"When a government becomes powerful, it is destructive, extravagant and violent; it is an usurper which takes bread from innocent mouths and deprives honorable men of their substance for votes with which to perpetuate itself." - Cicero
"Government is not reason. It is not eloquence. It is force." - George Washington
"In all that people can do for themselves, the government ought not to interfere." - Abraham Lincoln
"The most cogent reason for restricting the interference of government is the great evil of adding unnecessarily to its power." - John Stuart Mill
"The government's role is whatever the government defines it to be." - Helen Clark

Blogarama

Review Kiwi Pundit

< ? kiwi blogs # >







inHOUSE: Software development and services, web design, computer training, crystal reports, sql, business intelligence and reporting in Wellington, New Zealand

 
Cullen to NZ Post

I think the anger at the appointment from National supporters is a little naive.

National appointed him so that if they get accused of cronyism when they appoint their own people, they can say "Hey, we appointed Cullen to NZ Post". NZ Post is not a place that gives great scope for political manipulation, compared to others where he could have gone and Cullen will likely be a better manager than most other ex-Labour people. Getting him out of Parliament before Clark will also make it clear to Mt Albert voters that they really are voting for Tizard if they elect Twyford.

This is how politicians operate and should not surprise anyone. If people don't like it they should stop voting National or Labour and vote for a party with principles instead.

 
Utterly predictable

From the Dom Post:

Television's Supernanny has been sent to the naughty step.

Behaviour-control techniques popularised by the TV disciplinarian breach the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child and the national curriculum, an Auckland academic says.

Pauline Bishop, a Unitec lecturer with 20 years' experience in early childhood education, told the Early Intervention Association conference in Auckland this week that Supernanny techniques had spread to preschools but were unprofessional for teachers.

"What you're really doing is you're punishing the child for doing something that is not appropriate, instead of teaching them, which is our mandate.

"It could be quite traumatic for children they might have hit somebody because they didn't understand or they couldn't communicate so they lashed out. Instead of teaching them a way of communicating, we're punishing them by putting them on a naughty chair and giving them time out."

Teachers who used the Supernanny techniques were breaching the UN declaration and the national curriculum document, Te Whariki. "That talks about respectful, responsive relationships," she said.

This foolishness is the natural next step for the nanny statists after the smacking ban. They spun the anti-smacking law as being about non violence, when really it was always motivated by opposition to punishment of any kind. At least this woman is honest about that.

Apart from that, this is terrible advice anyway. Kids need to learn that hitting others is something you just don't do. There will always be times when someone does something that makes you angry and there is no way to respond effectively by "communicating". Teachers can't eliminate all those situations. The lesson that to be that hitting is always wrong regardless of provocation.

 
Memo to Bill English

Hi Bill,

If you don't want banks to increase long-term interest rates, don't have an inflationary fiscal policy. When ministers talk about cancelling promised tax cuts or anything else that promotes spending over saving, banks are going to see the danger of their loans being devalued and move to protect themselves by raising rates. They have economists who can work this stuff out.

Please give me a reason to think things have changed now that Labour is gone.

Regards,

Nigel.

 
Lock me up then

According to the Parole Board, the following kind of person is a danger to society and should not be kept in prison:

The board said he also had a "completely inappropriate attitude to guns".

The board concluded that Barlow had a sense of entitlement with regard to protecting himself, and could exercise this entitlement in "easily imagined circumstances."

Around the time of his trial Barlow told police that Americans who had firearms for protection hardly ever used them and "hardly anyone was ever shot".

He was described as using "florid and extravagant language" in referring to having had two guns for protection against people who might be threatening to him.

The subsequent psychological report said Barlow had "a superficial elitist interpersonal style that is usually characterised by an internal strong focus and entitlement beliefs."

Well, let's see:

• I have a sense that I am entitled to protect myself.
• I can easily imagine circumstances where I would need to do so.
• It's absolutely true that few people have died as a result of keeping guns for their own protection and many have died because they failed to do so.
• Anyone who says I should be denied the right to protect myself is a fucking fascist. Is that "florid and extravagant" enough?
• It's not elitist and internal because I think everyone else has the same rights.
• Do I believe we're entitled to these rights? Hell, Yes!

So there you have it. I am now officially a menace to society. Have a nice day.

 
This just in

Things you wouldn't find in the NY Times when Bush was president:

BAGHDAD — As the American military prepares to withdraw from Iraqi cities, Iraqi and American security officials say that jihadi and Baath militants are rejoining the fight in areas that are largely quiet now, regrouping as a smaller but still lethal insurgency.

There is much debate as to whether any new insurgency, at a time of relative calm in most of Iraq, could ever produce the same levels of violence as existed at the height of the fighting here. A recent series of attacks, however, like bubbles that indicate fish beneath still water, suggest the potential danger, all the more perilous now because the American troops who helped to pacify Iraq are leaving.

Detainees, some innocent, but many of them former insurgents long held in American military custody, are being set free every day, potentially increasing the insurgency’s numbers. The American-Iraqi security agreement requires the release of all detainees in American custody unless there is sufficient evidence to bring charges in an Iraqi court. At least one former detainee has already blown himself up in a suicide attack.

Now the line is that everything was going fine until the US started pulling out troops and releasing detainees. Since Obama has backtracked on his election rhetoric and will now keep troops in Iraq, I guess they have to alter the reporting to match.

 
Winter is on the way

Truly shitty weather in Wellington today. Bitterly cold and strong southerly.

The good news is that India will have to play cricket in this, so we'll find out whether their batsmen can play strokes while wearing three jerseys and their skinny fast bowlers can run up into a 70km/h wind straight from Antarctica. But it'll probably be rained out.

 
Worthless

The Standard is absolutely right about this and this.

Worth is talking as a minister and he is promoting his flight school in the same interview. Then he signed an MOU as minister to advantage the flight school. He had an actual conflict of interest and, worse, he lied about it.

Key promised us a new era of accountabilty. Looks like we’re about to find out what Key’s word is worth.

National rode to power off the back of years of rhetoric accusing the last Labour government of corruption.

Who can forget the screams from the Nats? - “Corrupt! Corrupt! Corrupt!” they cried. The boys in blue were going to deliver us a new era of transparency and accountable government.

This is not a "perceived conflict of interest" (whatever that means), as Key calls it. It's an actual conflict of interest and a corrupt abuse of Worth's ministerial position. I have always expected National to behave just like Labour, but I hope to be proved wrong in this case.

 
Watermelons

Read this.

The Greens are just nasty little totalitarians, in case you didn't already know. We can only guess how much more of this kind of thing is going unnoticed. Just imagine what these people would do in government.

 
MMP

DPF links to this study showing that only 52% of voters know that the party vote is more important than the electorate vote.

If people were going to learn how MMP works they would have done so long before now. MMP is basically the same as printing the ballot papers in Chinese. Only those who are willing and able to invest the time and effort required to learn enough Chinese are able to vote for the givernment they want. Everyone else is unable to vote effectively. The disadvantages of FPP or STV are insignificant miniscule compared to this.

In a sane society, holding five elections under such a system this would be regarded as a major scandal. The system would be scrapped immediately and there would be enquiries into how it was allowed to happen.

 
Disgraceful

From the Dom Post:

Too many children are starting school without basic skills, including knowing how to hold a pencil and washing their hands, educators say.

The factors schools considered included a child's ability to recognise colours and their own name, knowing how to hold a book the right way up, and being able to hold a pencil.

"The message is pretty clear if they are not being read to at home, given basic tools, they are not going to get a good start in life. There is plenty of data showing this leads to some pretty sad outcomes, including falling into a life of crime.

"It puts enormous pressure on teachers to get [pupils] up to a standard where they can progress."

I have a 16 month old who knows colours, her own name, holds a pencil, and can hold a book the right way up if there are pictures in it. She has yet to master hand washing but that may be due to an inability to reach the taps.

A five year old not being able to do these things can only be explained by really, really shitty parenting. It doesn't require money, education, taxpayer funded kindergartens or having had a happy childhood yourself. Naturally they quote a unionist who completely misses the point:

New Zealand Educational Institute president Frances Nelson said new entrants' readiness varied across the country. Children who had not had early childhood education tended to be less prepared. "Unfortunately, it's increasingly in [poorer] low-decile areas where access to preschool education is not so easy to come by."

In the past, people who are so disinterested in spending time with kids would simply not have had them. Alternatively, the other parent would have made up for it. Now that the welfare system has turned children into a revenue stream it is no surprise they are being treated as having no intrinsic worth and merely as a means to an end.

The one-size-fits-all education system isn't helping either, though this really shouldn't be an education issue. It's parental neglect, just the same as a failure to provide proper food, clothing or medical care.

 
Good news

A depositions hearing has found that Virender Singh has no case to answer.

Unfortunately the reason was related to problems with the evidence, so this doesn't mean it is safe for other dairy owners to defend themselves against violent thugs. Hopefully the police may lose interest in these kind of cases if they lose enough of them.

 
Clark to the UN

Great cartoon from the Herald:


To paraphrase a former NZ Prime Minister, Clark leaving Parliament for the UN will improve the average standard of both organisations (unless Tizard gets in).

 
Hands free makes no difference

An opinion piece in today's Herald once again points out that using a hand-held cellphone while driving is no more dangerous than using a hands-free kit. This has been known for a long time now, in fact I blogged about it way back in June 2003, here and here.

The problem, if there is one, is the distraction of the conversation, not the fact of having one hand on the wheel. Normally you at least have manufacturers pushing back against silly regulations, but here they stand to make a lot of money because suddenly everyone will need a hands-free kit.

 
Problems with the Geither Plan

From Arnold Kling at EconLog:

Suppose that a week ago I had entered a March Madness pool, paid $10, and filled out a bracket.

Suppose that right now my bracket is looking weak, with only about half the teams I picked to make the sweet 16 still in the tournament. I have not been mathematically eliminated from winning the pool, but I need extremely good luck the rest of the way. (Incidentally, this example is hypothetical. I don't follow college basketball, and I don't enter any pools.)

At this point, my entry is no longer worth $10. If I were to sell it, I might get fifteen cents for it. If I were a bank, my bracket would be a toxic asset.

Now, along comes Tim Geithner with a fistful of taxpayer dollars. The way his plan works, you can put up a nickel to get a share of my bracket, and Tim will lend you forty-five cents, which you do not have to pay back if you lose. If you win, you and Tim split the proceeds. You're happy, because for a nickel you're picking up half a share of a bracket worth fifteen cents. I'm happy, because I sell my toxic bracket for fifty cents instead of fifteen cents. Somebody should be unhappy. Guess who?

As Tyler Cowen suggests, there is an even better option: buy the bracket yourself for book value with 90% Treasury backing. Then you get $10 for the sale and are only risking $1 of your money to buy it, effectively a $9 gain and a 6000% rate of return.

 
Perigo on Obama

True jokes are the funniest:

"Were it Bush (or Sarah Palin) on Jay Leno making a crack about crippled bowlers, were it Bush delivering the President of Ireland's speech off his teleprompter and actually reading the bit thanking himself before realizing it was the wrong speech, there'd be a feeding frenzy about how dumb he was, unable to function without or with a teleprompter, indifferent to the plight of the halt and the lame, etc.

"Now that the nincompoop is licking Iranian Islamofascist butt yet again we can look forward with relish to his first no-preconditions session with Ahmadinejad and the joint press conference that follows. If there's another autocue mix-up and he ends up vowing 'Death to America!' and 'Israel will be wiped off the map!' it will at least be the first honest speech he's ever delivered.

Heh.

And you can add to the long list of cockups, Obama writing to the previous president of France saying how much he was looking forward to working together.

 
Abuses and usurpations

Working together in Barack Obama's America:

An internal document designed for law enforcement ... claims that membership in, among other groups, the Libertarian Party and/or the display of what it calls “political paraphernalia” in support of the party or its 2008 presidential nominee (former US Congressman Bob Barr) could be an indicator that someone is involved in a “militant militia”.

The memo purports to outline “trends” in extremist militia activity and claims those involved in such activity “…commonly associate with 3rd party political groups.” It went on to claim that militia members are “usually supporters of” Bob Barr, another third party candidate and Republican Ron Paul. While the report claims to be a memo about trends in militia activity, no specific evidence is offered to support the claim.

Kind of like the SIS spying on Keith Locke except that the US libertarian party doesn't have a history of supporting murderous regimes.

 
Sign the free trade petition

You can sign it here:

Free Trade Is the Best Policy

The specter of protectionism is rising. It is always a dangerous and foolish policy, but it is especially dangerous at a time of economic crisis, when it threatens to damage the world economy. Protectionism’s peculiar premise is that national prosperity is increased when government grants monopoly power to domestic producers. As centuries of economic reasoning, historical experience, and empirical studies have repeatedly shown, that premise is dead wrong. Protectionism creates poverty, not prosperity. Protectionism doesn’t even “protect” domestic jobs or industries; it destroys them, by harming export industries and industries that rely on imports to make their goods. Raising the local prices of steel by “protecting” local steel companies just raises the cost of producing cars and the many other goods made with steel. Protectionism is a fool’s game.

But the fact that protectionism destroys wealth is not its worst consequence. Protectionism destroys peace. That is justification enough for all people of good will, all friends of civilization, to speak out loudly and forcefully against economic nationalism, an ideology of conflict, based on ignorance and carried into practice by protectionism.

Two hundred and fifty years ago, Montesquieu observed that “Peace is the natural effect of trade. Two nations who differ with each other become reciprocally dependent; for if one has an interest in buying, the other has an interest in selling; and thus their union is founded on their mutual necessities.”

Trade’s most valuable product is peace. Trade promotes peace, in part, by uniting different peoples in a common culture of commerce – a daily process of learning others’ languages, social norms, laws, expectations, wants, and talents.

Trade promotes peace by encouraging people to build bonds of mutually beneficial cooperation. Just as trade unites the economic interests of Paris and Lyon, of Boston and Seattle, of Calcutta and Mumbai, trade also unites the economic interests of Paris and Portland, of Boston and Berlin, of Calcutta and Copenhagen – of the peoples of all nations who trade with other.

A great deal of rigorous empirical research supports the proposition that trade promotes peace.

Perhaps the most tragic example of what happens when that insight is ignored is World War II.

International trade collapsed by 70 percent between 1929 and 1932, in no small part because of America’s 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariff and the retaliatory tariffs of other nations. Economist Martin Wolf notes that “this collapse in trade was a huge spur to the search for autarky and Lebensraum, most of all for Germany and Japan.”

The most ghastly and deadly wars in human history soon followed.

By reducing war, trade saves lives.

Trade saves lives also by increasing prosperity and extending it to more and more people. The evidence that freer trade promotes prosperity is simply overwhelming. Prosperity enables ordinary men and women to lead longer and healthier lives.

And with longer, healthier lives lived more peacefully, people integrated into the global economy have more time to enjoy the vast array of cultural experiences brought to them by free trade. Culture is enriched by contributions from around the world, made possible by free trade in goods and in ideas.

Without a doubt, free trade increases material prosperity. But its greatest gift is not easily measured with money. That greatest gift is lives that are freer, fuller, and far less likely to be scalded or destroyed by the atrocities of war.

Accordingly, we the undersigned join together in a plea to the governments of all nations to resist the calls of the short-sighted and the greedy to raise higher the barriers to trade. In addition, we call on them to tear down current protectionist barriers to free trade. To each government, we say: let your citizens enjoy not only the fruits of your own fields, factories, and genius, but also those of the entire globe. The rewards will be greater prosperity, richer lives, and enjoyment of the blessings of peace.

 
Sad but predictable

From the Washington Post:

At least 17 of the 20 major nations that vowed at a November summit to avoid protectionist steps that could spark a global trade war have violated that promise, with countries from Russia to the United States to China enacting measures aimed at limiting the flow of imported goods, according to a World Bank report unveiled yesterday.

The report comes ahead of an April 2 summit in London in which the heads of state from those 20 industrialized and developing economies will seek to shape a coordinated response to the economic crisis. Their inability to keep their November promises is another indication of how difficult it will be to implement any agreement reached next month on a global scale.

Protectionist measures may also sharply worsen the collapse of global trade, which the World Bank said is facing its steepest decline in 80 years as global demand dries up.

"Leaders must not heed the siren-song of protectionist fixes, whether for trade, stimulus packages or bailouts," said World Bank Group President Robert B. Zoellick. Noting that protectionism is widely viewed as having deepened and prolonged the Great Depression, he added "economic isolationism can lead to a negative spiral of events such as those we saw in the 1930s, which made a bad situation much, much worse."

While New Zealand can't really do much to stop this, we can at least make sure we refuse to retaliate. Even if other countries impose tariffs on our exports or subsidise their own producers we should not respond by doing the same. Doing so would make us poorer, as well as destroying any moral authority we might have to shame our trading partners into doing the right thing and sticking to their agreements. We should just grit our teeth and keep trading freely with those who refuse to trade freely with us. And I say this as someone who is more likely than 99% of the population to favour retaliation in lots of other circumstances.

 
Words fail me

Who needs the Onion when we have these guys::

Saudi Gazette report

AL-AHSA/DAMMAM – The Commission for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (Hai’a) in Al-Ahsa arrested a sorcerer who dealt in magic and provided his services to several men and women, who turned to him out of a lack of religious motivation and ignorance, that sorcery became the talk of the town.

Sheikh Adel Faqih, an expert in such matters and director of the Hai’a branch of sorcery in Riyadh, said, “We are in an Islamic country which is governed by Islamic law which prohibits polytheism. Sorcery and magic are considered polytheism in Islam. Unfortunately, sorcery is not a new phenomenon. It is a problem that has existed since the time of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).”

He explained that Saudi Arabia was an open country where people come for Haj and Umra from different societies and cultures from all parts of the world. Some of these people, he pointed out, think that sorcery scripts are a part of religion because sorcerers make use of certain Qur’anic terms to deceive simple people, Al-Youm Arabic daily said.

“We deal with sorcerers in a special way. No one should think that we mention the name of whomever files a report about sorcery. We protect the identity of informants. We merely receive the information and thank the individual for his help without involving him in any kind of confrontation,” Sheikh Faqih added,

He also said that they do not arrest a sorcerer simply because someone has filed a report against him. There are procedures that have to be followed. Investigations have to be made and information must be collected before an arrest can be made. Finally, no action can be taken without receiving permission from the authorities concerned , he added.

Sheikh Faqih explained that a sorcerer can be identified when he asks for the name of a patient and for the name of the patient’s mother or if he is seeking to buy an animal with certain features. He can also be identified if he asks for a sheep to be killed without mentioning Allah’s name and asks to stain the body with the animal’s blood or if he asks for similar unusual things.

Sheikh Faqih said, “Sorcery cannot be divided into two branches. There is only one kind of sorcery. There is no such thing as black or white magic. Allah said that magic is infidelity and no one can be a sorcerer unless he offers sacrifices to spirits and disbelieves in God.” “Sorcery deals with amulets and talismans which lead people to believe that such things can help them, but that Allah cannot,” he added.

“There are several awareness programs conducted by the Hai’a through local and international media to counteract the phenomenon of magicians and sorcerers,” Sheikh Faqih said.

(HT The Volokh Conspiracy)

 
Keynes and government spending

Tyler Cowen has this quote from Keynes' General Theory:

It follows, therefore, that, if the consumption psychology of the community is such that they will choose to consume e.g., nine-tenths of an increment of income, then the multiplier is 10; and the total employment caused by (e.g.) increased public works will be ten times the primary employment provided by the public works themselves...

I don't know why you would trust anyone who could write that sentence. Apart from the technical errors (which Cowen explains), if the above was true the Soviet Union would have been wealthy and successful.

 
Censorship in Australia

It sounds like the Australian government is trying to secretly block access to web pages showing aborted foetuses:

IN an unprecedented move, Australia's communications regulator has threatened to fine a company up to $11,000 a day for indirectly leaking part of its top-secret list of banned internet web pages.

The action by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has wide ramifications for media companies, online publishers, web hosting suppliers and any organisation that publishes feedback from readers or customers on their website.

On March 10, ACMA issued Sydney web hosting company Bulletproof Networks with an "interim link-deletion notice" for allowing its customer, the Whirlpool internet community website, to post the link to an anti-abortion web page blacklisted by the regulator.

It's not entirely clear, but it appears that not only are there fines for allowing users to access the content, there are also fines for revealing that the content is prohibited. One can only imagine the outrage if the Howard government had done this to a left wing site.

 
Roads ARE the future

Nice to see that National plans to build more roads:

Big roading projects such as a $320 million motorway tunnel under Victoria Park in Auckland are on the fast track under a $1 billion transport funding stimulus announced by the Government yesterday.

The Waikato Expressway between Mercer and Cambridge, and a four-lane highway from Puhoi to Wellsford, are also nominated by Transport Minister Steven Joyce as possible beneficiaries of the boost to state highway funding over three years.

But some people aren't happy:

Labour's transport spokesman, Darren Hughes, accused National of being "ideologically rooted in tar-seal" and Green Party co-leader Russel Norman said the Government was defying international thinking by boosting a "dinosaur fossil-fuel economy".

The problem is that NZ's size, shape and population density is not suited to public transport. We're not western Europe and so european solutions won't work here. The thought of taking my kids up the coast to the beach on public transport is the stuff of nightmares. I'd much rather chug up the hill at 30 km/h in an electric car than try to get there on trains and buses.

Fossil fuels are limited but we'll be using cars indefinitely, long after the last petrol driven one has left the road. The future is hydrogen power which is still far off and may not be achieved in my lifetime. We'll bridge the gap between petrol and hydrogen by using electricity generated renewably through hydro, wind, tidal and solar power. Cars on roads are here to stay and ranting about fossil fuels is a just a straw man.

UPDATE: One thing I would like to see happen is more effort put into developing driverless cars. The technology is already quite far along. I take the train to work even though the journey is about 25 minutes longer and the cost of petrol and parking is less than the value of that time. The reason is that time spent in a car is entirely non-productive, while the train journey is a combination of walking and sitting on the train reading. Since I would have needed more exercise anyway if I didn't walk to the station, the train actually uses time more efficiently. But if I could read in the car it would be the best of both worlds.

 
The Ugly Left

From yesterday's Christchurch Press:

Unions are urging the Government to tighten borders and companies to fire migrant workers before Kiwis, as the full force of the recession hits.

Manufacturing and Construction Workers Union general secretary Graeme Clarke said the union had been in contact with the Government about companies continuing to employ migrant workers.

Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union national secretary Andrew Little said he was dealing with a similar situation at a New Plymouth business.

Migrant workers had helped New Zealand through years of major skills shortages, but there were now questions over what to do when Kiwi workers were losing jobs. "Kiwi workers are obviously capable of making a long-term commitment to the business, but those on work visas are limited to a couple of years," he said.

"I would hope employers would take that into account," he said.

Aside from the blatant racist element that has always been a feature of NZ unions, at some point those so-called "kiwi workers" need to learn that it's hard to get ahead in a world full of people who are willing to work harder than you are.

 
Iraq Update

Now that defeating Republicans in the election is no longer the media's top priority, this ABC/BBC/NHK report is able to tell us how much Iraq has improved since the surge:

The gains in the latest ABC News/BBC/NHK poll represent a stunning reversal of the spiral of despair caused by Iraq's sectarian violence in 2006 and 2007.

Eighty-four percent of Iraqis now rate security in their own area positively, nearly double its August 2007 level. Seventy-eight percent say their protection from crime is good, more than double its low. Three-quarters say they can go where they want safely – triple what it's been.

Sixty-five percent of Iraqis say things are going well in their own lives, up from 39 percent in 2007 (albeit still a bit below its 2005 peak). Fifty-eight percent say things are going well for Iraq – a new high, up from only 22 percent in 2007. Expectations for the year ahead, at the national and personal levels, also have soared, after crashing in 2007. And the sharpest advances have come among Sunni Arabs, the favored group under Saddam Hussein, deeply alienated by his overthrow, now re-engaging in Iraq's national life.

Confidence in the national government, local governments, the army and police all are at new highs. And the growth in support for democracy, bolstered by successful provincial elections in January, is critical – a 21-point gain from March 2007 to a new high in polls since 2004. As Sunni Arabs have stepped back from their preference for strongman rule, so have many Shiites dropped their preference for an Islamic state.

A substantial number of Iraqis, 42 percent, are concerned that security may in fact worsen after U.S. forces leave.

So much for the myths about the oppression of the evil Bushitler. The removal of Saddam will now be regarded by history as clearly a positive move, despite the cost.

I still think troops need to remain there for a long time - Iraq won't fully sort itself out any quicker than Germany and Japan did.

 
What he said

Blair has a message for the ACT MPs regarding the Gang Insignia Bill. It's too good to just quote a section so go there and read the whole thing.

 
Asked and answered

From Lindsay Mitchell's Blog:

At 4:14 PM, MikeE said...

He's a fucking idiot, and an embarressment to the rest of the party. To suggest that its ok for someone to get anally raped for smoking pot is insane.

At 12:06 PM, David Garrett said...

... if you can draw my attention to anyone who is in jail for "smoking pot" and nothing else, $100 is yours...

At 3:54 PM, MikeE said...

... heres a tetraplegic jailed (in NZ) for use of Med Pot.

http://www.norml.org.nz/Medical/Danuiel_Clark.htm

I'll be picking up my $100 at the AGM tomorrow thanks.

Heh. The guy actually grew pot (for his own use) so Garrett is probably entitled to keep the $100. But the basic point that these kind of people will be put at risk by double bunking is correct. Extra space can be found by letting out drug offenders guilty of anything less than a large scale business operation.

 
Influence of Saul Alinsky on Obama

Very interesting post at The Right Coast on the Democrats' attempts to demonize Rush Limbaugh, and the ideas of Saul Alinsky:

Saul Alinsky's Thirteenth Rule: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

He wasn't kidding. In his handbook for community organizers, Rules for Radicals, he made it clear that the way to succeed is to demonize your opponent. Pick someone your followers can focus their anger upon and attack him without mercy.

Who would have ever thought that the White House would follow Saul Alinsky's playbook?

Well ... anyone paying attention to the candidates' histories in the recent election, that's who. Again and again, Obama has made it clear that Alinsky is his inspiration. As community organizer during the late 1980s, he worked for Alinsky protege Jerry Kellman. (Alinsky himself was already dead). The Chicago Sun-Times reported in a 2007 article entitled "Ruthless for Obama" that his campaign had organized Alinsky-style boot camps for activists called "Camp Obama" at which young recruits were urged to be "'absolutely ruthless'" for their candidate. Even NPR calls Alinsky "The Man Who Inspired Obama." Why should anybody be surprised when the new administration acts like Alinsky?

I have no interest in defending Limbaugh - this kind of strategy works precisely because the person attacked is rightly disliked across the political spectrum. But it's important to understand the strategy being used, especially at a time when some might think there are other things the Obama administration really ought to be focussing on.

 
The Cycleway

It sounds like the government is actually going to build this thing. It won't have a net benefit for the country but is very clever politics.

• It enables the government to be seen to be actually doing something.
• The cost will be significant but still small compared to other projects there might be pressure to waste money on.
• It will take quite a while to build and will be seen all over the country so there will be lots of news coverage.
• All New Zealanders can use and enjoy it.
• It's hard for the left to attack.
• The labour required to build it (what people see anyway) will include people who might otherwise be unemployed.

So it's probably a good move by National but only if they use it as political cover to avoid doing really harmful stuff (such as the nine day fortnight).

 
We're here to help

The US State Department is warning that it's dangerous to travel to Honduras following an increase in the minimum wage there:

In January, Honduran President Manuel Zelaya increased the minimum wage 60 percent, raising monthly wages from US$ 181 to $289. As a result, an estimated 15,000 people have been laid off in urban areas. This number is expected to steadily increase as businesses cannot afford the new mandatory wages. Remittances from Hondurans in the U.S. have also decreased throughout 2008.

Some analysts predict increased crime in Honduras due to citizens unable to find legitimate sources of income. Many unemployed Hondurans could look to kidnapping for ransom in order to obtain large sums of money for a small amount of planning and effort. As the disparity between economic classes continues, wealthy Hondurans or foreigners of affluent appearance conducting business in Honduras could continue to be targeted at a higher rate.

Not only does the minimum wage lead to 'disparity between economic classes' it turns out it can also get you kidnapped. I guess we have to add Hillary Clinton's State Department to the list of right wing ideologues claiming that higher prices lead to people buying less. (HT: Best of the Web)

 
Electoral Spending

The electoral expenses have now been published here. The major ones are:

Labour: $2,263,841.25
National: $2,206,835.53
Greens: $1,457,744.39
ACT: $1,142,087.64

At some point the facts must put to rest the lie that the right have lots of money that they can use to buy elections. Labour and the Greens combined spent around $1.11 for every $1 spent by National and ACT combined.

The ability of individuals and groups to promote their views by spending their own money should not be a left vs right issue.

 
Do you want this guy in charge of your money?

I hope it is still acceptable to make fun of things the President says now that Bush is no longer in office. Here is some investment advice from the Obamessiah:

President Obama told Americans to take a look at investing in the stock market [yesterday] afternoon, a remarkable utterance for an American president, especially as the Dow Jones Industrial Average proceeds on its course Southward.

"What you're now seeing is . . . profit and earning ratios are starting to get to the point where buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you've got a long-term perspective on it," the president said on a day that trading continued to hover under 7,000.

Would you take investment advice from a guy who talks about "profit and earning ratios"? Though I should add, through hard work and sound judgment, my business has maintained a solid profit to earnings ratio of 1:1 since its inception. If you want to invest, my email address is on the left.

 
Wanganui Gang-Patch Ban

This bill is now going to pass with the support of ACT. I can only say that I whole-heartedly agree with the views expressed here:

The move to outlaw gangs, their patches and tattoos is nothing more than a ploy to give the appearance of action - a ploy that will yield no results or benefit to New Zealand society in the long-term struggle to deal with the country's gang problem, ACT Deputy Leader and National Security Spokesman Heather Roy said today.

"Such moves are wrongly-focussed, token-ist and entirely predictable - hard-line policies to deal with gangs are reeled out by different Parties in the run up to every election," Mrs Roy said.

"Clearly none of these 'flash in a pan' policies have worked - because they focus more on addressing the mayhem that individual gang members cause, rather than on initiatives that will hit gangs hardest and make it harder for them to operate.

"Legislation outlawing gangs and their insignia is just more law - we don't need more laws, we need to enforce the ones we already have and give police the power to tackle lawlessness where and when it happens.

"Gangs' impact on society is more about their actions than their visibility. Rather than worrying about what gangs wear, we should establish a special IRD unit to audit their incomes and hit them where it hurts the most - in their wallets, rather than their wardrobes.

"This is political spin at its worst. Enforcing the laws and by-laws we already have, and following the money rather than the mayhem, is the real answer to dealing with gangs in New Zealand,"

Heh. (HT Lindsay Mitchell)

 
Drunk Driving vs Drowsy Driving

Brad Taylor asks:

Why are drunk drivers treated like the devil incarnate while drowsy drivers barely raise an eyebrow?

Propaganda and the fact that one is illegal are a big part of it, but a more subtle difference is that someone who is drowsy is not a danger unless they actually fall asleep at the wheel, whereas someone who has been drinking is an increased risk as soon as they get behind the wheel.

In the same way we attach much greater blame to a speeding driver who kills someone than to a speeding driver who narrowly misses someone, we don't attach much blame to driving when tired unless the person actually falls asleep.

The blame is based on the certain (i.e. minimum) risk to others rather than the expected value of the risk to others. Most people have no concept of expected value. The TV show Deal or no Deal makes this infuriatingly clear.

 
Three strikes

ACT's three strikes policy will be introduced to Parliament this week. Essentially it is:

First strike: no change
Second strike: maximum sentence
Third strike: 25 year minimum non-parole period

It should be noted that a strike must be a serious violent or sexual offence. This is quite different from the three strikes laws in the US, where any felony is a strike so people can get life in prison for stealing a bag of chips. This difference is absolutely crucial and there are already some grossly irresponsible media reports that mention problems in the US ones without explaining that the definition of 'strike' is completely different.

If someone has committed three serious violent or sexual offences, the expected social cost of further offending is so high that the cost/benefit analysis of putting them away is unanswerable. The disincentive to commit the third crime in the first place is a bonus, not the core justification for the policy.

ACT is claiming that this policy would have prevented 77 murders committed by offenders who already had three qualifying convictions. This seems high and I would like to see the details. Even with New Zealand's current lax approach to violent crime I expect three consecutive sentences for qualifiying offences would put the offender out of action for a fairly long time.

 
The Regulation/Ownership Distinction

There was a story in the news yesterday about the Department of Conservation accepting a payment of $175,000 in exchange for not opposing a windfarm development.

There is an important distinction here between the government's role as a regulator and its role as a property owner.

As a regulator, the government should not oppose developments that comply with all relevant regulations. It can, and usually should, take action where the regulations are not complied with. In no circumstances should a government agency accept money in exchange for not performing its regulatory function.

It's different where the government is acting as a property owner, and DOC is a major property owner in New Zealand. If my neighbour wants to do something that may reduce the value of my property, I have a right to object. There is nothing improper if I choose to accept a payment from my neighbour in exchange for withdrawing my objection. I don't see any reason this should be different when the property owner is the government.

On the facts that have been provided so far, the indications are that DOC as acting as a property owner rather than as a regulator.

 
Gains from Trade - Example

There is nothing new or insightful in this example, but it is worth repeating from time to time in case people aren't familiar with the principle or have forgotten.

Let's say Mary and Jane are the only two survivors of a shipwreck. They end up on an island but are on opposite sides of the island and don't know the other is there. There are two sources of food on the island: catching fish or collecting coconuts. Mary can catch 2 fish per day or collect 4 coconuts per day, while Jane can catch 3 fish or collect 5 coconuts.

Each decides to split their time evenly between catching fish and collecting coconuts so, after 10 days, Mary has caught 10 fish and collected 20 coconuts, while Jane has caught 15 fish and collected 25 coconuts.

At the end of the tenth day, they meet in the middle of the island. After discussing their experiences so far, they decide on a new plan. For the next 10 days, Mary will only collect coconuts while Jane will spend 9 days catching fishing and 1 day collecting coconuts.

During the next 10 days, Mary collects 40 coconuts, while Jane catches 27 fish and collects 5 coconuts. Mary then trades 20 coconuts to Jane for 11 fish. The result is that Mary now has 11 fish and 20 coconuts, while Jane has 16 fish and 25 coconuts. Each has gained one fish.

This is a very simple example of gains from trade. Even though Jane has an absolute advantage in collecting coconuts, it's better for Mary to specialize in this because she has a comparative advantage. The only way there could fail to be comparative advantage is if Jane was superior to Mary in all tasks and in exactly the same proportions. In this example, if Jane could catch 3 fish or collect 6 coconuts per day there would be no comparative advantage and no gains from trade.

In the real world, if Mary and Jane were countries instead of people, there would be a vocal group in Jane's country claiming that reliance on imported coconuts was destroying local jobs. There would be vocal groups in both countries claiming that this trade business was all a nasty plot to keep Mary's people poor by forcing them to collect coconuts all day long and shutting them out of the lucrative market for fish.

What is happening in the US right now is just another example.

 
Solid Energy

No Right Turn is upset that Solid Energy paid for a report that undermined the Government's position on climate change. However it seems to me, that if Solid Energy acted improperly, one of the following must be true:

1. Solid Energy should not pay for reports on the environmental effects of its businesses practices.

2. If Solid Energy does pay for such a report, they have a duty to bury it if, and only if, the outcome suggests their business practices are acceptable.

3. Solid Energy actually influenced the outcome of the report.

4. The fact that Solid Energy paid for it and the result suits them, means they can be presumed to have influenced the result.

1 and 2 are clearly unreasonable and there is no evidence of 3 that I am aware of. I guess that 4 is what NRT is driving at though it isn't clear. Does this mean that no taxpayer owned entity should ever pay for and use research that supports their position on any controversial issue? It seems so.

 
Minimum Wage

National has increased the minimum wage by 50c, to $12.50 per hour.

The downside of doing this is that it costs jobs. Reasonable people can differ about the level at which the minimum wage begins to render some people unemployable, but there is some level at which this happens. Obviously you couldn't set it at $50. After a year of recession and no end in sight, it would be difficult to argue that a $12.50 minimum wage will not lead to some unemployment.

We cannot close the wage gap with Australia by increasing the minimum wage. Wages are ultimately determined by the increase in revenue a firm can obtain by employing someone. The minimum wage doesn't change that and so can't change overall wages, over the medium to long term.

The upside of the minimum wage is that low paid workers do get a pay increase, at least in the short term. The market is not perfectly competitive and, under normal economic conditions, there are businesses keeping surplus for themselves in the form of profits, rather than passing that surplus on as either increased wages or lower prices.

However, in a recession, that surplus has already been mostly eaten away. Increased costs will either be passed on through higher prices or will create a risk of business failure. That is the real tradeoff here. In the best case scenario, the increase will be paid for by consumers, while in the worst case, businesses will fail and workers will see their pay cut from $12 to $0.

I would like to suggest an alternative. I'm not necessarily saying this is something that should be done, but it is better than increasing the minimum wage.

Suppose we cut the minimum wage from $12 to $8 and introduce a benefit payable to those earning less than $12 per hour, which tops up their income to the same amount they would have received if paid $12 per hour. Also suppose this benefit is funded by a new tax on employers who pay workers less than $12 per hour.

This is (apart from transaction costs) identical to the minimum wage. Instead of Mary paying Paul $12 per hour, she only pays him $9 per hour. But Paul gets $3 from the government for every hour he works and Mary has to pay a tax of $3 for every hour Paul works. So far there is no point in doing this.

But what if the benefit is funded from general taxation instead of just from those who employ low-paid workers? Now it becomes a genuine wealth transfer to low income workers and there is an incentive, rather than a disincentive, to employ them as staff. It could be done as an extension of Working for Families, for example.

 
US Stimulus Package

A pretty good framework for analysis of the likely effect can be found here. The method essentially is:

For each $100 of stimulus spending:

1. Take the value of currently idle resources (mostly people) that will be utilized if the spending occurs

2. Subtract the value of 'housework' (unmeasured output) that will be lost if the resources in 1 are applied to measured output

3. Add the increased value of public economic activity relative to private economic activity (or subtract if you think public is generally of less value than private)

4. Subtract the loss due to incentive effects (high taxes so people get to keep less
of what they produce leading to a disincentive to produce in the first place)

Obviously the conclusion depends on what numbers you plug in. Regular readers of this blog will know I am skeptical of government's ability to get things right, but attempting to set that aside I think a fair assessment is (leaving number 1 to last):

2. Between -$20 and -$40
3. Between +$20 and -$20
4. Between -$10 and -$20

So in the best case, a $100 stimulus will break even if it results in employment of an extra $10 of resources over and above what would have been employed if there was no stimulus and the money was left in the private sector.

In the worst case, the $100 stimulus will need to employ $80 more resources.

I think even $10 is optimistic and what will actually be needed is closer to an $80 gain than a $10 gain.

Added to that is the likelihood that a much smaller and targeted stimulus would likely still capture any gains that are available. The above analysis also values leisure time at $0.

 
It's Cold

The northern hemisphere is having an unusually cold winter this year. This doesn't prove anything about long term trends, but since the global warming alarmists use every sunny day as unequivocal proof of our impending doom, it seems only fair to mention the data points that indicate the opposite:

http://www.danwei.org/front_page_of_the_day/beijing_winter.php

White Christmas for all parts of Canada for the first time since 1971

Chaos in Seattle as city unprepared to deal with heavy snowfall

Minus 30 in Chicago, people told not to go outside

Frigid Storm Closes California Freeways, Drops Snow in Malibu

 
Is Bill English stupid or racist?

I thought/hoped we had seen the end of this kind of nonsense:

The Government has vetoed plans by one of Asia's richest men to buy a giant ironsands business in a $250 million deal.

The new Government, which had criticised the Labour administration's decision to block a partial takeover of Auckland airport, sandbagged the deal because of a lack of "substantial and identifiable benefit" to New Zealand.

Australian firm BlueScope Steel owns the business - and says it is considering its legal position after Finance Minister Bill English blocked the sale.

BlueScope had planned to sell the Taharoa ironsands business, south of Auckland, to a company controlled by Hong Kong multibillionaire Li Ka-Shing.

It's a sale by an Australian firm to a Hong Kong firm. There is no direct economic gain or loss to New Zealand, but the indirect gains are:

1) Companies will be more willing to invest here if they know they will be able to sell without government interference.
2) A company that wants to buy is much more likely to look after the business and safeguard jobs than a company that wants to sell but can't.

Only racism or ignorance can explain English's actions. I'll be charitable and put it down to ignorance.

 
Catchup

Cricket

We appear to be holding our own in the first test against the Windies, though we could still collapse and lose it on the last day. The problem is the team is bad enough to be disappointing, but not yet so bad I can give up on them completely. Rather like my golf game actually.

Truancy Changes

I'm not opposed to fining the parents, though $3000 is excessive. A warning for the first offence and $100 for each subsequent offence is plenty. The idea of school being a place that kids want to go is not realistic. Many will go only because they are made to go, and parents need to take responsibility for doing that.

There must be more scope for using technology though. I have no idea what process truancy officers use now, but there should be a system where the names and photos of kids that skip class are transmitted to the truancy officer's phone. Then they just walk around the shopping centres and other known hang-out spots and pick the kids up. The parents should be emailed as well.

90 Day Probation

I have tried to understand the objections to this, but I just don't see it. If someone who opposes the change could give me an example of a net social loss that might arise, please do so.

Normally urgency should not be used for something like this, but the benefits are overwhelming and it will be good to have the change in place if the downturn does lead to more job turnover.

In fact, there are benefits that have not been clearly explained, e.g.:

- All the talk about low income workers losing out is premised on the assumption that only the employer and employee have a stake in the outcome. What about the benefit to the person who gets the job that opens up after the sacking? It's a win for the employer because they get a more productive worker and break-even between the person who loses the job and the person who fills the vacancy.

- The need to carry sub-par workers because it's too hard to sack them is built into wage levels. The employer is concerned about two things: total output and and total cost. The need to carry unproductive workers thus reduces the amount paid to productive workers.

I disagree with the advice at Kiwiblog and elsewhere that workers should refuse to agree to such a provision. To a productive worker this is an opportunity for free money. They should be paid a premium for agreeing to the provision and it is sensible for the employer to agree to do so.

Bail Changes

I don't agree with this, as I have said earlier. It's not soft on crime to prefer to convict people before locking them up. There are three good reasons to refuse bail:

1. The person has offended while on bail in the past, or
2. The evidence is overwhelming and a prison sentence is certain, so the time spent locked up awaiting trial is then subtracted from the rsulting sentence, or
3. Flight risk (leaving the country not just failing to turn up at court)

Police Spying

It's a gross breach of civil rights and invasion of privacy. National needs to really come down hard on those responsible and show that abuse of government power ended at the last election, regardless of the political allegiance of those involved.

Of course, it's entirely proper to infiltrate known criminal groups such as the Save Happy Valley coalition. It may turn out that the groups listed were planning crimes, but it seems highly unlikely. If not, they should have been left alone.

Tax Changes

Only the top rate really matters for economic growth and that is only reducing from 39 cents to 37 cents. With marginal rates for our most productive and entrepreneurial citizens as high as that, NZ isn't going anywhere. The big gap between the company rate and the top personal rate also leads to time and effort being wasted on complex avoidance measures.

Education Standards

This is long overdue, though it should have been applied to all schools receiving government funding, not just state schools. In order to have even a basic level of accountability we need annual literacy and numeracy testing, starting with the child's very first day at school.

There is no reason at all for low decile schools to be disadvantaged by this, because what matters is the change in performance over time. Some kids turn up at school already able to read while others can't even hold a book the right way up. Testing is the only way to recognise and reward a school that lifts the second kid to an average level rather than a school where the first kid leaves at an above average level.

There should be published league tables showing the average increase in literacy and numeracy while kids attended each school. Sounds like a job for the Minister of Consumer Affairs.

 
Brilliant

This is very clever:

 
To what issue will this come?

The Volokh Conspiracy has an extract from the arrest warrant for Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. Essentially, the FBI wiretapped him trying to sell the appointment to Obama's old senate seat. It makes interesting reading:

101. c. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that the consultants (Advisor B and another consultant are believed to be on the call at that time) are telling him that he has to “suck it up” for two years and do nothing and give this “motherfucker [the President-elect] his senator. Fuck him. For nothing? Fuck him.”

ROD BLAGOJEVICH states that he will put “[Senate Candidate 4]” in the Senate “before I just give fucking [Senate Candidate 1] a fucking Senate seat and I don’t get anything.” (Senate Candidate 4 is a Deputy Governor of the State of Illinois). ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he needs to find a way to take the “financial stress” off of his family and that his wife is as qualified or more qualified than another specifically named individual to sit on corporate boards.

According to ROD BLAGOJEVICH, “the immediate challenge [is] how do we take some of the financial pressure off of our family.” Later in the phone call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that absent getting something back, ROD BLAGOJEVICH will not pick Senate Candidate 1.

HARRIS re-stated ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s thoughts that they should ask the President-elect for something for ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s financial security as well as maintain his political viability.

HARRIS said they could work out a three-way deal with SEIU and the President-elect where SEIU could help the President-elect with ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s appointment of Senate Candidate 1 to the vacant Senate seat, ROD BLAGOJEVICH would obtain a position as the National Director of the Change to Win campaign, and SEIU would get something favorable from the President-elect in the future.

d. One of ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s advisors said he likes the idea, it sounds like a good idea, but advised ROD BLAGOJEVICH to be leery of promises for something two years from now. ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s wife said they would take the job now. Thereafter, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and others on the phone call discussed various ways ROD BLAGOJEVICH can “monetize” the relationships he is making as Governor to make money after ROD BLAGOJEVICH is no longer Governor.

102. Later on November 10, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Advisor A discussed the open Senate seat. Among other things, ROD BLAGOJEVICH raised the issue of whether the President-elect could help get ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s wife on “paid corporate boards right now.” Advisor A responded that he “think[s] they could” and that a “President-elect . . . can do almost anything he sets his mind to.”

ROD BLAGOJEVICH states that he will appoint “[Senate Candidate 1 [[Obama’s presumed favorite]]] . . . but if they feel like they can do this and not fucking give me anything . . . then I’ll fucking go [Senate Candidate 5].” (Senate Candidate 5 is publicly reported to be interested in the open Senate seat). ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that if his wife could get on some corporate boards and “picks up another 150 grand a year or whatever” it would help ROD BLAGOJEVICH get through the next several years as Governor. . . .

104. On November 11, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with JOHN HARRIS about the Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH suggested starting a 501(c)(4) organization (a non-profit organization that may engage in political activity and lobbying) and getting “his (believed to be the President-elect’s) friend Warren Buffett or some of those guys to help us on something like that.”

HARRIS asked, “what, for you?” ROD BLAGOJEVICH replied, “yeah.”

Later in the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that if he appoints Senate Candidate 4 to the Senate seat and, thereafter, it appears that ROD BLAGOJEVICH might get impeached, he could “count on [Senate Candidate 4], if things got hot, to give [the Senate seat] up and let me parachute over there.” HARRIS said, “you can count on [Senate Candidate 4] to do that.”

Later in the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH said he knows that the President-elect wants Senate Candidate 1 for the Senate seat but “they’re not willing to give me anything except appreciation. Fuck them.”

There is nothing to suggest that Obama or his people did anything wrong here. But this does make it even harder to believe that any Democrat can be elected in Illinois without getting their hands dirty.

UPDATE: A whole lot more here from Jake Tapper at ABC. The highlights:

Obama adviser David Axelrod said that Obama and Blagojevich talked about the replacement. Now Axelrod says he was mistaken and they never discussed it. Axelrod also refused to help out with Blagojevich's gubernatorial campaign because he 'had concerns about it'.

UPDATE2: It sounds as though Obama is going to need a new Chief of Staff.

 
The unlucky country

How are the Australians doing after a year under Labour? Here are some examples:

• A man has been convicted on child porn charges after cartoons showing Simpsons characters having sex were found on his computer. This is on appeal so two courts have agreed.
• They are changing the labour laws so that employers can be forced by an arbitrator to accept union demands.
• The headline says it all really: Alcoholics snatch dumped kids to get bonus. Paying people to have kids is just a disaster, no matter how you do it.
• An Australian journalist is in jail in Thailand for an article that offended the Thai King but the government says there is nothing they can do to help. This is what happens when you elect politicians who don't understand that their job is to keep citizens safe and protect their rights. Countries have gone to war over less.
• The Rudd government's bank deposit guarantee has led to interest rates at artificially high levels since risk management is no longer required.

If we are still lagging far behind Australia by 2020, we will have only ourselves to blame.

 
Yes We Can!

Remember all the claims that the Bush administration condoned torture? It turns out, now the election is over, that Democrats also think torture may be justified:

Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who will take over as chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee in January, led the fight this year to force the C.I.A. to follow military interrogation rules. Her bill was passed by Congress but vetoed by President Bush.

But in an interview on Tuesday, Mrs. Feinstein indicated that extreme cases might call for flexibility. “I think that you have to use the noncoercive standard to the greatest extent possible,” she said, raising the possibility that an imminent terrorist threat might require special measures.

Afterward, however, Mrs. Feinstein issued a statement saying: “The law must reflect a single clear standard across the government, and right now, the best choice appears to be the Army Field Manual. I recognize that there are other views, and I am willing to work with the new administration to consider them.”

 
Public Service Announcement

If you or your children were born in New Zealand since 1969, you need to read this.

 
The Wisdom of Crowds

Results from the latest opinion poll on global warming, covering 12,000 people in 11 countries:

Less than half of those surveyed, or 47 per cent, said they were prepared to make personal lifestyle changes to reduce carbon emissions, down from 58 per cent last year.

Only 37 per cent said they were willing to spend "extra time" on the effort, an eight-point drop.

And only one in five respondents - or 20 per cent - said they'd spend extra money to reduce climate change. That's down from 28 per cent a year ago.

Results of the poll suggested that 55 per cent of respondents in the 11 countries said their governments should be doing more by investing in renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar and wave power.

That's more than double the 27 per cent who wanted their governments to participate in Kyoto-style international agreements to reduce emissions.

To those of us who have been out campaigning for election, it will be no surprise that public support for agreements like Kyoto is so low.

It's not clear whether the drop is due to tougher economic times, or it has just taken people a while to absorb the facts and reach the conclusions those facts imply. If it is because of the economy, that reinforces the view that the only way to get people to care about the environment is to first have a strong economy where people's higher priorities are satisified.

 
Meet the new boss (US edition)

Here's what Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder, said about unlawful combatants back in 2002:

One of the things we clearly want to do with these prisoners is to have an ability to interrogate them and find out what their future plans might be, where other cells are located; under the Geneva Convention that you are really limited in the amount of information that you can elicit from people.

It seems to me that given the way in which they have conducted themselves, however, that they are not, in fact, people entitled to the protection of the Geneva Convention. They are not prisoners of war. If, for instance, Mohamed Atta had survived the attack on the World Trade Center, would we now be calling him a prisoner of war? I think not. Should Zacarias Moussaoui be called a prisoner of war? Again, I think not.

He is very clear: they aren't protected by the Geneva convention and that's good because it means more information can be elicited from them.

Since then, Democrats have found it convenient to attack Guantanamo Bay and the treatment of detainees - not because they genuinely believe that treatment is wrong, but just because it is politically convenient to do so. The political considerations no longer apply now that they control the executive and legislature.

I'll predict that Obama will close Guantanamo Bay, declare the issue resolved, but very little else will change. The detainees will probably be separated and moved further from the jurisdiction of the US courts, rather than closer, and will not get anything like the due process of an ordinary criminal trial. Most will never be released unless Al Qaeda is wiped out, which is unlikely in the medium term. The media will lose interest and so will everyone else.

 
The Audacity of Hypocrisy

Another one that is too good to excerpt. This time, I'm just going to copy the whole thing:

A few months ago, Barack Obama told a gathering of the American Federation of Teachers that he opposes private school choice programs, adding: “We need to focus on fixing and improving our public schools; not throwing our hands up and walking away from them.”

It’s not clear whether or not the president-elect will be able to fix our public schools, and I don’t know if he’s thrown up his hands, but he and his two daughters have just walked away from the public schools. Again. When they move from Chicago to D.C., Malia and Sasha Obama will be moving from the prestigious private Lab School to the prestigious private Sidwell Friends school — Chelsea Clinton’s old stomping ground.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that. In fact, it’s wonderful that the Obamas had such a broad range of public and private school choices available to them. What’s puzzling is that the president-elect opposes programs that would bring that same easy choice of schools within reach of families who lack his personal wealth. By his actions, Senator Obama is demonstrating that he is not willing to wait for his own policy prescriptions to “fix and improve” public schools, but he expects folks with less ample bank accounts to patiently await his hoped-for change.

And while many reports will no doubt trumpet the $25,000+ tuition at Sidwell Friends, implying that this is extravagantly beyond what is spent in D.C. public schools, they will be mistaken. As I wrote in the Washington Post and on this blog, D.C. public schools also spent about $25,000 per child in the 2007-08 school year.

It’s not that president-elect Obama is against spending a lot of money on other people’s kids — he’s just against letting their parents choose where that money is spent.

The bottom line is that private schools are better than state schools, for reasons that are quite obvious when you look at the incentives involved. Spending USD25k per child on state schools is a lot though. For left-wing leaders, childlessness is really the only way to avoid hypocrisy without disadvantaging your kids.

Does anyone know where John Key's kids go to school and what the tuition fees are?