WeblogBahamas.com

But what about welfare you ask

Rick Lowe

A reader of our post yesterday, while sympathetic to the point raised, wondered what happened to those people in society that cannot work or help themselves.

This is a legitimate question, although she was conferring the responsibility to help on the "government". I quickly pointed out that private charity was pushed out by government mandates as noted by Dr. Richard Ebeling in a lecture entitled The Economics of Liberty and The Welfare State, watch it here… and I still think private charity is the best route.

If that doesn't help, read The Poverty of Welfare: Helping Others in Civil Society by Michael Tanner.

Here's what sums it up best as far as I'm concerend.  It's from Donald J. Kochan and his 1997 article for The Freeman entitled, The Pervasive Duty to Rescue: Only Private Charity Can Help Those Truly in Need of Assistance.

"…Government programs create dependency, create flawed incentives, and are too broad and generalized to target resources effectively. They hurt more than they help. In tort law, an individual can be held liable for a failed rescue when his heroic attempts are beyond his capacity and actually do harm to the one in need of assistance. The government, however, is not liable for the harm its rescue programs do.

"Only private charity can meet the requirements of those truly in need of assistance. Private funds can be targeted toward those in actual need. Moreover, private organizations are smaller and more localized, allowing them to address the specific problems that needy people have and apply specific solutions, instead of merely sending out impersonal checks drawn against government accounts. Finally, private charities must be more accountable, for they do not have the coercive power of taxation available to ensure continued funding.

"Government programs, unfortunately, have co-opted this superior private approach. Many people believe that they need not get involved because of a flawed perception that the government is doing the job. Moreover, many cannot afford to assist privately, given the drain on their budget from taxation. In tort law, a person can be held liable for preventing a needy individual from getting more effective assistance.[6] That, essentially, is what the government does by its discouragement of private charity, but again, the government is not liable for the harm it does.

"The rules of the common law, developed over many centuries, usually exhibit a profound wisdom in the ordering of human affairs. The rule against compulsory rescues is such a rule. If you were obligated to help everyone in need, the demands on your time and money would be almost endless. The only solution to the problem that protects the individual’s freedom of action and property rights is the one adopted by the common law: there is no legal duty to rescue. There may be a moral duty, but the law leaves that to the individual and his conscience." (Emphasis added).

Using the coercive force of government to "help" the less fortunate only encourages depedency, and I don't think that's what society wants. It is surely not what's best.

Poverty is the problem, not the wealth of other people

Rick Lowe

Listening to the "fairness" debate around the water cooler reminded me of Dr. Deepak Lal's book, Reviving the Invisible Hand: The Case For Classical Liberalism In The Twenty-First Century, that was released in 2006.

Click on image to enlarge

The liner notes explain that Dr. Lal:

"Taking a broad cross-cultural and interdisciplinary approach, Lal argues that there are two groups opposed to globalization: cultural nationalists who oppose not capitalism but Westernization, and "new dirigistes" who oppose not Westernization but capitalism. In response, Lal contends that capitalism does not have to lead to Westernization, as the examples of Japan, China and India show, and that "new dirigistes" complaints have more to do with the demoralization of their societies than with the capitalist instruments of prosperity."

And I think he is right. Just look at the charts on the left from Chapter 5 (page 133) of his book that records how long the world was mired in poverty. In other words, as a result of Capitalism, millions have been brought out of poverty.

Isn't it time we realised that people getting wealthy is not the problem? The problem is how to get people out of poverty.

But many in the political class find it easier to create illusions that it is wealth that's the problem. This is most unfortunate.

In other words Adam Smith was right.

Buy your copy here…

Lessons in Freedom: The bottom line on Obama-economics!

Tibor R. Machan

Economic fairness is impossible: an oxymoron. Since economic activities are inherently varied and often competitive and since one size doesn’t fit all and not everyone can win in a competition, no such thing as fairness is possible unless it simply means no one may be prevented from taking part. Certainly, however, the outcome will most likely be very different for different participants.

The sort of fairness and equality President Obama and his supporters are after maybe achieved around a family or fraternity dinner table or in a last will and testament where goods are being distributed among family members who each expect the fulfillment of an implied promise from elders to receive a “fair share” of the wealth left to them. “Fair” here makes sense since the idea is that no one is going to get much less or more than another. But no such expectation makes any sense throughout a country!  The government owns nothing and can thus leave nothing to the citizenry without engaging in massive redistribution of wealth it doesn’t have any authority to distribute or redistribute.

Still, there will always be those who want to level the economy. The main reason is the misguided conviction that we are, after all, in the same boat, just as are the children in a family. But the government isn’t like our parents who have made a promise to care for all their children. We aren’t the children of Mr. Obama and his administration! To try to serve us all with all the benefits that parents owe to their offspring would be futile and invites totalitarianism.

When fairness is demanded, it implies that the government does have the authority to assign winners and losers in the economic sphere. As if we still lived in a monarchy awaiting the decision of the king as to who will be the beneficiary of his largess. All the subjects can hope they will receive a fair share of the wealth of the country.

Gregg Allman - Song of the week - January 30, 2012 - Before The Bullets Fly

 

Rick Lowe

We just went to see Gregg Allman and his band in Florida, and what a treat it was.

The band was fabulous and he had his old friend Floyd Miles with him who also performed two songs.

Hope you enjoy the studio version of Before The Bullets Fly below. The live version was excellent!

Please visit Gregg Allman's site here… and buy a couple of his cd's. Heck buy them all like I have.

BeforeTheBulletsFly

Of course Gregg is one of the leaders of the great Allman Brothers Band.

Check out the video below of I Can't Be Satisfied from Gregg's You Tube Channel here…

Bahamas Elections 2012. An interesting new site

 

Rick Lowe

Check out this new site, Bahamas Elections 2012, it's still under development, but so far we can view:

1. Candidates with their pictures
2. Constituencies
3. The list of Candidates, and
4. Polling Divisions.

Still under development is an option to make predictions by Constituency for each candidate, a comment box and more.

The site is designed by Alexander J. Hanna and e1 Technology Limited.

Looks like it will fun to follow this site during the campaign season and on election night.

Hope you will take some time and poke around.

The FNM, PLP, DNA and the Brookfield Myth

Rick Lowe

When Mr. Brave Davis Deputy Leader of the PLP broke with the story of some secret deal hatched in the Cabinet Office between Brookfield and Atlantis, it seemed almost believable.

Then Mr. Perry Christie, Leader of the PLP and Mr. Branville McCartney, Leader of the DNA, followed up about how bad all this was.

Not too far behind were Mr. James Smith, former Minister of Finance for the PLP and former Governor of the Central Bank of The Bahamas and Mr. Franklyn Wilson, businessman confirming and or adding new twists to the story and the Brookfield Myth was being cemented in our minds as fact.

Then the so called deal was called off and the myth all unravelled when Mr. Hubert Ingraham, Prime Minister, said that when the arrangement fell through was the first communication between Brookfield and his office.

Mind you, I do not agree that it was wrong for Mr. Christie to allow the property as collateral to assist with Dubai product either. He was given a proposal at the time the world economy was booming, and nobody knew we would face a world recession in just a few months. And we must not forget we are dealing with private property here, not Crown Land.

This all leads me to the question that if the PLP and DNA would go to such great lengths to create the Brookfield Myth instead of debating the issue from a policy perspective, i.e. offer ideas and suggestions on what they would do if they were in the decision making seat, how can we take them seriously any longer?

What will it take for our politicos to debate issues with solutions in mind instead of myth making? Surely this is possible in a country approaching four decades of self rule?

Child killed in traffic mishap. Who is to blame?

Rick Lowe

Well we all knew the day would come again when a pedestrian would be killed by a Jitney, and this time it's a four year-old girl. What a tragedy.

Unfortunately from the eye witness report in The Tribune, it seems to indicate both the mother and the driver are at fault.

However, it's far past the time that jitney drivers should be acting more responsibly with their driving and parents should be more careful with their children.

Hopefully this will be a wake call for everyone that when we do not pay attention on the road tragedy can strike.

Condolences to the family and the driver. What a difficult thing it must be to deal with.

See the Nassau Guardian article about the incident here…

Abner Pinder recalled to post as chief councillor for Spanish Wells as Gilbert Pinder steps aside

Rick Lowe

I was taken by this recent letter to The Tribune indicating that Gilbert Pinder of the PLP had resigned after being voted to serve as Chief Councillor back in June 2011, paticularly after this PLP web site made such a fuss about it.

It is heartening news that Abner Pinder of the FNM has been asked to resume the post of Chief Councillor for Spanish Wells Eleuthera once again after Gilbert Pinder resigned.

Abner served ALL the people of Spanish Wells for 15 years in an exemplary manner and is deserving of the honour.

As an aside, I visited Spanish Wells in late December and went into Gilbert Pinder's store to buy some fish and the three or four employees were dressed in PLP paraphernalia. This was in contrast to visiting Abner Pinder's business where there were no political "colours" of any kind being displayed.

The company I work for does not allow associates to wear political garb as our clientele are from all walks of life and political persuasions.

Back to the chief councillor of Spanish Wells.

It seems hype is more important to some in politics than service. And Abner gives the people of Spanish Wells the service they deserve, and that's why he was returned in my not so humble opinion.

The photo above is from The Eleutheran. Click here to visit their site.

Some prosper while others decay

Rick Lowe

The following two articles should make us all sit up and take notice.

First, Dr. Burt Folsom points to the reasons why Detroit, Michigan in the USA has gone backwards over the decades in this post...

He notes:

"The lesson for the U.S. today is clear. If we overtax and overregulate, we create an unstable climate to invest, which cuts the chances people have to make money. Thus, people with money leave and invest elsewhere. All of this decline plays out over several decades. Therefore the U.S. can increase taxes, debt, and regulations and be like Detroit–and like New York, Boston, and San Francisco from 1950 to 1980–or the U.S. can cut its corporate tax (which is currently the second highest in the industrialized world) and its high income tax and, above all, cut its reckless spending and be more like New York, Boston, and San Francisco after 1980, when they capped taxes and encouraged investment. The choice is ours. Our future will depend on our decisions."

Second, a friend sent an oped by Victor Davis Hanson, a classicist and an expert on the history of war, entitled The Hundred Years' German War about the resentment of Germany's usccess by some European countries while they fail.

He points out that;

"Behind all the EU's 11th-hour gobbledygook, Germany's new European order is clear: If you wish to live like a German, then you must work and save like a German. Take it or leave it."

Hope you can take the time to read both pieces. They are very instructive.

Lessons in Freedom: TSA & a Free Country: Are the Compatible?

Tibor R. Machan

Why does the TSA annoy so many of us? Not having the resources to do a survey, I resort here to what might be called educated speculation. I suspect it is because free men and women consider it invasive for government agents to order them around--pat them down, make them endure electronic surveillance, being ordered around by TSA agents, etc.--unless they give their permission.

Just because someone embarks upon air travel it doesn’t follow that such permission can be inferred, especially if the search is conducted by government agents. If a private carrier states up front that utilizing it will require submitting to various intrusions, there is a difference. People may require of visitors to their homes or business establishments to submit to certain reasonable precautionary measures, say, for hygienic or security purposes. That’s because their home belongs to them and they may impose conditions for accessing it to others even if these others do not quite understand the rationale behind the measures to which they are subjected. They can go elsewhere. But when government imposes such requirements, given the overwhelming force it wields and its monopolistic powers, certain due process provisions must be met. One cannot escape the government since it runs air traffic. Thus, not unless there is solid reason to suspect someone of misconduct or ill will may they be interfered with by the government. Otherwise the policy is arbitrary.