Say Anything Blog

Here’s a quick explanation of how government “stimulus” works.

You take money from those who have it via taxation, inflation, or borrowing.  Generally, those who have money are those who know the difference between productive and unproductive labor, and the difference between a good and a poor investment.  Otherwise, they would not have money that you could get via taxes, inflation, and borrowing. (more...)

Here.

Dino’s come up with a few posts which claim to settle once and for all that the Community Reinvestment Act is not to blame for the collapse of credit markets this year.  Well, all of those sources have one thing in common; they are not answering a very basic question;

“If the CRA sets up a mechanism for the monitoring and penalizing of banks for failing to issue loans in high risk (formerly “red-lined”) areas, would we expect this law to result in more, or fewer, high-risk loans?”

While the correct answer to this question evades Dino and apparently Ben Bernanke, it’s really not that difficult.  You threaten expensive legal actions against banks unless they issue risky loans, you will get more of those risky loans than otherwise. 

The debate here is over whether the CRA is the dominant factor here, not whether it’s a factor.  Of course, you won’t find Mr. Bernanke admitting that years of loose monetary policy created first a stock bubble in the 1990s, and then a real estate bubble this decade.  And you probably won’t find him admitting that the CRA has been a disaster, either; the Fed is one of the chief proponents of the law and its expansion.

One of the biggest problems I can see in our national discourse is that each interest group tends to see its issue as “THE” problem facing the country in one area or another. 

But is this true?  As an engineer by trade, I’m very familiar with a “Pareto” diagrams named after the Pareto Principle.  More or less, 80% of the problem is related to 20% of the factors.

While that would seem to indicate that if we fix 1-2 problems, we’d be almost there, reality is that often the factors we see are not the full spectrum of problems, but rather only the top 20%.

Upshot?  There’s plenty of room for solutions.  If we use the crisis of the Detroit 3 as an example, there is plenty of blame to spread on the Detroit 3, the unions, CAFE standards, and more.  We don’t need to insist that it’s just one party’s fault here.

Kudos to RBB for noting that a democratic governor has been arrested.  It is Rod Blagojevich (blah-goy-a-vich the pronunciation), and he is accused of soliciting bribes to appoint the next Senator from that state.

It’s also probably one of the more MINOR things Blagojevich can be accused of.  Wait for more to come.  Illinois has been ravaged by corrupt Chicago Democrats for decades.  Hopefully we can get rid of a few of them, and sadly, we probably just elected one to the Presidency.

Those who know me know that I’m a big proponent of shall issue concealed carry.  Permit class was a date (and a good one) for my wife and I.  We do when we can and when we’re allowed to.

One troubling thing, however, is the reality that shall issue carry doesn’t seem to have greatly reduced crime in cities where it was allowed.  Why is that?

Well, let’s add things up.  You have $400 or more for a decent weapon, up to $200 for the holster, $100 for carry permit class, $100 for the permit, $100 for ammunition and range fees each year to keep proficient….

...and quite frankly, you’re going to find that many/most inner city residents—especially those who are in the worst neighborhoods—aren’t going to be able to afford such a move.  Those who can, by and large, are not going into their neighborhoods.  Hence, they’ll stay as dangerous as ever.

So I’d argue that shall issue carry is a great way of depressing crime in most areas, and it may keep crime to the worst areas—people will be afraid to victimize neighborhoods outside their own.  But it may not be terribly effective in deterring crime in the neighborhoods hardest hit.

I can’t decide whether the caption should be “May You be Surrounded by Friends This Thanksgiving” or “Budget Cuts at PBS Take a Grisly Turn.”

Cross posted at Bike Bubba’s Bits.

I’ve been noticing an interesting trend with the President-elect that fellow conservatives ought to be aware of; Obama appears to be intensely using the Clintonian strategy of testing his ideas by leaking them through his staffers to the press.

If we want to lose every fight with him, we can devour those “choice bites” of leaking (gossip), respond to them before they are official, and both preserve Obama’s political capital (“it wasn’t an official announcement”) and embarass ourselves by acting on gossip.

If we want to win a few, we need to hold our fire and only go after the things he makes official by open, sourced announcements.

Avoiding gossip isn’t just a Biblical imperative; it’s a way to be effective in life.

If you’re going to claim self-defense in the killing of your best friend, I would think it would help if you didn’t reload your pistol eight times.  Just a hunch.

Maybe not guilty by reason of insanity, but if he didn’t know what he was doing was wrong, why clean up afterwards?

Go here for live video of Rob and his friends on their annual deer hunt.

I figure I better help out RealityChallengedBob with this one.  Somehow he misses a few.  I have no idea why.

Senatrix Boxer did fire the man upon learning of the charges.  On the other hand…he’s only been indicted, not convicted.  Maybe a leave of absence to deal with the charges, with the understanding he’d be fired if convicted, would be more appropriate?

A lot of political types, alarmed by huge losses among the Detroit 3, are proposing a monstrous bailout for them.  Given the make-up of Congress, this will likely consist of huge payouts, government equity/control of automakers, and increased regulation of the products the make.

More or less, this is the same process by which the British put cars by Triumph, Aston Martin, and Leyland in driveways around the world.  Except, of course, they didn’t; they simply made these makers a byword for “junk”.

So I have a slightly different proposal.

(more...)

Read this.

Now think about it.  You have a law officer (Secret Service officers have arrest and other powers).  He is in uniform.  He is driving a marked car.

He doesn’t think anything is awry when a woman he thinks is a prostitute doesn’t shy away from talking to a man in uniform in a marked government car.  I have a hunch that in virtually any other city, anybody driving a marked government car can pretty much watch the ladies of the night melt into the shadows while driving down the street.  Not in DC, though.

What’s wrong with D.C.?  As this event indicates, too many government officials are literally in bed with criminals.

Here.

Evidently, almost all of the changed/added/subtracted votes are from a few Democratic precincts in the Iron Range.  If Lott’s analysis holds, I dare suggest that Minnesota ought to be providing free room and board for the elections officials in these precincts.

Behind bars, of course.  Democrats seem to do a lot of complaining about how rigged the elections are.  What they don’t say is who’s doing the rigging.

Update: Powerline notes that 100 of the added Franken votes are from November 2, two days before the election. Who knew that the Daleys were vacationing in the Iron Range at that time?

Waited about an hour to vote, and the guy right in front of me was not registered, and admitted to the poll workers that his drivers’ license was clipped, but the poll worker said his passport would work.

Given that the license is clipped when it is no longer valid (upon expiration or moving), and a passport simply says where you lived up to 10 years ago, I suspect I voted right after a guy who had no right to cast a ballot. 

Sigh.  Also interesting; the guy and his girlfriend seemed to have no clue of why the electoral college was implemented or important.  I’d have to guess that they cast a few extra votes for Obama.

If you wonder why ID requirements for voting are important, this is why.