Town Crier
July 26, 2016

Making Something Free Does Not Make it Cheaper

One of the latest fads in progressive, socialist dramatic thinking revolves around the $1.3 trillion in student loan debt. In this episode, college graduates play the role of the victims. The producers casted debt and college tuition as the villains. And as always, government takes the part of the savior. The simple plot shows the college student being held hostage by debt and rising tuition costs. To make matters worse, the victim cannot earn enough money at their waitressing or bartender job to pay the ransom. The savior slays the villains by forgiving the loans and offering free college. The End.

There is an old economic axiom that states when you subsidize something you get more of it. In order to make college “affordable”, government for some time now has subsidized student loans in the form of borrowing costs below the natural rate. When you lower the interest rates for student loans, then more people will go to college, which increases the demand for higher education classrooms and facilities. Colleges react to this new demand by offering a wider spectrum of degrees to meet the various interests from this influx of students, which means hiring more faculty and constructing additional facilities. Some degrees wouldn’t qualify a student for a greeter at Wal-mart. The ultimate effect from subsidized loans is higher tuition costs.

If you want to make college affordable and diminish student debt, the answer is to quit subsidizing higher education. The simple progressive solution will mean ever more demand and the working people of this country shouldering an enormous tuition bill.

Making something free does not make it cheaper.

Town Crier
July 24, 2016

The Drama of Progressive Thinking

In honor (not in the literal sense) of the Democratic Convention, this is the first in a series of articles devoted to the progressive, liberal and socialist mindset (one in the same).

Progressives often hold themselves out as intellects with the ability to analyze and philosophize in a deep manner well beyond the capabilities of mere mortals.

In his book What Gay Marriage Says About Liberty &You, Dr. Michael Peters unlocks the secret to the progressive thought. It turns out the thinking processes of the left run no deeper than the coffee they sip.

The progressive mind approaches every issue from a triangular perspective, or what Peters calls dramatic thinking. A good drama requires three actors; a victim, a villain, and a savior (never in the context of God). The analysis of a cop shooting a black person goes no further than the obvious victim, racism or white privilege or the gun as a villain, and a political savior in the form of gun control, or diversity training, The progressive mind predisposes racism anytime an interaction between a police officer and black person results in a negative outcome for the latter. This ignores the fact that half of police shootings in 2015 resulted in a white person on the receiving end of the bullet compared to 25% for blacks. A Department of Justice study on the Philadelphia Police Department concluded a black police officer was 3.3 times more likely to fire a gun than a white officer.

While the dramatic thinker dabs the tears of white privilege, the critical thinker deconstructs the problem. A colleague wrote the following passage:

On July 17th, 2014, Eric Garner died during an encounter with the police. The reason for the encounter: Garner was illegally selling cigarettes.

Rumain Brisban was shot by police on December 2nd, 2014 and died the next day. The police were questioning him about a possible drug deal and he fled.

Jerame Reid was shot and killed on December 30th, 2014. He had been pulled over for failing to come to a complete stop at a stop sign.

Walter Scott was killed on April 4th, 2015 after being pulled over for a broken tail light.

April 12th, 2015 Freddie Gray died in the custody of police after he was arrested for possessing an illegal switchblade.

Victor White III died after being arrested for cocaine and marijuana possession on March 2nd, 2014.

All of these men were black. I went through each name and researched the circumstances of their deaths. I find these six to be the most frustrating because they could be alive today.

Not one of these men had violated the rights of another person. Drugs, cigarettes, and driving offenses (as long as they do not cause an accident) violate no rights of other people. Why are they illegal?

If those laws did not exist, the interactions between these men and the police would never have happened and they would be alive today.

Laws can only be enforced through the use or threat of force, which includes the possibility of the enforcer firing a weapon. In other words, every single law carries a probability of death. The odds of being shot by the police increase every time a governing body adds a new law to the books.

So, if we want to reduce the number of deaths at the hands of the police, the solution might be to restrict the laws to those where a person clearly violates or threatens another’s property or life.

Town Crier
July 16, 2016

A Dangerous Economic Policy

The democrats wasted little time to breathe the bumper stick glue after Trump announced Governor Mike Pence as his running mate. Clinton henchman John Podesta said the choice of Pence showed Trump’s willingness to double-down on failed economic and discrimination policies that favor millionaires and corporations over working families. Was Podesta talking about the Federal Reserve manipulating interest rates to near zero over the last eight years when “working families” and retirees saw no return on savings while millionaires got richer in stocks and real estate. One thing about bumper stickers, they never dive into facts or logic. Later on, Podesta revealed the truly danger of Pence’s economic mind. Apparently, the governor opposes a $15 per hour minimum wage.

Anyone with the most rudimentary knowledge of economics understands the immediate consequences of raising the minimum wage. First like any normal good, the increase in the price of unskilled labor will cause employers to look for substitutes in the form of capital (a man-made good used to produce another good). The recent expansion in the use of ordering and payment kiosk in the fast-food industry demonstrates this substitution effect.

The employer might also try to get by with less staff. Starbucks touted itself as a responsible employer when the company increased wages without the prod of a government edict. The employees saw a different face than what the company turned toward the public. It seems the coffee house giant started cutting employee hours soon after the raise. Wal-mart did the same thing of raising wages and then reducing staff.

Many who support an increase in the minimum wage fall back on the argument that big corporations like McDonalds and Burger King can afford to pay their employees more. This logic fails to realize one thing; most fast-food restaurants bearing the McDonalds logo are owned by franchisees. McDonalds, the corporation, receives a royalty equal to around 5% of sales. Labor costs (wages, matching social security contributions, and benefits) make up around 30% of total expenses for a franchisee. A doubling of wages increases the labor portion of total cost to 46% (I’ll let you figure the math). In order to maintain the same return on investment, the franchisee must either reduce staff or raise prices or both.

Again, the laws of economics get in the way of raising the minimum wage. When prices increase, consumers look for substitutes. Last week, Starbucks announced plans to raise the price of certain drinks by a dime to 30 cents, which might not sound like much to a millionaire getting richer by Federal Reserve policies. But at some point, known as the margin in economics, an increase in price causes the “little guy” to cut back on their consumption of Starbuck’s coffee and McDonalds hamburgers. The “little guy” can make hamburgers on the grill and coffee in a Keurig. Since labor is a function of demand, a reduction in sales at Starbucks translates into fewer employees.

In the end, someone loses a job with an increase in the minimum wage. Now that sounds like a dangerous economic policy to me.

Town Crier
July 9, 2016

Diversity and Inclusion is not a Culture

If you mixed every paint pigment together, what color do you get? Black, like the far depths of a cave. No reference points exist in the pitch darkness. You wonder without a sense of direction. The rough, but unseen, cave walls bounce you down a path to another blind step. Three possibilities waits for the lost traveler at the end of the trail; light, a cave wall, or a plunge to the death down a deep pit.

A society based on inclusion and diversity leads society to a result no different than a painter who mixes the colors. In his Letters from an American Farmer, J Hector Saint John de Crevecoeur (try putting that on a back of a jersey) wrote about the American melting pot. The mixture he talked about consisted of citizens from all across Europe. The Judea-Christian moral code formed the basis of the culture. The melting pot or smelting pot, as Ralph Waldo Emerson called it, included people of different color and immigrants traveling from south of the border and Asia. It all worked because, regardless of religious background, people carried out their lives centered on hard work and a moral code. And also something else, politically incorrect, came into play.

People of different cultures and customs traded with each other, but didn’t necessarily mix. They lived in places labeled by their ethnicity; Chinatown, Little Italy, the Barrio, Little India. In these conclaves, people found comfort speaking their native tongue and practicing traditional rituals.

The progressives then demanded we mix regardless of beliefs and customs. They threw the moral code into the dumpster. Bureaucrats and judges found a human right to steal, murder an unborn child, marry a same-sex partner, and to imagine a body different than your genetic make-up. Government supported and encouraged the lazy, the raising of a child outside of the traditional family, and religions based on conquest by death. Assimilation now means accepting the unacceptable under the threat of force. Contrary to popular myth, a political solution for cohesiveness does not exist. The black paint was stirred by progressive politics.

A friend passed on this thought; we need to retreat to our neutral corners. It is time to think about a divorce. We can still mingle and relish our cultural differences through trade, but we don’t have to accept the unacceptable.

Town Crier
July 6, 2016

Don’t Drink the Diarrhea

I strolled into a Starbucks the other for a cup of brew and an economics lesson. A young man with a ponytail and earrings who probably majored in LGBT studies gave me a cheerful greeting.

Server: “What can I get you sir?”

Me: “I definitely don’t want any of that diarrhea you’ve been drinking. It turned your brain into shit.”

Server: Pardon me, what are you talking about?”

I think he stomped his feet at this point.

Me: “Do you like working for Starbucks? How much do they pay you?”

Server: “I love working here. They gave us a raise to $15 an hour.”

Me: “That’s great. How many hours per week do you work?”

Server: “I work 20 hours a week”

Me: “How many did you work before the raise?”

Server: “I worked 40 and made $10 an hour.

Me: Do the math and don’t give me the shit you drink. I’ll take a Latte.

Server turning to an older man: “Dad, I need a latte.”

Me: “Your Father works here.”

Server: “Yeah, he works two jobs now.”

Me: “When did that start?”

Server: “After Obamacare. But now we can afford insurance.”

Me: “How much are the deductibles.”

Server: “$6,000.”

Me: “How much does your family have in the savings account?”

Server: “About $3,000, Can I get anything else for you?”

Me: “A shot of cyanide.”

It looks like Starbucks along with Wal-mart played everyone for economic fools. In a public relations coup these companies boasted how they raised the minimum wages for their employees. But there are two variables when it comes to compensation; the wage rate and the hours worked.

Town Crier
July 4, 2016

Happy Treason Day

On this day in 1776, Fifty-six mostly young, white guys affixed their signatures to a death warrant in the name of liberty. Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, the two main architects of the document, were 33 and 41 years of age respectively. John Hancock, the first signer and who lost his entire fortune supporting the revolution, was 39. As Adams noted later in life, they risked everything for an idea.

In essence, the founding fathers postulated the rights of people came from their humanity or creator and not from the whims of a single person or governing body. And when government became oppressive, it was the right of the people to disassociate from or alter it. People possessed the right to live their lives as they saw fit as long as their actions did not harm another’s property or life. Embodied in this idea of liberty, people could freely associate or withdrawal from relationships, including government.

In 1776, the signers realized a political solution no longer existed between them and an imperialistic; corrupt government seated in Great Britain. The Declaration of Independence was not a declaration of war. Only the British throne made it such. But men like Patrick Henry knew the government would not go quietly into the night and compromise only led to increased oppression. In his give me liberty or death speech Henry noted:

Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned – we have remonstrated – we have supplicated – we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne.

In a twist of irony, the people of Great Britain 240 years later decided by referendum to sever the ties with an ever encroaching, corrupt government know as the European Union. Some in the media, as I am sure they would have done in 1776, labeled such action as an example of extremism.

Tonight as you watch fireworks light up the night sky, reflect on what you’re celebrating. What true freedoms do you have? What part of your daily life does the government leave you alone? I dare say you cannot even go to the bathroom without the infringement of government. Even our right to vote has been limited to two parties that only wish to expand government

Just as in 1776, we face a position where politics no longer provides a solution.

Town Crier
June 27, 2016

Don’t Say Anything About her Shoes

In order to avoid the wrath of the gender socialists, the University of North Carolina instituted some rather bizarre policies toward what a person can say to the opposite sex, and what a person can wear. Apparently, the gender Nazis feel uncomfortable when someone compliments the shoes on their feet. The logic follows the path of a guy noticing a woman’s shoes, which means he also gets a glimpse of her legs. Well, it is just a hop, skip and a jump to the crotch, and the next thing you know the guy has a two-foot boner sticking through his pants. Maybe instead you should say, did you sprain your ankles or have they always been that size, bitch.

Secondly, the University wants its employees to dress in a manner that does not reveal gender. Does that mean women will be forced to go braless. Imagine the sight of sixty-year old women strutting around campus without a bra and their tits drooping down to their belly buttons. That will make any guy transgender.

Gender-neutral clothing could mean you don’t wear any clothes. And if you don’t wear any clothes people can see if you have a thing or an un-thing, which means they know what gender you are and what bathroom you should use. And you also get to look at a naked sixty-year-old woman with big fat ankles and a pair of tits drooping down to her belly button.

But remember, don’t say anything about her shoes.

Town Crier
June 26, 2016

Time for Reason to Come Out of the Closet

I just started to read a book, What Gay Marriage Says about Liberty &You, by Michael Peters. In the first chapter, the author attacks the premise of gay-from-birth from two different perspectives. Socialists use the gay-by-birth reasoning to constitutionally justify the right for gays to marry and a transgender using a facility different from their genetic makeup.

The first argument against gay by birth comes from the Darwin point of view. The purpose of natural selection is so a species might adapt and continue to thrive. If this is the case, then what purpose do gays serve for the continued survival of humans. A man has a “thing” and a women has an “unthing” so that humans can continue to inhabit the earth. A gay couple cannot breed, and thus, they hinder the ability for humans to populate the world. There is no point for a gay man to have a thing or a lesbian to have an “unthing”. Under evolution, you might expect a person gay –from- birth to come out of the womb with “nothing”.

I have yet to see any proven scientific data indicating a gay gene. In fact, one of the more damning evidence against a gay genome comes from identical twins where one of the pair is gay and the other is not. Dr. Neil Whitehead, a researcher for the New Zealand government, observed that because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. “No-one is born gay,” he notes. “The predominant things that create homosexuality in one identical twin and not in the other have to be post-birth factors.”

The logic of gay-from-birth fairs no better in the sphere of God’s creation. I find no where in the Bible where it supports the idea God created a man to join another man in a sexual relation or the same in the case of a woman lusting another woman. In Romans, Paul talks about God’s wrath against those who participate or support homosexual activity.

It’s time for people of reason to come out of the closet. Maybe the next parade should be a Gay Fraud march.

Town Crier
June 23, 2016

Immigration is Making You Sick

illegalsIn a little over a month, athletes from around the world will gather in Rio de Janeiro for the summer Olympic games. Literally, a bug has marred this quadrennial sporting event before the lighting of the Olympic flame. The Zika virus has caused reporters and athletes alike to unpack their bags and stay home.

Continue reading

Town Crier
June 18, 2016

Where Have You Been for the Last Eight Years

I would sue any president that exceeds his or her powers”

For eight years, Paul Ryan watched Obama shred the Constitution into confetti. He sat mum over one executive action after another.But now when Donald Trump proposes a ban on immigrants from Muslim terrorist countries, Ryan finds such an idea disgusting. He even floated the idea of suing a President Trump who took action to stop people who want to kill Americans from entering the country.

Continue reading