Don't feed the trolls

I know, you aren't supposed to.
But because this is an election year, and because the potato sack empress brought this up at the debate right away, I feel compelled, as a public service, to correct the notion that seems accepted by an astounding number of supposedly intelligent people:  trickle-down economics didn't work!
A little background here might be instructive.  "Trickle-down" is a reference to the effect of a decrease in the highest marginal tax rates, which is obviously paid by the wealthiest among us.  The thinking goes that this decrease in tax rates frees up income previously taken by the government or tied up in relatively unproductive tax-avoidance "shelters".  This money can now find more productive use as capital for the creation or expansion of businesses, in the process creating new job opportunities and generating new wealth not only for the investor, but also the newly employed worker, who otherwise wouldn't have had that job.  It is in the generation of new wealth that this so-called "trickle-down" effect occurs.  It is a concept that is straightforward, and proven with spectacular improvement of the American economy in the early 1980s.  Of course, since the main proponent of lowering marginal tax rates was a Republican, the opposition party, tied to the idea of ever-expanding government and their own political power, sought out any way they could devise to discredit Reagan's obvious success.  The reality is a small cottage industry was born to try and explain away why Reagan's success was not success.  The masses had to be convinced Reagan did them wrong.
So in the years since the net positive economic effect of lower marginal tax rates was so effectively demonstrated to the world, a twisted new logic was conceived whereby trickle-down was nothing more than an evil plot to further enrich the wealthy at the expense of the rest of us.  Democrats have been demonizing Reagan since before he even left office.  In order to make this work, they first need to run the misdirection that a tax cut is the same as a subsidy. That somehow, letting a person keep more of what they have earned equates to greed or evil intent.   This notion can only be true if all income is the property of the government, and the government alone will decide what is fair in terms of keeping the income you made.  Of course, this notion is ridiculous, but the entire idea of trickle-down being a failure is built on it.  If your logical foundation is wrong you have no real logic at all.  Don't tell that to the stooges endlessly repeating the mantra of the modern Democrats of "tickle-down" failure.  If you call them out on their lack of understanding of what trickle-down is, expect to be called every name in the book.  They might even bring out a thousand little charts purporting to make their case.  But trickle-down is a very simple concept with plenty of actual data showing benefit for much more than the wealthy.
A lot of the heat generated on this topic has to do with more recent attempts at reducing marginal rates not having a benefit here in this country to the working classes, and there is some truth to that, but its not because trickle-down doesn't work. On the contrary, it still works as well as ever.  It is just that other factors are removing the trickle from American workers and towards workers from other nations.  The prime driver is without question the high cost of American labor, relative to the world market.  As difficult as it is to swallow here, labor is a commodity, and American workers don't want to work all day for what a Chinese or Mexican factory worker would make in that same day. Only by making productive hourly units less expensive here will the bleeding of jobs stop, otherwise "the invisible hand" Adam Smith refers to will do what it always does.  The increasingly global economy won't stop to let Americans caught off-guard catch up.  And you can blame trade deals if you want to but it won't change any of the underlying factors that have slowly eviscerated our manufacturing base.  Agreements like NAFTA only accelerated this, they were not the root cause.
A real academic or better writer might make a more persuasive argument.  But I am just another Joe SixPack who happened to have the benefit of actually studying this topic at the time it was being implemented.  So I'm not going to just sit idly by when leftists try to rewrite history for their own political benefit.  Of course, if we had some actual Republicans with the brains to make the case I might not have to play the part of the lone wolf howling in the dark.  But that's another topic for another day.

PS I am under no illusions that my commentary will have any effect on the aforementioned trolls, because they are normally so convinced of their own superiority that I can't even join the conversation without a PhD. I humbly, nonetheless, submit my text for your consideration.

Confessions of a beer "dweeb"

Ok, I like to drink beer.  Anyone who knows me knows I will, from time to time, imbibe.  When I first started to drink any serious beer I was a freshman at college, which was perhaps behind the curve when compared to my peers.  I usually drank beer at the keggers and rarely drank whiskey or other "hard liquor" with the exception of "Punch" with everclear and God knows what else.  As not particularly wealthy college students, the beer was almost always cheap. Heineken or Warsteiner were reserved for the formal dinners at the fraternity house, which suited me fine.  Even at that early age I preferred the lighter brews to the darker ones with more distinctive flavors.  I didn't really feel any peer pressure to drink heavier beers and craft beers were in their infancy in terms of their current popularity.

So college comes to an end and "real life" begins -- working, marriage, family, settling down. I still like to drink beer but it is mostly reserved for weekends, when work doesn't interfere.  For the most part, I stick to Miller Lite, Coors Light, or Old Milwaukee/other cheap beer.  Skip forward 30 years. 

Social norms change over time, and the younger beer-drinking crowd seems less interested in "dads" beer and more interested in the many craft beers that have exploded onto the scene in recent years.  You may have run into this guy, the guy who REALLY knows all these beers and can describe the differences.  A beer "connoisseur", beer "snob", whatever word you like.  This guy was indeed rare in my formative beer drinking days in the Midwest.  He isn't so rare anymore, as I have found out.  Compared to this guy, I am a beer "ignoramus" or beer "dweeb".  Don't get me wrong, I don't think there is anything wrong with beer snobbery.  I am glad there is something out there for everyone, its the free market at its best.  I just ain't that guy.  This past weekend I was invited to a party with a beer and boardgame theme.  In attendance was an old friend and his son and son's friends, so most were in their twenties, and college-educated.  Upon arrival, I find that there is a LOT of beer.  Many different kinds of beer.  Curiously, there is NO Bud Light, Miller Lite, Coors, Bud, or any other "popular" beers that would be there were I to be throwing a get-together.  It was a little bit of shock to the system, to realize just how far out of the loop my beer dweebness was from the younger hipper crowd.

Well the games and the company was great, and I was able to sample a few brews I hadn't before, some of which weren't bad at all.  I find that I just don't care for anything citrus-y or dark.  It's just that, after so many years of common lagers, I have developed a comfort level with "dads" beer.  So I am the beer dweeb.  Thirty years ago the peer pressure would have made me go the way of what was hip.  Today, though, I realize what is hip may not appeal to me.  The music sure doesn't, and the beer doesn't have to either.

Worth pondering

Why this (the smart-aleck comments) is wrong

My friend wanted to know why I thought this picture, making its way around facebook, is wrong.  So, here is my explanation as to why this awesome picture has been rendered silly by the addition of stupid commentary.

Let's start with the notion that somehow Mr. Gaster has not paid a "fair" share of taxes.  He surely started this business with not very much and built it up, paying federal, state, and local taxes on every dollar he made along the way.  The taxes were assessed whether or not the business was successful, and only increased with the success of the business.  As the business became more successful, Mr. Gaster was able to hire employees, making a positive contribution to the local economy and increasing his own tax burden in terms of employment and unemployment taxes.

Then there is this notion that the business succeeds because there are public roads, and public police and firefighters, and public education for Mr. Gaster and those who might work for him.  But would not these things exist if Mr. Gaster not chosen to risk all of his earthly possessions to start his business?  Of course they would, because society has decided that roads and schools and police forces and firefighters are things that are needed.  They are provided to the extent that society can provide for them through taxation.  Mr. Gaster, as a part of that society, paid for these things just as anyone else in his community had, so he has just as much right as anyone else has to benefit from roadways, water systems, waste water treatments, garbage collection, police forces, and any other things the community has provided for.  Indeed, these type of services are touted by localities as reasons for those wanting to establish businesses to put their business in that area and not somewhere else.

Then we get to the laughable notion that reliable electricity has been provided by the government, as if the company actually generating and selling the electricity to Gaster Lumber was the government, and not a public utility regulated by a public utility commission.  I think if you ask an employee of Duke Energy or American Electric Power who is paying them I do not think the response you get will be the government.  Ask customers of Dominion Power how they feel about the response to the recent derecho.  There you have a situation where the government tries to distance itself from the electric utility.

Finally, we get to the completely silly assertions such as the business is successful because of trade agreements, currency, access to radio waves, or internet access.  As if there would be no business without trade agreements, currency, radio waves, or internet.  Business existed before any of these things.  The fact that they exist now does not mean that a business can succeed only because of these things.

We haven't even begun to discuss the things government does that hinder the expansion or even drive businesses onto bankruptcy.  Obamacare is only the most recent example as government has been levying taxes and regulations on businesses for years.  Businesses need to hire accountants and lawyers to successfully navigate the minefield  laid for them by the government's various regulatory agencies and legal requirements.  If a business somehow manages to successfully navigate all the these obstacles, they get the privilege of being demonized by the current administration, and the bonus of being labelled as greedy if they complain in any way.

So in short, when Obama says something as silly as "you didn't build that" then Ray Gaster and everyone else in his position has every right to tell him to "KMA" and I proudly support him.

Who is Brett Kimberlin? If you don't know you should

Way too much has already been written about this convicted domestic terrorist.  What is scary is that he and his associates are systematically harassing conservative bloggers, causing things like job firings, SWAT raids, and legal harassment through frivolous lawsuits.  He has managed to become well-funded through the use of non-profit organizations that raise money from various left-wing sympathizers, who are all happy to see these attacks carried out on their ideological enemies.  Do yourself a favor and read about this guy.  And remember that you too could be a target of this guy or people like him.

How to change a headlight in 3+ hours

After being pulled over by Lawrenceburg's finest last night for having the audacity to drive to work with a burned out headlamp, I resolved today to replace the bulb. It was an off day, and the December weather wasn't so terrible, so working on the car didn't seem especially scary for my non-mechanically inclined self. I needed to drop off my daughter at school for the pep band, so afterwards I made my trip to the auto parts store to procure the replacement. This was at 6 PM. Around 6:15 I arrived at the Harrison Advanced Auto, where the clerk promptly offered to help when I mentioned I needed a new low-beam. A couple of seconds later, he had looked up the part and within two minutes, I was on my way $15 poorer. I knew the fun was just beginning however, as this car was (relatively) new to me and I hadn't really done anything to it myself.

After arriving home, I got my meager basket of tools and got set up in the driveway, where the outdoor floodlights would provide enough light to do the chore. I got out the owner's manual the manufacturer provided with the vehicle, to see if there was any helpful information to be found. My previous experience told me not to expect too much, and I was not disappointed. Most of these books tell you nothing, other than to take the vehicle to the (fill in the blank) dealer for service. Not wanting to pay a hundred bucks to swap out a light bulb, I persevered. This particular vehicle has a four foot long cowling for which the only function I can ascertain is a dust cover for the radiator. Of course this piece is in the way from the headlamp assembly, or at least the brackets that hold it in place. It is held in place by a dozen screws, so I dutifully removed them, taking care not to misplace them (experience has taught me this lesson, like anything else I ever learned about working on cars, learned the hard way.)

After a few minutes I removed the giant dust cover, and loosened the bolts that held the brackets. But the headlamp assembly still didn't move, and the flood lamps didn't produce enough light under the hood to see what the obstruction was. Need a flashlight I guess. Twenty-five minutes and two phone calls later, I find out that the flashlight (the one that still works) is in the blasted car! Now I can see that nothing is obstructing the headlamp assembly. A little wiggle and the whole assembly turns, so now I can get to the actual bulb. Of course, the useless owner's manual doesn't tell me that the connectors are not pulled out like other vehicles I have had in the past; instead, the bulb is rotated to disconnect, then it just sits there with nothing holding it in. Luckily, I figured this out BEFORE I broke the connectors that didn't want to move (my Voyager wasn't so lucky.) Finally, the bulb is free! Now just put the new one in, and I am done.

This is where frustration sets in, as the new bulb, so thoughtfully provided by the helpful clerk, was NOT the right one. I purchased a H11, but the proper replacement is the H11B, which looks like the H11 but the base is different. Dead in the water, no other car here, got to reassemble the car and head back to the store. Closing in on 8 PM, got to call the store and make sure they are still open. Open until 9! OK, off I go again.

Now it is about 8:15, and I find out when I arrive that they don't have any H11B in stock, but they can get some tomorrow. Which would mean another trip. So I opt instead for the refund on the first bulb, and take my chances at the Auto Zone down the road. Apparently H11B is a popular replacement bulb in Harrison, because they don't have any at Auto Zone either, but they do have four in stock in Lawrenceburg. Back in the car.

Fifteen miles of driving later, I am at the Lawrenceburg Auto Zone, which does indeed have 4 in stock. $23 and I am out the door, and this isn't even a SilverStar bulb.

Now after 9 PM, I am back in the driveway, this time with the proper replacement bulb. The disassembly goes quicker this time since I had so recently done so before. The new bulb goes in without a hitch, and then all that remains is to put it back together. Of course, that too is easier said than done, because the lower bracket is bolted on through a recessed portion of the giant dust cover. I can't just drop in the bolt because, oh no, it falls off to the side underneath the cowling! Therefore, I must take the dust cover off again to retrieve the bolt. Not wanting to repeat this scenario, I find some needle-nosed pliers and replace the bolt in the manner one uses when playing the childhood game "Operation". This is successful and I finally finish the task at 9:53 PM, having only busted one knuckle and driven only 51 miles.

Now why is it I don't work on cars more often?

2010 comes to an end

Another year gone by, this one was a rough one. I fear more rough ones are on the way. I don't think people realize yet that our economy can get worse, much worse. This country has had really tough times before, like the Civil War and the Great Depression, but most people alive now remember nothing but relative prosperity. When states and cities go bankrupt, hard choices will have to be made. We've been promised the world, but there is no way to pay for everything we've been promised. So get yourself ready now, while there is still time.