Nervous, overachieving New Republic Editor Peter Beinart,
and
Nervous, underachieving Dilbert intern Asok?
Tuesday, May 20, 2003
Monday, May 19, 2003
Ludwig von Mises Meet JB Doubtless
From Liberalism published in 1927:
The jobless worker who is on relief does not consider it necessary to look about for a new occupation if he no longer finds a position in his old one; at least, he allows more time to elapse before he decides to shift to a new occupation or to a new locality or before he reduces the wage rate he demands to that at which he could find work. If unemployment benefits are not set too low, one can say that as long as they are offered, unemployment cannot disappear.
From Liberalism published in 1927:
The jobless worker who is on relief does not consider it necessary to look about for a new occupation if he no longer finds a position in his old one; at least, he allows more time to elapse before he decides to shift to a new occupation or to a new locality or before he reduces the wage rate he demands to that at which he could find work. If unemployment benefits are not set too low, one can say that as long as they are offered, unemployment cannot disappear.
Saturday, May 17, 2003
I Don't Make A Party Out Of Lovin' (sandals)
Ahhh...the beautiful summer weather is here. Glorious sun, blue sky as far as the eye can see, the nothing-says-summer-better aroma of lilacs (I don’t know what Lileks smells like).
Many are breaking out their summer duds for the first time. Shorts are coming out of the storage box. Linen shirts are being ironed for hours to make them at least presentable.
And somewhere in the closet lay those sandals you got a few years ago.
Let’s just end this little charade right now, shall we? The sandals must go. Dispatch them to the ash can this instant. You are an adult, and unless you’re still an active hacky-sacker or a university professor, then it must end, now.
Do you really think anyone wants to see your calloused, fish-belly-white, hairy feet? Why would you put society through viewing that nasty, worn-out old leather with literally years of sweat and fungususses ground in?
Does anyone want to know firsthand your skills at toenail clipping? At loofahing your corns?
And I’ll not even mention the odoriferous sins you commit simply sauntering by.
So before you even put them on for one more season, just end it.
As Merle put it:
leather boots are still in style for manly footwear
beads and roman sandals won’t be seen
Amen.
Ahhh...the beautiful summer weather is here. Glorious sun, blue sky as far as the eye can see, the nothing-says-summer-better aroma of lilacs (I don’t know what Lileks smells like).
Many are breaking out their summer duds for the first time. Shorts are coming out of the storage box. Linen shirts are being ironed for hours to make them at least presentable.
And somewhere in the closet lay those sandals you got a few years ago.
Let’s just end this little charade right now, shall we? The sandals must go. Dispatch them to the ash can this instant. You are an adult, and unless you’re still an active hacky-sacker or a university professor, then it must end, now.
Do you really think anyone wants to see your calloused, fish-belly-white, hairy feet? Why would you put society through viewing that nasty, worn-out old leather with literally years of sweat and fungususses ground in?
Does anyone want to know firsthand your skills at toenail clipping? At loofahing your corns?
And I’ll not even mention the odoriferous sins you commit simply sauntering by.
So before you even put them on for one more season, just end it.
As Merle put it:
leather boots are still in style for manly footwear
beads and roman sandals won’t be seen
Amen.
Friday, May 16, 2003
Thursday, May 15, 2003
What Are They Smoking In St. Louis Park?
You don't smoke. You don't like second hand smoke. But how do you avoid restaurants where you might be exposed to the evils of second hand smoke?
Well if you live here in St. Louis Park, Minnesota the city government is working on a solution.
A St. Louis Park task force proposal requiring restaurants to disclose secondhand smoke levels could mean an increase in license fees for restaurants that aren't smoke free.
Representatives from the city and the St. Louis Park Restaurant Smoking Task Force will outline a proposal during a series of upcoming meetings requiring restaurants that allow smoking to disclose secondhand smoke levels to customers and employees.
"So when patrons walk in to a restaurant they'll see a posted certificate or graph of smoking levels in the establishment and they can make an informed consumer decision comparing levels to other restaurants," said Brian Hoffman, director of inspections.
Silly me. I thought that maybe by walking into a restaurant you could decide for yourself whether it was too smoky for your tastes. Obviously other St. Louis Park residents must have been clamoring for a GRAPH so that they can make an "informed" decision. Clearly government intervention is required.
Gary Rackner, co-owner of Bunny's Bar and Grill, 5916 Excelsior Blvd., said he's willing to go along with the testing and pay an increase in license fees to appease the task force.
Now I've been to Bunny's a few dozen times and when it comes to smoking in the joint, it's not the smoke that's second hand it's the breathable air. So I was curious why the owner would favor this proposal.
"I'm glad it came to this. They were originally talking about making all restaurants in St. Louis Park non-smoking. That would be horrific," said Rackner. "If it was a state ban then fine, but if it was just non-smoking here, with businesses in other cities offering smoking, it would kill us."
When Rackner said he was willing to "appease" the task force he wasn't kidding. Faced with a choice of paying a bit more in license fees or going out of business he's doing whatever it takes to survive.
But I guess as long as the restaurant owners are picking up the tab this really won't affect us taxpayers in St. Louis Park right?
If the proposed program was enacted, Hoffman said the city would need to purchase equipment for staff to use when collecting the samples.
"We are still working to finalize the costs, however the estimated total initial capitol costs could range from a few thousand dollars to approximately $20,000.
These costs could be amortized over time and included in the annual testing cost or possibly covered through a grant from some interested party wanting to promote tobacco awareness," said Hoffman.
Now 20k isn't a lot of money. And I suppose that if some "interested party" was willing to pick up the cost it would be okay. But we have a state budget crisis here in Minnesota and all I've been hearing from the city for the last six months is whining about how much they're going to have cut back (and raise my property taxes) because state funding to cities is being trimmed back. My question is do we REALLY need this program?
There are approximately 70 restaurants in St. Louis Park--one-third of them would be affected by the proposal, which, Hoffman said, is not meant as a punishment for restaurants allowing smoking. "The real goal is to promote awareness of secondhand smoke so residents can make wise decisions."
Obviously there are non-smoking options available. You don't like second hand smoke? Don't eat in smoky restaurants. Don't work in a smoky restaurant. It's called the marketplace.
Awareness? Don't tell me that you need a chart on the wall to tell you whether it's smoky. Walk into Bunny's. Look around. Smell the air. Get a clue.
Well if you live here in St. Louis Park, Minnesota the city government is working on a solution.
A St. Louis Park task force proposal requiring restaurants to disclose secondhand smoke levels could mean an increase in license fees for restaurants that aren't smoke free.
Representatives from the city and the St. Louis Park Restaurant Smoking Task Force will outline a proposal during a series of upcoming meetings requiring restaurants that allow smoking to disclose secondhand smoke levels to customers and employees.
"So when patrons walk in to a restaurant they'll see a posted certificate or graph of smoking levels in the establishment and they can make an informed consumer decision comparing levels to other restaurants," said Brian Hoffman, director of inspections.
Silly me. I thought that maybe by walking into a restaurant you could decide for yourself whether it was too smoky for your tastes. Obviously other St. Louis Park residents must have been clamoring for a GRAPH so that they can make an "informed" decision. Clearly government intervention is required.
Gary Rackner, co-owner of Bunny's Bar and Grill, 5916 Excelsior Blvd., said he's willing to go along with the testing and pay an increase in license fees to appease the task force.
Now I've been to Bunny's a few dozen times and when it comes to smoking in the joint, it's not the smoke that's second hand it's the breathable air. So I was curious why the owner would favor this proposal.
"I'm glad it came to this. They were originally talking about making all restaurants in St. Louis Park non-smoking. That would be horrific," said Rackner. "If it was a state ban then fine, but if it was just non-smoking here, with businesses in other cities offering smoking, it would kill us."
When Rackner said he was willing to "appease" the task force he wasn't kidding. Faced with a choice of paying a bit more in license fees or going out of business he's doing whatever it takes to survive.
But I guess as long as the restaurant owners are picking up the tab this really won't affect us taxpayers in St. Louis Park right?
If the proposed program was enacted, Hoffman said the city would need to purchase equipment for staff to use when collecting the samples.
"We are still working to finalize the costs, however the estimated total initial capitol costs could range from a few thousand dollars to approximately $20,000.
These costs could be amortized over time and included in the annual testing cost or possibly covered through a grant from some interested party wanting to promote tobacco awareness," said Hoffman.
Now 20k isn't a lot of money. And I suppose that if some "interested party" was willing to pick up the cost it would be okay. But we have a state budget crisis here in Minnesota and all I've been hearing from the city for the last six months is whining about how much they're going to have cut back (and raise my property taxes) because state funding to cities is being trimmed back. My question is do we REALLY need this program?
There are approximately 70 restaurants in St. Louis Park--one-third of them would be affected by the proposal, which, Hoffman said, is not meant as a punishment for restaurants allowing smoking. "The real goal is to promote awareness of secondhand smoke so residents can make wise decisions."
Obviously there are non-smoking options available. You don't like second hand smoke? Don't eat in smoky restaurants. Don't work in a smoky restaurant. It's called the marketplace.
Awareness? Don't tell me that you need a chart on the wall to tell you whether it's smoky. Walk into Bunny's. Look around. Smell the air. Get a clue.
Keep This In Mind Next Time You're Whining About That $15 Copay
Developing drugs is not cheap.
Developing a drug, including studies required after regulatory approval, costs nearly $900 million, according to the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, an industry-funded group. The cost, estimated at $897 million, is up from an estimated $802 million in November 2001, which excluded postmarketing approval costs.
''Drug development remains a time-consuming, risky, and expensive process,'' Kenneth I. Kaitlin, director of the Tufts center, said in a statement. ''To mitigate rapidly rising R&D [research and development] costs, pharmaceutical firms over the past decade have aggressively sought to identify likely drug failures earlier in the development process. These efforts appear to be paying off, as the rate of late-phase terminations in the 1990s declined, compared to the 1980s.''
Developing drugs is not cheap.
Developing a drug, including studies required after regulatory approval, costs nearly $900 million, according to the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, an industry-funded group. The cost, estimated at $897 million, is up from an estimated $802 million in November 2001, which excluded postmarketing approval costs.
''Drug development remains a time-consuming, risky, and expensive process,'' Kenneth I. Kaitlin, director of the Tufts center, said in a statement. ''To mitigate rapidly rising R&D [research and development] costs, pharmaceutical firms over the past decade have aggressively sought to identify likely drug failures earlier in the development process. These efforts appear to be paying off, as the rate of late-phase terminations in the 1990s declined, compared to the 1980s.''
OutWilding The Wild
After watching the Wild toil fruitlessly yet again last night I have to admit that I'm damn impressed with the Ducks. Giguere gets all the attention (and deservedly so) but what is less appreciated is the marvelous team defensive effort that the Ducks have been turning in. Defensemen and forwards all work hard, block shots, and clog up the defensive zone. They rarely make mistakes and when they do Giguere is there to bail 'em out.
The first five minutes of last night's game were like watching a couple of the Wild victories over Colorado and Vancouver from the opponents perspective. The Wild were all over the Ducks controlling the play and creating chance after chance. But they got nuthin' for their efforts. Then the Ducks come down, throw a shot on goal, jam home a rebound and bam it's 1-0. Turn out the lights the game's over.
I certainly don't expect the Wild to climb out this hole and win the series and I'm pretty doubtful if they can even win Game Four to send the series back to St. Paul. But for the love of Pete (that phrase has a whole new meaning for Mr. Townshend) can you boys please, please score a freakin' goal? This is getting downright embarrassing.
The Hockey Commisioner of Minnesota may decide to voluntarily step aside if this continues much longer.
By the way if the current trend holds up expect the Wild to lose by a score of 8-0 on Friday. That result should be painfully familiar to any of you who followed the North Stars back in the day.
After watching the Wild toil fruitlessly yet again last night I have to admit that I'm damn impressed with the Ducks. Giguere gets all the attention (and deservedly so) but what is less appreciated is the marvelous team defensive effort that the Ducks have been turning in. Defensemen and forwards all work hard, block shots, and clog up the defensive zone. They rarely make mistakes and when they do Giguere is there to bail 'em out.
The first five minutes of last night's game were like watching a couple of the Wild victories over Colorado and Vancouver from the opponents perspective. The Wild were all over the Ducks controlling the play and creating chance after chance. But they got nuthin' for their efforts. Then the Ducks come down, throw a shot on goal, jam home a rebound and bam it's 1-0. Turn out the lights the game's over.
I certainly don't expect the Wild to climb out this hole and win the series and I'm pretty doubtful if they can even win Game Four to send the series back to St. Paul. But for the love of Pete (that phrase has a whole new meaning for Mr. Townshend) can you boys please, please score a freakin' goal? This is getting downright embarrassing.
The Hockey Commisioner of Minnesota may decide to voluntarily step aside if this continues much longer.
By the way if the current trend holds up expect the Wild to lose by a score of 8-0 on Friday. That result should be painfully familiar to any of you who followed the North Stars back in the day.
The Right Choice
The guys over at Powerline have already linked to it (and nobody can link like they link) but I can't resist bringing this piece on Minnesota guv Tim Pawlenty by John Fund at OpinionJournal.com to your attention. I've been a Pawlenty guy for a long time but less than a year ago some of my associates (you know who you are) doubted whether Pawlenty had the goods to get elected and perform effectively as governor. This editorial is just the latest affirmation that Pawlenty is the man of the hour in Minnesota politics.
The guys over at Powerline have already linked to it (and nobody can link like they link) but I can't resist bringing this piece on Minnesota guv Tim Pawlenty by John Fund at OpinionJournal.com to your attention. I've been a Pawlenty guy for a long time but less than a year ago some of my associates (you know who you are) doubted whether Pawlenty had the goods to get elected and perform effectively as governor. This editorial is just the latest affirmation that Pawlenty is the man of the hour in Minnesota politics.
Wednesday, May 14, 2003
The Toughest Fill In Gig In Talk Radio
Subbing for Rush Limbaugh and his legions of devoted listeners? Nah.
How about trying to fill the shoes of Dennis Prager and being able to discuss politics, philosophy, religion, and photography (sometimes all on the same show)? Nope.
It must be replacing the talented Hugh Hewitt and having to juggle the amazing variety and quality of guests that he's able to attract? Not even close.
You want the want toughest temp job in talk radio? Try filling in for Michael Savage.
Last night I stumbled across the Savage Nation and was surprised (and actually relieved) to not hear Savage's voice. I can't recall the name of the fellow taking Savage's place but after listening to him for a few minutes I realized what an unenviable position he was in. Think about it. You may take Savage for granted but it's not easy to find someone that hateful, that spiteful, that angry, that bombastic and no one can match Savage's grating, annoying delivery.
Sure this guy gave it a try but I just couldn't feel the bile coming through the airwaves like you do with Savage. I guess in that way he is just about irreplaceable. Everyone else seems so milquetoast in comparison.
Maybe Vince McMahon will be available next time.
Subbing for Rush Limbaugh and his legions of devoted listeners? Nah.
How about trying to fill the shoes of Dennis Prager and being able to discuss politics, philosophy, religion, and photography (sometimes all on the same show)? Nope.
It must be replacing the talented Hugh Hewitt and having to juggle the amazing variety and quality of guests that he's able to attract? Not even close.
You want the want toughest temp job in talk radio? Try filling in for Michael Savage.
Last night I stumbled across the Savage Nation and was surprised (and actually relieved) to not hear Savage's voice. I can't recall the name of the fellow taking Savage's place but after listening to him for a few minutes I realized what an unenviable position he was in. Think about it. You may take Savage for granted but it's not easy to find someone that hateful, that spiteful, that angry, that bombastic and no one can match Savage's grating, annoying delivery.
Sure this guy gave it a try but I just couldn't feel the bile coming through the airwaves like you do with Savage. I guess in that way he is just about irreplaceable. Everyone else seems so milquetoast in comparison.
Maybe Vince McMahon will be available next time.
Tuesday, May 13, 2003
The Crushing of Dissent 1-2-3
Last night we furtively huddled in the basement of an undisclosed location in the western suburbs of Minneapolis clandestinely watching the Wild-Ducks hockey game. We kept one eye on the hockey game and one eye on the door half expecting the jack booted thugs of Hockey Commissioner (more accurately Commissar) Hugh Hewitt to come crashing through it at any moment and haul us off to one of the camps.
You haven't heard of the camps?
People only dare whisper about them around here but from the few details that have emerged the "re-education"camps were designed by the despotic Hewitt himself and built deep in the North Woods of Minnesota. "Campers" are required to study Hewitt's In, But Not Of for hours on end and must carry a copy of the book with them at all times. They are forced to watch propaganda films regaling the glory days of the Browns and Indians (all in black and white of course). The diet consists mostly of a heavy regimen of Vitaganza products and the camp's loudspeakers blare Canned Heat's Going Up The Country twenty four hours a day. It's the closet thing to hell on earth yet devised by man.
That is the fate that awaits us if we fall into the nefarious clutches of Hewitt. He is, at this very moment, preparing a "proclamation" banning us from all hockey related activities in Minnesota and threatening to send us into exile after the playoffs are over. When Hugh learned that I was leaving the state to play in a hockey tournament in Chicago this weekend he darkly hinted that he might seal the border and not allow my return.
What has brought about this unprecedented wave of terror and repression?
We dared to raise our voices and speak out. We said that we're mad as hell that a Ducks fan is our Hockey Commissioner and we're not going to take it.
Can there be any doubt at this point that Hugh is not acting in the best interests of the state as our Hockey Commissioner? How else to explain the Wilds 2-0 deficit in the series with the hated Ducks then the presence of a Fifth Column here in Minnesota led by Hewitt from his So Cal redoubt?
Wake up hockey fans of Minnesota (and elsewhere). Rise up and shake off the chains of oppression and fear.
Read the petition to Recall Hugh Hewitt and act upon it.
This battle is not just for Fraters Libertas it is for all lovers of liberty and hockey.
Take comfort in our motto: The Fraters can die but cannot yield.
To victory!
Last night we furtively huddled in the basement of an undisclosed location in the western suburbs of Minneapolis clandestinely watching the Wild-Ducks hockey game. We kept one eye on the hockey game and one eye on the door half expecting the jack booted thugs of Hockey Commissioner (more accurately Commissar) Hugh Hewitt to come crashing through it at any moment and haul us off to one of the camps.
You haven't heard of the camps?
People only dare whisper about them around here but from the few details that have emerged the "re-education"camps were designed by the despotic Hewitt himself and built deep in the North Woods of Minnesota. "Campers" are required to study Hewitt's In, But Not Of for hours on end and must carry a copy of the book with them at all times. They are forced to watch propaganda films regaling the glory days of the Browns and Indians (all in black and white of course). The diet consists mostly of a heavy regimen of Vitaganza products and the camp's loudspeakers blare Canned Heat's Going Up The Country twenty four hours a day. It's the closet thing to hell on earth yet devised by man.
That is the fate that awaits us if we fall into the nefarious clutches of Hewitt. He is, at this very moment, preparing a "proclamation" banning us from all hockey related activities in Minnesota and threatening to send us into exile after the playoffs are over. When Hugh learned that I was leaving the state to play in a hockey tournament in Chicago this weekend he darkly hinted that he might seal the border and not allow my return.
What has brought about this unprecedented wave of terror and repression?
We dared to raise our voices and speak out. We said that we're mad as hell that a Ducks fan is our Hockey Commissioner and we're not going to take it.
Can there be any doubt at this point that Hugh is not acting in the best interests of the state as our Hockey Commissioner? How else to explain the Wilds 2-0 deficit in the series with the hated Ducks then the presence of a Fifth Column here in Minnesota led by Hewitt from his So Cal redoubt?
Wake up hockey fans of Minnesota (and elsewhere). Rise up and shake off the chains of oppression and fear.
Read the petition to Recall Hugh Hewitt and act upon it.
This battle is not just for Fraters Libertas it is for all lovers of liberty and hockey.
Take comfort in our motto: The Fraters can die but cannot yield.
To victory!
It All Depends What You Mean By Bailing
Andrew Sullivan claims that independent voters are "bailing" on President Bush after the war in Iraq and concludes that it is due to the President's domestic policies which Sullivan says do little to warm the hearts of independents. Now when I hear the word "bailing" used in this context I imagine a mass exodus of supporters leaving Bush. However, if you examine the actual poll results it's not all that clear cut.
Keeping in mind that the poll has a margin of error of +/- 2.5% we see that Bush's support has indeed slipped among independents. An earlier poll conducted in early-mid April had 31% of independents saying that they would "definitely reelect Bush" while in the most recent poll only 25% of independents responded similarly. A 6% drop is nothing to sneeze at but considering the 2.5% margin of error is it a sign of "bailing"?
If you continue to look at the results you see that the number of independents who would "consider someone else" for president rose from 32% to 40%, again not a good sign for Bush. But interestingly whereas 28% of independents would "definitely vote for someone else" in the previous poll this time around only 25% would. It would appear as if the independent supporters that Bush has lost haven't found other candidates to support yet and are aren't even committed to not voting for Bush, they're just "considering" other candidates.
The poll results clearly show that Bush's support among independents has eroded since the war ended. And it is something that his administration should be concerned about. But is "bailing" really the best way to describe it?
Andrew Sullivan claims that independent voters are "bailing" on President Bush after the war in Iraq and concludes that it is due to the President's domestic policies which Sullivan says do little to warm the hearts of independents. Now when I hear the word "bailing" used in this context I imagine a mass exodus of supporters leaving Bush. However, if you examine the actual poll results it's not all that clear cut.
Keeping in mind that the poll has a margin of error of +/- 2.5% we see that Bush's support has indeed slipped among independents. An earlier poll conducted in early-mid April had 31% of independents saying that they would "definitely reelect Bush" while in the most recent poll only 25% of independents responded similarly. A 6% drop is nothing to sneeze at but considering the 2.5% margin of error is it a sign of "bailing"?
If you continue to look at the results you see that the number of independents who would "consider someone else" for president rose from 32% to 40%, again not a good sign for Bush. But interestingly whereas 28% of independents would "definitely vote for someone else" in the previous poll this time around only 25% would. It would appear as if the independent supporters that Bush has lost haven't found other candidates to support yet and are aren't even committed to not voting for Bush, they're just "considering" other candidates.
The poll results clearly show that Bush's support among independents has eroded since the war ended. And it is something that his administration should be concerned about. But is "bailing" really the best way to describe it?
Can't We All Just Get Along?
Excellent piece at Enter Stage Right on the Conservative-Libertarian clash and how it has played out in the Bennett gambling story. The main takeaway is that although there are significant differences between them, Conservatives and Libertarians need to work together on the overriding value that both camps wish to preserve; individual liberty.
Excellent piece at Enter Stage Right on the Conservative-Libertarian clash and how it has played out in the Bennett gambling story. The main takeaway is that although there are significant differences between them, Conservatives and Libertarians need to work together on the overriding value that both camps wish to preserve; individual liberty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)