“When egalitarian redistributors make an effort to justify the assumption that the state has the legitimate right to rearrange entitlements to achieve equality, it’s usually in the form of an invocation of the theory that all production is inextricably joint, that is, that all that you have (at least above the barest and meanest possible kind of brute existence) would be impossible without the farmers in the fields growing the crops that nourish you, the cop on the beat protecting you from thieves, and so on, and that none of the inputs into that process could be added or withdrawn. It’s the cop on the beat, i.e., the state, however, that gets the attention, since it’s assumed that the enforcement of claims to wealth and income is what accounts for the fact of your having wealth and income at all, and thus the state, as the sine qua non of that wealth and income, is entitled to dispose of all of it.”
|
|||||
|
“I think it’s an interesting reflection on politics today when the choice in a major election is between a drunken, possibly alcoholic, philanderer and a philanderer. I’ve nothing at all against booze, excessive consumption of such, extra-marital legovers nor even illegitimate children. All add enormously to the gaiety and variety of life and no society with even the slightest claim to being liberal or free would say different. But it is an interesting insight into the characters of those who rise to the top in politics, isn’t it?” Well, if you explore the history of the 18th Century and 19th, for example, you will find political figures who were drunks, wife-beaters, adulterers, duellists (Andrew Jackson, the US president, fought several, as did British political figures such as Fox, Castlereagh and Canning); indolent fools, frauds and con-artists. Plus ca change…… February 29th, 2012 | 9 comments - (Comments are closed)
Frederic Bastiat, quoted over at Bleeding Heart Libertarians. I also liked this following paragraph:
Bastiat is also described in this piece as a “Ninja”. Nice! February 28th, 2012 | 4 comments - (Comments are closed)
“Penn takes the direct opposite side from his government and country” That’s not a problem. I do it all the time. ALL the time. Penn’s problem is he’s an idiot. (Fine actors are frequently just a splurge of emotion and empathy. You want superhot steam in a calliope. You don’t want it under your desk with the PC and the genitalia.) ‘His’ government happens to be equivocal on the point currently. But if it agreed with him, it wouldn’t make his view any less idiotic. – Guy Herbert February 27th, 2012 | 3 comments - (Comments are closed)
Your teeth belong to the collective. – From a Planet Money piece quoted by Alex Tabarrok (who was linked to today by David Thompson), about how China went from the bad old days of the Great Leap Forward to the better days that followed. The above words, which Thompson also singled out for attention in his link, were an answer to a property rights query to those in authority, in the bad old days. Do we even own our teeth? No you do not. The switch from collective “property” to actual property, as Tabarrok makes clear, was initiated by the people of China, rather than by their rulers. It began in the village of Xiaogang, whose farmers decided to go back to actual property for each individual farmer and his family, with immediate beneficial effects. And then it became a movement. The rulers of China didn’t decide to make this change. They merely decided not to stamp it out. February 24th, 2012 | 7 comments - (Comments are closed)
“He writes as though his prose has been fed through Google translate. Twice. Alas, discerning his meaning remains possible when it would plainly be better for him if it were not. He is not in Kissinger’s class. But he is still youngish and so there is time yet for his prose to develop a thicker crust of unintelligibility that would be a fitting match for his statesmanlike grandeur and all the rest of that sort of thing.” The Google remark is particularly good. That must hurt. What an utter buffoon Mr Penn is. And humourless, as the creators of Team America: World Police discovered. February 24th, 2012 | 2 comments - (Comments are closed)
“Nothing more poignantly reflects the collapse of the great global warming scare than the decision of the Chicago Carbon Exchange, the largest in the world, to stop trading in “carbon” – buying and selling the right of businesses to continue emitting CO2. A few years back, when the climate scare was still at its height, and it seemed the world might agree the Copenhagen Treaty and the US Congress might pass a “cap and trade” bill, it was claimed that the Chicago Exchange would be at the centre of a global market worth $10 trillion a year, and that “carbon” would be among the most valuable commodities on earth, worth more per ton than most metals. Today, after the collapse of Copenhagen and the cap and trade bill, the carbon price, at five cents a ton, is as low as it can get without being worthless.” February 20th, 2012 | 3 comments - (Comments are closed)
Who forms criminal associations? You see them formed by bankers, politicians, judges, and maybe, sometimes… by thugs. – Beppe Grillo, Italian blogger and comedian February 19th, 2012 | One comment - (Comments are closed)
We already have a ‘Samizdata quote of the day’ for today, but, yes, here are seven more. I wrote them down over last Christmas, and then forgot about them. Ant then today, I encountered them again. They still make me smile, so here they all are for you good people. First, a couple of things said by Patsy Stone, the amazing fashion monstress played by Joanna Lumley in Absolutely Fabulous. Over Christmas there were two new episodes. So much for my “complete” box set that I found in a charity shop last year. On the terribleness of the recent riots in London:
On the drugs issue:
Also on a fashion theme, from one of those Father Christmas in a New York Shopping Store movies, said by the Lady Boss:
That’s the spirit. And depending on how the project turns out:
Which has to be a very old joke, but like I say, it made me smile. Next, this from the Headmistress of St Trinian’s (played by Rupert Everett), about her (I think) brother (also Rupert Everett), to her brother’s daughter:
Finally a couple of overhearings from BBC Radio 3. Here’s something from the recently deceased Gustav Leonhardt, about and with whom they did a commemorative Music Matters show, featuring a recorded interview with him. Leonhardt is explaining why the biographical details of the lives of the great composers don’t interest him that much, only their music.
Finally, here is Professor Robert Winston, ruminating on science, in between introducing some of his classical favourites with Rob Cowan:
The phrase “climate science” was never uttered, but you got the distinct feeling that this particular Public Voice is thinking that CAGW is a band-waggon that it now makes more sense to get off rather than to shout from. I must remember to email the Bishop about that. Something tells me that the CAGW-ists will, any year now, start having short memories masquerading as clear consciences. February 17th, 2012 | 3 comments - (Comments are closed)
As this is the anniversary of the day that the Blaine Act ended prohibition in the US, I feel that we are morally obliged to have a beer to commemorate. – my colleague, in response to an email I sent around at work asking whether we should make the customary Friday lunchtime trip to the pub. February 17th, 2012 | 2 comments - (Comments are closed)
Via Bryan Caplan at EconLog:
He’s quoting the John Galt speech out of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged. I agree with Caplan that that is a great quote. And she was right: if we say “it’s only human” when we refer to someone being an asshole, or forgetful, or inconsiderate, or loses their temper, or some such, shouldn’t we also say “it’s only human” when a person is thoughtful, considerate, productive, courageous and adventurous”? On a slightly different tack, though, I think people often use the “I am only human” when, as the use of the word “only” implies, we are talking about the limits, and inevitable fallibility of we creatures. But then again, it is precisely because of our limits and partial knowledge, that it is all the more admirable, and worthy of note, when we imperfect creatures do the right thing, do things well, and show excellent character. February 16th, 2012 | 19 comments - (Comments are closed)
What is the difference between a landed family’s trust fund and a dole recipient’s benefits? I’ll tell you: One of them is an income derived from a piece of territorial property, assigned by accident of birth, originally acquired by forcefully expropriating the previous owners but now generally regarded as legitimate and which is only paid by people who choose to occupy the estate in question instead of living somewhere else… …and the other one is a landed family’s trust fund. – Typographically challenged commenter ‘fjfjfj’ February 14th, 2012 | 11 comments - (Comments are closed)
|
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||