Friday, February 25, 2011

Friedman Friday

What Will You Do?




So, I know you are disappointed that it's not our boy Milton in the video. But, It sets the stage nicely to highlight the best idea that he ever had: school choice.

There obviously isn't a silver bullet in education, but there is not a more indicative example of the failing system of education than this fact: We have the biggest economy in the world, yet ranked 20th out of 28 industrialized nations in education. Which one is built on free market? Which one looks more like the world?

Tinkering around the edges isn't going to vault us back to the top, but totally rethinking our entire system and building it up based on free market principles through vouchers will give us the best chance (blog from August on education).

This video asks the question: What will you do? Well, there is a Governor in Indiana named Mitch Daniels that has decided what to do. And, it is one of the many reasons I believe he should run for President.

Most Aggressive Education Reform Agenda in the Country

Mitch Daniels has the most impressive record of any governor in the U.S. at the moment, but for the first time, he is entering this Legislative Session with majorities in both houses. The main item on his agenda is the most transformative education initiatives in the country, and it is centered on Milton Friedman's idea of vouchers.

He is going to extend school vouchers to any child in low income or middle income families for them to attend the school of their choice-public or private. The state spends between $5,500 and $11,500 on educating each student each year depending on the county. Instead of our antiquated model of the state sending the money for education to the building, they will send it to the backpack. Students will no longer be relegated to failing schools just because of their geography; now they will get to use their money and direct their own future. Here are the specifics:
  • Any child on low or reduced lunches will receive 90% of that districts per-student funding. He will be able to take that money to go to any school of his choice.
  • A family of four making up to $80,000 a year will receive 50% of the funding
  • A family of four making up to $100,000 a year will receive a voucher worth 25%.

Other reforms include:

  • Increasing charter schools and their requirement
  • Establishing a trigger system that allows parents to petition their school for conversion to a charter or new school
  • Renegotiating collective bargaining agreements
  • Introducing merit-based pay for teachers

Conclusion

I know that this post will likely cause a little negative feedback, but I welcome it. Yes, education starts in the home. Yes, I know you think it cannot be that simple. But, the education system at the present is a monopoly. The unions are holding innovation hostage, regulation has made it worse not better, and schools are measured by how many "ribbons' they have. The only method for breaking up a monopoly is through competition. We need to make schools compete for their students. Yes, bad schools, public and private, will fail. But, the good schools will be rewarded. Just like business.

It is their money. It is their future. Why not let them choose it?

Here are some links for your Friday:

In 15 Years, All Tax Revenue Will be Eaten by Entitlements, Interest

We are almost past the point of no return. In 15 years, there will be no tax money for education, research, welfare, defense, etc because of our debt and entitlement obligations. But, hey! At least Obama is serious about it. Maybe he will make a speech and it will be all better. Someone needs to lead.

How Much Did it Cost Us to "Create or Save" a Job from Stimulus? Answer: $223,000

It is not that the Stimulus didn't create jobs, because it did. It was just a really awful way of doing so. One question: How can you claim a job creation range of 1.3M to 3.5M? That is extremely vague.

I'm Not George Bush, Love Me! Ferguson Sums up Obama's Foreign Policy

This video is fascinating. Even the MSNBC anchors have no response. Even Christopher Hitchens can't understand this President's foreign policy in the Arab world. I guess he really does think he can drop in a make a speech in Cairo and everything is solved. I guess if Gaddafi would have legislated against unions, then Obama might have mentioned his name in the press conference.


Dem Rep. Gwen Moore: "Have Abortions or Eat Ramen Noodles"

I really do not know what to say here. We should let women have abortion because they would otherwise have to be poor and eat Ramen Noodles?

One of Worst Business Decisions of Decade: RIAA not Buying Napster?


In 2000, the Recording Industry Association of America had the opportunity to buy out Napster, who was at the time a growing, innovative music sharing site--before anyone ever heard of iTunes. Instead, they chose to be technophobic and file a lawsuit for piracy and filed a lawsuit. Of course they won the suit, Napster was shut down. Irony of ironies is that by suing and not buying they set fire to tens of billions of dollars and have put lots of artists worse off! The Music industry is down 45% from its 1973 baseline. Whoops!

Monday, February 21, 2011

A Watershed Moment: Government Unions vs. the Taxpayer

Who said it?

"It is impossible to collectively bargain with the government..."

It wasn't Ronald Reagan or Ron Paul, but George Meany the former Director of the AFL-CIO (the largest federation of unions) said this in 1959. FDR himself called the implications of government unionization as "unthinkable."


I want to preface this blog post by saying that I believe all employees of government around the nation are hard working and provide valuable service to this country. I believe that most of them are getting a bad name for what is happening in Wisconsin, but I do want to highlight the history and facts, as I see them, of government unions, their origins, and the objective implications.

A Brief History of Government Unions

Trade Unions began as way for workers to collectively organize for better pay and working conditions in the private sector in the late 19th Century. As late as the 1950s, there were no unions for government workers. This made sense in many eyes because unions primarily were disgruntled over lack of a share of the overall profit from greedy business owners and over the odious conditions they claimed companies made them work under to turn a greater profit. So, why would government workers, who are paid by the taxpayer, need a greater share of profits or have any complaints on working conditions? The government is supposed to be made up of the intelligent and compassionate right? Isn't that why we have ceded so much power and decision-making to them over the last century? However, as they say: "that dog just doesn't hunt." Government workers do not create profit--they merely negotiate for more of your tax money.


But, as the private union movement began to grow, it was pushed in NYC and eventually to the White House. In 1962, John F. Kennedy signed into law the ability for government workers to unionize and bargain for benefits. Since that time, the number of workers engaging in private sector unions has been diminishing as workers participating in public sector unions has increased.

With only 6% of private employees now engaged in unions, the unions are becoming desperate to keep their power, dues, and money flowing. It is being accomplished through the rise of almost 38% of the government being unionized. A practice that as "unthinkable" by FDR has now become the biggest source of campaign money, organizing power, and drag on the changing the budget of the nation.

The Biggest Sham: Taxpayer Dollars

One of the biggest scandals of the government employee unions is the way it influences campaigns through your tax dollars. If I was to donate to a certain candidate during an election cycle, then that is perfectly legal, often applauded to be engaged in the political process. Hey, it's my money I can do with it what I want. Well, what if I took 100 dollars from your pocket and gave it to that same candidate? Would that be legal and applauded? Absolutely not! That would be stealing. Well, this is precisely what has happened in government employee unions and the government since they were allowed to bargain collectively in 1962. Here are some facts:

2010 Election Cycle Numbers from Three Biggest Unions:

  • American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) gave 87 million to candidates running for election. The most of any company, organization. 99.5% went to Democrats. 0.5% to Republicans.

  • Service Employees International Union (SEIU) gave 44 million.

  • National Education Association (NEA) gave 40 million. 96% to Democrats

Giving an estimated 250 million in volunteer time and door-to-door activity, it is very substantial. This activity would be wholly appropriate if it was their money, but it's not theirs-it is yours! It is wholly inappropriate and unwise to have collective bargaining for union members because negotiations are made with no regard for the taxpayer. The union bosses are using your taxpayer dollars to support and funnel money to candidates that will in turn increase their wages, increase their time off, and give them more benefits. Is there any wonder that all of the pension liabilities and wages are unsustainable? Is it any wonder why 160 Billion of 800 Billion Stimulus package was given to save government worker jobs for two years when only 3% was given to infrastructure?

With that history and reasoning as our backdrop, let's talk about the state of the nation and Wisconsin.

What's Happening in the Nation?

Since the beginning of the recession, the private sector has lost 7.2 million jobs while the Federal Government has gained 98,000 jobs. A 6% drop compared to a 3.5% increase. Government employees nationwide now, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, make double the average salary of the private sector. 120,00 vs. 60,000 average. Federal workers making over $150,00 make up 3.5% of workers compared to 0.4% in 2005. The number of employees making over $100,000 has doubled under this president. Important point to remember: those salaries are paid through the taxes generated by the private industry employees.

What's Happening in Wisconsin?

All of the implications of public sector moment have come to fruition at Madison, Wisconsin. A bill put forward by the Governor has the votes for passage, but the 19 Democratic Senators have left the State for over a week avoiding the vote. If only conservatives had done this on the health care debate!

The facts of the present in Wisconsin:

  • State Employees contribute less than 1% on average to their pensions compared to virtually no pensions in the private sector.
  • Average compensation for public school teacher is $89,000 for 180 calendar day school year.
  • Employees contribute % on average to health premiums when the national average is 25% (I pay 25%).
The facts of Gov. Walker's proposal:

  • State employees to contribute 5.8% on average.
  • State employees to contribute 12% on average to health premiums-still half of national average.

The most controversial measure of the bill to reign in spending in Wisconsin with the government unions and the source of most contention is the alterations to the collective bargaining agreement. Under current "fair share agreements," a government worker who does not want to join the union must still have $500 to 1,000 deducted from their paycheck to go to the union. So, Gov. Walker now makes this issue voluntary and will no longer allow unions to deduct dues right out of paychecks involuntarily. Also, he gives them the ability to negotiate for wage increases and so forth, but anything about normal inflation or stand procedure must go to the taxpayer for a referendum. It shifts the balance of power back into equilibrium, so the ultimate funder of the government employees has a say-so in the bargaining process.

Remember that in a given year there is a defined amount of tax dollars to be distributed to infrastructure, Medicaid, education, and government jobs. So, every dollar we spend on top of what is necessary is stealing money away from children on Medicaid or an increase in taxes on you. The alternative in Gov. Walker's budget would be to kick 200,00 children off Medicaid or fire 5,000+ government workers. Or do they not understand the words of the Honorable Winston Churchill: "I contend that for a nation to tax itself to prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket trying to lift himself up by the handle."

Conclusions

Our 2 million plus government workers are very good people and deserve our support and our praise. However, our nation has been living outside its means for long period of time and must face the reality of diminishing tax receipts and increasing entitlement and pension obligations that threaten our economic future. The taxpayer and the ballot box has been circumvented by the government unions and have influenced massive hiring, raises, and lavish pension benefits for state employees that cannot continue. Gov. Walker's proposal returns the balance of power of the government back to the people who fund it. We should stand with him.

In the words of Walter Williams in regard to excessive taxation: "When you legalize theft, it pays for everyone to participate. Those who don't will be losers."

For the last 40+ years, the taxpayers have been the losers. This is watershed moment for the country. This is a chance to even the scorecard.


Update: An Indictment of Baby Boomer Generation
Ruth Anne Baily makes a scathing indictment of the Greatest Generation's self indulgence in this article. The irony of ironies here is that these decisions seem so distant from our generation, but will indeed have the greatest impact. In the short term, a blockage of the Governor's bill will cause him to lay of between 5,000 and 12,000 workers. The irony is that due to union contracts and the "last in-first out" agreements, the layoffs will fall overwhelmingly on the youngest workers in the field--our generation. In the long term, we will continually be saddled with a debt that we refuse to confront. We have the choice to dictate terms today, but the bond markets and creditor nations will not be so kind in the future. Here is a favorite ad of mine from across the pond. "Dad's none, Mum's eyes, Gordon Brown's debt."

Seems to me that my pick for President has always been ahead on this issue. He delivered a prophetic speech to Butler University's Commencement on the indulgence of his generation.
"We were the me-generation. We have consumed more and spent more than any other generation... We had a blast, now enjoy cleaning up our mess!" My man Mitch is right. Let's start cleaning it up in Wisconsin.

Blake

Whimsical Wisconsin Madness

Turns out I have had plenty of opinions about current events lately, but I haven't had much free time to lay pen to paper and get those opinions out in the open. So today, while I sit at home in honor of Presidents Days, I wanted to say something about Collective Bargaining for public employees and hopefully beat Blake to the punch.
First, let me admit that for all the negatives that some want to throw at unions, they have done some good, albeit in the private sector. Unions can be thanked for child labor laws, the 40 hour work week, and even weekends off among other things. I don't want to get into private unions though and I don't want to debate the positive and negatives of private unions, I want to address public unions.
Public Unions really make no sense at all. Why might you ask? Because the public votes for the government officials. There is a terrible conflict of interest when the public unions can vote in their favored politician and then that politician can work to funnel money and benefits to that union. I work in the private sector, and unless I go buy a sizable amount of stock, I have no say in who my boss is, the public sector does, they have elections for their top bosses. So again, what I want to harp on is Conflict of Interest, the root of the problem. The issue in Wisconsin that is causing the largest uproar right now is not so much that the public employees might have to pay a little more towards pensions and health care, its the loss of collective bargaining. The ability for a group of professionals to combine their individual voices together to create a group that has more power than each individual on their own, or in reality, a group that gives up their individual voices in favor of a small group of leaders who speak on their behalf. But again, this group already has something that their private sector counterparts don't have, a vote. In no way is taking away collective bargaining taking away the voice of public employees, it is simply fixing the conflict of interest that has corrupted the government and will limit the power of public unions over elected officials. It will stop the abuses that have allowed politicians to buy votes with public money. Public union members already have a voice, getting rid of collective bargaining is not taking away their right to be heard, it is fixing a problem in the system that unfairly allocates funds from the tax payers to those with the most powerful unions. I am all for the public sector employees and what they do for this country, and I believe that they should be compensated for their work, I have no problem paying taxes that goes towards their paychecks. I do have a problem when the system is corrupted and unions and elected officials have the ability to collude and dictate policy in a nondemocratic fashion.
That's all I got, see you again in another 3 months or so.

Friday, February 4, 2011

Friedman Friday (Sort of)





Walter Williams weighs in. It is easy to throw this term around-without really knowing what it means.

Can ObamaCare Really Reduce the Deficit? Give Me $1B.


Critics say repealing ObamaCare will increase the defict. Well, tell me if you agree with this: Send me a check for $1B from the Government. Finance it with $3B in tax increases. Ta-dah! The government keeps $2B and "reduces the deficit." Same logic with ObamaCare. $500B in taxes plus $500B in cuts in Medicare finances 900B+ in new spending. Ta-dah! Deficit reduction.

Administration plans $53 Billion in High Speed Rail Investments

Investment in rail sounds good to the ears. But, is a fantasy. Only intellectuals could ignore the record of failure in the U.S. 41 out of 44 routes run by Amtrak lost money last year. Taxpayers subsidized $32 for each Amtrak passenger. Every billion we spend is one less billion spent on health care, decreased taxes, or deficit reduction.

Man-made CO2 Emissions are 3.4% of All CO2 Emissions

So, let me get this straight: Greenhouse gases make up 2% of all gases in the evironment, CO2 is 3.6% of those gases, and man originated 3.4% of the total of CO2 emissions. Whew. So, let's redistribute tons of money to combat this problem of .002% of all gases.

These 15 Quotes put it pretty well.

An Interesting Take on the Egyptian Situation by Ron Paul

Once you start leaning Libertarian, do you ever go back? I will admit I am already conservative-libertarian in economics, but am I starting to walk to plank in foreign policy? Nevertheless, the situation in Egypt is facsinating. A couple sound articles on the Egypt situation here and here.

At any rate, enjoy the links. Hope to keep the blog rolling more in the future.

Blake