhaps newly empowered blacks and women wouldn't be as racist as white people. But if we assume that upfront, aren't we believing that blacks and women are morally superior to whites and men, since they will be able to resist the temptations of power while white people, or empowered and privileged people, continue to oppress?
Is the YWCA meeting the Webster's definition of racism?
Let's take a look at that definition of racism. Prejudice plus privilege plus power. Prejudice alone does not make one a racist according to Barry's definition. One must also have privilege and power.
So what is privilege? Can a black person have privilege? Can a woman? Do all white people have privilege? Where does it come from? Can it be transferred to someone else? Can it be eliminated? Who should eliminate it? Can privilege be eliminated without the use of power? Since power is a component of racism, and racism is bad and should be eliminated, should we elimate power? Given the association of power to racism, why would the YWCA want to empower women?
As for me, I will stick with Webster's definition of racism which is "the assumption that the characteristics and abilities of an individual are detirmined by race and that one race is biologically superior to another."
By redefining racism, Barry by definition lets members of certain races off the hook for being racists. The goal of the YWCA seemingly is to shift power from one race to another. If successful, would this end racism? Aren't we just changing who the racists are? Or are we to assume that a newly empowered and privileged race, lets say black people, would be less likely to be racist than whites?
Perhaps newly empowered blacks and women wouldn't be as racist as white people. But if we assume that upfront, aren't we believing that blacks and women are morally superior to whites and men, since they will be able to resist the temptations of power while white people, or empowered and privileged people, continue to oppress?
Is the YWCA meeting the Webster's definition of racism?
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Greg Helding, Conservative?
Racine mayoral candidate Greg Helding has called for the demolition of the "infamous" Jacato Drive apartments, according to a recent article in the Racine Journal Times. From the article:
“It is high time to solve this problem once and for all,” he stated in a news release. “The law allows the city to proceed against the buildings as a public nuisance.
It is often said that Greg Helding is one of two conservatives running for mayor, the other being Jody Harding. Is Greg Helding's proposal conservative?
Not in my view. Conservatives believe in limited government, the rule of law, personal responsibility, and property rights, among other things.
Let us consider the GH's proposal in light of the beliefs or values typically held by conservatives.
1. Limited government. GH's proposes to take and destroy private property owned by people neither accused of or convicted of any crime. This is unlimited government power. Indeed, this is abuse of power and conservatives should not stand for it. Oh, and it would be very expensive with court costs, lawsuits, razing costs, relocation costs etc...
2. Rule of law. This is the idea that laws should be fairly, rather than arbitrarily, applied. GH's proposal to demolish nuisance properties would be arbitrarily applied. How do I know this? I am willing to bet that the three buildings that require the most police responses are Horlick, Park, and Case. Will these buildings be destroyed? No, of course not.
3. Personal responsibility. There are people committing crimes in Racine, to be sure. Rather than hold the criminals responsible for their own behavior, GH instead proposes to destroy the property of the people who have not been accused of any crime. Why not hold criminals responsible for the crime problem?
4. Property rights. GH's proposal is just another of a series of proposals and policies that undermine the rights of property owners in Racine.
Many of GH's proposals are not conservative. Indeed, he has seemingly embraced and or proposed virtually every big government idea at City Hall. I take no pleasure in saying so. GH understands conservative thought but it seems to me that he no longer embraces conservative ideas. If he believes otherwise, he is most welcome to chime in here.
“It is high time to solve this problem once and for all,” he stated in a news release. “The law allows the city to proceed against the buildings as a public nuisance.
It is often said that Greg Helding is one of two conservatives running for mayor, the other being Jody Harding. Is Greg Helding's proposal conservative?
Not in my view. Conservatives believe in limited government, the rule of law, personal responsibility, and property rights, among other things.
Let us consider the GH's proposal in light of the beliefs or values typically held by conservatives.
1. Limited government. GH's proposes to take and destroy private property owned by people neither accused of or convicted of any crime. This is unlimited government power. Indeed, this is abuse of power and conservatives should not stand for it. Oh, and it would be very expensive with court costs, lawsuits, razing costs, relocation costs etc...
2. Rule of law. This is the idea that laws should be fairly, rather than arbitrarily, applied. GH's proposal to demolish nuisance properties would be arbitrarily applied. How do I know this? I am willing to bet that the three buildings that require the most police responses are Horlick, Park, and Case. Will these buildings be destroyed? No, of course not.
3. Personal responsibility. There are people committing crimes in Racine, to be sure. Rather than hold the criminals responsible for their own behavior, GH instead proposes to destroy the property of the people who have not been accused of any crime. Why not hold criminals responsible for the crime problem?
4. Property rights. GH's proposal is just another of a series of proposals and policies that undermine the rights of property owners in Racine.
Many of GH's proposals are not conservative. Indeed, he has seemingly embraced and or proposed virtually every big government idea at City Hall. I take no pleasure in saying so. GH understands conservative thought but it seems to me that he no longer embraces conservative ideas. If he believes otherwise, he is most welcome to chime in here.
Where are the Protesters?
Does anyone protest against the war in Iraq anymore? There used to be weekly protests here in Racine, letters to the editor etc... but not any more. Did something change? Is the war over? Did we win? If anyone can fill me in on what happened in Iraq, I would greatly appreciate it.
Friday, March 13, 2009
To Blame or not to Blame
A commentary in today's JT by local liberal activist Sister Michelle Olley has me scratching my head.
On the one hand she says:
Billions of people are caught in the unrelieved miseries of poverty, hunger, homelessness, disease, illiteracy, family disintegration and injustice while the tax evaders, risky investors, irresponsible spenders, overly compensated CEOs etc. wash their hands and insist that they are not responsible for the starvation, infant mortality, crime etc.
And then this:
When we start blaming each other for some problems, we can't focus on working together to bring about the best outcomes. To blame rarely enhances our understanding of the troubling situation and often hampers effective problem solving.
I blame Sister Michelle Olley. Her overly simplified attack on business and excesses by people in business have left her unfocused while hampering her "understanding of the troubling situation" that we find ourselves in.
On the one hand she says:
Billions of people are caught in the unrelieved miseries of poverty, hunger, homelessness, disease, illiteracy, family disintegration and injustice while the tax evaders, risky investors, irresponsible spenders, overly compensated CEOs etc. wash their hands and insist that they are not responsible for the starvation, infant mortality, crime etc.
And then this:
When we start blaming each other for some problems, we can't focus on working together to bring about the best outcomes. To blame rarely enhances our understanding of the troubling situation and often hampers effective problem solving.
I blame Sister Michelle Olley. Her overly simplified attack on business and excesses by people in business have left her unfocused while hampering her "understanding of the troubling situation" that we find ourselves in.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Re Public School Curriculum/Political Agenda
In my ten years or so of observing local news, I don't ever recall hearing of a public school teacher being fired for anything other than criminal conduct. So I am rather intrigued by the recent firing of a World History teacher at Park being fired for departing from the curriculum. The full story can be found at journaltimes.com.
From the article:
After a meeting with Park and Unified officials Nov. 18, Pinter was given a formal reprimand. According to the written reprimand, the meeting was held “to discuss concerns over the appropriateness of teaching religious concepts and topics” in the class.
“The information that you have presented to your students crosses the line in terms of what should be taught in this course and goes way beyond the level of interest for this topic,” Park’s directing principal, Dan Thielen, wrote in the letter.
Pinter said worksheets he prepared that included scriptural verses were based on the district-sanctioned textbook, and he has used them before. It wasn’t an attempt to sway students’ beliefs, he said.
“I would never say this is the way it is,” Pinter said. “I say Muslims believe this. Christians believe this. I never say I believe this.”
He said he didn’t touch on Christianity again and thought the episode was over. Then in January the district alerted him that Thielen recommended he not be renewed “based on poor classroom management, failure to follow the District’s curriculum and ineffective teaching.”
A bit later in the article, a school board member who voted for Pinter's dismissal said that the case "focused on the teacher’s failure to follow the curriculum."
Now it may well be that Pinter is a lousy teacher. But I can't help but notice the double standard here. If a teacher teaches about world religion in a world history class, he gets fired for departing from the curriculum. But if a history teacher at, say, Horlick High School manages to get his student riled up enough to fight for the "rights" of illegal immigrants and to pester locals into passing another school referendum, then that teacher is following the curriculum?
Well at least we are getting some insight into the curriculum at our public schools, namely, left wing political movements.
From the article:
After a meeting with Park and Unified officials Nov. 18, Pinter was given a formal reprimand. According to the written reprimand, the meeting was held “to discuss concerns over the appropriateness of teaching religious concepts and topics” in the class.
“The information that you have presented to your students crosses the line in terms of what should be taught in this course and goes way beyond the level of interest for this topic,” Park’s directing principal, Dan Thielen, wrote in the letter.
Pinter said worksheets he prepared that included scriptural verses were based on the district-sanctioned textbook, and he has used them before. It wasn’t an attempt to sway students’ beliefs, he said.
“I would never say this is the way it is,” Pinter said. “I say Muslims believe this. Christians believe this. I never say I believe this.”
He said he didn’t touch on Christianity again and thought the episode was over. Then in January the district alerted him that Thielen recommended he not be renewed “based on poor classroom management, failure to follow the District’s curriculum and ineffective teaching.”
A bit later in the article, a school board member who voted for Pinter's dismissal said that the case "focused on the teacher’s failure to follow the curriculum."
Now it may well be that Pinter is a lousy teacher. But I can't help but notice the double standard here. If a teacher teaches about world religion in a world history class, he gets fired for departing from the curriculum. But if a history teacher at, say, Horlick High School manages to get his student riled up enough to fight for the "rights" of illegal immigrants and to pester locals into passing another school referendum, then that teacher is following the curriculum?
Well at least we are getting some insight into the curriculum at our public schools, namely, left wing political movements.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Coming Clean
OK, I will come clean. My last thread, "Experts Warn of Split White Vote" was a lie. I made it up as an experiment. I wanted to see what kind of reaction I would get.
A few days ago, I came upon a local site called Insider News. The Insider News is a newspaper and web site that caters primarily to Racine's black community, so far as I can tell. Anyway, I found a thread entitled "Experts Warn of Split Black Vote." That thread is now gone, replaced by a similar, longer thread entitled "Will the Black Vote Split." You can read it at racineinsider.blogspot.com.
Anyway, the relevant paragraph is still there. It reads:
"Some black community leaders will not say it publicly, but they are concerned a crowded field including three well-known black candidates in the Racine mayoral campaign could split the black vote and throw the race to a white candidate."
Sound familiar? I basically used the same wording except I switched white for black and posted:
"I am aware of some white community leaders that won't say it publicly, but they are concerned that a crowded field in the mayoral race, including several well known white candidates, could split the white vote and throw the race to a black candidate."
Frankly, I find it rather disturbing that there are community leaders who openly (well, depending on the race of the listener) espouse racial solidarity in an election. Disturbing, but not surprising.
Thankfully, the Free Racine readers who did react displayed a negative reaction to the faux news regarding white solidarity. Not so over at the Insider News. Electing a black candidate apparently trumps, for some, electing the best candidate. How sad.
A few days ago, I came upon a local site called Insider News. The Insider News is a newspaper and web site that caters primarily to Racine's black community, so far as I can tell. Anyway, I found a thread entitled "Experts Warn of Split Black Vote." That thread is now gone, replaced by a similar, longer thread entitled "Will the Black Vote Split." You can read it at racineinsider.blogspot.com.
Anyway, the relevant paragraph is still there. It reads:
"Some black community leaders will not say it publicly, but they are concerned a crowded field including three well-known black candidates in the Racine mayoral campaign could split the black vote and throw the race to a white candidate."
Sound familiar? I basically used the same wording except I switched white for black and posted:
"I am aware of some white community leaders that won't say it publicly, but they are concerned that a crowded field in the mayoral race, including several well known white candidates, could split the white vote and throw the race to a black candidate."
Frankly, I find it rather disturbing that there are community leaders who openly (well, depending on the race of the listener) espouse racial solidarity in an election. Disturbing, but not surprising.
Thankfully, the Free Racine readers who did react displayed a negative reaction to the faux news regarding white solidarity. Not so over at the Insider News. Electing a black candidate apparently trumps, for some, electing the best candidate. How sad.
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Experts Warn of Split White Vote
I am aware of some white community leaders that won't say it publicly, but they are concerned that a crowded field in the mayoral race, including several well known white candidates, could split the white vote and throw the race to a black candidate.
Please share your thoughts or comments.
Please share your thoughts or comments.
Friday, March 06, 2009
On Emotions and Laws
"I see the same slippery slope, but I'm confident that society, legislators, Chief Executives and Judges can handle it just fine."
The above quote is from Rich Preston, a new participant here at Free Racine. It is regarding our disagreement on gay marriage. I contend that the same argument used to change the definition of marriage (basically that the present definition discriminates) can be used to change the definition further to include polygamy (aren't we then discriminating against those oriented toward multiple spouses?) or other combinations or permutations.
But RP is confident in society, judges etc... that marriage would not change any further. Or perhaps he is confident that it will change further but that that too is good. Perhaps Rich will clarify.
We have tampered with our legal system to such an extent that it will increasingly become nonsensical. Take for example the results of expansive interpretaions of the Commerce clause (regulating interstate commenrce) and the judicialy created right to privacy. So now we have a right to abort a child in a public hospital because of a right to privacy, but we don't have the same right to smoke a joint in our own home, with pot from our own garden (not an admission of guilt here, FYI) because it violates interstate commerce regulations.
Now this is not a screed against abortion or for pot smoking but rather an observation that if an abortion in a public place is protected on privacy grounds, why wouldn't smoking pot in a private place be likewise protected.
Such oddities will continue to happen when we endorse illogical laws based on emotional considerations. And RP is right that the elites in society will handle this type of nonsense. The rest of us will have a more difficult time navigating a leagal system that makes no sense.
The above quote is from Rich Preston, a new participant here at Free Racine. It is regarding our disagreement on gay marriage. I contend that the same argument used to change the definition of marriage (basically that the present definition discriminates) can be used to change the definition further to include polygamy (aren't we then discriminating against those oriented toward multiple spouses?) or other combinations or permutations.
But RP is confident in society, judges etc... that marriage would not change any further. Or perhaps he is confident that it will change further but that that too is good. Perhaps Rich will clarify.
We have tampered with our legal system to such an extent that it will increasingly become nonsensical. Take for example the results of expansive interpretaions of the Commerce clause (regulating interstate commenrce) and the judicialy created right to privacy. So now we have a right to abort a child in a public hospital because of a right to privacy, but we don't have the same right to smoke a joint in our own home, with pot from our own garden (not an admission of guilt here, FYI) because it violates interstate commerce regulations.
Now this is not a screed against abortion or for pot smoking but rather an observation that if an abortion in a public place is protected on privacy grounds, why wouldn't smoking pot in a private place be likewise protected.
Such oddities will continue to happen when we endorse illogical laws based on emotional considerations. And RP is right that the elites in society will handle this type of nonsense. The rest of us will have a more difficult time navigating a leagal system that makes no sense.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Observations on Abortion, Government Health Care
Consider the following letter to the JT by one Mrs. William Hansen:
In answer to Linda Peterson's comment (Feb. 26) on abortion: You think abortion is wrong? Well, so is starving babies, shaking babies, abandoning children, having children you can't afford to feed, clothe or house. Life is precious, but so is a good one.
Now I did not read Linda Peterson's letter that Mrs. Hansen was responding to, but I am willing to bet that she did not advocate for the starving and shaking of babies.
To think that there is actually a person out there that thinks that an opponent of abortion is therefore an advocate of child abuse and torture.
Coming soon, a bureaucrat may one day decide whether Mrs. Hansen's life is precious enough to save.
In answer to Linda Peterson's comment (Feb. 26) on abortion: You think abortion is wrong? Well, so is starving babies, shaking babies, abandoning children, having children you can't afford to feed, clothe or house. Life is precious, but so is a good one.
Now I did not read Linda Peterson's letter that Mrs. Hansen was responding to, but I am willing to bet that she did not advocate for the starving and shaking of babies.
To think that there is actually a person out there that thinks that an opponent of abortion is therefore an advocate of child abuse and torture.
Coming soon, a bureaucrat may one day decide whether Mrs. Hansen's life is precious enough to save.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
PC Nicknames
I went to a basketball game last night featuring the Hawks vs the Crusaders. I wonder how long it will take before the matchup is Doves vs Toleraters.
Theory of the Day
The amount a local or state government spends touting opportunities for businesses is proportionate to the number and degree of business-hostile policies that they have enacted.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Right to Bare Arms
I don't know why people are making a fuss about Michelle Obama's apparent preference for sleeveless shirts.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Econ 101
The Sheperd Express has announced that Charlie Sykes is this weeks "Jerk of the Week."
"Charlie Sykes, who is still arguing that this package will not stimulate the economy because it is a variety of Democratic programs. Charlie either doesn't understand Economics 101 or he does and chooses to misinform his listeners. So Charlie, are you dumb or just a liar?" asks the SE.
And, argues the SE, "If people were paid to dig a hole and bury a newspaper, it would have the same stimulus impact (as Obama's plan) because these shovelers would then spend their wages and create more jobs." Why bother with the shoveling? Why not just give people vouchers so that they spend it?
Count me among those that don't understand Econ 101, if this is how it is being taught these days. Sure, I understand that spending stimulates, but the SE seems to be making the leap that any spending will be good for the economy.
How can this be so? What the SE fails to account for is the fact that the money paid to dig holes will have to be paid back. And where will that money come from? Money spent will either be wasted or it will be used to generate wealth. If it wasted, how will we pay the money back?
In the long run, whether government spending is good for the economy depends on whether it is well spent. The same is true in the private sector. If I make a wise investment I will generate additional wealth. If I spend it on a stimulating substance, say cocaine, I will certainly harm my own financial situation.
The idea that any spending will automatically help the economy in the long run makes no sense to me. Any Obama defenders want to take a shot at explaining this to me, in plain English please?
"Charlie Sykes, who is still arguing that this package will not stimulate the economy because it is a variety of Democratic programs. Charlie either doesn't understand Economics 101 or he does and chooses to misinform his listeners. So Charlie, are you dumb or just a liar?" asks the SE.
And, argues the SE, "If people were paid to dig a hole and bury a newspaper, it would have the same stimulus impact (as Obama's plan) because these shovelers would then spend their wages and create more jobs." Why bother with the shoveling? Why not just give people vouchers so that they spend it?
Count me among those that don't understand Econ 101, if this is how it is being taught these days. Sure, I understand that spending stimulates, but the SE seems to be making the leap that any spending will be good for the economy.
How can this be so? What the SE fails to account for is the fact that the money paid to dig holes will have to be paid back. And where will that money come from? Money spent will either be wasted or it will be used to generate wealth. If it wasted, how will we pay the money back?
In the long run, whether government spending is good for the economy depends on whether it is well spent. The same is true in the private sector. If I make a wise investment I will generate additional wealth. If I spend it on a stimulating substance, say cocaine, I will certainly harm my own financial situation.
The idea that any spending will automatically help the economy in the long run makes no sense to me. Any Obama defenders want to take a shot at explaining this to me, in plain English please?
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Thought of the Day
Who would have thought that buying a dog would require more deliberation than saving the U.S. economy?
Racy Discussion at UWP
I have been invited, by a Parkside student, to a discussion at Parkside today (5 pm, Molinaro Hall, no info on UWP web site) concerning homphobia in black churches. Given that this discussion is coming on the heels of the California vote concerning gay marriage, and the widely discussed fact that blacks voted to preserve traditional marriage, or oppose gay marriage, (choose your own narrative) I can't help but wonder whether the underlying assumption of the discussion will be that opposition to gay marriage is synonymous with homophobia. Anyway, I guess I will have to go to find out. But it is pretty gutsy of Parkside to have two traditionally liberal groups go head to head. If any sparks fly, I will report back later.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Not Really Black
Kay at Kay's Blue Racine has questioned the blackness of Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele. So I, not wanting to be among the cowardly in our nation, called her on it.
Seemingly, authentic blackness has less to do with skin color or national origin and everything to do with the degree to which you accept liberal orthodoxy.
Reaching this conclusion about black people requires a few intermediate steps. First, you must assume that black people do not possess the intelligence necessary to detirmine their own political viewpoints. Second, you need to assume that black people are not individuals with varied thoughts, upbringings, and experiences but rather are members of a monlithic group with identical cultural experiences that should result in identical political affiliations. And thirdly, you must confer upon yourself the authority as final arbiter of all things black, even if you are a white woman from a small town in Wisconsin.
I don't meet anyone's definition of black, but if I did, I am quite certain I would want nothing to do with people holding such condescending views.
Seemingly, authentic blackness has less to do with skin color or national origin and everything to do with the degree to which you accept liberal orthodoxy.
Reaching this conclusion about black people requires a few intermediate steps. First, you must assume that black people do not possess the intelligence necessary to detirmine their own political viewpoints. Second, you need to assume that black people are not individuals with varied thoughts, upbringings, and experiences but rather are members of a monlithic group with identical cultural experiences that should result in identical political affiliations. And thirdly, you must confer upon yourself the authority as final arbiter of all things black, even if you are a white woman from a small town in Wisconsin.
I don't meet anyone's definition of black, but if I did, I am quite certain I would want nothing to do with people holding such condescending views.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Shall We Overcome?
The Racine Journal Times ran an article today about some Horlick student agitators gathering to sing some old civil rights song called "We Shall Overcome." The group is working to overcome some obstacles like the self segregation that was happening at school and issues in the community such as unemployment.
Tucked at the very end of the article is this paragraph:
"Horlick senior Breana Stephens said too often she sees there are classes at school where there are mostly students of one particular race. For instance, she said advanced placement classes often have mostly white students. It's one of the issues she said that the community still needs to "overcome" as the old protest song says."
Unless Horlick has a whites-register-for-classes-first policy, I think it is an aversion to studying that needs to be overcome. Neither a lovely singing voice or a heartfelt concern for minorities will help much in Calculus class.
Tucked at the very end of the article is this paragraph:
"Horlick senior Breana Stephens said too often she sees there are classes at school where there are mostly students of one particular race. For instance, she said advanced placement classes often have mostly white students. It's one of the issues she said that the community still needs to "overcome" as the old protest song says."
Unless Horlick has a whites-register-for-classes-first policy, I think it is an aversion to studying that needs to be overcome. Neither a lovely singing voice or a heartfelt concern for minorities will help much in Calculus class.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Harding for Mayor #2
I enjoy grappling with tough issues. And the recent flap about mayoral candidate Jody Harding is a tough issue.
A year or so ago, Harding wrote that people on the government dole should not be able to vote while on the dole. These people include those who are on food stamps, housing assistance, farmers who receive subsidies and others. The Racine Post has all the details.
The word "crestfallen" probably best describes my initial reaction to this news. But after a day or two of reflection, I have a different view.
For starters, Harding was discussing a real problem. It is a problem when a person votes to enrich themselves. In virtually all other circumstances in real life, this is considered a conflict of interest that should be avoided via a recusal.
For the record, I disagree with Jody Harding. There is no legislative solution for this problem. Detirmining who is or is not voting for selfish reasons is simply not possible. People should not vote for selfish reasons, certainly, but education and morals are the needed antidote to this problem, not disenfranchisement.
And finally, the mayor of Racine would have no authority to disenfranchise anyone, so this whole issue is just a bit of political philosophizing on her part. Granted, it does suggest that Harding may be a bit prone to saying what is on her mind but I like that in a politician. I still hope she wins.
A year or so ago, Harding wrote that people on the government dole should not be able to vote while on the dole. These people include those who are on food stamps, housing assistance, farmers who receive subsidies and others. The Racine Post has all the details.
The word "crestfallen" probably best describes my initial reaction to this news. But after a day or two of reflection, I have a different view.
For starters, Harding was discussing a real problem. It is a problem when a person votes to enrich themselves. In virtually all other circumstances in real life, this is considered a conflict of interest that should be avoided via a recusal.
For the record, I disagree with Jody Harding. There is no legislative solution for this problem. Detirmining who is or is not voting for selfish reasons is simply not possible. People should not vote for selfish reasons, certainly, but education and morals are the needed antidote to this problem, not disenfranchisement.
And finally, the mayor of Racine would have no authority to disenfranchise anyone, so this whole issue is just a bit of political philosophizing on her part. Granted, it does suggest that Harding may be a bit prone to saying what is on her mind but I like that in a politician. I still hope she wins.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Nation of Cowards
Attorney General Eric Holder recently said that we are a nation of cowards when it comes to speaking candidly on the subjest of race. Is he right?
I think he is. The problem is the political correctness that has been brought to us by leftist intellectuals. The only acceptable conversation on race goes something like this:
The larger society (whites) have oppressed and continue to oppress minorities and must work to rid themselves of the racist attitudes that are the cause of whatever social problem exists in a given minority community.
If you depart from the acceptable conversation, there is a good chance you will be thought a racist.
And since very few people want to go out of their way to be considered racist, they simply avoid the conversation.
And yes, this is cowardly.
We can't just complain about political correctness. We must confront it and the problems that it causes. And, IMHO, the politically correct attitude concerning race encourages minorities to give up while holding racist views themselves, that whites are the cause of their problems. And this prevailing attitude is very harmful to minorities. It is also cowardly to blame others for your own problems.
So yes, we are a nation of cowards.
I think he is. The problem is the political correctness that has been brought to us by leftist intellectuals. The only acceptable conversation on race goes something like this:
The larger society (whites) have oppressed and continue to oppress minorities and must work to rid themselves of the racist attitudes that are the cause of whatever social problem exists in a given minority community.
If you depart from the acceptable conversation, there is a good chance you will be thought a racist.
And since very few people want to go out of their way to be considered racist, they simply avoid the conversation.
And yes, this is cowardly.
We can't just complain about political correctness. We must confront it and the problems that it causes. And, IMHO, the politically correct attitude concerning race encourages minorities to give up while holding racist views themselves, that whites are the cause of their problems. And this prevailing attitude is very harmful to minorities. It is also cowardly to blame others for your own problems.
So yes, we are a nation of cowards.
Unasked Question
How often in recent weeks did you hear some version of the following question?
#1) Liberal journalist to Republican opponent of the stimulus spending: "Why is it that you now oppose spending but you did not try to stop the excessive spending that occured during the Bush administration?"
Now how often have you heard this question?
#2) Republican to liberal journalist: "Why, if spending was excessive during the Bush administration, as your question suggests, does it make sense to massively increase spending?"
Question #1 is meant to embarrass Republicans and, truth be told, they deserve it. But question #2 is the far more important question and yet it never was asked.
#1) Liberal journalist to Republican opponent of the stimulus spending: "Why is it that you now oppose spending but you did not try to stop the excessive spending that occured during the Bush administration?"
Now how often have you heard this question?
#2) Republican to liberal journalist: "Why, if spending was excessive during the Bush administration, as your question suggests, does it make sense to massively increase spending?"
Question #1 is meant to embarrass Republicans and, truth be told, they deserve it. But question #2 is the far more important question and yet it never was asked.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Partner Wanted
I know a married woman who was listed as "partner" of a gay man. This allowed said woman to fly for free around the country, as her "partner" worked for an airline that extended certain benifits to domestic partners.
Governor Doyle is proposing a new domestic partner classification that would, among other things, provide health care coverage for partners. "This isn't an issue of being gay or straight - we are not judging people's lives here" Governor Doyle said.
Very well then. I am glad Governor Doyle won't be judgemental. Though I am already married, I wouldn't mind having a partner, provided he or she is an employee of the state. People form all sorts of partnerships for all kinds of reasons- who are we to judge?- and I would like a partner who can provide my family medical care.
Won't you be my partner?
Governor Doyle is proposing a new domestic partner classification that would, among other things, provide health care coverage for partners. "This isn't an issue of being gay or straight - we are not judging people's lives here" Governor Doyle said.
Very well then. I am glad Governor Doyle won't be judgemental. Though I am already married, I wouldn't mind having a partner, provided he or she is an employee of the state. People form all sorts of partnerships for all kinds of reasons- who are we to judge?- and I would like a partner who can provide my family medical care.
Won't you be my partner?
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Stimulus Trial and Error
Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker has an interesting idea. It isn't going to happen but he wants to use stimulus money to eliminate the sales tax for the remainder of the year and issue property tax refunds.
I think it is a good idea. If states or municipalities could use the money as they saw fit, we could learn something from the multitude of likely uses of the money. Some cities would build useless libraries while others would reduce taxes. Some would invest in the stock market while others would build solar powered windmills for their rain gardens.
And then, some years down the road, we would have data. We would know what worked and what didn't. But don't expect anything of the sort from this spending package. It will come with specific instructions from Washington.
I think it is a good idea. If states or municipalities could use the money as they saw fit, we could learn something from the multitude of likely uses of the money. Some cities would build useless libraries while others would reduce taxes. Some would invest in the stock market while others would build solar powered windmills for their rain gardens.
And then, some years down the road, we would have data. We would know what worked and what didn't. But don't expect anything of the sort from this spending package. It will come with specific instructions from Washington.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Understanding Liberals
Just so there is no misunderstanding, the title of this thread is not meant to suggest that liberals are understanding but rather to suggest a means by which others may begin to understand one of the commonly held and mistaken views of liberals.
Liberals (and many others) mistakenly equate or link business and business people with the free market. Business, in their view, is private sector profit-seeking activity and the free market is merely the place where such profit seeking behavior takes place. Liberals have a very limited view of business and a very expansive view of free markets.
Now contrast this with my views of business and free markets. I tend to view business much more broadly and the free market much more narrowly. For example, I think we are all in business. I am in the business of selling stuff. Others may be in the business of selling their time and skills to an employer. Still others are in the business of loafing while seeking to ensure that others provide for their needs. One can engage in any of these business activities without believing in or desiring free markets. The free market is a belief that each of us should be as free as possible to engage in business without harm from others or interference from government. Don't confuse business activity with a free market.
Now let us consider our current economic problem and view it in light of the differing definitions of business and free markets. Liberals see businesses grovelling for bailout cash and conclude that the free market is a failure. I see businesses engaging in profit seeking behavior with no regard for free markets. I see businesses that have failed in a free market and, for the sake of their survival, turn to the market distorters, or politicians, for a solution. I see businesses moving away from free markets and towards distorted, government-run economic activity. It is a mistake or a lie to suggest that these businesses are engaging in free market activity when in fact they are doing just the opposite.
Now this is no innocent mistake and it has profound implications for society. The failed-free-market theory provides the argument for just about every bad idea advanced by liberals. If the free market is a failure, then we have to turn to government for the answers, right? Isn't that what liberals do?
It is no accident that liberals dominate in the businesses that are least free and most dominated by government. Thus liberals are merely engaged in their own type of business when they trash the virtues of the free market. They do this in order to ensure greater government control of the economy because, in the short term at least, it is in their own economic self interest. More public school teachers, more government jobs, more welfare handouts for people who won't work etc...
If you have made it this far, thank you for hanging in there through my rambling and please consider my main point, that business and free markets are NOT the same thing.
Liberals (and many others) mistakenly equate or link business and business people with the free market. Business, in their view, is private sector profit-seeking activity and the free market is merely the place where such profit seeking behavior takes place. Liberals have a very limited view of business and a very expansive view of free markets.
Now contrast this with my views of business and free markets. I tend to view business much more broadly and the free market much more narrowly. For example, I think we are all in business. I am in the business of selling stuff. Others may be in the business of selling their time and skills to an employer. Still others are in the business of loafing while seeking to ensure that others provide for their needs. One can engage in any of these business activities without believing in or desiring free markets. The free market is a belief that each of us should be as free as possible to engage in business without harm from others or interference from government. Don't confuse business activity with a free market.
Now let us consider our current economic problem and view it in light of the differing definitions of business and free markets. Liberals see businesses grovelling for bailout cash and conclude that the free market is a failure. I see businesses engaging in profit seeking behavior with no regard for free markets. I see businesses that have failed in a free market and, for the sake of their survival, turn to the market distorters, or politicians, for a solution. I see businesses moving away from free markets and towards distorted, government-run economic activity. It is a mistake or a lie to suggest that these businesses are engaging in free market activity when in fact they are doing just the opposite.
Now this is no innocent mistake and it has profound implications for society. The failed-free-market theory provides the argument for just about every bad idea advanced by liberals. If the free market is a failure, then we have to turn to government for the answers, right? Isn't that what liberals do?
It is no accident that liberals dominate in the businesses that are least free and most dominated by government. Thus liberals are merely engaged in their own type of business when they trash the virtues of the free market. They do this in order to ensure greater government control of the economy because, in the short term at least, it is in their own economic self interest. More public school teachers, more government jobs, more welfare handouts for people who won't work etc...
If you have made it this far, thank you for hanging in there through my rambling and please consider my main point, that business and free markets are NOT the same thing.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Just Say No
The city of Racine wants some of that stimulus money. Top on the wish list is a new $36 million library to be located on Racine's west side.
I hope we don't get a dime from the federal government. It is not that the cash couldn't come in handy, but in the hands of our elected officials, they will obviously just make things worse.
A new library is a perfect example. For starters, we don't need one. We have a beautiful library already. I go there with some regularity and it is never crowded. Usually there are no more than a few people looking at books. Certainly the computers are almost always in use, but addressing this problem could be easily accomplished by renting some of the abundant available retail space and buying 40 new computers. There, I just saved the federal government $35 million.
OK, so they build a sparkling new library using overpaid union labor as required by law. After overpaying for labor, we will then have to hire a slew of union librarians that we don't need. And we will be paying for their health care and pensions for the next fifty years.
If our local officials are going to use federal money just to expand the government, as the wish list suggests, then we will be better off without it. No thanks President Obama.
I hope we don't get a dime from the federal government. It is not that the cash couldn't come in handy, but in the hands of our elected officials, they will obviously just make things worse.
A new library is a perfect example. For starters, we don't need one. We have a beautiful library already. I go there with some regularity and it is never crowded. Usually there are no more than a few people looking at books. Certainly the computers are almost always in use, but addressing this problem could be easily accomplished by renting some of the abundant available retail space and buying 40 new computers. There, I just saved the federal government $35 million.
OK, so they build a sparkling new library using overpaid union labor as required by law. After overpaying for labor, we will then have to hire a slew of union librarians that we don't need. And we will be paying for their health care and pensions for the next fifty years.
If our local officials are going to use federal money just to expand the government, as the wish list suggests, then we will be better off without it. No thanks President Obama.
The Racine Lie
Remember just a few months ago when some of our elected officials were touting Racine Promise? The initiative was to be based on a program in Kalamazoo Michigan where PRIVATE donations funded college tuition for graduates of Kalamazoo's public schools. No tax money would be used for this program, we were assured. Well, what do you know, Racine Promise is looking for $5 million from the misnamed federal stimulus bill. Credit must go to JT blogger Twister who pointed out this new, uh, twist in the Racine Promise idea.
One more reason not to believe in political promises.
One more reason not to believe in political promises.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Question of the Day
My son recently gave me a book entitled "10 books that screwed up the world." Just for fun I asked a few people to guess the books that were included. A few people guessed that the bible was or should be included. Does the bible belong alongside the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf as among the most destructive books ever produced?
Personally I don't think so, not by a long shot. But I am especially interested in hearing from those who think the bible has had a powerful negative influence on the world.
Personally I don't think so, not by a long shot. But I am especially interested in hearing from those who think the bible has had a powerful negative influence on the world.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Ethical Dilemma
I received a letter today from a collection agency. They claim that I owe $70 to a local business. I called the local businessperson to inquire about the claim. According to her, in 2006 I agreed to a $70 advertisement in a local publication. I have no recollection of making any such agreement (though I recall the offer) and neither I or my wife recall receiving a bill of any kind, though the lady claims she sent two notices. Apparently the advertisement was run, though I never saw it nor did I receive any acknowledgement of it from customers. Additionally, the lady is a somewhat frequent customer of ours but never mentioned the bill in person. And lastly, she indicated that she remembers my agreement but that it was never a contract in writing.
I floated the idea of meeting her half way but she didn't seem to interested. Additionally, I confess to being a bit annoyed that she took this small claim to a collection agency even though she also apparently forgot about the bill-she recently discovered it on her computer when she sold her business. Will the claim harm my credit rating?
Chime in readers. How would you handle this?
I floated the idea of meeting her half way but she didn't seem to interested. Additionally, I confess to being a bit annoyed that she took this small claim to a collection agency even though she also apparently forgot about the bill-she recently discovered it on her computer when she sold her business. Will the claim harm my credit rating?
Chime in readers. How would you handle this?
Honest Debate?
More than once I have heard President Obama describe the stimulus debate as a choice between his plan and doing nothing. BO's presentation of the stimulus question is disingenuous.
As I see it, there are three options. There is BO's plan or some modified version of it which involves massive government spending. And then there is doing nothing. And finally, government could slash taxes and entrust taxpayers to lead the economic recovery.
Now my point on this thread is not to debate the merits of the three options but rather to point out that our president is pretending that there are only two and hoping that you won't notice. He is attempting to create a straw-man Republican that wants to do nothing. We deserve a more straightforward and honest argument from our president.
As I see it, there are three options. There is BO's plan or some modified version of it which involves massive government spending. And then there is doing nothing. And finally, government could slash taxes and entrust taxpayers to lead the economic recovery.
Now my point on this thread is not to debate the merits of the three options but rather to point out that our president is pretending that there are only two and hoping that you won't notice. He is attempting to create a straw-man Republican that wants to do nothing. We deserve a more straightforward and honest argument from our president.
Monday, February 09, 2009
Question of the Day
In 1930, there was a higher rate of employment among blacks than whites. In 1931, a federal minimum wage law was enancted. In 1931 and thereafter, the rate of unemployment for black people has exceeded that of whites. Coincidence?
Sunday, February 08, 2009
Stimulus Question
President Obama's criticism of Republicans went something like this: Republicans got us in this financial mess. Bush never vetoed a spending bill. Now they are opposing the spending that will stimulate the economy.
OK, BO is correct that Republicans spent too much and that their current obstructionism exposes the inconsistency of Republicans on spending.
But if excessive government spending got us into this mess, why would an even greater amount of spending get us out of it?
OK, BO is correct that Republicans spent too much and that their current obstructionism exposes the inconsistency of Republicans on spending.
But if excessive government spending got us into this mess, why would an even greater amount of spending get us out of it?
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Election Politics
A month or so ago, nearly everyone in Racine's government appeared to favor a proposed multi-unit apartment complex in West Racine. Fastforward a month and the whole proposal is shot down without a single vote in favor of the project.
There was significant vocal opposition to the project and this no doubt was a factor. But I have lived here long enough to know that politicians are quite adept at ignoring the concerns of their constituents..... except come election time.
Yes, I suspect the upcoming mayoral election had a silent but powerful effect on the vote to shelve this project. Nobody running for mayor wants to tick off and energize large numbers of folks in West Racine. But remember folks, some (or most or all?) of the pols now running for mayor were behind this project just a month ago. If this was such a good idea for Racine then, why isn't it a good idea now?
There was significant vocal opposition to the project and this no doubt was a factor. But I have lived here long enough to know that politicians are quite adept at ignoring the concerns of their constituents..... except come election time.
Yes, I suspect the upcoming mayoral election had a silent but powerful effect on the vote to shelve this project. Nobody running for mayor wants to tick off and energize large numbers of folks in West Racine. But remember folks, some (or most or all?) of the pols now running for mayor were behind this project just a month ago. If this was such a good idea for Racine then, why isn't it a good idea now?
Sunday, February 01, 2009
The Rosa Parks of Welfare Scammers
When I read letters like one written by Jennifer Dragseth (MJS letter to editor) I fear for this country. Dragseth was responding to a series of articles in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that exposed welfare fraud in Wisconsin.
"The real scammers are those who pay so little that the state must subsidize them... Reform that will stop the cycle of poverty is to ensure that all workers are paid a living wage... Mothers who choose to stay home with their babies rather than work for a minimum and unliveable wage are not the problem with society: indeed, this civil disobedience might be the solution."
So women who defraud the taxpayers of the state by claiming fictitious jobs and racking up fictitious child-care expenses are not the problem. The problem is people like me, who own businesses and pay people a mutually agreeable wage, because we are not paying enough. The solution, according to Dragseth, is for more women to engage in criminal fraud. Only then, I suppose, will money magically appear in my bank account such that I can then offer my employees a liveable wage.
"The real scammers are those who pay so little that the state must subsidize them... Reform that will stop the cycle of poverty is to ensure that all workers are paid a living wage... Mothers who choose to stay home with their babies rather than work for a minimum and unliveable wage are not the problem with society: indeed, this civil disobedience might be the solution."
So women who defraud the taxpayers of the state by claiming fictitious jobs and racking up fictitious child-care expenses are not the problem. The problem is people like me, who own businesses and pay people a mutually agreeable wage, because we are not paying enough. The solution, according to Dragseth, is for more women to engage in criminal fraud. Only then, I suppose, will money magically appear in my bank account such that I can then offer my employees a liveable wage.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Harding for Mayor
I am impressed with mayoral candidate Jody Harding. I won't offer biographical info as you can look that up yourself at www.JodyForMayor.com.
Though interested in politics and even more so policy, I usually prefer to keep my distance from politicians. But I think I will make an exception for Jody Harding.
Harding is not by any stretch of the imagination part of any good old boys network in Racine. She is not a backslapper. What she is, it appears to me, is a mature, competent, experienced, decent, committed individual genuinely interested in the betterment of Racine.
Now the same might be said about many of the other candidates. The difference between her and them, to the best of my ability to discern, is that she will take the exact opposite approach to improving Racine.
So instead of more government, she will try to shrink it. Instead of higher taxes, she will try to lower them. Instead of more regulations on garage sales etc... she will seek fewer regulations.
If you want big government, don't vote for Jody Harding. But if you think 50 consecutive years of liberalism hasn't worked out so well for Racine, I suggest taking a good long look at Jody Harding for mayor of Racine.
Though interested in politics and even more so policy, I usually prefer to keep my distance from politicians. But I think I will make an exception for Jody Harding.
Harding is not by any stretch of the imagination part of any good old boys network in Racine. She is not a backslapper. What she is, it appears to me, is a mature, competent, experienced, decent, committed individual genuinely interested in the betterment of Racine.
Now the same might be said about many of the other candidates. The difference between her and them, to the best of my ability to discern, is that she will take the exact opposite approach to improving Racine.
So instead of more government, she will try to shrink it. Instead of higher taxes, she will try to lower them. Instead of more regulations on garage sales etc... she will seek fewer regulations.
If you want big government, don't vote for Jody Harding. But if you think 50 consecutive years of liberalism hasn't worked out so well for Racine, I suggest taking a good long look at Jody Harding for mayor of Racine.
Thought of the Day
Offer your time and money and you are engaged in volunteerism and charity. Offer another's time and money and you are engaged in slavery and theft.
On Public Discrimination
According to an AP article: Congress on Tuesday sent to the White House a bill that makes it easier for women and others to sue for pay discrimination. Obama is expected to sign the bill into law.
Meanwhile, State Rep Bob Turner has "introduced a bill in the Assembly that would require all employers in Wisconsin to grant a paid leave of absence on Veterans Day to employees who are veterans" according to a JT article.
I wonder if the new federal bill will allow Wisconsins non-veterans to sue Bob Turner for wage discrimination.
Meanwhile, State Rep Bob Turner has "introduced a bill in the Assembly that would require all employers in Wisconsin to grant a paid leave of absence on Veterans Day to employees who are veterans" according to a JT article.
I wonder if the new federal bill will allow Wisconsins non-veterans to sue Bob Turner for wage discrimination.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Questions of the Day
Why is there such a thing as a stimulus spending package but not recessulus or depressulus spending packages? Is all spending stimulative?
Monday, January 26, 2009
More on Local Child-care Scams
I called County Executive Bill McReynolds today hoping to talk to him about the child-care scams recently exposed by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. See two most recent posts. McReynolds returned my call and set up a meeting between me and Debra Jossart, Director of Human Services Department and three supervisors responsible for approving payments to child-care providers and rooting out fraud.
Bottom line, I have no idea whether county employees are doing an exceptional job, a mediocre job, or a lousy job of preventing fraud.
But the larger problem is the program itself. In order to encourage work, the state, with federal funds, will pay for child care expenses. Under some circumstances this could be a great idea. However, when the state pays a child-care provider $85,000 so that someone can earn $20,000 at a minimum wage job, I have to question the value of such a program. Because of the large difference between a minumum wage salary and the state payout for child-care services, an opportunity exists to defraud the system. Even without outright fraud, I fail to see how the larger society gains by paying huge sums of money so that someone can work a minimum wage job.
And I must admit, I don't know what to do with or for poor, single women and their multiple children. But I do think we should remove the incentives that exist for women to have multiple children and then use them to milk the government for profit.
And lastly, I have asked Bill McReynolds, via voice mail, what, if anything, county employees or county government could do to reduce the fraud. If I hear anything, I will let you know.
Bottom line, I have no idea whether county employees are doing an exceptional job, a mediocre job, or a lousy job of preventing fraud.
But the larger problem is the program itself. In order to encourage work, the state, with federal funds, will pay for child care expenses. Under some circumstances this could be a great idea. However, when the state pays a child-care provider $85,000 so that someone can earn $20,000 at a minimum wage job, I have to question the value of such a program. Because of the large difference between a minumum wage salary and the state payout for child-care services, an opportunity exists to defraud the system. Even without outright fraud, I fail to see how the larger society gains by paying huge sums of money so that someone can work a minimum wage job.
And I must admit, I don't know what to do with or for poor, single women and their multiple children. But I do think we should remove the incentives that exist for women to have multiple children and then use them to milk the government for profit.
And lastly, I have asked Bill McReynolds, via voice mail, what, if anything, county employees or county government could do to reduce the fraud. If I hear anything, I will let you know.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
On Stingy, Child-Abusing Taxpayers
I love this tidbit from Charity Elison, executive director of the Wisconsin Council on Children & Families, a nonprofit advocacy organization that has been studying W-2 and the Wisconsin Shares programs.
In a Milwaukee J-S article (see previous post) exploring Wisconsin Shares child-care scams, Elison defended the program, saying that "without child-care assistance, parents have been forced to leave their children in locked cars or in other unsafe situations."
Got that taxpayers! You are forcing parents to lock their children in cars. Shame on you!
In a Milwaukee J-S article (see previous post) exploring Wisconsin Shares child-care scams, Elison defended the program, saying that "without child-care assistance, parents have been forced to leave their children in locked cars or in other unsafe situations."
Got that taxpayers! You are forcing parents to lock their children in cars. Shame on you!
Racine Scam-child-care Industry Exposed
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has a very lenghty investigative article on child-care scams in Wisconsin. I would recommend reading the article, but in case you don't have a spare half hour, I will provide some of the lowlights and my observations.
The scam goes something like this: A woman with multiple children teams up with someone claiming to be a child care provider and someone claiming to be an employer. Even the most ridiculous employment claims are unquestionably accepted. So the state pays the child care provider money to take care of the children, and, presumably, the mother and the fake child care providers share in the take.
Now on to a few particular cases from Racine. One scammer, convicted cocaine dealer Katia Wright used her seven children to scam the state out of $85,000. She teamed up with a Kenosha man who claimed to employ her, though the Wisconsin Department of Revenue has no record of taxes filed for the business. Also, the fictitious business carried no worker's compensation insurance, and this should have disqualified him as an eligible employer.
And then there is Talisha Burkhart, a check forging mother of six, also from Racine. Her scam is much like Wright's, so I will spare you those details. But here is what she had to say when confronted by the Sentinel reporter: "I work. I work. It's 50,000 child-care providers around here... My auntie's a child-care provider, my uncle's a child-care provider, cousins are child-care providers, everybody's a child-care provider around me, but this is the only person that I know ya'll have talked to."
Even if everything is above board, as in real children, a real employer, and real day care providers, does it really make sense to pay someone $85,000 so that a mother of seven can earn less than $20,000 at a minimum wage job? It would be far less ridiculous to just pay the woman minimum wage to take care of her own children.
The scam goes something like this: A woman with multiple children teams up with someone claiming to be a child care provider and someone claiming to be an employer. Even the most ridiculous employment claims are unquestionably accepted. So the state pays the child care provider money to take care of the children, and, presumably, the mother and the fake child care providers share in the take.
Now on to a few particular cases from Racine. One scammer, convicted cocaine dealer Katia Wright used her seven children to scam the state out of $85,000. She teamed up with a Kenosha man who claimed to employ her, though the Wisconsin Department of Revenue has no record of taxes filed for the business. Also, the fictitious business carried no worker's compensation insurance, and this should have disqualified him as an eligible employer.
And then there is Talisha Burkhart, a check forging mother of six, also from Racine. Her scam is much like Wright's, so I will spare you those details. But here is what she had to say when confronted by the Sentinel reporter: "I work. I work. It's 50,000 child-care providers around here... My auntie's a child-care provider, my uncle's a child-care provider, cousins are child-care providers, everybody's a child-care provider around me, but this is the only person that I know ya'll have talked to."
Even if everything is above board, as in real children, a real employer, and real day care providers, does it really make sense to pay someone $85,000 so that a mother of seven can earn less than $20,000 at a minimum wage job? It would be far less ridiculous to just pay the woman minimum wage to take care of her own children.
Friday, January 23, 2009
No Current Aldermen for Mayor
I can not, in good conscience, recommend any of Racine's current aldermen to be the next mayor. Here is why:
I have personally brought to the attention of the entire city council that one of their ordinances is unconstitutional. I have also witnessed several others make nearly identical claims.
Here in the US of A, we have a right to appeal to the judicial branch of government when the executive branch accuses us of something. Remember that separation of powers, three branches of government stuff from civics class? Yet, when Racine's Unified Neighborhood Inspection Team (UNIT) fines residents for various infractions, said residents no longer have the right to state their case in court. Instead, they have to appeal to the same people that fined them in the first place. This is simply not right and it is not how we do things in this country.
I suppose I am just a crank for caring about such things. Even so, when EVERY member of the city council is able to casually dismiss serious charges without, to the best of my knowledge, any attempt to refute said charges, I must conclude that each and every one of them is quite comfortable with curtailing the rights of the citizens they claim to represent.
I have personally brought to the attention of the entire city council that one of their ordinances is unconstitutional. I have also witnessed several others make nearly identical claims.
Here in the US of A, we have a right to appeal to the judicial branch of government when the executive branch accuses us of something. Remember that separation of powers, three branches of government stuff from civics class? Yet, when Racine's Unified Neighborhood Inspection Team (UNIT) fines residents for various infractions, said residents no longer have the right to state their case in court. Instead, they have to appeal to the same people that fined them in the first place. This is simply not right and it is not how we do things in this country.
I suppose I am just a crank for caring about such things. Even so, when EVERY member of the city council is able to casually dismiss serious charges without, to the best of my knowledge, any attempt to refute said charges, I must conclude that each and every one of them is quite comfortable with curtailing the rights of the citizens they claim to represent.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Back from Vacation
Sorry readers for the extended blog break. I went on vacation to San Antonio and while their I tried to avoid thinking about politics. I failed.
In San Antonio, there was news that the city had "found" $30 million from unspent bonds or something. The pols were positively giddy about the ways they would spend the money. Giving the money back to taxpayers was not among the proposals. Politicians thinking they know best is not a problem unique to Racine.
I talked with a shopkeeper in SA who was worried that the city would sell the property and that new owners would raise the rent. Or, to put it another way, a shopkeeper has enjoyed artificially reduced rents (for thirty years) while consumers, taxpayers and retail competitors have paid the price. At least Racine isn't in the commercial real estate business, thank goodness.
And San Antonio is quite nice. They have a famous river walk area, the people were friendly, the food was good and the weather was sunny and 60's and 70's.
In San Antonio, there was news that the city had "found" $30 million from unspent bonds or something. The pols were positively giddy about the ways they would spend the money. Giving the money back to taxpayers was not among the proposals. Politicians thinking they know best is not a problem unique to Racine.
I talked with a shopkeeper in SA who was worried that the city would sell the property and that new owners would raise the rent. Or, to put it another way, a shopkeeper has enjoyed artificially reduced rents (for thirty years) while consumers, taxpayers and retail competitors have paid the price. At least Racine isn't in the commercial real estate business, thank goodness.
And San Antonio is quite nice. They have a famous river walk area, the people were friendly, the food was good and the weather was sunny and 60's and 70's.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Move On Racine
I don't wish to pile on here but Mayor Gary Becker should resign or be removed from office. If you read the entire complaint against the mayor, you will understand.
The mayor of a city is the public face of a city. Our public face would hereafter be met with snickering or disgust or even rage. How could we possibly move forward with this baggage? What would we attract to Racine if we become known as a pedophile tolerant city? Yes, the question does sort of answer itself.
This is no longer about Gary Becker. The issue now resides squarely with the city council. They should move now to remove Becker from office, not for retribution sake, but for the health of our community. Gary Becker will have his day in court as he should. But Racine needs to move on with new leadership.
The mayor of a city is the public face of a city. Our public face would hereafter be met with snickering or disgust or even rage. How could we possibly move forward with this baggage? What would we attract to Racine if we become known as a pedophile tolerant city? Yes, the question does sort of answer itself.
This is no longer about Gary Becker. The issue now resides squarely with the city council. They should move now to remove Becker from office, not for retribution sake, but for the health of our community. Gary Becker will have his day in court as he should. But Racine needs to move on with new leadership.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Stimulating Voters/Harming the Country
Receiving money is stimulating, no doubt. Conversely, giving it up, or paying taxes, is destimulating. So when governments hand out cash or advantages that will result in cash, some people are being stimulated while others, namely those who are paying more in taxes than they are receiving in cash, are being destimulated.
The Obama administration will no doubt seek to stimulate those who voted for him and hope that the rest don't notice how much they have been destimulated. The problem for the entire country is that too much stimulus given to less productive people or entities (public education, unionized auto manufacturers, cost inneffective green businesses etc...)and too much destimulation of the productive will cause great harm to the economy which will in turn destimulate, or depress, productive and unproductive alike.
But it worked politically for FDR and I suspect it will work politically for BO, even as it damages the country.
The Obama administration will no doubt seek to stimulate those who voted for him and hope that the rest don't notice how much they have been destimulated. The problem for the entire country is that too much stimulus given to less productive people or entities (public education, unionized auto manufacturers, cost inneffective green businesses etc...)and too much destimulation of the productive will cause great harm to the economy which will in turn destimulate, or depress, productive and unproductive alike.
But it worked politically for FDR and I suspect it will work politically for BO, even as it damages the country.
Inauguration Indoctrination
According to a Journal Sentinel article, MPS School Board president Peter Blewett has called for a special meeting in order to encourage MPS schools to
"suspend the use of its normal curriculum and encourage teachers to develop appropriate lessons focused on presidential inauguration activities.... Milwaukee Public Schools should instill in its students a keen awareness of the presidential inauguration as a sign of continuity or the peaceful transfer of power in our democracy and encourage active participation of schools in emphasizing the importance and historical significance of the Inauguration."
Sounds great, but I don't recall a similar effort to urge students to participate in the peaceful transition of power from Bill Clinton to George Bush.
I wonder what it is about this particular inauguration that captures the fancy of Peter Blewett.
"suspend the use of its normal curriculum and encourage teachers to develop appropriate lessons focused on presidential inauguration activities.... Milwaukee Public Schools should instill in its students a keen awareness of the presidential inauguration as a sign of continuity or the peaceful transfer of power in our democracy and encourage active participation of schools in emphasizing the importance and historical significance of the Inauguration."
Sounds great, but I don't recall a similar effort to urge students to participate in the peaceful transition of power from Bill Clinton to George Bush.
I wonder what it is about this particular inauguration that captures the fancy of Peter Blewett.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Helping the Poor
There is a fellow over at RacinePost grousing that he didn't get a $5.6 million subsidy for his low income housing project. You can read more about it here: http://news.racinepost.com/2009/01/state-agency-down-on-racine-one.html
According to the article, the $9 million project would have included 4500 square feet of retail and 24 housing units. Even if they spent $1 million on the retail portion, that would mean each of the housing units would have cost $333,333 each. And that is considered low income housing?
The developer claims "his market study showed a need for large, nice housing units for low-income families."
Interesting. My market study shows that the poor need 80ft yachts, country club memberships and vacation homes in the Hamptons.
I realize that I am regularly criticized for just writing and/or complaining. I am ready to step up now and help the poor. I will provide for all their needs so long as the rest of you subsidize my efforts. Deal?
According to the article, the $9 million project would have included 4500 square feet of retail and 24 housing units. Even if they spent $1 million on the retail portion, that would mean each of the housing units would have cost $333,333 each. And that is considered low income housing?
The developer claims "his market study showed a need for large, nice housing units for low-income families."
Interesting. My market study shows that the poor need 80ft yachts, country club memberships and vacation homes in the Hamptons.
I realize that I am regularly criticized for just writing and/or complaining. I am ready to step up now and help the poor. I will provide for all their needs so long as the rest of you subsidize my efforts. Deal?
Racine Unified Budget Info
Racine Unified has a projected spending budget of just under $260 million for the 08-09 school year. That amounts to roughly $12,380 per each of the 21,000 or so students. This information can be obtained by securing a copy of the budget or by reading this blog. It can't be obtained by listening/reading the false statements of Unified's chief financial officer quoted at the Racine Post: http://news.racinepost.com/2009/01/tough-budget-times-ahead-for-racine.html
I will be looking into the budget a bit more in the coming days, but for now just realize that the CFO at Racine Unified misunderestimated the budget by about $50 million. That kind of thing could have gotten him in trouble if he worked at, say, Enron.
I will be looking into the budget a bit more in the coming days, but for now just realize that the CFO at Racine Unified misunderestimated the budget by about $50 million. That kind of thing could have gotten him in trouble if he worked at, say, Enron.
Monday, January 12, 2009
City Discrimination Ordinance is Discriminatory
Thanks to Dustin at Racinepost, I have been scrutinizing a City of Racine ordinance concerning discrimination. The following is how the city defines discrimination:
Discriminate, discrimination and discriminating refer to any type of act or refusal to act prohibited by this article, which is based to any degree on a consideration by the actor of the age, sex, race, color, veteran’s status, disabled veteran's status, religion, disability, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, familial status or economic status of any other person.
Very well. So you can't act or refuse to act, to ANY degree, based on a person's sex, race etc...
And yet, in the very same ordinance, Racine attempts to tackle the problem of unequal employment in the following manner:
(b) Since the prohibition of discriminatory practices is not sufficient to effectuate the principle of equal employment without affirmative and direct action, the city adopts this article designed to increase the representation of under-represented groups in all departments, job classifications, and salary categories in city employment. The city, in developing the affirmative action plan, shall require an affirmative action plan from vendors, contractors, and firms with which it does business of $10,000.00 or more per contract.
If discrimination is acting or refusing to act based in ANY way on a persons race, gender etc... then any attempt to help under-represented groups is an action based to some degree on race, gender etc...
In other words, the attempt by Racine to help under-represented groups violates their own policy regarding discrimination.
Discriminate, discrimination and discriminating refer to any type of act or refusal to act prohibited by this article, which is based to any degree on a consideration by the actor of the age, sex, race, color, veteran’s status, disabled veteran's status, religion, disability, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, familial status or economic status of any other person.
Very well. So you can't act or refuse to act, to ANY degree, based on a person's sex, race etc...
And yet, in the very same ordinance, Racine attempts to tackle the problem of unequal employment in the following manner:
(b) Since the prohibition of discriminatory practices is not sufficient to effectuate the principle of equal employment without affirmative and direct action, the city adopts this article designed to increase the representation of under-represented groups in all departments, job classifications, and salary categories in city employment. The city, in developing the affirmative action plan, shall require an affirmative action plan from vendors, contractors, and firms with which it does business of $10,000.00 or more per contract.
If discrimination is acting or refusing to act based in ANY way on a persons race, gender etc... then any attempt to help under-represented groups is an action based to some degree on race, gender etc...
In other words, the attempt by Racine to help under-represented groups violates their own policy regarding discrimination.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
God Bless Armed Robbers
I have never been robbed at gunpoint, so I can't know for sure how I would react. But somehow I doubt I would say "God bless you" to the perpetrators as they left with my cash.
But this is how one Hilary Chavez, in a Journal Sentinel letter to the editor, claims to have reacted after having been robbed recently. While being robbed Chavez thought that perhaps the young perpetrators were "looking for a little Christmas money" or "may have had problems with addiction." Her larger point was to defend the idea of "restorative justice" which "provides the opportunity to show criminals that their actions have consequences for others" and that we can't "incarcerate our way out of the drug problem." Chavez is the Program Coordinator of Milwaukee Treatment Initiative, Community Advocates Public Policy Institute.
I don't claim to know much about "restorative justice", but I can state, unequivocally, that we should be highly suspicious of any policy proposals coming from someone who's first instinct is to excuse and even bless the behavior of armed robbers.
But this is how one Hilary Chavez, in a Journal Sentinel letter to the editor, claims to have reacted after having been robbed recently. While being robbed Chavez thought that perhaps the young perpetrators were "looking for a little Christmas money" or "may have had problems with addiction." Her larger point was to defend the idea of "restorative justice" which "provides the opportunity to show criminals that their actions have consequences for others" and that we can't "incarcerate our way out of the drug problem." Chavez is the Program Coordinator of Milwaukee Treatment Initiative, Community Advocates Public Policy Institute.
I don't claim to know much about "restorative justice", but I can state, unequivocally, that we should be highly suspicious of any policy proposals coming from someone who's first instinct is to excuse and even bless the behavior of armed robbers.
Thursday, January 08, 2009
On Middle East Peace
Dr. Kenneth Yorgan, chairman of the Racine Coalition for Peace and Justice, has a commentary in today's Journal Times entitled "It's time for Israel to make a real commitment to peace."
How does Israel achieve peace with an armed enemy acting on their plainly stated goal of ending Israel's existence?
A prerequisite for peace, it seems to me, would be an acknowledgement that Israel and Jews have a right to live. And unless that acknowledgement is forthcoming from Israel's enemies, peace is obviously not possible.
Why is this not obvious to Dr. Yorgan and the members of the Racine Coalition for Peace and Justice?
How does Israel achieve peace with an armed enemy acting on their plainly stated goal of ending Israel's existence?
A prerequisite for peace, it seems to me, would be an acknowledgement that Israel and Jews have a right to live. And unless that acknowledgement is forthcoming from Israel's enemies, peace is obviously not possible.
Why is this not obvious to Dr. Yorgan and the members of the Racine Coalition for Peace and Justice?
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
JT Endorses Racine's Subprime Housing Ventures
The following are excerpts from the Journal Times' editorial endorsing the city of Racine's continued forays into the subprime housing business, interspersed with my comments:
JT: Hope isn't a feeling that normally lingers around forclosures, but it might be soon.
DN: Hope... or willful delusion? We will see.
JT: The city of Racine plans to apply for federal funding to buy and renovate forclosed homes....Officials are prepared for ther own version of "Flip This House," but the city shouldn't be in this game for the profit.
DN: No need to worry about profit.
JT: If leaders receive the full $2 million they're requesting, that could cover up to 20 homes. That might not make a huge dent, at least initially. The difference will be measured years down the line.
DN: Very well. We are now "years down the line" from the city's previous forays into the subprime housing market. How about we measure how those investments panned out?
JT: The small size of the project should also inhibit any desires government might have to gentrify the city and push out existing residents.
DN: Yes, this gets to the heart of the problem. The government of Racine, and the JT evidentally, share the view that policy should favor government dependents over taxpayers. Thus they both want to take money from wealth producers and funnel it to people who aren't productive enough to buy a home.
JT: Left to the market, forclosed homes could easily land in the hands of slum landlords.
DN: Let's do away with the market and have the Journal Times decide who gets to buy homes and for how much.
JT: As buildings fall into disrepair and fill with unscrupulous tenants...
DN: Maybe it would make sense to gentrify and "push out existing residents," especially the unscrupulous.
JT: Owners are the ones most invested in a community, and they're more likely to pounce on a home that's already in decent shape.
DN: So who's stopping anyone from buying these homes now? Oh wait, I get it. You want these homes to go to people who can't afford to pay for them.
JT: Racine is already piling up experience in real estate, having taken on several homes from the defunct Southside Revitalization Corp and a few others that were forclosed for nonpayment of city-issued loans.
DN: In other words, the city has experience FAILING in the real estate business.
JT: Affordable homes must be exactly that, and prospective buyers should be scrutinized to ensure the forclosure cycle doesn't start anew.
DN: Banks traditionally are the ones that "scrutinize" prospective home buyers. Anyone who passes this scrutiny can buy these homes now, so this entire program is pointless.... except the purpose here is to get homes into the hands of people that the bank considers too risky. Ie, these are subprime loans we are talking about.
JT: We would hope the city learned enough lessons from the financial crunch to handle this carefully.
DN: Ha, this is funny. The financial crisis was caused by banks loaning to people who couldn't pay pack the loans. And now the city wants to loan money to people that banks are taking a pass on. What has the JT learned from the financial crunch?
JT: Times are too dire for leaders to sit back and wail about what's going wrong.
DN: Yes, dry your eyes and do the same thing that didn't work the last time.
JT: Let's hope the key fits.
DN: It doesn't.
JT: Hope isn't a feeling that normally lingers around forclosures, but it might be soon.
DN: Hope... or willful delusion? We will see.
JT: The city of Racine plans to apply for federal funding to buy and renovate forclosed homes....Officials are prepared for ther own version of "Flip This House," but the city shouldn't be in this game for the profit.
DN: No need to worry about profit.
JT: If leaders receive the full $2 million they're requesting, that could cover up to 20 homes. That might not make a huge dent, at least initially. The difference will be measured years down the line.
DN: Very well. We are now "years down the line" from the city's previous forays into the subprime housing market. How about we measure how those investments panned out?
JT: The small size of the project should also inhibit any desires government might have to gentrify the city and push out existing residents.
DN: Yes, this gets to the heart of the problem. The government of Racine, and the JT evidentally, share the view that policy should favor government dependents over taxpayers. Thus they both want to take money from wealth producers and funnel it to people who aren't productive enough to buy a home.
JT: Left to the market, forclosed homes could easily land in the hands of slum landlords.
DN: Let's do away with the market and have the Journal Times decide who gets to buy homes and for how much.
JT: As buildings fall into disrepair and fill with unscrupulous tenants...
DN: Maybe it would make sense to gentrify and "push out existing residents," especially the unscrupulous.
JT: Owners are the ones most invested in a community, and they're more likely to pounce on a home that's already in decent shape.
DN: So who's stopping anyone from buying these homes now? Oh wait, I get it. You want these homes to go to people who can't afford to pay for them.
JT: Racine is already piling up experience in real estate, having taken on several homes from the defunct Southside Revitalization Corp and a few others that were forclosed for nonpayment of city-issued loans.
DN: In other words, the city has experience FAILING in the real estate business.
JT: Affordable homes must be exactly that, and prospective buyers should be scrutinized to ensure the forclosure cycle doesn't start anew.
DN: Banks traditionally are the ones that "scrutinize" prospective home buyers. Anyone who passes this scrutiny can buy these homes now, so this entire program is pointless.... except the purpose here is to get homes into the hands of people that the bank considers too risky. Ie, these are subprime loans we are talking about.
JT: We would hope the city learned enough lessons from the financial crunch to handle this carefully.
DN: Ha, this is funny. The financial crisis was caused by banks loaning to people who couldn't pay pack the loans. And now the city wants to loan money to people that banks are taking a pass on. What has the JT learned from the financial crunch?
JT: Times are too dire for leaders to sit back and wail about what's going wrong.
DN: Yes, dry your eyes and do the same thing that didn't work the last time.
JT: Let's hope the key fits.
DN: It doesn't.
Tax Inequity Exposed
City officials are reacting favorably towards a proposed $7.2 million West Racine residential/retail development. The project is dependent on a $5.2 million tax credit according to an article in today's JT.
According to my back of the envelope calculations based on my own property tax obligations, I figured that a $7.2 million property would owe approximately $170,000 per year in property taxes. Therefore, a $5.2 million tax credit would amount to thirty years worth of property taxes waived, or more accurately, assumed by those who do pay property taxes.
As some of you may know, I recently concluded my own redevelopment project. My taxes are now over $11,000 per year. Not having to pay property taxes for thirty years would mean $330,000 more in my pocket. And I am sure any property owner reading this would be more than happy to be relieved of thirty years worth of property tax obligations.
Now I am all for tax relief, don't misunderstand me. But it should be fairly applied. In this case, out of town developers are getting a thirty year tax break while you and I get stuck paying their share of the tax burden for the next thirty years. Why would we want this?
According to my back of the envelope calculations based on my own property tax obligations, I figured that a $7.2 million property would owe approximately $170,000 per year in property taxes. Therefore, a $5.2 million tax credit would amount to thirty years worth of property taxes waived, or more accurately, assumed by those who do pay property taxes.
As some of you may know, I recently concluded my own redevelopment project. My taxes are now over $11,000 per year. Not having to pay property taxes for thirty years would mean $330,000 more in my pocket. And I am sure any property owner reading this would be more than happy to be relieved of thirty years worth of property tax obligations.
Now I am all for tax relief, don't misunderstand me. But it should be fairly applied. In this case, out of town developers are getting a thirty year tax break while you and I get stuck paying their share of the tax burden for the next thirty years. Why would we want this?
Monday, January 05, 2009
On Second Thought
Regarding the fairness of the JT, during the last 10 days or so I have seen the following photos on the front page: a bloody Palestinian reaching out from a pile of rubble, Israeli soldiers firing guns, A Palestinian woman holding up a red (signifying blood) hand in protest of Israel's military actions, an Israeli tank near the border of the Gaza strip, a crater and severely damaged buildings resulting from an Israeli bomb, a Palistinian man crying while holding the body of one of his children, and finally, today a young Palestinian girl crying because, according to the caption, a relative had been killed during an Israeli air strike.
The message being sent via these heartbreaking pictures is unrelenting Israeli aggression and loss of innocent Palestinian life. The message is a lie.
The message being sent via these heartbreaking pictures is unrelenting Israeli aggression and loss of innocent Palestinian life. The message is a lie.
Sunday, January 04, 2009
Fair and Balanced JT
Not surprisingly, the Journal Times covered the publicity seeking Racine Coalition for Peace and Justice's protest of Isreal's offensive against the rocket launchers in Gaza.
Very surprisingly, they also wrote an article entitled "There's no reason for Isreal to commit national suicide" which was essentially a response from members of a local Jewish congregation.
Congratulations JT for being fair and balanced. And if you need a person on staff that can consistently articulate the position of the other side, well, you know where to find me.
Very surprisingly, they also wrote an article entitled "There's no reason for Isreal to commit national suicide" which was essentially a response from members of a local Jewish congregation.
Congratulations JT for being fair and balanced. And if you need a person on staff that can consistently articulate the position of the other side, well, you know where to find me.
Saturday, January 03, 2009
Identify the Course Offerings
I am thinking about taking a course at Parkside. The following are some of the course I am considering. Try to identify the bogus course offerings.
1)Understanding White Privilege
2)Feminism in Philosophy
3)Dead White Male Appreciation
4)Capitalism and Economic Growth
5)LGBT Studies
6)Lesbian Literature
7)History of Conservative Thought
8)Literature Classics
9)Problems in Industrial Society
10)Problems in Socialist Society
1)Understanding White Privilege
2)Feminism in Philosophy
3)Dead White Male Appreciation
4)Capitalism and Economic Growth
5)LGBT Studies
6)Lesbian Literature
7)History of Conservative Thought
8)Literature Classics
9)Problems in Industrial Society
10)Problems in Socialist Society
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Question of the Day
My brother owns a home in Maryland. It is worth in the neighborhood of $700,000 and his property taxes are roughly $4,000 per year.
I own property in Racine. It was assessed at $478,000 and my tax bill was over $11,500.
The Maryland property has a tax rate of approximately $5.70 per $1,000 of property value while my tax rate was over $24 per $1,000 of value. Racine residents pay over four times the property tax than does my brother in Maryland.
Now my question for readers, especially liberals, is this: How do property tax rates affect property value and the behavior of property owners?
I own property in Racine. It was assessed at $478,000 and my tax bill was over $11,500.
The Maryland property has a tax rate of approximately $5.70 per $1,000 of property value while my tax rate was over $24 per $1,000 of value. Racine residents pay over four times the property tax than does my brother in Maryland.
Now my question for readers, especially liberals, is this: How do property tax rates affect property value and the behavior of property owners?
Sunday, December 28, 2008
City Will Fail in Housing Business
The city of Racine now wants to buy and flip forclosed homes in marginal neighborhoods with your money. Read about it here: http://www.journaltimes.com/articles/2008/12/27/local_news/doc4956ea55c1ee0781977341.txt
Not a good idea. The city "already owns six houses which it has obtained through defaulted home improvement loans" according to city development director Brian O'Connell. In other words, taxpayers are holding the bag for the city's previous failed efforts in the housing business. What will be done differently this time? Did someone at city hall get fired for squandering our money the last time? Nothing and no are the correct answers I suspect.
The city officials will fail again and again in the housing business because they fail to recognize an obvious truth: People who can afford to but a home in Racine's rough neighborhoods don't want to live there and many people who do live there aren't stable enough, economically or otherwise, to be successful homeowners. This leaves renting as the only realistic option for the homes in question.
Not a good idea. The city "already owns six houses which it has obtained through defaulted home improvement loans" according to city development director Brian O'Connell. In other words, taxpayers are holding the bag for the city's previous failed efforts in the housing business. What will be done differently this time? Did someone at city hall get fired for squandering our money the last time? Nothing and no are the correct answers I suspect.
The city officials will fail again and again in the housing business because they fail to recognize an obvious truth: People who can afford to but a home in Racine's rough neighborhoods don't want to live there and many people who do live there aren't stable enough, economically or otherwise, to be successful homeowners. This leaves renting as the only realistic option for the homes in question.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Unions and Ponzis
This might be a stretch, but here goes. There are significant similarities between unions (perhaps not all or even most) and ponzi schemes.
Getting in early is key. Early investors in a ponzi scheme often do quite well before the gig is up. Similarly, early participants in unions often will cash in with higher wages, health care expenses paid in large part by the younger healthier union members, and pensions. Before the union ultimately destroys the source of the money, some more realistic negotiations may start to take place. Sometimes these include sacrificing new employees with two tiered compensation packages, so the new guys continue to fund the original union/ponzi members.
The unions destruction of the money source can take decades. The more clever and powerful unions then set their sights on a deeper reservoir of cash, taxpayers. But, as we will eventually find out, bailouts and hidden obligations to municipal employees etc... will bankrupt communities and individuals alike. There is no such thing as a free lunch.
Getting in early is key. Early investors in a ponzi scheme often do quite well before the gig is up. Similarly, early participants in unions often will cash in with higher wages, health care expenses paid in large part by the younger healthier union members, and pensions. Before the union ultimately destroys the source of the money, some more realistic negotiations may start to take place. Sometimes these include sacrificing new employees with two tiered compensation packages, so the new guys continue to fund the original union/ponzi members.
The unions destruction of the money source can take decades. The more clever and powerful unions then set their sights on a deeper reservoir of cash, taxpayers. But, as we will eventually find out, bailouts and hidden obligations to municipal employees etc... will bankrupt communities and individuals alike. There is no such thing as a free lunch.
Friday, December 26, 2008
Coming Clean
I have a confession, of sorts, to make. My son, age 13, has discovered the joys of anonymous blogging. He was active on a recent post concerning climate change, claiming that Florida will be under water soon and that the clown fish will soon be extinct etc...
Yes I was aware of his antics and I even begrudgingly gave permission. Sorry Sam, Nemo, UP. I will discourage, but not forbid, anonymous postings by my son.
But there was some value there IMHO insofar as it demonstrates just how easy it is to parrot liberal positions.
Yes I was aware of his antics and I even begrudgingly gave permission. Sorry Sam, Nemo, UP. I will discourage, but not forbid, anonymous postings by my son.
But there was some value there IMHO insofar as it demonstrates just how easy it is to parrot liberal positions.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Unions Prevail Over Taxpayers
The Journal Times reports today that several people were protesting outside of City Hall yesterday. The protesters say the city's heating and air conditioning contractor is not paying the prevailing wage. "Josh Garner, a union member, said the nonunion Kenosha company Southport Heating and Cooling pays 50% percent less than prevailing local wages mandated by the state."
I have no way of knowing whether the city's contract is lawful or not, but I think it ought to be. If the city can get the job done, employ willing workers, and save taxpayers 50% on labor costs, they should be allowed to do so.
It seems that "prevailing wage law" is designed to protect overpaid union labor while sticking it to the taxpayer.
I have no way of knowing whether the city's contract is lawful or not, but I think it ought to be. If the city can get the job done, employ willing workers, and save taxpayers 50% on labor costs, they should be allowed to do so.
It seems that "prevailing wage law" is designed to protect overpaid union labor while sticking it to the taxpayer.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Evidence of Climate Change
The other day I was rifling through my car, looking for an ice scraper. Though none was to be found, I did find three umbrellas and some sun screen.
I am starting to believe in climate change.
I am starting to believe in climate change.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Michael Gibson Does Something
The near completion of an unsustainable, wasteful, feel-good environmental project atop a dilapidated school building prompted local student Michael Gibson to announce that "It just shows something can be done with this location in the inner city. It shows something can be done with this group of students."
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Opposition or Hatred?
I went to the city council meeting last night intending to speak in opposition to a proposed ordinance concerning landlords. I was also aware that a battle was brewing over a proposed LGBT center.
When I arrived I became involved in a brief discussion with, I think, the would be proprietor of the LGBT center. I asked him why there was opposition to the center and he responded that it was all about bigotry and hatred by Christians. I thought that this was not a very charitable assessment of his opponents motives, so I asked what his opponents might offer as a reason for their opposition. He didn't know.
In my previous post I suggested that a council meeting about a conditional use permit was probably not the proper venue for Christians to hold forth on the immorality of homosexual activity. But is this hatred?
No, it is disagreement. And disagreement and hatred are not necessarily synonymous. And disagreement resolved through an open, fair and just process is what we should aspire to as citizens.
I didn't see hatred coming from the Christian speakers last night. I saw strong, though misguided, opposition coupled often with a stated concern (whether sincere or not I don't know)for gay people.
After perusing the JT and Racine Posts blogs on the subject, it seems that many supporters of the LGBT center are quick to declare that hate is what motivates their Christian opponents. Which makes me wonder whether it is hateful to assume that an opponent is hateful.
When I arrived I became involved in a brief discussion with, I think, the would be proprietor of the LGBT center. I asked him why there was opposition to the center and he responded that it was all about bigotry and hatred by Christians. I thought that this was not a very charitable assessment of his opponents motives, so I asked what his opponents might offer as a reason for their opposition. He didn't know.
In my previous post I suggested that a council meeting about a conditional use permit was probably not the proper venue for Christians to hold forth on the immorality of homosexual activity. But is this hatred?
No, it is disagreement. And disagreement and hatred are not necessarily synonymous. And disagreement resolved through an open, fair and just process is what we should aspire to as citizens.
I didn't see hatred coming from the Christian speakers last night. I saw strong, though misguided, opposition coupled often with a stated concern (whether sincere or not I don't know)for gay people.
After perusing the JT and Racine Posts blogs on the subject, it seems that many supporters of the LGBT center are quick to declare that hate is what motivates their Christian opponents. Which makes me wonder whether it is hateful to assume that an opponent is hateful.
Christians Right?
Efforts to block the opening of a LGBT community center at last nights city council meeting relied almost entirely on religious arguments. Homosexual activity is immoral, the bible says this or that, the end is near etc.... were just some of the arguments offered by members of the public to try to put a stop to the center. But the issue before the city council was not whether homosexuality is right or wrong but whether to approve a conditional use permit. The permit requirement is used by city officials to try to ensure that permit seekers will genuflect (keeping with the religious theme) to the council and promise to cut the grass, paint the exterior etc...
While Christians are certainly free to view homosexuality as sin, in this case they should be careful what they wish for. I recall not to long ago that a Christian church opening was delayed and nearly prevented by this very same permit requirement. Mayor Becker and the city had hopes for condo development along the river and they used the permit requirment to try to block the project. Requiring a conditional use permit was wrong then and it is wrong now.
Christians and gays should work together to protect private property rights and allow the legal use of property to proceed without government or public interference.
While Christians are certainly free to view homosexuality as sin, in this case they should be careful what they wish for. I recall not to long ago that a Christian church opening was delayed and nearly prevented by this very same permit requirement. Mayor Becker and the city had hopes for condo development along the river and they used the permit requirment to try to block the project. Requiring a conditional use permit was wrong then and it is wrong now.
Christians and gays should work together to protect private property rights and allow the legal use of property to proceed without government or public interference.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Landlord Law Enforcement
It appears as though there is already a law on the books in Racine that permits the city to fine lanlords for the trangressions of their tenants. In today's JT local section, one Diana DeChenne was contesting a nuisance citation issued to her because her tenant allegedly fixes cars commercially in the garage. DeChenne asked, rather sensibly, why she was receiving a citation when her tenant has not, to which the judge replied that it was the law. For DeChenne to be in compliance with the law she must make an effort to prevent her tenant from fixing cars commercially.
Wow! So DeChenne must now become part time investigator and law enforcement official. She is now required to somehow detirmine if her tenant is recieving payment for his work or whether he is working on his own car or doing a favor for a friend or whatever. Perhaps she should set up a sting operation, FBI style, then swoop in arrest her tenant, cuffing him to the steering wheel.
As ridiculous as is the present law, the city is considering a change that would, in addition to requiring lanlords to become unpaid law enforcers, seek to prevent them from having their day in court. "If a revised ordinance passes it would send nuisance cases to the Public Safety and Licensing Committee and City Council rather than to Municipal Court."
And so the city's attacks on property owners continues.
Wow! So DeChenne must now become part time investigator and law enforcement official. She is now required to somehow detirmine if her tenant is recieving payment for his work or whether he is working on his own car or doing a favor for a friend or whatever. Perhaps she should set up a sting operation, FBI style, then swoop in arrest her tenant, cuffing him to the steering wheel.
As ridiculous as is the present law, the city is considering a change that would, in addition to requiring lanlords to become unpaid law enforcers, seek to prevent them from having their day in court. "If a revised ordinance passes it would send nuisance cases to the Public Safety and Licensing Committee and City Council rather than to Municipal Court."
And so the city's attacks on property owners continues.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Hubris or Experience?
Renowned Democrat Donna Brazile asks and answers the following question: "What in the name of all that is holy made Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich think he could put a U.S. Senate seat on the auction block? There's only one answer: hubris."
Really? Only one answer? How about experience? If a governor has spent years selling government favors, it seems to me perfectly rational that he would think he could sell a senate seat. And what about buyers? Every seller needs buyers. Blago had lined up at least one buyer for the senate seat and he clearly had buyers for his other nefarious schemes.
So, to answer Donna Brazile's question, to hubris I would add experience, buyers and a culture of corruption as the reasons that Blago thought he could sell a senate seat.
Really? Only one answer? How about experience? If a governor has spent years selling government favors, it seems to me perfectly rational that he would think he could sell a senate seat. And what about buyers? Every seller needs buyers. Blago had lined up at least one buyer for the senate seat and he clearly had buyers for his other nefarious schemes.
So, to answer Donna Brazile's question, to hubris I would add experience, buyers and a culture of corruption as the reasons that Blago thought he could sell a senate seat.
Ending Legal Corruption
It is perfectly legal for a political candidate to accept money and/or support from an individual or group and it is perfectly legal for the politician to make and deliver on promises to said individual or group. It is not legal to explicitly state that campaign contributions are the impetus for favorable legislation. So it seems that exchanging campaign contributions for favorable legislation is legal so long as you never say that that is what you are doing.
Obviously there is but a very fine line between legal representation and illegal corruption and there is such a thing as legal corruption.
As I see it, the only solution to the problem of legal and illegal corruption is well informed voters.
Obviously there is but a very fine line between legal representation and illegal corruption and there is such a thing as legal corruption.
As I see it, the only solution to the problem of legal and illegal corruption is well informed voters.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Bush Betrayal?
Whatever the merits of an auto bailout might be, using TARP money for that purpose would constitute a betrayal of taxpayers who were assured that TARP money would be used to rescue the financial system, not the manufacturing system.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
A Case for Limited Government
Illinois Governor Rod Blagoyavich, a Democrat, was arrested this morning by the feds after a lengthy corruption probe. Soon he may be joining former Illinois Governor George Ryan, a Republican, in jail.
It amazes me the quantity of people who continue to believe they are on the side of the good guys, when it should be abundantly clear that there is corruption among both Dems and Repubs.
Rather than pretend that your guys are virtuous and the other guys are scoundrels, it seems to me far more sensible to be wary of all people seeking power. Additionally, we should grant the least amount of power possible to our government officials such that there is less power available to abuse.
It amazes me the quantity of people who continue to believe they are on the side of the good guys, when it should be abundantly clear that there is corruption among both Dems and Repubs.
Rather than pretend that your guys are virtuous and the other guys are scoundrels, it seems to me far more sensible to be wary of all people seeking power. Additionally, we should grant the least amount of power possible to our government officials such that there is less power available to abuse.
Sunday, December 07, 2008
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
Who We Got?
Many have rightly criticized GW for being a poor speaker and many consider BO to be a great speaker. Yes BO can deliver a great speech but he is a bit of a mess when speaking extemporaneously. Lots of long pauses interspersed with uh's and um's. Today I listened to him answer questions and it was painful. And when he wasn't sure who was to ask the next question, he asked "who we got?" Yikes.
Troublemakers Welcome
The city of Racine is apparently considering an ordinance wherein landlords may be fined for the behavior of their tenants. A public hearing on the subject will be held at City Hall on December 16th, 7 pm.
And so continues the trend in Racine to allow miscreants and misdemeanants to carry on while holding others accountable for their behavior.
Why stop with landlords? My understanding is that some of our public schools have enough of a nuisance problem that the police have opened mini stations inside of our schools. Perhaps we should fine the principal when the children act out.
Of course this would be widely seen as unfair, even ridiculous, and rightly so. But when it comes to landlords we seem to have lost our sense of fairness.
What city officials fail or refuse to recognize is that too many losers have chosen Racine as a place to live. Come to think of it, Racine officials are complicit in this choice insofar as they are making Racine a place where troublemakers won't be held accountable for their own behavior. What better place to live if you are a troublemaker?
And so continues the trend in Racine to allow miscreants and misdemeanants to carry on while holding others accountable for their behavior.
Why stop with landlords? My understanding is that some of our public schools have enough of a nuisance problem that the police have opened mini stations inside of our schools. Perhaps we should fine the principal when the children act out.
Of course this would be widely seen as unfair, even ridiculous, and rightly so. But when it comes to landlords we seem to have lost our sense of fairness.
What city officials fail or refuse to recognize is that too many losers have chosen Racine as a place to live. Come to think of it, Racine officials are complicit in this choice insofar as they are making Racine a place where troublemakers won't be held accountable for their own behavior. What better place to live if you are a troublemaker?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
