MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’

Dems Change Mind On Border Wall After Realizing It Will Keep People From Leaving When We Switch To Socialism

Posted by M. C. on July 1, 2021

https://babylonbee.com/news/dems-change-mind-on-border-wall-after-realizing-it-could-be-used-to-keep-people-in-once-country-switches-to-socialism

U.S.—The nation’s Democratic leaders announced Tuesday they are reversing course on Trump’s proposed border wall, since “it will keep people in once we switch to socialism.”

“We thought the border wall was a bad, racist idea,” said Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. “But then this light bulb turned on over my head. It was actually just a light bulb though, not an actual idea, which was disappointing. But that got me thinking about trying to have an idea. And I got an idea: when we switch to socialism, everyone’s gonna try to run away. But what if there’s a big, solid object along the border? Then they can’t run away. I mean, they could try to climb, but we could shoot them.”

Senator Bernie Sanders said in his experience, walls are “absolutely necessary” to keep a socialist country’s citizens from fleeing. “The Soviets had it right: big wall in Berlin, the symbolic Iron Curtain, shooting people who try to flee. It’s all necessary to a healthy socialist state.” Besides, Sanders added, politicians like him would be exempt from the “no running away” rule and he could fly out any time he wanted on a government plane.

Dems suggested maybe the border wall could use some upgrades such as landmines on the U.S. side, outposts with guards armed with AK-47s, and attack dogs. It will also need to be extended to surround the entire country and “maybe also a big dome around the top.”

Bee seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

EconomicPolicyJournal.com: After the COVID-19 Lockdowns: The Next Globalist Power Grab Move

Posted by M. C. on April 23, 2021

With a Veritas secret recording device rolling, CNN Director Charlie Chester explained how the spin occurs:

Any reporter on CNN — what they’re actually doing is they’re telling the person what to say… It’s always like leading them in a direction before they even open their mouths. The only people that we [CNN] will let on the air, for the most part, are people that have a proven track record of taking the bait.

Chester also described how CNN has used the COVID-19 panic to keep viewers hooked on the screen.

“It’s fear. Fear really drives numbers – [TV ratings],” Chester said. “Fear is the thing that keeps you tuned in.” 

He added, “COVID? Gangbusters with ratings, right? Which is why we [CNN] constantly have the [COVID] death toll on the side.” 

The scam is on. When government officials talk about “climate change,” you should think the raping and pillaging of the economy by corporate elitists who are close to power or who often control power.

https://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2021/04/after-covid-19-lockdowns-next-globalist.html

Do you think things will return to normal after the COVID-19 lockdowns are over? Forget about it.

The financial rape of the average man is going to reach an entirely new level.

The global elitists are setting up for the next move to capture as much of global wealth as they can for themselves. 

A major tell came in the recently released undercover tapes released by Project Veritas, where a Veritas undercover reporter talked to a high-ranking CNN official.

While most of the focus was on the discussion of how CNN distorted the news about Donald Trump and also COVID-19, the key point of alarm should have been the discussion of what the next distortion campaign is going to be all about.

With a Veritas secret recording device rolling, CNN Director Charlie Chester explained how the spin occurs:

Any reporter on CNN — what they’re actually doing is they’re telling the person what to say… It’s always like leading them in a direction before they even open their mouths. The only people that we [CNN] will let on the air, for the most part, are people that have a proven track record of taking the bait.

Chester also described how CNN has used the COVID-19 panic to keep viewers hooked on the screen.

“It’s fear. Fear really drives numbers – [TV ratings],” Chester said. “Fear is the thing that keeps you tuned in.” 

He added, “COVID? Gangbusters with ratings, right? Which is why we [CNN] constantly have the [COVID] death toll on the side.” 

Chester said Jeff Zucker – the network’s president –- would call the CNN newsroom during live TV segments and order the staff to keep COVID death tolls on the screen to capture viewers’ attention.

But COVID-19 fatigue has set in and Chester revealed the new plan:

Chester: “I think there’s a COVID fatigue. So, like whenever a new story comes up, they’re [CNN’s] going to latch onto it. They’ve already announced in our office that once the public is — will be open to it — we’re going to start focusing mainly on climate.” 

Chester: “It’s going to be our [CNN’s] focus. Like our focus was to get Trump out of office, right? Without saying it, that’s what it was, right? So, our next thing is going to be climate change awareness.”

Veritas Journalist: “What does that look like?”

Chester: “I don’t know. I’m not sure. I have a feeling that it’s going to be like, constantly showing videos of decline in ice, and weather warming up, and like the effects it’s having on the economy–”

Veritas Journalist: “Who decides that?”

Chester: “Head of the network.”

Veritas Journalist: “Who is that? Is that [Jeff] Zucker?”

Chester: “Zucker, yeah. I imagine that he’s got his council and they’ve all like, discussed, like where they think–”

Veritas Journalist: “So, that’s like the next–”

Chester: “Pandemic-like story that we’ll beat to death, but that one’s got longevity. You know what I mean? Like there’s a definitive ending to the pandemic. It’ll taper off to a point that it’s not a problem anymore. Climate change can take years, so they’ll [CNN will] probably be able to milk that quite a bit.”

Veritas Journalist: “So, climate change overload.”

Chester: “Be prepared, it’s coming. Climate change is going to be the next COVID thing for CNN.”

Hmm, so is there any other proof the elitists are thinking climate change as the next big move?

Secretary of State Tony Blinken delivered an address on climate change at the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland on Monday in which he admitted that some American workers “would be hit hard” by the Biden administration’s policies, reports Breitbart.

Blinken said that the U.S. needed to lead the global fight against climate change.

“If America fails to lead the world on the climate crisis, we won’t have much of a world left,” Blinken said.

Blinken also claimed that “weather events are becoming more extreme,” another claim that scientists have criticized, noted Breitbart.

And here is the indication that it is all one big scam.

Much of Blinken’s speech focused on domestic policy — for example, stressing the need for “good, paying jobs, and the opportunity to join a union” as part of climate change policy. The opportunity to join a union a climate change policy?

But Blinken also said Biden’s policy would cause job losses for some Americans.

“We will be mindful that for all the opportunities offered by the unavoidable shift to clean energy, not every American worker will win out in the near term. Some livelihoods and communities that relied on old industries will be hit hard.”

He then said: “We won’t leave those Americans behind. We’ll provide our fellow Americans with pathways to new, sustainable livelihoods, and support as they navigate this transition.”

Bottom line: It is all about a move toward a more centrally planned economy with the elitists and power freaks in charge.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is all on board:

Listen to this:

The intersecting crises which we face demand a Green New Deal to create jobs, deliver justice, and save our planet. Thank you @AOC, the @sunrisemvmt, and all of our partners organizing in Congress, online, and in the streets for a just and livable future. pic.twitter.com/vQkapTodDR— Ed Markey (@EdMarkey) April 21, 2021

And yesterday, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen spoke virtually at the Glasgow Finance Alliance for Net Zero event. Forty-three banks from 23 countries (with assets of $28.5 trillion) form the Net-Zero Banking Alliance

See the rest here

 –RW

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

AOC supports court-packing, says SCOTUS should not be able to overturn legislation | Disrn

Posted by M. C. on April 22, 2021

“I do think we should be expanding the court,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “The idea that nine people, that a nine-person court, can overturn laws that … hundreds and thousands of legislators, advocacy and policymakers drew consensus on … we have to … just ask ourselves, I think as a country, how much does that current structure benefit us? And I don’t think it does.”

Negating unconstitutional laws is the main reason for having a supreme court. Do you suppose U of Boston has Occasinal-Cortex on their recruiting posters?

https://disrn.com/news/aoc-adds-four-seats-to-be-filled-by-biden-judicial-review-does-not-benefit-us

by Jenny Mount ·

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez(D-NY) is backing the Democrats’ efforts to add four new seats to the Supreme Court to be filled by President Biden, saying the courts should not be allowed to overturn laws passed by Congress.

“I do think we should be expanding the court,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “The idea that nine people, that a nine-person court, can overturn laws that … hundreds and thousands of legislators, advocacy and policymakers drew consensus on … we have to … just ask ourselves, I think as a country, how much does that current structure benefit us? And I don’t think it does.”

Ocasio-Cortez’s stance on the principle of judicial review echoed the position taken by former President Barack Obama in 2012 when Obamacare was brought before the Supreme Court.

At the time, Obama complained “that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.”

However, Obama later clarified that he did accept the principle of judicial review, which has been part of the constitutional framework for more than two centuries and continues to be a crucial component of the balance of power between the three branches of government.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Socialism: A Youthful Passion, A National Problem by Carl Horowitz

Posted by M. C. on April 13, 2021

First, much of our formal education system, especially at “prestige” colleges and universities, is driven by an imprimatur of faculty and administrators who lean far leftward. It’s hard to imagine many Columbia University students and recent graduates, for example, possessed of much enthusiasm for capitalism even if they work for a capitalist enterprise. 

Third, many journalists at leading newspapers, webzines, and cable news outlets are public relations agents for socialism. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., right now just might be the most photographed and quoted woman in America. 

https://townhall.com/columnists/carlhorowitz/2019/05/11/socialism-a-youthful-passion-a-national-problem-n2546176

Carl Horowitz

Carl Horowitz

It is one of modern history’s more famous quotes: “If a man is not a socialist at 20, he has no heart. If he remains one at age 40, he has no head.” These words (and variations thereof) have been attributed to everyone from Disraeli to Clemenceau to Churchill. Whatever the true source, they convey a wisdom that frequently is going unheeded in America. And we risk becoming an ever more controlled and corrupt society. 

Consider recent survey data.

This January, the public relations firm Axios released the results of a SurveyMonkey online poll of nearly 2,800 U.S. adults. Respondents were asked how they felt about capitalism and socialism. Capitalism produced a favorable response among 61 percent of all respondents, yet socialism was well-received among a sizable 39 percent. Fully 58 percent of persons ages 18-24 and 51 percent of persons ages 25-34 viewed socialism in a positive light; a positive view of capitalism among these age brackets, respectively, were 58 percent each.  

This survey was no fluke. A Harris Poll conducted for Axios in February of more than 2,000 U.S. adults revealed very strong support for socialism among Millennials (born 1980-94) and Generation Z (born 1995 and after). These combined cohorts backed universal health care and tuition-free college, respectively, by 73.2 percent and 67.1 percent. Fully 49.6 percent said they would prefer living in a socialist country. Meanwhile, a Gallup Poll released last August showed that 51 percent of adults ages 18-29 had a favorable view of socialism, but only 45 percent felt this way about capitalism. The figure for capitalism, alarmingly, was down from 68 percent in 2010.  CARTOONS | Tom Stiglich View Cartoon

Granted, socialism comes in a variety of forms. Some are more tolerable than others. But even the big bad wolf of socialism – Communism – is getting a reprieve among young adults. According to a survey released in October 2016 by the Victims of Communism Memorial, only 55 percent of respondents born during 1982-2002 believed that Communism is, or ever was, a problem. The respective figures for baby boomers and the elderly were 80 percent and 91 percent.    

It may be that similar views prevailed in prior decades. After all, the impulse to “change the world” reaches full flower during young adulthood. That’s long been the case. Career, marriage, childrearing and homeownership supposedly bring the starry-eyed down to earth. But to what extent? Doubtlessly many young socialists of today will come to support capitalism. But just as likely, many won’t. Callowness can’t explain everything. 

One would think the events of the last 100 years would have rendered support for socialism almost nil by now, with Venezuela the latest casualty. Yet the dream lives on. Quite possibly, the survey numbers reveal not simply a replication of a classic tendency, but the dawn of an era defined by the likes of Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren. 

Why are so many young adults today, to say nothing of their elders, warming up to socialism? I briefly offer some explanations. 

First, much of our formal education system, especially at “prestige” colleges and universities, is driven by an imprimatur of faculty and administrators who lean far leftward. It’s hard to imagine many Columbia University students and recent graduates, for example, possessed of much enthusiasm for capitalism even if they work for a capitalist enterprise. 

Second, radicalism, especially at the national level, is rapidly supplanting the modern liberalism of the New Deal and the Great Society. Radicals, many of whom are seeking the Democratic Party nomination for president, routinely exploit public discontent over certain recent outcomes of capitalism (e.g., the 2008 stock market crash, auto industry bailouts) for the purpose of discrediting capitalism as a whole. And many in their audiences believe them. 

Third, many journalists at leading newspapers, webzines, and cable news outlets are public relations agents for socialism. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., right now just might be the most photographed and quoted woman in America. 

Fourth, large-scale immigration, especially by Asians and Hispanics, is creating a generation of new voters whose resentment of the white majority and capitalism are of a piece. Ethnic identity can’t so easily be disaggregated from ideology.  

If America goes socialist, it will not happen all at once. And it won’t involve five-year industrial plans, farm collectivization, wholesale government takeovers of businesses or other Soviet-era relics. What it would involve is a gradual adoption of populist-Left hobby horses such as “free” college education, health care and day care, plus Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez’ scatterbrained Green New Deal. There also would be large-scale transfer payments from whites to “people of color” under the guise of reparations. A better recipe for inefficiency, divisiveness and corruption hardly can be imagined. More than ever, economic success would be determined by political connections and an erosion of the rule of law.    

“We are born free, and we will stay free,” remarked President Trump during his State of the Union address in February. “Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.” Those words caused gnashing of the teeth among those who want Trump out of office. But the debate between capitalism and socialism will be around long after he leaves. For defenders of capitalism, there is much teaching to be done. And for young America, there is much to learn. 

Carl F. Horowitz is senior fellow at National Legal and Policy Center, a Falls Church, Va.-based nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting ethics and accountability in American public life.  

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

EconomicPolicyJournal.com: AOC Wants Biden to Boost Infrastructure Spending to $10 Trillion

Posted by M. C. on April 2, 2021

Maddow must have been short on time because she did not get a chance to ask AOC how she would pay for a $10 trillion program, or ask her about the economic distortions government programs cause or ask her why she wants to promote standard of living lowering unions.

https://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2021/04/aoc-wants-biden-to-boost-infrastructure.html

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that President Biden’s $2.25 trillion infrastructure package is  “encouraging.”

However, she added that she has “serious concerns that it’s not enough.” 

AOC said that the U.S. could “realistically need $10 trillion over 10 years.”

“I know that may by an eye-popping figure for some people, but we need to understand that we are in a devastating economic moment. Millions of people in the United States are unemployed. We have a truly crippled health care system and a planetary crisis on our hands, and we’re the wealthiest nation in the history of the world. So we can do $10 trillion,” she told Maddow. 

And here is the part where Rep. Ocasio-Cortez mentions the 10 trillion number that caught @Lawrence ‘s attention.

We’ll have the full @AOC interview published later tonight. pic.twitter.com/y7ZXNr9sht— Maddow Blog (@MaddowBlog) April 1, 2021

Maddow must have been short on time because she did not get a chance to ask AOC how she would pay for a $10 trillion program, or ask her about the economic distortions government programs cause or ask her why she wants to promote standard of living lowering unions.  –RW

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

EconomicPolicyJournal.com: Prepare for the Coming “Climate Lockdowns”

Posted by M. C. on February 23, 2021

Three obstacles to overhaul must be removed, she says, “business that is shareholder-driven instead of stakeholder-driven, finance that is used in inadequate and inappropriate ways, and government that is based on outdated economic thinking and faulty assumptions.” She is really talking about fascist economics, where governments set the policies of “private” sector firms:

https://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2021/02/prepare-for-coming-climate-lockdowns.html

AOC with Mariana Mazzucato

 Do you think it can’t get much worse than COVID-19 lockdowns?

Think again.

An establishment-connected lefty professor says that in “the near future, the world may need to resort to lockdowns again — this time to tackle a climate emergency.”

“Under a ‘climate lockdown,’ governments would limit private-vehicle use, ban consumption of red meat, and impose extreme energy-saving measures, while fossil-fuel companies would have to stop drilling,” writes Mariana Mazzucato, a professor at the Economics of Innovation and Public Value Center at University College London, in a paper titled “Avoiding a Climate Lockdown.” 

The title of her paper is very misleading. She believes climate lockdowns will be necessary unless we “overhaul our economic structures and do capitalism differently.”

Three obstacles to overhaul must be removed, she says, “business that is shareholder-driven instead of stakeholder-driven, finance that is used in inadequate and inappropriate ways, and government that is based on outdated economic thinking and faulty assumptions.” She is really talking about fascist economics, where governments set the policies of “private” sector firms:

[G]overnment assistance to business must be less about subsidies, guarantees, and bailouts, and more about building partnerships. This means attaching strict conditions to any corporate bailouts to ensure that taxpayer money is put to productive use and generates long-term public value, not short-term private profits…Because markets will not lead a green revolution on their own, government policy must steer them in that direction. This will require an entrepreneurial state that innovates, takes risks, and invests alongside the private sector.

From The New York Times:

Her message has appealed to an array of American politicians. Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts…has incorporated Dr. Mazzucato’s thinking into several policy rollouts, including one that would use “federal R & D to create domestic jobs and sustainable investments in the future” and another that would authorize the government to receive a return on its investments in the pharmaceutical industry. Dr. Mazzucato has also consulted with Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York, and her team on the ways a more active industrial policy might catalyze a Green New Deal…

Even Republicans have found something to like. In May[2019], Senator Marco Rubio of Florida credited Dr. Mazzucato’s work several times in “American Investment in the 21st Century,” his proposal to jump-start economic growth. “We need to build an economy that can see past the pressure to understand value-creation in narrow and short-run financial terms,” he wrote in the introduction, “and instead envision a future worth investing in for the long-term.”..

[A] charismatic figure in a contentious field that does not generate many stars — she was recently profiled in Wired magazine’s United Kingdom edition…Her ideas…are finding a receptive audience around the world. In the United Kingdom, Dr. Mazzucato’s work has influenced Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the Labour Party, and Theresa May, a former Prime Minister, and she has counseled the Scottish leader Nicola Sturgeon on designing and putting in place a national investment bank. She also advises government entities in Germany, South Africa and elsewhere. “In getting my hands dirty,” she said, “I learn and I bring it back to the theory…

[S]he pointed at an announcement on her laptop. She had been nominated for the first Not the Nobel Prize, a commendation intended to promote “fresh economic thinking.” “Governments have woken up to the fact the mainstream way of thinking isn’t helping them,” she said, explaining her appeal to politicians and policymakers. A few days later, she won.

The world is full of economists with very bad ideas but Mazzucato’s central planning ideas are among the worst. She is filled with ideas that would result in the harassment of individuals and independent businesses. Combine this with the following she is garnering and it makes her extremely dangerous.

Enjoy your hamburgers while you can. –RW

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

AOC and Schumer Want Taxpayer Funding for Covid-19 Funerals | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on February 10, 2021

By now, we already know that the forced business shutdowns created a pattern of destruction that will be hard to remedy. According to Yelp’s data, 97,966, or 60 percent, of the 163,735 businesses listed on the platform that closed between March and August won’t reopen. To many of these small business owners and their employees, unexpected closures meant poverty, depression, and lack of access to healthcare, all problems that also lead to deaths.

https://mises.org/wire/aoc-and-schumer-want-taxpayer-funding-covid-19-funerals

Alice Salles

US residents whose family members died with or of covid will be eligible to receive $7,000 for funeral and related expenses, New York senator Chuck Schumer (D) and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D) announced.

During a briefing in Queens on Monday, February 8, the duo announced that $267 million of the federally funded funeral benefits would go to low-income families in New York alone. The package, Schumer added, is part of a $2 billion disaster funds program run by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that will provide benefits to families nationwide.

In her speech, Ocasio-Cortez explained that families “are having to pay for the storage of the bodies of their own loved ones” in addition to covering the funeral and burial expenses.

“This is wrong,” she added.

The announcement was received warmly on social media, so it wasn’t a surprise to see few people questioning the duo’s intentions.

But if the goal is to help those impacted by the pandemic, why did neither Democrat bring up plans to provide aid to the families who lost loved ones to various state governments’ responses to the coronavirus?

An Undeserving Bunch

Following the first reports of infections, most states had stay-at-home orders in place as early as March 2020. While some governors started lifting some of the restrictions in June, the majority kept them in place, tightening restrictions once again by Thanksgiving.

By now, we already know that the forced business shutdowns created a pattern of destruction that will be hard to remedy. According to Yelp’s data, 97,966, or 60 percent, of the 163,735 businesses listed on the platform that closed between March and August won’t reopen. To many of these small business owners and their employees, unexpected closures meant poverty, depression, and lack of access to healthcare, all problems that also lead to deaths.

According to some estimates, deaths associated with factors other than coronavirus make up at least one-third of all excess deaths during the pandemic.

Deaths of despair, which include suicide and drug abuse, have been on the rise everywhere in the country since the beginning of the lockdowns, as well as deaths caused by delayed or interrupted medical treatment. The rate of domestic abuse is also growing, putting a greater number of lives at danger. One would think congressmen would try to use the lockdown-related data to push yet another benefits package. However, they all seem to play down the deaths and suffering caused by governments’ shutdown orders.

Before pushing for funeral expense reimbursements for families whose loved ones had covid, Ocasio-Cortez tried to play down the Democrats’ support for lockdowns by blaming Republicans who don’t wear masks for “forcing” states to shut down.

“Here’s what’s ironic to me: all these Republicans, all these people who were anti-shutdown, were the same people who weren’t wearing masks, who forced us to shut down in the first place,” she said in an Instagram Live video.

Despite her claims, two of the states hardest hit by the pandemic, California and New York, were also two of the first to enact mask mandates. But on Monday, February 8, the New York congresswoman had no words of sympathy for the families whose loved ones died due to the tyrannical mandates enacted by governors such as New York’s Andrew Cuomo, who now believes that lockdowns have gone too far.

“We simply cannot stay closed until the vaccine hits critical mass. The cost is too high,” he tweeted following the inauguration of President Joe Biden.

If Schumer and Ocasio-Cortez are indeed working to help the low-income families who lost loved ones in 2020, they are letting down a great number of Americans (and immigrants). Author:

Alice Salles

Alice Salles was born and raised in Brazil but has lived in America for over ten years. She now lives in Fort Wayne, Indiana with her husband Nick Hankoff and their three children.  

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Rent Control Is Nuts – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on May 18, 2020

And according to Assar Lindbeck, a Swedish economist, “In many cases, rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city except for bombing.” Almost as a follow up, Vietnamese Foreign Minister Nguyen Co Thach averred: “The Americans couldn’t destroy Hanoi, but we have destroyed our city by the very low rents.”

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/05/walter-e-block/rent-control/

By

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY, 14th District) has called for nation-wide rent control. AOC’s plan is to not allow rent increases larger than 3% per year. This is somewhat surprising, given that she majored in economics at prestigious Boston University. I – along with virtually every other economics professor in the country — am always at great pains to present in my introductory to micro-economics courses the familiar supply and demand diagram. It demonstrates that rents below equilibrium levels create shortages. I suppose she missed that lecture. If so, she really should have obtained the class notes from someone else, and/or perused her introductory textbook.

Senator Bernie Sanders has, if anything, done her one better: he is calling for a national rent control policy. California Governor Gavin Newsom has signed into law a policy along similar lines: rent increases shall be limited to 5% annually, in addition to any inflationary increases; this is coupled with making it more difficult to evict tenants.

Present New York City policy is very much in keeping with Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s plan. It has recently worsened its previous rather Draconian rent control legislation. The presumed aim is to help tenants. But, there is something in economics called “unintended consequences.” Translation: “the plans of mice and men often go astray.”

Suppose, instead of exacerbating its rent control regulations, that the city council of this great city had tried this sort of thing with a different consumer good. Suppose the Big Apple had passed a law placing a ceiling of $1 on a fast food meal.The obvious result would be that McDonalds, Burger King, Wendy’s and their ilk would pretty much vacate the entire city. Posit that the city council mandated that gas stations charge no more than $1 per gallon. A similar result would ensue. Denizens of the New York City would be greatly inconvenienced.

Mr. DeBlasio would never institute any such ridiculous initiative. He would be laughed out of office if he did. Why, then, does the mayor think he can get away with inculcating analogous rules for residential real estate? This is because while burger and gas emporiums can easily locate elsewhere, the same is not true for buildings. If the owners had their ‘druthers, and this were economically and legally possible, they would hoist their real estate holdings upon onto giant wheeled vehicles, and roll them out of the city as soon as possible. New York City would then have no more accommodation for tenants than it would have fast food outlets or gas stations, under our hypothetical contrary to fact scenarios.

Of course, landlords can do no such thing, much as they would like to; heck, they would give their eye teeth to be able to cock a snook at the politicians in this manner.

But this inability of landlords does not mean that rent controls have no adverse effects upon local residents. They can certainly build less new capacity than would otherwise be the case. They may be legally compelled to upkeep and maintain presently existing apartments, but they will do so only reluctantly. “The customer is always right” which prevails in most industries, and will continue to do so for commercial and industrial real estate, which lack such unwise price controls, but will not apply to residential units. They will fight like the dickens to convert their holdings to condominiums and cooperatives. They will have incentives to – how can I put this delicately – not to be too unhappy if their buildings accidentally catch fire. Do we really want to promote such incentives, whether or not they actually become implemented?

Vacancy rates will plummet even further, with these new dispensations. This will have negative repercussions on labor mobility, when occupants fear to give up their rent controlled units. There will be a tendency to convert apartments to stores, to industrial and commercial uses. New laws will have to be enacted to prevent this, and will not be totally successful. Landlord – tenant relations will plummet even further (not of course for non-controlled, non-residential units.) New York City already has special courts charged with solving these confrontations. This is something not at all needed in any other industry. These costs are substantial, and the money misallocated in this direction could have been far more wisely spent.

The economics profession is not unified on too many issues, but this one is an exception. Opposition to rent control stretches all the way from Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek on one stretch of the political spectrum, to several scholars on the very opposite side. For example, in the view of Nobel Prize winner in economics Gunner Myrdal, “Rent control has in certain western countries constituted, maybe, the worst example of poor planning by governments lacking courage and vision.” And according to Assar Lindbeck, a Swedish economist, “In many cases, rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city except for bombing.” Almost as a follow up, Vietnamese Foreign Minister Nguyen Co Thach averred: “The Americans couldn’t destroy Hanoi, but we have destroyed our city by the very low rents.”

It is urged in favor of this policy that tenants are poorer than property owners, and, often, are compelled to spend an inordinate percentage of their salaries on rent. But, with fewer buildings being constructed, and more of them falling into disarray due to reduced maintenance, upward pressure on rent levels, paradoxically, will tend to be the result. It is an economic truism that the less supply, other things equal, the higher the price. There are no exceptions for housing, or based on the fact that this expenditure plays a large role in the budgets of poor and middle class householders.

In any case, we do not single out textile manufacturers and insist they alone help clothe the impoverished, that only grocers and restaurants feed them, that automobile, air conditioner and television purveyors all on their own make these products available to those who cannot afford them. All of these income transfers come out of general funds. I do not at all favor any of these policies, but fair is fair. Why should housing be any different? Why should landlords, alone, have to bear the entire burden of housing the poor?

Not only should these latest violations of private property rights be rescinded, but the entire notion that rent control can alleviate housing shortages and high fees should be confined to the dust bin not only of history, but of economics too. From a legal point of view, this is a taking. Landlords should be compensated for this seizure of the (value of) their property.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

This Should Really Scare You About Joe Biden Domestic Policy

Posted by M. C. on May 17, 2020

As a wise man once said-Deja vu all over again.

Fast and Furious

https://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2020/05/this-should-really-scare-you-about-joe.html

On Thursday, the Biden campaign revealed the members of six “Biden-Sanders Unity Task Forces” that will develop his policy platform for the general election run, according to a press release.

The six groups will focus on immigration, climate change, criminal justice, the economy, education, and health care. There does not appear to be a sound advisor among them.

Democratic Socialist  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will co-chair the working group on climate change.

House Progressive Caucus co-chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., will co-chair the health care group.  He campaigned for Sanders in early primary states and supports “Medicare for All.”

Former Attorney General Eric Holder, who was part of the Obama administration, will be part of the criminal justice reform group.

And, most concerning, the eonomics task force includes Stephanie Kelton, who promotes modern monetary theory–the idea that you can just print and print and print money out of thin air to solve all the country’s problems.

Let’s hope that these groups won’t actually have any influence over the platform that Biden and the DNC adopt and that it is just a reach out to these mad people.

If Biden’s team actually supports any of the stuff coming out of these groups and he is elected, we will be in worse trouble than we are now.

RW

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Our Planet Is Not Fragile – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on August 4, 2019

Occasionally, environmentalists spill the beans and reveal their true agenda. Barry Commoner said, “Capitalism is the earth’s number one enemy.” Amherst College professor Leo Marx said, “On ecological grounds, the case for world government is beyond argument.”

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/03/walter-e-williams/our-planet-is-not-fragile/

By

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez claims that “the world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.” The people at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change agree, saying that to avoid some of the most devastating impacts of climate change, the world must slash carbon emissions by 45 percent by 2030 and completely decarbonize by 2050.

Such dire warnings are not new. In 1970, Harvard University biology professor George Wald, a Nobel laureate, predicted, “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” Also in 1970, Paul Ehrlich, a Stanford University biologist, predicted in an article for The Progressive, “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” The year before, he had warned, “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.” Despite such harebrained predictions, Ehrlich has won no fewer than 16 awards, including the 1990 Crafoord Prize, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences’ highest award.

Leftists constantly preach such nonsense as “The world that we live in is beautiful but fragile.” “The 3rd rock from the sun is a fragile oasis.” “Remember that Earth needs to be saved every single day.” These and many other statements, along with apocalyptic predictions, are stock in trade for environmentalists. Worse yet, this fragile-earth indoctrination is fed to the nation’s youth from kindergarten through college. That’s why many millennials support Rep. Ocasio-Cortez.

Let’s examine just a few cataclysmic events that exceed any destructive power of mankind and then ask how our purportedly fragile planet could survive. The 1883 eruption of the Krakatoa volcano, in present-day Indonesia, had the force of 200 megatons of TNT. That’s the equivalent of 13,300 15-kiloton atomic bombs, the kind that destroyed Hiroshima in World War II. Before that was the 1815 Tambora eruption, the largest known volcanic eruption. It spewed so much debris into the atmosphere that 1816 became known as the “Year Without a Summer.” It led to crop failures and livestock death in the Northern Hemisphere, producing the worst famine of the 19th century. The A.D. 535 Krakatoa eruption had such force that it blotted out much of the light and heat of the sun for 18 months and is said to have led to the Dark Ages. Geophysicists estimate that just three volcanic eruptions — Indonesia (1883), Alaska (1912) and Iceland (1947) — spewed more carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere than all of mankind’s activities during our entire history.

Our so-called fragile earth survived other catastrophic events, such as the floods in China in 1887, which took an estimated 1 million to 2 million lives, followed by floods there in 1931, which took an estimated 1 million to 4 million lives. What about the impact of earthquakes on our fragile earth? Chile’s 1960 Valdivia earthquake was 9.5 on the Richter scale. It created a force equivalent to 1,000 atomic bombs going off at the same time. The deadly 1556 earthquake in China’s Shaanxi province devastated an area of 520 miles.

Our so-called fragile earth faces outer space terror. Two billion years ago, an asteroid hit earth, creating the Vredefort crater in South Africa, which has a diameter of 190 miles. In Ontario, there’s the Sudbury Basin, resulting from a meteor strike 1.8 billion years ago. At 39 miles long, 19 miles wide and 9 miles deep, it’s the second-largest impact structure on earth. Virginia’s Chesapeake Bay crater is a bit smaller, about 53 miles wide. Then there’s the famous but puny Meteor Crater in Arizona, which is not even a mile wide.

My question is: Which of these powers of nature could be duplicated by mankind? For example, could mankind even come close to duplicating the polluting effects of the 1815 Tambora volcanic eruption? It is the height of arrogance to think that mankind can make significant parametric changes in the earth or can match nature’s destructive forces. Our planet is not fragile.

Occasionally, environmentalists spill the beans and reveal their true agenda. Barry Commoner said, “Capitalism is the earth’s number one enemy.” Amherst College professor Leo Marx said, “On ecological grounds, the case for world government is beyond argument.”

Be seeing you

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »