The Swamp’s Cure

I heard a short excerpt today from an interview with Eric Bolling, author of The Swamp. Now “the swamp” is nothing new, nor are the warnings about it and the cries to drain it. Probably one of the greatest legacies of President Eisenhower was his [unheeded] warning against the military-industrial complex. Various authors since then have made a name for themselves exposing the rip-offs engineered by swamp people. Few people are willing to support the swamp, but fewer still are willing to drain it.

One of the questions asked Mr. Bolling was how to put an end to the swamp. His answer was to not allow government employees to become lobbyists for five years after their governmental service, and beyond that, simply, to shine the light on it, to expose it. Swamp people would scatter like cockroaches do when the light is turned on, he said.

I’m sorry, but that is the equivalent of giving a cancer patient baby aspirin, and expecting it to cure him. The “cure” is inadequate and useless, and deadly because it covers up the problem instead of dealing with it.

There is only one way the swamp will ever be drained, (if it’s even possible to do so.) That is by putting a wall of separation between government and business, such that no business can ever get an advantage over others by use of government legislation, regulation, or largesse.

Ayn Rand identified the problem decades ago. “It is not a matter of accidental personalities, of ‘dishonest businessmen’ or ‘dishonest legislators.’ The dishonesty is inherent in and created by the system. So long as a government holds the power of economic control, it will necessarily create a special ‘elite,’ an ‘aristocracy of pull,’ it will attract the corrupt type of politician into the legislature, it will work to the advantage of the dishonest businessman, and will penalize and, eventually, destroy the honest and the able.” She went on to add, “Government control of the economy, no matter in whose behalf, has been the source of all the evils in our industrial history – and the solution is laissez-faire capitalism, i.e. the abolition of any and all forms of government intervention in production and trade….”

Many centuries ago, the Bible warned against people in positions of power allowing their decisions to be warped by a bribe, or of using their position to extort payments from the weak. Just because modern man has built this into the fabric of his society does not change the evil inherent in its practice. We must drain the swamp, by stopping the water from flowing into it in the first place.

[See the article “Notes on the History of American Free Enterprise,” in Ayn Rand’s Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal for the quoted passage.]

Duh! or “Shall we try for $30?”

The city of Seattle “is gradually increasing the hourly minimum to $15 over several years. Already, though, some employers have not been able to afford the increased minimums. They’ve cut their payrolls, putting off new hiring, reducing hours or letting their workers go, the study found.

The costs to low-wage workers in Seattle outweighed the benefits by a ratio of three to one, according to the study, conducted by a group of economists at the University of Washington who were commissioned by the city. . . . On the whole, the study estimates, the average low-wage worker in the city lost $125 a month because of the hike in the minimum.”

This is sad, but – I guess to show that comic relief is a positive virtue? – the paper then tries to act as though this was an unexpected result. The study’s “conclusions contradict years of research on the minimum wage,” it asserts. (I’m serious! Read it for yourself in the Washington Post, June 26, 2017.)

Perhaps they’re banking on their readers all being ignorant or gullible. But even my 1967 edition of Samuelson’s Economics textbook says this about minimum wage rates: “These often hurt those they are designed to help.” Samuelson, as old-timers remember, was mildly leftist and supported a minimum wage law. A less ideologically-driven text (University Economics, by Alchian and Allen, 1964 edition) was less sanguine. “…a minimum wage rate above the current market rate will lead to unemployment.” It was true then, still true. Only ideological wonks have refused to believe it for the last 45 years.

It’s seldom that the effects of the minimum wage are seen so directly, quickly and blatantly. I’d imagine the low level of “inflation” recently has allowed the results to be seen more clearly. (“Inflation” which causes a nominal rise in the general wage structure of a country, often masks the effects of an increase of a minimum wage law.)

The truth has been known for 50 years and longer, but the Siren call of political expediency, coupled with greed by the populace, has overridden it for many decades. In an age when truth is rejected and hated and covetousness reigns, that’s not likely to change any time soon.

(Post’s story title: A ‘very credible’ new study on Seattle’s $15 minimum wage has bad news for liberals)

Sanders as Speech Policeman

Bernie Sanders, according to an article by Yahoo News, is claiming that “Under President Trump, our country is moving in an authoritarian direction and the very nature of American democracy is under attack,”

Finding this hard to believe, I read the article. I mean, there really doesn’t seem to be much movement in D.C. at all. The Democrats won’t play with the Republicans, and the Republicans won’t play with Trump. The result appears to be change at glacial speed.

However, the little change I have noticed has been overwhelmingly the repeal of some of the most egregious rules, regulations, and executive orders of the previous years. Now as long as he’s attempting to speak English, then Sander’s statement is worse than ridiculous. Except in the case of a few laws prohibiting the initiation of force against others, repealing of a government action is, by definition almost, an advancement of freedom and a step away from authoritarianism.

So what’s he trying to pull? It’s the old “1984” trick of painting black white, and white black. C. S. Lewis discussed it years ago, when he pointed out the terrible results to be expected once we see words as emoticons, not as truth tellers. Philosophers have been trying for decades to lead us to that place – and they have finally succeeded. Words are now used to create a feeling in the listener – fear and loathing of Trump, in Sander’s case – not to refer to an objective truth you are discussing.

Notice in Sander’s case: All the “evidence” he mentions (according to the article) consists of things Trump has said, nothing he has done. Now our forefathers knew and understood that speech was a freedom, and that the censorship of free speech was tyrannical and authoritarian. Sanders and his ilk reject that. Sanders equates speech with action (and disagreeable speech with evil actions), then further twists things by claiming freedom of speech consists of forcing people with whom you disagree to keep their mouth shut.

“1984” Isn’t it amazing how much life follows art?

[See the article: ‘American democracy is under attack’: Sanders urges vigilance against Trump’s ‘authoritarianism’, Yahoo News, 06/23/17]

Euphemism for Violence

I read an interesting discussion yesterday concerning the episode in Portland where two women are being raked over the coals because they wanted to sell Mexican food – but they weren’t’ Mexican.

It’s a sad story, not just for the women who are being oppressed by the useful idiots of the Left and deprived of their livelihood. But it’s sad because it shows just how far our country has departed from even the concept of freedom. The groups that once proudly declared themselves the defenders of cultural freedom, have again shown us that freedom, to them, means lockstep with their ideas.

The discussion mentioned above was in a publication by Doug Casey. He said, “This is a cultural thing. There are no political solutions to cultural problems.”

That’s not quite true. While there may be no political resolutions to cultural problems, history is replete with political solutions to cultural problems. That solution is called tyranny. It is practiced by the politicians of both the “Left” and “Right.”

Political solutions, by definition, involve the use of force to impose one solution on everyone. Sometimes the solution imposes a belief/practice on everyone; other times, the solution does not allow a politically-unwanted belief/practice to happen.

There’s no doubt the “gloves have come off” the clenched fist of the present-day Left in America. If America is to have a future different than the rest of the world’s dismal course, we have got to pray and work for the rebirth of the Freedom Philosophy in our day.

Note: While I wrote this prior to the shooting incident at the GOP baseball practice today, I decided to post it anyway, because it is very apropos. That “political solution” is a euphemism for a solution using force to solve a problem does not make the force any less real or true. That the economic/class conflict (another euphemism) rhetoric covers over the violence upon which it is based also does not make the violence any less real or true. Sometimes, it breaks out in a physical way such that it is impossible to ignore. Today’s episode in DC appears to be such an example. Ideas do have (existential) consequences.