Legendary libertarian economist Thomas Sowell wrote a little reminder to America that redistributionisms (like public schools and food stamps) always end in massive poverty like Soviet Russia, WHERE FOOD STAMPS YOU.
He starts his article on Obama’s “recently” “uncovered” appearance at a conference at Loyola “University” in “1998″ where the future President admitted to being pro-Communism/a Democrat. Sowell, like everyone else, acknowledges that the video is not remotely important or interesting, or news. He conflates the young Obama’s (characteristically two-sided and critical) support for the Chicago public housing authority and school system with a Bolshevik kleptocracy, then reminds people of the shittyness of Soviet Russia and Castro’s Cuba, but as usual, neglects the redistributive dystopias of Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, France, United Kingdom, Germany, Belgium, Norway, Finland, and the United States.
And he can’t resist the perfect libertarian metaphor of how “if you give a man a fish, he eats for a day, [etc.]” That ditty never really connects, however, when you think about how if you teach him to fish instead, you’re out of a job. So if you want real Economic Freedom®, you’ve gotta let the people who know how to fish keep catching fish and selling the fish, but don’t take that fish and give it to someone for free! ‘Cause that’ll make them full now but poor forever. And don’t take a fish and give it to a teacher in return for teaching kids to fish, cause then we’ll all have too much fish, I guess? Bottom line is don’t take my fucking fish or I’ll move to Luxembourg.
Thomas Sowell is obviously a great mind, but this tried-and-true argument still leaves out the fact that those who are ‘redistributed to’ are mostly meant to be children or the mothers of children; that by helping them survive and attend school, the state generates a wide base for the development of new human capital in the future. The fish goes to a young fisherman who lives another day to learn to fish himself and teach another generation, and so on.
The John Galt threat is undermined by how selfish it is to let a child go hungry or illiterate because she’s someone else’s responsibility.
J/K, I'm a dog!
I’ve had this picture open on my workstation for a week now, because every time I see it I smile like a dumbass. Thanks r/pics.
In an op-ed in the ‘On Faith’ section of WaPo, Richard Dawkins lays into Rick Perry and every other politician who uses their ignorance of facts as a tool to court the scared and uneducated Republican base.
Except that a politician’s attitude to evolution, however peripheral it might seem, is a surprisingly apposite litmus test of more general inadequacy. This is because unlike, say, string theory where scientific opinion is genuinely divided, there is about the fact of evolution no doubt at all. Evolution is a fact, as securely established as any in science, and he who denies it betrays woeful ignorance and lack of education, which likely extends to other fields as well.
Darwin’s idea is arguably the most powerful ever to occur to a human mind. The power of a scientific theory may be measured as a ratio: the number of facts that it explains divided by the number of assumptions it needs to postulate in order to do the explaining. A theory that assumes most of what it is trying to explain is a bad theory. That is why the creationist or ‘intelligent design’ theory is such a rotten theory.
I love that he focuses on the elegant simplicity of Darwin’s theory (using the word theory correctly, of course) and how implausible and complex intelligent design actually is. I tend to think people who accept intelligent design as possible have switched these distinction in their minds – they think evolution requires complexity where God is simple. He isn’t, but his followers are.
Posted in atheism, people, politics, Quickies
Tagged Darwinism, god, Intelligent design, Republicans, Richard Dawkins, Rick Perry, Scientific theory, Texas
As reported by Entertainment Weekly.
I’m going to do everything possible to get a job in this writing room. Everyone pray for me.
The whole world (except these guys and these guys) is celebrating the end of Osama Bin Laden’s life. But is celebration the appropriate response?
Ricky Gervais fancies himself quite the ethical bloke, at least according to the traditional rules. And just like his inflammatory essay from last summer, ‘Why I Am an Atheist,’ Ricky wants people to know how ridiculous and preferential their faith really is. This morning he released via his website a breakdown of how he’s probably a better a Christian than 90% of Christians, according to Christianity, and only because he doesn’t give a fuck.
Tim Minchin‘s poem ‘Storm’ is probably the funnest, most cutting and sympathetic case against casual supernatural inclinations that I’ve ever seen. For those of you who haven’t had the pleasure, here’s a friggin awesome animated version:
Thank you Boing Boing.
Which one am I, the has-been or the never-was?
Jose Canseco apparently was too scared to get into a Celebrity Boxing match against actual-boxer Billy Paden, so instead of backing out over privacy concerns related to the inevitable blood testing he’d endure, he sent his identical twin brother to fight for him! Problem is, he has tattoos that appear not only on his body, but on the ads for the fight itself. Nice move.
First of all, I had no idea Jose Canseco had a twin brother. Second of all, this is ballsy. Third of all, why didn’t they do an awesome tag team act?
Also, the Bash Brother has struck back on Twitter, which is hilarious. That we can write, I mean.