“Elections Could Be Avoided”

Posted on by
Reply

The Italian government is in crisis—which is to say things are proceeding normally for the Italians, since that government has been stably unstable since the end of WWII (66 separate Cabinets in those 75 years).

The latest round is Matteo Renzi taking his Italia Viva party out of the four party coalition government (have I mentioned stability?) that currently is in charge and is nominally led by Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte and the major coalition parties, the 5-Star Movement and the Democratic Party (the Free and Equal party is the fourth coalition member). The withdrawal included the resignations of two IV cabinet ministers, which eliminated the coalition’s parliamentary majority (don’t ask. This is Italian politics).

A couple of things ensue from Renzi’s move: coalition parties attempt to negotiate a new coalition agreement with Italia Viva. If that fails, President Sergio Mattarella assemble a “national unity” government to deal with the Wuhan Virus situation. It Mattarella failed, the only option would be national elections.

That brings me to what drew my eye and to the point of this article.

Renzi said, in the aftermath of his collapsing the coalition government, that (quoting from OANN‘s paraphrase) he thought elections could be avoided.

Elections could be avoided. Avoid letting the people choose their own government whenever possible.

This is an all-too-typical attitude of European politicians. They’re in charge, not the people.

This is the Europe Progressive-Democrats want us to emulate.

An Empirical Test?

Posted on by
Reply

Ex-Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate and ex-entrepreneur Andrew Yang now is running for mayor of New York City, and he wants to implement there his Universal Basic Income scheme.

We can eradicate extreme poverty in New York City. If you put just a little money in their hands it can actually be what keeps them in their home and, again, avoids them hitting city services that are incredibly expensive.

Or not.

Keep in mind that demand is not the number of people who want a product, it’s the amount of money being spent for the product.

The problem with giving unearned money to everyone—using the $1,000/mo, or $12,000/yr, from his Presidential campaign for concreteness—is that you increase demand (this time artificially) by those $12k/yr. Since production won’t increase much—the money representing demand won’t be earned from production, it’ll be printed, or it’ll come from taxes, or it’ll come from borrowing (future taxes)—the result will be pure inflation.

That inflation will rise to fully absorb those $12k, leaving buying power where it was before the UBI started getting handed out. The $2 candy bar will cost $24, and the UBI will be completely absorbed. The recipients will be no better off than before.

In fact, everyone will be worse off. Inflation will leave everyone’s buying power fundamentally unchanged, but money taken out of the economy by those taxes or that debt will lead to an overall reduction in economic activity. Taxes or debt (either one) will reduce businesses’ ability to innovate—which is jobs—or to give bonuses/pay raises—which is jobs—or to improve existing plant—which is jobs—or to hire more employees—which is jobs—since absent innovation, there’ll be reduced ability to expand.

Or, Yang is onto something.

If so, what better place to run the test than in the aftermath of Bill de Blasio’s New York City?

On-Line Sports Betting

Posted on by
Reply

That’s the venue, but the question is much larger.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) is moving to authorize mobile sports betting, by having his government conduct “competitive bidding” for government permission to host such.

State Senate Racing, Gaming, and Wagering Committee Chairman Joe Addabbo (D, Queens) said in an interview that

he was glad the Democratic governor had shifted away from his opposition to online betting but believed the state should enact a more expansive system.
“I am not a believer that one sportsbook provider, or operator, can handle the volume in New York[.]”

Both miss the larger problem. In a truly competitive process, private economy entrepreneurs would start their own mobile sports betting enterprises, and they would compete—on the basis of product quality and breadth of services—for the consumer’s dollar. They wouldn’t be forced to compete—on the basis of politics—for the government’s imprimatur.

This is another Progressive-Democrat-run government’s attempt to control businesses.

As Michael Corleone (almost) said, It’s not business. It’s strictly politics.

Whose Money is it, Again?

Posted on by
Reply

Xavier Becerra (D), Joe Biden’s nominee for Health and Human Services, has long had a firm dislike for charitable organizations that don’t spend according to his requirements.

Case in point from then-Congressman from California Becerra on charitable foundations:

…someone needs to do something, especially when you’re using the taxpayers of America’s money to do your philanthropic work[.]

Notice that. Taxpayers’ money. Not working stiffs’ money. Not citizens’ money. Government’s money.

Government-Run Medicine

Posted on by
Reply

France provides its own example, after Great Britain’s NHS, of the nightmare that is Government medicine.  Consider France’s nursing folks homes and the nation’s red tape.

The few hours it took to give the first coronavirus vaccine shots to 14 residents of the John XXIII nursing home…took weeks of preparation.
The home’s director, Samuel Robbe, first had to chew his way through a dense 61-page vaccination protocol, one of several hefty guides from the French government that exhaustively detail how to proceed, down to the number of times (10) that each flask of vaccine should be turned upside down to mix its contents.
“Delicately,” the booklet stipulates. “Do not shake.”

And

After the European Union green-lighted use of the BioNTech-Pfizer vaccine in December, Robbe says it took two weeks to put together all the pieces to this week vaccinate 14 residents, just a fraction of his total of more than 100.

This is the level of red tape and speed of performance we can expect from Joe Biden’s Medicare for All demand. Especially since our Progressive-Democrats are as enamored of red tape as is the French government. All that coming American red tape, after all, represents Biden’s promise of “good union jobs,” here good Government union jobs.

Vive les syndicats. Vive la bureaucratie.