Follow by Email

Search This Blog

Pageviews past week

Saturday, December 31, 2011

Vol 08 No 01 Liberty ViewsLetter 01-01-2012

Vol 08 No 01 Liberty ViewsLetter 01-01-2012
Eighth Year, Issue 308
The announcement of a new Liberty ViewsLetterBlog Post goes to 588 subscribers
We invite your comments and feedback. We invite your submissions; articles you have read. Send us a link. Or you can send us something you have written yourself.

Managing Editor Chuck McGlawn Chuckest@aol.com
Contributing Editors
Walter Clark/Paula Clark
Will Otey
Chuck McGlawn

To subscribe, unsubscribe, comment or to submit, go to > Liberty  ViewsLetter

PreViews
Congratulations, if you are reading this you have successfully responded to and navigated your way to our new Website. The format will be much the same as before. Our major sections will be  LibertyViews Where we will abbreviate Commentaries from very reliable sources with links to the FULL ARTICLE. Starting with the lead article, that we call Your Must Read for the Week. The NewsViews where we will abbreviate news articles from very diverse sources with links to the FULL ARTICLE. We will also continue to include  ChallengeViews, WordViews, ReaderViews,  AnnounceViews and Audio/VideoViews. There is another element, least important but most demanding, that being called PersonalViews. Each element is separated by a joke, a quote or some interesting trivia.

LibertyViews

Your Must Reads For The Week Why the establishment really fears Ron Paul  By Jack Hunter Blogger for "Paulitical Ticker. As Ron Paul has risen in the polls, so has the frequency of attacks against him. “Any stick will do to beat a dog” goes the old saying, and the whacks against Paul range from reasonable to ridiculous. Expect the attacks to continue. Expect them to get more ridiculous. And expect the worst attacks to come from Republicans.Read more at, http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/27/why-the-establishment-really-fears-ron-paul/#ixzz1i6WXP68s
Why Do GOP Bosses Fear Ron Paul? John Nichols on December 21, 2011 -
Ron Paul represents the ideology that Republican insiders most fear: conservatism. Not the corrupt, inside-the-beltway construct that goes by that name, but actual conservatism.
And if he wins the Iowa Republican Caucus vote on January 3—a real, though far from certain, prospect—the party bosses will have to do everything in their power to prevent Paul from reasserting the values of the “old-right” Republicans who once stood, steadily and without apology, in opposition to wars of whim and assaults on individual liberty.
Make no mistake, the party bosses are horrified at the notion that a genuine conservative might grab the Iowa headlines from the false prophets. Already, they are claiming a Paul win won’t mean anything. Please read the FULL ARTICLE at http://www.thenation.com/blog/165290/why-do-gop-bosses-fear-ron-paul  
I would like to invite, encourage, entice, influence, pressure, persuade, cajole, coax, plead, request can I demand? Or would a threat of bodily harm move you to read both FULL ARTICLES links above. This is NECESSARY INFORNATION, making it a MUST READ. GET THE FACTS CONTAINED IMPRINTED ON YOUR MIND. THEN YOU WILL UNDERSTAND AND BE READY TO PRESENT COGENT INFORMATION ABOUT WHY THEY MUST UNDERMINE RON PAUL. READ THE FULL ARTICLE and then FORWARD IT TO EVERYONE ON YOUR E-MAILLIST.
From FreedomFrank, of the Campaign for Liberty, The time is now. Your knowledge bank is filled with reason for Republicans (and Democrats alike) to support Ron Paul for President in 2012. You are prepared to help Ron Paul on many fronts. You can make phone calls. Your friends and relatives are just waiting for studied reasons to support Ron Paul. Equip yourself with answers to, “I like Ron Paul, but he can’t win.” Ask your friends and relatives, why has the mantra, “Anybody but Obama” morphed overnight into “Anybody but Paul?” Why are they afraid of Paul if he can’t win?
 Large groups of sign waves convey an important message to a much, much large group of passers by. You be a part of those groups make them so large that they require the Police to help contain them. A police presents just draws more attention.
Nothing is more effective than precinct Neighborhood Walking. Grab a hand full of literature and go “walking and knocking” with a brief message like, “I thought you may want to know what concerned candidates like Ron Paul think about… (whatever the pamphlet covers. It is good to be topical here.) Paulistas do not be afraid of this activity, even the worst case, where they say, “I am not interested in that political crap.” You have made progress. You have shown that concerned neighbors support Ron Paul. Those very people might say to their friends, “You know that Ron Paul guy has some good ideas.”
And after a sign waving event, or some “walking and knocking” come home get yourself a cup of your favorite beverage and turn on your computer get your keyboard in your lap prop up your feet and blog away. The attacks on Ron Paul the last two weeks are deafening and we can flood their “Comment” section with the truth about Ron Paul. Make your message short mention Ron Paul as often as you well can.
In effect you will have tapped into their reader base with a short reasoned support for Ron Paul. We understand Liberty, and must not hold back. I recommend you counter all Ron Paul attacks at: http://octeapartyblog.com/.
PersonalViews By Chuck McGlawn
We have observed the “I hate President Obama” go from a trickle to Niagara Falls. Then grow into almost a Cottage Industry. Frankly, we wondered why. Republicans out of power were able to prevent him from really accomplishing anything. He got the Health bill passed, But I do not think it will ever be implemented. It will be stopped by the Court of repealed by a R and D coalition.
Bush on the other hand, started two wars, passed Patriot Act one and two. Homeland Security, TSA, Military Commissions Act, No Child Left Behind, doubled the budget of the Dept. of Education, Corporate Bailouts etc, etc, etc.
But Obama’s inability to actually do anything didn’t stop the haters. As a publisher of a Libertarian/Conservative Views Letter I would get the e-mails from everyone. We would receive as many as 40 per day, with 5 to 10 copies of the very same message. Like ripples in a lake the repeats were many at first then dwindle down to fewer and fewer then none. But they never die. Four months later here it would come again, sometimes coupled with another newer message.
Even the passage of the NDAA, the most Liberty destroying legislation did not increase the “I hate President Obama” e-mails. That could be because it was almost a Rep. program.
That was way too much of an introduction to my point. That being the same tactic is being used on Ron Paul. It is as if the dinner bell rang and everyone came to the “Anybody but Ron Paul” table. Republicans, Conservatives, Democrats (some of them were already at the table, but many moved from the “Anyone but a Republican” table. And they are all banging the knives and forks in a “Get Ron Paul rant.”
Some of the surprise attendees at the table is the entire crew ay KRLA “Intelligent Conservative Radio” 870 on your LA/OC radio dial. They include, (I have not listened to them all) Glenn Beck, 6 to 9am, Dennis Prager 9 to noon, Michael Medved, Noon to 3 pm Huge Hewitt, 3 to 6 pm and Dennis Miller 9 to midnight.
Now it is not a choirs, with everybody singing the same song. Each of them have their own parts to play. Beck Loves Paul on everything but his foreign policy. But he is not quite sure Paul would be an improvement over Obama. Prager takes a religious stance, you know No drug legalization and no legalized prostitution. Medved covers almost everything: He can’t win, he shouldn’t win, Paul is anti Israel, and an isolationist, and the last guy that should be trusted with Head of State status. I do not catch Hewitt much, but today he said he would vote for Obama over Paul. Hewitt must not on the Hate Obama mailing list. The COOL Dennis Miller lauds Paul on many things, but is just not sure about his foreign policy.
My recommendation to Republicans is to find out more about Ron Paul. If you do you will vote for him in the Primary. For Paulistas, reread C4L Frank’s program and go to it. Conservatives should contact any anti-Paulist and tell them they are wrong, and withhold your support until they change their tune. And Libertarians, do what I am doing: register Republican, join Freedom Frank of C4L support Ron Paul with ever fiber of your being, and vote for him in the primary in June. And if he should get the Republican nomination continue to campaign for him. Join the “I hate Obama” transmission belt and forward all them “Anybody But Obama” e-mails.
*********************************
I was married by a judge. I should have asked for a jury.
In order to buy arsenic you need a legal prescription. A picture of your mother-in-law just isn't enough.
**********************************
ChallengeViews  (last week answer here.)

This Week’s Challenge. A military collector was shopping with a friend when they found the following Medal:
To Captain Hendry
for Bravery, Leadership and Daring.
During WWI
from the Troops of the 8th Battalion.
The friend said. “Do not buy it, it is a fake.” How did the friend know it was a fake?  Justify your answer Send your answer to Chuckest@aol.com . Answer posted next week.
**********************************
There are only two rules for ultimate success in life:
1.Never divulge everything you know.

Entropy isn't what it used to be.
**********************************
ReaderViews This feature my go defunct with the built in “Comment” section.

**********************************
He'a A Blond
I arrived at an automobile dealership to pick up my car, I was told that the keys had been accidentally locked in it. In the service department I found a mechanic working feverishly to unlock the driver's side door. As I watched from the passenger's side, I instinctively tried the door handle and discovered it was open. "Hey," I announced to the technician, "It's open!"
"I know," answered the young man. "I already got that side."
**********************************
Ron Paul and the future of American foreign policy by Justin Raimondo
Antiwar.com "Rabinowitz and McQuaid and the rest of the hate-mongers, who come up with a fresh Enemy every time we knock off the old one, or tire of the  task, know who their real enemy is -- and it isn't the President of Iran, or the Communist Party of China. It's those patriotic Americans  who believe we ought to be putting the interests of Americans first -- and that the empire is an albatross hung around our necks." (12/30/11)
[You will want to read this to better understand why Ron Paul is in the cross hairs of virtually EVERONE.] Read it at http://bit.ly/vx4lSw
**********************************
~ You Know You Are Fat When
~ You could sell shade.     
~ When you cross the street, cars look out for you.
~ When you turn around, people throw you a welcome back party.
~ You can't even jump to a conclusion.
~ You went to the movies and sat next to everyone.
**********************************
Ron Paul is a disaster for Republicans and Democrats, but not for America's freedoms by Dave Duffy Backwoods Home (12/29/11)
Old guard Democrats [as we all expect] are scared stiff of Ron Paul. Strangely Paul is terrifying to the old guard of the Republican Party. With Paul we get an end the War On Drugs, thereby ending the drug cartels, emptying our prisons of marijuana users, and undercutting the corruption of our police, judiciary, and political system that attends the drug war.
Repealing the Patriot Act will help restore our personal liberties. The Patriot Act would have put all our Founding Fathers in prison, just as it can put any one of us in prison for all sorts of vague conspiratorial crimes.
Slashing our military spending and pulling out of Afghanistan will go a long way toward eliminating America’s debt. We are in 120 foreign countries right now, not just Afghanistan. Getting out of Afghanistan is just the tip of the iceberg. Ending our role as the policeman of the world [or bully in the school yard] would bring all that money back home. Read it all at http://bit.ly/rzkwoU
**********************************
Signs Your New Car is a Lemon
~ Disqualified from Soapbox Derby for lack of structural integrity.
~ Car has spent more time on "60 Minutes" than on the road.
~ Oil spills on your driveway prompt a visit from Greenpeace.
~ Changing the pre-set radio stations voids the warranty.
~ Two Words: Pontiac Sunkist
~ Manufactured in Zchkynk, Crzyktjkystan.
~ Motor Trend never mentioned a "Chevrolet Caca."
**********************************
Warning Warning. Distortions Ahead
**********************************
Procrastination is the art of keeping up with yesterday.
I've never had money problems.  Just lack of money problems
Save your money.  it may become valuable again someday.
**********************************
More LibertyViews: Just a headline, a grabber and a link.
The anti-Ron Paul Axis of "Decency" by Will Grigg Pro Libertate
"Newt Gingrich, lapsed adulterer, unrepentant warmonger, and self- appointed 'teacher of civilization,' has excommunicated Ron Paul and  his supporters from the ranks of human decency for rejecting the fundamental tenet of statism (12/29/11) http://bit.ly/u0fRSc
America's businesses get it: Immigration is good by David Bier 12/28/11 OpenMarket.org       The primary victims of harsh immigration laws are business owners who must verify immigration status. This burdensome  heavy-handed government regulations that conservatives rail against in every other area. http://tinyurl.com/cwd3tzd
The case for austerity by Andrew P. Napolitano LewRockwell.com  12/29/11
Government can notbe made to operate as a business,. Business is subject to  the forces of free choice, supply and demand, and competition. Can you  imagine government permitting us to ignore it? http://lewrockwell.com/napolitano/napolitano34.1.html
**********************************
When you cross an elephant and a skin doctor you get a pachydermatologist
There is too much youth, how about a fountain of smart.
*************************************************************
NewsViews

Obama regime sets up new hotline for immigration abductees CNN
"In the latest volley between the federal government and states pushing
anti-illegal-immigration laws, the Obama administration announced Thursday
it was establishing a new hotline for immigration detainees who feel they
'may be U.S. citizens or victims of a crime.' The 24-hour-a-day, 7-days-a-week
hotline is part of a 'broader effort to improve our immigration enforcement process and prioritize resources to focus on threats to public safety...'" (12/29/11) Read the FULL ARTICLE at, http://tinyurl.com/6np2esm
**********************************
One nice thing about egotists: They don't talk about other people.
Bigamy is having one wife too many. Some say monogamy is the same.
Life teaches: that some days you're the pigeon, and some days you're the statue
Age is a very high price to pay for maturity.
**********************************
US to Iran: Don't you dare act like us Guardian [UK] (12/28/11)
"Tensions between the United States and Iran have dangerously  ratcheted up as naval officials with America's Fifth Fleet warned any attempt by Iran to close a strategically vital oil route through the Strait of Hormuz would 'not be tolerated.' The news heightens a sense of growing crisis in the Persian Gulf after two days of threats by senior Iranian figures that they might shut down the important trade route in response to any future international sanctions against the country's oil exports." http://bit.ly/taP2kr
**********************************
Only a lack of imagination saves me from immobilizing myself with imaginary fears.
Why waste your time reliving the past, when,  you can spend it much more productively by worrying about the future?
**********************************
Abortion, immigration changes among new 2012 laws  South Oregon Mail Tribune       "Girls seeking abortions in New Hampshire must first tell their parents or a judge, some employers in Alabama must verify new workers' U.S. residency, and California students will be the first in the country to receive mandatory lessons about the contributions of gays and lesbians under state laws set to take effect at the start of 2012. Many laws reflect the nation's concerns over immigration, the cost of government and the best way to protect and benefit young people, including regulations on sports concussions." (12/28/11)  http://tinyurl.com/d3hpyuf
**********************************
Budgets are a systematic way of living beyond your means.
 Men are from earth. Women are from earth. Deal with it.
It's amazing how fast later comes when you buy now
Americans on the average eat 18 acres of pizza each day.
You should almost hardly ever equivocate.
**********************************
More NewsViews Just a headline, a grabber and a link..
NY: Tennessee tourist abducted after attempting to check gun at 9/11 memorial New York Post "A tourist politely asked if she could check her weapon.
Instead, she was dragged out in cuffs. [proving that it's a totalitarian police state]." (12/29/11)  Read the FULL ARTICLE at,http://nyp.st/uBwSvM
Russia slams US for its human rights record Richmond Times-Dispatch
Foreign Ministry has attacked America's human rights record. (See just above) Far cry
from the ideals that Washington proclaims. (12/28/11) Read http://tinyurl.com/cxyhl4h
Scientists: solar storm "could knock out radio signals"  Daily Mail [UK]
"Solar storm will slam into Earth and produce amazing Northern Lights, or auroras. On the downside, experts expect radio blackouts for a few days" (12/28/11) Read more at,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2079352/Massive-solar-...
*********************************
Would the Standing Committee please sit down?
We do precision guesswork.
To be intoxicated is to feel sophisticated but not be able to say
If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?
**********************************
WordViews by Walt Clark
hazmat \HAZ-mat\ noun: a material (flammable or poisonous) that would be a danger to life or to the environment if released without precautions, as in “the hazmat database gave directions for cleanup.”
Synonyms:
There aren’t any which is why this word entered our language so quickly.
Word Wise:
Hazardous Materials wasn’t even a concept until the environmentalists created a whole industry around protecting us from ourselves. Society as a whole has gotten richer. That means two things: there’s more waste and less land. When land was cheap you merely abandoned it after pollution made it unusable. Those libertarians that come from a Republican heritage don’t like the environmentalist’s use of government to control society the way they see fit. Those libertarians with a liberal heritage point out that environmentalists have greatly influenced the private sector too. It’s not just because it’s against the law; we feel good about taking used oil back to the auto parts store for recycling. There’s a challenge here for all libertarians of both types with respect to hazmat. It is “failure of the commons” in reverse. All libertarians have at one time or another explained why socialism is like a pasture that farmers share. It is in there self-interest to exploit it rather than husband it. But what about hazmat and capitalism? If all the means of production and indeed all land was in private hands, it is in everyone’s self interest to dump their pollution into the air or into the ground water. To propose market processes for moving waste around assumes that everyone has bought into the idea that waste materials are not to be part of the commons. How do we libertarians propose stopping cheaters from being the most profitable? (Send your responses to the editor of this newsletter.)
         Hazmat is an attributive noun. That means it is more often used as an adjective, as in the phrase hazmat team. Attributive nouns such as “leather” in the phrase leather jacket are so common we don’t even notice the ambiguity. Words that are modifiers need to be short since the main point is the noun. If “hazardous materials” would only be used as a noun we could spell it out that way forever. But as a modifier, there’s a natural urge to shorten it, or at least hyphenate the phrase to make sure it is recognized as a modifier. New words are often born as attributive nouns.

This is not the end it is The Beginning     
Begin to share some of this information with others.

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Selected Quotes from The Economic Logic of Illegal Immigration by Professor Gordon H. Hanson.

Quotes Selected by Chuck McGlawn.

It is a 52-page report commissioned by the Council on Foreign Relations. I am not going to try to abbreviate the contents of the Dr. Hanson Report. I am just going to share with you some of the quotations that should have some effect on your thinking about so called Illegal Immigration. We will quote some of Dr. Hanson remarks found in the Foreword, Introduction, Current U.S. Immigration Policy, Illegal Immigration and the U.S. Economy, Benefits and Costs of Immigration, Reforming Immigration Policy and Final Considerations

In the FORWARD, Professor Gordon H. Hanson approaches immigration through the lens of economics.
By focusing on the economic costs and benefits of legal and illegal immigration, Professor Hanson concludes that stemming illegal immigration would likely lead to a net drain on the U.S. economy.

Hanson argues that guest worker programs now being considered by Congress fail to account for the economic incentives that drive illegal immigration, which benefits both the undocumented workers who desire to work and live in the United States and employers who want flexible, low-cost labor.

In the INTRODUCTION Professor Hanson says, “From a purely economic perspective, the optimal immigration policy would admit individuals whose skills are in shortest supply and whose tax contributions, net of the cost of public services they receive, are as large as possible. Admitting immigrants in scarce occupations would yield the greatest increase in U.S. incomes, regardless of the skill level of those immigrants. In the United States, scarce workers would include not only highly educated individuals, such as the software programmers and engineers employed by rapidly expanding technology industries, but also low-skilled workers in construction, food preparation, and cleaning services, for which the supply of U.S. native labor has been falling.”

[T]here is little evidence that legal immigration is economically preferable to illegal immigration. In fact, illegal immigration responds to market forces in ways that legal immigration does not.

Illegal migrants tend to arrive in larger numbers when the U.S. economy is booming [When they are needed.] and move to regions where job growth is strong. Legal immigration, in contrast, is subject to arbitrary selection criteria and bureaucratic delays, which tend to disassociate legal inflows from U.S. labor-market conditions.

Two-thirds of legal permanent immigrants are admitted on the basis of having relatives in the United States. Only by chance will the skills of these individuals match those most in demand by U.S. industries.

[T]emporary legal immigrants come to the country at the invitation of a U.S. employer, the process of obtaining a visa is often arduous and slow. Once here, temporary legal workers cannot easily move between jobs, limiting their benefit to the U.S. economy.

Quotes from ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION AND THE U.S. ECONOMY: “Between 1960 and 2000, the share of working-age native-born U.S. residents with less than twelve years of schooling fell from 50 percent to 12 percent.”

Native-born U.S. workers with low schooling levels are increasingly hard to find. Yet these workers are an important part of the U.S. economy—they build homes, prepare food, clean offices, harvest crops, and take unfilled factory jobs.

Illegal immigration also brings low-skilled workers to the United States when the productivity gains of doing so appear to be highest. During the past twenty years, Mexico has experienced several severe economic contractions, with emigration from the country spiking in the aftermath of each downturn. In terms of the economic benefits, this is exactly when one would want workers to move—when their labor productivity in the United States is highest relative to their labor productivity at home. Long queues for U.S. green cards mean there is little way for legal permanent immigration to respond to such changes in international economic conditions.

Quoting from BENEFITS AND COSTS OF IMMIGRATION:  “Overall, immigration increases the incomes of U.S. residents by allowing the economy to utilize domestic resources more efficiently”

Immigration generates extra income for the U.S. economy, even as it pushes down wages for some workers.

More workers allow U.S. capital, land, and natural resources to be exploited more efficiently. Increasing the supply of labor to perishable fruits and vegetables, for instance, means that each acre of land under cultivation generates more output. Similarly, an expansion in the number of manufacturing workers allows the existing industrial base to produce more goods.

The annual immigration surplus in the United States appears to be small, equal to about 0.2 percent of GDP in 2004.

[L]ower wages for low-skilled labor mean lower prices for labor intensive goods and services, especially those whose prices are set in local markets rather than through competition in global markets. Patricia Cortes finds that in the 1980s and 1990s U.S. cities with larger inflows of low-skilled immigrants experienced larger reductions in prices for housekeeping, gardening, child care, dry cleaning, and other labor-intensive, locally traded services.

Lower prices for goods and services raise the real incomes of U.S. households, with most of these gains going to those in regions with large immigrant populations.

The total impact of immigration on U.S. residents—the sum of the immigration surplus (the pretax income gain) and the net fiscal transfer from immigrants—would be unambiguously positive.

If immigrants are a net fiscal drain, the total impact of immigration on the United States would be positive only if the immigration surplus exceeded the fiscal transfer made to immigrants. For low-skilled immigration, whether legal or illegal, this does not appear to be the case.

In REFORMING IMMIGRATION POLICY: [Remember this report was published in April 2007]  Liberty Views suggest that you read this segment yourself. We  make this recommendation because, “There are no easy answers to U.S. immigration problems.”

“One issue on which most members of Congress agree is that border and interior enforcement should be expanded. At current enforcement levels, as many as 400,000 new illegal immigrants are probably still entering the country on net each year, and halting that flow will require a further increase in the already substantial resources devoted to the task.

“The expenditures on border enforcement (more than 0.1 percent of GDP) are already greater than the fiscal benefits of reducing illegal immigration (less than 0.1 percent of GDP).

Currently [2007], U.S. employers, by virtue of asking workers for identification at the time of their hiring, can plausibly deny having knowingly hired illegal immigrants. A system of electronic verification would potentially eliminate plausible deniability, placing a greater burden on employers to screen out workers who are unauthorized for employment. But by any measure, halting illegal immigration is likely to be a net drain on the U.S. economy.

 Professor Gordon H. Hanson is the director of the Center on Pacific Economies and professor of economics at University of California, San Diego, where he holds faculty positions in the Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies and the department of economics. Professor Hanson is also a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research and coeditor of the Journal of Development Economics. He obtained his BA in economics from Occidental College in 1986 and his PhD in economics from MIT in 1992.

Prior to joining UCSD in 2001, he was on the economics faculty at the University of Michigan (1998–2001) and at the University of Texas (1992–1998).

Professor Hanson has published extensively in the top academic venues of the economics discipline. His current research examines the international migration of high-skilled labor, the causes of Mexican migration to the United States, the consequences of immigration on labor-market outcomes for African-Americans, the relationship between business cycles and foreign outsourcing, and international trade in motion pictures.

In recent work, he has studied the impact of globalization on wages, the origins of political opposition to immigration, and the implications of China’s growth for the export performance of Mexico and other developing countries. His most recent book is Why Does Immigration Divide America? Public Finance and Political Opposition to Open Borders (Institute for International Economics,

For more current recommendations, read A Better Immigration Policy for America
Each year, the United States turns away thousands and thousands of highly skilled immigrants who want to join the U.S. labor force. It does this by setting aside more work visas for people chosen randomly by a lottery than for those who possess demonstrably greater abilities, by sending home many of the foreign graduates it has helped to educate, and by admitting an absurdly low number of immigrants for the size of the U.S. economy. As a result, the United States squanders a fantastic opportunity to foster innovation and accelerate economic progress, according to Independent Institute Research Director Alex Tabarrok. READ MORE

The No-Brainer Issue of the Year: Let High-Skill Immigrants Stay, by Alex Tabarrok (The Atlantic, 12/20/11)

Launching the Innovation Renaissance: A New Path to Bring Smart Ideas to Market Fast, by Alex Tabarrok; a TED Kindle book

Entrepreneurial Economics: Bright Ideas from the Dismal Science, edited by Alex Tabarrok

Saturday, December 24, 2011

Liberty vs. Freedom by Chuck McGlawn


You may be asking yourself where is he going with this. Well, let me tell you. I see Liberty and Freedom as very different. Let me list some of the subtle distinctions

Freedom is created. It is likened to an invention like the telephone. Liberty is discovered. I liken it to a discovery like the discovery of the law of gravity. Freedom must be constructed, as with the written Constitution, or years of tradition. Liberty is described, like with the Declaration of Independence.

Freedom is subjective. That is why the freedom movement is always splintered by disagreement and constant infighting over the boundaries, and what . Liberty is objective. Everyone knows what it is, and if not, a one-sentence description and on goes the light.

In my view, freedom is a positive thing. It must be constructed and once it is constructed it has boundaries. Liberty is a negative thing. It is just there, and it has always been there waiting to be discovered. It does not require construction and has no boundaries. The boundaries of Freedoms have been constructed by very smart people to be sure. And its goal and boundaries are worthy. Freedom is deemed worthy and valuable by additional smart people. The distinction that sets freedom apart from liberty is that, freedom has subjective rules, and liberty has unchangeable objective law.

Freedom has goals it wants progress and improvement. Its advocates think and want more for next year and even more for the year after. And it wants to broaden its base, by instilling the quest for Freedom into more people, then more people. Liberty is passive, but it allows limitless growth and improvement, for a limitless number of people, and it does this by just being there.

When I got to this point in my writing, I had more to say, however, I thought I should Google the subject. Of the many hits I got, three articles at least touched on the concepts that I was expanding.

Paul V. Hartman in "Freedom" and "Liberty" Are Not the Same Thing” confirms what I am saying when he wrote,Freedoms end when they encounter a contrary freedom of another person. You are free to smoke, until you encounter my freedom not to inhale your smoke. Liberty lacks that distinction: my liberty never contradicts or limits yours. In other words, freedoms have boundaries, because they are active or positive. Liberty does not because they are passive and negative.

Geoffrey Nunberg put a historical spin on the subject, and in the process he suggests that Liberty is of a higher order than Freedom. In the Nation article Freedom vs. Liberty; More Than Just Another Word for Nothing Left to Lose Published: March 23, 2003 wrote, “For the founders of the nation, liberty was the fundamental American value.” Nunberg added, Echoing John Locke, the Declaration of Independence speaks of ''life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.'' The text doesn't mention freedom at all. It was liberty that Patrick Henry declared himself willing to die for, and liberty that the ringing bell in Philadelphia proclaimed on July 8, 1776.
Liberty remained the dominant patriotic theme for the following 150 years, even if freedom played an important role, particularly in the debates over slavery. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address began by invoking a nation ''conceived in liberty,'' but went on to resolve that it should have a ''new birth of freedom.''
Never the less, in the early 1870, just five years or so after the (so called) Civil War France began the construction of the Statue of Liberty.
That makes me ask did Lincoln have some insights into the differences before any one began writing about it. Additionally, Nunberg observed, “But ''freedom'' didn't really come into its own until the New Deal period, when the defining American values were augmented to include the economic and social justice that permitted people free development as human beings. Of Roosevelt's Four Freedoms -- of speech, of religion, from want and from fear -- only the first two might have been expressed using ''liberty.'
The civil rights movement made ''freedom now'' its rallying cry. The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. used ''freedom'' 19 times in his ''I Have a Dream'' speech, and liberty only twice. Feminists extended freedom to cover reproductive rights, while Timothy Leary spoke of the ''fifth freedom . . . the freedom to expand your own consciousness.''
More recently in The Calling of Cultural Liberty · Thursday November 06, 2008 by Crosbie Fitch
We may express a desire to have the freedom to park our car on our neighbour’s drive, but the mere citing of an aspiration of ‘freedom’ cannot invoke a right, as if that invocation could then trump our neighbour’s natural right to privacy.
Then in three profound statements he rendered almost useless the need for me to continue. What he said was,
Freedom is a lack of constraint. It is neither intrinsically noble nor inherently ethical.
Ethical freedom is a lack of unethical constraint, and is more succinctly termed ‘liberty’.
We do not have a right to freedom. We have a right to liberty – freedom constrained only by the equal rights of others.

Paraphrasing Fitch We have a right to liberty, and liberty is freedom constrained only by the equal rights of others” reminds me of the oft times admonition that we can have liberty only if we are willing to share is with everyone. And correct me if I am wrong, but is that not just another way of saying, no one has the right to initiate force on another.

Monday, December 19, 2011

Cause & Effect Lessons for Alabama


by Chuck McGlawn 12/19/2011
The Cause & Effect lessons and REAL LIFE experience has shifted Alabama’s stance on its extremist immigration law from defiance to damage control.[Did he say DAMAGE CONTROL? That would mean the law is doing DAMAGE.] Gov. Robert Bentley admitted this month that the law needed fixing…   

We now learn that, “When Mr. Bentley signed the law in June, he ignored warnings from legal experts and civil-rights advocates that it would curtail rights for all Alabamians, criminalize routine business transactions and acts of charity, encourage racial profiling, and cast an unconstitutional chill on school enrollment.”

Warnings came from other sources as well. It turn out that, “The governor and legislators were also warned that the law would attract multiple lawsuits and pummel the economy, particularly farming when immigrant workers fled.” It raises a question what percentage of Alabama’s population would have to be among the 74% of …Americans [who] Think (Wrongly) That Illegal Immigrants Hurt the Economy, for the Governor to ignore all the informed warnings.

Any Governor, worth his salt knows what to do when, “The warnings have all come true” according to a New York Times Editorial, Alabama’s Second Thoughts Published: December 17, 2011

The law, as written and passed enables utility providers, “In just one example, some utilities are threatening to shut off customers without the right papers.”

From the NY Times editorial, “Mr. Strange [has] spent six months trying to defend the law in court and in public. At one point he even challenged the federal government’s authority to investigate civil-rights abuses committed under the law. A federal appeals court has temporarily blocked parts of the law; most recently, a judge issued a restraining order preventing Alabama from denying trailer-home licenses to people it decides are here illegally.”

Attorney general, Luther Strange has seen the light, as he, “is urging lawmakers to drop some major provisions, including:

“The requirement that schools collect immigration data on children and parents, which he said would cost too much for the benefit it would provide.

“The part making it a crime for immigrants not to carry their papers, which is illegal under federal law.

“The part barring people from college if they do not have documents, because some people, like certain refugees, can be here legally without documents.

“The sections that allow Alabama residents to sue officials they believe are not adequately enforcing the law, because of conflicts with the state Constitution.

Even if lawmakers accept Mr. Strange’s proposals, it still will not undo the harm — to the undocumented, to all Alabamians, to the state’s image and economy. This law is indefensible. The only solution is repeal.
Unfortunately, too many of Alabama’s politicians still don’t get it. Mike Hubbard, the House speaker, vowed on Facebook, “we’re not going to repeal or weaken the law, acquiescing to liberal elites’ and the news media’s efforts to intimidate and shame Alabama.” And 12 senators have written to the governor, urging him not to retreat. news media’s efforts to intimidate and shame Alabama.” And 12 senators have written to the governor, urging him not to retreat.

Sunday, December 18, 2011

Workfare, Not Welfare, Immigration Solution

by Chuck McGlawn 12/18/2011
Let me make it clear I believe Arizona and Alabama can pass and enforce almost any anti-immigration law that their citizens want. And I said so in Nine States & The Liberty ViewsLetter Backs Arizona on Immigration I think Arizona’s SB 1070 law could have provided Arizona and most other States an important lesson in Cause and Effect, leading to more workable Immigration Laws as I stated in Immigration Cause & Effect May be Rearing its Head. That lesson was short-circuited by the State Supreme Court that nullified its most egregious sections. However, no State law should empower authorities to abuse violators of that law. And it should not create a culture of corruption, that turns its head when citizens of a certain color or language are swept up in zeal to rid the State of illegals.
States Have a Right to be Wrong But, Not Criminal
In a recent article entitled, U.S. Finds Pervasive Bias against Latinos by Arizona Sheriff, lovingly called Sheriff Joe, the poster boy of anti-immigration get a deserving slap on the wrist. In a strongly worded critique of the country’s best-known sheriff, the Justice Department on Thursday accused Sheriff Joe Arpaio of engaging in “unconstitutional policing” by unfairly targeting Latinos for detention and arrest and retaliating against those who complain. That is how bigotry works. You use your power and authority to arrest and detain the TARGET, then you harass anyone who complains.
After an investigation that lasted more than three years, the civil rights division of the Justice Department said in a 22-page report that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, which Mr. Arpaio leads, had “a pervasive culture of discriminatory bias against Latinos” that “reaches the highest levels of the agency.” The department interfered with the inquiry, the government said, prompting a lawsuit that eventually led Sheriff Arpaio and his deputies to cooperate.
 [M]ore than 400 inmates, deputies and others had been interviewed as part of the review, including Sheriff Arpaio and his command staff. Mr. Perez said the inquiry, which included jail visits and reviews of thousands of pages of internal documents, raised the question of whether Latinos were receiving “second-class policing services” in Maricopa County. A separate federal grand jury investigation of Sheriff Arpaio’s office is continuing, focusing on accusations of abuse of power by the department’s public corruption squad.
Sheriff Arpaio was singled out for criticism in the report, which said that he had used racially charged letters he had received to justify raids and that he helped nurture the department’s “culture of bias.”Asked at a news conference about Sheriff Arpaio’s role in the department’s problems, Mr. Perez said, “We have to do cultural change and culture change starts with people at the top.”
Predictions of abuse of Arizona’s SB-1079 materialized as, “The inquiry’s findings paint a picture of a department staffed by poorly trained deputies who target Latino drivers on the roadways and detain innocent Latinos in the community in their searches for illegal immigrants. The mistreatment, the government said, extends to the jails the department oversees, where Latino inmates who do not speak English are mistreated.”
I personally favor a States right to limit immigration in any manor the people of the State choose. However, “The absence of clear policies and procedures to ensure effective and constitutional policing, along with the deviations from widely accepted policing and correctional practices, and the failure to implement meaningful oversight and accountability structures, have contributed to a chronic culture of disregard for basic legal and constitutional obligations.” Civil libertarians that warned of violations of Civil Rights were right, as “…Latino drivers were four to nine times more likely to be stopped… than non-Latino drivers, …called the most egregious racial profiling seen in this country,
The report also suggested that Sheriff Arpaio’s well-publicized raids aimed at arresting illegal immigrants were sometimes prompted by complaints that described no criminal activity but referred to people with “dark skin” or to Spanish speakers congregating in an area. “The use of these types of bias-infected indicators as a basis for conducting enforcement activity contributes to the high number of stops and detentions lacking in legal justification,” the report said.
It is no secret that I favor immigration, and, I favor liberty. And I look forward to the day when the second of those two statements is a redundancy. I believe immigration will always produce a gain to the area that the immigrants decide to settle. That is, unless WE THE PEOPLE through coercive laws offer up a smorgasbord of services to immigrants that they find it unnecessary to apply their full efforts to providing for their family and providing for their future.
Workfare Not Welfare
It is the Welfare State that attracts the undesirable immigrants. When you place huge billboards on the border that say, “FREE EDUCATION”, “FREE MEDICAL CARE” “FREE HOUSING”, and “FREE FOOD” What would you expect from immigrants who are willing to pay a coyote three or four thousand dollars for passage into the land of plenty?  Our current Immigration and Welfare Laws are a formula for the anti-immigration sentiment that empowers the Sheriff Joes of the US. Incidently, those signs are painted on both sides. And they have played a major roll in turning hard working Americans into the handout seekers that leave gapping holes in our unskilled labor force that invites in the illegals
The Workfare State (if we only had one) would attract only immigrants who want a chance to offer their marketable services in a competitive environment. I made this clear in A philosophical Libertarian on Immigration where we posed the question, “What harm does Juan do when he comes to the US and takes a job?” Additionally we asked, “What is it that makes a rat-trap anything other than just a piece of wood and some wire?” The answer is the cheese. If we take away the cheese, we stop attracting RATS. As for Mexicans who have marketable skills, like the ability to repair refrigerators, or transmissions, or can build fences, lay brick, or even mow and make our yards look better, and can save us money in the process, money that we go out and spend on other things that create other jobs, then I say welcome neighbor.
In a Workfare State, everyone benefits. Americans that leave jobs that they want done, undone because they value the money it would cost if the jobs were done by domestic labor. However, immigrants want the money the Americans are willing to pay to get those jobs done, more than they want the time it takes to do the jobs.
The seeds of a workable immigration policy are found in these observations. We just need more lookers. Invite others to look

Sunday, December 4, 2011

Cause and Effect From Someone Who KNOWS By Chuck McGlawn

We have read and abbreviated (below) The New Alabama Immigration Law: A Preliminary Macroeconomic Assessment written October 2011 by Samuel Addy, Ph.D. Director of the Center for Business and Economic Research Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration
The University of Alabama

Dr. Sam Addy joined the Center for Business and Economic Research (CBER) in 1998 and assumed the position of Director in 2007. He holds an M.S. in Mineral Engineering from the University of Minnesota, and a Ph.D. in Mineral Economics from The Pennsylvania State University.

In this role as Director, he regularly speaks to groups and organizations on topics including the Alabama economy, economic policy, economic development, and workforce development. Dr. Addy works with CBER’s economic research program and has directed and conducted economic impact studies for numerous public and private clients across the state. Other areas of emphasis include assessment and analysis of Alabama’s workforce; fiscal policy; socioeconomic analysis for transportation and other development projects; and environmental and climate change issues. Sam has published in academic journals and is often quoted in local, regional, national, and international media.

In his recent article he points out that, “Economies are demand-driven so any policy, regulation, law, or action that reduces demand is misguided and will not contribute to economic development…” He goes on to say, “Instead of boosting state economic growth, the law HB56  is certain to be a drag on economic development…”

Dr. Abby doesn’t blame the well intentioned lawmakers, or the citizen supporters of HB56, however misguided, “those that tend to favor the law focus on its intent but often not on its actual effects.” Dr. Abby says, “[T]he law is likely to drive a portion of … illegal immigrants out of state or underground. [D]emand in the Alabama economy is reduced since the income generated by these people and their spending will decline. That results in a shrinking of the state economy and will be seen in lower economic output, personal income, and fewer jobs  (Emphasis added) than would otherwise have been.

Dealing with some of the misconceptions, he says. “What about the argument that illegal immigrants are a drain on resources because they don’t pay taxes? Yes, illegal immigrants use some public services but they do pay taxes and the economy enjoys some benefits as a result of the demand created by their presence.” He goes on to say, “[T]he level of income they receive many illegal workers will not have to pay federal income tax because of the standard deduction and personal exemption allowed. Indeed, they could receive earned income tax credit, which many do not file for because they wish to remain below the radar and because their status makes it practically impossible. In addition, they make payroll taxes with little chance of ever benefiting from those social safety net programs unless somehow they become legal.” [Where have we heard that before?]  However, [illegals do] “pay sales and property taxes directly and indirectly through their income spending and consumption activities.”

Near the end of his paper, Dr. Abby joined the throng by adding, "Although there’s an ongoing debate about the costs and benefits of illegal immigrants, it is generally accepted that immigration, as a whole, has a net positive effect on the national economy."

Dr. Abby concludes with, “Bottom-line, the law will be costly to the state economy even without consideration of [increased] enforcement costs. Is it possible to amend the new immigration law so that it keeps the admirable intent but also increases demand in the economy, brings more of the informal economy into the light, boosts economic development, and facilitates continuation of the economic strides that the state has been making? In short, what we need are laws and policies that will keep Alabama on a ROLL.

My own conclusion is that any one that favors keeping HB 56 and enforcing it, has some other agenda than economic benefits to the National economy, benefits to the Alabama economy and a better life for not only those immigrants that will be affected but the people of Alabama.

The BUCK Starts Here By Chuck McGlawn

Let us you and I have a mind experiment. You got this buck and you want a candy bar. Your local Walgreens sells Super Snickers for a buck. You go there and buy one, and then proceed to eat and enjoy it. That buck that you spent has a huge job ahead of it. Some of that buck goes to pay the rent on Walgreens' location. Some of it goes to pay the insurance the store must carry. Some of it goes to the utility companies for power to light the store. Some must go to the maintenance crew for store clean up. Some of that buck must go trash removal. Of course, some must go to the clerk, his supervisor, his manager and the District Manager. In addition, do not forget some must go for sales tax.

That list could go on for pages and pages before you ever get to the Mars Candy company that made the Super Snickers that you bought. Mars then would have additional pages and pages of things they must pay for like rent, insurance, utilities, employees, excreta, excreta, excreta, excreta, excreta. Did I mention excreta?  In addition, they must also buy chocolate, peanuts and caramel with whatever part of your buck that they got.

I am sure that if you could list everyone that benefited by getting some part of your buck it would take a thousand volumes of a thousand printed pages each just to list them. You are feeling important, right.

In this thought experiment let, us give Mars Candy two factories one in Illinois and one in Mississippi. And Mississippi has just passed an immigration friendly law, allowing an additional one thousand guest workers, and some go to work for Mars doing clean-up and janitorial work. Mars learns that these younger more energetic workers can get the jobs done with a 20% decrease in janitorial staff.

Instead of just cutting the janitorial staff, the plant takes the best of the 20% and places them around the plant in other jobs. This gives Mars the ability to do something they have wanted to try. They take the best from various divisions of the plant and they create an efficiency staff. This group gets a pay increase and they roam the plant looking for waste in production. This plan works very well, and efficiency improves.

The Company Management finds things going well and hire or train some bilingual supervisors. More guest workers are employed. Both production and profits are up.

You, unaware of all of this interaction, get an attack of the “sweet tooth”; you grab your buck and head to the Walgreens, where you find you are able to buy your Super Snickers for just fifty cents. On your way to your car, you find a vending machine and you buy a soft drink for that “Half Dollar”. And back in California Chuck McGlawn starts a new article entitled, “The Half Dollar Starts Here”

Friday, December 2, 2011

Cause and Effect Can Solve the Immigration Problem By Chuck McGlawn 12/02/2011


The US and especially Alabama is about to get a real-life lesson on “Cause and Effect”. That is if the courts stay out of Alabama’s H.B. 56, passed on June 9, 2011. Alabama can now boast of having the nation’s harshest anti-immigrant law. The law makes it a crime to be without status.  The Court intervened in Arizona, removing the real teeth from SB 1070 and averting the real economic disaster. Alabama might not be as lucky, the dominos are already falling.

It is real easy to say, as Center for American Progress has that, “$40 million—A conservative estimate of how much Alabama’s economy would contract if only 10,000 (8%) of the  undocumented immigrants stopped working in the state.”  It is a lot harder to say, how does Chad Smith of Smith Farms, replace the $300,000 lost because of labor shortages in the wake of H.B. 56. Harder still what happens to the supervisory staff (likely citizens) that lose their jobs? What happens the piano teacher that loses 25% of her students because of lost profits and lost jobs. Will she be able to make her mortgage payment? How wide and how deep does the loss of $300,000 profit go? Let me say. it touches everyone. Homeless Freddie doesn’t eat today because waitress Madge didn’t get her regular tips from the Jones’ family who couldn’t afford their Friday Family Feast at the local Pizzeria because increased cost of food for every night dinner drained the Friday Family Feast Funds. Tony’s profits, are cut because he must have new menus printed to reflect the new higher prices. (By the way, I am taking up a collection for a “hit-man” for the idiot that says, “The printer’s business is up”) There is just no way that the incremental pain and suffering can be measured and set forth in any research study.

If Alabama is successful and every undocumented immigrant self-deports, Alabama will lose over 18,000 jobs and 2.6 billion in economic activity according to a Perryman Group study   
Alabama’s State Senator, Scott Beason continues to say HB56, is a “jobs bill” although this is contrary to all evidence. Based upon all available economic research and evidence, the Federal Reserve Bank declared “there is no evidence that immigrants crowd out U.S.-born workers in either the short or long run.” It further found that
Statistical analysis of state-level data shows that immigrants expand the economy’s productive capacity by stimulating investment and promoting specialization. (Emphasis added)  This produces efficiency gains and boosts income per worker. At the same time, evidence is scant that immigrants diminish the employment opportunities of U.S.-born workers.
And concerning HB56, economists almost universally (Emphasis added) concur that: Anti-immigration laws like Alabama’s are jobs and economic growth killers. These laws play well politically, but are based on flawed economic logic. The reason for this is that, as Michigan economics professor Mark Perry says, “There is no fixed pie or fixed number of jobs, so there is no way for immigrants to take away jobs from Americans. Immigrants expand the economic pie.”
What will HB56 do to Alabama’s economic pie?  A study by the Perryman Group, produced an “An Analysis of the Economic Impact of Undocumented Workers on Business Activity in the US with Estimated Effects by State and by Industry” as we have said above, The study concludes that if Alabama is sucessful and every undocumented immigrant self-deports, Alabama will lose over 18,000 jobs and 2.6 billion in economic activity, and these numbers are even understated:
Therefore, with HB56 standing alone (the “static scenario”) without any “contemporaneous adjustment” at the federal level, Alabama stands to lose over 51,000 jobs and 8 billion in economic activity. (BTW, this is the present situation.)
Because of these staggering numbers, the analysts conclude:
The most compelling conclusions from this assessment are (1) the undocumented workforce is vital to US business growth and prosperity (and, in some cases, sustainability) and, thus, (2) an enforcement-only and removal approach is simply not viable. . .
The Perryman Group’s analysis indicates that the undocumented workforce has a positive effect on the economy. It is becoming more and more apparent that Dr. Keivan Deravi, an economics  professor at AUM and budget adviser to the Legislature, was right, HB56 “wasn’t supported by facts and wasn’t based on real economic theories and research.
The Cause and Effect lesson will become very clear when, the second most asked question in Alabama, right behind “Where are your papers” is, “Where are our profits?”