Posted onJune 3, 2011|Comments Off on Straight from Hilter’s Playbook
My colleague Alex Nowrasteh and I recently wrote a column for The Daily Caller favoring letting more high-skilled immigrants become U.S. citizens. Here is a persuasive and well-reasoned excerpt from commenter jobs4us, who disagrees:
Don’t buy into this baseless propaganda – it is straight from Adolf Hilter’s playbook
Misspelling of Hitler’s name and punctuation error are in the original.
Posted onMay 5, 2011|Comments Off on Regulation of the Day 171: Cream Puffs
A new bill in the Wisconsin legislature would make the cream puff the state’s official dessert. An influential lobbying group consisting of fourth-graders from Mukwonago used Facebook and other media to pressure Sen. Mary Lazich into introducing the bill.
Despite support from the powerful Wisconsin Bakers Association, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel points that the cream puff bill’s success is not guaranteed. Previous attempts “to make Harley-Davidson the official state motorcycle and to recognize the microbe that turns milk into cheese failed to pass.”
This blog will be paying very close attention to the heated legislative battle in Madison to give the delicious cream puff its due. After all, the time that legislators spend on this is time they aren’t spending passing more harmful legislation.
Comments Off on Regulation of the Day 171: Cream Puffs
In journalism lingo, the lede (pronounced “leed”) is your lead sentence or paragraph. It’s spelled funny to avoid confusion with the word “lead.” A good lede grabs the reader’s attention and makes him want to keep reading.
Posted onMarch 14, 2011|Comments Off on Legislating the Way to Prosperity
Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. has a novel idea for ending poverty: make it illegal. He explains in this short video of a speech he gave on the House floor:
The Constitution should be amended to guarantee everyone the right to a decent home. That way, everyone will get one. In a speech he gave on the House floor, he asks, “What would that do for home construction in this nation? What would that do for millions of unemployed people?”
The Constitution should also be amended to guarantee the right to decent health care. Jackson implores, “How many doctors would such a right create?”
Education needs an amendment, too. “How many schools would such a right build, from Maine to California?” Jackson goes on to wonder how many jobs would be created by giving every student and iPod and a laptop.
If ending poverty really is as simple as passing a few laws, then Jackson isn’t going nearly far enough. If we want a truly prosperous nation, then the Constitution should guarantee everyone not just a decent home, but a mansion filled with servants to take care of every need.
Everyone should have the right to not just a doctor’s visit every 6 months, but a cadre of specialists with access to the latest technologies and tests. This would be a boon for life expectancy.
And why only an iPod and a laptop for children? They deserve supercomputers! They should have the right to a Ph.D from Harvard in the field of their choice. Such a law would guarantee that America’s population will be the most educated in the world. And it won’t even be close.
If legislation really is the only thing keeping every American from enjoying Bill Gates’ lifestyle, then Jackson is being far too moderate. Don’t just legislate a decent lifestyle. That doesn’t go nearly far enough. Congress should pass a law that guarantees an above-average lifestyle for all Americans.
If the seat is always left down, men incur an inconvenience cost of 2: 1 to lift the seat, and 1 to lower it. Women incur a cost of 0. This is hardly fair.
Leaving the seat up is no better. The costs are the same. They just switch gender. This isn’t fair for women, who must lower the seat and raise it every time they use the loo.
Choi’s paper suggests a third way: leave the seat as you left it. As he explains:
With either up or down rule, each member of one gender group has to incur the inconvenience costs two times with each usage… This inefficiency can be avoided by using the selfish rule since the inconvenience costs are incurred only when the consecutive users are from different genders.
Quite clever. The highest possible inconvenience cost is 1. And if consecutive users are of the same gender, inconvenience costs are 0.
Unfortunately, this blogger must continue to follow the down rule because his cats are too thirsty for their own good.
[R]esidents and local reporters told Saudi Arabia’s Al-Weeam newspaper that the matter seemed to be a “Zionist plot.”
The accusations went viral, with hundreds of posts on Arabic-language websites and forums claiming that the “Zionists” had trained these birds for espionage.
It is not clear if the bird’s guilt has been determined by Saudi authorities, or what its sentence will be.