Archive for the ‘USA’ Category

Creation vs. Redistribution of Wealth

Free Market, God, USA | Posted by George
Aug 14 2011

Redistribution of wealth is one of the most cynical and self-serving notions of the political realm.

Redistribution of wealth posits that only so much wealth is available and should therefore be equally distributed.  But wealth is created by those with drive, determination, and an eye to the true laws of economics (e.g. sowing and reaping, generosity drives profitability, etc.).  Wealth is not a limited thing, but a thing that can and is regularly created.  Every invention that reduces the impediments to get what is needed creates wealth (e.g. efficiency in farming via better process, better varieties, better distribution; efficiency in production of any good through economy of scale or automation; etc.).  Every time multiple lower-cost components are assembled to produce a higher-than-the-sum-of-the-parts priced item, wealth is created.  Every time a seed is planted and a 100-fold crop is harvested, wealth is created.

Furthermore, there are no laws,  of nature or of God, that suggest that wealth should be forcibly redistributed by government.  (Although God’s law indicates that those who understand how to invest will receive a return and that those who generously assist others in need will be generously profited.)  In fact, it is foolishness and cynicism to take away the “seed” from the one who has demonstrated the ability to be productive and put it into the mouth of the one who has demonstrated a propensity to be unproductive — all become less wealthy by the redistribution of wealth because it hampers the production of wealth.

Western culture that was (sic) based on basic principles of ownership, responsibility, and freedom has created a higher standard of living not only for itself but for an entire globe.  Certainly the wealth is not distributed to everyone evenly, but neither should it be!  But the vast majority of the globe has been enriched by the wealth of the Western way.  However, it would be simple to undo this process.  Simply take all the wealth of the West and distribute it equally across the globe to every person.  Most of the wealth would disappear in a matter of a few meals, and there would not be enough capital to fuel the production of wealth.  This is just one large example of the principle that wealth can in fact be created (and generously distributed) but forcible redistribution destroys wealth.

Why then the political bent toward redistribution?  As above, it is cynical and self-serving.  Power from (not to) the masses is the underlying impetus of cynical, wealth-destroying socialism and its white-washed twin in American politics, economic liberalism.

Fixing Education

Culture, Education Reform, Free Market, Politics, Socialism, USA | Posted by George
Apr 11 2011

Fixing Education

Yeah, it is no real surprise: the US educational system needs fixing.  So how do you fix it?

Well, how do you fix anything that is so steeped in socialism, it hardly knows what to do any more except require more money?

That is a simpler question.  You create competition at every level.  You weed out corruption in the government complex that runs the show – and if government is a necessary component, you create a watchdog that is strongly incented to find and reduce favoritism.  You reduce the regulatory overload that bureaucracy naturally creates. You get information out to the market so that the competition can do it’s job most effectively – with an informed consumer.  And then you let the free market system do what it does best – create a better product at lower cost.

So let’s apply those principles, and make it obvious what the US needs to do.

Create competition at every level. That means that every teacher, every school, every district competes against every other one for the students that will keep their school in business.  That means that every student and every parent will need to compete to get into the schools that best promote the student’s objectives.  And that means that every community and every business will have a vested interest in financially investing in their own future – the students going through their schools.

So let’s get to hard decisions.  What should education look like?

First, you pin a check for $10,000 (to pick a random number in the right ballpark) to the shirt of every child in the US on September 1.  That means that the ingenuity of American educators everywhere would be leveraged to create the best opportunities for their potential clients – kids from age 5 to 18.  Schools would be required to publish information on their students’ standardized test scores, acceptance to various colleges, placement into jobs of various incomes, and other relevant information, allowing students and parents to choose among schools that are succeeding and those that are not, weeding out the poorer schools and increasing the profitability of those models that are helping more children.

Next, you let a school make its own enrollment decisions to promote its approach and image, creating a second layer of competition.  A school can cater to students with certain strengths, particular desires, or certain needs.  Schools could focus on vocation, science, business, or liberal arts. Students or parents who are motivated to attend a certain school will compete on the basis of parent volunteerism or student effort or ability.  Schools would not be required to retain students who create disciplinary problems unless the student or a parent is willing to take immediate remedial action.  Businesses could invest in vocational schools, even guaranteeing employment for successful graduates.  Universities could make agreements with the academically most competent students for rapid advancement similar to current 3+2 expedited masters degree programs.

As a side note, urban centers can have numerous specialized schools, but even students in rural areas could attend schools of their choice via Internet “satellite schools” in which (perhaps volunteer, or other low-cost) room monitors and computers connect the students to a variety of schools taught by central educators online (or via video).  Note also that any student in any location could in principle be part of such a distributed educational classroom – suddenly we do not have to move inner-city kids out or suburbanites in to mix things up; let the Internet do the bussing.  This approach can level the playing field and make opportunity proportional to effort or aptitude instead of location or caprice.  Given the $10K check, only the human imagination is the limit to the educational approach, and many would be willing to provide powerful novel approaches to education.

By catering to older students with special scheduling or family needs, special schools providing alternative schedules – say, weekends and/or evenings – could provide a route to increase graduation percentages.

Schools could be privately held or publicly traded corporations.  In either case, the profit motive would be sufficient to both increase the effectiveness and decrease the cost of American education.

What is the role of the government? The government does not do a good job of most domestic services, but it has two excellent roles here, as well as a few other smaller functions.  First, it can assemble and distribute the funding.  (I would like to discuss the way that the government should fund things, but that’s a bigger question than I want to address here.)  Even in this role, government cannot be trusted and it would be to the taxpayers’ benefit to have a watchdog that is financially incented to find and eradicate corruption.  Second, the government should maintain a minimum level of acceptable output.  Given the dismal state of education in our current system, it might seem that the government could not do even this job well, but it is important that there be care against abuse of children or gross negligence regarding their education, and it is a role of justice that the government can fill.  We need to beware, however, lest the government place so many requirements on the education of student that the businesses become unprofitable – government bureaucracy has a real tendency in this direction – so the real requirement is basic justice and an advocate for parents as the parents and students exercise their choice to maintain real educational accountability of the schools.

For the time being, it is important that the decentralization of the school bureaucracy be unhampered; thus, it is essential that educational businesses be empowered to combat dominant centralized unions.  Businesses naturally resist the inefficiency of unions, so unless the government interferes by requiring them or unduly enabling their continued existence, competition will drive them to the fringes unless and until they become necessary.

Finally, an independent informational service should be created to enforce truth in educational advertising and to provide an information infrastructure for legitimate decision-making for the customers (students and their parents), businesses (the schools), and their collaborators (communities, businesses, and institutions of higher education).

Our educational system has become increasingly socialistic – liberal government bureaucracy and unions opposing any real reform.  And because of its socialistic bent, the system’s costs continue to rise while its effectiveness continues to plummet — that is how socialism works!  It is time to return to our American roots –giving our people opportunity to succeed or fail, leveraging market forces to create a better product at lower cost, and saving our country’s future from the dwindling returns of mediocrity.

The Union Onion in Wisconsin

Justice, Politics, USA | Posted by George
Mar 10 2011

Truth is so often difficult to find… sometimes you have to peal back the layers of the onion to find out what is in the core… and then what you find stinks and makes you want to cry.

The stinky issue at stake:  Should taxpayers be forced to support liberal politicians’ re-election campaigns?

You probably didn’t know that this is the real issue in Wisconsin, not that the media wants you to know… but it is really pretty simple:  If you want to be a teacher (or other public employee in numerous roles) in Wisconsin, you are forced by law to be a part of the teacher’s (or other… etc) union.  If you are part of the union, you pay union dues.  So a portion of the teacher’s paycheck never hits the teacher’s bank account because the government sends it directly to the unions.  And a portion of the union’s income goes directly to re-electing the liberals – check out the NEA’s contribution reports.  Hmmm… sounds hardly American!

More generally, the union dues pay for several union functions:

  1. Negotiate for better contracts
  2. Keep your job
  3. Keep the liberals in power

The first one seems benign, so let’s deal with that one last.

The second and third points are the real reasons why there is such an uproar in Wisconsin.  The union bosses and the liberal democrats don’t want to lose this cushy taxpayer-funded gravy train, so they incite fear via lies and get the rank and file out in force.

Governor Walker, in his recent article in the WSJ, pointed out that Indiana public employees are doing better after the end of collective bargaining for public unions in that state.  Could it be that point one above really does not work out as everyone assumes it would? Do extra added layers of socialism actually multiply the inherent inefficiencies in socialism? Perhaps that last question is a bit of a jump, so let’s review…

Reality being what it is, socialism does not work out well.  Those that work hard discover that it doesn’t help them out.  Those that don’t work hard find out they do just as well as the others.  Everybody loses incentive.  Everybody loses work ethic.  Everybody loses.  As many examples as there are… that is how many times socialism has produced poorer product at higher cost.

So let’s put government in charge and socialize our education!  And we do… more expense, poorer product.  And then let’s add another layer of socialism – government-corrupting unions!  And we do… more expense, poorer product.  Is it any wonder we get a decreasing quality of education in the US for an ever-increasing cost?

So do extra added layers of socialism actually multiply the inherent inefficiencies in socialism? Of course they do!  Socialism squared is worse than just plain socialism.

So when the union layer gets pealed off, when there becomes a modicum of accountability, when good teachers can be retained and inferior teachers can be let go, when millions of taxpayer dollars are not being siphoned off to pay the union bosses and re-elect the liberals… you can save your state money and there is still a bigger pie to share among the people who are actually productive!

Once you get the unions out of the way, once there is some level of competition in education, once we have pealed back one layer of socialism, MAYBE we can peal back another layer and actually introduce competition into education, and then maybe the real excellence in our teachers can make itself felt and America can retake the lead in education, and then retake the lead in innovation and creativity.

But you gotta start by pealing the onion.

Justice, the Rule of Law, and President Obama’s DOMA Stance

Justice, News, Politics, USA | Posted by George
Feb 25 2011

It is essential in the pursuit of justice that the government play by its own rules.  The reason a country has a constitution is to establish those rules, and to establish how those rules will be created, judged, and enforced.  When a government turns its back on its own rules, it willfully creates injustice by its own definitions.

This brings us immediately to the situation regarding our current president’s position on DOMA.  Apparently, he has been reticent to defend or enforce this law since coming into office and has recently announced publicly that he will no longer defend it.  The media, which is apparently party to this act, portrays this as President Obama denying the constitutionality of the law itself. But President Obama does not have the position to make that claim, as anyone even barely educated in the US form of government clearly knows.

The constitution states that, “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.”

What is executive power?  Black’s Law Dictionary provides this definition of “executive” for us: “As distinguished from the legislative and judicial departments of government the executive department is that which is charged with the detail of carrying the laws into effect and securing their due observance.”

The US Constitution creates a President for the purpose of vesting executive power in him – i.e. power to secure the due observance of the law.  He is not in a place to pass judgment on the law, but simply to carry the law into effect and secure its due observance.  If President Obama were an American patriot, he would uphold his duty or remove himself from the position of responsibility he currently occupies.

When he decides to undermine the law, he violates both the letter and the spirit of the constitution he swore to uphold.  ”I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

When the president comes out of the closet against a law, he demonstrates his arrogant disregard for America and exposes himself as a law-breaker.  He breaks the law of the constitution and, in so doing , he undermines the American system of justice.  This president has perverted justice and undermined the integrity of our nation.  It is a sad day for those true to America.

Justice – Foundation of Freedom

Freedom, Justice, USA | Posted by George
Feb 18 2011

Legal, moral justice is necessary if one is to exercise his moral freedom without needing to have the personal strength to enforce it.  (Put another way, if I can exert political, financial, or military power to insist on the unhindered exercise of my freedom, that is no more than “might makes right.”  If we expect true freedom as a hallmark of our society, the proof (and even the only necessary element) is in providing unhindered exercise of freedom to those without political, financial, or military means.) To the degree the weak or those lacking influence cannot obtain justice, this is the degree to which our “freedom” is a fiction.

Legal, financial justice is necessary if one is to exercise his financial freedom.  Note that financial freedom is not wealth per se, but the freedom to free succeed or fail in the financial realm.

Freedom without justice is simply an exercise of one’s power, and it is freedom of the few, not the freedom of a people.  Justice that can be impacted by one’s power is encroachment on American freedom.

Welcome

Christianity, Culture, Freedom, God, Justice, News, Politics, Religion, USA | Posted by George
Feb 18 2011

Welcome to Just Reality, a blog on both simple reality with God and pursuit of justice in a free society.  Thanks for coming by!