Chart of the Day #1

Although some of the goods and services provided by government are essential, it is not essential that they be provided by government. On the contrary, the private market place, operating on the principle of voluntary cooperation and exchange, is not only able to provide these goods and services, but can provide them more efficiently and for less money. – Sy Leon,  None of the Above: Why Non-Voters Are America's Political Majority

Today's Chart shows the money supply vs the housing price index over the last ten years:

 
If I get this right, the money supply needs to grow with the population so that the free flow of capital can be efficiently enabled. Loosely translated,  the banks should have enough money to loan to meet the demand, so that consumers and businesses can reach their maximum potential.
 
Okay, so now, there appears to be enough money out there to buy every house on the market. Can we stop the printing press now?
 

Chart of the Day #2

The whole of economics can be reduced to a single lesson, and that lesson can be reduced to a single sentence. The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups. -- Henry Hazlitt;  Economics in One Lesson

Not to worry. The Rich will cover it.

Okay, so what IS a terrorist then?

Last night I saw an item on cable news relating the story of a gunman/grenadist in Belgium that killed five and wounded 125 people. The reporter was quick to interject that the guy was "not a terrorist".

That got me thinking.

Just because a fellow hasn't pledged allegiance to Hamas, Al Quaeda or SEIU; it doesn't mean he's not a terrorist. Clearly anyone who practices mayhem on large groups of people is a terrorist; regardless of his motives or affiliations.  Do we need the government to classify terrorists for us now?

This guy may be too optimistic.

Our Decade from Hell will Get Worse

The case for any republican

Dear Wize-guys,

I apologize for being remiss in my blogging duties. All my wize time for the last three months had been tied up in money school. You'll probably hear more about those adventures as the paper chase continues. Suffice to say for now that I am an expert in matters regarding the Fed (which is to say that I know more than President Obama about how it should work) and I can also read between the lines of a financial statement for any publicly traded company like Enron, etc. I am a danger only to myself, however, if I spot something interesting I will also let you know about it. Hopefully the added dimension of my econ training will make me a better blogger too.

While I was gone, I did manage to see a few segments of the big government preservation debates. On the plus side, I think some good topics have gotten some air. Unfortunately, I don't see that anyone other than Ron Paul gets a vote.

Here are the tiebreaker scenarios (to cop an NFL analogy):

1. Ron Paul: Gets a bye all the way to Super Tuesday. Sentimental favorite.
2. Newt. Vulnerable but a high scorer.Very creative.
3. Mitt: Best defense but no firepower.
4. Pick 'em

If Ron Paul is still in the race when he gets to my state's primary: Hands down. It's not even close. A pro-life libertarian can not be topped in this ranking.

If for some reason he's out of the race, then it gets difficult.  You then apparently have to choose among three remaining options. Stay home. Newt. Mitt.

Maybe it's better to work from the bottom up:

Herman's out. Tim Pawlenty is out. Who else? Gary Johnson? His ideas are mostly right, but he can't even get on the debate stage, and when he does, he scares people.

I can't make a case for Michele B. or for Rick S. I know they mean well. I know they would want to do the right thing, but neither one has advanced any thoughts beyond framing their own bona fides. We get it. You are both wonderful people. The problem is, you can't fix this. This economy, this climate of stagnation and non-productivity. What would you do to fix it? I'm not hearing ideas.

Perry? I can get past his mental lapses, and his heart also seems to be in the right place. However, his solution to America's problems is to treat everybody like a Texan. Suck it up, big boy. It's a free world, get out there and get to work. You know. Texas works because Texas works, not because Rick made it work; and unfortunately, Rick thinks he can export Texas to Minnesota, Oregon, and Delaware. I'm not seeing it.

Stay home is a pretty decent option.

Romney. Romney. What to do about Romney. Seems to have a good grasp of what's wrong. Doesn't seem to be too driven to change things though. He totally represents the right wing of the big government party (which is establishment republicans and all democrats). Would I get out of bed to vote for Romney? I think I'll have to do more research.

Which leaves us with Newt. Could I vote for Newt? Maybe. I think his ideas are bigger than anyone else on the planet. I like having him around. He would be highly entertaining, especially if he wields his veto pen. My positive recollections of Newt were when he shut down the government. It was the only week in the last 23 years that I felt the oppression of big government start to lift. He pushed Bill Clinton to drop health care, and revamp welfare, and balance the budget. Sounds just like the kind of stuff we need now.

Yeah sure. I've heard the bad stuff. He accepted an advance on a book. He worked for Fannie Mae. Sounds like a free market guy so far. Left two wives. That's actually better than keeping one while cheating on her (hello again Bill). He's a loose cannon. Okay, but at least he fires in the right direction.

Am I ready to vote for Newt? Maybe. Watch this space. He may be an acceptable backup, in case people aren't ready for Dr. Paul.

So, fellow Wize-guys. Let me have it.

Wizer One-Liner #27

When you take into consideration that most of the establishment republicans - and all the democrats - are against Newt Gingrich, it's pretty easy to see why he's winning this particular beauty pageant.

Prisons on The Tarmac

Every street is choking

Looks like too much traffic on the road
No fun in driving
You wait in line forever just to go
Heavy roar of engines
Sitting in your prisons on the road
-- John Mayall, Prisons on the Road

The old Mayall tune makes its way into my consciousness every once in a while when I find myself in a traffic situation. As bad as a 15 minute delay is to us highway bound low-lings, it's even worse for people who are in enough of a hurry that they resort to buying a seat on an airplane.

The recent Hartford situation reminded me why I judiciously avoid flying. People spend hours of their lives waiting in security lines, waiting for shuttle buses, waiting hours for the simple process of taking off and landing, only to wind up in a different city with natives that may or may not be up to the task. For the question of whether I would take a two hour flight, or drive for 7 hours, I pick the latter. It's not the time, it's the hassle. I'm blessed with relatively clear middle-of-the-country highways, so driving is not as much of a chore as it might be if I were on, say, the Jersey Turnpike. Still, there are countless recent "innovations" that have soured me for air travel.

1. Obviously, the TSA
2. Not just the TSA, but the whole security thing. -- A security station is supposed to make us feel safer, but actually has the opposite effect: If it was safe, why do they need security? If there is security, it must be inherently unsafe. I think L. Neil Smith in his Prometheus Award winning The Probability Broach had the right idea: Let people carry their weapons on the airplane, but issue plastic bullets. That way if a gunfight breaks out, it won't compromise the hull integrity. People will be safer, because it's a self evident situation. ...but I digress.
3. Time. So much time and energy is wasted in the process of boarding and deboarding a plane. If airplane service actually met the expectations of the flyers, there would be plane-side parking, heated garages, and food service much like an NFL stadium. Instead, you park 3 miles away, crowd into a shuttle bus, only to stand in a 30 minute bafggage line and a 30 minute security line. Air travel is supposed to save time.
4. Very often it doesn't, especially when you wind up in a different city from the one listed on your boarding pass.
5. Nickels and Dimes: Due to the inefficiency of most corporate travel policies, the airlines have to quote the lowest possible fare price, and as a result must charge you to check luggage, charge you for an aisle seat, charge you for overhead compartment space, and even now for the bag of peanuts. All just to make their minimum acceptable margin of profit. I liked it better when the prices were simply too high, and everything was covered.
6. Why does my laptop have to be shut off and put under the seat? In the event of unexpected turbulence, where my laptop winds up is the least of our problems. Leave me alone. My computer is the only productive piece in this entire flight. Better yet give me enough room so I can arrange things in a more organized fashion.
7. Enough room. Right. In days past, you could select a slightly higher priced flight that would have some open seats, so you could lay your work out on the seat next to you. Fat chance of that, now. You are the middle seat. All the flights are the same price. And all of them are full.
8. How did things get so that there is no differentiation between airlines? Why are they all the same? I would have paid more for better service. Is the whole air travel industry a slave of the business bean-counters, who would just as soon fedex their employees to the next client meeting in Tucson?
9. Then there's sheer incompetence. Gates being unavailable, because the previous airplane hasn't left, because, he can't get pushed away from the gate, because  the staff is overloaded, because the babysitter couldn't make it.
10. Let the people off the damn airplane. They would rather be 4 blocks away from the terminal and on the ground than couped up on the airplane. Who in the world thinks it's better to sit there waiting for an impossible situation to get better?

Give me my prison on the road. I'm clearly better off than the poor folks in that prison on the tarmac.

Wizer One-Liner #26

Attention Occupiers: Crony Socialism is not a solution.

Karl Marx and the false premise

Capitalism is not an 'ism.' It is closer to being the opposite of an 'ism,' because it is simply the freedom of ordinary people to make whatever economic transactions they can mutually agree to. -- Dr.Thomas Sowell

I have spent some time defending the notion of capitalism but have now discovered that it's a false premise. From now on, the question of "How do you defend capitalism", will be relegated to the wrong question heap. The real question is "how can you defend (or not defend) the free market?"

Here's an important distinction, put into play by Chris Whalen.

"Marx created the term 'capitalism'. It's a pejorative, insulting description that says all economic activity is a matter of greed," Whalen explains. "If you're any sort of libertarian. If you believe in American principles of democracy and free enterprise, just the fact we use the term 'capitalism' should insult you. We need new labels."

People are conditioned to blame "capitalists" for a lot of economic ills. To be sure, it's still the best descriptor for "Crony Capitalists", and many other such capitalists who are not of the free market variety. These would include Jeffrey Immelt, Warren Buffet, Ken Lay, and Bernie Madoff.

From now on, I am no longer a capitalist.

Pardon me, but..

It's not the kind of thing you really want to commemorate, is it? Every time our enemies see us wringing our hands over the missing towers, they can take deep satisfaction that we still feel the effects. Maybe, just maybe, we would have been better off clearing the space and putting up a Wendy's, a Starbucks, and a Walmart. That would have showed the bastards that they didnt leave a permanent dent in America.

I know one thing, the endless rehashing was irritating at best. This incessant decade-long weepathon is not something we want our enemies to count on every time they try to take us down, is it?