« Pelosi's Unprecedented Requests for Military Travel | Main | Put two and two together »

I've got nothin'

Hey kids! How's everyone enjoying their first month-plus of Hope and Change? There's just so much silliness emanating from Washington these days it's impossible to stay on top of the latest Obamanation inflicted upon the children. They'll be the ones cashing the checks. Not me, brother. I'm already plotting my escape to the unbridled laissez faire capitalism of the black market and underground economy.

But until then a man's got to pay the bills. And since my new Chinese overlords are happy to have me in the office 12+ hours a day I've found myself less interested in the daily trials and tribulations of Team Obama. I guess that's how the politburo controls the proletariat - keep them slaving so hard they don't have the energy to care. The Obama, Biden, Clinton, Holder, Reid, and Pelosi circus has left me so shocked and awed I'm numb to what a trillion dollars even means anymore.

Maybe I just need more sleep. The pace and volume of my new job really has been a bit overwhelming. Thank goodness I didn't have to coordinate the giveaways for the career fairs. I can say without hyperbole that after the last seven weeks I know what it was like to live through the siege at Stalingrad.

But it's only just started. You know it's going to get worse. It's the waiting that drives you mad. Everything up to now has just been a feint. When is the real bombshell going to drop? I can't be the only one who feels that way.

And then there's Obama and Company's hijinx.

Bona fide mental fatigue and Obamnesia have left me with pretty much nothing lately. Well, that, some nice spring weather, and the new NASCAR season.

Still, I did see that Obama has undone the Bush funding restrictions on embryonic stem cell research. Being a capitalist sort, I always wonder why ESC research has such a difficult time attracting private funds like other biotech companies and must rely on public money. The usual answer is that federal regulation and the threat of more regulation frightens away investors.

Which seems plausible except that there are no restrictions on ESC research - only a requirement that federal dollars are restricted to the 18 lines of cells that existed when Bush first funded ESC research. What frightens investors is, for all the talk of miracle cures just around the corner, the extremely low probability of any successful and marketable treatment using ESC in the foreseeable future. All their potential is just that for now.

An obvious follow-up is why would we want to expand government's control of our health care system, energy production, schools, or financial system if its restrictions stifle private investment and innovation? Maybe the last person out of Detroit can tell us all the reasons why. California has always been a barometer for America. How are things going there these days?

What did I tell you? Me and Obama are like peas in a pod. Two sleep deprived guys with nothing.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (8)

But do your ears stick out ... (Below threshold)

But do your ears stick out as far?

BVO, first of all, I too am... (Below threshold)

BVO, first of all, I too am thankful NASCAR cranked up. (no pun intended) Secondly, you are right on, there is no profit in the ESC research. The left is driven by emotion not facts. ww

there is no profit in th... (Below threshold)

there is no profit in the ESC research. The left is driven by emotion not facts.

Just for fun, Willie: should biomedical research be driven by profit?

When is the real bombsh... (Below threshold)

When is the real bombshell going to drop? I can't be the only one who feels that way.

Ditto. Not only am I walking around holding my breath due to our current economic mess, but you damn well know the terrorist aren't done with us yet.

Unfortunately, either I'm surrounded by the most ignorant people on the planet or no one cares about our current crisis. For example, I was conversing with my supervisor about the country's situation and his reply to me was "I don't watch the news or read the newspaper it's so depressing". Wake up! I hear this nonsense from way too many people, it's sad.

I don't necessarily always agree with every banger commentor, but at least they have an opinion.

Waiting to exhale...

Jsut for fun, hyper: <a hr... (Below threshold)
Just for fun, pgg: some soc... (Below threshold)

Just for fun, pgg: some social goods, including aspects of human health and overall well-being, do not evoke the same sort of responses in the marketplace such that necessary innovations can be left in the hands of the private sector.

If beating Phil Donahue in an argument means that Friedman was a good economist, then I would hope that you would apply that same standard to Paul Krugman every time he eviscerates a conservatarian bobblehead.

Otto - "Well, that, som... (Below threshold)

Otto - "Well, that, some nice spring weather, and the new NASCAR season."

Three cheers for that. However, sometimes NASCAR fails to come close to reasonable decisions.

hyper:Excellent st... (Below threshold)


Excellent strawman you have there! I'll set it afire just the same.

The point the Friedman made so powerfully is this: no government - anywhere, ever, in all of recorded history - has produced scientific innovation or advancement, or for that matter, net social good, at a rate approaching anything close to the profit-motivated free enterprise system.

And he's correct.

Most especially, most obviously, most pronounced in their failures are those governments which mandate the market policies. In particular note Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, Castro's Cuba, and today, Chavez's Venezuela.

Tell me, what sort of response would you anticipate from the marketplace in a situation where Obama adminstration decides what a "necessary innovation" is? Let me offer you an example from the current events hotline: The recent discussion of the possible passage and enactment of the Orwell-inspired Empolyee Free Choice Act has inspired Citigroup to downgrade Wal-Mart's stock from "buy" to "hold." I'm presuming here that one of your political ilk would argue that government-mandated expansion of union presence in the American marketplace is a "necessary innovation" in the direction of "social goods, including aspects of human health and overall well-being," and yet the marketplace response has been decidedly negative to this development.

One of the dozens of fine points you are forgetting here is that business works best when EVERYONE benefits - all stakeholders. That includes customers, who get desirable product at fair prices, for which they willingly pay; stockholders, who get reasonable return on investment, which they freely made; and company employees, who are paid wages according to empoyment contracts into which they willingly entered. If a company goes long down a path which does not consider all three of these stakeholders and their particular profit motive in the equation, the enterprise will collapse eventually.

Did Edison invent the light bulb to satisfy his altruism and improve the lives of generations of Americans?

Did Henry Ford mass-produce automobiles so we could all get more wear out of the soles of our shoes?

Did Garrett Morgan invent the traffic signal just to improve traffic control in Cleveland?

Did Elisha Otis invent the elevator to save the backs of deliverymen?

It is pure folly to think so. They did it because they saw an opportunity to improve their own lot by profiting from an innovation, and by improving the lot of the customers who saw greater personal value in owning their product than not doing so.

The profit-motivated free enterprise system is win-win commerce at its purest. Only when abused does it begin to fail. And that failure has historically come from any and all of the three stakeholders - customers, investors and employees alike. But also frequently, that abuse is mandated by government.

But nobody loves that narrative these days, so you'll never learn that unless you hunt for it.

Citigroup downgraded Wal-Mart, and today their stock dropped 2%. The market has resonded negatively to the EFCA in particular. Nor has the market responded well to Obama's policies either over his first 50 days, because they are anti-free market, mirroring your man Krugman and his man Keynes. So the free market, the source of just about every innovation for social good this nation has ever seen, responds accordingly. Surprise, surprise.

And the first time Krugman eviscerates a conservative using a higher standard than the lies and reversals common to his written efforts in the New York Times, I'll congratulate him with all appropriate grace.

But Milton Friedman would have taken Krugman's lunch away from him, tweaked his nose and sent him crying home to his momma. Just like he did to poor Phil.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy