Free kibbles

ECONOMY:

Because labor unions harm competitiveness, they have almost died out in the competitive private sector. But because government has no competition, they're thriving in the government sector (not the public sector).

"The one sector where unions have managed to hold their ground is in government. Union density among government workers has held steady at between 33 and 36 percent of total public employment. Unions can survive and thrive in the government sector because, by definition, there is no real competition. The costs of unionization can be passed along to taxpayers without losing market share."

Labor unions are bad for workers and management because they put businesses out of business. But this is true only because government granted unions the power of coercion. If unions were voluntary, they'd be thriving in America and they'd be making companies more competitive. If unions were voluntary, they'd be partners in productivity, increasing the wealth and standard of living for all Americans.

HEALTH CARE:

In speech decrying fearmongering by his opponents, Obama claims more will die if we don't pass his health care plan. Do you think think Obama understands irony? Hypocrisy? Or does he just not care? Once again this begs the question: is he stupid or evil (or both)? Virtually every speech he gives and every policy Obama supports begs that question.

I stopped reading Obama's speech about a third of the way into it. It was a crock of manure. It just repeated the same discredited claims he's been making all summer without addressing the primary issue - how government has made prices skyrocket and quality lag. Here's some informative criticism:

"President Obama’s address to Congress and the nation Wednesday evening was yet another illustration of his seemingly endless ability to soar to genuinely impressive rhetorical heights without ever landing back on truthful ground.
...
Sometimes the prevarications were so obvious that even the president’s most ardent supporters – like the news staff of The New York Times - had to concede that he was playing fast and loose with the facts. For instance, the Times quoted Obama’s repeating of his familiar claim that “if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance, nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have."
"That is technically true,” the Times carefully admitted, “but there is a real possibility that existing policies could change as a result of the legislation. The government, for instance, would set new standards, and employers that already offer insurance would have to bring their plans into compliance.” In other words, when, as is inevitable, the cost of providing health insurance is more than the federal fine Obama seeks for not providing it, companies will drop their employee plans, forcing millions of people into the government-run health care system against their will."

But all Obama has to do is sway one senate Republican to support his bill. We still don't know if he did that. By all accounts, the gang of six which includes Olympia Snow hasn't budged.

Obama can climb the mountain and make all the sermons he wants. He can promise mana from heaven. It's bull. We have to live with bill Congress passes, and this essay from Cato destroys Obama's claims about the health care bills.

This story has to be bogus. It claims that because of Obama's speech, a few blue dog Democrats who were afraid of the costs of Obamacare are suddenly sure that it won't raise the debt.

"Especially important for the White House was the reaction of several conservative Democrats, who will be critical to passing a bill that can clear the House and Senate. They cheered the president's pledge to ensure that an overhaul would not add to the government's debt.
"If the details live up to the quality of the speech, then it's a good plan," said Tennessee Rep. Jim Cooper, a conservative Democrat who has been critical of the liberal healthcare bill developed by House leaders."

If the details live up the speech? As if congressman Cooper is unaware of the details in the House bills. Or the Senate bills. The president can promise to fart only gold dust, and it's meaningless. Congress writes the bills. We know what they say. Gold from farts isn't in them.

EDUCATION:

I'm glad to see Cato agrees with me about the president's speech to school kids:

"Even so, there's something grotesquely collectivist about the idea of the president addressing a captive audience of 50 million schoolchildren, hectoring them to turn off the X-Box and hit the books.
After all, the president has no constitutional power over education and no proper role in it. Our Constitution's framers thought schooling was too important to be left to a federal government that would be far removed from local communities, and whose principal responsibility was to deal with large national concerns, like defense, that the states and localities couldn't handle."

I said it better, but this is still good.

GLOBAL WARMING:

France to tax CO2 emissions. In a related story, French people soon to guillotine rulers.

WAR:

Malou Innocent shoots down 5 myths being used to support our flawed mission in Afghanistan.

TAXES:

Obama isn't interested in tax reform. Just the opposite. He's just trying to squeeze more blood from productive people and buying more votes with giveaways.

POLITICS:

Republican congressman calls for hearings investigating Obama's unaccountable czars.

MISC:

Japan has launched an automated space freighter to resupply the space station. Cool. How much you want to bet flying this shuttle costs less than 1 percent of the cost it takes to fly our space shuttle?

Economic calculation and the courts: a theory of hoaxes. I've seen plenty of cases where prosecutors acted as willing accomplices for individuals making obviously false accusations. This should be interesting. Only 8 pages.

Defending corporations. Only 23 pages.

Now Obama's ACORN buddies have expanded into child prostitution.

Using different words, Boortz brings up the question I continually ask: is Obama stupid or evil? These are the only two possible explanations for the two comments Boortz highlights and for pretty much all of Obama's policies. Michael Barone discusses convenient fantasies of Barack Obama, but this begs the same question.

Microsoft opens open source foundation. That's like the Soviet Union creating a freedom foundation. What a joke.

Because of these surveillance cameras, I'm marking Lancaster, Pennsylvania off of my places to visit.