Friday, January 26, 2007

This Week on the Web (January 20 – January 26)

********************************************************************************************

Quote of the Week:

Every time oil prices shoot up, there are cries of "greed" and demands by politicians for an investigation of collusion by Big Oil. There have been more than a dozen investigations of oil companies over the years, and none of them has turned up the collusion that is supposed to be responsible for high gas prices.

Now that oil prices have dropped big time, does that mean that oil companies have lost their "greed"? Or could it all be supply and demand -- a cause and effect explanation that seems to be harder for some people to understand than emotions like "greed"?

- Thomas Sowell

Editorial Cartoon of the Week:

Stranger Than Fiction

Cox and Forkum

NEWS

Threat to New York as centre of finance

MSNBC.com

New York is facing a threat to its position as the world's leading financial centre, according to a report commissioned by Michael Bloomberg, the city's mayor, and New York Senator Chuck Schumer.

If current trends continue, New York could lose up to 7 per cent of its market share, equivalent to 60,000 jobs, over the next five years. But much of that loss would be prevented if the US implemented legal and regulatory reforms, says the report by McKinsey, the consultancy.

[…]

John Thain, chief executive of the New York Stock Exchange, warned last year that the competitiveness of New York was being undermined by the litigious US climate and Sarbanes-Oxley.

COMMENTARY

The Joy of Football: The Super Bowl Offers a Too-Rare Celebration of Goal-Achievement

Thomas Bowden, Capitalism Magazine

The essential value of spectator sports lies in their capacity to illustrate, in a dramatic way, the process of human goal-achievement. They do this by making the process shorter, simpler, and more visually exciting than it is in daily life--and by giving us heroes to admire.

A process of goal-achievement underlies everything that makes our lives richer, from discovering new medicines to learning about computers, from pursuing a career to enjoying friends and family. But success is not automatic--each such endeavor must be started and maintained, often in the face of great obstacles, by an individual's choices. To gather the moral courage to make their own difficult choices each day, people need inspiration--the spiritual fuel that flows from the sight of another's achievement.

[…]

Ultimately, sporting events like football's Super Bowl offer a microcosmic vision of what "real life" could, and should, be like.

In a society that increasingly rewards weakness and failure, sports fans appreciate that each athlete has to earn his way onto the field by proving his superior ability, and that physical and mental handicaps will be recognized for what they are -- obstacles to be overcome on the road to achievement, not values in their own right.

In a nation whose laws are increasingly arbitrary, sports fans look forward to spending time in a world where the rules are explicit, known in advance by all participants, and fair to everyone.

In a culture that preaches the deadening duty of self-sacrifice and service to others, sports fans love to turn on the TV and immerse themselves in an exciting, suspenseful contest for no purpose other than their own personal enjoyment.

Environmentalism vs Creativity

Wayne Dunn, Capitalism Magazine

For decades environmentalists have cried that man should adopt an "alternative" form of energy. But in this freest country on earth, exactly how have they exercised their liberty to try and make their dream come true?

Well, they support like-minded politicians¾ who've invented nothing but obstacles to innovation. They march in protests¾ that have created nothing but vandalism. And they rage against capitalism¾ the only system by which worthy creations can effectively be financed, marketed and widely distributed.

One woman is admired by her fellow environmentalists, not for pouring her time and energy into, say, inventing a new kind of generator or more fuel-efficient engine, but for spending two years perched atop a redwood tree!

Clearly, a viable, cleaner form of energy (if you buy into the faulty premise one is needed) will not be created by some snarling rock-hurler, nor some land-confiscating government official, nor some loafer who nests with squirrels. A material value isn't going to spring from those who tell us to renounce material things. Innovations stem from capitalists pursuing self-interest, not naturalists preaching self-sacrifice. True creative achievement requires a mental outlook more akin to that of a Thomas Alva Edison than a Julia "Butterfly" Hill.

Yet it's the profit-oriented, productive achiever-types that the "save the planet" crowd most despise and desire to shackle. The men and women who possess the ingenuity, personal ambition, and business acumen that a successful new energy venture would require, environmentalists lob eggs at.

Yet it's businesspeople, not "Friends of the Earth," who, by translating scientific discoveries into practical reality, actually advance human life and eliminate pollution.

For instance, when was the last time you fretted about scarlet fever polluting your child's body? Or polio? Or malaria? When have farmers in free countries been unable to control the pollutant of insects that, if not for such marvels as pesticides and genetic engineering, would devour their crops, in turn raising food prices or perhaps eventually even causing famine?

********************************************************************************************

Other links

The Ayn Rand Institute

The Objective Standard

Capitalism Magazine

4Commonsense.net

OpinionJournal.com

Junk Science

Activism Humor

The Intellectual Activist

Web Logs

Principles in PracticePrincipled commentary on cultural matters and current events from “The Objective Standard”

Cox and ForkumPolitical cartoons and commentary

Noodle Food

The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid – Donald Luskin

Dollars and Crosses – CapitalismMagazine.com

Rule of Reason – The Center for the Advancement of Capitalism

4CommonSense

**********************************************************************************************************

Please feel free to forward this newsletter to anyone who may be interested (or they can sign up by sending an email with “Week on the Web” in the subject line to rsmurphy@hotmail.com).

Send links to articles that you feel would be a good addition to this newsletter to rsmurphy@hotmail.com.

To receive this newsletter in Microsoft Word format, please reply to this email and include “Week on the Web - MS Word” on the subject line.

If you wish to unsubscribe, please reply to this email and include “Week on the Web - unsubscribe” on the subject line.

Friday, January 19, 2007

This Week on the Web (January 13 – January 19)


********************************************************************************************

Video of the Week:

A Short Course in Brain Surgery
Stuart Browning, YouTube

Ontario’s “compassionate” socialized system failed a patient who needed an MRI, so he turned to the “selfish” U.S. market for help.




Editorial Cartoon of the Week:

Dead Ball
Cox and Forkum




NEWS

Military gear bound for Iran, China traced to Pentagon surplus sales
International Herald Tribune

The U.S. military has sold forbidden equipment at least a half-dozen times to middlemen for countries — including Iran and China — who exploited security flaws in the Defense Department's surplus auctions. The sales include fighter jet parts and missile components.

In one case, federal investigators said, the contraband made it to Iran, a country President George W. Bush branded part of an "axis of evil."

In that instance, a Pakistani arms broker convicted of exporting U.S. missile parts to Iran resumed business after his release from prison. He purchased Chinook helicopter engine parts for Iran from a U.S. company that had bought them in a Pentagon surplus sale. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, speaking on condition of anonymity, say those parts made it to Iran.

The surplus sales can operate like a supermarket for arms dealers.





COMMENTARY



Bush's Iran Policy Encourages More Attacks on Americans in Iraq
ARI Media, The Ayn Rand Institute (via Principles in Practice)

In his January 10 speech, President Bush acknowledged that Iran is providing key material support for attacks on American troops in Iraq.

"Iran's support for these attacks constitutes an act of war against the United States—the latest act of war in a long series stretching back to the Iranian hostage crisis," said Dr. Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute. "Our government has a moral obligation to respond to these vicious acts by taking decisive military action against Iran: hostile nations must not be given a blank check to murder American citizens.

"Shamefully, instead of vowing to retaliate against Iran, President Bush has meekly announced plans to 'disrupt' future attacks and destroy isolated 'networks' of Iranian agents plotting to murder more American citizens.

"President Bush's inaction against Iran will encourage the regime to sponsor further attacks on Americans in Iraq, and to expand the scope of its aggression further. Those who value the lives of our soldiers and the security of America must demand that the Bush administration change course and eliminate the Iranian threat."

**********************************

Battles Are Yours to Pick
Michael Hurd, DrHurd.com

You don't have to be in any fight or conflict, with anyone at any time, unless you CHOOSE to be. All anybody can do is put you in a situation where you must escape. This isn't to imply that it's wrong to defend yourself. It's simply to imply that it's wrong to assume you must fight a battle on the terms of the person who's harassing you. Strive to be conscious of what's important to you, and why -- and what's not important to you. If there are people in your life who invite you to struggle with them about things that are unimportant to you, then consider the option of ignoring their invitations. This isn't cowardice, or spinelessness. Cowardice or spinelessness is refusing to defend and protect what's important to YOU. You don't exhibit strength by letting someone else decide what's important for you to defend.



**********************************

How to Truly Support our Troops
Alex Epstein, The Ayn Rand Institute (via Principles in Practice)

Whatever their views of President Bush's new "surge" of 20,000 soldiers, both liberals and conservatives continue to claim that they support our troops. Liberals say they support our troops by criticizing or opposing "Operation Iraqi Freedom," which they claim has unnecessarily killed 3,000 soldiers. Conservatives say they support our troops by supporting the mission that most of our troops believe in.

In fact, neither liberals nor conservatives truly support the brave men and women who risk their lives to defend America. For both, "support our troops" is a cheap, undeserved claim to patriotism—one that obscures their unwillingness to do what is truly necessary to protect America and its soldiers.

Granted, almost everyone wants to give our troops the resources they need to do their jobs: the best weapons, armor, provisions, and training available—as well as praise, gratitude, and encouragement. But for our government to truly support our troops, it must do far more than help them do their jobs; it must give them the right jobs to do—the jobs that will effectively defend America while minimizing the risk to their lives.


**********************************

Royalty Pains
Max Schulz, TCS Daily

The final big-ticket item in new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's first-100-hour agenda, to be taken up today, is an energy proposal that will do nothing to help achieve long-term energy security. Instead it will merely serve to satisfy Democratic bloodlust about "Big Oil" and the energy industry's recent high profits.



********************************************************************************************

Other links

The Ayn Rand Institute

The Objective Standard

Capitalism Magazine

4Commonsense.net

OpinionJournal.com

Junk Science

Activism Humor

The Intellectual Activist



Web Logs

Principles in Practice– Principled commentary on cultural matters and current events from “The Objective Standard”

Cox and Forkum – Political cartoons and commentary

Noodle Food

The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid – Donald Luskin

Dollars and Crosses – CapitalismMagazine.com

Rule of Reason – The Center for the Advancement of Capitalism

4CommonSense

**********************************************************************************************************
Please feel free to forward this newsletter to anyone who may be interested (or they can sign up by sending an email with “Week on the Web” in the subject line to rsmurphy@hotmail.com).

Send links to articles that you feel would be a good addition to this newsletter to rsmurphy@hotmail.com.

To receive this newsletter in Microsoft Word format, please reply to this email and include “Week on the Web - MS Word” on the subject line.
If you wish to unsubscribe, please reply to this email and include “Week on the Web - unsubscribe” on the subject line.

Friday, January 12, 2007

This Week on the Web (January 6 – January 12)


********************************************************************************************

NEWS

Brown to end Blair's terror strategy
Telegraph

Gordon Brown vowed yesterday to take on President George W Bush and the Americans over foreign policy as he spelt out plans to break from Tony Blair's approach to the "war on terror".

The Chancellor, who is on course to succeed Mr Blair as Prime Minister this summer, made clear he wanted to place Britain's national interest above the special relationship with Washington.

Mr Brown also forced Mr Blair, his long-term rival, to authorise No 10 to issue its first statement denouncing the bungled execution of Saddam Hussein.

****************************************************

Hospitals told to delay operations to ease debt
Telegraph

Hospitals have been told not to operate on patients until they have been on a waiting list for up to 20 weeks in the latest attempt to deal with the financial crisis in the health service.

The instructions to delay treating people for as long as possible are spelled out in leaked documents seen by The Daily Telegraph.

In one letter, hospital managers are told to work out how many operations can be put off until after the new financial year, which starts in April.

*********************
Editor’s Note: More evidence as to why the immoral is impractical.



**************************************************************************************
COMMENTARY


'No Substitute for Victory': Replies to Criticisms
John Lewis, Principles in Practice

Regarding my article "No Substitute for Victory": The Defeat of Islamic Totalitarianism in The Objective Standard, readers have brought up several questions that I'd like to answer. Among them are two of great importance: (1) Isn't the enemy stateless, i.e., without the kind of centralized political state that controlled Japan? and (2) Can religion and state be separated in Islam, which is a social-political-legal system as much as it is a religion?

I will address these issues, and others, at length in a reply to readers' comments in the forthcoming issue of TheObjective Standard. But I wish to give a brief answer here in advance.

The power of a policy that states the goal of the war as eliminating State Islam is that it identifies the enemy precisely: those who use force to impose Islam politically. It states exactly what we want from the enemy: an end to his use of force. It has a successful historical precedent. It is also fully consistent with the requirements of individual rights and freedom; it does not ask us to win at the price of losing our liberty. It leads directly to a clear strategy to achieve the policy.


****************************************************

Sticking it to low-skilled workers
John Stossel, Jewish World Review

Legal wage minimums kill all kinds of entry-level jobs, particularly those that would teach young people basic work habits and the benefits of effort. That's why there are no kids cleaning your windows at gas stations or working as ushers at movie theaters. Those jobs are extinct now because they are worth less than the legislated minimum. Who is helped by that?
Let's face it. The higher minimum wage is a feel-good law. A slight increase will pass because politicians and poverty activists will be able to say they have "done something" for the poor, while the victims of the policy go unnoticed. Those who can't find jobs because they produce too little are not likely to blame the law or the politicians who tried to "help" them. Then the resulting unemployment will justify expansion of the welfare state.
As George Mason University economist Walter Williams says, "It's tempting to think of higher minimum wages as an anti-poverty weapon, but such an idea doesn't even pass the smell test. After all, if higher minimum wages could cure poverty, we could easily end worldwide poverty simply by telling poor nations to legislate higher minimum wages."


**********************
Editor’s Note: Also see Raising the Minimum Wage Will Not Reduce Poverty by The Heritage Foundation



****************************************************

Arguments left and right
Jeff Jacoby, Townhall.com

The 110th Congress convened under new management last week, and in the House of Representatives, the rush was on. Led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrats got ready to plow through an ambitious pile of legislation in their first 100 hours. Among the items on their punch list: increasing the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour, expanding publicly funded embryonic stem cell research, cutting the interest rate on student loans, and imposing price controls on Medicare prescription drugs.

A more liberal policy agenda isn't all that will be moving into the spotlight. There will be a heightened focus on liberal *arguments* as well -- which means we'll be hearing more about good intentions and less about good results. Political discourse will dwell even more than it already does on "fairness" and "compassion" and "unmet needs" -- and even less on factual evidence and the historical record.


****************************************************

Writing and Understanding
Lisa VanDamme, Principles in Practice

Several weeks ago, in my article "Pattern Recognition vs. Real Understanding," I stressed the crucial connection between writing and understanding:

For the student to write explanations, in complete sentences, about every subject—whether history, literature, grammar, math, or anything else—requires that he have a true understanding of the concepts at hand. But he can often do well on multiple choice, matching, or other rote exercises with no real understanding.

Let me elaborate on this topic.

If a student's understanding of a given idea is genuine, if he holds the idea independently and clearly sees its relationship to reality, then he can offer reasoned support for his view. In asking the students to write paragraphs and essays in every subject, we are able to emphasize this crucial aspect of thought—we demand that they give reasons for their assertions.

Far from the "every opinion is sacred" attitude learned in most all of today's schools, our students learn that "any unsupported opinion is sacrilege."


********************************************************************************************

Other links

The Ayn Rand Institute

The Objective Standard

Capitalism Magazine

4Commonsense.net

OpinionJournal.com

Junk Science

Activism Humor

The Intellectual Activist



Web Logs

Principles in Practice– Principled commentary on cultural matters and current events from “The Objective Standard”

Cox and Forkum – Political cartoons and commentary

Noodle Food

The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid – Donald Luskin

Dollars and Crosses – CapitalismMagazine.com

Rule of Reason – The Center for the Advancement of Capitalism

4CommonSense

**********************************************************************************************************
Please feel free to forward this newsletter to anyone who may be interested (or they can sign up by sending an email with “Week on the Web” in the subject line to rsmurphy@hotmail.com).

Send links to articles that you feel would be a good addition to this newsletter to rsmurphy@hotmail.com.

To receive this newsletter in Microsoft Word format, please reply to this email and include “Week on the Web - MS Word” on the subject line.
If you wish to unsubscribe, please reply to this email and include “Week on the Web - unsubscribe” on the subject line.

Friday, January 05, 2007

This Week on the Web (December 30 – January 5)


********************************************************************************************

NEWS

Warrantless mail searches may be allowed
MSNBC.com

A statement attached to postal legislation by President Bush last month may have opened the way for the government to open mail without a warrant.

The White House denies any change in policy, but civil libertarians are alarmed, saying the government has never publicly claimed that power before.


********************************************

COMMENTARY


Universal Guinea Pigs
Michael Hurd, DrHurd.com

According to a Wall Street Journal story on 12/30/06, the new Democratic Congress plans to propose universal health care for children. They consider it a start on the road to universal, socialized coverage for all Americans. Republicans and The Wall Street Journal are wondering how you can possibly oppose health care for children, while still remaining politically relevant?

Here are some arguments they could make:

Will government health coverage do for children what the postal monopoly did for U.S. mail? If so, why does the post office operate in the red, with mediocre service at best, while competing private companies (UPS, FedEx) make billions in profits, provide thousands with good jobs, and offer ten times the quality of service?

Is health care for children to become the equivalent of the postal service, while health care for everyone else will become the equivalent of FedEx or UPS?

Why should children be forced into government coverage, while adults still have choices, tax credits and the like -- and even seniors have some choices through private companies that contract with Medicare, and so forth?

Why is there some private sector (meaning: freedom of choice) for adults and seniors, while there's to be none for children? Why are children to be the guinea pigs for a socialized system that government officials are unwilling to impose on adults first? Children can't object to this treatment, while adults can...So why go after innocent children? What's wrong with political leaders who seek to do such a thing?

And what about the doctors? Are doctors allowed to treat children outside the context of government? Will they be allowed to accept private health insurance for children, or even fee-for-service negotiated by parent and child? Or will such private contracts between doctors and patient-parents be considered "blackmail," under the law, as Hillary Clinton proposed explicitly in her infamous 1994 plan?

Not to worry, you opponents of "universal care" for all under a government monopoly...the arguments against such a policy are easy to make. What's crucial is that you make them.

********************************************

How The West Could Lose
Daniel Pipes, Capitalism MagazineAfter defeating fascists and communists, can the West now defeat the Islamists?On the face of it, its military preponderance makes victory seem inevitable. Even if Tehran acquires a nuclear weapon, Islamists have nothing like the military machine the Axis deployed in World War II, nor the Soviet Union during the cold war. What do the Islamists have to compare with the Wehrmacht or the Red Army? The SS or Spetznaz? The Gestapo or the KGB? Or, for that matter, to Auschwitz or the gulag?Yet, more than a few analysts, including myself, worry that it's not so simple. Islamists (defined as persons who demand to live by the sacred law of Islam, the Sharia) might in fact do better than the earlier totalitarians. They could even win. That's because, however strong the Western hardware, its software contains some potentially fatal bugs. Three of them – pacifism, self-hatred, complacency – deserve attention.


********************************************

Rules more important than personalities
Walter Williams, Jewish World Review

Not that many complimentary things are said about politicians. When a problem arises, people say, "Government ought to do something." They seem to have forgotten that it's the politicians who are running the government. Many think things can be changed by electing different politicians, but I ask: Given the incentives politicians face, why should we expect one politician to differ significantly from another? We should focus less on personalities and more on rules. [...]How is it that players with conflicting interests and reasons for winning can play a game, agree with the outcome and walk away as good sports? It's a minor miracle of sorts. That "miracle" is that it is far easier to reach agreement about the game's rules than the game's outcome. The rules are known and durable, and the referee's only job is their evenhanded enforcement. Even football teams with losing records would find their long-run interests lie in known, durable and evenhandedly applied rules. They can more adequately devise a winning strategy because predictability is enhanced.
Suppose the game rules were flexible and referees played a role in determining the game's outcome. In other words, imagine the referees were more interested in what they saw as justice than enforcement of neutral rules. What might one predict about team behavior? Instead of trying to raise team productivity, owners would allocate resources to influence-peddling in the form of lobbying or bribing the referees.

********************************************


Big Developers Get Pinched
Jacob Laskin, TCS Daily

When the Supreme Court handed down its verdict in Kelo v. City of New London in June of 2005, few imagined the development industry in the role of victim.

On the contrary, most opponents of the decision supposed, not unreasonably, that construction companies and building firms would be the likeliest beneficiaries of municipalities' disputed right to seize private property under the "public use" clause of the Fifth Amendment: Who else would be contracted to develop their dubiously gotten gains?

But a little-noticed case from New Jersey suggests that the battle lines in the political war over eminent domain are more ambiguous than critics have heretofore assumed.

In 2002, the development company MiPro won approval from the zoning commission of Mount Laurel Township, a residential community of 41,000 in Southern New Jersey, to develop a 16-acre parcel of land for 23 single-family homes. The deal aptly underscored Mount Laurel's motto: "A Home for Businesses and Families."

Then the township had a change of heart. Reasoning that a new residential development would mean urban sprawl, and all its attendant complications, the city sought to buy the land from the developer. MiPro, as was its right, declined the offer.

And there the trouble began. Rather than accept the refusal, the town moved to condemn the entire property. It justified the decision with reference to the "public use" clause and its powers of eminent domain. In fact, though, the town's plan was to set the land aside as open space; its sole "public" purpose in acquiring the land was to block further development.

********************************************

The Imperative of Lecturing
Lisa VanDamme, Principles in Practice

Every class in elementary and junior high school should be in a lecture format. The teacher must be an authority on the subject, he must grasp its basic purpose, he must carefully define the knowledge to be conveyed by reference to that purpose, and he must present that knowledge in a hierarchical, integrated, and engaging form.

When I teach a literature class, I go in to each class armed with an understanding of the value of studying literature, and the knowledge that this value is derived primarily from an appreciation of the novel's plot, an understanding of the basic nature of the characters, and a clear grasp of the novel's theme.

********************************************************************************************

Other links

The Ayn Rand Institute

The Objective Standard

Capitalism Magazine

4Commonsense.net

OpinionJournal.com

Junk Science

Activism Humor

The Intellectual Activist



Web Logs

Principles in Practice– Principled commentary on cultural matters and current events from “The Objective Standard”

Cox and Forkum – Political cartoons and commentary

Noodle Food

The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid – Donald Luskin

Dollars and Crosses – CapitalismMagazine.com

Rule of Reason – The Center for the Advancement of Capitalism

4CommonSense

**********************************************************************************************************
Please feel free to forward this newsletter to anyone who may be interested (or they can sign up by sending an email with “Week on the Web” in the subject line to rsmurphy@hotmail.com).

Send links to articles that you feel would be a good addition to this newsletter to rsmurphy@hotmail.com.

To receive this newsletter in Microsoft Word format, please reply to this email and include “Week on the Web - MS Word” on the subject line.
If you wish to unsubscribe, please reply to this email and include “Week on the Web - unsubscribe” on the subject line.