If you have a comment or question, just click Read the rest of this entry »
President Obama has called for an increase in the Minimum Wage,making the claim that it would be good for business because those receiving the higher wage would have more to spend. Higher demand would lead to increased consumption. That boon is easy to see, but serious policy makers must also consider the less visible consequences.
Where does the money for the raise come from?
No business has a money tree from which to pluck dollars, the raise must be accounted for either by reducing the wages of other employees or the number of employees, reducing their consumption, or raising the prices of the company’s products or services, leaving the customers with less to spend somewhere else, or from the business owner(s) pockets, reducing their consumption, or investment in their own business, or those of others through stock purchases, reducing the consumption of those businesses or their employees.
In every case, the increased consumption by minimum wage earners comes at the expense of reduced consumption by someone else. There is no net benefit to the economy.
Increased wages can bring true increases in consumption and economic growth only if they are the result of increased wealth creation by the employee.
Either the President is being guided by extremely simplistic economic theory or he is simply pandering and hoping no one will notice the fallacy. Neither option is encouraging.
The President’s advisers should point out to him that ‘pulling oneself up by his bootstraps’ is only a figure of speech.
This is the parking space for the Obama for President Campaign next door to my office. These are the folks who want CAFE Standards raised so that we common folk will not be able to buy the kind of vehicles they drive. The smallest vehicle is the 18MPG Jeep Grand Cherokee.
But isn’t it always like that with liberals?
CISPA. It’s the latest acronym being used to control you and your internet experience. This time the pretense is cyber security. It is perfectly understandable to want to prevent cyber attacks, but they can’t take small efforts to protect our civil liberties? Huh?
Civil Libertarians have probably seen this http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75670.html on Facebook.
The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) – It sounds like a good thing. All that sharing and protecting. The problem is, they did precious little to protect individual liberties. One could even argue that they went out of their way not to. Read the rest of this entry »
With the controversy over the shooting death of Trayvon Martin and the later arrest of George Zimmerman, there has been a great deal of confusion in the media over what self defense is and how the Stand Your Ground law in Florida and many other States applies. A great deal of totally irrelevant issues are being brought into the matter which confuse something that is really pretty simple.
I am not a lawyer, but I studied Virginia’s Case Law on self defense extensively during the Ryan Frederick trial, so perhaps I can make this a bit more understandable.
Self defense is a natural right, and a legal defense of necessity. Read the rest of this entry »