Archive for November, 2011

Another Day Another “Woe”

November 16, 2011 Leave a comment

Check out this story from my university.  This illustrates perfectly why progressives will never be satisfied.  A hundred years ago socialists claimed moral supremacy by supporting the “right” of everyone to the basic necessities of life, which at the time included things like food and shelter.  Using this battle cry, they managed to take over several countries and people starved in record numbers.  Meanwhile in America the poor became increasingly obese.  Now they claim moral supremacy by supporting the “right” of everyone to the basic necessities of life wich include, apparently, access to broadband internet, a luxury without which people have somehow managed to scrape by for some 6000 years.

This type of rhetoric is obviously targeted at the most naive members of society which is no doubt why they do this stuff around college campuses.  It’s a really bold move to come out in support of more free stuff for people.  But if you even think about these claims a little bit, the absurdity is undeniable.  For instance, take statements like this:

The telcos have failed America. We have third-world broadband.

Then click the link a couple lines above it and discover–no doubt to your horror–that the U.S. is 9th among OECD countries in broadband subscriptions per 100 people.  What a colossal failure of the free market that is.  I mean, all the telecoms have done for us is invent a new life-changing technology and disseminate it to a large portion of the population for not very much money.  But according to our governor, in a TV ad which I saw but can’t find, half of low-income people in Washington don’t have it.  (It’s so sneaky how she says it too, she says something like “half of low-income families don’t have broadband–that’s right–half.  She sort of glosses over the “low-income” part and repeats the “half.”)  So this makes us a third-world-country?  That only half of our poor people have broadband internet?  I guess that explains why progressives are fleeing our shores in droves for more enlightened countries like Cuba and Vietnam, where no doubt the broadband internet flows like water.

This attitude that whenever something cool gets invented everyone has a “right” to it is so absurd the only explanation I can think of for people believing in it is that they haven’t really thought about it.  So I’m  trying to do my part to get them to think and you can too.  The next time you see one of these people, ask them what would make them satisfied.  What would a society that was fair and just enough for you look like?  Everyone would have food, and housing, and broadband, and healthcare?  How big would everyone’s house be?  What food would they eat?  How much healthcare would they get?  I mean does everyone just get as much healthcare as they want?  What if someone can be kept alive for one more day at a cost of a million dollars, do they have a “right” to that?  How will the answers to these questions be determined?  Perhaps more importantly, where will this stuff, this food and housing and healthcare and broadband come from?  Who will invent the next drug or the next broadband when as soon as they do, it gives everyone in society a claim against them?

Obviously these questions have no answers (at least not answers that progressives would acknowledge), because they are making that most fundamental of economic errors–assuming no scarcity.  This is why they will never be satisfied.  We keep getting more stuff, our lives keep getting easier, and they keep getting more angry because there is still scarcity.  There is always something that somebody has that somebody else doesn’t have so there’s always something to get outraged by if you are inclined to this way of thinking.  And if you do, then every great invention will become a source of “woe” in no time.

Categories: Philosophy, Politics Tags:

How Liberty Dies

November 10, 2011 2 comments

If you didn’t catch it you should check out the little ceremony for Obama’s executive order to cut wasteful spending earlier this week.  Notice 3 things.  First, as everyone who is paying attention already knows, his reelection strategy is to run against congress.  He expects us not to notice that congress is half Democrats and that the Republicans in the House have passed twenty-some odd bills that are now stalled in the Democrat-controlled Senate and that Obama is spending all his time traveling around making speeches about how the Congress won’t do anything and none of his time actually trying to work out a deal with congress to do something.  But this is not the thing we should be concerned about.

The real intention of all of this (or at least the effect) is to make congress irrelevant.  Notice that they make this signing of an executive (here are some others) order look just like the signing of a bill.  Also notice (number 3) that Obama actually calls it a bill right before signing it, and after repeating several times that we don’t need to wait for congress to act, we can take actions even if congress won’t act, etc.  It’s about time we asked ourselves “what can’t the president do without congress?”  I guess he can’t pass laws.  He has to call them “regulations.”  He can’t pass a spending bill.  Wait wasn’t this an executive order to cut spending?  (Just wait until the next time congress tries not to raise the debt limit.)  Well he can’t declare wa–wait, nevermind…….

Remember progressives do things progressively.  If they want to make congress irrelevant they don’t just come out and say “hey we think congress should be made irrelevant.”  They just sort of gradually get you used to the idea by making the signing of a bill and an executive order look the same until you don’t really notice the difference.  And of course this is always done at first over issues that nobody would complain about like cutting wasteful spending.  Then later on they say “well we’ve been doing it for a long time and nobody complained before, this is just racism…”  Remember this.  This president who was supposed to usher in a new era of government transparency tried to issue an “executive rule” making it legal for the administration to flat-out lie to Freedom of Information Act requests.  Their justification was that they’ve been lying for a long time, they just want to make it legal, it’s really not a big deal.  This is how liberty dies–progressively.

Categories: Politics Tags: ,