Is Obama a Socialist?

Not exactly.
Don Boudreaux says it well in this article.

A well regulated militia...

Gun sales are up

I'll take a break from the boring economic posts I keep doing and focus here on what I have been up to. (Which you may find equally as boring).

I have found a church I enjoy! It is called Grace DC and I heard about it through a friend of a friend back in CA. The sermons are engaging, applicable and well thought out. One of the newer aspects to me is the weekly communion. It's also a different communion from ones I have been to in that they have a choice of drinks: grape juice in an individual cup, wine in an individual cup or wine from a communal cup. The service is also at 5PM which does the sleep department well.

We began a new course on Monday, focusing our attention on International Affairs. Our main project will be examining trade relationship with the US from the perspective of a respective country we chose to research. I chose Iran. Rock and roll.

At my Tuesday internship class, there was a beautiful presentation on taxes. It was amazing. They also got cheesecake for my birthday. I felt especially loved.

These days at ALEC, I have been calling our legislative members to see if they plan to attend our Tax Academy in December. It hasn't been too bad, I sometimes get to talk with the legislators. Other than that, I do spreadsheets, research things and write a little.

Okay, I just can't resist.

You can make a lot of money off of cigarette tax differences between states. Of course, it's illegal, but check this out:
Cigarette tax in Maryland is $2 while the tax per pack is $.30 in Virginia. If you load up your trunk with 300 cartons of cigarettes from VA and take them to MD to sell, you can make $5100 just from the tax difference. State to state cigarette smuggling, never would have thought of it.

What is seen...

Stephen Moore is on the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal. He writes some intelligent stuff.
This excerpt is from an article about an interaction he had with the CEO of FedEx on the topic of our present economic situation.
In it is a key example of corporate taxation and what is seen compared to what is not seen:

"He uses an example from FedEx. "Look, our capital budget as we went into this year was about $3 billion. We went out to Boeing in July for our board meeting to see the new triple seven, [the Boeing 777] which we have bought. If we had a lower corporate tax rate with the ability to expense capital expenditures, guess what? We'd buy more triple sevens. We absolutely have to cut the corporate tax. Our current tax rate is about 38%. Even Germany has a 25% rate.""

What is seen: higher tax rates, revenue and expansion of aid programs. For a time.

What is unseen: the fact that more packages aren't getting delivered, jobs aren't being created and wealth spread to the rest of society in a meaningful, effective manner.

Of course, his opinion is one among many, but I thought it illustrated the seen and unseen well.

Here's the whole article if you're interested

Album Cover

This album cover is nuts! Check it out
Animal Collective

Third Party debate tonight between presidential candidates Chuck Baldwin and Ralph Nader. Watch it on CSPAN at 9PM EST. Should be a good time.

I found this today while on International Paper's website. They decry the myth that trees are disappearing and that there are more today than at the start of the Industrial Revolution. Of course, that's not the level America once had, but hey, they had to make room for some people.
Apparently, there is third party governance of some of our nation's forests. Sustainable Forest Iniative is a charitable organization which promotes sustainable forest harvesting practices.
This is an example of effective non-governmental regulation, funded by people's goodwill.

A cool grassroots movement put on by the National Taxpayers Union. Give it a look.

http://notaxhikers.org/

Too Much Fun

I think I can post this. I got this in an email from the director of ALEC and it ties in well with my below post. It's sick and has to do with taxes. Enjoy, if you dare read it all.

"Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers, he
said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group stil l wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
But what about the other six men who are the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly
the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so: The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free.. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'

'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!

'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'

'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important.

They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier."

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics, University of Georgia

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

Redistributing the Goods

Obama's desire to raise the tax on the upper 5% and to not on the lower 95% comes from a weird perspective on wealth. From some inner part of human beings, there is this assumption that the rich should not be so rich. We say, "What can they really do with $40 million a year? Some of that should go to people who are far less fortunate. We need to close the gap between the rich and poor." To borrow from Bastiat's illustration of what is seen and what is unseen fits well with this mistaken philosophy.
What is seen: government getting more funds to expand or better fund programs like welfare, Medicaid and Medicare, public education, etc. Right on!
What is unseen: where would that money have gone instead of to the government? Probably more investments, business ventures, or spent on some good. Jobs are required to supply a greater demand. Wealth is spread apart from government coercion in a much more efficient manner.
How efficient is our welfare program? LBJ tried that Great Society thing in the 60s, lowered poverty a little, but every since, despite the increased funding, the poverty level has remained the same. Education is no different. Twice as much is spent now per pupil compared to the 1970s and performance has barely risen in the last 30 years. If government were a non-profit organization, we'd stop giving to it because of its poor stewardship.
I am not saying the rich should not be taxed. They should and so should everyone else. But it must be kept within reason. There is a point of taxation, that when passed, revenue ceases. Check out the Laffer Curve. The t variable is movable, but usually below the 50% mark.
(I remember when I first encountered the Laffer Curve in Dr. Victor Claar's book on economics. It was a beautitful moment. Love at first sight).
When taxation is unreasonable, people and businesses leave. California is an example. There has been a migration out of the state the last few years, due in part to the 10.3% personal income tax, a 8.9% corporate tax rate, and a rising minimum wage. There's a gnarly deficit going on in CA now. I do not know where the disconnect between the fact that tax rate increases are directly corrolated to the outward migration of the very people who pay them. If no one is left to pay, you can raise the rate all you want but your revenue will continually decrease. It's been shown to happen and is happening.
Had to get that out there.
Think before voting for more programs which would raise taxes. Think before voting for politicians who under the guise of goodness, may end up doing more harm than good and in the course of it all, infringing upon liberty and property.

Wall Street is crazy these days

Dudes
Sick weekend filled with beautiful Taylor University people invading DC.
More to come.

Weekend Summation and a Thought

The parents came out for the weekend. Good times had by all.
Friday night I went to the Americans for Prosperity dinner where George Will and D'Souza spoke. Will was my favorite. He pandered to my latest hobby of looking for wasteful government departments to get rid of. Two on my list are Depts of Education and Agriculture. Downscale man, that's what efficient government should be.
My parents met me after the dinner and we went to a cool pub in Chinatown.
Saturday we met up with some of my parents' friends and had pancakes at Eastern Market. They were friends of theirs from the Lost Valley Ranch days. It was good getting input from them about LVR because I've been thinking about applying there after graduation.
The rest of the day was showing them where I work, Georgetown, the Native American Indian museum and Old Ebbitt Grill (very good restaurant).
On Sunday, their short visit ended. It was great having them. My family is kind of like a dock in the midst of any type of storm. Definitely a beautiful gift. Don't let me take them for granted!

Now for a thought I had today:
Lately I have been thinking about the intensity of political discussions here, especially about social issues. I realized part of the reason discussions with people in DC are so militant is because most everyone is here investing their lives in a cause or worldview they believe to be true. It's difficult to have a peaceful conversation between the government worker in some department and the libertarian policy worker who is advocating its abolition. Ideas have legs and to admit someone with an opposing view is correct here often would mean a job/friend circle change. It seems you don't come here to seek truth, you come here because you already know what's true.

Week

It's been awhile since my last post. What have I been up to? (If you're interested, read on. If not, you know what to do).

Tuesday was the usual Koch Foundation class all day. Always good stuff there.
Wednesday was time at ALEC making phone calls and compiling data. Then class in the afternoon where we talked about things like, would Jesus talk to Ahmadinejad if he were president of the US.
We also had the "family dinner" and I was able to talk with my table about markets and whether Christians can be libertarians.
Thursday was ALEC all day with more phone calls, lunch with some new friends from the ONE campaign. Conversation topics there ranged from VP picks to stereotyping Christians to US foreign policy, etc. Then back to work talking with state legislators all around the nation, asking them if they had received our mailing and would like to update their email address. My dad also came last night since he was done with his meetings in Baltimore earlier than he expected. So we chilled on the roof and talked about self-interest vs selfishness and all its implications, who is Jesus? and dabbled in the roll of violence. It was great to process things with him, he's a pretty good guy, to put it very, very mildly.
Today I am supposed to be writing a paper, then to a White House briefing-which is only vaguely as cool as it sounds. There will be some official from the White House coming to speak to us on something. No doubt it will be good, it just wont be the President. Then I aim to campaign for McCain because we have to get in at least 30 hrs of volunteering with a campaign before Nov 5. Then I am going to a dinner to hear some speakers like George Will, D'Souza, and David Koch. Then my parents pick me up and we hang out over the weekend.
Of course, all those plans could change.

Shout out to 2nd East Wengatz for first place in Airband! Really wish I could have been there for that.

More Camping

This weekend I went camping for the second time in Maryland. It was way good. Randomly saw my internship coordinator at the Shady Grove stop, caught a baby bass in an old canal, absorbed the smokey smell, ate random food and slept really well that night, which I did not expect. Walking to and through Union station with a pile of blankets and a full bag which has a quote from Thomas Jefferson I got for free from my internship, is a great experience. Coming back from camping is even better because I feel more a part of the dirty parts of the city, smelling like smoke and a little dirtier than I was before. People look at me differently when I'm carrying a bunch of blankets than when I'm dressed for internship. I fit into a different niche. I also feel like it's a sampling of two different types of people who live in the city: the guy who just slept inside and guy who just slept outside.

Here's a trailer to the movie I saw the other night: Do As I Say
It was entertaining as well.

Failure #2

That last post of mine sounds horrendously heartless. I realized that last night when I was watching a documentary on hypocrisy (I'll mention it later). What's the Christian's role in all the evolution of the market?
Protecting people's life, liberty and property is the realm of government, I believe. In a market system there will be people who lose their jobs and those who are left out of it from the get go. Compassion and character are so important in order for good to be done to its greatest potential. Christ also calls us to be generous with our resources in helping the poor and disenfranchised. An integral part of that, I think, is affirming people's dignity as God's special creation. So much of Christian ministry and philanthropy as a whole, necessitates a relationship in order to best help people from where they are at. I envision this whole scene of Christian relationship with the world not as a "We're up here, let us reach down and pull you up" but as reaching across, at the same level, and saying "He will lift you up."

Just my evolving thoughts

Failure

Failure is a part of a free market. It's known as creative destruction. It's also the nasty part which no one wants to see happen, especially when it is your own invest which has been "creatively destroyed."
What would happen if we didn't allow this process to take place? I wouldn't be typing this on Blogspot or even a computer, the quality of everything would be down. Products and services sell when they provide higher quality than previous products or services.
In this way, when everyone has the ability to enter the market with a new idea, the good of the greater society is served. It is this right to enter the market which government must protect. The entrepreneur should also be able to have his property, both physical and intellectual, protected from the encroachment of others. These are the rights government should protect.
Everything gets messed up when we confuse those creative rights with the right to a job. For instance, many people lost their jobs when typewriter sales went down due to personal computer sales. Imagine now if those typewriter special interest groups had gotten government to protect their industy by heavily taxing PC companies. The jobs of thousands have been saved, their children can still go to school, ensuring a better life for potential more thousands, right?
Look at the benefits PCs have brought to the world, especially with the advent and proliferation of the internet. Imagine if the "rights" of typewriter manufacturers had been protected.
(This example didn't come from my own head, I read it somewhere and it stuck in my brain because it's a good one).
Also, I am not saying PCs are the embodiment of everything good on this earth. They've allowed also for the proliferation of evil ideas and bad ideas at a more rapid pace than the typewriter allowed. Still, the overall quality of life around the world has improved because the idea of the typewriter was creatively destroyed.

I have become a bus evangelist lately. They are so convenient. They're cheap, they usually drop you off way closer to where you want to be than the Metro does and you actually get to see where you're going. Granted, they take a little getting used to the city in order to use them effectively. Getting used to DC has been a little like getting used to a campus, after a while my travel becomes more refined and it seems less an expanse of unknowns.

Last night, McCain's faith based initiatives rep came to talk with us since she was unable to make it last week. It was a sweet time listening to her perspective as well. When it comes to this issue, Obama and McCain both agree that the faith based initiative program should be kept alive. However they disagree over whether the equal opportunity employment law should be applied to these faith organizations if they are to receive federal funding. Obama's position is that people of different faiths, other than the one the organization promotes or follows, should be protected under law in order to have opportunity to work. McCain's position allows organizations to choose who to hire or not and still be able to receive federal funds.
Discuss