Economics

Choking On My Coffee….

This entry was posted in Economics Government on by

In his notes on today’s theft bailout hearings Mike Nizza says in the 9:51 segment:

It may come as no surprise that the world’s greatest deliberative body is expressing a bipartisan feeling against rushing things too fast.

The rest of the world is really in deep doodoo if the us congress is the world’s greatest deliberative body.
Perhaps it is. It is also an abject failure at everything but serving its masters and its masters are not the people.

The british parliament is good at serving its masters as well but at least it gives us the prime minister’s Questions.

Who’s Going to Pretend to Solve Our Financial Problems?

This entry was posted in Anarchism Economics Election 2008 Federal Government Government on by

Well, of course, the folks who created them in the first place:

The ruling class is the state. The state exists to serve the interests of the ruling class, and only the interests of the ruling class. They may promise you greater unemployment benefits, better health care, and a host of other government benefits — all benefits also paid for by you, please note (the ruling class does have a sense of humor, after all; vampires are often crudely funny creatures) — and those promises will cause most Americans to fall for the con still one more time.
Whatcha gonna do? Not a goddamned thing. Vote for McCain! Vote for Obama! It doesn’t matter. The ruling class wins either way. The ruling class always wins. That’s how the system was designed, and that’s how it works. For the ruling class, it works very admirably.

You really should be reading Arthur regularly!

Why Galveston?

This entry was posted in Anarchism Economics Government Insurance Libertarianism on by

There is much ado about the devastation of Galveston by hurricane Ike. However, there would be little chatter about this if Galveston were not there and Galveston would not be there in anywhere near the form it was in before the storm without some failed incentives for people to build on that barrier island. From the above linked Fox News story:

Barrier islands like Galveston are particularly vulnerable to storm damage because they are made of sand, as opposed to the hard bedrock that underlies larger islands and the mainland.
They also tend to have very low elevations, making it easy for water to wash over and submerge the island.
Many have questioned the wisdom of choosing to build on and develop barrier islands, given their risks.

Why, then, have so many ignored what look to be obviously significant risks?
Perhaps someone has reduced the risks for the folks who have built out Galveston. One way of doing that would be for insurance companies to offer wind insurance.
But any wise insurance company would surely charge such a high annual premium that it would be prohibitive for any one to build on Galveston Island. If they can’t charge a high enough rate they won’t offer the insurance. To wit:

Allstate dropped windstorm coverage for nearly 65,000 policyholders last year, and other companies, such as State Farm, stopped coverage within 2,500 feet of the coast.
In the wake of the disastrous 2005 storm season in which hurricanes Katrina and Rita battered gulf coast states, many private insurers abandoned the coast, forcing their clients to seek “insurers of last resort.”

Yes, there is an insurer of last resort: the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association. These folks note on their web site:

TWIA’s purpose is to provide Texas citizens adequate wind and
hail coverage when it is not available in the insurance
marketplace;and pay insured’s claims when losses occur.
The Texas Windstorm Insurance Association is a ‘pool’ of all
property and casualty (P&C) insurance companies authorized to
write coverage in Texas.
TWIA is neither a state organization, nor a for-profit company,
and therefore does not seek to increase its market share.

Oh, where to begin.
First, here is the failed incentive. The market, yes, the market makes it clear that it does not make sense to build on this barrier island (inter alia). But someone one has decided that even though it is pretty stupid to build here the risks of doing so should be alleviated. Who, might that someone be?
Well, this so called association is not a voluntary outfit*. It was created by the Texas legislature and the referenced property and casualty insurance companies do not participate voluntarily; they are required to by law to participate. As noted* its too low fee structure is set by the Texas legislature; it’s members can be assessed (taxed) for losses and they will charge higher rates to their other customers to recover these losses (more taxes); and what isn’t covered by the initial funding mechanisms will be picked up by the rest of the Texas taxpayers. Hmmm, this is beginning to sound like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
So the TWIA tells us that it is not a state organization. Well, it walks like one, it is funded like one, it is constrained like one, it provides false incentives like one, ….
Like the duck, it is a state organization and no amount of doublespeak is going to change this.
Why Galveston? The state of texas decided it should support stupid investments: construction in areas that have a high likelihood of repeated severe storm damage. There really is no excuse for this.
That the TWIA exists is a perfectly good example of government failure and is a perfectly good reason to impeach, heck, just toss out the folks that implemented and continue to support such wasteful programs.
There is no good reason to replace them either.

* See this article for background: Reforming the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association (PDF)

Let Us Now Give Thanks…

This entry was posted in Ecology Economics Federal Government Government on by

…to our government:

We now depend on a few corn and soybean strains for the majority of calories (both animal and vegetable) eaten by U.S. citizens. Our addiction to just two crops has made us the fattest people who’ve ever lived,dining just a few pathogens away from famine.
Barbara Kingsolver, Animal, Vegetable, Miracle, 2007, pg 54

A long series of government interventions in and regulation of many different aspects of the market system has led to this state.
Those who find “the answer” in more government intervention and regulation should consider exactly what that approach has achieved to date and whether what we now have writ larger is really their goal.
If it is then we must ask whether this goal is really the health, life and liberty of this country’s and the world’s people.

Time to Follow the French

This entry was posted in Economics Government Military on by

The French are taking a step, albeit a small one, that the rest of the world, especially the United States, should follow:

France’s military will slash its ranks by 54,000 personnel and close dozens of air, army and other bases in an overhaul meant to slim forces at home while making it easier and faster to deploy troops abroad, the prime minister announced Thursday.
Prime Minister Francois Fillon said the 15 percent cut in manpower and base closings will save billions of dollars but still permit an agile military suited to the country’s security needs.

This small beginning in demilitarization will open the doors to our future just a bit wider. A future of free human beings creating and evolving rather than nation states destroying and killing.
It is unfortunate that opposition to these clearly desirable actions comes from those who live off the milk of the state:

Officials in towns slated to lose their bases argue the plan will be disastrous for local economies and say they will fight the closures.
Fillon said he understood people’s fears and promised $503 million in aid to the most affected regions, many in France’s depressed northeast. He also said measures would be taken to encourage investment in the those regions.

Fight the closures they might but their futures will be much stronger if built locally rather than on the backs of taxpayers and at the whim of national or state governments.

These bases should not have existed in the first place and that they have is no rationale for either maintaining them or subsidizing local economies once they are gone.