I don’t know what the “real” unemployment will prove to be, in the months ahead. (There’s much debate about what the real unemployment rate truly is, too.)
I do know that there could be little worse than raising taxes in these difficult conditions.
See, “Real” Unemployment Could Surge to 25%, Portfolio Manager Says.
Not every apology is accepted, or even helpful.
None of this would apply to officials in Whitewater, Wisconsin: an apology hasn’t been spotted here since late 1967, early 1968.
Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute offers Six Reasons to Downsize the Federal Government, and by doing so, assure Americans more freedom and greater prosperity:
1. Additional federal spending transfers resources from the more productive private sector to the less productive public sector of the economy.
2. As federal spending rises, it creates pressure to raise taxes now and in the future.
3. Much federal spending is wasteful and many federal programs are mismanaged.
4. Federal programs often benefit special interest groups while harming the broader interests of the general public.
5. Many federal programs cause active damage to society, in addition to the damage caused by the higher taxes needed to fund them.
6. The expansion of the federal government in recent decades runs counter to the American tradition of federalism.
For more, see DownsizingGovernment.org.
Good morning,
Today’s forecast for Whitewater calls for a sunny day, with a high of thirty-seven degrees. Balmy.
There are teacher conferences in our public school district today, so students have no school.
Wired remembers today as a great day in science: March 4, 1877: The Microphone Sounds Much Better. Here’s why microphones started sounding better —
1877: Emile Berliner files a patent caveat for a new kind of microphone. It assures the future of the telephone, but not fame for Berliner.
Alexander Graham Bell had already invented his telephone, but without Berliner’s carbon-disk or carbon-button microphone, telephones would have sounded terrible for decades. And they may not have been capable of surmounting such great distances, hindering one of humanity’s most important advances….
Berliner’s patent application improved on the existing design by adding a layer of carbon particles in between two contacts, one of which acted as a diaphragm for catching sound waves. Movements of the diaphragm created varying pressure on the carbon particles, allowing more or less electricity to pass between the contacts.
Bell paid $50,000 for Berliner’s microphone patent (about $1.1 million in today’s money) and began manufacturing telephones using the technology in 1878. But controversy dogged the patent, which was eventually thrown out, much to Berliner’s dismay. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1892 that Thomas Edison, and not Berliner, invented the carbon microphone.
In truth, neither can claim total credit.
As Bell executive W. Van Benthuysen told The New York Times (.pdf) in December 1891, the idea of transmitting speech by varying the current between two contacts as they are affected by sound waves was common knowledge in some circles, having appeared in published works as early as 1854 — well before either Berliner or Edison (who filed a similar patent) claimed credit for the idea in 1877….
Nonetheless, Berliner reputedly went to his grave in 1929 convinced that Edison had stolen his idea. Before that, he did receive ample credit for another crucial invention: the lateral-cut vinyl-disc record, whose design is still prized by hipsters and purists alike. Before that, everybody was using Edison’s phonograph cylinders, which took up much more space, and were difficult to duplicate.
Berliner’s vinyl records were used in toys from 1888 until 1894, when his company began selling records using a logo of a dog cocking its ear towards a record player. Modified versions of the “His Master’s Voice” logo have been used by record companies around the world, including RCA in the United States. It now forms the retail entertainment chain HMV’s logo….
Hard to believe this is true, but foolish things happen the world over.
The New York Times and Cato are right – all the Bill of Rights, applied to the states, on the basis of the Privileges or Immunities Clause, not merely through piecemeal a Due Process analysis.
Ruling this way, the United States Supreme Court will reject the nineteenth century mistake made in the Slaughterhouse Cases.
Long overdue.
Eugene Volokh publishes a group blog, of several contributors, called the Volokh Conspiracy. Most of the contributors are law professors, and all are by turns serious and intentionally humorous.
Volokh is sharp, and the arguments he presents inspiring to those committed to individual liberty.
Here’s a description of a video interview with Volokh from Reason.com:
“Reason.tv’s Ted Balaker sat down with Eugene Volokh, professor of law at the UCLA School of Law and founder of The Volokh Conspiracy, to discuss gun rights, free expression, and the Nanny State.
Find out what Volokh thinks the biggest threats to free expression are, and whether today’s muzzlers come mostly from the left or right. Volokh also explains what the landmark Supreme Court case, DC vs. Heller, has done to gun control and whether he agrees with the “more guns, less crime” thesis.
Other topics include: media bias and gun rights, Alabama’s prohibition on selling sex toys, and whether judges can be nannies.
Interview by Ted Balaker. Shot by Alex Manning and Hawk Jensen. Edited by Paul Detrick.
Approximately nine-and-a-half minutes.”
Link: Eugene Volokh on Gun Rights, Free Expression, and the Nanny State more >>
Reason has a video online from John Stossel’s new program. Here’s the description: “On January 29, 2010, Reason.tv’s Nick Gillespie appeared on Fox Business Channel’s Stossel to talk about the “food police,” childhood obesity, and the ever-growing nanny state. Featuring a legendary battle between Gillespie and junk-food prohibitionist MeMe Roth.”
Good morning,
Whitewater’s forecast is for a day of patchy fog with a high temperature of thirty-seven degrees.
Whitewater’s Landmarks Commission meets later this afternoon, at 5 p.m., at 5 p.m. in the City Manager’s ultra-plush conference room. Here’s the agenda for the meeting:
I. Call to Order
II.Roll Call
III. Approval of Agenda and Possible Rearrangement.
IV. Approval of Minutes of February 3, 2010 Meeting
V. Set date of next meeting Wednesday, April 7, 2010, at 5Old Business
VI. Report from Friends of the Mounds Meeting (Helmick)
1. Garlic Mustard Pull – April 23
2. Wis. Archaeological Preservation events – May 22-AM
VII. Action on Landmark Commission Bylaws (McDonell, Singer)
VIII. Update on Train Depot Renovation (Lashley)
IX. Update of possible moving or demolition of James and Ella Rockefeller House at 837 South Janesville Road (Scott)
X. Report from Indian Mound Task Force Meeting (Christ, Scott)
XI. Discuss possible events and projects for Historical Preservation Month
1. Library display – May 1 through May 31
2. Local Landmarks Tour – May 22 – PM
3. Stone Stable signage dedication and presentation
XII. Report on the New Provisions of Chap.17 (Scott)
1. Discuss establishing criteria for designation
2. List of possible itemsNew Business
XIII. Discuss possible projects and events for 2010
1. Local Landmark Designations
2. Historic Districts
XIV. Future Agenda Items
1. Congregational Church Clock Tower
2. Whitewater Historical Survey Recommendations
3. Leaflets and Educational Materials
4. Certified Local Government Reports (Scott)
XV. Adjournment
Book fairs continue at both Lincoln and Washington Schools. I’m sure there are fine offerings at both schools. There’s no way readers can go wrong with Seuss, whose birthday was yesterday. There’s also a band concert at our Middle School tonight at 7 p.m.
In honor of Seuss, here’s a clip from Green Eggs and Ham:
Link: Green Eggs and Ham
Wonderful, just wonderful, isn’t it? more >>
BigGovernment.com has a roundup of taxpayer abuse at the Pork Report. The latest edition is packed examples of public waste and disregard for private initiative.
See, March 2nd Pork Report.
On a ship, the officer of the deck looks out, and sees storms directly ahead. He makes no mention of it to the captain, or anyone else among the crew. The ship sails directly into the storm, and is tossed about, being badly damaged from high waves and fierce winds. Afterward, the captain confronts the officer about the storm. Did you not see the waves? he asks. Well, yes, captain, I did, the officer replies. Why did you not alert anyone? asks the captain. Well, replies the officer, I was waiting for someone to mention the turbulence, and if one of the passengers had complained, I would have told you.
Whitewater, Wisconsin has a public access cable station, and on that station one finds recordings of our common council meetings. A recent session included discussion of an ordinance to ban drink specials.
Last year, Whitewater’s police chief and city attorney met with certain tavern owners. Afterward, the city attorney drafted an ordinance against flat-fee drink specials.
That session is now online, and it’s a good thing, because one can see what passes for advice to our common council.
Here’s the video of that session:
Link: http://blip.tv/file/3232390.
Well into the session, members of Whitewater’s common council begin to consider the limitations of a proposed ban on drink specials. The text of the draft ordinance, that Whitewater’s city attorney, Wally McDonell prepared, has apparent holes. Some specials that taverns offer would not be covered.
Here’s the city attorney’s comment, beginning around 51:10:
I will say that I thought of issues like that when I drafted it, but, and was going to add language that said, or similar-type specials, but I think that the at this stage of the game all that was requested was the flat all-you can-drink specials and we’ll see how that works and if it’s clear that there is a attempt to go around the spirit of the ordinance, it may well come back for more specifics and an attempt to meet anything that might have a similar-type effect, similar-type effect as a flat fee, but at this stage of the game, this is what’s hear on the table, and what’s here for discussion.
If the council wants something that would attempt to catch other things that are very close to the a flat-fee special, then we could take it back to the drawing board and come up with something like that….
A non-lawyer points out gaps, the city attorney noticed as much himself, but didn’t bother to exercise even that level of non-lawyer’s level of judgment when drafting the ordinance. The theory, I suppose, is that one should only draft what one’s asked.
The confusion in this way of thinking is clear: when non-lawyers do the asking, and one adds no additional effort, the product isn’t an attorney’s thinking, it’s a non-laywer’s level of thinking.
Why bother to have an attorney at all? Even non-lawyers could have drafted as well. Actually, better, because a non-lawyer saw the deficiencies in the draft, too, and would likely have overcome some of those deficiencies just by thinking clearly.
It’s not to a lawyer’s credit to contend that he saw the problems in the draft, but did nothing about them.
It’s actually more embarrassing if that’s the case.
And yet, for Whitewater’s city government, it is the case. more >>
Not long ago, Whitewater’s common council saw a proposal to regulate the drink specials that some taverns in Whitewater offer. After a half-hour discussion of the proposal, the matter was sent to an alcohol licensing committee for further consideration and recommendation to the common council. Not for unfettered consideration — for consideration to propose an ordinance more comprehensive than the one that council initially considered.
I’m not a bit surprised — Whitewater will regulate just about anything that moves, until through application of burdensome
regulation, it stops moving. If you’ve heard that small towns are less regulatory than big cities, then you’ve heard about small towns other than the City of Whitewater, Wisconsin.
Shortly after hearing about the proposal, I published a short cartoon, with an animated dog, teasing about the idea. See, The Debut of Dog X: On ‘Drink Specials.’ I published the cartoon with the idea that the regulation would pass. I’m sure that some version of the ordinance will pass.
(Some have asked about Dog X, and whether he’ll be back again. He will, I wouldn’t wonder. Right now, he’s hard at work on a study oftax incremental financing. He’s got books, papers, calculators, and used coffee cups all over the House of Dissenting Opinion.)
Proposals like regulation of drink specials offer a chance to show how flimsy is the basis for the proposal, how likely disingenuous is the motivation behind regulation, and how easily well-meaning people are swept into a regulation frenzy without any likelihood of solving problems through legislation.
A few quick points, before we begin. I’m not a big drinker, and among the range of those who drink, I would be considered only an occasional drinker. I’m not a particular advocate of alcohol, or a drinking culture. Drinking moderately is the most anyone should probably drink, and there’s nothing funny or interesting about a drunk. Sketch comedy about people pretending to be drunk is invariably dull and tired; there’s nothing humorous about a sloshed rumpot.
Special Pleaders. Take a look at this ordinance, and one finds some tavern owners, meeting with Whitewater’s police chief and city attorney, to talk about a problem. Does anyone really — really and truly — think that binge drinking is the only concern on these owners’ minds? They must also see, if they see anything at all, that a regulation against drink specials will prohibit tavern successful in the offering from out-competing unsuccessful taverns.
This ordinance allows those business that can’t keep up to use a health concern for a selfish business purpose — to use government to pressure more successful taverns.
It’s typical — and shameless — of Whitewater officials to meet a few owners, on the flimsy basis that there’s a health issue foremost in these tavern owners’ minds, and contend that this is all about public health.
That’s not the consequence of a proposed ordinance: that’s less competitive taverns leveraging government regulation so that more competitive taverns lose their advantage in the marketplace.
There’s an absurd argument that drink specials are money-losing anyway, so they should be regulated. That’s nonsense. If drink specials were truly money-losing for a business, the tavern would go under. They’re not money losing for all taverns; they’re just money losing for less competitive taverns.
A New Prohibition. If there’s nothing funny about over-drinking — and there isn’t — there’s also nothing efficacious about most drink regulations. At the least, those who advocate a regulation should be able to show that it will work. The burden should be on those proposing to restrict or prohibit adult activity to show that (1) the activity should be regulated, and that (2) the regulation will work.
America tried, and failed, to restrict alcohol for the supposed betterment of society. We neither stopped drinking nor improved society. Legislation does not make men better; if there were any hope that it would, Prohibition would have made America a better place. It didn’t; people still drank, cursed, showed up late for work, and all the while committed crime after crime in support of an underground drinking culture.
He’s what I’d say, to those who — well-meaning that they are — want to do something to stop binge drinking — this ordinance won’t get you what you legitimately want. Those who want to stop binge drinking will not stop the problem by regulating away drink specials – that small number of those patrons who are binge drinkers will gather privately for the same behavior.
Those who sincerely believe that this is a health issue are, I think, just being used by some businesses in a war against others.
Smearing Patrons. The world would be better off without binge drinkers, but not all of those who enjoy drink specials should be smeared as binge drinkers. These are adults engaging in lawful behavior, and our town has gone on just fine these many years without collapsing from the patronage at these taverns. It sounds like a public health matter, but it’s not — these patrons are not all fiends and scoundrels. Stop pretending that they are — the overwhelming majority are nothing of the kind, no matter how often one repeats the term binge drinking.
I’ve no doubt that this ordinance will pass, in one form or another.
Afterward, our town will be no safer or healthier. We will be, however, a good example of how some businesses use a health concern to legislate against competitors. The only consequence from this ordinance will be the triumph of some businesses against others. We’ll be less competitive and prosperous, but no safer.
Greatest legislator of all time – “get that weak-ass legislation out of my house.”
See, Senator Dikembe Mutombo Blocks Record Amount Of Legislation.
Hat tip to Radley Balko for the link.
Good morning,
The forecast for Whitewater, Wisconsin calls for a day of patchy fog, with a high of thirty-five degrees.
In the City of Whitewater today, there are two principal public meetings — the Tech Park Board meets at 2 p.m., and Common Council meets at 6:30 p.m.
Not long ago, at a public meeting, someone asked about the possible uses for the tech park, and its multi-million dollar office building Innovation Center, and Whitewater learned that it’s possible — wait for it — video games might be designed there.
Admittedly, that’s a big industry. Unfortunately, it’s a big industry in places other than Whitewater. Those other places, of course, have names — names like California, Japan, and South Korea.
I don’t think — even slightly — that the video game proposal was a serious one. Let’s assume, though, that it was. Even as I type, somewhere there’s a sad and dispirited tech park board, wondering how’ll they crack the video gaming industry.
I’ll do my part.
Over at Wired, there’s a story entitled, “10 Literary Classics that Should be Video Games.” Here’s the chance for an educational enterprise. From Wired‘s story:
Dante’s Inferno proves it: Classic literature is a videogame gold mine.
Now that Electronic Arts is finished reimagining Dante Alighieri’s epic poem as an Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 adventure through the circles of hell, the development team’s going to need to find inspiration in other classic literary works.
Game|Life would like to humbly suggest 10 more books that would make totally kick-ass games.
Wired lists Twain’s Huckleberry Finn, Kafka’s Metamorphosis, Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath, and Melville’s Moby Dick as great possibilities. They even offer an inspirational mock-up of Huckleberry Finn. Here’s a screen shot:
Whitewater’s brighter future is only a few pixels away…
