'Silence; We’re Studying For Our Pregnancy Test'

Education, Family, Feminism, Gender, Pop-Culture, Psychology & Pop-Psychology

The following is an excerpt from “Silence; We’re Studying For Our Pregnancy Test,” my new WND column:

“Had an alien from Deep Space dropped in on Planet America during the pregnancy-pact apoplexy, he’d have concluded this and this alone: Kids having kids is not a bad thing. Kids conspiring to have kids: now that’s wicked. It doesn’t get much worse than a principal accusing kids of conspiring to have kids. …

So why would the Zeitgeist have its metaphoric pitchforks hoisted to skewer Principal Sullivan, but shower the girls with sympathy? Do the girls not attend a school where pregnancy tests have been incorporated into the curriculum? Is it unusual to see underage girls parading their bumps or pushing prams along the hallways of Gloucester High? Does the school not provide these valedictorians with an onsite daycare center? …

At the heart of this homage to the Girls Gone Bad is the confusion that comes with a dialogue devoid of values. For decades, America’s progressive schools have been conducting a sick experiment in parallel parenting. Hatchery High is the payback:

It’s Rosemary’s pedagogic Baby.” …

Comments are welcome.

‘Silence; We’re Studying For Our Pregnancy Test’

Education, Family, Feminism, Gender, Pop-Culture, Psychology & Pop-Psychology

The following is an excerpt from “Silence; We’re Studying For Our Pregnancy Test,” my new WND column:

“Had an alien from Deep Space dropped in on Planet America during the pregnancy-pact apoplexy, he’d have concluded this and this alone: Kids having kids is not a bad thing. Kids conspiring to have kids: now that’s wicked. It doesn’t get much worse than a principal accusing kids of conspiring to have kids. …

So why would the Zeitgeist have its metaphoric pitchforks hoisted to skewer Principal Sullivan, but shower the girls with sympathy? Do the girls not attend a school where pregnancy tests have been incorporated into the curriculum? Is it unusual to see underage girls parading their bumps or pushing prams along the hallways of Gloucester High? Does the school not provide these valedictorians with an onsite daycare center? …

At the heart of this homage to the Girls Gone Bad is the confusion that comes with a dialogue devoid of values. For decades, America’s progressive schools have been conducting a sick experiment in parallel parenting. Hatchery High is the payback:

It’s Rosemary’s pedagogic Baby.” …

Comments are welcome.

Updated: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism

BAB's A List, Capitalism, Energy

Economist Robert Murphy, Ph.D., a delightful capitalist PIG, has joined Barely A Blog’s A-List with this debut essay. He’s selling something, of course.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism
By Robert P. Murphy

When my book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism (Regnery, 2007), first came out last year, Ilana graciously invited me to plug it here on her blog. As is obvious, I rudely dragged my feet in getting this promotional article to her—but hey, at least the publisher sent her a free copy of the book. You, dear reader, will get no such treatment—unless you tell me you have a popular blog and might favorably review my book. (What do you expect from a capitalist pig?)

As its title suggests, the The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism tackles the popular myths of the alleged evils of an “unregulated” market economy. I show that on issues ranging from labor unions to anti-discrimination laws to financial speculators, the conventional wisdom about the supposed necessity of government oversight is exactly backwards. The market in theory should be able to handle all of these potential problems, and then I also show how in history the market really has performed up to snuff.

People have “learned” that white people on the whole benefited from the existence of slavery, that the free market caused the Great Depression, that the New Deal got us out of it, that the War on Poverty reduced poverty, and that Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts led to huge deficits. But as I show in my book, these historical “facts” are obviously wrong.

On some issues, I merely summarize defenses of the market economy that other popular economists (such as Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell) have given. On other issues, I offer the wisdom of the Austrian School of economics, providing insights from Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek.

And then on a third set of issues, I broke new ground, to the best of my knowledge. For example, in one chapter I explain the benefit of derivatives markets and financial speculation in a depth that I haven’t seen used elsewhere. The true fan of the free market will probably gain the most from reading these sections.

A basic understanding of derivatives markets, such as the market for oil futures, is crucial to guide citizens through the upcoming months. Right now politicians are promising to regulate or even ban institutional funds from investing in oil futures. To understand the ramifications of such meddling, you must first understand the role that futures contracts play in allowing producers and consumers to plan more confidently because they are inoculated against oil price movements. For example, a car manufacturer might produce more vehicles if it can hedge its exposure to gas prices through purchasing oil futures (which go up in value when oil prices rise).

What is particularly ironic about this case is that, if the punitive politicians get their way, then the average Joe has been deprived of one of his most basic defenses against skyrocketing gasoline prices. Yes, Joe Sixpack is getting killed at the pump, but at least his retirement has (say) a 2% allocation in a Commodity Index. If that type of position is soon rendered illegal, then Joe Sixpack will have to start trading in the oil futures markets himself if he wants to offset the harm of rising oil prices. Oh wait, I forgot—since he would want to do such trading electronically, he might have this option thwarted too once the regulators close the “Enron loophole.” Gee thanks, guys.

The problems don’t stop there. If large potential buyers are chased from the market, then it becomes less liquid. This is exactly what all the financial analysts have said regarding the credit crisis: nobody knew how to value a counterparty’s balance sheet because its mortgage-backed securities didn’t have any price. Because the market for such “toxic” derivatives had completely dried up, everyone was stuck with their contracts. They couldn’t alter their holdings at a convenient price. What had once been very liquid like an ounce of iron was suddenly illiquid, like an expensive piece of art.

Yet if everyone can see the downside of a shallow market in mortgage-backed securities, why in the world would we want to force such a fate on the oil futures market? If certain rich people think oil prices are going up, they will find somewhere in the world people who will field such wagers. The price of oil will still move in response to speculators. But the benefits of futures markets will be reduced, because the market will be shallow. Producers and consumers of oil would be much more willing to rely on oil futures contracts if they knew they could unload them on a dime without suffering a huge price cut. Without large institutional funds to “pick up the slack,” day-to-day fluctuations in the oil market will lead to wilder price swings.

The operation of futures markets is just one of the topics I cover in The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism. There are plenty more issues, including the space program and seatbelt regulations, where I restore the free market’s good name. Once you buy a copy for yourself, you will then arrange for copies to be mailed to your six closest friends who either love or despise the free market.

Robert P. Murphy has a Ph.D. in economics from New York University and is an economist with the Institute for Energy Research. IER has recently released a study exonerating speculators from the charge that they have caused massive hikes in oil prices.

Updated (June 27): We have been fortunate to have the Doctor on Call. Many thanks to Bob for taking the time to reply to readers. Now go do the right thing; buy Bob’s book.

Update II: How Shall I Praise Thee, Oh Bloody Congress?!

Bush, Ethics, Government, The State

COINAGE FOR CONGRESS. In the post titled “Energy Independence Isolationism”, reader Steve protests my uncharacteristic choice of language for Congress members.

I responded by asking him what else would he have me call them? I have run out of adjectival niceties. Maybe readers have some, but I’m all out.

I’ve been in the trenches for over a decade, and have been pretty polite throughout. (Okay, in “Bush’s 16 Words Miss the Big Picture,” I likened Bush’s “Bring ‘Em On” grin to “the grimace on the face of a demented patient with end-stage syphilis.”)

Have the Leaders returned the courtesy? Have they refrained, at the very least, from bloodletting and thieving and all other manner of immorality and dishonor? No.

To everything there is a season, it is written in Ecclesiastes. The time is ripe to call a F-ck Face a FF.

I’ll tell you what: I’ll change “Congressional Cockroaches” to “Congressional Creeps.” I was being grossly unfair to cockroaches.

Updated (June 24): Steve has forgiven me (although he posted his reply to the wrong post). He writes:

Ilana, touché. No need to pull punches. They are f-ck faces. Libertarian small-g goddess-hood intact. Now, I just have more than your intellect by which to be intimidated. My use of the f bomb tends to be more mundane and unimaginative, and almost universally traffic-related. Props!

Thanks for feeling my pain, Steve. I’m glad my fall from grace has been halted. As a first-time offender (scroll down), let me say in my defense that mitigating circumstances were–are–in abundance. Actually, believe it or not, christening Congress as I did was no “crime” of passion. I had thought of removing the risqué moniker, and then decided that the time was ripe to “Out [these] damned spots.”

Update II: Has anyone noticed that this is blog number 666? The Number of the Beast. Speaking of the Devil. (The Number of the Beast Iron-Maiden style is cool).

By the way, in case of a misunderstanding, the honorifics in this post apply, naturally, to members of both Houses (sans Ron Paul). A pox on both Houses.