It’s stiff competition, but it may be the Ed.D. If I were king, there would be no colleges of “education.”
Category Archives: Economics
In Case You Missed It
Iowahawk has the scoop on the vice president’s plan to jump the Grand Canyon with Amtrak. Speaking of which, Ray LaHood showed up at the Commercial Space Transportation Conference on Thursday. The topic of his speech? High-speed rail.
The country’s in the very best of hands.
“We Cannot Survive Without You”
I’ve been pointing for a year now that NASA needs private providers a lot more than they need NASA. Jeff Foust has a report from the plenary session of the conference yesterday, in which Charlie Bolden confirmed it. This will, of course, cause exploding of heads in the moronosphere.
[Update a few minutes later]
And as predicted, here is the latest insanity from Mark Whittington:
Charles Bolden was reported to have told Apollo astronaut Gene Cernan that he would provide a bailout for commercial space firms “equal to that given the auto industry” if the private sector faltered in providing space transportation services. Bolden later issued a non denial denial of Cernan’s account.
This raises the question of in what sense is the Obama program “commercial.” Under the Bush era COTS program, the consequences for failure were that a commercial company would be out of the program. Originally a company called Rocket Plane/Kistler was part of COTS. But because RP/Kistler could not meet milestones, it was replaced by another company called Orbital Systems.
But under the Obama plan, the only consequences for failure would be more money pumped into the commercial companies that are developing private space craft. With the demise of Constellation, companies competing for ISS servicing contracts have become too important to fail.
So far this virtual guarantee of money has not had much of an effect on the performance of companies in the commercial space program. Recently, SpaceX successfully orbited, reentered, and landed on the ocean a prototype of its Dragon space craft.
I don’t have time to dissect it right now, so I toss it as chum to the comment sharks. I will note though, that there is no logical connection between the first and second sentences in that last paragraph. Which is not atypical of a Whittington piece.
The Future Of ObamaBusiness
They still don’t get it:
“I have seen the future of Obamabusiness and its regulations (my primary responsibility as a business is to provide jobs, not make a profit) and have responded by not hiring in the traditional manner at all – ever. I will now use temp agencies. Almost no paperwork, no disputes, no benefit costs, no HR department, no lawsuits, no commitments. Welcome to the future of being an employee.”
Emphasis mine. The notion that the business of a business is to create jobs is a Marxist one. As the president remains, despite his shellacking.
Repeal
…and replace. Some good ideas for the Republicans on health care.
Demosclerosis
Thoughts from (law professor) Glenn Reynolds on America’s laws and lawyers, and why we probably have too many of both. It’s part of the ratchet effect I discussed a couple of days ago.
“I Want My Sudafed!”
Thoughts on the incremental nature of the destruction of liberty. Unfortunately, it’s like a ratchet, and it’s a lot harder to get rid of bad laws than to create new ones.
The ObamaCare Repeal
..has begun.
How To Repeal ObamaCare
It’s a longer-term project, but definitely doable. And it would be a great victory for freedom, with the biggest rollback of the state in almost a century, since The New Deal.
Obama’s Antique Technological Vision
Thoughts from Michael Barone:
If you put together Obama’s resistance to just about any serious changes in entitlement spending with his antique vision of technological progress, what you see is an America where the public sector permanently consumes a larger part of the economy than in the past and squanders the proceeds on white elephants like faux high-speed rail lines and political payoffs to the teacher and other public-sector unions. Private-sector innovation gets squeezed out by regulations like the Obama FCC’s net neutrality rules. It’s a plan for a static rather than dynamic economy.
Leftists only like change when they are in control of it.
[Update a few minutes later]
Sorry, link is fixed now.
[Update a while later]
This seems related somehow: Network news anchors struggle to understand the Internet in 1994.
I had been using email for over ten years prior to this.