Filed under: Capitalism, Domestic Policy, Economy, Freedom, Law, Taxes | Tags: A Trillion Dollar Burden, Excessive Regulation, Free The Economy
One of the biggest whoppers in Obama’s Kansas ‘fairness’ speech was his claim that tax cuts and deregulation have “never worked” to grow the economy. This is absurd. Countries with greater economic freedom consistently produce greater overall prosperity. President Reagan’s program of lower taxes and deregulation led to a two-decade economic boom.
The Small Business Administration says that the regulatory burden on our economy is a staggering $1.75 trillion annually. If it were implemented correctly, cutting the regulatory burden would provide a cost-free stimulus almost immediately. Cass Sunstein, who heads up the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, calls it an “urban myth”, though the methodology from which those numbers are derived are widely accepted. Well, that’s what Democrats do — regulate.
Wayne Crews surveys the growth of the regulatory state every year in a report called Ten Thousand Commandments, every year since 1996. Over that span, he has seen the number of pages in the Federal Register grow from 67,000 to 81,405. Each page contains a rule that imposes costs on businesses. Owners usually give up and hire someone to handle compliance when they reach a size of about 30 employees. The costs of complying with regulations average $10,585 per employee, the SBA says.
The Chamber of Commerce surveys show that over 60% of small businesses have no plans to hire in the next year, and firms point to greater regulation or the threat of it as a major reason.
— The federal plumbing police are reviewing water efficiency standards for urinals, last reviewed in 1998. The DOE must, according to law, allow the states to toughen the requirements if the feds don’t do it within 5 years. This can be found in the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles which also regulates the efficiency of toilets, faucets and showers. Add refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, furnaces, dishwashers, light bulbs and more.
Urinals are also regulated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which requires one urinal for every 40 workers at a construction site for companies with less than 200 employees, and one for every 50 workers where more than 200 are employed. The Americans With Disabilities Act also controls the proper dimensions and placement of bowls.
— A family farmer in California grows almonds and walnuts on about 40 acres. He has to deal with the state Water Resources Control Board which allows him rights to 405 acre-feet of water a year. The state Department of Pesticide Regulation requires reports on what he uses for navel orangeworm and husk fly and codling moth. If he didn’t do it himself with state certification, there would be other safety rules. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District issues permits for burning pruned limbs. There’s the state and federal Occupational Safety and Health, and the state Employment Development Department which require paperwork for the farm’s one employee. There’s the Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan for above-ground petroleum tanks. Of 81,500 farms and ranches, ¾ sell less than $100,000 of crops and commodities.
Another farmer near Modesto has 450 acres in almonds and walnuts. During harvest time he’s required to keep down the dust. So he went looking for a 2,000-gallon water truck, and found a nice one that fit the bill. The dealer couldn’t sell it to him without costly modifications because the California Air Resources Board was cracking down on emissions from diesel trucks.
— From the other side of the country, the crew of Carlos Rafael’s 76-foot steel dragger fishing boat captured a giant bluefin tuna in their trawl gear while fishing offshore. Rafael immediately called a bluefin tuna hot line maintained by fishery regulators to report the catch. These fish are highly prized in Japan. A 754 lb. specimen fetched a record price in Tokyo, selling for nearly $396,000.
When Rafael met the boat in Provincetown, agents from NOAA’s Office of Law Enforcement informed him they were confiscating his fish, all 881 pounds of it. Even though the catch had been declared and the boat had a tuna permit, the rules do not allow fishermen to catch bluefin tuna in a net. They said it had to be caught with a rod and reel. After being towed in the net, the fish was already dead. A public affairs specialist with NOAA said the fish has been forfeited and will be sold on consignment oversees. If it is determined that there was a violation the money will go to the asset forfeiture fund.
— New rules proposed by the U.S. Department of Labor aim to protect children’s safety in a dangerous industry — family farms. They intend to restrict the chores children can be hired to perform like driving a tractor or rounding up cattle in corrals on horseback. The rules would bar young people under 16 years of age from operating power equipment, branding or breeding farm animals or working on ladders higher than 6 feet. Under the regulations a rancher wouldn’t be able to hire local kids to move hay or pull the grain cart at harvest time. Farm injury rates have declined 59% from 1998 to 2009. Current labor laws allow children under 16 to work on farms when they aren’t in school but limit the tasks they can do.
Lorinda Carlson, who owns a small orchard in Chelan County WA, said the law would make it harder to hire the five 13-15 year-old workers who usually help her load cherries during harvest season, a job few adults are willing to do.
Filed under: Capitalism, Domestic Policy, Economy, History, The United States | Tags: Facts Not Fantasy, The Real History, Three Big Myths
It was a hard time, and people were frightened. Constant experimentation made it seem that government was really trying. The history is colored by the politics of the times and the politics ever since. All that continuous experimentation? Major mistake. Here’s the real story.
Filed under: Capitalism, Domestic Policy, Economy, Law, Liberalism, Politics, Progressivism, Statism, Taxes | Tags: Liberals Missing Principles, Liberalsim Makes no Sense, Who Needs Principles?
I am currently reading William Voegeli’s Never Enough: America’s Limitless Welfare State, which I recommend highly. Having read many of the statements from the left about the new social programs they felt were necessary to answer the needs of the poor, the downtrodden, the needy, Mr. Voegeli intended to write a book describing the welfare state that was envisioned by liberals. He soon discovered there was no limit to the utopian dream of the perfect welfare state, hence the title.
Republicans, conservatives, libertarians and tea partiers agree on the principles of the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, and mostly agree on the Bill of Rights, individual liberty, free markets, free trade, limited government and low taxes. They know what they stand for, but what do Liberals stand for?
“Liberalism,” Voegeli says, has a “continuing inability to make sense.” To the liberal mind, the powers of government are not just enumerated, but innumerable. Government extends as far as the eye can see, and tries to go farther. “Despite their political victories, liberals remain frustrated, and believe that the welfare state America should have is always much bigger than the one it does have.
When liberals see conservatives so earnestly discuss their principles, write books about their principles, make speeches on true conservative principles — and their principles seem to guide their actions — it makes liberals start to wonder just what their own principles are.
In January 2005, The American Prospect ran a headline that said “We’re Taking Suggestions: What Does Liberalism Stand for? They knew what conservatives stood for, but liberals lacked a big idea to unite their policy proposals and convert them from a hodgepodge of narrow and specific fixes into a vision for society. No answers.
Jonathan Chait of The New Republic scoffed at big ideas, because for liberals “everything works on a case by case basis.” You cannot formulate sweeping ideas when you are operating on a case-by-case basis. Is that why liberal ideas make no sense?
In May 1932, Franklin Roosevelt said, in an address at Oglethorpe University, that “the country demands bold, persistent experimentation. It is common sense to take a method and try it: If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.” No wonder we had a Great Depression.
The big ideas of campus liberalism are too politically difficult to translate into the vernacular, and stand for a welfare state bigger than anything seen in any country. The faculty lounge has not had a lot of contact with the free market. If liberalism doesn’t stand for a much bigger welfare state, then it doesn’t stand for anything at all.
Back in 1987/88 the very liberal New World Foundation — Hillary Clinton was chairman — commissioned a 1998 Zogby International poll that asked 1,800 rank-and-file members of nine progressive groups what a progressive agenda should look like. The results were printed in The Nation magazine by David Kallick. Respondents ranked racism as the country’s most important social problem, followed by poverty, corporate power, jobs/economy, environment, moral decline and education. Again, you have progressives trying to discover their big idea.
But that is just the point. liberals have no big idea. They have annoyances, things they hate, a big cloud of things that must be fixed. Think of a black cloud hanging over every liberal’s head containing racism, poverty, the environment, dangerous playground equipment, people who stay in the shower too long, fossil fuels, and free speech.
Liberals have been taught that America is not an exceptional country, but one that has perpetrated all sorts of evils— wars and slavery, Indian genocide, fat children, destroyed the environment, when what should be — is communal government that guarantees the right to housing, nice employment, health care, opportunity, and education. Liberalism stands for a belief that every genuine need corresponds to a right to have that need addressed. Liberals are nice, and they want to prove it with your money.
The problem is that with no guiding principles, liberals address each need with a brand new bright idea. They thus have no guidelines and no brakes on their ideas. They pick the wrong ideas from the past to imitate. It’s no wonder that their ideas simply do not work.
People who have no guiding principles shouldn’t be in charge of anything.