Sandbox – 28jun15

About

June 2015
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

Sandbox – 28jun15

28 June 2015

[This is the first post-comment rules sandbox. We await with bated breath … . gjr]

Posted in Comment Sandbox

185 responses to “Sandbox – 28jun15”

Gregory

28 June 2015

Let me start this one off with a comment that has already passed muster:
Pyramiding, diverting money withheld for payroll taxes into your pockets is a fraudulent practice… yes or no?
This question is for everyone but especially that one someone who thinks not being charged means no crime was committed.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

28 June 2015

Posted by: Gregory | 28 June 2015 at 03:10 PM
Do we seek a real truce George or is this a sham?

LikeLike
Walt

28 June 2015

Here is an odd one,, NORAD’s airborn command is a little low.
http://www.flightradar24.com/GOTOFMS/6a8a099
And still dropping altitude.

LikeLike
Walt

28 June 2015

Never mind,, just heading into Travis in a wild roundabout way.

LikeLike
George Rebane

28 June 2015

Invitation to Mr Don Bessee – what is your take on Cato Institute’s Policy Analysis #774 ‘Designer Drugs – A New, Futile Front in the War on Illegal Drugs’? You can download the short pdf from here.
http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/designer-drugs-new-futile-front-war-illegal-drugs

LikeLike
Don Bessee

28 June 2015

I will check it out, just back from a 500 mile drive. Amazing day. I can however observe that the Chinese and other chem companies are playing the us and the DEA. We can pass a list of restricted chem. compositions and sweep some off the market but they change an irrelevant molecule or the like and its a ‘new’ drug as a munkelt would happily tell you. I would submit that a pattern of this kind of willful avoidance by subterfuge should be a basis to pull their import licenses for all products.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

28 June 2015

Gregory @ 3:10 pm, the very first comment. I assume we are slamming The Social Security Supplemental Income Trust Fund again. When you said “your pockets”, I immediately deducted that you were not referring to my pockets and the contents thereof. I delved deeper and the only logical creator/implementer of The Vast Radical Wing Pyramid Scheme Conspiracy is none other than our Great White Father in Washington, District of Columbia. Who else believes that what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine? Oh, maybe Bernie Sanders or Lizzy Squaw Squawker and the true Kool Aide sippers and brain washed disciples of their cult.
No response necessary to keep these softball questions rethorical and shamless.

LikeLike
Gregory

28 June 2015

Pulling import licenses would certainly be a boon for domestic producers of similar substances.
George, I’m going to guess you sent well earned jeers towards the Senator Clintons who complained that gun manufacturers must kept marking superficial changes to get around the so called assault weapons ban. How is this different?
Personally, I think designer drug users are flirting with brain damage and folks who well to kids should expect to spend some long hard time behind bars, but it’s an unwinnable fight.

LikeLike
Larry Wirth

28 June 2015

GJR @ 4:20p
Surely you meant “bated” breath. “Baited” breath is what the kitty brings home from the bait shop, no?

LikeLike
Ben Emery

28 June 2015

George, From the other sandbox- 27 June 2015 at 09:18 AM
If we are to view natural resources/ environment like a bank account or budget there cannot be a 100% withdrawal policy. That is what I was getting at with the equilibrium angle. You guys like to always put things into financial category except natural resources/ environment. Why?
Cutting down a forest adds to the GDP correct? But where is the negative externality calculated into your equation, I don’t see it.
So really I am questioning how we measure GDP and how much it is weighted in our political and economic discussions. It is a very antiquated idea especially for the US since the WTO and regular trade relations started with China and South East Asia. Basically since NAFTA(1992), WTO(1995), and regular trade relations with China(2000) and every free trade deal in between is when over 90% of our national debt was accumulated. Since 2000 over 50,000 factories have gone out of the country and since Reaganomic tax policies we have seen disparity sky rocket and both public/ private debt explode.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/ysa5OBhXz-Q?feature=player_embedded
How do we accurately measure the value of the positive impact wolves are having in Yellowstone?

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

28 June 2015

Positive impact the wolves are making at Jellystone? Do we really have to put a dollar value on it, Ben? Thus, your question is rather a good one. How do we measure the mystic wonder we experience when seeing the sunset over the ocean while viewing yonder sailboats in the twilight follow the sinking sun? Or, how much monetary value can we put on the awesomeness of coming across a native, but extremely rare, wildflower. Or watching spellbound a bird of prey in flight? Too magnificent for me to comprehend, no less apprehend.
The impact of wolves at Mr. Ranger’s Jellystone Park is all in the eyes of the beholder. Think it was Washington State than banned wolf hunting or adjoining Idaho. Probably Wazoo State. ‘Twas too late to save The Wolfman, but future wolf pups and wolf packs were spared the senseless murder by humanoids, aka, the bloodthirsty ones at the top of the food chain. The impact in the Northeast Washington State region and Northern Idaho became more than a nuisance. It became…..drumroll please…it became deadly!! Please cue the theme to Jaws playing in the background.
Deadly not to just house cats, oversized wood rats, and newborn fawns, but to the trespassing humans who were not there first.
Seems the wolf population in that region recovered and grew in numbers. The wolves in the higher country began to drive the moose down to lower elevations, thus more moose contacts with humanoids. More fatalities starting occuring on the highways and byways as automobiles (polluting machines made by humans) started hitting moose. Moose are big, cars are small. Suddenly humans come around a corner on a country lane they have driven for 40 years and lo and behold Bullwinkle is starting there challenging you to a game of chicken. Death by moose, not the noose. Hit a kid, go to jail. Hit a moose, go to the ER or morgue. At least the wolf population is finally retaking its former range, which was all of North America.
How much for that puppie in the window?

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 June 2015

LarryW 1026pm – You are right of course; fingers too fast, brain too slow – very embarrassing. Another tile has fallen from my carefully constructed façade.

LikeLike
Walt

29 June 2015

News for Ben. Trees grow back. That’s why they are called “renewable”.
I have been in places where the “old timers” did their cutting, and those places are ready to be harvested again.
There are pictures all over town where not a tree is to be found. You can find those places where the pictures were taken, and note the diff.
But I guess it’s better to let them burn in wild fires these days. It’s a more ECO death.

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 June 2015

BenE 1035pm – One thing a scientist learns quickly in his training – all things in this universe cannot be measured, and fewer can be reliably predicted. It is the layman standing at a distance in awe of science who believes otherwise, and from those beliefs concocts systems of social order and governance.
Harvesting forests for timber is no different than harvesting corn. The harvester, seeking a profit, will properly husband that resource within the time horizon he has ‘ownership’ of the resource. In such a case there is no need for a third party to enter and by force impose external costs on the harvester and his customer.
The GDP equation in 25jun15 sandbox is not ‘mine’, but one of the more useful and understandable ways to compute GDP. There are several others, which if properly handled, all give the same answer. But you are right, given the formal definition of subjectively allocated externalities, no GDP calculation includes them. Externalities accounting is primarily a progressive ploy to control the private sector through public policies based on such arguments which themselves are arbitrary and unfounded. More about this later.

LikeLike
Walt

29 June 2015

Where is Boardman? See his piece in the Union? All my careful planning is now shot to shit.
I was working on deals with tourist bus Co.s.. Getting bus routs set up to go by dope grows. Shaddy deals with growers for “tasting” stops. Cut rate deals with food joints to feed those with the munchies. ( PB&J sandwiches are hard to come by around here)
Yes dude,, you may be on to something. The sheriff should diversify to make an extra buck.
And good idea about making money playing “cops and dopers”. Hell… if you can’t beat’m, join’m.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 June 2015

Searching the SCOTUS opinion and I just cannot find where it says two of anything is the limit. It just taks about “intimate” and “happiness”. Here we go, polygamy and goats are next.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 June 2015

Todd
Can you find anything in the Constitution that defines marriage? Why should government be involved in the whole issue anyway?

LikeLike
Jon

29 June 2015

Paul,
Didn’t you know? We’ve now heard implications over the last few days that Sharia Law and goat weddings are coming to America in our lifetime. Lunacy rules.

LikeLike
Ben Emery

29 June 2015

George, 29 June 2015 at 09:03 AM
Shouldn’t the entire cost be part of the price of the product or service? That is what I advocate, paying the actual cost. Western world lifestyle would drastically change if we actually paid the true cost of natural resources, goods, and services. Instead we pay for it through taxes at every turn and get to argue amongst our working poor ranks.
Isn’t that what markets do? Try and make a secure structure so it is more predictable?
Harvesting corn that takes months to grow is not the same as harvesting timber that takes decades and centuries to grow. The business model might be the same but that business model is flawed.
Trying to get industry to capture the external costs would create the incentive for them to correct that flaw. Sure the cost will be passed onto the consumer but at the same that area in the business becomes a place where they can save money by improving their practices.

LikeLike
George Boardman

29 June 2015

RE Walt at 9:13 AM:
Don’t be discouraged; it’s not always the first guy into a new market who wins. As they like to say in Silicon Valley: “You can always tell who the pioneers are. They’re the ones with the arrows in their backs.”

LikeLike
Joe Koyote

29 June 2015

” This question is for everyone but especially….. someone who thinks not being charged means no crime was committed.” Does this axiom also apply to presidents, VPs, defense secretaries, and others who authorized torturing “suspected enemy combatants” but were never charged? No foul no crime? What about gross polluters or bank executives who pocket millions of dollars while millions of people suffer as a result of their actions, does it apply to them as well? The real question here is “does legal also mean moral”?

LikeLike
Gregory

29 June 2015

So Ben,… who gets to determine your proposed externality value subtracted tax, you or me?
If you think big money influences elections now, just wait.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 June 2015

Paul Emery 10:38 AM. Bingo!

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 June 2015

Is someone who plea bargains a crime for no jail time but probation guilty of a crime? For instance, tax fraud of failure to pay employee taxes to the IRS? But of course JoeK only discusses R’s and fails to “indict” killing American with drones without a court. Now who is doing that?

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 June 2015

BenE 1107am – Trees would not be harvested like corn – they’re intrinsically different kinds of resource. It seems like you’re basing your arguments on a profound ignorance of the economics of operating businesses that resides either on your part, or hopefully on the part of your readers.
Given the supply-demand curves and the self-interests of the supplier and consumer, neither party wants to “capture” any more costs than they have to. And all that is independent of the fact that every attempt by “a third party to enter and by force impose external costs on the (supplier) and his customer” results in effectively imposing government price controls. (please see reread my 903am)
This arbitrary approach is a perpetually demonstrated way to mangle markets, reduce supply, and increase criminality (black markets). That such a direct cause-effect has never been picked up by progressives is a dilemma beyond comprehension.

LikeLike
Joe Koyote

29 June 2015

“If you think big money influences elections now, just wait.” — they aren’t elections anymore, they are auctions where candidates pander to, and sell themselves to people like Sheldon Adelson, George Soros, the Koch bros. and a dozen or more other people you have never even heard of. The common practice is to “interview” potential primary candidates in order to decide whom they are going to throw their millions behind. “The Nation”, Bill Moyers, and other left of center news outlets have recently been giving a lot of coverage to what they call the “money primary” and how, via the Citizens United decision, our electoral system has been skewed in favor of the very wealthy allowing them to pick and choose candidates that will enact favorable policies consistent with the donor’s world view. Is this any different than a religious jihad that seeks to enact its world view on a population? One uses military power and terror and the other uses economic power and law (is legal moral when you get to write your own laws?) to accomplish the same purpose. The jihadists don’t have tons of cash like the billionaires, but they do have tons of weapons that the billionaires provided. You have to use the tools that you have. Either way the vast majority of humanity is caught between self-aggrandizing ideologues and their followers fighting it out to see which one will get the biggest statue in some square somewhere in remembrance of their greatness. That is until the next self-aggrandizing ideologue comes along and tears it down to erect a statue of themselves in its place.

LikeLike
Gregory

29 June 2015

Koyoteman, how was the money in politics different in Leland Stanford’s day? Think before writing.

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 June 2015

JoeK 1220pm – Please expand on the basis for assigning ‘big money’ and ‘fanatical Islam’ as bookends on the same shelf. Other than both cohorts use their available resources to attain their widely variant objectives, they share no other attributes. Your argument could just as well have compared the Service Employees International Union to the ragheads – both use what resources they have to achieve their quite different aims.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

29 June 2015

Welcome back, Brother Ben! You are in true form today and I see you have taken note of Dr. Rebane’s subtle advice to us to keep the word smithing short(er). Good to see you took his request in stride. I’ll try to knock 10% off the blabbing for the good of the team and future generations. It’s a tough road to hoe for us of the long winded persuasion.
Ben from the tribe of Benjamin @ 1107am
“Sure the cost will be passed onto the consumer but”……….but what??? Don’t be so cavalier. All these “it only costs a few bucks a month” items add up real quick and taken as a culminative index, it’s driving more and more elderly, young working families, and everything in between to the poor house.
Shame, shame on you who stand tall defending the poor, the struggling, and those who live check to check. All your “sure, the cost will be passed on to the consumer”s are now a juggernaut rolling across my back, leaving me flatter than the hills on Great Granny’s chest. Shame, shame. Any more bright ideas, Einstein?

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 June 2015

JoeK 12:20 PM. Why do you think the election of a person is so expensive? And why are voters staying away from the actual effort of their vote?

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 June 2015

Todd, George
the Republicratic party, as I like to refer to our one party system is just a collection agency for special interest money that expects results in return for their financial generosity. How anyone can support this system is beyond me. Vote independent in ’16 and get government back in control of the citizens of this country not special interest groups.

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 June 2015

PaulE 231pm – First, there is no ‘vote independent’ possible on the ballot. Second, it doesn’t matter who is in power in government, it only matters how much power government has to provide the contributors in “return for their financial generosity.” Hanging ‘Independent’ on your congressional office door does not purify you from your previously having hung ‘Republicrat’ on your door. It is the catalog of government favors that you can sell/trade that determines the level of corruption in such deals with whatever politician has control of the favors.
Progressives don’t understand this fundamental principle of human nature applied to governance, and therefore always suggest solutions which are akin to trying to manage the wrong end of the process. The obvious solution to the rest of us is that you pare down the catalog of favors government can sell. The fewer the favors, the fewer the customers seeking such favors, the less corrupt money comes into government, …, you hopefully get the picture.
Powerful governments attract powerful special interests for maintaining their power. It is always the case that the most powerful (and richest) special interests absolutely require the government’s gun to maintain their positions of power and wealth. Once more, first reduce the scope and reach of government if you really want reform – leaving elite technocrats to man powerful bureaus and agencies will not help, no matter their politics of their political bosses.
The real problem is that today no one can start reducing the catalog of favors because every favor has a strong moneyed constituency on which certain politicians (of whatever stripe) depend for their government sinecures. Sorry to be so brutally negative about the periodically revived idea that changing the sign on your office door can do anything to reduce corruption in government.
PS. this also answers ToddJ’s 1244pm, but not in the way that JoeK may have answered it.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 June 2015

George
Since all that special interest goes through our warped so called two party system imagine the jolt to the powers that be (those that dish out the money) to have their agents, the Republicrats dumped from power. Can you think of any other way to accomplish that goal? My main quarrel with your lofty idealism is that you have this stubborn allegiance to the Republican Party which history has shown is just like the Democrats in their lust for special interest money. Do you really think it will make any difference if the Republicans controlled everything like they did from 2000-2006? Yeah, some great reform happened in that time frame.

LikeLike
Gregory

29 June 2015

Paul, at no time during Bush II did the GOP have more than a tenuous hold on the House, or a strong Speaker.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 June 2015

Gregory
Can you point to any ATTEMPTS at reforming the influence of money on our political system that the Republicans tried during their control of the Legislature and the Presidency?

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

29 June 2015

I agree with George in that the problem is not the money but is, instead, what politicians are able to sell and that “special interest” money can buy. This is one of the reasons why limited and as small as possible government is best. It is also one of the things that the Tea Party gets correct.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 June 2015

Kesti, George
Of course you’re right but we have the foxes minding the hen house here and the Republicratic Party (I refrain from using both parties) have no intention to giving up their cash cow so no wonder there is no reform. The Tea party offered some hope for a short time as did Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich factions that were easily marginalized by the big boys. The Libertarian and Green parties are left out in the cold when it comes to media attention. Oh guess what? Who owns the Media? The same entities that control the Congress and Presidency. Obama and the mainstream Repubs dancing cheek to cheek over TPP are clear evidence that on big issues there is no difference between them, only subtleties such as social issues that don’t mean a rats ass to the big money interests.

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 June 2015

PaulE 344pm – It appears that you continue to think that changing the nameplate on the door will solve our govt corruption problems. Let me correct you about my “lofty idealism”. Changing politicians without changing government succumbs to Einstein’s definition of insanity. Reducing the scope and reach of government is the ONLY pragmatic solution to reducing corruption and maintaining our liberties. However, even that doesn’t guarantee that it is possible to pull it off. But merely changing nameplates does guarantee that nothing different will happen. Recall Bush2 was also a progressive.
Empires fall and hegemons retreat – read the exhaustively documented book by that blonde radio commentator.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 June 2015

Having been in politics and running for office and also helping others I can say all of the above is a part of the issue of money. However, what you all fail to deal with is the cost of being elected. It has become a huge burden on the person wanting to run. So, you say the “people with a horse in the race” put in the money. Yes they do. But go look at the disclosures of any politician, left, right and center, and you will see there is no money from the little people. So the vacuum is filled by those with something to gain or lose.
When I ran for State Assembly in 1992 I raised and spent $56,000. That bought me ONE mailer to the likely voters of the Third Assembly District. I got endorsed by the newspaper in Paradise. The winner spent $300,000 and the runner up about the same. Not one news program or newspaper said hey! Come on in and we will give you free air or paper time. Not one. And that was all seven of us on the R side in the primary. I learned a lot about money in elections. Far removed from the $15,000 I spent in the primary and general in 1984.
So, call them corrupt or Republicrats but the PEOPLE, the regular people, don’t contribute and the press doesn’t give you free time. And the postal service wants theirs (for mailers you pay someone to create and make a gazillion of) . You figure it out It ins’t tough to do. Jeeze.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 June 2015

George
So what do you propose as a way out of this situation? I propose Revolution at the ballot box. Another possibility is economic boycotts and an independent cash free economy or a tax rebellions. What do you have in mind since we fairly well agree on the nature of the beast.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

29 June 2015

Paul Emery 29Jun15 05:27 PM
I’m not as certain that hope for the Tea Party is lost just yet. My hope was again renewed this week when the FUE posted his scathing indictment of the Tea Party for planing to distribute invites(sic) to “activism events” as well as copies of the Constitution. The FUE and his cohorts were shocked. Yes. SHOCKED!

LikeLike
George Rebane

29 June 2015

Yes, the Left is always shocked when someone distributes subversive literature like the Constitution to mere individuals and asks them then to think for themselves. The Reformationists like Luther and Calvin also irked Rome when they had the Bible translated into the vernacular and encouraged the lay folks to read it for themselves. What’s a central planner and controller to do?
PaulE 543pm – Don’t know how the ballot box and economic revolutions and boycotts would work across a population of 310M. But a massive tax code rewrite would definitely be promising, as would be civil disobedience conducted through Madisonian legal defense funds against regulatory agencies.
Don’t get me wrong; I don’t have any easy answers since we are beyond the tipping point with an electorate bathed in national dumbth and half the population paying no or negligible taxes (and demanding that the other half pays more). A slippery slope is what it is, and we’re on it. Perhaps MichaelK’s hope in a resurgence of the Tea Party will also contribute to a step toward sanity. I count my own assessment there of little worth since I am a Tea Party member and an eternally hopeful optimist that an informed grass roots electorate can really spark plug change. Believe me, I want the Great Experiment to succeed.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

29 June 2015

Gruber was on to something.

LikeLike
Scott Obermuller

29 June 2015

Ben at 11:07:
“Shouldn’t the entire cost be part of the price of the product or service?”
Yes Ben – we’ve noticed your outrage at tax payer subsidized ‘green energy’ scams.
Let’s start making sure folks who buy solar panels, batteries and electric cars pay the actual cost of dealing with the filthy chemicals and the clean up after the fact of these new green tech waste piles.
Don’t forget the defense money spent to secure the hinterlands that hold deposits of rare earth elements needed for green energy.
Oh, wait – that only applies to oil, right Ben?

LikeLike
Gregory

29 June 2015

Can you point to any ATTEMPTS at reforming the influence of money on our political system that the Republicans tried during their control of the Legislature and the Presidency?
Posted by: Paul Emery | 29 June 2015 at 04:29 PM
Paul, do you consider a 51/49% split “control”?
The way towards less money in politics is for the to have less control of our economic life and the last six years have been a disaster for that.

LikeLike
Gregory

29 June 2015

Regarding the Tea Party, there is no The Tea Party. Never on any ballot I’ve seen.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

29 June 2015

Gawd, I just hate this overused expression, but it applies to the recent exchange of ideas between Mr. Paul Emery and the good doctor Rebane. Paul, “that’s like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.” Besides, the millions of low information voters who think that rearranging the deck chairs will solve everything don’t have the attention span of a rat. Come Election Day, probably 3% of the Rearrangers will vote Green or American Socialist. The rest who agree with you will stay home waiting for the next election cycle, vote a straight Democrat ticket, or light some incense, put on some good music and forget about the whole thang.
Hope we can agree that a good shaking of the tree and letting the rotten fruit fall to the ground is a splendid idea, one that tickles me fancy. Our republic was founded on rebellion, pure and simple. A tax revolt would have much historical precedence. Them silly Bostonians dressing up as Washington Redskins and dumping tea overboard. A real Tea Party. The second thing our first Congress did was pass a whiskey tax which immediately led President Washington to sent troops to squash the Whiskey Rebellion. BTW, when you consider that President Washington was a whiskey maker by trade, just the idea of taxing his vocation and signing the tax law shows his character, an outstanding principled man who did not think more highly of himself than he thought of Old Glory.
Let’s have a tax revolt. Let’s rollback the added gas tax that was implemented Jan 1 to build the TRAIN to Bullonwillows and build low income projects…er…low income housing. I just know the builders and contractors who will get the job to build our new The Projects are corrupt and greased the technocrats palms to the max and beyond. Heck, the blessed and sacred cow known as Prop 13 started right here in the Golden Shower State. We can do it. Yes we can! United we stand, divided we fall. Love our country but fear our hovernment. Hope and Change. I stand with both Paul and Ben Emery on this one. Please, please don’t start the tax revolution without me. It only takes a spark to start a fire…if only people would look up from their handheld devices long enough to notice what day it is, then the revolt will spread.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 June 2015

Gregory, George
All I wanted to hear about was any attempts by the Republicans to gain independence from their providers. Certainly the Democrats did not moved in that direction when they had the majority. But what the heck, our government was bought fair and square and we keep electing the same ilk thinking there will be change. I am a firm believer that with a combination of mass numbers of independent voters (non Republicrats) and selected consumer strikes the word would get out that we no longer will tolerate bought and sole professional politicians. I remain the optimist.

LikeLike
Greg Goodknight

29 June 2015

Paul, I’ve been a LIB since the 80’s… it ain’t that easy to win as an alternative party canddiate for a federal office, unless you pretend Saunders is 3rd party, none have in my memory.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

29 June 2015

Greg
It’s not realistic to think of winning at first. What can happen for is a good number of none of the above (Republicrats) votes to scare the hell out of the status quo
That’s a realistic goal. I have succumbed to fear tactics in the past to vote mainstream but no more. The state of the State is a bi-partisan effort. Anyone who thinks otherwise is seriously delusional.

LikeLike