Harry Jaffe writes a column in the Washington Examiner, and his articles frequently take unnecessary jabs at people who depend on automobiles in Washington, DC for transportation. He advocates a mandatory Car-free DC day in the following article, but he needs a serious reality check.
Car-free D.C. in your future?
Cyclists require no licensing to demonstrate knowledge road rules, carry no insurance, pay no gasoline tax to fund upkeep, and carry no visible vehicle identification. If a cyclists pops from the curb into oncoming traffic (quite commonly happens), a driver may have to make a split second decision between hitting the cyclist or the car in the next lane. In the latter scenario, the cyclist can pedal away unidentified and bear no liability. Nonetheless, DC has elevated cyclists to having the same privileges of the road as motorists.
Mandatory car-free day would effectively become work-from-home day for many. As for me, I can't take Metro every day, and it becomes I-can't-get-to-class day since I leave work for night school in Montgomery County some days.
Don't get me wrong. I like the bike lanes and use them regularly myself. However, Harry Jaffe should recognize that cyclists are getting a free ride and already have it pretty good.
Friday, September 23, 2011
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Let's hold up a mirror to the advocates of regulations
The Washington Examiner recently ran the following articles about regulation.
"What will Congress do to stop Obama's red tape explosion?"
"NARAL puts abortion profits ahead of women's safety"
Having friends and family who own and operate small businesses, I know their workload of complying with regulations frequently exceeds that of performing the work of their actual business. The regulations have such complexity that the same question to more than one regulator may get completely different answers, sometimes contradicting one another. Try to avoid pulling your hair out when you have to satisfy them all at once! Most Americans don't experience this first hand and hence don't have experience with this and how it compromises business growth, which of course has a tight correlation with job growth. So that Americans gain such a perspective, I propose the following. Before government regulators, such as employees of the EPA, collect each bi-weekly paycheck and vacation day, they must complete a maze of regulatory paperwork comparable to that which they impose upon domestic industry. Shall we extend this to recipients of entitlement spending while we're at it? If this happens, excessive regulation will shrink. NARAL is protesting Virginia requiring abortion clinics to meet medical standards. If they are throwing a temper tantrum about this, then I think we know what they really think about regulations.
"What will Congress do to stop Obama's red tape explosion?"
"NARAL puts abortion profits ahead of women's safety"
Having friends and family who own and operate small businesses, I know their workload of complying with regulations frequently exceeds that of performing the work of their actual business. The regulations have such complexity that the same question to more than one regulator may get completely different answers, sometimes contradicting one another. Try to avoid pulling your hair out when you have to satisfy them all at once! Most Americans don't experience this first hand and hence don't have experience with this and how it compromises business growth, which of course has a tight correlation with job growth. So that Americans gain such a perspective, I propose the following. Before government regulators, such as employees of the EPA, collect each bi-weekly paycheck and vacation day, they must complete a maze of regulatory paperwork comparable to that which they impose upon domestic industry. Shall we extend this to recipients of entitlement spending while we're at it? If this happens, excessive regulation will shrink. NARAL is protesting Virginia requiring abortion clinics to meet medical standards. If they are throwing a temper tantrum about this, then I think we know what they really think about regulations.
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Keeping social security promises will require large scale sacrifice
On July 7, the Heritage Foundation published a charticle that plots defense spending versus entitlement spending against the past ~50 years.
http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/defense-entitlement-spending
On September 12, CNS news reported the ratio of 1.75 people working full time jobs in the private sector for every 1 person collecting social security,
Labor Dept. Data: Only 1.75 Full-Time Private Sector Workers Per Social Security Recipient
...and with the Baby Boomer generation soon to retire, this ratio is going to get worse. To sustain social security for the current
retirees and the Baby Boomers, politicians will have to develop a strong spine to make some very tough decisions. For that to happen, voters and taxpaying citizens must do the same. We refer to the WWII generation as the Greatest Generation for all the sacrifices they made so that we could live in the country we have today. As a member of Generation X, I propose a far lesser sacrifice: pay into social security during our working lives until every last person 55 years or older receives every social security benefit promised to them by the US government. But after that, social security, at the federal level,
must end and never exist again.
http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/defense-entitlement-spending
On September 12, CNS news reported the ratio of 1.75 people working full time jobs in the private sector for every 1 person collecting social security,
Labor Dept. Data: Only 1.75 Full-Time Private Sector Workers Per Social Security Recipient
...and with the Baby Boomer generation soon to retire, this ratio is going to get worse. To sustain social security for the current
retirees and the Baby Boomers, politicians will have to develop a strong spine to make some very tough decisions. For that to happen, voters and taxpaying citizens must do the same. We refer to the WWII generation as the Greatest Generation for all the sacrifices they made so that we could live in the country we have today. As a member of Generation X, I propose a far lesser sacrifice: pay into social security during our working lives until every last person 55 years or older receives every social security benefit promised to them by the US government. But after that, social security, at the federal level,
must end and never exist again.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Power plant shutdown portends future energy rationing
The Washington Examiner recently ran articles about shutting down a power plan in Alexandria due to environmentalist concerns as well as an article about low satisfaction with Pepco.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/capital-land/2011/08/alexandria-power-plant-shut-down
http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/2011/07/satisfaction-pepco-plunges
Environmental extremists hale the announcement of the closing of the Potomac River Generating Station. Meanwhile, consumers award Pepco with a score of 54 on a scale of 1-100, and Business Insider declares Pepco the, "most hated," company in America. The low rating comes from repeated outages during adverse weather conditions leaving without power for a few hours or even days. If these extremists continue to have their way with coal fired power plants, energy rationing lurks just around the corner. If that happens, energy customers will yearn for the days when they complained about outages lasting for hours or days. In its place policy makers will institute peak usage surcharge rates and regularly scheduled blackouts. Don't be surprised if brownouts become commonplace too. The extremists cite asthma as a primary reason for the advocating this plant's closure. Take it from somebody with asthma, the extremists' successful efforts to replace my albuterol inhaler with the, "more ozone friendly," less effective version show how much they truly care about people with asthma. Alexandria mayor Bill Euille calls this great news. Why doesn't he put actions to words and sever every power line to his personal home until a new plant generates what the closing power plant won't?
http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/capital-land/2011/08/alexandria-power-plant-shut-down
http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/2011/07/satisfaction-pepco-plunges
Environmental extremists hale the announcement of the closing of the Potomac River Generating Station. Meanwhile, consumers award Pepco with a score of 54 on a scale of 1-100, and Business Insider declares Pepco the, "most hated," company in America. The low rating comes from repeated outages during adverse weather conditions leaving without power for a few hours or even days. If these extremists continue to have their way with coal fired power plants, energy rationing lurks just around the corner. If that happens, energy customers will yearn for the days when they complained about outages lasting for hours or days. In its place policy makers will institute peak usage surcharge rates and regularly scheduled blackouts. Don't be surprised if brownouts become commonplace too. The extremists cite asthma as a primary reason for the advocating this plant's closure. Take it from somebody with asthma, the extremists' successful efforts to replace my albuterol inhaler with the, "more ozone friendly," less effective version show how much they truly care about people with asthma. Alexandria mayor Bill Euille calls this great news. Why doesn't he put actions to words and sever every power line to his personal home until a new plant generates what the closing power plant won't?
Monday, September 5, 2011
Environmental Extremists should bear the same anger of Pepco's customer service
On 8/30/2011 the DC Examiner ran this story about a power plant closing in Alexandria, VA: Alexandria power plant to shut down
On 7/11/2011 the DC Examiner ran this story about Pepco's customer satisfaction sinking to 16 year lows: Satisfaction with Pepco plunges
Environmental extremists hale the announcement of the closing of the Potomac River Generating Station as reported by the Examiner on 8/31. Meanwhile, consumers award Pepco with a score of 54 on a scale of 1-100, and Business Insider declares Pepco the, "most hated," company in America. The low rating comes from none other than repeated outages during adverse weather conditions that leave customers without power for a few hours or even a few days. If these extremists continue to have their way with coal fired power plants, energy rationing is just around the corner. And if that happens, energy customers will yearn for the days when they complained about outages lasting for hours or days. In its place policy makers will institute peak usage surcharge rates and regularly scheduled blackouts. Don't be surprised if brownouts become commonplace too. The extremists cite asthma as a primary reason for the advocating the plant's closure. Take it from somebody with asthma, the extremists successful efforts to replace my effective albuterol inhaler with the, "more ozone friendly," version have done far more harm to me than the Potomac River Generating Station. Alexandria mayor Bill Euille calls this great news. Why doesn't he put actions to words and sever every power line to his personal home until a new plant generates what the closing power plant won't?
On 7/11/2011 the DC Examiner ran this story about Pepco's customer satisfaction sinking to 16 year lows: Satisfaction with Pepco plunges
Environmental extremists hale the announcement of the closing of the Potomac River Generating Station as reported by the Examiner on 8/31. Meanwhile, consumers award Pepco with a score of 54 on a scale of 1-100, and Business Insider declares Pepco the, "most hated," company in America. The low rating comes from none other than repeated outages during adverse weather conditions that leave customers without power for a few hours or even a few days. If these extremists continue to have their way with coal fired power plants, energy rationing is just around the corner. And if that happens, energy customers will yearn for the days when they complained about outages lasting for hours or days. In its place policy makers will institute peak usage surcharge rates and regularly scheduled blackouts. Don't be surprised if brownouts become commonplace too. The extremists cite asthma as a primary reason for the advocating the plant's closure. Take it from somebody with asthma, the extremists successful efforts to replace my effective albuterol inhaler with the, "more ozone friendly," version have done far more harm to me than the Potomac River Generating Station. Alexandria mayor Bill Euille calls this great news. Why doesn't he put actions to words and sever every power line to his personal home until a new plant generates what the closing power plant won't?
Friday, August 26, 2011
Dueling Governors is Federalism at Work
The dialog and comparisons between Governor O'Malley and Governor McDonnell published in the past few issues of the Examiner are very informative.
McDonnell, O'Malley spar over economy, spending
McDonnell, O'Malley differ on unions' rights
Each of the two state so may enact its own policies and the people can choose to vote with their feet if they prefer one set
of policies versus the other. We have two states in very comparable situations. Both sit adjacent to the nations capitol, both have a large presence of government jobs and related contracting fueling their respective economies, and of course both have very similar climates. The differences of the state lay rooted in policy. One has right-to-work legislation while the other imposes collective bargaining. One taxes at low rates, and the other taxes at high rates. One believes government spending serves as a major component to economic recovery, and the other believes that the private sector does that better than government. DC has it's own approaches to these issues, more similarly to our neighbor directly to the north. Let's
watch this ongoing comparison and judge them on results.
As a DC resident who is trying to decide where I may want to live on a more permanent basis one day, I'm watching this debate very closely. Which of the three areas will offer me the best environment as a resident, taxpayer, and recipient of government services? I asked Mayor Gray at a town hall several months ago what he's doing to make DC more competitive to bring new business investment into DC, citing how low DC ranks in business friendliness. To paraphrase his answer, he claims DC doesn't have to worry about attracting new business because it already offers a competitive environment. Decide for yourself if that addresses the issue.
Given all the evidence of budgets, deficits, and unemployment figures, Virginia is cleaning the other two's clock. This is federalism at work, where we can observe which ideas work the best in our nation, and our federal government should recognize that for this reason amongst others state governments should drive most public policy, not the federal government. If each respective party believes their ideas truly are the better ideas, they should embrace this concept to far
greater degree.
McDonnell, O'Malley spar over economy, spending
McDonnell, O'Malley differ on unions' rights
Each of the two state so may enact its own policies and the people can choose to vote with their feet if they prefer one set
of policies versus the other. We have two states in very comparable situations. Both sit adjacent to the nations capitol, both have a large presence of government jobs and related contracting fueling their respective economies, and of course both have very similar climates. The differences of the state lay rooted in policy. One has right-to-work legislation while the other imposes collective bargaining. One taxes at low rates, and the other taxes at high rates. One believes government spending serves as a major component to economic recovery, and the other believes that the private sector does that better than government. DC has it's own approaches to these issues, more similarly to our neighbor directly to the north. Let's
watch this ongoing comparison and judge them on results.
As a DC resident who is trying to decide where I may want to live on a more permanent basis one day, I'm watching this debate very closely. Which of the three areas will offer me the best environment as a resident, taxpayer, and recipient of government services? I asked Mayor Gray at a town hall several months ago what he's doing to make DC more competitive to bring new business investment into DC, citing how low DC ranks in business friendliness. To paraphrase his answer, he claims DC doesn't have to worry about attracting new business because it already offers a competitive environment. Decide for yourself if that addresses the issue.
Given all the evidence of budgets, deficits, and unemployment figures, Virginia is cleaning the other two's clock. This is federalism at work, where we can observe which ideas work the best in our nation, and our federal government should recognize that for this reason amongst others state governments should drive most public policy, not the federal government. If each respective party believes their ideas truly are the better ideas, they should embrace this concept to far
greater degree.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Answering Warren Buffet's Call to Mega-Tax the Mega-Wealthy
Warren Buffet has called for the government to drastically increase taxes on the very wealthy: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=3.
But does this really serve our nation's best interest?
Our country is better off with a few billion airs who can amass the kind of wealth to have enough power to challenge government. Government being the only big guy on the block isn't good for the country. When billion airs and large corporations spend money to confront the government over poorly crafted regulations that inhibit private sector growth, for example, we all benefit. I think of this is as class action law suit against government on behalf of the people, albeit corporations and billion airs very well do this for the purposes of self benefit, but that doesn't change the fact that society as a whole may benefit too. It's not realistic to take the position that if we don't like certain rules and regs, then we just vote them out. First, nobody can vote on one single issue. Second, waiting for an election cycle to exercise voting power may not offer the necessary expediency of addressing the issue.
All that said, as a catholic and a person who values charity, I do believe that billion airs have a moral responsibility to help improve the lives of those around them who are less fortunate. However, giving excessive amounts of dollars to a government to (a) pay out to the special interest, (b) funnel the money to those who carry their favor, and (c) take it's cut along the way resembles no real sense of morality. Neither does imposing this mandate on other billion airs resemble any sense of morality either.
But does this really serve our nation's best interest?
Our country is better off with a few billion airs who can amass the kind of wealth to have enough power to challenge government. Government being the only big guy on the block isn't good for the country. When billion airs and large corporations spend money to confront the government over poorly crafted regulations that inhibit private sector growth, for example, we all benefit. I think of this is as class action law suit against government on behalf of the people, albeit corporations and billion airs very well do this for the purposes of self benefit, but that doesn't change the fact that society as a whole may benefit too. It's not realistic to take the position that if we don't like certain rules and regs, then we just vote them out. First, nobody can vote on one single issue. Second, waiting for an election cycle to exercise voting power may not offer the necessary expediency of addressing the issue.
All that said, as a catholic and a person who values charity, I do believe that billion airs have a moral responsibility to help improve the lives of those around them who are less fortunate. However, giving excessive amounts of dollars to a government to (a) pay out to the special interest, (b) funnel the money to those who carry their favor, and (c) take it's cut along the way resembles no real sense of morality. Neither does imposing this mandate on other billion airs resemble any sense of morality either.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)