For at least 50 years various pundits have noted that the world has too many people and they have proposed various controls. But rather than edicts and Orwellian directives why don’t we all just suggest that people who can’t afford to raise children simply stop having them. It must be politically incorrect to make such a suggestion.
I see that we have another bond advisory committee appointed, this time to recommend lots more taxpayer money for the Maricopa Hospital. More spending is a foregone conclusion because, whenever these committees are appointed, the appointing authority insures the outcome. They always go to great lengths to claim that the committee is very diverse. It is always diverse geographically and it is diverse ethnically and it is diverse in age and diverse in gender and diverse in business verses government versus private sector members.
The only diversity which these committees always lack, and this one is no exception is the only meaningful diversity…….philosophical diversity. That is, there will be no believers in smaller government appointed to any committee like this. All the committee members will be in favor of spending more taxpayer money. If they disagree at all they will simply disagree about how the loot (tax money) is distributed. Can such a committee seriously be considered “diverse”?
We need a better process, one that protects the taxpayer instead of one that continually fleeces them.
A few days ago I returned from a 3000 mile two week trip through Germany and France and Luxembourg. I had gone over there with a fellow veteran who was interested in battlefields but, because there is little to see at most battlefields we wound up spending our time mostly at American cemeteries (10 of them in all, including the one at Normandy and the one in Paris). The reason I write this editorial is because I was totally unaware of these cemeteries (except for Normandy) and they are spectacular. Another benefit to a tourist like me is that they are located in rural areas, mostly France, and the countryside is absolutely beautiful to drive through.
But the most impressive part is how these cemeteries impressed upon me the sacrifice that our military made in World War I and II. These cemeteries are impressively maintained (sometimes 10-14 full time landscapers) and only very slightly visited. At some cemeteries there were only a handful of visitors the entire day. The word about these spectacular monuments needs to get out. I encourage European travelers to include them in travel plans.
More detail is available at the web site of the American Battle Monuments Commission. http://www.abmc.gov/home.php
President Obama is holding the nation hostage with his refusal to negotiate. For example, this morning I heard a woman on the radio who had come 2000 miles to see the Grand Canyon, complain that she had resigned herself to not seeing the canyon because “no one can do anything.” This is simply not true. Republicans have offered to open several government services, including parks, but the senate and the president refuse. In addition, Arizona has offered to open the Canyon with state funds. The Park Service refuses to allow it. This is blackmail. Opening the Grand Canyon would likely get all 535 votes in the senate and house, whereas the “my way or the highway” demand by the president and senate to pass the senate bill might only squeak by with a vote or two to spare. This example makes it quite clear that it is the big-government leftists who are keeping the government shut down, not the conservatives.
The government shutdown is not all bad. We can learn from it, just like we did with the recent sequestration. There was a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth before the sequestration about all the terrible things that would happen but it turned out not to be so bad. We learned that the size of government CAN be reduced after all.
Now we are facing a Super Sequestration in the form of government shutdown. Maybe we will learn that government can be cut even more. Essential services are already exempted from the shutdown and some additional exemptions can certainly be made. It will come as quite a shock to the big government supporters when our country seems to continue operating with this smaller government
As one possible lesson we might logically ask why “non-essential” services need to be performed by government?!?!
My wife and I found out what happens when unions control bus transportation. We were in Las Vegas over the weekend and had walked a few miles down the Strip when we decided to take a bus back to our hotel. We bought two passes for $12 that would allow us to ride the bus for two hours and then we waited for what seemed like a very long time….about 20 minutes. When the bus arrived we saw that it was very large and double decked….and completely full. The bus sat at our bus stop for several minutes while some people tried to exit the bus and a line of about 50 people attempted to board. It was obviously very difficult for people to get off the bus, partly because of the second deck, and very difficult for people to board because of the large numbers and because people who had already boarded would not move to the back of the bus, probably because they were concerned about being able to get off at their chosen bus stop.
The scene was a mad house and we were not able to board. The next bus was not due to arrive for 20 minutes so we decided to give up our $12 investment and walk back to our hotel.
One might wonder why Las Vegas would use such large buses at such infrequent intervals? I believe it is because the unions lobby for large busses that run as full as possible so that unions can justify very high wages for the bus drivers. The public be damned. I hope we can avoid this fiasco in Arizona and maintain some reliance on market forces so we can have a sane transportation system.
Arizona Public Service is afraid of competition and is using extraordinary measures to stop it from coming to their electricity empire. Not content to let the elected Corporation Commissioners act in the best of Arizona consumers, APS is pressuring local businesses and non-profits to support the anti-deregulation movement. And APS has a lot of influence in Arizona because, not only are they are the largest provider of electricity in our state, but they are also one of largest donors to many non-profit organizations.
Insiders have known about this improper attempt by APS but the cat was let out of the bag at a recent debate on the subject of deregulation that was sponsored by Valley Leadership and Arizona Town Hall. The format pitted two representatives of regulators, Arizona Public Service and Salt River Project, against one representative of competition, Stan Barnes. Even though the debate was two to one against deregulation, I would contend that it helps to be on the side of truth and the truth is that regulation always benefits the regulated companies and competition always benefits the consumers.
During one portion of the debate Stan Barnes mentioned the campaign by APS to pressure local groups to support their position and said that it was unlike anything he had ever seen before. Now that the cat is out of the bag, maybe APS will back off and confine their lobbying to the official docket, as they should and as they have done in the past.
For one sovereign nation, the United States, to bomb another sovereign nation, Syria, when there is no imminent threat of attack by Syria against the United States or any of our allies, constitutes a war crime under treaties that we have signed. If Obama goes ahead with this rash and ill-advised action, he should be impeached.
If we are sure that Bashar Assad ordered the use of Sarin Gas why has he not been charged with war crimes?
Nick Dranias was correct when he opined in the August 26 Arizona Republic that “Utilities don’t want consumer choice.” And why should they? Why would any company give up guaranteed profits and guaranteed future growth? But, on the other hand, why should Arizona electric consumers be denied the choices and lower prices that a competitive market would bring? Electric utilities in Arizona made a big mistake when they went along with allowing the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) to effectively manage part of the utilities operations by mandating a portion of the generation source that they must use (the Renewable Energy Standards). Now utilities realize that the portion of their customers who produce their own solar will bankrupt the utilities because these customers do not pay the full cost of their demands on the electrical system. APS and some others are trying to get the ACC to change the rates for these customers (rates known as “net metering”).
A much better idea, as suggested by Nick Dranias, is to simply end the monopoly and let the utilities compete. Government guaranteed monopolies simply do not make economic sense. They do make political sense because, like any regulated industries, the regulations allow those with political power to get cheaper rates at the expense of those with less political power. But all consumers pay more because monopolies are never as efficient as a free market company and they stifle innovation which prevents consumers from receiving the benefits of changes in rapidly evolving technologies.
Some will argue that these monopoly regulations once made sense but today’s rapidly changing technology makes them less viable. Actually, such regulations never made any economic sense (even though they might have made political sense as I previously outlined). These regulations were supported by the regulated utilities with the argument that they wanted to protect consumers but the real reason for these regulations and for most government regulations is to protect the regulated entity from competition.
Finally, there is one truth that has become obvious to me as I attend meeting after meeting where arcane economic theories and incredibly complex new technologies are explained. That truth is that there is simply no fair way for some government bureaucrat to determine what any consumer should fairly pay for any given amount of electricity. That determination can come only from the interactions in a freely competitive market. Let’s get there as soon as we can.
roymilleraz 