Category Archives: Free Markets

Update VIII: Launching The Most Beautiful Site (& Blog) On the WWW

Aesthetics, Free Markets, Ilana Mercer, IlanaMercer.com, Technology

We have lift off!

At last we’ve launched the fabulous, new ILANAMERCER.COM.

The site is huge; the task Herculean. It’s easily the most beautiful site on the WWW.

As you spend time on the new ILANAMERCER.COM, you’ll get an opportunity to test the site’s database and advanced search, and enjoy its many features.

“Going live” is much like moving into a castle in cyberspace.

Developing some of the concepts was great fun. First to my favorite, the creature named “that funky snake”:

At the risk of being denounced, I did not want the Stars and Stripes on the site. The flag no longer stands for the classical liberal ideas and ideals of self-government and individual rights. I don’t think I’d get an argument from our regular readers.

Conversely, early American symbols do represent the values cherished and championed in my work. And in particular, the “Don’t Tread on Me” flag. Or the Gadsden flag.

Other candidates were the Liberty Bell and Liberty Tree. The massive trunk and gnarled bark of the oak (elm was also used) is depicted famously in a lithograph by E. C. Kellogg, the “Connecticut Charter Oak.” (It lives at the Connecticut Historical Society.)

The two symbols, however, turned out to be way too busy as website wallpaper. I just knew that, enlarged as background, the snake symbol would give the page the depth I wanted, bar the busyness. The snake just needed the right artistic touch. He got it.

Although fierce, the rattle snake is an honorable creature that never attacks without provocation and gives its enemies ample notice before attacking. Read about the Gadsden flag here.

The “Ilana Shrugged” concept was certainly unorthodox, down to the Atlas that matched the site’s theme colors.

A nice touch is the call-out side bars on the site’s core pages, showcasing Mercer quotes. The quotes rotate and change each time the page is refreshed. Other favorite and fun elements: the Gallery design, and the mouse-over effect on the upper navigation bar. Naturally, I just had to bring Leonidas into our world. Big and bold. (Read “300.”)

But mostly, the contents. At last, all my work is under one roof, and what a smashing roof it is.

And a huge shout-out to a true maverick: our benefactor, David Szasz. David donated most of the funds for this project.

A big “thank you,” too, to each and every reader who has contributed materially or intellectually.

Enjoy.

Update I: Another handy feature: If you wish to receive the weekly newsletter, click “Mailing List” on the navigation bar, and sign up here. Want to “Unsubscribe”? That too is possible, although never recommended.

Update II: Thanks to Sam Karnick of The American Culture for his kind wishes on our launch, as well as to the Canadian economist, champion of liberty, Pierre Lemieux. He quipped that ours was a “nice site/sight.”

Professor Haym Benaroya is most gracious:

Ilana, your new web site is representative of its owner: unique, and attractive to the mind and the eye. You truly are a master of language. I also appreciated the Atlas-like pose, as would have, I am sure, Ayn Rand. I will spend some more serious time looking it over. (I am wondering why, given Sean Hannity’s endorsement, he does not invite you to his show?) Best of luck! I do what I can to publicize your columns.

Update III: Barely a Blog is getting a makeover too. Fear not.

Update IV (October 29): Another favorite of mine is the “Click-to-expand-click-to-close” features on the Biographical and Quotables pages.

Update V (October 31): Although extremely user-friendly, some of you may find the Advanced Search a little intimidating. So, on the Articles Page, a smart, Search-by-Category button has been set up. Click on it! You’ll arrive at this lovely page, where you can flit between the many search categories with great ease. Let us know how that works for you.

Update VI (Nov. 6): I continue to receive web-approving letters. Thanks to Prof. Rob Sauer of the Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies for his kind words; to the intrepid Jim Ostrowski (he has launched a new site too; I wish him all the best. I was always very pleased to have been instrumental in pushing him to write Political Class Dismissed). And to my mother, of course, for her good wishes.

Update VII (Nov. 7): Working with programmers, you learn pretty fast that Microsoft WORD is regarded as a virus. Programmers say it is crappy code. (About programmers, the spouse, who’s an RF engineer, and a PhD., once made this succinct comment: “They–programmers–manipulate ones and zeros; we–engineers–manipulate the laws of nature.”) Fair enough. I won’t get into a turf war; after all, what do I know about code? I’m willing to agree that programmers are right and WORD is crappy from a technical point of view. It sure has gummed up the beautiful font and formatting on my site with HTML gunk. However, WORD is the most popular program in the WORLD.

It is what most of us PC plebs choose to use. The market has spoken. The market always chooses voluntarily what it prefers. Hundreds of million of users have voted. Few of us want to use those other rarified programs PC snobs are always exalting. And for a reason: WORD must have an advantage. (As opposed a government agency, a company grows by gaining market share; by getting people to cast a vote for the product. There is no such thing as monopoly where voluntary exchanges are concerned; only where government is concerned.)

The fact that (far fewer) programmers cannot adapt their code to the most used program chosen by the market is a fault of the programmers, not the market. The market is always right. Call it the aggregate customer. Programmers have simply failed to come up with solution to the problems presented by WORD.

Again, theoretically, programmers who complain about WORD are probably 100% correct, but pragmatically, they’ve not solved the market’s problem. So they’re at fault.

Update VIII (Nov. 21, 2008): I have now launched the most beautiful blog on the WWW, after I had found the perfect blog spot on which to unfurl my signature, Gadsden, “Funky-Snake” flag.

Enjoy!

Update VIII: Launching The Most Beautiful Site (& Blog) On the WWW

Aesthetics, Free Markets, Ilana Mercer, IlanaMercer.com, Technology

We have lift off!

At last we’ve launched the fabulous, new ILANAMERCER.COM.

The site is huge; the task Herculean. It’s easily the most beautiful site on the WWW.

As you spend time on the new ILANAMERCER.COM, you’ll get an opportunity to test the site’s database and advanced search, and enjoy its many features.

“Going live” is much like moving into a castle in cyberspace.

Developing some of the concepts was great fun. First to my favorite, the creature named “that funky snake”:

At the risk of being denounced, I did not want the Stars and Stripes on the site. The flag no longer stands for the classical liberal ideas and ideals of self-government and individual rights. I don’t think I’d get an argument from our regular readers.

Conversely, early American symbols do represent the values cherished and championed in my work. And in particular, the “Don’t Tread on Me” flag. Or the Gadsden flag.

Other candidates were the Liberty Bell and Liberty Tree. The massive trunk and gnarled bark of the oak (elm was also used) is depicted famously in a lithograph by E. C. Kellogg, the “Connecticut Charter Oak.” (It lives at the Connecticut Historical Society.)

The two symbols, however, turned out to be way too busy as website wallpaper. I just knew that, enlarged as background, the snake symbol would give the page the depth I wanted, bar the busyness. The snake just needed the right artistic touch. He got it.

Although fierce, the rattle snake is an honorable creature that never attacks without provocation and gives its enemies ample notice before attacking. Read about the Gadsden flag here.

The “Ilana Shrugged” concept was certainly unorthodox, down to the Atlas that matched the site’s theme colors.

A nice touch is the call-out side bars on the site’s core pages, showcasing Mercer quotes. The quotes rotate and change each time the page is refreshed. Other favorite and fun elements: the Gallery design, and the mouse-over effect on the upper navigation bar. Naturally, I just had to bring Leonidas into our world. Big and bold. (Read “300.”)

But mostly, the contents. At last, all my work is under one roof, and what a smashing roof it is.

And a huge shout-out to a true maverick: our benefactor, David Szasz. David donated most of the funds for this project.

A big “thank you,” too, to each and every reader who has contributed materially or intellectually.

Enjoy.

Update I: Another handy feature: If you wish to receive the weekly newsletter, click “Mailing List” on the navigation bar, and sign up here. Want to “Unsubscribe”? That too is possible, although never recommended.

Update II: Thanks to Sam Karnick of The American Culture for his kind wishes on our launch, as well as to the Canadian economist, champion of liberty, Pierre Lemieux. He quipped that ours was a “nice site/sight.”

Professor Haym Benaroya is most gracious:

Ilana, your new web site is representative of its owner: unique, and attractive to the mind and the eye. You truly are a master of language. I also appreciated the Atlas-like pose, as would have, I am sure, Ayn Rand. I will spend some more serious time looking it over. (I am wondering why, given Sean Hannity’s endorsement, he does not invite you to his show?) Best of luck! I do what I can to publicize your columns.

Update III: Barely a Blog is getting a makeover too. Fear not.

Update IV (October 29): Another favorite of mine is the “Click-to-expand-click-to-close” features on the Biographical and Quotables pages.

Update V (October 31): Although extremely user-friendly, some of you may find the Advanced Search a little intimidating. So, on the Articles Page, a smart, Search-by-Category button has been set up. Click on it! You’ll arrive at this lovely page, where you can flit between the many search categories with great ease. Let us know how that works for you.

Update VI (Nov. 6): I continue to receive web-approving letters. Thanks to Prof. Rob Sauer of the Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies for his kind words; to the intrepid Jim Ostrowski (he has launched a new site too; I wish him all the best. I was always very pleased to have been instrumental in pushing him to write Political Class Dismissed). And to my mother, of course, for her good wishes.

Update VII (Nov. 7): Working with programmers, you learn pretty fast that Microsoft WORD is regarded as a virus. Programmers say it is crappy code. (About programmers, the spouse, who’s an RF engineer, and a PhD., once made this succinct comment: “They–programmers–manipulate ones and zeros; we–engineers–manipulate the laws of nature.”) Fair enough. I won’t get into a turf war; after all, what do I know about code? I’m willing to agree that programmers are right and WORD is crappy from a technical point of view. It sure has gummed up the beautiful font and formatting on my site with HTML gunk. However, WORD is the most popular program in the WORLD.

It is what most of us PC plebs choose to use. The market has spoken. The market always chooses voluntarily what it prefers. Hundreds of million of users have voted. Few of us want to use those other rarified programs PC snobs are always exalting. And for a reason: WORD must have an advantage. (As opposed a government agency, a company grows by gaining market share; by getting people to cast a vote for the product. There is no such thing as monopoly where voluntary exchanges are concerned; only where government is concerned.)

The fact that (far fewer) programmers cannot adapt their code to the most used program chosen by the market is a fault of the programmers, not the market. The market is always right. Call it the aggregate customer. Programmers have simply failed to come up with solution to the problems presented by WORD.

Again, theoretically, programmers who complain about WORD are probably 100% correct, but pragmatically, they’ve not solved the market’s problem. So they’re at fault.

Update VIII (Nov. 21, 2008): I have now launched the most beautiful blog on the WWW, after I had found the perfect blog spot on which to unfurl my signature, Gadsden, “Funky-Snake” flag.

Enjoy!

Energy Independence Idiocy

Economy, Energy, Free Markets

I’ve spoken frequently on BAB about the folly of “Energy Independence Isolationism,” including about comparative advantage:

“The idea of trade is that everyone does what he is best and most efficient at, and exchanges the products of that labor for stuff others do better and cheaper. To aim for self-sufficiency is to aim for bankruptcy.”

John Stossel expounds on the concept in “The Idiocy of Energy Independence”:

“It’s amazing how ideas with no merit become popular merely because they sound good.
Most every politician and pundit says ‘energy independence’ is a great idea. Presidents have promised it for 35 years. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we were self-sufficient, protected from high prices, supply disruptions and political machinations?
The hitch is that even if the United States were energy independent, it would be protected from none of those things. To think otherwise is to misunderstand basic economics and the global marketplace.
To be for ‘energy independence’ is to be against trade. But trade makes us as safe. Crop destruction from this summer’s floods in the Midwest should remind us of the folly of depending only on ourselves. Achieving “energy independence” would expose us to unnecessary risks — such as storms that knock out oil refineries or droughts that create corn — and ethanol — shortages.
Trade also saves us money. ‘We import energy for a reason,’ says the Cato Institute’s energy expert, Jerry Taylor, ‘It’s cheaper than producing it here at home. A governmental war on energy imports will, by definition, raise energy prices‘. Anyway, a ‘domestic energy only’ policy (call it ‘Drain America First’?) is a fantasy.”

Read the rest here.

Updated: Energy Independence Isolationism

Economy, Energy, Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Free Markets

About “oil independence,” I wrote the following in September of last year:

“I can never understand the protectionist, bellyaching about oil independence. Has anyone heard of trade? Perhaps if we traded more with Iran, instead of boycotting its wares, Iranians would be less belligerent. Trade is the best antidote to war. Think clearly: Iran has to sell its oil. That’s its livelihood. We need to buy it. Voila! Trade! Oil independence is a foolish leftist notion. Do I grow carrots in my backyard so as to become less dependent on Costco? Why would I? Costco needs to sell its fabulous produce; I want to buy it. Case closed.”

About the fallacy and fundamental dishonesty of “energy independence,” Bill Anderson writes this:

“There is something reassuring about the concept of ‘energy independence,’ but the term is much more dishonest than one might think. First, and most important, the United States is part of a world economy, and it is not the case that because one product is produced within the borders of this country the United States is “independent” of what happens elsewhere in the world. Indeed, many people who call for “energy independence” have no problem in calling for U.S. troops to be sent around the world for military operations because they insist that global issues are our issues, too. (My comments are not an endorsement of such policies, but rather an attempt to point out that people who call for energy independence need to be consistent in their thinking.)

Second, one must remember that trade itself is by nature a peaceful activity, spurred on by mutual benefits to all parties involved. It is in Americans’ interest to trade with all nations, including those in the Middle East. Before the Gulf War of 1991, the United States was trading peacefully with Iraq and other nations of the region. The turmoil in Iraq-U.S. relations was more the result of U.S. policies than anything hatched by the late Saddam Hussein, as cruel and dictatorial a person as he was. Furthermore, even if this country could theoretically produce all necessary fuel domestically, the cost to taxpayers and consumers would be extremely high and would greatly lower Americans’ standard of living and increase the rate of poverty here.

Energy ‘independence’ is a foolish term that has no bearing in reality. Such a regime of “independence” would require government to expand its powers of taxation and regulation far beyond where those powers operate today, and Americans would be made substantially poorer for the effort.

There is another way. The United States could return to being a peaceful trading partner with countries of the world, no matter what the ideology of their governments. In the long run, there would be no call for ‘energy independence,’ because trade obviously would be the better and wiser route to take.”

If you haven’t yet, do read “The Goods On Gas.”

Update (June 22): COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE. When I see my frugal, time-deprived husband change the oil in his car, I begin talking about comparative advantage. Yes, in addition to the highly specialized work he does, the man is more than able to do most things around the house. However, how viable is that? The time he devotes to the oil change could have been better utilized to do more lucrative work. Or to play the guitar, also the second greatest love of his life. (We hope)

The idea of trade is that everyone does what he is best and most efficient at, and exchanges the products of that labor for stuff others do better and cheaper. To aim for self-sufficiency is to aim for bankruptcy. The Saudis are good at getting oil out of the ground. Their installations showcase magnificent high-tech equipment. Thanks to the environmental ideologues the US is run—and overrun—by, we’ve fallen by the way. So now we want to stop trading?

According to CNN:
“America now uses nearly 21 million barrels of oil a day, a quarter of total world consumption. It imports nearly 60 percent of it. Domestic production has been falling for 35 years.”

Importing what we need is good. But halting production for political reasons is not.

Speaking of the best of technology: Did anyone see the CNN and interviews with Anadarko Petroleum? If only the f-ck-faces in Congress left it up to companies like this and their teams of geologists and engineers, we’d have oodles of gas in no time.

On one of their many rigs drilling goes on thirty-three thousand feet–six miles down. On the day the CNN correspondent visited, they were “down 11,000 feet, two miles below the ship.” That’s astonishing.

Anadarko Petroleum has

“Remotely operated vehicles, or ROVs, [that] reveal what is happening on the sea floor. Global positioning systems and thrusters underneath the ship keep it in place over the wellhead. Computerized lifts pull pipe 270 feet at a time with nothing more than the flick of a wrist.”
“The ship and crew cost nearly $300,000 a day, each deep water site [is] a huge gamble, hundreds of millions for what could be a dry hole.”

These vilified companies are incredible. Read the transcripts here for more about the wherewithal of one of our oil companies. If only the putrid politicians and their gangrenous pals would let the likes of Anadarko Petroleum do what they do best. Take care of business.

On the other hand, if I were being called every other day to face the congressional cockroaches, so as to satisfy the pitchfork-wielding folks, I’d do an Atlas Shrugged. Liquidate, sell, get out of the business.