[Update a few minutes later]
This sentence encapsulates why this president is such a disaster economically: “The President thinks he can redistribute income without stifling economic growth.”
Monthly Archives: February 2013
David Frum’s Knowledge Of Guns
…must come from watching Yosemite Sam and Elmer Fudd cartoons.
Or so a commenter says. Scroll up to see why he wrote it. There certainly are some monumentally ignorant, even stupid questions there.
Asteroids
A reminder of space program weakness.
[Update a few minutes later]
Over at The Space Review, Jeff Foust asks if this will finally be the event that gets our long-term attention.
A Degree In Fine Arts
Pro tip: Don’t borrow money to get one:
Among the 4,000 colleges and universities in the federal database, the Creative Center in Omaha, Neb., a for-profit school that offers a three-year bachelor’s in fine arts, had the highest average debt load, at $52,035. Median pay for graduates of the school with five or fewer years’ experience is $31,400, according to PayScale.com.
“Salaries can be pretty darn high or pretty low” for the school’s graduates, who typically get jobs in graphic arts or advertising, said Creative Center President Ray Dotzler.
You don’t say. Of course, if they could figure that out, they’d have probably majored in economics or business. Interestingly, the majors with the best prospects for paying off debt seem to borrow the least, and vice versa.
Universal Pre-School
…is bad for everyone.
Well, except for pre-school teachers.
This is one of the stupider ideas (among many stupid ones) in the presidents SOTU.
[Update a while later]
Note that there’s a bonus point in the link. School in general is a waste of time for most kids.
More Chelyabinsk Thoughts
…from the very thoughty Professor John Lewis.
I’ll be interested to see how long the media interest in this lasts.
“Quote” Of The Day
Call me crazy, Kevin, but isn’t a “quote of the day” supposed to be an actual, you know, quote? That isn’t even a paraphrase.
New Gun Laws
Could they spark massive civil disobedience?
The political class would do well to recall (if they’re sufficiently educated to have ever learned it) what it was that sparked the first American Revolution:
In obedience to your Excellency’s commands, I marched on the evening of the 18th inst. with the corps of grenadiers and light infantry for Concord, to execute your Excellency’s orders with respect to destroying all ammunition, artillery, tents, &c., collected there, which was effected, having knocked off the trunnions of three pieces of iron ordnance, some new gun carriages, a great number of carriage wheels burnt, a considerable quantity of flour, some gunpowder and musket balls, with other small articles thrown into the river. Notwithstanding we marched with the utmost expedition and secrecy, we found the country had intelligence or strong suspicion of our coming, and fired many signal guns, and rung the alarm bells repeatedly; and were informed, when at Concord, that some cannon had been taken out of the town that day, that others, with some stores, had been carried three days before …
This, not hunting, despite all of the nonsensical rhetoric about the latter, is the purpose of the Second Amendment.
The Conservative Critique Of ObamaCare
…was basically correct:
[“Liberal”] Kapur’s argument amounts to the following: Democrats passed a law that had and still has insufficient public support (points 1 and 4), that cannot achieve its goals without unconstitutional means (point 2), that did not allocate the necessary resources to accomplish its objectives (point 3), and that lacks and still lacks even minimal support across the political aisle (all four points).
That sounds very much like the conservative critique of ObamaCare. At this point it’s fair to say that ObamaCare opponents have won the argument. Of course, since supporters won the political battle three years ago (and Obama won re-election), this monstrosity is now the law of the land, ensuring that both sides’ victories will have been Pyrrhic.
And then there’s this:
It has become very clear to everyone involved who is analytical and not ideological that the rational strategy, for both large and small firms, is to cease providing health care insurance to employees.
No company wants to admit that they are considering eliminating health insurance as an option, or be the first one to drop their health insurance plan, but once a competitor does so, the preference cascade will begin. The clear sentiment is “We will not be the first one to drop our health insurance plan, but we would be a close second.”
The coming preference cascade for employer group health plans is what the Democrats fear the most, because Obamacare was sold to the masses as “if you like your health insurance plan, you can keep it.”
Which was always a lie, of course.
I think the Democrats will be reaping a whirlwind in the next two election cycles.
ObamaCare
Democrats are turning on it:
The about-face of these Democrats is a phenomenon worth pausing over. Many formerly supportive constituencies have grown wary of Obamacare in recent weeks as we’ve learned more about the effects it will have on the health care system. But these Senators’ 180-degree turns are something more severe.
The fate of the Democratic party in America over the next decade is tied to Obama’s healthcare reform. If it is seen to be a success, America could trend Democratic for the foreseeable future. If it fails, liberalism as we’ve known it will take a massive hit. But, so far, support for Obamacare has been waning instead of waxing. Even a recent piece by Talking Points Memo that placed the blame for Obamacare’s potential failure on Republicans noted that the law’s unpopularity with the public at large was the number one threat to its success. Democrats are getting nervous and consequently are trying to put some distance between themselves and the ACA.
Well, Queen Nancy told us we had to pass the bill to find out what was in it.