Big Regs will create more Mr. Potters

I recently watched the Christmas classic It's A Wonderful Life and pondered on how people may view the villainous Mr. Potter. The character Potter is a wealthy, shrewd banker who preys upon the bottom of the income scale. He applies strict lending standards and isn't forgiving when clients struggle. The character George Bailey in contrast grants loans with a sense of charity. With little thought, it’s easy to liken Mr. Potter to those calling for an end to practices of risky lending via Fannie and Freddie and liken George Bailey to those who don’t. However, this comparison omits something very important. George Bailey’s clients loved him. They scrapped every bit of effort and money they could to make their payments. While big banks in some cases resemble Potter, borrowers of the sub-prime crisis claiming themselves victims of predatory lending do not necessarily measure up to George Bailey’s clients. They had a personal relationship with him, one that more likely stems from small, community banks opposed to big banks. This relates to Stossel’s piece in the following way. John Allison, BB&T’s founder, claims he couldn’t start his bank today with current regulations and that small banks can’t emerge into markets to compete. Mr. Allison does not strike me at all as a Mr. Potter, but his point signals that current regulations will produce more Mr. Potters and less George Baileys.

Climate Science Should Undergo Proper IV&V

Mann and Jones’ research relies on climate simulation models. Before modeling and simulation professionals trust their results, they apply a rigorous process called Independent, Verification, and Validation (IV&V). This involves third parties running benchmarks against known outcomes so as to demonstrate to stakeholders that the simulation can produce reliable results. Everyone depending on energy is a stakeholder, and refusal to make the research publicly available avoids proper IV&V. A carbon trading based economy will introduce an exponential increase of inroads for the special interest and lobbyists, as demonstrated by fraud in Denmark’s Agency of the Climate and Energy Ministry and Europe’s Emission Trading System registry. Until the public has the opportunity to conduct proper IV&V, no legislation should come to exist based on Mann and Jones’ findings. Even Canada's plans to withdraw from Kyoto, signaling their growing distrust in climate change research.

The Left's Opposition to Diversity

Diversity is a three legged stool comprising of race, culture, and ideas. Each of these legs has correlation with the others, but they are distinct attributes of diversity. The Left has historically waged war against the diversity of ideas. They vigorously oppose state autonomy of public policy as though the Tenth Amendment has no relevance. Diversity of ideas leads to diversity of values. Diversity of values leads to a diversity of governance. In America, we have fifty states for that reason. Embracing diversity means embracing the idea of eliminating a number of large federal agencies, administering entitlements at the local level far out of reach of federal powers, and sending far more tax dollars to local governments rather than federal. The Left's hostility to this reveals what they truly are with respect to diversity: a fraud.