Regulation of the Day 77: Banning Toys in Happy Meals

Roberto Zabrido, a government official in Spain, is “adamant that the Happy Meal and its ilk pose a risk.”

The solution? Legislation that “would ban restaurants and food manufacturers from including toys and prizes with their products.”

If Happy Meals – Happy Meals! – are Spain’s most pressing national problem, then that country is either the most trouble-free place on Earth, or else busybodies such as Mr. Zabrido have too much money and power. My bet is on the latter.

(Hat tip: Jacob Grier)

They Needed a Poll to Find This Out?

A headline in today’s Politico reads, “Poll: U.S. too politically divided.”

How is that news? Who is going to say they don’t think the U.S. is divided enough?

Time to Leave Afghanistan

Bill Easterly’s surprisingly Hayekian take on Afghanistan is worth a read:

News sources say that President Obama will choose “escalate” with additional troops for Afghanistan in his speech at West Point tonight. I and many like-minded individuals find this disastrous.

“Like-minded” means that critics of top-down state plans for economic development are also not fans of top-down state plans for military development. If the Left likes the first, and the Right likes the second, that just shows you how incoherent Left and Right are.

Regulation of the Day 76: Generic Medication for Farm Animals

If you put chlortetracycline powder in your farm animals’ drinking water to prevent disease, please be aware that a new federal rule now allows you to buy a generic version of the powder if you wish.

Actually, I probably shouldn’t be calling that rule a “rule.” As the new rule states:

This rule does not meet the definition of ‘‘rule’’ in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because it is a rule of ‘‘particular applicability.’’

Despite the rule being called a rule twice in one sentence, it really isn’t a rule. Probably best to let logicians sort that one out.

The Economics of Black Friday

This year’s Black Friday was much more peaceful than last year’s. No tramplings were reported. There was a fight at a Wal-Mart in the wee hours, unfortunately. The store was temporarily closed, which led to this lovely scene:

[P]eople began “yelling and screaming,” pounding on the glass doors and trying to sneak into the store through the lawn and garden section. Store managers had to be sent outside to try to calm the crowd, workers said.

Which brings us to Black Friday’s most important economics lesson: not all costs are measured in money. Yes, the discounts to be had can be great. But you pay a price for them. The price can be waiting outside in the cold. It could be the crowds, the parking, or the long checkout lines. In rare cases like today’s Wal-Mart near-riot, safety becomes an issue.

Here’s an example of what I mean. Suppose the people who camp out all night end up saving $40 on their purchases. If they spend eight hours suffering in the cold, that’s a savings of only $5 per hour. Less than minimum wage. Some people don’t place much value on their time, it seems.

Or, for some people, Black Friday’s pomp, circumstance, and sales are a cultural experience. They’re worth all the trouble. For other people, they’re not. Wherever you stand, non-price costs should be factored into your shopping habits. Otherwise you just might be getting ripped off.

The Obvious Reply Is “No I Didn’t”

“No college sophomore has ever turned in a paper denying the existence of free will without first choosing to do so.”

-Stephen Landsburg, The Big Questions, p. 68.

(Hat tip to my fiancée’s quick wit)

500th Post

If WordPress’ statistics are right, this is the 500th post here at Inertia Wins. This blog has changed quite a bit since I started it in 2005. Mostly for the better, I hope. Last month’s redesign has gotten a lot of positive feedback, and the traffic has well exceeded my expectations (tell your friends!). The new About and Publications sections are handy additions. More new features are on the way.

I also thought I’d take this opportunity to look back at a few of this blog’s highlights. Hopefully old readers and new will find something to enjoy.

-In one of my first posts, 2005’s “Is This Grounds for Pessimism?“, I recount one of my many learning experiences on Capitol Hill.

-A quick look through the category “The Partisan Mind” should dispel the notion that I am a Democratic or Republican party hack. I’ve been accused of being both over the years.

-For my views on executive power, soured by the experiences of the Bush and Clinton years, see “Why Good Men Don’t Become President Anymore,” written on the day of President Obama’s inauguration.

-Echoes of Mencken in one of my favorite lines I’ve ever written. The post was in response a comparison of the presidency to a monarchy: “Presidents are unremarkable creatures. Borne of much talent for campaigning and little for governing, more love for power than for principle, and the unyielding belief that they know best, presidents have the worst kind of hubris. This is perhaps their only regal trait.” The whole post is here.

-Channeling Charles Darwin, the French Enlightenment, and Austrian-school views on consumer sovereignty, I explain why most news coverage is shallow and overly pessimistic.

-I remain particularly proud of this letter to the editor from 2007, even though it was never published.

-On Earth Day of 2008, I explain what has become known around the office as my certainty principle.

-And finally, my ongoing Regulation of the Day feature. 75 dumb rules and counting.

More to come on all those fronts and more. Much more. Thanks for reading.

Happy Birthday, Carl Sagan

I’m a bit late on this, but Carl Sagan would have turned 75 on November 9. The Skeptic Society’s Michael Shermer has set up a nice tribute to him.

The thing I admire most about Carl Sagan isn’t his academic credentials, impressive though they were. It’s that he wasn’t afraid to be a popularizer. In fact, he embraced it. He has been an inspiration for what I hope to accomplish in my own professional life.

Will Durant’s book The Story of Philosophy is credited with introducing more people to its subject than any other book. What Will Durant did for philosophy (and later, with his wife Ariel Durant, history), Carl Sagan did for astronomy.

Some pointy-nosed academics looked down on Sagan for pandering to the masses. But Sagan did more in his too-short life to actually educate people than the lot of them combined. How many of those same disdainful academics were inspired to forge a career in science because of Carl Sagan? For a subject as esoteric as cosmology, this is no small achievement.

People who work in economics or public policy would do well to pay attention not just to what Carl Sagan did, but to how he did it. Intellectuals from all disciplines should follow the sterling example set by Carl Sagan.

Brett Favre: Psychological Terrorist Weapon?

WTMJ’s headline: Detainees at Camp in Iraq Use Favre To Tease Wisconsin Soldiers

According to a military official, detainees at a Wisconsin National Guard camp in Iraq are using Brett Favre as a manner of getting at the guard troops there.

“They know Favre by name,” said First Lieutenant Tim Boehnen, who is from New Richmond, Wis.

“One of the big words they know now is shenanigan. They’ll constantly talk about ‘Favre shenanigans,’ ‘He’s so good for the Vikings,’ and ‘The Packers have got to really feel bad about that one.’ “

(Hat tip: Ivan Osorio)

The Partisan Deficit

When Republicans are in the White House, Paul Krugman thinks budget deficits are bad. When a Democrat is in the White House, deficits are no problem at all.

Correctly noting in 2005 that the Bush deficits were “comparable to the worst we’ve ever seen in this country,” Krugman worried that investor confidence would wilt under the difficulty of paying back such massive obligations.

Now that President Obama has tripled the Bush deficits, he has a column poo-pooing deficit worriers as “being terrorized by a phantom menace — a threat that exists only in their minds.” Investor confidence will be just fine.

Would he be so sanguine if a Republican president ran up a $1,400,000,000,000 budget deficit in his first year in office? The party in power has nothing to do with whether deficits are good or bad. Deficits are either a problem or they aren’t.

Krugman’s partisanship is regrettable. What’s more regrettable is that it is taken seriously. Such is the tragedy of the partisan mind.