Shomron Center for Economic Policy Research

In Search for an efficient Institutions

November 15, 2012
by Moshe
0 comments

Is it possible to compete against free stuff? Lessons from Obama victory 2012

Rabbi Steven Pruzanski proposed his explanation “Why Romney Didn’t Get Enough Votes to Win“.

He insists:

1. “… Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.”

2. “Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate…  it is impossible to compete against free stuff.” – concludes the Rabbi.

We couldn’t accept even a one Short Run related above cited argument (we cited them  as para (1)).

GOP could find better candidate, able to inspire voters’ majority by conservative revolution ideas to defend ancient liberties instead of “obama-lite” “nice for all” (and really nice man) like Romney;

GOP run poor campaign, taking pause before debates, poor targeted, appeasing worst enemies like feminists (who wouldn’t vote GOP anyway);

GOP paused again their campaign during Hurricane Sandy instead to present, to celebrate, to glorify advantages of private charity initiatives vs. governmental failures  giving the liberals chance

We are totally agree the long run related arguments of Rabbi Pruzanski (see para (2)).

Conservatives could win elections from time to time – no doubt about it. They could even succeed in natural economic growth encouragement.

So, increasing national cake would just kindle, encourage the special interests groups’ passion to redivide / redistribute this big nice cake.  Interesants, bureaucrats, leftists (“liberals”) could easily rebuild and widen winning coalition for this cake redistribution under Universal Suffrage. Therefore, immoral coalition for Free Stuff couldn’t be defeated finally (in Long Run). The problem of government-dependent voters’ conflict of interests couldn’t be resolved under Universal Suffrage.

That’s why we are insisting (see our book for details) : it’s a time to repeal Universal Suffrage and break social spendings, all kind of welfare, first and foremost. Charity is developed enough to help the needy. So the Civil Society’s responsibility is to “disarm” current budget funded free stuff benefectors.

 

September 25, 2012
by Moshe
0 comments

President Obama, the New Keynes, and Some Associations

In a recent July 13, 2012, address delivered in Roanoke, VA, President Obama aptly and adequately expressed the essence of a new way of reading Keynes. In his view, the state not only has the honor of disbanding the economy and sustaining output and employment on a high level. After working intensively for the benefit of society, the government and its people have a right to fame, something that society bestows upon the successful entrepreneur by virtue of its own benightedness and ignorance.

As we noted in “Modern Anti-Capitalistic Ideologies,” Chapter 9 of our book, ideology is an easily digestible form of worldview and morals. We may also add: of science, as well (at least, of such a far-from-strict-science as economics).

Moving right along from the idea of forgetting about the Long Run period and about the differences in investment quality for state and private ownership (J. M. Keynes original), we go on to the model of Munchausen (with some people in this connection referring in politically correct manner… to Lincoln), which represents the state’s pulling itself and its steed (the economy) out of the swamp “by its own hand.” A transition, it should be noted, which is quite logical. This idea, which forms the complement to Keynes’ own implicit assumption of the equal value of private and state investments in terms of efficacy (return on investments), is also the basis for government policies in most of the leading economies for “overcoming crises.” This is the policy of redistributing means from effectively operating businesses to ineffective ones. Investments grow drastically while this is in process, but, for some reason, employment and output show evidence of almost no growth at all. This is probably because the generation of today is living during that same Long Run period that Lord Keynes was not willing to think about, so as to avoid getting upset.

Let’s see, on what account did Mr. Obama make out a final invoice for business?

The entrepreneur and his workers have paid all the taxes used to finance the government sector (including the salaries and even the salary taxes for the President and government officials). For this money, the businessman and his people get all the worst type services (including defense and security, if they do not overly interfere with the terrorists; as well as education for potential firm employees, roads, and the rest). Workers can, for the time being, be recruited from China, India, and Russia (since, judging by the results of international Olympiads in mathematics, the likelihood of finding an ambitious educated young guy with good math is there a few times greater than in the US). They may also be drafted from the private schools and universities still remaining. But competition against the state is difficult and risky.

These risks make it clear why it was the state, and no other, that built BRIDGES AND HIGHWAYS FOR AUTOMOBILES in the US. This holds, while railroads, a grandiose network of hundreds of thousands of kilometers, as well as railroad bridges, were in the US built exclusively by private business. Add to this that these developments came decades before state construction of the Autobahns (not only Roosevelt, but the Fuehrer of the Third Reich, too, adored highway construction). True enough, at a certain stage, the state decided to stimulate construction, based on both economic and strategic considerations. The stimulating turned into a decades-long problem of lines ridden with losses (naturally, more had been constructed than it was profitable to maintain given the conditions of the severest competition). The state not only in Russia, but also in the US, is reminiscent of the mythical King Midas. But the other way around: any gold which it touches turns into a product of dubious quality.

And so, behold this state, represented by the President, as it puts forth claims not only to taxes to be levied from business. It claims the very success of business, along with the moral reward accruing to those who continue to make ever new goods and services available for the millions.

The honor and respect due for making available electric home appliances, automobiles, or computers with user-friendly software, may go to Roosevelt (F. D.), Clinton, or Obama. To them, the chosen ones, do the honors go, and not to self-appointed upstarts who are the likes of Edison, Ford, Jobs, or Bill Gates.

In conclusion, let us repeat. After having paid the state for all its programs by means of taxes and credits, business is compelled to purchase services it never asked for. Services (education, first of all) of a quality level which it finds satisfactory are something business is more and more often forced to seek abroad or from other businesses, or else from a third sector. Services providing the education already mentioned or the access to automobile highways are not of the best quality because these areas have been invaded by the state without due cause – to put it mildly.

This much done, the entrepreneur still remains in “inexhaustible debt.” And should the entrepreneur be so imprudent as to give money to the Republican campaign (and not to the Democratic one, like George Soros), then guys from the IRS may pay him a visit, and spend a long time inquiring into the details of his life and creative work.

Does this not remind you of anything?

English version –  by Elen Rochlin

June 4, 2012
by Moshe
0 comments

Who is Julia?

Pres. Obama’s electoral staff invited us to meet Julia.

Who and what is the Julia’s real prototypes?  Or, less politically correct speaking, “Who the hell is “Julia,” and why am I paying for her whole life?”

She looks like modern “emancipated – liberated” woman without husband (“married to the state” as pointed out the article commentator). Her electoral propensities are well illuminated by the table below:

Subgroup

Bush, 2000

Bush, 2004

Obama 2008

McCain 2008

Overall

48

51

53

46

Men

52

56

50

50

Women

45

48

57

43

Married

57

60

44

56

Not married

36

40

65

35

Married men

59

61

42

58

Unmarried men

49

45

63

37

Married women

56

58

47

53

Unmarried women

31

36

66

34

Attend church   weekly

56

63

45

55

Attend church   nearly weekly/monthly

51

55

51

49

Seldom/Never   attend church

41

40

62

38

Sources  – Gallup polls:  http://www.gallup.com/poll/112132/Election-Polls-Vote-Groups—2008.aspx ; http://www.gallup.com/poll/13957/How-Americans-Voted.aspx.

So, definitely, unmarried Julia, relying on the government and heavily “invested” by the latter is natural obama-voter.

The strategy to reward their own hardcore liberal voters on the independent entrepreneurs’ cost is quite rational for Obama and for American leftists.  They grab from their enemies to reward friends. I believe, Obama’s electoral staff addresses the potential pro-liberal activists,  publicizing the message. The decision to target potential activists, ignoring all the rest voters looks quite reasonable on this stage of the campaign.

The question is, how self-made Americans and their devoted wives could defend their life-style, is still unanswered.

Would m-r Romney’s administration actually ready to divorce Julia, to save US budget, to save Julia’s real family and her chances to be happy? Or his best is “to cut program like … by 20%”?

For more information, wait for our book‘s Chapters 11 and 12 translations. It is coming soon!

 

May 24, 2012
by Moshe
0 comments

Moore’s law – near end? (PRC forecast readers’ reaction)

Demand for quality goods and PRC economic prospects

The demand for more expensive, as well as more reliable products could be encouraged by electronic technologies development slowdown. The slowdown means longest terms of moral depreciation of electronic devices and, therefore creates additional demand for durability and reliability.   

According to the Moore’s law (ML), formulated by G. Moore from Intel decades ago, density on chips (or, in simple terms, computer performance) doubles each 2 years. Though several obstacles on the path of the above law were encountered during the decades that passed, until now the rumors about its close death have been from time to time greatly exaggerated. The following signs indicate, however, that the main candidate for the ML extension – EUVL (extreme ultraviolet lithography) – is not going to be ready for mass-production in 2014 as wished.

1) No reported progress on EUV sources since Jun 2010, when ASML NXE:3100 tool with 20W-power was introduced. This is in spite of the fact that more milestones (with source power up to 100-200W) were anticipated then (06.2010) till the end of 2011.

2) While 13.5nm EUV is far from being at hand, EUVL community speaks loudly about the next 6-7nm step. According to the author’s experience, this is a well-known and clearly alarming sign.

3) At the last EUV Sources’ workshop (Dublin Nov 07-09) a special session on alternative EUV sources (mainly Free Electron Lasers – FELs) was held. FELs are expensive, never proven in industrial conditions and demand change of the fab logistics (1 FEL source – multiple tools, instead of the present paradigm 1 source – 1 tool). The interest of industry in FEL shows IMHO their near-despair regarding the heavily-invested plasma sources.

4) The language of many titles and abstracts of the last International Symposium on EUVL (Miami, Oct 13-16 2011) is rather alarming  E.g.:

EUV Masks:  Ready or Not?

There are many challenges in EUV mask which needs innovative technologies.

While incremental progress has been made …, the rate of learning is not trending to meet the commonly perceived requirement in time for production.

Substantial progress, especially on source power, is still required before EUVL can be applied to high-volume manufacturing.

Dr. Yehoshua Socol    www.FalconAnalytics.com

May 24, 2012
by Moshe
0 comments

Should Retirement Security Funds Invest in Chinese Active Assets?

In Chapter 8 of our book    Authoritarianism and Chinese Success Story, we tried to provide grounds for China’s inability to sustain high growth rates for any extended period of time.

The quality of China’s economic growth is worsened by the intimidation of local and foreign investors. The absence of guarantees of the inviolability of the individual person makes business in PRC increasingly dangerous. Problems in reproducing a quality workforce (the struggle against the high birthrate, affecting primarily the urban centers), incitement of anti-entrepreneurial attitudes, instigated by the authorities themselves, and other negative elements pose the threat of substantial obstacles to long-term stable growth.

Finally, profound economic reforms directed at easing the burden of heavy and unfair taxation (of the “progressive” type, for instance) and demented regulations (“green” ones, gender ones, and many others) upon the economy in any large market democracy immediately leads to the drain of capital from China’s real sector into the real sector of the country in question.

More and more consumers note with annoyance the general lowering in quality of technically complex products, something that has become widespread since the time when all large companies moved primary production activities to China. This means that the demand for more expensive, as well as more reliable US, Canada or European products is in evidence, and will most probably remain on the rise.

In other words, long-term (more than 10 years) investments in Chinese active assets and holdings appear to us to be an unwise and risky undertaking.

See also readers’ reaction on the forecast

English version –  by Elen Rochlin

May 20, 2012
by Moshe
0 comments

Conservatives’ demand for free economy

Leftists’ and conservatives’ enlightement in light of the EconWatch results: enjoy, but with care

“…the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant;

it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”

Reagan R. “Time for choosing” October 27 1964

Professor Daniel B. Klein of George Mason University in Virginia, editor of the online journal Econ Journal Watch, in co-authorship with Zeljka Buturovic) published their really great job results:

Economic Enlightenment in Relation to College-going, Ideology, and Other Variables:  A Zogby Survey of Americans http://econjwatch.org/articles/economic-enlightenment-in-relation-to-college-going-ideology-and-other-variables-a-zogby-survey-of-americans

Based on a survey, authors tried to assess the impact of political and ideological preferences and education on American economic enlightenment. The questionnaire was a mini-test for understanding certain elementary yet significant economic problems.

The results were impressive. Leftists (who often justly call themselves “Liberals” in the US) evinced a lack of awareness approaching total ignorance. Those surveyed preferred to disregard unpleasant facts, which are often common knowledge, if these facts did not fit the world picture dictated by their worldview. Such facts included washing out cheap dwelling under governmental rent price control; growth of prices for goods and services licensed by the state; being ready easily to “count” successful, large and growing companies among the monopolies; and so on.

The survey showed that education levels did not significantly impact levels of economic enlightenment. This is easily explainable by the leftists’ domination at universities. As a consequence, formal possession of a diploma is no evidence of either adequate basic knowledge, or culture of such knowledge acquisition (sometimes even information seeking skill). The article was published in May 2010.

The author became target for attack by leftist colleagues dominating the US academic community. The key “error” the author was ready to concede was his choice of well-known “sore calluses” of the Left and his having “gloatingly” stepped on them.

The next report (May 2011), very title made in sinner confessional style under “Party purges”. The authors are resolutely “bending their knees before the Party”. In the 2-nd  survey authors asked questions which stepped on the conservatives’ “sore toes.”  (“Economic Enlightenment Revisited: New Results Again Find Little Relationship Between Education and Economic Enlightenment but Vitiate Prior Evidence of the Left Being Worse” http://econjwatch.org/articles/economic-enlightenment-revisited-new-results )

Conservatives in this report evinced a lack of deepened understanding of problems in the Welfare Economics and lack of familiarity with a university course in Public Sector Economics. Liberals answered the same questions “better” simply thanks to a pre-arranged correspondence of their ideologemes with the “correct” answers.

Conservatives evinced an insurmountable certainty that normal market deals are mutually profitable. In other words, conservatives believe that success can be achieved by honest labor, given free contracts and private property. Liberals, by contrast, believe that success is forced redistribution, and that there is no other way to achieve success. Hence also their conviction that state “correcting” redistribution is moral and efficient.

It is obvious that the second survey became a new proof of the conservatives’ commitment to principles of economic freedom and plain common sense, and the enmity espoused by the liberals toward the same principles (not to mention “occupy capitalists’ money” professors).

However, the authors opted to admit their error (!) in the first study. Protected by private property safeguards (George Mason University is private and commercial) and the First Amendment, American conservatives are afraid to defend their findings even when holding indisputable proof in their hands.

The 1-st surveys’ questionnaire most issues are really important; 2-nd surveys’ questionnaire’s questions’ (as if “vitiating” previous results) significance is questionable… ( two questionaries’ analysis and relevant references see here: EconWatch_comments).

In light of Reagan’s vision of the problem with liberal friend the only appropriate question for new survey IMHO would be:

Question Answer   options “Unenlightened”   person’s answer / comment
The   State principal responsibility and budget spending priority should be: 1.Defense,   security, justice2. Education, healthcare, culture, science3. Redistribution,   welfare4. Poor countries assistance and peace in the world promotion5.   Diversity, gender and race equality promotion All   choices but 1-st option /General (for all non-taxpayers’ democracies) trends   to expend state spending for mixed “public goods” at the cost of   pure public goods and with prospect to spend more and more for debt and   interest repayment, to impose more regulations on private business   explainable by the very basic choice of the State goals “… either to   promote happiness, orsimply to prevent evil”

Moshe Yanovskiy

English by Elen Rochlin

 

April 3, 2012
by Moshe
0 comments

2011 Summer Riots in Tel Aviv: what they are want actually

“Tent protest” (Israel earlier version of “occupy… everything” leftist movement, Summer 2011; “TP”)

The Jerusalem Institute for Market studies (JIMS) reaction on Trajtenberg Commission proposals: trachtenbergPR2english (link at JIMS web site are temporarily out of order)

to download the text as pdf click here ;

the post content is part of the report for 2012 Public Choice Society Annual Meeting

# The issue (the problem) Reason/     Decision of the problem Government proposal and “TP” leaders    reaction “Trachtenberg commission” proposal and    “TP” leaders reaction “Tent protest” leaders demands
1 “Mass feeling of injustice” (means   “feeling of unequal distribution of wealth) New branches (High Tech) arising in the Israel and   new prospering groups of population respectively; first time in the Israel   history incomes not depend on bureaucracy and politicized oligarchy, controlling   Public and other leading Mass media    resources Enhance “progressivity” of taxation (two   new “brackets” of the scale); references on “biblical   prophets” (as if the prophets ever were communists, demanded equal   distribution not equal treatment in the court only) / too little too late;Moderate economic liberalization reversed To break the trend of incomes  inequality
2 To substitute security agenda by “social   justice” agenda New security challenges caused by Islamic   fundamentalism rising to the power around the Israel; the TP leaders urged   “to repeat success of Tahrir Square in Israel” http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/04/israel-protests-social-justice?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487 Shares the TP leaders rhetoric; actual cuts of   military spending till not happened
3 Cheap (subsidized) dwelling At the same time demand to break building in Judea   and Samariahttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/04/tel-aviv-tent-city-protesters?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487 Actual   freezing in building in Judea and Samaria; liberalizing of building projects   procedure (see the bill draft: http://www.knesset.gov.il/committees/heb/material/data/kalkala2011-07-06.pdf   –   Hebrew) No liberalizing[1],   no Judea and Shomron building, subsidizing only
4 Free pre-schooling child-care (since 3 years old)

More sources on the Issue:

Ori Chudy   (29 August 2011) (on TP leaders demands)

Trachtenberg commission reports  http://hidavrut.gov.il/ (Hebrew)

TP own “panel of experts” (see for example http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/alternative-experts-panel-vows-to-address-israel-s-unacceptable-economic-policy-1.378729 ); no any plan published as a result;

Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies:  Trachtenberg’s Plans Will Be Costly Failures  JIMS Cites Report’s Faulty Logic, Offers Alternatives http://www.jims-israel.org/pdf/trachtenbergPR2english.pdf

Hillman (2010) “expressive behavior” (means voting or rioting for leftist agenda just “to looks fine” in spite of the majority of Israeli voters never shared this values and not interested in the agenda issues) concept reflects Israelis’ habit to the leftists ideological indoctrination[2]. Leftists ideological indoctrination (“state provided butter better than  guns” or “war is no solution” etc) means practically change the national agenda from security issues to welfare-redistribution issues and substitution the pure public goods by mixed public goods.

Mixed public goods provision defined and interpreted by leftists as “moral” and pure public goods provision (reliable defense and security provision) as  “vigilantism”, “militarism” and even fascism

For References:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Diagram:  2011 Expenses Budgetary Structure

35% of Total central Government spending – Debt Repayment, Interests and Comission; 31% Social Spending;

less than 25% – Defence and Security

Sources: Israel Finance Ministry

http://www.mof.gov.il/BudgetSite/StateBudget/Budget2011_2012/Pages/Budget2011_2012HP.aspx      (Hebrew)   Grand total 348,185  billion NIS (roughly $95-97 billion)

http://www.knesset.gov.il/committees/heb/material/data/kalkala2011-07-06.pdf


[2] The media shift and leftist indoctrination guaranteed in Israel by “public” media and “public” schools (Rabins’ – Peace lessons etc).

 

 

April 1, 2012
by Moshe
0 comments

2011 Summer Pogroms in England

A little bit old, but still important News:

Welfare, lasted for generations, disarmed Police, multiculturalism, “new citizen” (no more responsibility, no 2-nd Amendment Right, a lot of governmental care); to blend thoroughly… This  is a prescription how to cook a pretty good pogrom.

At the same time, the prescription’s components list coincides with the principal issues analyzed in depth in our book.

British journalists worthful coverage and assessment:

1.  Melanie Phillips   Britain’s liberal intelligentsia has smashed virtually every social value

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2024690/UK-riots-2011-Britains-liberal-intelligentsia-smashed-virtually-social-value.html#ixzz1nlv5EbpJ

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2024690/UK-riots-2011-Britains-liberal-intelligentsia-smashed-virtually-social-value.html

2. Max Hastings “Years of liberal dogma have spawned a generation of amoral, uneducated, welfare dependent, brutalised youngsters”   Last updated at 12:49 PM on 10th August 2011

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2024284/UK-riots-2011-Liberal-dogma-spawned-generation-brutalised-youths.html#ixzz1VELkeNqN

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2024284/UK-riots-2011-Liberal-dogma-spawned-generation-brutalised-youths.html

March 30, 2012
by Moshe
0 comments

New York Times: to explain leftists’ domination in US Academia to forgive it

We have focused in the issue in the 2-nd Chapter of our book. We sent the reader to the Lichter – Rothman study (Lichter S.R. The Vanishing Conservative — Is There a Glass Ceiling?) see http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/Z5238L.pdf

or in paperback:  The Politically Correct University Problems, Scope, and Reforms / Ed. By Fr.M. Hess, R. Maranto, R.E. Redding. AEI Press (September 2009).

BTW NYT presents own coverage of the same issue.

The article references is the Fosse, Gross et al studies on the Graduate admission process and Political liberalism and Graduate school attendance .

In the first paper authors denied significant dependency of the application process and mentioned activities of 2008 Obama (McCain) campaign.

In the latter paper authors found liberal shift explained it by conservative graduates’ less desire to join and activities dominated by liberals, to start the academic career as the Academy already overpopulated by the leftists.

http://www.soci.ubc.ca/fileadmin/template/main/images/departments/soci/faculty/gross/audit_paper_march_3.pdf

http://www.soci.ubc.ca/fileadmin/template/main/images/departments/soci/faculty/gross/fosse_freese_gross_2_25.pdf