MLLG

MLLG Special: The Camouflaged Nexus Of . . . Climate Change, Critical Race Theory and the Spending Crisis

George Noga

There is a hidden connection among climate change, race and the spending crisis.

MLLG Special: The Camouflaged Nexus Of . . .

Climate Change, Critical Race Theory and the Spending Crisis

By: George Noga – July 18, 2021

Three mega-issues changing America are linked in ways not well understood. Climate change is regarded, including by President Biden, as an existential issue in the literal sense and not the philosophical sense of mankind’s search for meaning. The spending crisis will change America forever and Critical Race Theory has become an accepted part of pedagogy in schools, universities and workplaces throughout America.

The common denominator of these three issues is socialism along with its misanthropic stepchildren: communism, progressivism, and liberalism. In each case, unreconstructed socialists are the driving force behind the cause. They are working in tandem toward the same goal – whether or not they coordinate their efforts. They receive financing and succor from a coterie of camp followers and useful idiots including progressive groups, academia, public sector labor unions, teachers, media, government bureaucrats, NGOs, entertainment, organized religion, social media – and even sports and business.

Climate Change and Socialism

After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of communism, die-hard Marxists were homeless. They decided to pursue their goals via a back door by taking over the environmental (and later, climate change) movement. They simply cloaked their anti-capitalist agenda in green language and became watermelon environmentalists, i.e. green on the outside but red on the inside. Patrick Moore, a founder of Greenpeace, said, “Following the collapse of communism, Marxists hijacked the (climate change) movement. Their far left agenda is about socialism, not ecology or (climate).”

Critical Race Theory (“CRT”) and Socialism

Marxism is based on class conflict and the belief that workers would seize the means of production and create a utopian socialist society. However, socialist-style regimes proved dismal failures, murdering over 100 million of their own people. The human carnage and economic toll were so great even die-hard Marxists couldn’t hide from it. Moreover, Marxists came to understand workers in the USA, Western Europe, Japan and many other places never would buy into the notion of class struggle.

Just as Marxists knew they needed a back door (environmentalism and climate change) to achieve their goal, they also recognized they needed an alternative to class struggle. They decided to substitute race (and ethnic) struggle for class struggle and BINGO, Critical Race Theory was created. Masters of maskirovka, commies decided on the euphemism “equity” as their mantra. By equity they mean an end to private property and redistribution of everything according to race. There would be no individual rights, only group rights. At its core, Critical Race Theory is virulent socialism.

Spending Crisis, Modern Monetary Theory (“MMT”) and Socialism

Most groups pushing for MMT and massive spending, debt and deficits are socialist. Once again, they are seeking a back door to socialism. Progressives understand Americans will not accept socialism under normal circumstances; therefore, they must create an emergency serious enough to beguile Americans into accepting the hitherto unacceptable. Thus, we have a spending crisis that will result in horrors so frightening people will accept anything – especially if they are promised it is only temporary. The spending crisis is yet another back door to a socialist United States of America.

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

There you have it – the nexus of climate change, CRT and spending; they all represent back doors to socialism. The leaders of these movements know full well what they are doing but are few in number. They must rely on camp followers and useful idiots, i.e. clueless liberals besotted with feel-good progressive bromides and good intentions.

We must stand up to these assaults on our liberty and way of life. That requires the courage to speak the truth and to withstand the slings and arrows directed at you by elitist mobs. But courage begets courage and a majority is one person with courage.

Next on July 25th – The school choice movement in America.
More Liberty Less Government – mllg@cfl.rr.com – www.mllg.us

MLLG Book Review: Unsettled by Steven Koonin – The Science of Climate Change is Unsettled

George Noga

“Earth is warming and humans exert a warming influence; beyond that, nothing is settled.”

MLLG Book Review: Unsettled by Steven Koonin

The Science of Climate Change is Unsettled

By: George Noga – July 11, 2021

The May 2021 publication of Steven Koonin’s book “Unsettled” is the latest salvo from a distinguished mainstream scientist to debunk the so-called climate consensus and to expose the truth about manmade climate change. The climate alarmist dam cracked with Michael Shellenberger’s 2020 book “Apocalypse Never“, which was reviewed by MLLG on 8/16/20; read it on our website: www.mllg.us. If Shellenberger, a Time magazine “Hero of the Environment“, cracked the dam, Koonin blows it to bits.

Shellenberger refutes the fear mongering about climate change and the environment, concluding there is more reason for optimism than pessimism. He calls climate change the secular religion of rich educated elites, replacing God with nature. Apocalyptic environmentalism meets the same psychological and spiritual needs as religion and provides its acolytes a purpose and storyline that casts them as heroes, while retaining the illusion they are people of science and reason, not superstition and fantasy.

Unsettled: By Steven Koonin

Dr. Koonin, one of America’s most distinguished scientists, got his Ph.D. in theoretical physics from MIT and was a professor of theoretical physics at Caltech for 30 years including serving as VP and Provost. He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a governor of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. He published over 200 peer-reviewed papers. Recently, Koonin served as Undersecretary for Science at the Department of Energy in the Obama Administration where his portfolio included climate research. We could fill this entire post listing Dr. Koonin’s credentials.

Dr. Koonin goes directly for the jugular in the opening pages by proving:

  • Heat waves in the USA are no more common today than in 1900 and the warmest temperatures have not risen during the past 50 years.

  • Humans have no detectable impact on hurricanes in the past century.

  • Greenland’s ice sheet is not shrinking more rapidly than 80 years ago.

  • The net economic impact of humans on the climate is minimal.

The above is just to whet readers’ appetites. Koonin goes on to disprove most of the climate alarmist narrative including: (1) the climate is broken; (2) temperatures are rising; (3) sea level is surging; (4) ice is disappearing; (5) extreme weather is more frequent and more severe; (6) greenhouse gas emissions are causing all the preceding; (7) radical changes in human behavior are needed; (8) Earth is doomed; (9) global CO2 is at a high level; and the biggest whopper of all, (10) the science is settled.

In the few months since Unsettled was published, Dr. Koonin has been attacked by all the usual climate alarmist suspects – particularly those in the media. It is notable that not one critic has taken issue with any of the sources, data or logic used by Koonin.

If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. (Crichton)

Only when the miasma of anthropological climate change finally is in humanity’s rear view mirror, may we begin to understand how so many people were hoodwinked so completely and for so long. Eventually, we may even fathom why Time magazine named a know-nothing Swedish teenager its 2019 person of the year despite her pallid screeds directly contradicting Time magazine’s own hero of the environment.

Dr. Koonin’s book will hasten the end of the manmade climate change madness that has held our planet in its vise-like grip and terrorized our children for decades.

Next: We reveal an occult nexus among three of the biggest issues of our time.

Click here to join our mailing list

More Liberty Less Government – mllg@cfl.rr.com – www.mllg.us

Facebook ‌ Twitter ‌ LinkedIn

Independence Day 2021

George Noga

People render their home world uninhabitable and then move on to despoil other worlds.

Independence Day 2021

By: George Noga – July 4, 2021

MLLG’s annual Fourth of July posting, Independence Day, is both the most popular and most forwarded of all time. We have updated the story for 2021. For readers needing a refresher, the 1996 movie Independence Day featured extraterrestrials who made their home planet unfit for habitation, failed to learn from it and invaded Earth with the intent to ravage it before moving on to savage yet other pristine worlds.

For 60 years liberals have ravished and ransacked blue states via toxic governance. They have made them as uninhabitable as would marauding ETs. They despoiled blue states via crippling taxation, Kafkaesque regulation, sky-high living costs, mandatory unionization, and crumbling infrastructure. Their failed government schools are petri dishes for every dysfunction and social pathology. They indoctrinate students with fake history and instill values antithetical and hostile to those of their parents.

Progressives render blue states uninhabitable with rampant crime, gun control, massive debt, corruption, unfunded liabilities and tanking debt ratings. They tolerate public homelessness, drug use and human filth. They decriminalize arson, looting and theft while defunding police and elevating rioters above law-abiding citizens. They abolish bail, release dangerous criminals and create sanctuary cities and states; they pit Americans against one another based on race, income, gender and ethnicity.

Blue state horrors include stagnating economies that are hemorrhaging people, jobs, tax base and red ink with hopelessly underfunded public pensions. Quality of life, happiness, civility, culture and freedom suffer. Housing is scarce, dilapidated and costly due to rent control, hyper-regulation, eviction bans and environmentalism run amok. Climate change wackiness makes energy more costly. The pandemic response was bollixed due to an orgy of big brother over-regulation and obeisance to teachers union demands that disproportionately harmed the most vulnerable Americans.

The failure of blue state governance is so radioactive it reached critical mass, setting off a mass exodus. People are voting with their feet, fleeing these dystopian wastelands in droves – making beelines for red states. Each and every one of the blue state horrors listed supra is much less likely to exist in red state America, and if it does exist, it is much less extensive and virulent. Life in red state America is freer, more humanistic and, as measured by Gini coefficient, much happier. The hordes abandoning blue states love life in their new homes and none ever returns to blue state snake pits.

Inexplicably however, many (if not most) of these transplanted liberals fail to make the connection and continue to vote for the same pernicious, destructive policies that laid waste to their home states. They seem hellbent on transmogrifying red states into the veritable hell holes they desperately fled. They are no smarter or better then the aliens in the movie that go from one planet to another – destroying each one in turn.

I recall an old Florida cracker expression that if someone moved from Florida to Georgia, it would raise the IQ of both states. Something similar happens when progressives move from blue to red states – only they lower the IQ of both states.

There is one critical difference between the movie and the nascent progressive looting of red states. The aliens in the movie had the technology to move on to new worlds after sucking all the life out of their temporary homes. Where can we go once progressives finish their pillage and rape of what today is red state America?

Next on July 11th, the science behind manmade climate change is unsettled.

Click here to join our mailing list

More Liberty Less Government – mllg@cfl.rr.com – www.mllg.us

Wealth Inequality Benefits All Americans

George Noga

Every American is much better off with more – not less – wealth inequality.

Wealth Inequality Benefits All Americans

By: George Noga – June 27, 2021

Inequality of wealth, especially compared to the top 1%, is condemned by progressive class warriors. They are wrong. Most wealth inequality, including that of the top 1%, is beneficial, both economically and socially, to all Americans including those at the bottom of the economic pyramid. This post addresses wealth inequality; our post of May 9, 2021 addressed income inequality; read it on our website: www.mllg.us.

Although most forms of wealth inequality are a boon to society, some aren’t. The Latin American model where a few caudillos are immensely rich while most people live in poverty is condemnable. The Russian and third world model, where oligarchs get rich from abusing political power, also is evil. Some equality is harmful such as that in Haiti, Chad and Somalia; how much of that equality do you want? Then there is the matter of inherited wealth, which is addressed later in this post.

Why Wealth Inequality – Especially by the Top 1 % – Benefits Everyone

Even Soviet economists understood that newly minted wealth was the best indication of how well a society was innovating, becoming more efficient and serving the needs of all its people. In a free market capitalist economy such as the USA, wealth is created by providing products or services consumers voluntarily buy; it is always a win-win situation. Even the most powerful company cannot compel anyone to buy its products. The most potent force on earth is a consumer armed with a free choice.

Progressives like to consternate over the top 1% of wealth. AOC condemned “a system that allows billionaires to exist; every billionaire is a policy mistake”. Pocahontas called billionaires “freeloaders”. Bernie Sanders went bonkers saying, “The insatiable greed of billionaires is having an unbelievably negative impact on the fabric of our country.” So, is great wealth something to be condemned or lauded?

As noted supra, wealth is created by providing sovereign consumers with products they value. Great wealth is achieved by creating products desired by millions and even billions of consumers. The creation of great wealth is the same in principle as creation of small wealth; the only difference is the number of consumers being helped. Liberals believe it is okay to help a few people but it is evil to help a great many people.

Inequality between the top fraction of one percent and everyone else stems from the outsize success of entrepreneurs like Zuckerberg, Gates, Bezos, Jobs and Walton, who created millions of good jobs and enriched the lives of billions of people with innovative new products. Wal-Mart saves the average American family $100 per month via lower prices. The Waltons’ wealth pales compared to the benefits Wal-Mart provides ordinary Americans. We should celebrate such successes. Even though the great wealth that accrues to mega-entrepreneurs increases wealth inequality, Americans are much better off because of it. We need more of that kind of wealth inequality.

Inherited Wealth

Dynastic wealth is viewed differently; many who accept new wealth are less sanguine about wealth not earned. Arguably, a modest amount of dynastic wealth is a small price to pay for the societal benefits of the original wealth creation. While acknowledging inherited wealth is different, it is a tempest in a teapot for the following reasons.

  1. The motivation of the person creating the original wealth includes providing for his/her family and future generations – a universal human sentiment.
  2. The vast majority of billionaires did not inherit. Of the Forbes list of American billionaires and their family members, over 80% are self-made.
  3. Most goes to charity. Gates, Buffet and others are giving it all away.
  4. Estate taxes take a large bite out of dynastic wealth in each generation.
  5. Most wealth is dissipated within three generations due to an ever-expanding pool of future beneficiaries, prodigal behavior and poor investments.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Inequality of wealth in America is an unalloyed blessing; the more inequality we have, the better – especially if it results from the creation of incredible new products that make us more productive, enrich our lives every day and save us lots of money.

July 4th is MLLG’s inimitable post: Independence Day 2021.

Click here to join our mailing list

Ten Truths About Minimum Wage

George Noga

Minimum wage is the poster child for the law of unintended consequences.

Ten Truths About Minimum Wage

By: George Noga – June 20, 2021

We have written often about minimum wage, but this is our first post entirely on that topic; it contains much new material and updated statistics. Like most liberal bromides, the minimum wage harms the people it is intended to help. Here are ten truths about the minimum wage and the harm it causes the most vulnerable Americans.

1. The poor need jobs. Most people in poverty don’t work; raising the minimum wage makes it harder for them to find jobs. Those on welfare or unemployment don’t benefit.

2. Median household income $66,000. Those on minimum wage, like spouses and teens living at home, are part of solid middle class households; they are not poor.

3. Median age 24, 60% in school. A majority of minimum wage earners are young students; they are not full time workers trying to support a family.

4. 1% affected, 6 months or less. Nearly all (99%) workers earn above the minimum wage and virtually no heads of households or full time workers are affected. Those who do earn the minimum wage do so for an average of less than six months.

5. Increased cost of living. Child care workers earn $11/hour. A $15 wage would raise the monthly cost to families by $250 and would force many poor people to quit work to care for their children. Raising grocery workers to $15 would hike food costs.

6. The EITC is cut. Any benefit from a higher minimum wage would be substantially negated by a reduced earned income tax credit and is a disincentive to working.

7. Unemployment increased. Whenever the minimum rises, businesses automate and relocate. When the price of anything (labor) goes up, there is less of it.

8. Total wages decrease. Although hourly rates will rise to the new minimum, total earnings will go down due to fewer hours worked. When Seattle raised its minimum wage in 2016 to $13/hour, the earnings of low-wage workers actually declined.

9. Most vulnerable harmed. All the aforementioned problems with minimum wage disproportionately harm uneducated, poor, minority, low-skilled and young workers.

10. Differences between states. There are glaring differences in $15/hour between say Mississippi and New York. Mississippi would experience increased costs of over 40% in child care and other low-wage services; restaurants would all but cease to exist.

The ten truths and statistics listed supra are hard facts, not opinion. Economists of all political persuasions are near-unanimous in opposing raising the minimum wage. Why therefore is a $15 minimum wage an article of faith for progressives?

The answer is the same as for other progressive shibboleths: (1) it is about socialism, not economics; (2) they are virtue signaling; (3) it is all about intentions, not results; (4) it is a sop to labor unions by reducing competition for lower-paying jobs; (5) they know their media sycophants will shill for them; and (6) liberalism is a lie.

Markets determine wages, not governments. Regardless of the law, the real minimum wage always is zero, zilch, nada, niente, scratch, nix, zip, nothing – and that is the wage more and more workers will receive if the minimum is raised to $15 per hour.

Our next post is about inequality of wealth in America.

Click here to join our mailing list

More Liberty Less Government – mllg@cfl.rr.com – www.mllg.us

Will Liberals Please Just Leave Me Alone

George Noga

Mankind divides into two camps: those who seek control and those who want to be left alone.

Will Liberals Please Just Leave Me Alone

By: George Noga – June 13, 2021

Political labels abound. There are democrats, fascists, liberals, communists, centrists, conservatives, progressives, populists, republicans, socialists, libertarians, anarchists, democratic socialists and many others. Labels notwithstanding, all mankind is divided into two camps: those who want to control others and those who want to be left alone.

Robert Heinlein (Stranger in a Strange Land) wrote, “Humanity divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” Grover Norquist wrote that people divide politically between the “leave us alone” and the “takings” coalitions. Thomas Jefferson nailed it 260 years ago: “Men are divided into two parties. There are those who fear and distrust the people and wish to place all power into the higher classes. Then there are those who identify with the people and have confidence in them. In every country these two parties exist. Call them by whatever name you please, but they are the same parties and pursue the same object.”

Liberals want people to be controlled and they want to be the controllers because they know best what is good for all 330 million Americans. Liberals don’t want to leave people alone; they want to take from them. Liberals fear and distrust the people and the states and want to arrogate all power to themselves. They believe in the supremacy of the state and thereby reject the principles of America’s founding documents. They must control individuals to control society in order to bring about their vision of Utopia, inevitably resulting in hell on earth, as in all Utopias throughout history.

Why Liberals Hate Capitalism and Love Socialism

Liberals fear and loathe capitalism even though it has created enormous wealth for all Americans and indeed for the entire world. They reject it because they cannot control it. Following are the main reasons liberals hate capitalism and love socialism.

Capitalism happens organically: Adam Smith did not invent capitalism; he merely explained what happens naturally. No intellectual ever wrote a capitalist manifesto. No one is capable of controlling capitalism, whereas socialism requires controllers.

Capitalism is egalitarian: Anyone, including uneducated blokes, can make a fortune by providing a valuable product or service to consumers. In contrast, intellectuals are unrecognized and unrewarded; they are repulsed by successful capitalists.

Consumers are sovereign: The common man holds all the power; his decisions to buy (or not to buy) make suppliers rich (or poor). Wealth is achieved only by serving consumers; socialists and intellectuals have no special status or benefits.

Capitalism brooks no excuses: Success is based only on the ability to provide value to others. Capitalism is to each according to his accomplishments, not to his intentions.

Socialists are not rewarded by markets: Socialists succeed only by pleasing their government masters, not by providing value to others. Socialists prefer regulation to the chaos of markets and believe their pet theories should override the free decisions of individuals, if necessary by invoking the full police power of the state.

********************************************

Liberals covet control over others; they don’t understand why the poor ignorant rubes in flyover land believe they know what is best for themselves and for their families. Socialists, often highly educated intellectuals with pristine intentions, envision themselves as heroic emancipators, crushing greedy capitalists, saving helpless victims, creating a socialist Utopia and then reaping the approbation of all mankind.

Recorded history began 5,000 years ago with Sumerian cuneiform script. During the entire span of 5 millennia there is not one record of a successful socialist or Utopian state. But modern day liberals believe they will get it right next time if we give them just one more chance. My message to them is simple: Please, just leave me alone.

Next: For the first time, we devote an entire post to the minimum wage.
More Liberty Less Government – mllg@cfl.rr.com – www.mllg.us

Asian-Americans: Victims or Oppressors?

George Noga

The stunning achievements of Asian-Americans destroy the liberal meme of victimhood.

Asian-Americans: Victims or Oppressors?
By: George Noga – June 6, 2021

Progressives believe in many obvious contradictions; in fact, most of what they believe is contradictory. As but one glaring example, they support gender-selective abortion, i.e. the systematic abortion of female fetuses. They believe it is imperative to abort females in the womb in order to protect their rights when they are women, i.e. “We had to destroy the village in order to save it”. I could fill this post with more examples.

It therefore should come as no surprise that progressive dogma about Asian-Americans is hopelessly contradictory. On the one hand, they argue Asians, as people of color, constitute a victim group. On the other hand, they assert the success of Asians makes them white-adjacent and hence part of the oppressor class. Progressives have no shame in arguing both ways – depending on what suits their purpose at the moment.

Asian-Americans as Victims of White Supremacy

There have been high-profile attacks against Asian-Americans. The dominant media meme blames these on white supremacy, i.e. as attacks by whites on people of color. In the woke progressive narrative, it’s all Trump’s fault. Biden blamed the attacks on Trump’s naming Covid the Wuhan Virus and alleged it stoked bullying, harassment and hate crimes against Asian-Americans. Let’s look at the facts about these claims.

In the Atlanta massage parlor attacks, the attacker denies targeting Asians. In the Manhattan attack, the perpetrator was African-American. The Justice Department’s most recent Criminal Victimization report categorizes attacks on Asians by the race of the attacker. The report shows African-Americans responsible for 28%, other Asians 24%, whites 24% and Hispanics 7%; data are unavailable for the remaining 17%. In New York City, of those arrested for hate crimes against Asians, 10% were white while 60% were African-American and 30% Hispanic. The data disprove the progressive fairy tale of white supremacist hate crimes against Asian-Americans.

Asian-Americans as White-Adjacent Oppressors

The woke storyline is that Asians are people of color. Progressive dogma divides all Americans into two cohorts: oppressors (defined as white) and victims (defined as everyone else). However, the stunning achievements of Asian-Americans destroy the progressive myth of victimhood and raise embarrassing and vexatious questions.

Asian-American successes are legion; throughout school they overachieve. Their SAT scores (especially math) blow by everyone else’s. Their children have a virtual lock on the national spelling bee. Their performance makes prestigious universities place quotas on their admission. Median household income for Asians is $98,000, eclipsing whites ($76,000) and blacks ($46,000). The poverty rate for Asians is similar to whites but one-third that of blacks and Hispanics. I could go on, but you get the picture.

This consternates progressives. When Asians are included in the non-white category, it raises nearly any metric being measured to near equality with whites. Liberals respond by reclassifying Asian-Americans as white-adjacent – and lumping them in the same group as whites – even if they hail from southern India. Thus, they have banished Asians from the victim group and moved them into the white-oppressor class.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Liberals contort themselves into pretzels trying to square Asian-American success with their race-baiting politics. Asians are not being attacked by whites and they certainly are not victims. To the embarrassment (if they are capable of embarrassment) of progressives, the astonishing achievements of Asian-Americans shred the progressive shibboleth of whites as oppressors and non-whites as victims. Perhaps worst of all, it conveys to children of color that accomplishment is white. Remember, Critical Race Theory teaches that meritocracy is a white concept used to oppress non-whites.

Next: Humanity is divided into two camps: controllers and leave us alone.

Click here to join our mailing list

More Liberty Less Government – mllg@cfl.rr.com – www.mllg.us

Critical Race Theory, White Fragility and Equity

George Noga

If you believe you are not a racist, that simply proves how racist you really are; you are
so racist you didn’t even know it. If that upsets you, it is proof of your white fragility.

Critical Race Theory, White Fragility and Equity

By: George Noga – May 9, 2021

The dictionary definition of racism is: discrimination or prejudice based on the belief a particular race is superior to another in character or ability. Not being a racist seems straightforward, i.e. treat everyone alike and practice the golden rule; right? Wrong!

Critical Race Theory (“CRT”) asserts there is no such thing as not being racist; you are either a racist or an anti-racist. And being anti-racist means adherence to an ideology that whites accept their behavior is racist and has been for 400 years. Failure to accept that is prima facie proof of racism; if that bothers you, it is due to your white fragility.

Per CRT, all that matters about you is your race; that, and that alone, defines who you are. Racism is present everywhere and always. All racial progress is a mirage. You are either a victim or an exploiter. Critical Race Theory has five fundamental tenets.

  1. Centrality and intersectionality: Racism permeates American life; it is embedded in our culture, institutions and way of life. Color blindness and meritocracy are used by whites to feel good about themselves while oppressing minorities.
  2. Interest convergence: Whites allow racial justice and progress only to the extent there is something in it for them, i.e. the interests of whites and blacks converge.
  3. Race is a social construct: From Dred Scott and Jim Crow to the present, race has been constructed socially to the detriment of people of color.
  4. Storytelling and counter-storytelling: The experiential knowledge of people of color is critical to understanding racism and oppression. Lived experience must be taken seriously and used to debunk white middle class myths and values.
  5. Civil rights laws and affirmative action benefits whites: Brown vs. Board of Education was a white victory. Martin Luther King was both wrong and naïve.

Your children are being taught CRT in schools throughout America. They are told to remedy racist discrimination, there must be anti-racist discrimination; to remedy past discrimination there must be present discrimination. If you treat people equally regardless of race, you are a racist. Silence favors the status quo, violently oppressing black and brown people. There must be no such thing as an apolitical classroom.

“America has made more moral progress during the past 60 years

regarding race relations than any civilization in history.” (Steele)

Pushing back against CRT, noted African-American author Shelby Steele asserts that “Blacks today are far more likely to receive racial preferences, be celebrated for their race and be promoted above their skill level than to be held back.” Can there be even one gifted black child in America who has not been identified and placed on a fast track for success? Steele again, “I don’t know anywhere blacks are held back. They’re not just pushed forward, but they’re dragged forward into American life.”

Equity Versus Equality

Blacks have made breathtaking progress in politics, media, sports, academia and business. Despite these genuine accomplishments, the lives of many blacks have not benefitted. They inhabit the same crime-infested dysfunctional neighborhoods even though they have been governed by black mayors and police chiefs for many decades. Black children still attend the same terribly broken government schools. Black Lives Matter squandered its success on ephemeral sloganeering and failed to accomplish anything that matters to black lives. See our 12/6/20 post about BLM at: www.mllg.us.

Equity is simply a more palatable name for socialism.

Because of the failure of progressive ideas and governance over the past 60 years to materially improve the lives of inner-city blacks, proponents of Critical Race Theory and their progressive fellow travelers no longer believe in equality as in equality of opportunity or equality under the law. Their ultimate goal now is equity, which is the new buzzword for equality of outcomes and a more euphonic name for socialism.

Critical Race Theory, white fragility and equity have insinuated themselves into most schools and institutions. Meanwhile, the futures of over ten million black and brown children are being snuffed out by the systemic racism of failed government schools due to progressives, teachers unions and the NAACP. (See our post of 10/4/20).

MLLG is taking a belated spring break for the next few weeks.

Click here to join our mailing list

More Liberty Less Government – mllg@cfl.rr.com – www.mllg.us

May Day 2021: Income Inequality in America

George Noga

Socialism works in two places: heaven where it isn’t needed and hell where it already exists.

May Day 2021: Income Inequality in America

By: George Noga – May 2, 2021

 

When queried about former socialist havens like the USSR, China and Cambodia, today’s socialists demur. When asked about modern socialist Xanadus like North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela, they say not that type of socialism. Yet, when each of these socialist utopias began, they were darlings of collectivists everywhere, at least until they began eating their pets. When pressed, socialists aver that their model is Scandinavia – which is 100% capitalist. See our post of 10/15/17 at: http://www.mllg.us.

Socialism never has achieved economic success; a person would have to be blind not to see the advantages of capitalism. Yet, liberals remain enamored with socialism, even knowing it is a failure, because they don’t care. They see socialism as a moral, not an economic, imperative and their goal is a socialist society, not economic prosperity.

 

Income Inequality in America

 

A progressive meme is inequality. But is inequality good or bad; is it increasing; how is it measured; how much is too much; and what policies create inequality?

 

There are numerous and mind-numbing statistics for inequality. The Census Bureau reports the Gini coefficient, Theil index and the MLD or mean logarithmic deviation. Some of these metrics show more inequality than in the past. However, deconstructing the numbers reveals they are fatally flawed for the reasons listed below, every one of which, if properly measured, would significantly reduce income inequality.

 

1. The source for all statistics is AGI from tax returns. But adjusted gross income excludes giant swaths of income such as IRA and 401(k) contributions, non-taxable portion of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, EITC, stimulus and SNAP.

 

2. Statistics don’t track the same people. Income cohorts change. New (mostly poor) people enter the back of the line, skewing data downward. If the same individuals (rather than groups) were tracked, the data would show decreasing inequality.

 

3. Use of household instead of individual income. This renders comparisons between time periods and income groups meaningless as the number of people per household changes over time. One-person households have significantly increased, resulting in more inequality per household although there is much less inequality per individual.

 

4. AGI fails to account for income taxes. The USA has one of the most progressive tax systems in the world and failure to include taxes skews the data in favor of inequality.

 

5. Income cohorts (quintiles) are inconsistent. The top income quintile has 3.2 people per household whereas the bottom quintile has 1.7 people per household; hence, the household income in the top quintile must be spread among twice as many people.

 

6. Spending per income quintile. The Census Bureau reports the lowest quintile spends $2 for every $1 of reported income. If inequality were measured based on spending rather than on AGI, there would be a humongous decrease in income inequality.

 

It is radiantly obvious the six flaws noted above render conclusions about income inequality meaningless. No one knows how much inequality there is and whether or not it is increasing. Income inequality per se tells us nothing of value; inequality could be rising while the lives of those in the lower cohorts are greatly improved.

 

Some inequality is beneficial. There is little inequality in Haiti; where everyone is poor, there is no inequality. Even increasing inequality is beneficial if it results from innovation by new ventures such as Wal-Mart, Amazon or Apple. The benefit (savings) to low-income families from Wal-Mart alone is $100 per month. The Waltons are in the top 1%, but their gain must be juxtaposed against the benefit to ordinary Americans.

 

By the flawed measures that do exist, income inequality decreases under conservative administrations and increases under progressive regimes. That is due to progressive tax and regulation policies which result in less freedom and slower economic growth. As Milton Friedman said, “The society that puts equality before freedom ends up with neither; the society that puts freedom before equality gets a great measure of both.”

 

Angst about alleged increasing income inequality is political class warfare intended to beguile Americans into supporting the progressive agenda. Moreover, it is progressive policies that are the root cause of much of the income inequality in America today.

Next on May 9th: An honest discussion about race in America.
More Liberty Less Government – mllg@cfl.rr.com – www.mllg.us

Breakfast – Biden Tax Hikes – Journalistic Ethics

George Noga

America’s founding fathers established the weakest federal government possible.

Breakfast – Biden Tax Hikes – Journalistic Ethics

By: George Noga – April 25, 2021

This posting addresses FDA nutrition guidelines, the Constitution, Biden’s tax hikes and my letter to the editor of our local paper about journalistic ethics (oxymoron).

Breakfast and the USDA: One morning while enjoying my breakfast of orange juice, bacon, egg, buttered toast and coffee with cream, I had a Eureka moment, i.e. my government was wrong about every one of the seven items I was having for breakfast. The USDA warned Americans against eggs, butter and cream (cholesterol), coffee (caffeine) and bacon (fat). They encouraged consuming orange juice (fruit) and toast (grain). Every item they advised against now is deemed healthy, while both items they deemed healthy are now considered unhealthy, i.e. toast (carbohydrates) and orange juice (concentrated carbohydrates). Why would anyone trust, or want more of, a government that was wrong seven out of seven times – and that’s just for breakfast?

Constitution: Our founders intentionally wrote the Constitution to establish the weakest possible form of federal government – capable of performing only its essential and enumerated functions. This was for three fundamental and intertwined reasons. First, they understood government is inherently dangerous and the less power it has the better. Second, the states are closer to the people and more sensitive to regional needs and differences. Third, the states existed prior to the federal government. It was the people, through their states, that created the federal government, not the reverse.

Biden tax hikes on the rich wind up devastating the middle class.

Biden Tax Hikes: Democrats don’t really want to tax the rich and couldn’t do it even if they tried because of Hauser’s Law. Their real aim is political misdirection, to appear to be taxing the rich in furtherance of their class warfare agenda. And so it is with Biden’s proposed tax hikes on corporations and individual capital gains and dividends. Everyone knows corporations are merely vehicles for collecting taxes, but they don’t actually pay them. The tax burden falls on their customers in the form of higher prices. When capital gains and dividend tax rates rise, tax collections decrease as taxpayers modify their behavior. Biden’s taxes on the rich will devastate the middle class.

Packing the Supreme Court: The Constitution created three co-equal branches of government and provided for a separation of powers between them. If the court can be reconstituted whenever the executive and legislative branches change hands, there is a prima facie case the court not only is not independent but that there is no separation. Therefore, the Supreme Court should rule that court packing is an unconstitutional violation of: (1) separation of powers; (2) independence; and (3) co-equality.

Media Ethics: Our local newspaper recently wrote a self laudatory (and self delusional) puff piece touting the strength of its ethics policy. I wrote the following in response.

“I’m sure you have been in many restaurant rest rooms festooned with signs in uber large fonts commanding ‘Employees are required to wash their hands before returning to work.’ Such conspicuously placed signs are posted not to remind employees to wash-up but to disingenuously assuage customers’ concerns about sanitation. Just like the signs in restrooms, written codes of ethics are mostly window dressing. They are nothing more than platitudes from cans unless they are deeply embedded in the culture of the organization, scrupulously honored and strictly enforced. Enron had a 64-page code of ethics distributed to all its employees; how did that work out?”

“Your newspaper’s ethics are eerily similar to Enron’s, i.e. they are observed in the breech. Your ethical stricture to ‘make news decisions without the influence of any political preference’ is laughable. Every edition of your paper contains numerous and flagrant violations of this ethic. Your reporters and editors violate this policy with scorn and impunity because they understand it is only window dressing. When, if ever, was anyone sanctioned for violating this policy? As with restaurants, your paper doesn’t really care about clean hands. Your code of ethics is not intended for employees; it is for virtue signaling and maskirovka to hoodwink your readers.”

Next on May 2nd, in observance of May Day, we blog about socialism.

Click here to join our mailing list

More Liberty Less Government – mllg@cfl.rr.com – www.mllg.us