Thinking Right

By harold

November 29, 2006 08:39 AM | Link to this

harold shops at home. on the internet. because harold can’t stand any of you.

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 08:57 AM | Link to this

Wooten’s Premise Local Contract Bids should not have to conform to local ordinance criteria.

My Conclusion not even spell check coulda saved that blog.

Al Gore’s “an inconvenient truth” is 90 minutes of charts and baby seals but not one shot of Tipper bathing in all that global warming sun. Inexcusable. D-

By Jim Wooten

November 29, 2006 08:58 AM | Link to this

Thanks for contributing that, Harold. To Harold and others to come, good morning.

By getalife

November 29, 2006 09:05 AM | Link to this

Webb was tempted to ‘slug’ Bush during testy exchange:

Senator-elect Jim Webb told Bush that he really wanted to see his son brought back home from Iraq. “I didn’t ask you that, I asked how he’s doing,” Bush retorted, according to the source.

Would be #1 at Youtube.com

By getalife

November 29, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this

Jimmy Carter: “Iraq…One Of The Greatest Blunders That American Presidents Have Ever Made”

Your thoughts Jim?

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 09:09 AM | Link to this

Turkey’s Islamic Billy Graham scolded the Pope yesterday for spreading Islamophobia. )Is that like Arachnophobia?) He then blamed the pope for any violence that the web of islamists might commit to protest the pope’s remarks.

The pope then flipped Islamic hecklers the finger, and was fined $20K by the National Football League.

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 09:09 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. Jim raises two issues: (1) hidden taxation, arising from regulations that are not explicitly revenue oriented, and (2) stewardship by public officials. We address separately.

Taxation via regulation is a horrendously inefficient way to do business. If the purpose is to raise revenues, tax directly. If the purpose is to proscribe undesired behavior, criminalize the behavior. Jim cites a “preference” for particular companies. Thus if a local company – just for the fun of it, let’s call it Halliburton Stationery, Inc. – qualifies for preference, the county directs business to that company, thus ensuring profits for Halliburton, even if GiganticMart could sell the identical goods to the county for less. The taxpayers are thus unnecessarily paying more, for the sake of ensuring profits for Halliburton – a hidden tax, and generally a bad idea. A smarter course would be to buy the cheaper goods at GiganticMart and simply send a check for half the difference to Halliburton; the taxpayers would thus suffer less.

Somewhat related is the question of stewardship. The Commissioners in Dekalb have determined to use taxpayer funds for corporate welfare. I always believe voters get the government they deserve. While I may deem this as an ethical lapse by the good Commissioners, I appreciate that the voters of Dekalb obviously do not agree, as is their prerogative.

By Southern Democrat

November 29, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this

Mr. Wooten,

A good topic and I can’t wait to hear from Jbmlaw and others who are more knowledgeable about macro and microeconomics than me.

I can’t stop smiling at this line, though: “What I choose to do with my own money and what government chooses to do with that it extracts from me under authority of law.”

I know you conservatives hate taxes, but you make it sound as if paying them is somewhere between a root canal and a colonoscopy!

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 09:15 AM | Link to this

dammit jbm, if you cant edit, dont expect anyone to wade through that much tripe. I aint reading it. Nobody will, not even your cadre of trolls.

Your grade: zzzzz

Your prospects for readership: (o)

Your best romantic overture: <=3

bwa

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this

point of order, Jim’s typo: “that” should be, “what”.

that’s Y I say not even spellcheck coulda saved the right honorable jim wooten today. Too bad it’s not miller time.

By sct

November 29, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this

Jim, do you support the Bush administration “Abstinence Only” program that has been proven to be of little or no value.

To the tune of $151,000,000.00.

That seems to be a much better example of out of an out of control governmental social program that taxpayers are forced to fund.

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this

Root Canal? Colonoscopy? Somebody’s been reading Abu Graib testimony.

By Jim Wooten

November 29, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this

Political Fore, I changed it for you, bud.

Southern Democrat, thanks for some good posts in recent weeks, including some in my absence. At some level, yes, a good root canal can be more painless than either of the two options you offer.

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this

Sct: my wifes subscribes to the abstinence only formula and says the money is well worth it. I say no taxation without representation, and if I have to dress up like a gay indian and throw IUDs into Boston Harbor, then so be it!!!

I regret that I only have one sex life to give for my country.

By Janine

November 29, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this

The cynics amongst us wonder how DEMOCRACY can take root in a place like Iraq. Well, look to the barren soil of DeKalb County, where fiscal conservativism has been beaten to the ground — and yet a free market conservative survives and keeps her sanity. Mr. W.You never seem to want to acknowledge that one pesky little fact…Iraqis want a theocracy!! it matters not what we or anyone else does, they will always have a theocracy. Democracy will not take root … certainly will not flourish and will not even survive in Iraq.

By GodHatesTrash

November 29, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

Good point Jeanine - just like the Bubbas in the red states, the Bubbas in Iraq want Gawdocracy not democracy.

They’re all pigs and trash.

By Redneck Convert

November 29, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this

I say shop local. Like I go to Billy Bob’s to drink, when I could get the beer cheaper by going down the road a bit. But then Sister Dusty might see me and chew me out at church.

I hate taxes and specially the sneaky kind like Wooten writes about. That’s why I have my cement vault to put my money in near the trailer. So that Pelousy woman can’t get her hands on it when the libruls take over Congress next year.

I shopped local last night. I see dang fools paying 50 bucks for a little scrawny Christmas tree. Well, I snuck into a guy’s tree farm last night and cut me a big one and brung it home. It’s the redneck way, and it ain’t near as sneaky as rewarding companies for hiring local people.

Well, it’s back to the beer run for me. I’ll check in from time to time just to see jbmlaw and TFTT and Dusty and Van give the libruls the what for. I’m putting them up for a Ornery Redneck award down at Billy Bob’s. Even if TFTT has already throwed his in our face. They’s all rednecks. They just don’t know it.

By sct

November 29, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this

Bush is getting ready to ask for another 100 billion for the war in Iraq. We have now spent $400,000,000,000.00 in Iraq.

$400 billion to bring democracy to Iraq. Thats what I call the mother of all social programs.

$400 billion. Whats your share of that Jim?

By Van

November 29, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this

When I first read about the “Local Small Business Enterprise ordinace” - I asked myself, which small businesses are they talking about. I county would have bids out on evrything from new police cruisers to toilet paper. Does this mean businesses within a certain distance or geographic areas are eligible?

In todays world, most large companies already set aside a certain amount of contracts to women and minority owned businesses. With this new ordinence, more of the pie appears to be off limits to true competitive bidding.

I am not sure how I feel about this, on one hand it seems to favor the local mom and pop stores, but on the other hand it seems to be an unwise way to spend tax payer money.

By @@

November 29, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this

Jim: Democrats do like to buy into your conscience, while having no qualms with their own.

Smart shoppers those Dem politicians. Their consumers? Well…let’s just say I wouldn’t employ them to do my shopping.

I hate shopping by the way. I’m one of those rare women. “Do I really need this?” I ask myself, or “Am I just buying it to make myself feel good?”

I do know the difference.

By getalife

November 29, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

$400 billion for Iraqi welfare.

Where is the same outrage for those opposed to welfare?

Your thoughts hypocrites?

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this

Dear Janine @ 9:31, you raise an interesting point: are the commissioners in Dekalb, with apparent approval of the voting public, establishing a theocracy in Dekalb to replace the free market? The apparent theocracy worships the indefinable virtues of local businesses, without regard to the rational results from a more secular cost-benefit analysis. Establishment of a local faith?

By Van

November 29, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this

sct,

Shall we compare out of wedlock births and abortions between now and when I was in school? In the 50’s and 60’s the only thing taugt was abstinence. Seemed to work pretty good then, might be worth it today.

But then again, with abortion, there are less and less democrats being born today, we will soon out number you.

By Southern Democrat

November 29, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this

Upon reflection on the topic, I will play devil’s advocate and will attempt to spar with Jbmlaw (feeling, though, that I might have better luck with a young Casssius Clay).

I think Mr. Wooten invites us into a number of debates: government as market participant, government as ultimate arbiter of social values, and government as protector of its constituents.

I understand conservatives’ concerns with mandating preferences that might raise costs to taxpayers, but I’m not sure how valid the concerns are in this arena. First, it is not simple trade protectionism (a la tariffs, duties, and trade barriers) that favors local companies over another, but an expression of society’s desire to keep its money in its area (an argument I heard from conservatives over and over as a teacher in North Fulton). Second, the government is only regulating its own spending and attempting to maximize the effect of its tax revenue on the community. In fact, if everyone thinks as Mr. Wooten does in the first few paragraphs of his blog today, the program will be a net benefit for the same reasons the New Deal was effective: the government is tilting the balance in favor of its constituents and attempting to artificially create opportunity (something I would imagine conservatives vehemently disagree with). In effect, the local government is hoping that by preferring local contractors, more local taxpayers will benefit from the work, and (big assumption here) will spend the money locally.

By keeping tax exependitures in local hands (even at a minimal rise in cost), doesn’t the local economy benefit?

I leave it to those wiser than me in these matters to point out the flaws in my logic.

By the way, I am shocked that no one has bitten on Mr. Wooten’s practically embossed invitation to discuss minority preferences in government contracts!

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 10:28 AM | Link to this

Au contraire, my dear RC @ 9:56: “They’s all rednecks. They just don’t know it.” I am part of the first generation of my families to be reared in a city. I know who I am, and from whence I came.

I do not object to the “redneck” appellation. The “red” arises from hard work in the sun, the “neck” from our willingness to take chances. Certainly not leftist traits.

By time for the truth

November 29, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this

The utterly humourless paranoid witless sickster unhinged foreskin yet again has the cheek to call others “trolls” - and with NO hint of that pesky notion of irony.

time for the truth knows that harold actually hates harold more than anyone else because harold is very convincing (on here) as a hateful self loathing obsessive Cobb based car hater who’s had his driving licence taken off him yet again for drunk driving. This is the real reason why harold shops from home - because harold can’t get out as CCT have banned him for life and harold’s stolen rusty BMX bicycle has also filed for immediate divorce on grounds of mental cruelty.

Local shops in the USA, especially in the unbelievably homogenous - that means it all looks very much the same for my less literate liberal enemies - older downtown areas of smaller American towns largely devoid of national chains and strip malls often proffer little in the way of choice. For every Asheville NC or Harlan KY there seems to be a couple of dozen Mariettas, Adairsvilles, Acworths, Kennesaws, Cantons, Cartersvilles, Calhouns, Douglasvilles, Fairburns, Daltons etc where there is very little in the way of variety of shops selling useful everyday merchandise. Gifty shoppes and antique shops, usually run by rather snotty middle class wimmin are the norm with perhaps a few usually rather poor quality but expensive eateries. A few small towns, like say Ellijay or Blue Ridge have a touristy feel but similarly have little in the way of choice of shops in the immediate downtown area, which I am assuming is what is meant here by local shops.

For very different reasons to harold - I still have my driving licence and I dont use public transport here (except British Airways) - I also much prefer to shop online for most major non-grocery type purchases. Except for some essential electronics which need to be purchased locally for the extended warranty/service.

When you contrast the town centre’s of similarly sized smaller towns in England and the USA the USA towns invariably look like veritable ghost (shopping) towns compared to England. The most glaring difference being that almost all English towns and larger villages are still the commercial/retail centres of their communities whilst here they usually are not. Here the middle classes foist their antiques and curios and gifty shoppes etc on folks whilst in smaller English towns folks go shopping for almost everything in their weekly shopping trip. Its a very different culture in this respect. Many smaller towns even have food/general markets several days a week in their town centres, as well as what we in England call ‘permanent indoor markets’.

Perhaps Jim likes buying gifts or just browsing in such businesses as they have in say Marietta Square - each to their own.

By getalife

November 29, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this

Van,

You are for abortion because you love to bomb babies.

Your thoughts?

By JK

November 29, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this

First I hear “conservatives” squawking that government regulations hurt small business owners, thereby squashing the American dream for hard-working entrepreneurs. Absent from this usual rant are the tax breaks and special favors the government offers to big businesses, who, through volume, size, and “tax incentives,” squeeze out small busines owners and squash the American dream for hard-working entrepreneurs.

Today Mr. Wooten complains that government regulations are being used in an attempt to enhance the local economy, HELP small business owners, and increase the probability of success for hard-working entrepreneurs. Does Mr. Wooten subscribe to the philosophy that the mega-rich corporate bigwigs deserve all the breaks and privileges they can get, and hard working Americans who don’t toe the corporate line can suck it? Just curious.

By Diogenes

November 29, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this

Jim,

A strange thing happened on the way to the Forum today: you and I agreed on something. I appreciate being recognized by the clerks and managers of the stores I habituate, and I think we all do. I suggest that what we’ve bought with our cheaper prices at Wal-Mart, Target, Home Depot, et al. is a loss of the sense of belonging to a community. That price perhaps has been too great. I peer up and down the major thoroughfare near my home and all I see are box stores (as much as I love the people at my local Publix, they too are a box store). None of my neighbors have businesses near me: we’re all employed by “big guys.” I lament grievously the lose of small business entrepreneurship and the sense of doing business with your friends and neighbors. Thanks for trying, Publix.

The sense of what DeKalb is trying to do is noble: support small businesses; the method is atrocious. If we the people do not support our small businessperson, then government cannot force us to do it. Jim, is it our politics or our old age? I don’t know; but I agree with you.

By Van

November 29, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

getalife,

I think Mike Vick was thinking of you.

Try using slightly less moronic come backs.

By Aquagirl

November 29, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

The government bidding and contract business is so corrupt that this hardly matters. It’s not like there is an actual process where the best company is selected to do the work.

Maybe DeKalb could use a new motto: Wasting Your Tax Dollars Right Here In The Community!

By Van

November 29, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

Southern Democrat,

Actually, I did bring up large businesses “Diversity” policies regarding women and minority businesses.

To be really fair in the business world, I would set aside a percent of contracts to the smaller businesses reardless of who ownes them.

I can just see a mega, large cap supplier of goods getting preference over a smaller, cheaper business only because the owner is an asian woman.

By sct

November 29, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this

Van, recent studies show these abstinence only programs to be ineffective. Kids are signing abstinence pledges but are still having sex. Unprotected sex. Those who signed the pledge have a higher incidence of std’s.

And again the question is social programs and Big Government spending tax dollars. BTW, Bush wants the Abstinence Until Marriage budget raised to $241 million dollars in the next budget. In 2000 the budget was 20 million.

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this

I have to award Van the point in his last exchange with Takemywife. Van’s restraint in waiting till 11am to use the “m” word is admirable and proves he’s a gentleman. Point, set, match: VAN!

By JK

November 29, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this

Sct, you’re forgetting that Big (Repubican) Government (biggest EVER) has more interest in indoctrination that in education. Teaching kids to think and reason, and gather, sort, and analyzie information would only produce thinking, reasoning adults who might resist the sound-bite propaganda that is so prevalent and successful in places like Georgia today.

I’ve seen the abstinence propaganda.. I mean, curriculum. My response to my child upon viewing the workbook was, and I quote: “YOU’RE SH-TTING ME, RIGHT?” It was very short on actual information, however, very skillfully written so that the correct answer to 90% of the “study questions” was “Abstinence!” Fortunately, I was able to fill in the gaps in the child’s education while instilling the desired fear at the same time.

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this

The “abstinence only” program was ruined by the booty call. Seems a shame.

By getalife

November 29, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

For Dusty:

Stewart: “Argentina, Former Safe Haven For Nazi War Criminals Is Drawing The Line At The Bush Twins”

By CJ

November 29, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this

Southern Democrat @10:26 “By keeping tax expenditures in local hands (even at a minimal rise in cost), doesn’t the local economy benefit?”

Great question SD! The answer is a yes.

Dekalb’s new policy is an ingenious investment made on behalf of Dekalb taxpayers that will generate both direct and indirect financial rewards for them that will exceed the costs. Recall that this new ordinance requires that contractors hire a minimal percentage of local workers – not that the business be located in Dekalb. Of course, the idea is that those workers will put money back into Dekalb’s economy.

In addition to the economic benefits, the Dekalb County Commission has demonstrated a value system that isn’t just limited to short-term pocketbook decisions. Like Jim, most of us like the idea of buying locally to support our communities, so it makes sense to allow our elected officials to do the same on our behalf. After all, “Big Government” is, in fact, we the people.

Dekalb County Commissioners should be commended for demonstrating the high ideals that underlie such a policy and for their rare economic foresight. The five Commissioners who voted for the Local Small Business Enterprise ordinance are representing their constituents well.

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this

Dear Southern @ 10:26, you correctly infer that my inflated ego will regularly overwhelm my judgment, and by feeding my ego you obtain a tactical advantage.

You raise two economic doctrines, one ancient one called “comparative advantage,” and one more modern idea called “creative destruction.” The former concept is most easily grasped from a perspective of international trade, although the principles apply equally at the state, city, or neighborhood levels. An easy-to-read economist is Dr. Walter E. Williams, who writes frequently on comparative advantage. http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2006/10/25/shouldwetradeatall http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2006/10/18/foreigntradeangst The underlying idea is that anything can be produced anywhere, but wealth grows most by allowing free markets to work. I could set up jbmlaw mfg. co. in Dekalb County, to manufacture automobiles. I could build the best automobiles in the world, employing only Dekalb County employees, using only steel smelted in Dekalb County, using only tires manufactured in Dekalb County. I could even agree to sell all of my output to Dekalb County for a fixed profit of $1 per unit and with no salary for jbmlaw, if Dekalb County would buy only from me. Would Dekalb County go for that deal?

Surely there is one question that crosses your mind at this point: how much would the vehicles cost? Honesty compels me to tell you that I could not build such vehicles as cheaply as GM (and if you drill down, honesty would compel me to acknowledge that I could not build such vehicles as cheaply as Rolls Royce, either.) Nevertheless, I could guarantee you that you would fulfill your county’s “desire to keep its money in its area” under the jbmlaw program. Thus the “New Deal” re-enacted. You surely see that the ultimate effect of preserving the local jobs would be bankruptcy of Dekalb County, and eventually thereafter of jbmlaw mfg. co.

By allowing the free market to work, and allowing the price mechanism to work, Dekalb County has a larger amount of funds available for use in areas other than purchase of vehicles. Thus, my “stewardship” argument.

The more interesting and newer idea you raise is the concept of Joseph Schumpeter: http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2006/05/03/disappearingmanufacturingjobs The economic argument addresses the leftist shibboleth, regional or industry “job loss.” I cannot improve on Dr. Williams’s essay, and commend that to your review.

By Diogenes

November 29, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this

Perhaps Bush lacks a sex drive, but for the typical teen-age male, there is no greater force on earth. In the “abstinence only” classes, hand out condoms as the students leave, please.

By Diogenes

November 29, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw (1129),

What about the multiplier effect? You’re employing very large numbers of people in DeKalb County — people to build the plants, people to smelt the steel, people to build the separate parts, and so on. That’s a tremendous tax base for DeKalb County. I suspect you could probably get the price down to that of a Brinklin or an Avanti, which might be economical enough for DeKalb to pay for from the revenue they’ve gained from the multiplier effect. Comments, please.

By Aquagirl

November 29, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this

Thank you, Diogenes, for pointing out what is obvious to everyone on earth except the dried-up weirdos that push that silly abstinance junk.

Too bad Bush seems to like them. He recently appointed an idiot who thinks birth control is demeaning to women to head up family planning. More abortions, anyone?

By sct

November 29, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this

Didn’t Sonny Perdue and the Georgia government just do something similar?

In order to bring “jobs” to “Georgians” Kia just received a $258 million dollar taxpayer subsidy to bring the new manufacturing plant here.

I guess Big Business Kia gets the standard Republican waiver.

By Van

November 29, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

sct,

Then why was it so successful back in the “old” days?

Yes, we did indulge in pre-marital sex, but we were a lot more careful than the kids today. back then, there was shame attached to having a baby out side the bonds of matrimony. Having an abortion was unheard of, except for the rich kids.

We were also a bit less promiscuous, usually coupling was restricted to folks that had plans for marriage.

Today, all restrants are off. Kids can be a promiscuous as they want and have little bastards or abortions with or without their parents knowledge. My how we have advanced. We are so enlightened.

By Diogenes

November 29, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this

sct (1148),

So it makes more sense to have jbmlaw start up his plant in DeKalb County and pump that money into their economy? I think jbmlaw is onto something.

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this

Speaking of shopping: a xmas gift for that classical music lover in your life? A cd of Rossini’s String Sonatas, written when he was twelve.

Considered minor miracles. He wrote them after studying Mozart and Haydn. Preview of later masterpieces.

By time for the truth

November 29, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this

next time some twonk starts endlessly bleating about black slavery suggest they read this book:

http://www.amazon.com/White-Gold-Extraordinary-Thomas-Million/dp/0374289352/sr=1-1/qid=1164818922/ref=pdbbssr_1/103-9881180-1345409?ie=UTF8&s=books

my copy is on its way.

NAACP members should be ‘forced’ to read this book:

They Were White and They Were Slaves: The Untold History of the Enslavement of Whites in Early America

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0929903056/ref=pdcpb_title/103-9881180-1345409

the reviews on amazon are quite revealing historically/factually

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this

Dear Diogenes @ 11:39, good question, which I may rephrase as, “why hasn’t somebody, like Malcolm Bricklin, already tried this idea?” The multiplier effect will not benefit a closed economy, which was the fatal flaw in my hypothetical; a closed economy is a zero-sum game, and the inherent inefficiencies erode the wealth base. That same limitation was applied intentionally by the Soviet Union, and is ultimately what destroyed international communism. Thus I also provide the “creative destruction” reference, which states (to paraphrase obscenely-simply) “by allowing inefficient producers to fail, all economies grow.” jbmlaw mfg. inc. is such an inefficient producer, which deserves to fail.

By Aquagirl

November 29, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this

Van,

Society in general is more promiscuous. Why would kids be any less so?

And it sounds like teens in the “old days” had premarital sex (although you’re probably right, it was a little less frequent) but they got married when the girl got pregnant. Or she was shipped off somewhere to have the baby. Or got an illegal abortion. People just didn’t talk about such things.

With the average age for marriage in the mid to later twenties, anyone who blathers on about “abstinence until marriage” is just plain unrealistic. And probably on the frigid/uptight side.

By sct

November 29, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this

Van, yes they were more careful in the 50’s, men were told to carry a “spare tire”. Now they are only being taught abstinence, and are SPECIFICLY ordered not to talk about protection.

We are wasting millions of dollars trying to do the impossible, NO premarital sex. That goes for all you single males 20-80 years old. None. How absurd is that?

How many single adult Republicans would agree to that, no sex? Heck even major religious leaders could not uphold that.

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

Dear PF @ 11:56, you have my interest. We all know Rossini’s operas, but I had heard that he wrote some great pieces for small string sessions while he and Schubert were at the conservatory together (Schubert was 7 at the time). He did not use the crescendo then, did he?

By Dusty

November 29, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this

Good heavens, Jim,

this sounds so unAmerican to have local government tell you just whom you should hire. Is this another face of affirmative action? And how can you exactly affirm who is “local”?

Is the man on a DeKalb corner waiting for a stop by job considered a local? Will there be a company with a DeKalb address but still hires any one who can do the job?

Having a campaign or a push for local citizens is one thing but making laws about it is another. This sounds like another version of “you can have freedom the way we want you to have it.”

By Brian Curtis

November 29, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this

Communities can and should dictate the terms under which businesses are permitted to operate there.

I’ve looked and looked, but I just don’t see anything in the Constitution that makes capitalism or the free market “sacred” and untouchable.

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

Jbmlaw, if you have not heard these wonderful pieces, then I envy you and your voyage of discovery. These are all gems, written by a boy genius.

Yes, crescendoes! crescendoes! crscendoes! to move the most emotionless of listener. I love these sonatas. They are the gift of gifts for any classical music lover.

Also great listening: The Mannheim School of Music has composers like Stamitz. (Mozart contemporaries who mozart loved to heckle). Very informative.

By time for the truth

November 29, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this

on the subject of abstinence

if our very own Crackpipe Debbie plus HiTllary Klinton, Big Nose Streisand, tub of lesbian lard O’Donnell, botox Pelosi, the bigot Whoopi Goldberg, the skank Madonna etc were used as role models for the programme then abstinence would instantly become the most popular movement ever in the USA. These wimmin would also make superb lesbian aversion therapy ‘icons’.

It’s simply a matter of choosing the right feminazi icons from the left.

Similarly Bwarney Fwank, the alBore, band aid warrior Kerry, the execrable liar Stuart Smalley, the neurotic pervert Woody Allen etc would serve as perfect role models for abstinence for both homosexuals and younger women.

By Dusty

November 29, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this

Brian Curtis,

I looked for your first sentence in the Constitution and couldn’t find it. In fact, I didn’t find capitalism mentioned either.

Where did you find your definition of freedom?

By The O'Duh Factor

November 29, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this

Is the man on a DeKalb corner waiting for a stop by job considered a local?

No. He drove his new Honda Pilot SUV over from Cherokee County, parked it in a low income neighborhood in Dekalb so he could stand on the corner waiting for some cushy cash job building a deck for $30 and a sandwich.

By Curious Observer

November 29, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this

There is nothing wrong with using the powers of local government to encourage contractors to hire local people. At least the local residents receive something in addition to the finished contracted product.

If we leave such matters solely in the hands of the “free market,” we end up with outsourced jobs, a continuation of wage suppression, and an incentive for contractors to hire illegal aliens as a means of keeping their costs as low as possible.

At least DeKalb County’s action makes sense, whereas Sonny’s giveaway to Alabama residents in the case of the LaGrange automobile plant does not.

It’s past time that local governments use their powers to benefit their residents. We need to start controlling the knuckle-draggers who would have us living in an economic jungle and competing with 25-cent-per-hour third-world workers, thus dragging our standard of living down to theirs. I have nothing but contempt for those advocates who want to cite comparative advantage and other economic principles as justification for allowing our standard of living to continue to decline. They remind me of the heartless and oblivious narrator in Jonathan Swift’s A Modest Proposal—unconcerned about the horrifying implications of their positions and all-concerned about profit at the expense of humanity.

By getalife

November 29, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

We should ban idiots like Dusty who wants to take away American freedoms.

By Diogenes

November 29, 2006 12:41 PM | Link to this

There two sides to this debate. How many small businesses does a Wal-Mart absorb when it opens? How many people go from being entrepreneurs to being employees of Wal-Mart? If a county decided that our low prices at Wal-Mart were damaging community pride and community revenues, why should it not subsidize small businesses keep Wal-Mart out? Competition is the incubator of innovation and invention. How inventive can the employees of Wal-Mart be? Would that be good for a county economically? I don’t know; I’m sure studies have been done. Would it be good for the county in terms of building community? Possibly. I know that small businesses need to be encouraged. Has DeKalb found the right balance? I don’t know. I fear that we are about to lose the individual’s contribution to our society, that the contribution is being subsumed by big business. What’s the proper balance? I don’t know. I know that jbmlaw’s auto plant would benefit DeKalb County greatly if all the suppliers were local also. In the name of competition, I suggest that we are truly losing the competitive spirit in business. What’s to chose from Staples, Office Depot, Business Max? Location. Just location.

By Suggestion for You $$$ $$$$

November 29, 2006 12:42 PM | Link to this

Time for the Truth -

White slaves were only enslaved for a specific number of years and were allowed to buy their freedom, without fear of someone putting them back into slavery.

Also whites usually agreed to the terms of their enslavement. It was a way for them to enter this country, if they did not have the financial means.

So, from one black person to you - “you can keep the book” buddy - it means absolutely NOTHING.

By Van

November 29, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this

Aquagirl,

We are not talking about adults, but high schoolers.

Once they leave Mom and Dad and get out on their own, they take on theor own responsibilities. Until then, Mom and Dad have to shoulder their end of the deal.

By time for the truth

November 29, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this

Just heard on the telly that HiTllary may be in some trouble with its planned 08 primary campaign given all the nauseating fawning over the neophyte lightweight Osama Obama. Frist has thankfully now chickened out of being utterly humiliated in the GOP primaries. Its going to be hugely amusing watching the demoNcrats publicly eating their own next year.

By Van

November 29, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this

Diogenes,

I look at my local WalMart and I see 10-20 smaller businesses clustered around the big box. I see them using the WalMart as a draw for business.

Same thing with other big boxes.

On top of that, with the dirth of strip malls, plastered on every empty cornor, I do not think people are going and staying out of business. Personally, I find the small strip commercial shops more of an eye sore than WalMart - I mean how many cleaners and nail salons do we need?

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this

Dear Brian @ 12:27, and Curious @ 12:39 you both raise moral arguments that intrigue. Do you believe Smoot-Hawley was a good idea or a bad idea? (Google if necessary, and take your time to respond.) You seemingly affirm that a prospective application of Smoot Hawley, and similar policies, would be good; you surely know most economists would not agree.

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this

Dear PF @ various times, do you have a CD title or company for the sonatas? DG?

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

Dear Diogenes @ 12:41, I just discovered I can build my automobiles in Curious-Observer-land for only $5,000 each, mostly because I pay the workers there only 25 cents/hour. Should Dekalb County Buy my $95,000 Dekalb division vehicles, or my $5,000 COland division vehicles? (The real question I ask is, “Is this a matter of principle, or do the numbers matter?”)

By @@

November 29, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

I’m not inclined to post here more than once, sometimes twice. Today will be a twofer.

Off topic and onto TFTT’s comment.

I read an interesting article on Madonna’s recent transformation to “motherhood status”. She’s going to restrict her children’s viewing of her videos, but what has she left in her wake?

Your daughters and mine. She can afford her prior mistakes in judgment, but at a high price to today’s young and impressionable females.

By time for the truth

November 29, 2006 01:20 PM | Link to this

to the black person.

the wider point, which predicktably you deliberately missed, is that slavery was/is hardly just a black on white thang … and its nauseating beyond belief to hear bleating liberals and blacks attempt to portray it as that.

the reason for my raising this is because of Toni Blurrr’s pathetic, repugant, smug anouncement of “regret” for slavery in Britain a few days ago. At least Blurr didn’t formally apologise, thereby maybe opening the door for attempts at snouts in the trough payments for events of 200 plus years ago. Certainly most Brits, judging by the nations’ collective reaction realise there is nothing to apologise for and with the legacy of Wilberforce and others never will be.

Once the Romans apologise for enslaving Ancient Britons, Galls and others, the Vikings and other norsemen apologise for enlaving whites and selling them in the Copenhagen slave market for several hundred years around the first millenium of the common era, both the Egyptians and Babylonians apologise for enslaving the Israelites, the catholics apologise for being one of the biggest slave owners in the world at one point several hundred years ago, the arabs apologise for enslaving blacks from the horn of AfriKa 3000 years ago - the archetypal “black gold” - and black and arab afriKa stops the current bestial enslavement of other blacks AND APOLOGISE FOR ENSLAVING TENS OF MILLIONS OF BLACKS OVER THE CENTURIES then maybe we can all move on from the wholly one sided modern race baiting of slavery as its perpetrated by many in the USA.

Your assertions aint true for “all white slaves” bubba. Actually read the history before you make such pathetic comments glossing over/minimising such vile history. At least you used the term “white slaves” - so does that make their descendents equally eligible for reparations - or is it only blacks that are eligible? After all slavery is slavery - right? What about the South American slaves in Spanish speaking nations? And should we Brits and other whites get huge reparations from the Romans, Vikings, arabs et al?

By Curious Observer

November 29, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this

Jbmlaw,

I find no real problem with the prospective application of Smoot-Hawley. Although it might have some negative implications for international trade, the alternative is unthinkable—a continued decline in real wages and the standard of living in this country. We cannot continue to outsource jobs, refuse to raise the minimum wage, and hire illegal workers without negatively affecting our own workers. Neither can we continue to permit China and other countries to export goods produced by extremely low-wage workers into our country without severe consequences for our own workers and our standard of living.

Oh, I know the economists’ arguments, including your own—they go to the effect that free trade=good, tariffs=bad. But pray tell how much are we permitted to export to China or Thailand anyway? Even the Japanese, who are far from third-world, impose just about every trade restriction possible on our products. We are the suckers in this game—opening our markets to cheap imports while blustering (but never doing anything about)restrictions imposed on our exports.

The alternative to imposing tariffs on many of the imports is totally undesirable—driving down our own workers’ wages, contributing to a steep decline in our own standard of living, and eliminating increasing numbers of domestic jobs.

These are indeed moral as well as economic consequences. And who, jbmlaw, is going to buy the imported goods once their price esceeds the means of two-thirds of American workers? Your “free trade” approach is a prescription for serfdom for most American workers. It is “free” only to the countries that export to us. For American workers, it comes at the cost of their jobs and their wages. Perhaps we can restrict formal education to learning to use one sentence: “Do you want fries with that?”

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

November 29, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this

tftt/tommy comes from the British trash class, so his peeps were most likely indentured servants. Occasionally one of the British uppercrust would slip it to a servant wench and rejuvenate the shallow gene pool, but this died out several hundred years ago when the servant classes, so beaten down and inbred, lost their physical attraction to all but the most depraved gentleman.

Along with tftt/tommy, one can find the remnants of this inbred beaten down people in the original colonies, more common in the south than the north however, since most of the people who came over in the northern and middle colonies were religious refugees as oppsed to economic flotsam and jetsam.

Anyone who has spent time in eastern Virginia can pick this trash element out - pasty, stunted folk with weak chins and poor dentition. These are the decendents of the English trash class, here they have not fared all that well either. The patricians in the south imported slaves because of the laziness and doltishness of the indentured servants - that and the African women were much more attractive.

Look at tftt/tommy as an example - if not for the charity of his blind wife’s family, he’d be living under a bridge somewhere in the Carolinas or Florida.

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this

Dear Curious @ 1:37, you are a master of understatement. You say “negative implications for international trade” in the same way one might say “Residents of Hiroshima may notice some changes.” It was the prospective collapse of international trade – due to mutual restrictions legislated throughout the world - that caused the stock market crash in 1929. By unbundling the “benefits” of trade protection, we got ourselves into this prosperous “serfdom” we see today. Your desire for the good old days of the 1930s is fully understandable, and I hope you get the opportunity to live in a world without trade – but I hope I am not in the same world as you when that happens.

By Lily Toad

November 29, 2006 02:04 PM | Link to this

Whether you live in a small town or a large metropolis, please support small independent businesses — your local book store, hardware store, pet store, health food store, restaurant, etc., so people can continue to be small business owners.

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this

Dear Curious @ 1:37, my next question arises from your polemic: “Is a trade deficit a good thing or a bad thing?” I already know your answer, but I invite you to elaborate.

By Redneck Convert

November 29, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this

Well, I’m so low I need a ladder to touch a snake’s belly.

Bill Frist—the bestest doctor in the world—says he won’t run for president. It’s a shame too. He is so good he can tell whether a person is OK just by watching a TV screen. Like he did with that Florida woman.

Now we will have to pick from a bunch of libruls. McCain—a librul. Julianny—a librul. Maybe ol’ Newt will run. Any guy that can serve his wife with divorce papers whilst she’s in the hospital with cancer can make the hard decisions that a president needs to make.

Well, it’s back to my beer run. I could use all the prayers you have that this old redneck will be able to vote for a real conservative in two years or so.

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

November 29, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this

Actually, there are 3 main strains of Englishmen in the southron colonies - the aforementioned indentured servants, the slaveowners and slave rapers of the so-called patrician class, and the hillbillies from Scotland and Ulster. Unlike the industrious and parsimonious Pilgrims and Congregationalists of New England, and the principled Quakers of NJ and PA, the southrons were not interested in building a new and better society and community, but were only interested in personal fortune and/or laying about and rape and getting drunk.

For an excellent discussion of English immigration to America, I recommend David Fischer’s Albion’s Seed.

By Buy Danish

November 29, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this

I suggest that what we’ve bought with our cheaper prices at Wal-Mart, Target, Home Depot, et al. is a loss of the sense of belonging to a community.

This today^^. Yesterday at ML’s Diogenes claimed that being a NAZI is just part of man’s natural yearning to belong to an authoritarian group and concluded “There were exceptions, of course, as there always are, but for the majority, belonging trumps individuality”.

I can’t help but notice that Diogenes (who thinks I’m Satan) seems to be preternaturally preoccupied with a need to belong.

Personally, I don’t rely on the local hardware store to provide me with a sense of well-being. While small and local has its charms, it is not an essential ingredient to a happy life.

If small and local are priority, there are plenty of small towns where WalMart will never intrude (not that WalMart makes lonely aliens of us all anyway).

I find it somewhat ironic that Diogenes searches for self fullfillment in local stores, but shuns the concept of Christian churches - something that for many people provides just the neighborliness that Diogenes yearns for.

Could her stubborn preoccupation with Darwinism could be contributing to the very sense of isolation that she so regrets? How satisfying is it to have a bunch of people pushing the idea that Lucy was your ancestor? Does that warm the heart and soul?

Indeed, Diogenes could be a metaphor for the disenchantment that plagues so many miserable Libs. Perhaps they might be happier if they stopped blaming WalMart and looked to the charming steeples that dot our landscape as a place to find a sense of community.

Historically speaking, it worked for generations of Americans. The misery index has only increased (world wide) since Secular Humanism became chic, and instead of fighting evil, too many Americans are obsessed with fighting symbols of capitalism and every other cultural symbol that we have until fairly recently succesfully relied on as a nation.

As our common culture is attacked, we are becoming less and less unified as Americans - which means that people who think like Diogenes may be unwittingly contributing to the very isolation they so regret.

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this

Dear Curious, as you noted at 1:37, free trade produces some “suckers,” but I think you do not know who the sucker is. When we trade with Eastern Elbownia, we give them dollar bills and they give us a fine quality toaster oven. We use the toaster oven to cook Pop Tarts. How do they use the dollar bills?

They can use dollars to: (1) Buy American goods. (2) Invest in land, plants, or other infrastructure in the US (3) Buy US securities (4) Grind the dollars into a breakfast cereal

(I know you will argue that they can trade their dollars for goods with other countries, but someone out there is still holding the dollars and has to do one of the four above, ultimately.)

If our trade partners grind the dollars into a breakfast cereal, they reduce the dollars in circulation and thus diminish our inflation. If our trade partners invest in land, etc., in the US, they hire domestic workers, increase payrolls, pay American taxes, and otherwise contribute to our economy. If our trade partners buy US securities, they increase the lendable funds available for American industry, thus decreasing interest rates and expanding our economy.

But, if they buy American goods, they create a floor under American prices and thus cause a general price inflation. To the extent we can trick the “ferigners” into giving us goods and accepting pieces of paper in exchange, who is the sucker?

By JK

November 29, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this

Interesting. I thought the stock market crash of ‘29 was largely releated to defecit spending and investing by Americans who over-indulged in excess consumerism, lived beyond their means, and borrowed against their homes to invest in an unstable market. Kind of like now. International trade issues were a factor, so I’ve read, but mostly for farmers who lost on export prices and couldn’t pay their mortgages. Certainly the trade issues of which jbmlaw shrieks in terror (end of the world!) were not the primary factors. It seems our big-money, borrow-and-spend government and industry leaders have not learned the lessons from ‘29 that they should have. The good news is that there’s always some Democrat ready to come along, clean up the mess, and get people working and eating again.

By CJ

November 29, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw,

As you pointed out, since Dekalb County isn’t an island unto itself (i.e. a closed economy), your comparative advantage argument didn’t hold.

With regard to creative construction, your suggestion, I think, is that by forcing County vendors to hire Dekalb residents, the County is preventing such vendors from being “innovative” – defined in this circumstance as personnel management techniques that lead to hiring the cheapest and/or the best workers for the job. This inability to innovate, you seem to imply, would hinder economic growth in Dekalb. This theory is sound.

However, Diogenes brought up the “multiplier effect”. You predictably dismissed the “multiplier effect” which is the economic idea supporting my assessment of the new ordinance’s benefits. These benefits (arising out of the multiplier effect) would exceed the ordinances costs (arising out of creative destruction) because it would increase consumer spending in Dekalb. Your dismissal of the “multiplier effect” in your response to Diogenes is wrong for the same reason that your honorable dismissal of your “comparative advantage” argument is right – Dekalb County is not a closed economy.

Also, Curious Observer articulately demonstrated that your application of economics completely ignores morality factors involved in economic decisions. For example, choosing to eat lunch at restaurant owned by a neighbor over going to Wendy’s for a cheaper or better tasting meal isn’t factored into your amoral approach to economics. Nor does your application of economics consider either the morality or the economic effects of inequalities in distributions of income.

Humans do not operate as uncaring economic machines. Your selective applications of economic theories look at how amoral humans should behave, but does not recognize how moral humans do behave. That’s ideology, not economics.

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this

The Dekalb bidding ordinance is a anti-illegal immigration ordinance.

By time for the truth

November 29, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this

rednekkks NAMBLA —- YOU finally GOT BAIL!!!

WAY TO GO BUBBATURD!!

I trust your filthy perverted extremely long weekend with your soul mate JM Karr went well and homosexual wedding bells for you two lovebirds are finally in the air in Assachussettts. You might be able to persuade the despicable Bwarney Fwank to illegally help you out with tax payer funded premises to run your new DVD rental business focused on child beauty pageants.

I’m assuming your mammy had a big bone through her nose NAMBLA … is that why you’re so bitter about everyone else in the south? Your gene pool NAMBLA we discovered in your enforced (lack of bail hearing) recent absence comes from genuine nobility. You are indeed nobly descended from a long line of blue blooded apes who always had the pick of the bananas and insects in your tribe of baboons. Although when your grandfather slipped it to a female chimp with leprosy your familial aristocratic ape status suddenly ended with a long stint in exile in a primate research facility smoking 200 cigarettes a day and trying out new formulas of more astringent cosmetics for shallow spoiled yankkkee trollops.

Never mind eh - a brief welcome back - before your case goes to trial!!

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this

If any of you have never heard Mozart’s 38th symphony, then I urge you to get the Chicago Symphony’s Version conducted by Bruno Walter.

This symphony is considered the greatest ever written. The first movement alone is considered the greatest fifteen minutes of music ever. The second movement will rip you apart for years. The third and final is a rock and roll slug fest. (predict’s Beethoven’s fifth symphony, and it completely cancels out the damage that the dog-barking christmas carol album did to world of music in the fifties and sixties)

You are in for life changing listening.

BTW: dont give up on it. It took me five or six “listens” to hear this masterpiece. But once you “hear” it, you’ll get it. (it’s a music-structure thing, that you must break down in your mind by repeated listening)

By time for the truth

November 29, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this

rednekks NAMBLA’s hateful anti-southern bile sure is on fire today …

tell us about the ignorant yankkkee witch burners in New England NAMBLA …

the religious intolerant puritan nutters so many smug yankkkees are descended from …

the racists in NYC and elsewhere in this northern paradise who discriminated against virtually everyone who arrived in the various ‘aliyahs’ from Europe. Presumably the no Irish, no Italian, no Polish, no blacks etc signs were all just a figment of the festering yankkkee imagination.

Weren’t YOU one of the inbred proles that got slashed very badly in that early scene in Gangs Of New York?

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

November 29, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this

Over a year ago the Pope was living in Buckhead. Repairs on city streets and sewers were occuring on his street. He noted that the forepersons were all Anglo, while the workers themselves were all Hispanics.

One can imagine the economic boom that this causes to Atlanta and Georgia. Jose gets his dinero, spends a little bit on rent, a little bit on beer, a little bit on tacos, and a little bit at Western Union wiring the rest of the cash back to his people in Mexico, or Honduras, or Nicaraugua. When Jose gets hurt, the good people of Fulton County pick up his visit to Grady. When he gets drunk and gets in an accident with no insurance, your insurance company picks up the tab - no problemo! And the people of Georgia pay for his prosecution and incarceration.

So it’s all great for the economy, James.

You kkkons have such keen minds!

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 02:55 PM | Link to this

Dear RC @ 2:15, you omitted the candidate of choice for free-traders – Mitt. What say ye?

Dear PRAAQ1 @ 2:19, may I also recommend Tom Sowell’s “Black Rednecks and White Liberals,” wherein Dr. Sowell analyzed the pervasive inner-city mentality that created a second-class citizenry.

By Buy Danish

November 29, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this

Jim Wooten,

I think the concept that hiring locals will significantly increase local spending and revenue is a silly proposition to begin with.

How many people work in Atlanta but do not live there? Don’t they spend most of their money in the bedroom communities the commute from?

What is DeKalb going to gain? A few extra submarine sandwich sales? For this the entire county should pick up the tab, and be rewarded by feeling so darn good about how so darn neighborly they are?

Speaking for myself, I prefer to choose my own paths for giving and receiving and don’t need the County Social Engineers to do it for me at my expense.

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this

Dear JK @ 2:24, many who have never investigated hold those same prejudices. The 1929 crash was exclusively caused by the collapse of international trade. The 1930s depression was magnified and prolonged by currency deflation by the Federal Reserve. Nothing else was a factor at all, not “margin trading,” not even Roosevelt’s “accursed socialistic spending.” For the record, there was essentially no national debt at all in January 1929.

Dear CJ @ 2:27, you misread the hypothetical. jbmlaw mfg. co. can only exist with an agreement with Dekalb County, ensuring that the County pays all costs of manufacture plus $1 profit. Such an agreement without any relationship to real world costs and without taking advantage of manufacturing economies (e.g., cheaper steel, cheaper tires) ensures the product will have only one purchaser – Dekalb County.

The core flaw in your “multiplier” theory is that it exists only in a world devoid of “demand.” If there is no demand for a product – and the hypothetical we constructed ensured a total absence of price competitiveness – there is nothing to multiply. Anyone who does not dismiss the multiplier under that circumstance does not know the difference between static and dynamic analysis.

You seemingly believe “comparative advantage” is disproven or dismissed by someone somewhere; that is untrue. That is one of the few principles that even leftist economists (there are two or three of them) accept, after seeing the collapse of the Soviet. (Indeed, that is why they argue the Soviet failed – not because of Reagan’s bluster, but because of the uneconomic structure…)

I agree that good economics is unburdened with any subjective ethics. Good Christian men wish to ameliorate the harsh occasional effects of the free market and the price mechanism, and the extent of such subsidy is always appropriate for discussion. That does not invalidate the economic principles; indeed, nobody can intelligently discuss the amelioration unless they clearly understand the economics.

Finally you confuse your argument on how people should behave (which you always couple with legal requirements to compel all people to conform to your belief system) with my argument on how they do behave. Economics, applied correctly, only forecasts effects of action. Any interference with the market will always diminish efficiency. To the extent you will accept inefficiency – and that is certainly a fair topic for debate among men of good will – you may choose to interfere, but you should do so only based on all information. For me, I find that notion that you would make my choices for me, reprehensible.

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

November 29, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this

Excellent half a book by Mr. Sowell. He uses a lot of Fischer’s book.

He does a great job showing that what you call the inner-city mentality is an urbanization of white redneck culture, including a hatred and suspicition of education, religious fundamentalism, dependence on government, rape and sexual promiscuity, substance abuse, violence, bastardy, etc.

By CJ

November 29, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish @2:57 “Don’t [people] spend most of their money in the bedroom communities the commute from?”

Yes. That’s the genius of this ordinance.

Re-read Jim’s description of the ordinance BD. It gives preference to contractors bidding for government work who hire a fixed percentage of local workers.

By Rosharon

November 29, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this

OK, TTFT, slavery is bad and has been practiced all over the world by all races. But, in the USA, slavery was a BLACK institution where blacks were not considered citizens, even if “free persons of color.” What is unique to US slavery is that it was a racial institution. If you are interested, read “Slavery in America.” Buy from a local independent book store. This outlines how in early colonial America white people were slaves as well as blacks but soon the black slaves were slaves for life, but the whites’ servitude was temporary.

By Van

November 29, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this

Political Foreskin,

That might be, but my all time favorite is Beethovens 7th.

Mozart is a close 2nd. However I can not deny a admoration of bach’s Brandenburg Concertos. When you consider these were the state of the music art at that time you really have to admire the baroque period.

By CJ

November 29, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw @1:03 “Do you believe Smoot-Hawley was a good idea…”

jbmlaw @2:02 “…it was the prospective collapse of international trade – due to mutual restrictions legislated throughout the world - that caused the stock market crash in 1929.”

jbm,

The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act (and similar worldwide restrictions) were imposed in response to the stock market crash.

Let me restate that: The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act (and similar worldwide restrictions) were imposed AFTER the stock market crashed.

You continue to amaze me with the misinformation you’ll dispense to support your ideology.

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this

Dear PF @ 2:38, Walter must have been reissued. Didn’t he die 40 years ago? While I admire all of Mozart’s adult compositions – do you really prefer 38 to Jupiter? – I would nominate the first movement of Schubert’s 8th for best 15 minutes (“This is, the symphony, that Schubert wrote but never fin-ished.”)

By time for the truth

November 29, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this

HA HA HA HA HA …. just like clockwork

ALL the anti-southern bile that the oafish extra chromosomed rednekkks NAMBLA has stored up for a week or two is now YET AGAIN being robotically puked up onto the blog. I suppose this (periodically) helps this slimy yankkkee wanker fleetingly ameliorate -if not actually temper - its festering guilt and shame at living in a place it viscerally hates and has abject contempt for.

By Political Foreskin

November 29, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this

The entire dekalb ordinance is anti-illegal immigration. Period.

It’s not for any other reason, than to deter hiring of illegals.

By Buy Danish

November 29, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this

CJ,

Duh. I read what Jim said.

My point is that if DeKalb hires more people who live there already, all they are gaining is what those residents spend on lunch.

By JK

November 29, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw, thank you for your answer, although I take offense to “prejudices” being used to describe an admitted level of limted knowledge. Unlike those of you who get off pretending your intellect is miles above the rest of us, I’ll admit I dont know everything, and always welcome enlightenment from credible sources. May I ask where you studied economics, and how much of it you studied? (Though it’s not my field, I’m closely related to a prominent economist and author, so I’d love to get her take on your sources.) Are you indeed educated in early 20th century economic history, or do you just love to hear yourself bloviate? Surely if you are educated and qualified, you can back up your absolute assertions like “Nothing else was a factor.” (Hard for lil’ ol’ me to imagine anything of global proportion that had only one factor…) Not that we don’t enjoy your daily assertions of which you have total knowledge and no apparent lack of information, but please enlighten us as to the font of your unique brilliance, or.. dare I say it.. omniscience? Thanks so much.

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this

Dear CJ @ 3:27, you argue, in error, that Smoot Hawley was not on the table before the crash. Hoover had requested a tariff cut; the idiot Republicans took the opposite view. The rest of the world saw the dynamic, and passed their own anticipatory retaliative legislation, much before the crash and some, including the US shortly thereafter. The US legislation was the prime motivation for the rest of the world.

By jbmlaw

November 29, 2006 03:59 PM | Link to this

Dear JK @ 3:45, please don’t take offense – we all have prejudices. “Prejudice” is nothing more than a human “bookmark,” something that gets us through the day efficiently. If you are related to a prominent economist, don’t waste her time verifying my sources – verify my ideas instead. Nothing I argue is cutting edge economics. And if you raise ideas with an economist, you will always be rewarded with a rich and entertaining discussion.

The source: anything written by Milton Friedman. My undergraduate degree in economics was purely Keynesian, just before validation of Friedman’s forecast of failure of the Phillips Curve. Thus, all I know I learned in the newspapers.

By time for the truth

November 29, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this

Rosharon

the same is TRUE for ALL kinds of slavery of ALL races. Slaves anywhere were usually NOT considered to be citizens. Whites enslaved by arabs/mohammedans weren’t treated any better than blacks. Blacks in AfriKa absolutely enabled the Atlantic slave trade and did so for countless centuries - not just in cotton picking days of the south. Yet many blacks solely and bitterly solely blame whites for this, with little blame or bile aimed at arab master slavers and black AfriKans who actually at the very least equally enabled this bestial trade.

Mohammedans/arabs consider blacks to be hopelessly inferior - just read some of the older texts from even just a 150 years ago. This was at least as racist anything the odious KKK ever perpetrated.

Its implicit in most slavery that racism is factor, even within the same broad racial/ethnic groups who enslave each other still today - and that is shamefully entirely occuring in the Third World!!

By Buy Danish

November 29, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this

jmblaw,

I wonder if one of these women are the inspirational economist and author that JK is related to -

Feminist Economics Today by Marianne A. Ferber and Julie A. Nelson

By JK

November 29, 2006 04:15 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw, okay, let me get my list together. These are the things for which I’ll seek verification: a) How many factors contributed to the crash of ‘29? (And rank the relative impact of each) b) What effect did Friedmans’ forecast of the failure of the Phillips curve have on the widespread acceptance of Keynseian theory? c) What did Friedman have to say about the crash of ‘29 and ensuing Depression, and was it accurate in a comprehensive sense or specific only to certain factors? d) When exactly was the Smoot Hawley thing enacted, and what precisely was its catalyst?

Did I miss any?

By JK

November 29, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish, No. But thanks for your keen interest in my personal identity, and for adding the word “inspirational.” By tomorrow I’m sure you’ll have added many more imaginary details of what I supposedly said. creeeepy shivers

By CJ

November 29, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this

jbm @3:38 — Again with the misinformation?

You know that I didn’t say or imply anything about when Smith-Hawley was “on the table”. Now to CYA, you come up with this “anticipatory retaliative legislation” lie. In other words, you’re now saying that the fact that Smoot-Hawley was “on the table” caused the stock market crash? You’re desperate.

Buy Danish @3:41 — You’re arguing with yourself.

By Buy Danish

November 29, 2006 04:39 PM | Link to this

JK,

Lighten up girlfriend. I’m just having some fun. Are you denying that you are a “feminist”?

Sheesh.

CJ,

By responding to your (snotty) comment, and clarifying what I meant, I’m “arguing with myself”? Very slippery and very revealing.

How about showing us how exactly what new revenue streams DeKalb County will accrue because they hire people who already live there?

So far I’ve contributed Submarine sandwiches. I’ll add candy, gum, soda, a copy of the AJC and maybe a few beers. What else?

Okey dokey?

I may not make it back on by closing but I look forward to reading your response.

By CJ

November 29, 2006 04:44 PM | Link to this

Jbmlaw @3:17

You wrote in your earlier post, “The multiplier effect will not benefit a closed economy, which was the fatal flaw in my [comparative analysis] hypothetical…thus I also provide the creative destruction reference”

YOU (not “someone somewhere”) dismissed your own comparative analysis argument based upon the fact that Dekalb County is not a closed economy. As you correctly indicated, Dekalb was a closed economy in your “fatally flawed” hypothetical (one supplier, one customer).

With regard to your argument that the multiplier effect only works in a world devoid of demand, in addition to the fact that that’s total nonsense, you contradict yourself. You effectively, but inappropriately, used the multiplier effect to justify our trade deficit in your 2:23 post. In fact, this effect works where full employment doesn’t exist and/or the Marginal Propensity to Consume is relatively high for the affected workers. The multiplier effect is the reason that minimum wages have had the opposite result in reality than your ideology would have us believe.

Your assertion that any interference with the market will always diminish inefficiency makes my point. This assertion is based upon cherry-picked theories, it dismisses contradictory empirical data, it ignores the realities of human behavior, and it ignores the realities associated with inequalities in distributions of income. In other words, it’s ideology.

The most ironic part of your post is where you complain, yet again, that I would make choices for you, through the government I choose. Your implication, yet again, is that you don’t do make choices for me, through the government you choose. You do. Generally speaking, you emphasize guns — I emphasize butter. The difference is that you don’t limit your impositions to me; you spend my children’s and grandchildren’s money as well.

By CJ

November 29, 2006 05:00 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

At 2:57 you wrote: “Don’t [people] spend most of their money in the bedroom communities the commute from?”

Now you’re asking me, “How about showing us how exactly what new revenue streams DeKalb County will accrue because they hire people who already live there?”

I agreed with you at 2:57, and now you expect me to support your own point. I find that to be very strange.

Since you like to argue with yourself, I’ll throw a question back at you. Exactly how much additional taxes will this new ordinance require for Dekalb taxpayers?

What about on a per capita basis? If you want to break the benefits down submarine sandwich by submarine sandwich, then you’ll need a amount to compare them to.

By JK

November 29, 2006 05:02 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish, Are you denying that you are a “feminist”? Yes, I deny it; thanks for asking. Try to think outside the label for a bit, huh? Sticking a name on someone and nodding smugly is not the same as knowing a person or understanding their choices or motivations.

By advisor

November 29, 2006 05:30 PM | Link to this

Like minority set aside programs, restricting Dekalb contracts to Decalk business’s is just another excust to steer the contracts to favored contractors. We should not give the political whores an excuse to steer public dollars to their pals, rather we should be hunting down pols who do that, arresting, inditing, trying, and executing them. That is just too godd danmnn complex, just put a bullet thru their heads and save us the trouble of the arrest, trial, and execution. You know, like the cops in Dekalb, Fulton, and Atlanta deal with black folks all the time. I would like to do a seminar on home defense for elderly black ladies, and I would start with an AK-47 anchored to the floor and pointed at the front door. When the pigs come a knocking at 3 am, granny should start shooting, and not stop until the clip is empty.

By Buy Danish is a transvestite slut

November 29, 2006 05:31 PM | Link to this

Troll on you danish slut.

By CJ

November 29, 2006 06:03 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish and jbmlaw nicely demonstrated today the disingenuousness of the arguments coming from many on the right.

At 2:57 Buy Danish, desperate to support Wooten’s position, was clearly under the impression that the Dekalb ordinance required the County to give preferences to Dekalb-based vendors. She correctly assumed that such vendors would be likely to hire many workers from outside Dekalb county when she wrote “Don’t [people] spend most of their money in the bedroom communities the commute from?” After being informed that it wasn’t the vending companies that have to be located in Dekalb, but their workers, she quickly back-pedalled and began arguing against the point she made just a few minute earlier.

jbmlaw argues today that the Smoot-Hawley Tarrif Act was the sole cause of the 1929 stock market crash. When it’s pointed out to him that this Act wasn’t in effect at the time of the crash, he quickly back-pedals with his “it was on the table” comment.

Why would so-called conservatives contradict themselves from day-to-day or moment-to-moment even? In a word, taxes.

Big government? I thought I was for small government, but okay, as long as you don’t raise taxes to pay for it. War in Iraq? That war smells like nation building, but go ahead, just don’t raise my taxes to pay for it. Make taxpayers pick up the tab for polluters? I’m fine with it as long as you can pass the costs to the next generation. Deficits? Don’t matter if it means lower taxes for me. Let the kids pay for it after I’m gone.

I know. I know. Pathetic.

By Buy Danish

November 30, 2006 08:26 AM | Link to this

JK,

If you are not a feminist, then you are the first leftist that broke the mold. I’m delighted to hear that you oppose gender preferences! My apologies for labeling you.

CJ,

WTF are you talking about here?:

Buy Danish and jbmlaw nicely demonstrated today the disingenuousness of the arguments coming from many on the right. At 2:57 Buy Danish, desperate to support Wooten’s position, was clearly under the impression that the Dekalb ordinance required the County to give preferences to Dekalb-based vendors. She correctly assumed that such vendors would be likely to hire many workers from outside Dekalb county when she wrote “Don’t [people] spend most of their money in the bedroom communities the commute from?” After being informed that it wasn’t the vending companies that have to be located in Dekalb, but their workers, she quickly back-pedalled and began arguing against the point she made just a few minute earlier.

You are so stuck in minutia that you are incapable of seeing the big picture.

First of all, I disagree with Wooten as often as I agree with him, so I’m not “desperate to support” his postion.

Right off the top of my head, I disagreed with his position on the lottery and Hope Scholarships and I disagreed with his conclusion that the courts never have a role in school issues.

I NEVER said anything about VENDORS getting preferences. It is contractors who will benefit. Period.

I asked you a very simple question which you were unable to answer, and there are no numbers required to answer this:

How about showing us how exactly what new revenue streams DeKalb County will accrue because they hire people who already live there?

We are talking about contractors, not people who spend lavishly at the mall on Ralph Lauren. The only additional revenue streams that I’ve been able to identify is what they will spend on lunch (assuming that the image of the guy with a lunchbox and a thermos is outdated).

How will this benefit DeKalb County? These contractors, just because they live there, can now charge way over the going price for their services - not because they do a better job but because they have the right address.

I guess it could be a boon to the local housing market as contractors swarm to DeKalb, betting that they may win the lottery with their exorbitant job bids, so I’ll concede one more benefit.

How will DeKalb make money on this?

By jbmlaw

November 30, 2006 08:27 AM | Link to this

Dear JK @ 4:15, you have it, except item (d) is a little jumbled. The question you really want to ask is, “Did every country in the world pass a ‘retaliative’ tariff law when the US Congress pushed Smoot Hawley onto the fast track?” That is actually a simply history question, you should be able to google.

Poor CJ seems to think that nobody makes any plans until after Congress acts. Congressional planning causes other people to plan too.

By jbmlaw

November 30, 2006 08:30 AM | Link to this

Poor CJ, it looks like I have just totally confused you. I’m sorry - my explanations obviously just were not clear. The stuff you injected into my words in your first paragraph at 4:44 tell me this. If it really matters to you, go back and read the principle and the hypothetical again, with my follow up notes.

By JK

November 30, 2006 09:00 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw, per your suggestion, I had an enlightening discussion with an economist last night. According to my qualified source, your Guru Dr. Friedman is indeed a respected scholar and analyst, although “somewhat ideologically driven in his belief that the markets can solve everything.” This explains your “let the market rule” philosophy on everything. (Well, except those random things YOU think require government interference, like my uterus for example.) And yes, you are right in that the implementation of tariffs all around the world were indeed a major contributing factor to the crash of ‘29. But while your assertion is not inherently false, it is grossly incomplete. The libraries of major universities are crammed with books written over the decades explaining reasons for the crash. If there were only one reason, as you so vehemently posit, then there’d only be a need for one book, wouldn’t there? The idea that nothing else contributed is utterly shortsighted, and demeans the worthwhile information you have to share by indicating that your view and comprehension is unusually narrow. My education may not be as extensive as yours, but I possess the common sense to know that a complex economic situation would certainly entail more than one factor. As such, I assert again that the excesses of the 20’s, and in particular borrowing money against properties to invest, when those properties were declining in their ability to generate profit, was part of the cycle of declining productivity, wages, and profits that contributed to the crash. Another factor was that nations did not cut back on their currency in relation to the limited supploy of gold to which it was tied. Again, hundreds of scholars and economists have much to say about something that you claim to answer in one sentence. I have to wonder why YOU don’t have Alan Greenspan’s job….

By Buy Danish

November 30, 2006 09:29 AM | Link to this

This explains your “let the market rule” philosophy on everything. (Well, except those random things YOU think require government interference, like my uterus for example.)

JK,

It didn’t take very long to catch you in a tall tale! You’re not a feminist?

How big was that fish you caught?

By JK

November 30, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this

Part Deux: Back to your guru, Friedman’s “let the market rule” solution to all problems, there is merit to some of it; however, it omits factors that are external to the market (as I’ve heard others try to tell you), and these external factors do indeed affect productivity, employment, and the GNP. Several posters keep bringing up the moral issues of the human factors — these are external to the market, hence the market cannot solve them. How we raise our children is one. (Ask Van if he thinks young people today are more productive.) Our high percentage of incarcerated adults, the pollution created by development, production, and consumption, and OH yes, the choice of a woman to either pay $500 to a clinic, or to have, raise, and feed a baby at taxpayer expense, and whether that child learns to be productive, or sits in prison throughout his life, at taxpayer expense…. ALL factors in our collective economic state, but not subject to the magical solutions of letting the market rule.

I’ve tired now of dicussing economics, so I’ll leave you with this: The issues we debate are complex. Any time I read an opinion that states “It’s simple: just do this!” the poster’s credibility tanks with me. We are all interdependent (unless you live in a cabin in the wilderness), and to presume there is only ONE SIMPLE answer to anything is beyond absurd. Just as many different factors affect your health, (genetics, diet,habits, environment, activity level), the well-being of a society and an economy are related to a myriad of inputs, many of which directly affect the others, which directly affect the big picture. Your simplistic pontificating does a disservice to those who seek to understand, and undermines the credibility of the factual pieces you throw out.

So basically: I’m still willing to learn, YOU should get over yourself, and I’m going to work now. Seeeee ya.

By JK

November 30, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

Buy Danish, stop talking to me. I don’t care what you think. I reject your labels because I don’t know what they mean in your small, twisted little mind. I’m a human being, with lots of thoughts on lots of things. Go stick a label on yourself and leave me out of it. Suggestion: Beeeeyyyyotch.

By Buy Danish

November 30, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this

JK,

Pot to kettle?

It is amazing to me how “liberals” just can’t admit to who or what they are. “Uterus rights” are the number one obsession with feminists, yet you deny being one (after mentioning your uterus yourself, with no prodding from anyone).

Next you indignantly call me a b.i.t.c.h. for catching you at a lie (which I was kind enough to euphemistically refer to as a “tall tale” the first time).

Let’s not beat around the proverbial bush, JK - you are a liar. The chances are that gender preferences have enabled this unattractive trait. Women can get away with anything because they are a protected class which doesn’t do much to engender honesty (pun intended).

I will be sure to be on the alert for you using “labels” to make a point. I bet it won’t take long to catch you in the act and illustrate your b.i.t.c.h.y. hypocrisy.

Keep on talking J.K.!

By Buy Danish

November 30, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this

JK,

and OH yes, the choice of a woman to either pay $500 to a clinic, or to have, raise, and feed a baby at taxpayer expense, and whether that child learns to be productive, or sits in prison throughout his life, at taxpayer expense…

Leftist, Feminist - and always the twain shall meet. With apologies to Rudyard Kipling…

By JK

November 30, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this

Yawn! No one cares what you… ZZZZZ zzzzz ZZZZZ zzzz

By jonny610

December 11, 2006 09:38 PM | Link to this