tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3749455939728788402024-03-18T22:12:51.179-04:00Libertarian JewThe political and religious musings of a Right-leaning, libertarian, formerly Orthodox Jew who emphasizes rationalism, pragmatism, common sense, and free, open-minded thought.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1255125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-12512295140422946282024-03-18T09:44:00.001-04:002024-03-18T09:44:45.142-04:00England Bans Puberty Blockers for Kids: Will the U.S. Political Left Ever Question Youth Gender-Affirming Care?<p>Gender-affirming care is deemed by proponents as a vital medical procedure for those seeking to deal with gender dysphoria, which is the mental distress of one's gender identity not matching with biological sex. Partaking in hormone replacement therapy, taking puberty blockers, or having gender-reassignment surgery to better align some of one's secondary sexual characteristics with their gender identity helps them deal with the anguish that comes with gender dysphoria. If you read from such sources as the <a href="https://www.hrc.org/resources/get-the-facts-on-gender-affirming-care">Human Rights Campaign</a>, <a href="https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/doctors-agree-gender-affirming-care-is-life-saving-care">ACLU</a>, or <a href="https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/population-care/understanding-short-term-impact-gender-affirming-care">American Medical Association</a>, not allowing for such treatment is literally a matter of life or death. </p><p>Contrast that with what happened on the other side of the Atlantic in the United Kingdom. Britain's National Health Service (NHS) <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/mar/12/children-to-stop-getting-puberty-blockers-at-gender-identity-clinics-says-nhs-england">banned the use</a> of puberty blockers to treat children dealing with gender dysphoria. This follows a <a href="https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Consultation-report-on-interim-service-specification-for-Specialist-Gender-Incongruence-Services-for-Children-.pdf">June 2023 NHS report</a> that stated "there is not enough evidence to support [puberty blockers'] safety or clinical effectiveness as a routinely available treatment." This lines up with what is currently <a href="https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/treatment/">on NHS' website</a> as of last week:</p><p style="text-align: center;"><i>Puberty blockers (gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues) are not available to children and young people for gender incongruence or gender dysphoria because there is not enough evidence of safety or clinical evidence...Long-term cross-sex hormone treatment may cause temporary or even permanent fertility. </i></p><p>This should not be surprising. These puberty blockers <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-truth-about-puberty-blockers-overdiagnosis-gender-dysphoria-children-933cd8fb">are the same drugs</a> used to castrate sex offenders, which has some nasty side effects, including <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9578106/">decreased bone density</a>, <a href="https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2023/08/08/2023.05.30.23290763.full.pdf">deteriorating mental health</a>, and <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00044/full">lowered IQ</a>. This all leads to <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/05/evidence-base-for-youth-gender.html">what I illustrated last year</a>: the evidence base is too weak to justify youth gender-affirming care. </p><p>There are European countries that have implemented these medical procedures before it became trendy in the United States, including England, Sweden, Finland, and France. They have conducted systematic reviews only to find the evidence for these practices is lacking. Rather than make it readily available like candy, the approach in these countries is to limit these procedures as a last resort and to do so in a clinical setting. These countries otherwise use psychotherapy to help children navigate gender dysphoria, which does not even consider that about four out of five adolescents who have gender dysphoria naturally overcome it by the time they are adults without these medical procedures. </p><p>Medical treatments are supposed to be backed by a growing body of well-researched evidence. Rigorous scientific consideration should be considered when discuss the physical and mental well-being of a child. The scientific process should not take a back seat simply because it does not line up with one's political beliefs or whims. I am glad to see NHS correctly acknowledge that the costs and uncertainties outweigh benefits and political wishes of those on the Far Left. </p><p>Yet in the United States, much of the political Left treats this practice <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/07/how-social-justice-movement-behaves.html">as sacrosanct</a>. As much as the Left likes accusing the Right of being anti-science, there are those on the Left have clung onto anti-science beliefs, whether it has been genetically modified foods are bad for your health, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/02/cdc-directors-february-2023-testimony.html">face masks</a> and <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/06/two-more-systematic-reviews-confirm.html">lockdowns</a> helped stop COVID, or <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/08/we-should-not-shame-obese-but-we-should.html">any body size is healthy</a>. It is a similar adherence to faith that you see when there is <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/09/why-we-should-be-skeptical-and-critical.html">climate change fear-mongering</a>: not an iota of healthy skepticism. For these individuals, they believe without question that they are helping children. There is the misconception that to be against gender-affirming care is to either be a bigot or want trans children dead without considering the possibility that these medical procedures, much like any other medical procedure, are not without any drawbacks or side effects. The naysayers are accused of starting a culture war, even though it is the proponents who fired the first shot. </p><p>Gender-affirming care is experimental because there are no long-term studies showing its efficacy. It is also irreversible in that such procedures as mastectomies and penectomies cannot be undone. On top of it all, we are already seeing side effects with puberty blockers. Given the nature of such medical procedures, the burden of proof is on proponents to show that the benefits exceed the costs, not on naysayers to show it does not. To reiterate, I am a proponent of the Swedish approach, which is limiting these procedures and doing so in a clinical setting to develop more evidence. Any clinician pushing an experimental procedure without having the evidence to back it up <a href="https://unherd.com/2024/02/why-did-three-journals-reject-my-puberty-blocker-study/">is downright irresponsible</a>. I hope that more people in the United States will start scrutinizing this medical procedure as we should scrutinize other things that could cause us considerable harm.</p><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-54887120628817850242024-03-14T07:58:00.002-04:002024-03-14T18:06:10.985-04:00New Swedish Study Is Yet Another Study Showing How Lockdowns Inflicted Collateral Damage<p><a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/03/study-suggests-that-covid-vaccine.html">I wrote on how</a> COVID vaccine mandates likely created greater vaccine hesitancy with other vaccines earlier this week, so I figured I would continued with the theme of the COVID pandemic for this week. Since the beginning of the pandemic, proponents of lockdowns (who I have dubbed Lockdown Lovers) <a href="https://fee.org/articles/laissez-faire-sweden-had-the-lowest-mortality-in-europe-from-2020-2022-new-analysis-shows/">maligned Sweden</a> for not imposing a lockdown. For the Lockdown Lovers, they thought Sweden was playing Russian Roulette with Swedish lives. Whether Sweden's approach was the correct one is a question I have asked <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/08/exploratory-analysis-on-swedens.html">since June 2020</a> and asked again in <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/08/the-swedish-covid-approach-case-study.html">August 2021</a>. In August 2022, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/05/lockdown-advocates-were-wrong-to-mock.html">I wrote that Sweden</a> fared quite well both from a public health and economic standpoint. A recent study from <i>Economic Affairs </i>shows more positive affirmation that the Lockdown Lovers were wrong (<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ecaf.12611">Andersson and Jonung, 2024</a>). Here are the key findings from this study:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>"Countries with more stringent lockdown measures did not experience a lower death rate, as might be expected <i>a priori.</i>" This was a similar outcome in the U.S. context, mainly that states that implemented greater lockdowns <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/11/paul-krugmans-misinformation-on-florida.html">did not see</a> improved health outcomes. Sweden <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/05/lockdown-advocates-were-wrong-to-mock.html">also fared relatively well</a> in terms of COVID death rate and excess mortality rate. </li><li>"Compared with an average annual pre-pandemic growth rate of 2.6 percent cent, the Swedish economy lost approximately one year of growth. Countries with a higher lockdown rate lost between one and three years of economic growth...It was nevertheless possible to maintain a positive growth rate by avoiding the more severe lockdown measures applied in other countries." </li><li>"The more restrictions, the deeper was the downturn in the economy, and consequently, the larger was the budget deficit." <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/06/two-more-systematic-reviews-confirm.html">The large price tag of lockdowns</a> should not surprise us. When you shut down large swathes of the economy, there is less economic output. </li><li>"The social costs are many, such as increased mental illness through isolation in homes; increased violence mainly directed against women and children; and postponed and cancelled surgeries." I expressed a number of these concerns about mental and physical health <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/05/why-we-need-to-start-lifting.html">in May 2020</a>, and sadly, they came to fruition. </li><li>"School closures and the transition to online teaching impaired pupils' learning and could result in poorer opportunities later in life." </li><li>"The political costs deserve a separate analysis. The restrictions seem to have inspired growing polarization, conspiracy thinking, and protests and demonstrations in many countries. The lockdowns may thus have undermined liberal democracy and economic freedom. Freedom of the press was curtailed...In authoritarian countries, restrictions were used as a pretext for increased repression." </li></ul><div>Because of a low lockdown rate and intensity along with fiscal moderation, Sweden fared well during the pandemic. As the researchers conclude, "the lockdowns "had negligible positive health effects despite the evidence available at the time pointing towards the limited benefits of such broad measures." And they are right. The lockdowns were implemented in spite of no evidence in support of them. </div><div><br /></div><div>The lockdowns ended up having negligible positive outcomes, especially when compared to the gargantuan costs. Not only did lockdowns fail in saving the number of lives the Lockdown Lovers were hoping for, but there were economic, social, and political costs that we are still reeling from to this day. As vindicating as "I told you so" feels, what I would much rather have is the politicians and decision-makers held accountable and <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/02/questions-us-government-should-answer.html">answer some important questions</a> about how we let such an anti-science policy come into existence so we do not have this hell on earth thrusted upon humanity the next time there is a pandemic. </div><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-25924546115273008362024-03-11T11:42:00.001-04:002024-03-13T08:00:51.468-04:00Study Suggests That COVID Vaccine Mandates Created Greater Skepticism About Non-COVID Vaccines<p>I remember back in the days of the pandemic when I was excited about there being COVID vaccines. It meant that we could, at least in theory, put the pandemic behind us and find at least a semblance of a pre-pandemic normal. Yes, I was hesitant about getting a COVID vaccine, but <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/04/are-covid-19-vaccines-safe-some.html">once sifting through the science and getting past the hesitancy</a>, I felt comfortable enough to get my vaccine. </p><p>Although I had been in favor of COVID vaccines, that did not mean I was in favor of vaccine mandates. That is part of being libertarian. Simply because I think something is good personally does not mean I think that the government should force it onto people. That had been my take on this issue: I was in favor of COVID vaccines, but I was also against vaccine mandates. As a study from BJM illustrates (see figure below), there were potential negative unintended consequences (<a href="https://gh.bmj.com/content/7/5/e008684">Bardosh et al., 2022</a>). </p><p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAAnNclnIriuC7tCyUCsHk7qobMS1ujjXE2RHLo052PNbTqIGoVTDoQOAo_MsUMEoiVTgHtaR9L6UE9wM_t58iKNYFZvSsLJyIwIjXc0i3aRENXfmentw6RIPHucEF7d0PE1SBOZJEMqm_UWmDDCpVX35Y331RBZnPtT1IbnXo5VAZHWEvzQxDhv8gSw/s1280/bmjgh-2022-May-7-5--F1.large.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="554" data-original-width="1280" height="278" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAAnNclnIriuC7tCyUCsHk7qobMS1ujjXE2RHLo052PNbTqIGoVTDoQOAo_MsUMEoiVTgHtaR9L6UE9wM_t58iKNYFZvSsLJyIwIjXc0i3aRENXfmentw6RIPHucEF7d0PE1SBOZJEMqm_UWmDDCpVX35Y331RBZnPtT1IbnXo5VAZHWEvzQxDhv8gSw/w640-h278/bmjgh-2022-May-7-5--F1.large.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p><br /></p><p>In September 2021, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/09/10-reasons-why-bidens-federal-vaccine.html">I created a list of ten reasons</a> as to why the government should not mandate COVID vaccines. One of those reasons was that it would erode trust in the government. The vaccine mandates ended up having a spillover effect of distrust. It is not only regulatory oversight that fewer people trust. This excerpt came from a recent study from the National Academies of Science (<a href="https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2313610121">Rains and Richards, 2024</a>) and gives yet another reason to be against vaccine mandates:</p><p style="text-align: center;"><i>We used state-level data from the CDC to test whether vaccine mandates predicted changes in COVID-19 vaccine uptake, as well as related voluntary behaviors involving COVID-19 boosters and seasonal influenza vaccines. Results showed that COVID-19 vaccine adoption did not significantly change in the weeks before and after states implemented vaccine mandates, suggesting that mandates did not directly impact COVID-19 vaccination. Compared to states that banned vaccine restrictions, however, states with mandates had lower levels of COVID-19 booster adoption as well as adult and child flu vaccination. </i></p><p>The first finding here is that vaccine mandates did not incentivize or accelerate vaccine intake. What is worse is the second finding: vaccine mandates are likely to have disincentivized people to take COVID-19 boosters and flu vaccinations. Why did people resist? To quote the authors, "the theory of psychological reactance serves as one longstanding explanation for why freedom restrictions int he form of governmental mandates cause people to reject the advocated behavior or otherwise have unintended consequences." </p><p>In other words, this visceral reaction to vaccine mandates was entirely predictable (also see <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9212823/"><i>Mtimkulu-Eyde et al., 2022</i></a>). If individuals <a href="https://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2024/02/24/how_covid-19_vaccine_mandates_may_have_backfired_1013479.html">feel that</a> their freedoms are unduly being infringed upon, the more likely they will retaliate. Vaccine mandates are part of a larger pattern of public health policy throughout the COVID pandemic. </p><p>We were told to lock down large swathes of the economy, even though <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/05/why-we-need-to-start-lifting.html">there was no evidence</a> that lockdowns work. On the contrary, prevailing pandemic guidance right before the pandemic <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/12/we-didnt-know-is-invalid-argument-for.html">told us</a> <i style="font-weight: bold;">not </i>to implement lockdowns. It turns out lockdowns <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/06/two-more-systematic-reviews-confirm.html">caused much more harm</a> than prevented it. There was more opposition to face masks as it became clearer that face masks <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/02/cdc-directors-february-2023-testimony.html">are not effective</a> in preventing COVID transmission. A similar phenomenon happened with <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/06/think-of-children-covid-edition.html">school closures</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/12/travel-bans-are-nothing-more-than.html">travel bans</a>, and figuring out <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/10/pfizer-director-on-covid-vaccines.html">whether COVID vaccines</a> would prevent COVID transmission. </p><p>What was becoming plain as day as the pandemic progressed was that the powers that be who were bludgeoning the people with "Follow the Science" <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/04/when-follow-science-during-pandemic.html">were in fact ignoring the science</a>. I would contend that by the time the vaccine mandates came around, people were fed up with pandemic restrictions that were not based in science. It is "too little, too late" that Dr. Anthony Fauci, who was initially a proponent of vaccine mandates, <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/release/wenstrup-releases-statement-following-dr-faucis-two-day-testimony/">admitted in</a> a congressional testimony this year that COVID vaccines are likely to have increased vaccine hesitancy for years to come. </p><p>This is what happens when you politicize a pandemic and, by extension, a vaccine. People are less likely to trust public health officials to give basic health guidance in the future. More to the point, people feel distrust about other vaccines that have nothing to do with COVID. Vaccine opt-outs were already increasing prior to the pandemic (<a href="https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/145/3/e20190783/36844/Adherence-to-Timely-Vaccinations-in-the-United">Hargreaves et al., 2020</a>), but COVID vaccine mandates made matters worse. If this trend indeed holds out in the medium-to-long-term, do not be surprised that we see outbreaks of diseases we thought were relics of the past, whether that is <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/an-alarming-rise-in-measles-cases-is-being-driven-by-low-vaccination-rates/">measles</a> or <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/21/covid-vaccines-science-2024-election-00116520">polio</a>. That is the power that Big Government has when playing fast and loose with emergency powers and thinking they know what is best for our health. </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-78875794687681597132024-03-07T12:33:00.001-05:002024-03-07T12:33:44.033-05:00New Jersey and California Show How Plastic Bag Bans Increase Carbon Footprint<p>Groceries have been on my mind a lot lately. <a href="http://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/02/how-much-of-mixed-bag-is-it-that-states.html">Last week,</a> I examined whether states should be exempting groceries from the sales tax. <a href="http://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/03/the-ftc-should-not-dispute-kroger.html">Earlier this week</a>, I discussed the pending merger between two grocery stores: Kroger and Albertsons. Now I am here to look at an environmentally-related topic of grocery store shopping: plastic bags. Environmentalists believe that plastic bags are bad for the environment because of their adverse impact. Aside from the energy and carbon footprint creating the bags, there is also the fact that they contaminate soil and water once they begin to decompose. </p><p>This leads many to believe that the logical conclusion to this problem is to ban plastic bags. In 2014, <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/newsletter/2024-02-13/plastic-bag-ban-loopholes-essential-california">California was the first state</a> to ban single-use plastic bags. Since then, ten states <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/environment-and-natural-resources/state-plastic-bag-legislation">have followed suit</a>, including the state of New Jersey in 2022. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2014/07/lets-trash-plastic-bag-bans-and-taxes.html">I wrote on plastic bag bans in 2014</a>, which was right around when California started its ban. I speculated about whether there would be unintended, adverse consequences as a result of the ban. It looks like I was correct to be concerned that the cure (i.e., the ban) would be worse than allowing for single-use plastic bag consumption.</p><p>International market research firm Freedonia Group released <a href="https://www.freedoniagroup.com/press-releases/freedonia-report-finds-new-jersey-single-use-bag-ban-boosts-alternative-bag-production,-increases-pl">a research paper</a> on New Jersey's plastic bag ban. This ban had mixed results. On the one hand, the number of plastic bags produced went down by 60 percent, to 894 million bags. On the other hand, the state's consumption of alternative bags increased plastic consumption for bags by nearly three-fold. Six times as much woven and non-woven plastic polypropylene was produced to make these alternatives. This increase in plastic polypropylene increased greenhouse gas emissions by 500 percent. </p><p>If that were not bad enough, market research firm Freedonia also <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-jersey-plastic-bag-ban-report-environment-freedonia-custom-research-18d555d4">showed that</a> 90 percent of the reusable bags in New Jersey had been tossed into landfills after two to three uses. As University of Michigan professor Sheli Miller <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/01/climate/paper-plastic-bag-ban-new-jersey.html">pointed out</a>, you need to use these thicker polypropylene bags at least 10 times to break even with the additional energy and material required. According to <a href="https://www2.mst.dk/udgiv/publications/2018/02/978-87-93614-73-4.pdf">a 2018 study</a> from the Danish government, the break-even point is higher with cotton bags: 52 times to offset the climate change impact and 1,700 times to offset all environmental impacts. </p><p>Then there is the state of California. <a href="https://publicinterestnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Plastic-Bag-Bans-Work-January-2024.pdf">A report from PIRG</a> earlier this year ironically called "Plastic Bag Bans Work" showed how the California case study did not work. Of course, the authors contend that a well-crafted ban works when they encourage reusable bags over single-use bags. The report shows that per capita disposal of plastic bags in California increased since the implementation of the ban. Why? Because the new "reusable" bags required four times the amount of plastic as the standard single-use plastic (p. 14). University of Sydney professor Rebecca Taylor <a href="https://www.chicagobooth.edu/review/why-banning-plastic-bags-doesnt-work-intended">found that</a> Californians were replacing the single-use bags with thicker trash bags (<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0095069618305291">Taylor, 2019</a>), thereby reducing the environmental effectiveness. This ban has a similar result to the United Kingdom's mandatory five-pence fee on all plastic bags, as <a href="https://eia-international.org/wp-content/uploads/Checking-Out-on-Plastics-2-report.pdf">this Greenpeace report</a> shows. Even the Left-leaning <a href="https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2023-08-24/whats-the-deal-with-single-use-plastic-bag-bans">Los Angeles Times calls</a> California's ban a failure.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDl9LYw6k2zJKje1cXl7QsuIrASr38U2gmHczbFGArCbJxpHgtDOIa0POv1Nw3kRjjqtYjDlJoagOBv83S4AT-kauTBSHuvocK6CRgm2dNczLik0u8ldhleIM0rABpYC0vNy8-XDrD6XaXnwy9D7fT3qc3W5Je1enFNpvpMH7QMwdysY52A6wsebiwoQ/s2200/Screenshot%202024-03-02%20at%2010.51.47%E2%80%AFPM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="520" data-original-width="2200" height="152" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDl9LYw6k2zJKje1cXl7QsuIrASr38U2gmHczbFGArCbJxpHgtDOIa0POv1Nw3kRjjqtYjDlJoagOBv83S4AT-kauTBSHuvocK6CRgm2dNczLik0u8ldhleIM0rABpYC0vNy8-XDrD6XaXnwy9D7fT3qc3W5Je1enFNpvpMH7QMwdysY52A6wsebiwoQ/w640-h152/Screenshot%202024-03-02%20at%2010.51.47%E2%80%AFPM.png" width="640" /></a></div><p>These case studies get at two important points with regards to public policy. The first is that policies <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2019/07/the-left-needs-more-than-good.html">should be judged on</a> their outcomes, not on their intentions. The second is that we should not base our assumptions of policy effectiveness on what people theoretically do. We should base it on how the policy plays out in practice. This was a <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/02/n95-masks-are-not-effective-at.html">mistake with the face masks</a> during the COVID pandemic. Those who clung to their face masks thought that because mechanistic studies in a laboratory could produce positive outcomes, those same outcomes could be replicated in the real world. Assuming that people would consistently wear face masks in ideal conditions ignored human nature. The same goes here assuming that most people will reuse the heavier bags enough times to create a net-positive effect on the environment. </p><p>Going back to Professor Miller, <a href="https://news.umich.edu/is-reusable-always-best-comparing-environmental-impacts-of-reusable-vs-single-use-kitchenware/">she illustrates how</a> reusable is not always best for the environment. Every item has their tradeoff. Take paper bags as an example. Per a <a href="https://www.ctc-n.org/resources/single-use-plastic-bags-and-their-alternatives-recommendations-life-cycle-assessments">United Nations report</a>, "Paper bags contribute less to the impacts of littering but in most cases have a larger impact on the climate, eutrophication, and acidification, compared to single use plastic bags." As already pointed out, reusable cloth bags need to be used considerable amount of times before creating a net-positive, an amount that many bags likely will not experience. There is also the <a href="https://news.arizona.edu/story/reusable-grocery-bags-contaminated-with-e-coli-other-bacteria">bacteria contamination issue</a> that comes with reusable cotton bags, especially since most rarely, if ever, clean their cotton bags. None of this gets into getting at such issues as <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2010/01/tu-bshevat-reflections-can-judaism-and.html">consumption patterns</a> or <a href="https://www.wri.org/insights/banning-straws-and-bags-wont-solve-our-plastic-problem">how we need to improve</a> recycling infrastructures and technology. </p><p>Without considering the environmental impact of substitutes, we end up with the ruinous results that we see in New Jersey and California. The plastic bag ban reveals itself as another example <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/04/why-federal-ban-of-tiktok-would-be.html">in a growing list of examples</a> of what happens when governments apply broad economic bans on products it deems bad. Rather than assume that a plastic bag ban is good for the environment, the burden is on proponents to show that the alternative products used under a plastic bag ban is preferable to single-use plastic bans. </p><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-56856227283635600192024-03-04T10:52:00.003-05:002024-03-05T22:36:23.468-05:00The FTC Should Not Dispute the Kroger-Albertsons Merger <p>I wrote <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/02/how-much-of-mixed-bag-is-it-that-states.html">about grocery taxes</a> last week. I only thought it fitting to write about another piece of news in the grocery industry this year. In late 2022, there were two major grocers <a href="https://www.albertsonscompanies.com/newsroom/press-releases/news-details/2022/Kroger-and-Albertsons-Companies-Announce-Definitive-Merger-Agreement/default.aspx">that announced a merger</a>: Kroger and Albertsons. If it goes through, this $24.6 billion acquisition will be the largest supermarket merger in U.S. history. </p><p>The merger was supposed to be completed this year. However, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has taken such issue with the merger that <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/02/ftc-challenges-krogers-acquisition-albertsons">the FTC filed</a> a lawsuit last week in federal court to block the merger. <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/d9428_2310004krogeralbertsonsp3complaintpublic.pdf">In its filing</a>, the FTC makes two main arguments. One is that the merger will make the grocery market less competitive, which will result in higher grocery prices and reduce grocery quality. The second argument is that it will harm union grocery labor because the merger <a href="https://fortune.com/2024/02/26/ftc-sues-kroger-albertsons-merger-supermarket-chains-grocery-prices-lower-wages/">would increase leverage</a> over the laborers. </p><p>The FTC became a major topic at my blog last year when the FTC decided to go after Amazon with a lawsuit alleging that Amazon is anti-competitive. I asked whether <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-ftc-has-no-business-trying-to-break.html">Amazon is a monopoly</a> (it is not!), <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-ftc-has-no-business-trying-to-break_9.html">whether Amazon harms third-party sellers</a> (it depends), and <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-ftc-has-no-business-trying-to-break_16.html">whether Amazon is beneficial to consumers</a> (it really is). After writing this three-parter, I found that the FTC has an ideological axe to grind when it comes to companies that benefit consumers and makes for a healthier retail market. I have to wonder if the FTC is similarly grinding that axe with the Kroger-Albertsons merger. </p><p>Let us start with whether this merger would turn Kroger into a monopoly. I ask this question because when the FTC went after Amazon last year, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-ftc-has-no-business-trying-to-break.html">the FTC omitted</a> various retail competitors from their market sizing to make Amazon's market share look larger than it actually is. It looks like the FTC made the same mistake because <a href="https://laweconcenter.org/resources/five-problems-with-a-potential-ftc-challenge-to-the-kroger-albertsons-merger/">the market has expanded</a> beyond traditional supermarkets. The FTC's market sizing with Kroger-Albertsons <a href="https://www.americanactionforum.org/daily-dish/thinking-clearly-about-supermarket-mergers/">excludes</a> club stores (e.g., Costco), limited assortment stores (e.g., Aldi), dollar stores, or such e-commerce stores as Amazon. Determining proper market sizing helps us accurately answer whether or not this merger would create a monopoly. </p><p>Since data for 2023 have not been fully released, I am going to use 2022 market size data. Kroger had <a href="https://ir.kroger.com/news/news-details/2023/Kroger-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-2022-Results-Announces-Growth-Expectations-for-2023/default.aspx">$148.3 billion</a> in sales and Albertsons had <a href="https://www.statista.com/topics/6931/albertsons-companies/">$77 billion</a> in 2022. Given that Kroger had <a href="https://www.axios.com/2023/04/20/most-popular-grocery-stores">5.6 percent market</a> share that year, that would give Albertsons and Kroger a collective 8.5 percent market size. Even market research firm Numerator <a href="https://www.numerator.com/resources/blog/kroger-albertsons-merger-implications-consumers-and-future-retail/">estimates that</a> it would be 10.8 percent of the grocery market size. A market size of 8.5 percent or 10.8 percent seems large for a market as fragmented as the grocery market. Conversely, it hardly constitutes as a monopoly. Even if combined, Kroger's market share would trail behind Wal-Mart's market size of <a href="https://www.axios.com/2023/04/20/most-popular-grocery-stores">25.2 percent</a>. </p><p>As the Wall Street Journal brings up <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-trade-commission-challenges-kroger-albertsons-merger-lina-khan-supermarkets-walmart-amazon-1752aa47?mod=opinion_lead_pos3">in its editorial</a>, the grocery store industry is by its nature a competitive market:</p><p style="text-align: center;"><i>It's hard to think of a more competitive business than groceries. Traditional supermarkets have been squeezed from all directions. Most Americans shop and buy food and household products from a variety of sources, including dollar stores, farmers markets, big-box retailers, and online delivery services. </i></p><p style="text-align: center;"><i>Competition has driven hundreds of supermarket stores to close in recent years. The Kroger-Albertsons merger is intended to make the two more competitive by increasing their leverage with suppliers and making their supply chains more efficient. </i></p><p>If you want to read more on the effects on union labor power, you can <a href="https://laweconcenter.org/resources/five-problems-with-a-potential-ftc-challenge-to-the-kroger-albertsons-merger/">read this piece</a> from the International Center for Law and Economics. Since antitrust lower <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-ftc-has-no-business-trying-to-break_16.html">has historically been based on</a> the consumer welfare standard, I am going to conclude with whether this merger would harm or benefit consumers. </p><p>As previously mentioned, there are new types of stores that have expanded the market, thereby making the market more competitive. As economics professor and Chair of Georgetown University's business school John Mayo pointed out, the merger <a href="https://www.georgetown.edu/news/could-the-kroger-albertsons-merger-gouge-grocery-prices-an-economics-professor-answers/">provides real opportunity</a> to lower its distribution costs and the prices it pays to wholesalers. </p><p>Rather than diminish competitiveness, this merger was created in response to compete in an ever-evolving market. <a href="https://foodindustryexecutive.com/2023/01/why-the-kroger-albertsons-merger-could-be-a-win-win-for-the-industry-and-customers/">As this article</a> from Food Industry Executive illustrates, Kroger will need to strengthen initiatives across its value chain to compete with others, whether that it is its rewards program, converting existing storefronts into micro-fulfillment centers, or adapting to evolving buying journeys. To compete with other grocery stores, <a href="https://www.aier.org/article/what-reich-gets-wrong-about-the-kroger-albertson-merger-and-what-he-misses-completely/">Kroger will have to</a> ramp up the quality of its product line rather than diminish it.</p><p>If the FTC is successful, all they will have succeeded in is strengthening the market share of the likes of Wal-Mart, Amazon, and Costco. Rather than operate under the facile assumption of "big is bad" and trying to pick which companies should win or lose, maybe the FTC should be more concerned about whether the merger will help with consumer welfare.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-6132659247978416242024-02-29T06:59:00.001-05:002024-02-29T06:59:53.302-05:00How Much of a Mixed Bag Is It That States Are Eliminating Their Grocery Taxes?<p>Governments have a knack for taxing everything, from <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/coloradans-should-vote-no-on.html">property</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2017/12/congress-lowering-alcohol-taxes-should.html">alcohol</a>, and <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/11/massachusetts-millionaire-tax-will-cost.html">millionaires</a> to <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/05/it-looks-like-carbon-taxes-do-not.html">carbon</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2019/11/a-soft-drink-tax-is-hardly-sweet-policy.html">soft drinks</a>, and <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/07/maines-new-recycling-tax-and-asking.html">recycling</a>. Yet there is an exception I recently came across: the grocery tax. Fewer and fewer states are enacting a consumption tax on their groceries. Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt <a href="https://oklahoma.gov/governor/newsroom/newsroom/2024/february2024/governor-stitt-celebrates-end-of-state-grocery-tax.html">signed off on</a> abolishing Oklahoma's 4.5 percent grocery tax. Earlier this month, Illinois Governor J.J. Pritzker <a href="https://www.chicagotribune.com/2024/02/21/gov-j-b-pritzkers-budget-proposal-includes-800-million-in-tax-increases-largely-for-corporations-sportsbooks">announced</a> eliminating Illinois' 1 percent grocery tax in his budget. If Pritzker is successful, <a href="https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/state/sales-tax-grocery-tax-exemptions/">that would mean that</a> there would be 11 states that have a state grocery tax. It makes me wonder why a majority of states no longer have grocery taxes and what the costs of grocery taxes are.</p><p>One aspect is related to the impact of taxes generally. Taxes on the whole have two main outcomes: to collect revenue for the government and to discourage the consumption or production of what is being taxed. Since groceries are an essential for people to survive, it could discourage eating. A study from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) found that a one percentage increase leads to 0.7 percent decrease of food-at-home spending for SNAP-eligible non-participants (<a href="https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2021/december/food-taxes-linked-with-spending-habits-of-lower-income-households/">Stewart and Dong, 2021</a>). SNAP benefits were not found to be affected, although that might not say much considering SNAP participants have worse health outcomes than low-income non-participants. </p><p>That segues us into the second issue of grocery taxes: it discourages healthy eating. One study from <i>Health Economics Review </i>(<a href="https://healtheconomicsreview.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13561-021-00306-2">Wang and Zheng, 2021</a>) showed that "a one percentage point increase in grocery taxes increases obesity and diabetes rates by 0.588 and 0.215 percentage points, respectively." </p><p><a href="https://www.cbpp.org/blog/states-can-thoughtfully-implement-grocery-tax-reforms-to-help-families-and-improve-equity">To quote</a> the Left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), "Reducing or eliminating grocery taxes offers states a way to help families put more food on the table and afford basic needs." In 2020, <a href="https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/which-states-tax-the-sale-of-food-for-home-consumption-in-2017">CBPP illustrated</a> how households in the lowest quintile spend up to eight times their income on sales tax than the top one percent. The disparate impact makes sense given that lower-income households spend more of their income on food than high-income households (ibid.), which causes greater food insecurity (<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306919221000774">Zheng et al., 2021</a>).</p><p>At first glance, you would think I would be thrilled to see a tax cut. A tax cut seems like a win-win because it means less tax revenue, which in theory should mean less government (although it could also mean more spending with a smaller tax base). This also would help households when inflation has caused such harm, especially to low-income households. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2017/06/what-can-kansas-tax-cut-experiment.html">As I brought up with a Kansas tax cut in 2017</a>, tax policy is more than "tax cuts = good." </p><p>The problem is assuming that exempting groceries from the sales tax helps low-income households. It actually does the opposite. According to the Tax Foundation and its <a href="https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/state/sales-tax-grocery-tax-exemptions/">research on the grocery tax</a>, "the poorest decile of households experience 9 percent more sales tax liability with a grocery tax exemption than they would if groceries were taxed and the general rate were reduced commensurately." In part, this happens as a combination of the substitution effects of unprepared foods for prepared foods and the already-existing exemptions for SNAP and WIC beneficiaries. It also happens because to compensate for the exemption, the overall sales tax has to be increased elsewhere. </p><p>Exempting groceries from the sales tax also makes tax revenue more volatile. Another appealing aspect of the grocery tax is that it provides a constant source of revenue. Why? Everyone has to eat. Relying on other forms of consumption, especially during an economic downturn, increases revenue volatility. Plus, it erodes the tax base <a href="https://www.greenebarrett.com/post/cutting-grocery-taxes-good-politics-bad-tax-policy">because having a broad sales tax base</a> minimizes economic distortions and administrative and compliance burdens. The burden on low-income households is less, given that groceries make up a smaller portion of overall revenue. They have decreased from <a href="https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2020/november/average-share-of-income-spent-on-food-in-the-united-states-remained-relatively-steady-from-2000-to-2019/">14 percent of disposable income in 1960</a> from approximately <a href="https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/food-prices-and-spending/">5 percent in 2022</a> (U.S. Department of Agriculture), thereby diminishing an argument of burden on low-income households. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiyT_VAurC5K2OQs6knD_fya9Kc3l4bs-WYadlAWnNblaHtimohHbln9MWeGuvVhB0XdDOHRRJE4I4SZYTPdu6p25dwpCsyPcrPJoydaza2_T7IBm2g-xqgtgJk-Y52oB5YxReuToUnGZunBgTE80Z4OXQZ7lU8V-K1tWoSIzchGVv-Iy9Bv-ZjX5ORA/s450/food-prices_fig09_450px.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="383" data-original-width="450" height="544" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiyT_VAurC5K2OQs6knD_fya9Kc3l4bs-WYadlAWnNblaHtimohHbln9MWeGuvVhB0XdDOHRRJE4I4SZYTPdu6p25dwpCsyPcrPJoydaza2_T7IBm2g-xqgtgJk-Y52oB5YxReuToUnGZunBgTE80Z4OXQZ7lU8V-K1tWoSIzchGVv-Iy9Bv-ZjX5ORA/w640-h544/food-prices_fig09_450px.png" width="640" /></a></div><div><br /></div><p>The reality is that we are not going to live in a world without government. Yes, I would like for government to be significantly smaller than it is, but a government in either case needs a revenue base. I have asked these questions about which sorts of taxes are preferable, not whether taxes should exist. I have <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2019/01/eight-reasons-why-elizabeth-warrens.html">no love for</a> the wealth tax. I find the corporate tax problematic enough that I would <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2016/02/is-marco-rubios-idea-of-repealing.html">prefer a capital gains tax</a> over a corporate tax. </p><p>As for the consumption tax, I worry about how states could respond if they exempt groceries. In addition to raising the sales tax, I also have concerns that they could raise income taxes instead. The problem is that consumption taxes are more efficient than income taxes. To quote <a href="https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/us-consumption-tax-vs-income-tax/">the Tax Foundation</a>:</p><p style="text-align: center;"><i>"Income taxes impose steeper economic costs, and often steeper administrative and compliance costs, than consumption taxes. They place a higher tax burden on saving and investment. They also impose significant administrative and compliance costs that undermine the large anti-poverty programs for families and children administered through the tax code."</i></p><p>I am not looking at this as a matter of a utopia with zero government or zero taxes. I am looking at whether having a grocery tax beats the alternative. Based on the data we have, the answer is "no." It is better to have a grocery tax with a lower overall sales tax rate than it is having a grocery tax exemption. It is not only preferable for tax revenue purposes, but also for the purpose of helping out lower-income households. As counterintuitive as it seems for a libertarian, I am against a grocery sales tax exemption.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-52734665462945384492024-02-26T10:14:00.000-05:002024-02-26T10:14:08.195-05:00Argentina's First Budget Surplus in Over a Decade Showing Merits of Economic Austerity<p>For me, austerity is a term I remember coming across frequently during the Great Recession and subsequent years. It is reminiscent of the economic malaise from last decade. Whether it was <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2013/12/so-how-are-netherlands-in-austerity-trap.html">the Netherlands</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2012/05/would-return-to-drachma-be-real-greek.html">Greece</a>, or <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2013/01/austerity-britain-doesnt-even-know.html">Great Britain</a>, the neo-Keynsians were disparaging of any attempt of cutting government spending by labeling it as "austerity." Austerity refers to strict economic policy to rein in growing public debt, typically in the form of lower taxes, lower government spending, or a combination. Regardless of how the tax rates or government spending rates pan out, the idea is to implement these measures to improve economic health. </p><p>Fast-forward to December 2023 when Javier Gerardo Milei became president of Argentina. While Trump and Milei both have exuberant and flamboyant delivery styles, that is where their similarities end. Unlike Trump and his <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/02/trumps-proposed-60-percent-china-tariff.html">tariff-loving</a> populism, Milei is a right-wing libertarian and a component of free markets. Milei <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-argentinian-president-javier-milei-promises-to-take-a-chainsaw-to-countrys-crippled-economy-218155">promised to</a> take a chainsaw to the country's crippled economy with a laissez-faire approach. Milei <a href="https://elcomercio.pe/mundo/latinoamerica/javier-milei-firma-decreto-para-reducir-de-18-a-9-los-ministerios-en-argentina-que-carteras-elimino-noticia/">consolidated</a> eighteen governmental ministries into nine ministries. This also included eliminating the National Institute Against Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Racism (INADI), about which Milei <a href="https://www.elmundo.es/internacional/2024/02/22/65d769ce21efa0285f8b458a.html">said</a> "[INADI] no sirve para nada," or loosely translated, "it does not do squat." He let go of <a href="https://www.latercera.com/mundo/noticia/gobierno-de-milei-achica-estado-y-despide-a-7000-empleados-publicos/BHRYSRAB25HPFC3DUJXBC2HS4Q/#">7,000 government employees</a>, as well <a href="https://apnews.com/article/argentina-inflation-milei-currency-cuts-peso-devaluation-beddb4f7fd0021463653af37908bcb78">as devalue</a> the Argentinean peso by about half so that Argentinean goods can be more competitive in the global markets. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/01/deregulation-hasnt-really-been-road.html">As I brought up last month</a>, Milei also brought up a series of ways to deregulate the government. </p><p>The reason why Milei is taking this approach is because the Argentinean economy is in trouble. When I asked in December 2023 whether Argentina should dollarize, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/12/why-argentina-needs-to-ditch-its-peso.html">I pointed out that</a> Argentina's economy is plagued with unemployment, devaluation, inflation, and poverty. The reason why Argentina elected a libertarian to the office of President was in part because decades of government largesse and irresponsible monetary policy was not serving the Argentinean people. These austere measures are needed because Argentina is economically in hot water. </p><p>Although Milei has only been in power for a couple of months, we are already seeing positive results. For <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psDqn6KCrJ4&t=34s">the first time</a> in twelve years, Argentina's government has produced a budgetary surplus (see government data <a href="https://www.economia.gob.ar/onp/documentos/resultado/caja/c2024/enero24.pdf">here</a>). The importance and gravitas cannot be stated enough. Milei took <a href="https://twitter.com/Economia_Ar/status/1734728382301049230">what was projected to be</a> a budget deficit of 5.2 percent of GDP and turned it into a surplus of $580 million USD in less than three months. To translate that into the U.S. federal budget, <a href="https://mises.org/wire/javier-milei-ended-dc-sized-deficit-innine-weeks">that would be like</a> taking Congress' $1.2 billion deficit and turning that into a $400 million surplus. That is more impressive considering the United States has not had a budgetary surplus <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSD">in over two decades</a>. Even U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/blinken-meets-argentinas-milei-latest-sign-us-support-2024-02-23/">praised Milei</a> for his economic efforts. </p><p style="text-align: center;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/psDqn6KCrJ4?si=zv0hxaYj1TFyKmf4" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>It has only been a little over two months and Milei has plenty of political opposition that could hinder what he is looking to accomplish. At the same time, this is a great start to helping Argentina become the economic powerhouse it once was. It is not only Milei's political career or the Argentinean economy that hang in the balance. The stakes are higher than that. If Milei succeeds, he will show other countries that freer markets and less government intervention lead to greater economic prosperity. It will serve as an inspiration to other countries to get their profligate government spending under wraps. </p><p>After all, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/08/us-credit-downgrade-by-fitchs-reminder.html">it is why</a> the United States experienced another downgrading of its credit rating last year. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/01/should-we-reach-our-limit-with-debt.html">Last year, I compared</a> the United States' fiscal deterioration to that of Argentina and rightly so. Argentina serves as a fine example of what economic misery comes when government spending runs wild. Hopefully, Milei can be successful in his efforts and show us <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/04/reflecting-on-my-1000th-blog-entry-and.html">what happens when</a> economies abandon socialistic tendencies for more capitalistic ones. By embracing capitalism can we hope to improve the quality of life for citizens across the globe. </p><p><b><i><span style="font-size: medium;">¡Viva la libertad, carajo!</span></i></b></p><p><br /></p><div style="text-align: center;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6Fwv9Cek2F4?si=onFXKyUq4-0FFbxv" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-77818937464508119862024-02-22T07:48:00.000-05:002024-02-22T07:48:04.955-05:00Trump's Proposed 60 Percent China Tariff Would Be a Repeat of Economic Foolishness<p><a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/02/biden-blaming-businesses-for.html">Since I criticized</a> Biden's "shrinkflation" public service announcement earlier this week, I only thought it would be fair that I criticize President Trump today and his role in increasing consumer prices. Trump has been obsessed with tariffs to the point of earning the nickname of "Tariff Man." During his first term, he quadrupled U.S. tariffs on China, from 3 percent to 12 percent. Now he is looking to outdo himself. Earlier this month, <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/04/trump-floats-more-than-60percent-tariffs-on-chinese-imports.html">Trump proposed</a> a 60 percent tariff on China, although he said it could very well be higher. </p><p>We should first ask how well the tariffs fared under Trump's previous presidential term. I asked this question <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/08/trumps-proposal-of-universal-10-percent.html">when I criticized Trump's proposal</a> for a 10 percent tariff on all countries last year. The answer to the question: not well. Tariff proponents think that tariffs hurt the other country, which in this case would be China. Trump's tariffs really didn't stick it to China. The truth is that a U.S. tariff on China is an import tax <a href="https://taxfoundation.org/blog/who-really-pays-tariffs/">that U.S. consumers and producers paid</a>, as <a href="https://www.usitc.gov/press_room/news_release/2023/er0315_63679.htm">this report</a> from the United States International Trade Commission shows. During his first term, the annual net costs of Trump's tariffs were a reduction of GDP by 0.21 percent, wages being reduced by 0.14 percent, and 166,000 fewer full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs. As one <a href="https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2019086pap.pdf">research paper</a> from the Federal Reserve concluded, "the impact from the traditional import protection channel is completely offset in the short-run by reduced competitiveness from retaliation and higher costs in downstream industries." </p><p>What effects would quintupling the current tax rate have? The Tax Foundation <a href="https://taxfoundation.org/blog/trump-china-trade-war-proposal/">calculated that</a> such a tax would cost $200 billion <i>per annum</i>. The National Taxpayers Union <a href="https://www.ntu.org/publications/detail/behind-trumps-proposed-4000-per-household-tax-increase">estimates that figure</a> at an even-higher $495.7 billion, which would amount to an average tax of $3,942 per household. That is even worse considering that the New York Federal Reserve <a href="https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2019/05/new-china-tariffs-increase-costs-to-us-households/">found that</a> Trump's previous China tariffs cost the average household $831 <i>per annum. </i>As the Tax Foundation <a href="https://taxfoundation.org/blog/trump-china-trade-war-proposal/">correctly points out</a>, such a tariff would not be created with the primary goal of tax revenue collection, but discouraging trade:</p><p style="text-align: center;"><i>Imports from China would depress significantly. Supply chains would fragment, investment plans would be disrupted, and trade would be diverted to third countries. A prohibitive tariff would create a void in trading opportunities with China that other countries would fill, leaving the U.S. excluded. In sum, it is not a thoughtful approach to the U.S.-China economic relationship. </i></p><p>Insanity is defined as trying the same thing over and over again while expecting the same results. Trump's tariffs were a failure beforehand. A more self-aware man would back off and try something more constructive and successful. But that is not what Trump is doing. He is more than doubling down since he is looking to quintuple the tariff rate on Chinese goods. Rather than keep the U.S. on the global stage, Trump's China tariffs would set the U.S. economy further back. </p><p>Although Congress has historically been responsible for tariffs, that responsibility has shifted more to the executive branch in the past century. There are ways to repeal those provisions that allow for executive abuse, <a href="https://cei.org/studies/repeal-neverneeded-trade-barriers/">as this report</a> from the Competitive Enterprise Institute illustrates. Congress needs to take back its constitutional role of determining tariff rates. Otherwise, what we will see in the event of a second presidential term with Trump is even higher consumer prices than we already have while harming U.S. consumers, farmers, and manufacturers along the way.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-744146883431751012024-02-19T07:00:00.001-05:002024-02-19T07:00:08.921-05:00Biden Blaming Businesses for "Shrinkflation" Hides How He Contributed to Inflation<p>Super Bowl Sunday is a time where millions in the United States gather with friends and family to watch football and eat a lot of food. A little over a week ago, not only was there the Super Bowl, but one of the Super Bowl commercials was a public service announcement (PSA) by President Biden. What did the President speak about in his PSA? How soft drinks are smaller and how bags of chips have fewer chips than they used to have. The phenomenon that the President addressed was "shrinkflation", <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/shrinkflation.asp">which is the practice</a> of reducing the size or quantity of a product while maintaining its sticker price. </p><p><br /></p><div style="text-align: center;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GcVTzgZyGro?si=__7NzOzpeeNc8tY6" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe></div><p><br /></p><p>The business practice of "shrinkflation" is a form of stealth inflation in so that customers are less likely to notice the smaller quantity than they would be of a price increase. Businesses partake in "shrinkflation" because they understand a certain aspect of human psychology related to the <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/priceelasticity.asp">elasticity of demand</a>. What shows up in academic research is that <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-getting-less-with-shrinkflation-is-preferable-to-paying-more-181326">consumers are more sensitive</a> to price increases than they are to package downsizing (<a href="https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/150680/files/AAEA_paper_cakir_etal.pdf">Çakir et al., 2021</a>; <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11747-019-00716-z">Yao et al., 2020</a>; <a href="https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Consumers’-behavioural-intentions-after-deception-Wilkins-Beckenuyte/06c98dc4c4ccc2626f98248ff87f4766cd72e9ec">Wilkins et al., 2016</a>; <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022435913000456">Çakir and Balagtas, 2014</a>). As such, businesses partake in "shrinkflation" to improve their profit margin. </p><p>At first glance, I can understand how consumers would be annoyed. They are paying more for less, but doing so in a way that comes off as deceptive. Senator Elizabeth Warren <a href="https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1754966149022756867">portrays</a> the practice of "shrinkflation" as corporate greed. This is hardly the first time the Senator <a href="https://www.aier.org/article/the-greedflation-myth/">has pushed her</a> "greedflation" theory. I can tell you her "greedflation" theory is bunk. I wrote in October 2022 how corporate greed <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/10/corporate-profits-are-not-main-cause-of.html">was not the main cause</a> of the persistent inflation and how the theory does not withstand scrutiny.</p><p>There are already federal laws mandating the quantity or weight of each product. As the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank <a href="https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2022/12/01/beyond-inflation-numbers-shrinkflation-and-skimpflation">brings up</a>, it is the consumer's responsibility to compare weights against prices, but I digress. Warren et al. think that cracking down on the practice of shrinkflation would solve the problem. It would not. Businesses would simply increase their sticker prices, which would make consumers even more irate than they already are with the persistent inflation that Americans have been dealing with in recent years. If anything, Biden <a href="https://www.cato.org/commentary/biden-should-be-grateful-shrinkflation">should be thankful</a> for shrinkflation because it is masking and obfuscating inflation during an election year to which Biden contributed. </p><p>Am I saying that Biden is solely responsible for the inflation? Nope. Go back to <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/11/how-fiscal-and-monetary-policy-greatly.html">the piece I wrote in November 2022</a> on the inflation that continues to this day. I threw plenty of blame at the Federal Reserve for expanding money supply. But guess what? Biden is also to blame because he signed the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act, which greatly contributed to inflation. As a recent paper from the Economic Policy Innovation Center (EPIC) shows, large amounts of deficit spending during the COVID pandemic played a major role in this inflation (<a href="https://epicforamerica.org/publications/is-inflation-the-result-of-excessive-deficit-spending/">Beach, 2024</a>). </p><p>While Trump was responsible for some of that deficit spending, Biden continued to amp up the deficit spending, even after the pandemic crisis was averted. If it were not for Biden's expansionary fiscal policy, businesses would not have to use "shrinkflation" practices in the first place. Biden <a href="https://reason.com/2024/02/15/shrinkflation-is-real-and-its-largely-bidens-fault/">wants us to ignore</a> his vital role in increasing inflation and making goods and services much more expensive now than they were five years ago. That erodes the consumer's purchasing power, which means it is harder to enjoy life. As a consumer, you have a right to be angry. But don't be angry at businesses for "shrinkflation." Businesses have been trying to adapt to supply chain issues and increasing producer prices with "shrinkflation." Be angry at <a href="https://fee.org/articles/yes-the-products-you-re-buying-are-getting-smaller-even-though-prices-are-not/">the government who flooded</a> the economy with money and drove up consumer prices in the first place. </p><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-66658703675427035352024-02-15T08:04:00.000-05:002024-02-15T08:04:58.703-05:00Social Conservatives' War on Porn Shows the Far Right Can Be As Puritanical as the Woke Left (Part II)<p><b><i>Disclaimer: This blog entry does not contain any pornographic images or links to pornographic websites. This blog entry functions as a criticism of pornography bans. </i></b></p><p>It would not be American politics if the culture wars ceased to exist. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/02/social-conservatives-war-on-porn-shows.html">Last week</a>, I wrote about how social conservatives are reigniting the war on pornography. First, I went in how one defines pornography and obscenity. Second, I pointed out how pornography does not increase sexual assault. Third, I listed studies that show neutral or positive effects of watching pornography, which undermines the public health argument against pornography. Now I continue with other arguments as to why a ban on pornography is not wise. </p><p>4) <b>Whether someone views pornography is no one else's business</b>. There can be a myriad of decisions that other individuals make that you find disagreeable: voting for a candidate of an opposing political party, practicing a religion that is not yours, owning a gun, having different political beliefs, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2014/10/if-you-decide-to-have-children-get.html">having children before getting married</a>, burning <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/12/denmark-banning-quran-burning-is-sign.html">a Quran</a> or <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2016/12/trumps-flag-burning-comments-one-way-to.html">the U.S. flag</a>, having sex with or <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2015/04/religious-freedom-acts-what-do-they.html">marrying someone of the same sex</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/04/are-covid-19-vaccines-safe-some.html">not getting a COVID vaccine</a>, or <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/12/303-creative-llc-v-elenis-graphic.html">how a business owner manages their business</a>. There are other life decisions that are unhealthy, such as smoking cigarettes, drinking too much alcohol, eating foods with a ton of sugar and trans fats, not getting enough exercise, or spending too much time on social media. </p><p>Part of living in a free society means being surrounded by people who think, believe, and act differently than you do. As long as adults are not directly harming others, it does not matter what decisions they make, even if it causes self-harm. An adult who decides to view pornography in the privacy of his or her own home is not harming anyone else. A ban would turn viewing pornography into a victimless crime, which comes with its own costs. </p><p>5) <b>Enforcement would be messy, not to mention a violation the Constitution</b>. Forget for a moment <a href="https://reason.com/2019/10/04/pornography-is-protected-by-the-first-amendment/">that pornography has</a> <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/30/no-living-under-an-islamic-caliphate-wouldnt-be-better-than-keeping-camgirls-legal/">First Amendment protection</a>. First, you would need to shut down the production of pornography. Then you would need to stop millions of smartphone users from creating amateur pornography and distributing it anonymously. That is on the production end. To stop people from consuming pornography, the government would need to have unfettered access to monitor citizens' computers. <a href="https://reason.com/2023/09/06/u-k-government-finally-admits-it-cant-scan-for-child-porn-without-violating-everybodys-privacy/">This would mean</a> violating the privacy rights of all internet users and undermining data encryption tools. </p><p>6) <b>Underground market. </b>Pornography is popular because the vast majority of human beings are sexual creatures and pornography is more accessible than ever since the advent of the internet. 91.5 percent of men and 60.2 percent of women <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30358432/">have used pornography</a> in the past month. Banning pornography is not going to make those sexual desires dissipate. Banning pornography would create a black market in pornographic goods. </p><p><a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/04/why-federal-ban-of-tiktok-would-be.html">As I brought up last year</a> when discussing a potential TikTok ban, a blanket ban comes with a litany of negative unintended consequences. Likely outcomes of forcing pornography production underground is less safe working conditions, mistreatment of workers, and financial exploitation. As for consumers, those who are looking for porn will either find print publications or go to the dark web, both of which can expose consumers to even more illicit and problematic activities. These consequences are parallel to the unintended consequences of a similar policy alternative: <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/01/maine-to-show-how-partial-prostitution.html">a partial prostitution ban</a>. </p><p><b><i><u>Conclusion</u></i></b>: Let's recap the effects of a pornography ban. It would be expensive to enforce while violating privacy rights. Law enforcement would be punishing something that a vast majority of Americans do in the privacy of their homes. Given the intractable nature of such a ban, it would mean that enforcement would be arbitrary at best and discriminatory at worst. <a href="https://reason.com/2018/02/12/ban-porn-prohibition-wont-work/">It would make</a> conditions worse for the porn industry and open consumers to the black market. Meanwhile, pornography does not increase sex crimes while having mixed effects on personal health. All of this headache would be endured for a victimless crime. </p><p>This is not an isolated incident of the U.S. political Right. There was a time in recent years where the Right was starting to become a beacon of freedom since the woke Left was <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/07/how-social-justice-movement-behaves.html">being ridiculously puritanical</a>. However, the American Right has become increasingly enthused about banning or imposing severe limitations, whether that is <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/06/trumps-executive-order-limiting-work.html">immigration</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/08/trumps-proposal-of-universal-10-percent.html">restricting free trade</a>, <a href="https://www.cato.org/blog/critics-exaggerate-risks-minimize-benefits-gestational-surrogacy">surrogacy</a>, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/2022-primary-elections-kansas-abortion-b6d62a852c2ce4617f2c03589fbb523e">contraception</a>, or <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/405086/marijuana-views-linked-ideology-religiosity-age.aspx">marijuana</a>. The woke Left's puritanical impulses do not exclude social conservatives from attempting to thrust its authoritarian desires on the rest of us. Regardless of the side of the political aisle, we should remember that puritanism <a href="https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/01/23/the-joyless-puritanism-of-the-new-right/">is not</a> a winning political strategy. If the political Right wants to have lasting, positive change, it will acknowledge this reality and harness it into political change moving forward.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-83187510053255771042024-02-12T17:59:00.004-05:002024-02-17T08:44:01.183-05:00UNRWA Is an Ineffectual, Anti-Semitic Organization That Exists to Perpetuate Victimhood and Conflict<p>As if there were not enough twists and turns in the Israel-Hamas War, this development has to do with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). UNRWA was founded in 1949 to provide humanitarian relief to Arab refugees as a result of the Arab-Israeli War of 1948. Remember this is the same war that the Arab nations started after the United Nations proposed a plan (<a href="https://documents.un.org/doc/resolution/gen/nr0/038/88/pdf/nr003888.pdf?token=hxQGmN55zM0FE4Iglr&fe=true">UN Resolution 181</a>) that would have allowed for an Israeli state and Palestinian state to live side-by-side.</p><p>The latest UNRWA controversy has to do with the October 7 attack, which was the single largest attack and murder of Jews since the Holocaust. Forget <a href="https://unwatch.org/unrwa-terrorgram/">the report from UN Watch</a> that shows a Telegram group of 3,000 UNRWA teachers celebrating the October 7 attack. According to Israeli intelligence, 12 UNRWA employees were involved in the October 7 attack (<a href="https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/at-least-12-u-n-agency-employees-involved-in-oct-7-attacks-intelligence-reports-say-a7de8f36">WSJ</a>). Not only that, but <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-intelligence-accuses-190-gaza-un-staff-hamas-islamic-jihad-roles-2024-01-29/">190 UNRWA employees</a> are also Islamic jihadists. If that were not enough, 10 percent of the UNRWA employees in Gaza have ties to Islamic terrorist groups. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken <a href="https://www.france24.com/en/middle-east/20240205-as-donors-suspend-critical-funding-to-unrwa-allegations-against-staff-remain-murky">found the sources</a> to be "highly, highly credible." Apparently, it has been credible enough where several major donor countries, including the United States, Germany, Canada, Sweden, and France, have temporarily suspended funding to UNRWA. </p><p>UNRWA replied by stating that if its funding does not resume, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/unrwa-could-shut-down-by-end-february-if-funding-does-not-resume-2024-02-01/">it could be forced</a> to close down its doors by the end of February. The pro-Palestine side laments this, to be sure. From this vantage point, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/02/opinions/opinion-bociurkiw-unrwa-un-aid-lifeline-to-palestinians-at-risk/index.html">UNRWA is an</a> "omnipresent municipal service provider." For UNRWA proponents, the humanitarian work of UNRWA should not be eclipsed by a few bad apples in the organization, even if those bad apples are alleged pogromists that participated in the worst slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust. </p><p>Funny how the woke crowd thinks that we should give UNRWA more funding, but is the same Far Left that called for "defund the police" after a few bad apples and that we should eradicate racism (which <a href="http://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/why-so-many-on-woke-progressive-left.html">apparently does not include</a> Jew-hatred), but I digress on their intellectual inconsistency. I would contend that the rot in UNRWA goes beyond a few bad apples, especially since the pro-Palestine Al Jazeera <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/7/29/ethics-report-accuses-unrwa-leadership-of-abuse-of-power">reported on</a> the abuse of power of UNRWA leaders. This includes Pierre Krähenbühl, the ex-UNRWA leader <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/06/un-aid-chief-quits-investigation-palestinian-refugee-program-pierre-krahenbuhl/">who was accused of</a> nepotism, sexual misconduct, abuse of power, and bullying. </p><p>Aside from corrupt leadership, UNRWA has supported terrorism and anti-Semitism for many years. This rot predates the numerous UNRWA employees who reacted positively to the October 7 attack. The European Parliament <a href="https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2023-002620_EN.html">recognizes that</a> Palestinian textbooks teach Jew-hatred, which <a href="https://www.gei.de/en/research/projects/report-on-palestinian-textbooks-paltex">is illustrated</a> by the <a href="https://owncloud.gei.de/index.php/s/FwkMw8NZgCAJgPW">Georg Eckert Institute's report</a> on Palestinian textbooks. This trend is confirmed by a <a href="https://www.impact-se.org/wp-content/uploads/UNRWA-Education-Textbooks-and-Terror-Nov-2023.pdf">November 2023 report</a> from the Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education (Impact-SE), as well as a report from UN Watch <a href="https://unwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2023-Report-UNRWA.pdf">in March 2023</a> illustrating how UNRWA teachers incite Jew-hatred. These Palestinian textbooks have been so riddled with anti-Semitism that the United Nations <a href="https://www.un.org/unispal/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/CERD.C.PSC_.CO_.1-2.pdf">admitted in 2019</a> that the anti-Semitism in these textbooks exists to "fuel hatred and may incite violence."</p><p>If the systemic anti-Semitism at UNRWA is not enough to convince you about how UNRWA contributes to the perpetuation of conflict in the Middle East, let us examine the nature of the organization itself. But first, some information on the role of the United Nations and helping refugees. The United Nations operates two organizations to the cause. The first is the United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHCR), which is dedicated to the plight of refugees globally. The second is UNRWA, which is focused on Palestinian refugees. Here are some figures about UNHCR in comparison to UNRWA:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>UNHCR has 18,879 staff (as of 12-31-2022) <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/us/about-unhcr/who-we-are/figures-glance">to help 29.4 million refugees</a> under UNHCR's mandate. UNRWA, on the other hand, has <a href="https://www.unrwa.org/who-we-are/organizational-structure#">30,000 staff</a> that cover <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/us/about-unhcr/who-we-are/figures-glance">5.9 million individuals</a> under its mandate. This means that UNRWA has over 11,000 more staff to help out over 23 million fewer people than UNHCR. </li><li>This, of course, does not include the <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/us/about-unhcr/who-we-are/figures-glance">70-plus million</a> refugees and asylum seekers not covered under either organization. </li><li>In terms of funding, that is for <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/2023-09/advance-copy-revision-programme-budget-english.pdf">$10.80 billion</a> for UNHCR and <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN12316">$1.47 billion</a> for UNRWA in the year 2023. </li><li>That would make the funding-per-refugee ratio $367 for UNHCR and $249 for UNRWA. </li></ul><p></p><p>As fun as it is to look through these data points, they beg the question as to why the Palestinians have their own separate refugee agency. Are their lives more important than the <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/07/1138547">2.5 million Sudanese</a> that were displaced last year? That segues into how UNRWA treats refugees. With UNHCR, resettlement of refugees <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/what-we-do/build-better-futures/long-term-solutions/resettlement">is one of the main goals</a> of its mandate. For UNRWA, not so much. <a href="https://www.unrwa.org/sites/default/files/content/resources/61541acb4.pdf">In UNRWA's own words</a>, "UNRWA does not have a mandate to seek durable solutions for Palestinian refugees." </p><p>The reason why UNRWA does not want to resettle Palestinians has to do with how UNRWA defines refugees. By <a href="https://www.unrefugees.org/refugee-facts/what-is-a-refugee/">UNHRC's definition</a>, a refugee is "someone who has been forced to flee his or her country because of persecution, war, or violence." This lines up with how refugee was defined for Arabs displaced as a result of the Arab-Israeli War of 1948. However, <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/08/17/unrwa-has-changed-the-definition-of-refugee/">that definition changed</a> over time and has since applied to more people than the <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/05/1136662">original 700,000</a> who were directly affected by displacement in 1948. In 1965, UNRWA's eligibility requirements extended to third-generation descendants of refugees. In 1982, that applied was expanded further to any descendant, regardless of whether they had been granted citizenship elsewhere. </p><p>Under the <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/media/convention-and-protocol-relating-status-refugees">1951 U.N. Convention</a>, specifically Article I(c)(3), a person is no longer a refugee if he or she "has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality." Not so with UNRWA. If the standard definition under international law were used, the vast majority of the 5.9 million that are covered under UNRWA's mandate would not be defined as refugees because they are not among those who left the modern state of Israel in 1948. Under UNRWA's definition, refugee status can be inherited over generations, regardless of where one lives or has citizenship. This helps ensure that its refugee rolls expand every year, which also provides a perverse financial incentive to ask for more funding instead of helping resettle Palestinians. </p><p>This begs another question: How did other groups of refugees throughout history respond to displacement? During the Kashmir dispute, Pakistanis and Indians alike resettled. Germans after World War II resettled. Even Ukrainians who have been displaced in its current war with Russia are in the process of resettling. </p><p>In response to Israel becoming a nation-state, the Arab nations ejected <a href="https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/fd/il20062006_07/il20062006_07en.pdf">about 850,000 Jews</a> from their lands. Talking about ethnic cleansing! Instead of claiming permanent refugee status, Israel and other Western nations absorbed those refugees. Israel also absorbed Arab refugees, which explains the Arab Israeli population of 1.7 million. Israel did so in spite of the series of wars that the Arab nations started in the hopes to wipe out the Jews. </p><p>Every other refugee in history who has to leave their home for one reason or another finds a new home and resettles. Only the Palestinian "refugee" crisis has been perpetuated over the decades. UNRWA has been in existence for 75 years. You want to know how I know that UNRWA has failed in its mission? Because no other group of refugees has taken three-quarters of a century to get settled elsewhere. </p><p>Even pro-Palestinian activist and blogger Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/im-gazan-who-relied-unrwa-survive-dont-defund-itreform-it-opinion-1865479">acknowledged that</a> UNRWA's presence [inadvertently] meant enabling Hamas to be reliant on UNRWA for governance. This, of course, means avoiding <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/01/some-inconvenient-truths-in-response-to.html">the inconvenient truths</a> that Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and has been run by Hamas since 2007. </p><p>If UNRWA were successful at helping refugees, UNRWA would have been dissolved years ago. The fact that it is still around only confirms that UNRWA exists to bolster Palestinian victimhood into perpetuity while being encouraged to blame Israel. By perpetuating and enlarging the "refugee" crisis, <a href="https://www.cfr.org/blog/trump-gets-unrwa-right">what UNRWA has done</a> is keep the peace process more elusive while preventing Palestinians from living normal lives. As such, UNRWA <a href="https://www.fdd.org/analysis/op_eds/2024/02/07/close-down-unrwa/">should be abolished</a>. If you want an organization to help the Palestinians, UNHCR or the World Food Programme (WFP) <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/01/end-unrwa/">have a better track record</a> than UNRWA. I will end with a <a href="https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/01/29/unrwa-is-worse-than-you-think/">quote from Spiked</a> since they summarize the malaise so well:<i> </i></p><p><i>"In truth, UNRWA has helped to institutionalize a Palestinian politics of grievance, increase both local and global hatred for Israel, and provide spaces in which Gazan Islamists have been able to indoctrinate a new generation with the Jew hate that masquerades as 'Palestinian liberation.' Liberating Gaza from UNRWA ought to be at least a medium-term goal of everyone who cares about Israelis <b>and</b> Palestinians." </i></p><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-82809128887921995462024-02-09T08:13:00.000-05:002024-02-09T08:13:52.408-05:00The U.S. Needs to Grant More Green Cards to Immigrants with Advanced STEM Degrees<p>As we advance in the 21st century, there is a growth in technological advancement and societal change. Having current and future workers trained in various fields to help towards a better and brighter future are integral. This is especially true for the field of STEM: science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. These four disciplines will drive new innovations to help solve major challenges that we face. Whether countries have the adequate STEM workforce to move forward is a debate. </p><p>The labor shortage that the <a href="https://www.uschamber.com/workforce/understanding-americas-labor-shortage">United States is facing</a> is going to have implications if not addressed. This is especially true in the STEM field. If a report from the National Science Foundation entitled <i><a href="https://www.ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20221">The State of U.S. Science and Engineering 2022</a> </i>is indicative of anything, it is that the United States is starting to fall behind in STEM. The United States <a href="https://www.the74million.org/article/the-future-is-stem-but-without-enough-students-the-u-s-will-be-left-behind/">is getting outpaced by China</a> in terms of research papers published, patents produced, and graduating natural sciences PhD candidates. The issue with the STEM skills gap <a href="https://hrforecast.com/the-stem-skills-gap-a-growing-challenge-for-countries-to-overcome/">is not solely</a> a problem in the United States. If there is indeed a shortage, then there has to a concerted effort to make sure that the gap shrinks over time. Why? An economy having enough STEM workers will be a major factor in whether a country can be a major player in the global economy this century. </p><p>One surefire way to help close the gap, especially in the short-term, is to increase immigration of STEM workers. This is not merely based in economic theory. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2017/03/trump-needs-friendlier-stance-on-high.html">As I pointed out in 2017</a>, hiring STEM workers with the H1-B visa program increases patent production, economic growth, and helps increase employment of native workers. <a href="https://www.mercatus.org/research/policy-briefs/unintended-consequences-restrictions-h-1b-visas">A 2021 policy brief</a> from the Mercatus Center shows how restricting STEM visas results either in offshoring for large companies or increases costs for small businesses that do not incentivize them to hire native workers.</p><p>There is another advantage for allowing more STEM workers into the United States: it will help the federal budget. I have sounded the alarm on the rising federal debt, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/08/us-credit-downgrade-by-fitchs-reminder.html">most recently when</a> the United States had yet another credit downgrade this past summer due to profligate spending. The Wharton School of Business, the premier business school, brings good news from <a href="https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2024/1/18/budgetary-effects-of-stem-green-cards">a budgetary estimate</a> it released last month. Exempting immigrants with advanced STEM degrees would reduce deficits by $129 billion from 2025 to 2034.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfRlL_o2bsKbL8xqNWuDGMf_WeW_Twj7AUtySjEjGPJn-HprxM6ug5WyCn3QVYmU9XlBmzGBfnxSYcQQwD1CbzUSmIRWwa6QdDhfwxuKJ67UJZgZQGm_PVgQuoe0AlpsOHVKger1Qse527qwWBhLk_-zHGpRjdl8bC4AaTAVctLDG_kHh0k-mDTFMuxw/s1616/Wharton%202025-2034.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="634" data-original-width="1616" height="252" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfRlL_o2bsKbL8xqNWuDGMf_WeW_Twj7AUtySjEjGPJn-HprxM6ug5WyCn3QVYmU9XlBmzGBfnxSYcQQwD1CbzUSmIRWwa6QdDhfwxuKJ67UJZgZQGm_PVgQuoe0AlpsOHVKger1Qse527qwWBhLk_-zHGpRjdl8bC4AaTAVctLDG_kHh0k-mDTFMuxw/w640-h252/Wharton%202025-2034.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>Between 2035 and 2044, it would be an even higher $634 billion. Why should we care? That sounds like the government's problem, not ours. Here is the thing. An increasing debt-to-GDP ratio means that the government has to pay more on interest payments for the debt. Per <a href="https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58946">a 2023 report</a> from the Congressional Budget Office, that would likely result in "slow economic growth, push up interest payments to foreign holders of U.S. debt, heighten the risk of a financial crisis and make the U.S. fiscal position more vulnerable to an increase in interest rates." <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/12/7-reasons-why-national-debt-still.html">Improving budgetary prospects means</a> fewer debt interest payments and more economic prosperity for the American people. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgc8PNJU2hKR1LFrsXLE-wONtWH1QntAEGtotfEi3Jv_9A465xpYBpdM9Yt1d1OvXkheuavhKB973ikaztR81Nf-1Wb63OCaGbzRbtO-tzEXeXg7X5iAcPLXk3qHh8_-yg3L8JA9srQsyweX6QPj2hGgSkw0SdySSncH5BzyzPJxLA7Cq4SREryiJzwbA/s1636/Wharton%202035-2044.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="654" data-original-width="1636" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgc8PNJU2hKR1LFrsXLE-wONtWH1QntAEGtotfEi3Jv_9A465xpYBpdM9Yt1d1OvXkheuavhKB973ikaztR81Nf-1Wb63OCaGbzRbtO-tzEXeXg7X5iAcPLXk3qHh8_-yg3L8JA9srQsyweX6QPj2hGgSkw0SdySSncH5BzyzPJxLA7Cq4SREryiJzwbA/w640-h256/Wharton%202035-2044.png" width="640" /></a></div><p>Lowering the debt-to-GDP ratio is yet another benefit of increasing immigration of STEM workers to the United States. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/12/imf-study-adds-to-evidence-base-that.html">As I brought up in December,</a> more immigration improves macroeconomic growth, especially when this country is in the midst of a labor shortage both in the STEM field and the macroeconomy more generally. Contrary to the naysaying of nativists and other anti-immigration individuals, immigrants are not a drain on the economy. They are a net boon. The United States should not maintain restrictions on immigrants with advanced STEM degrees because it does so at its own peril. </p><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-11593054238909757252024-02-05T08:08:00.002-05:002024-02-06T13:55:24.952-05:00Social Conservatives' War on Porn Shows the Far Right Can Be As Puritanical as the Woke Left (Part I)<p><b><i>Disclaimer: This blog entry does not contain any pornographic images or links to pornographic websites. This blog entry functions as a criticism of pornography bans. </i></b></p><p>Ultra Right Beer is a beer company created in response to Bud Light's increasing wokeness, particularly with the Dylan Mulvaney <a href="https://people.com/bud-light-controversy-everything-to-know-7547159">controversy</a>. Last month, Ultra Right Beer released a 2024 calendar of various conservative women in sexually suggestive poses. <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/2024/1/10/24024341/calendargate-conservative-civil-war">This caused</a> enough backlash from social conservatives where the incident was called Calendargate. This incident shows a schism on the Right between social conservatives and those with libertarian, "live and let live" tendencies. This reemergence of social conservatism on the political scene is not limited to calendars. It is a phenomenon that occurs with pornography. </p><p>Alabama legislators <a href="https://www.wsfa.com/2023/11/07/alabama-lawmaker-proposes-bill-require-age-verification-porn-sites/">have proposed</a> age verification in an attempt to block minors from adult websites, which is already unconstitutional under <i><a href="https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/reno-v-american-civil-liberties-union/">Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union</a> (1997). </i>Last month, an <a href="http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2023-24%20INT/SB/SB1976%20INT.PDF">anti-porn bill</a> was introduced in Oklahoma is so extreme that it would make viewing "obscene materials" a felony. Such a bill <a href="https://reason.com/2024/01/22/oklahoma-bill-would-ban-sending-sexy-selfies-unless-youre-married/">would target</a> sexting and social media sites that are accessed in Oklahoma. </p><p>This is not a state here or there. Project 2025 is a coalition of over 70 conservative groups led by the Right-leaning Heritage Foundation. This Project includes a <a href="https://www.heritage.org/press/project-2025-publishes-comprehensive-policy-guide-mandate-leadership-the-conservative-promise">920-page policy guide</a> of what they would like to do if President Trump wins this election. Included in the manifesto <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/15/project-2025-policy-manifesto-lgbtq-rights">is a call</a> to remove pornography: </p><p><i>"Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian known inextricable binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare.....[it] has no claim to First Amendment protection...Pornography should be outlawed."</i></p><p>Social conservatives and religious conservatives have opposed pornography for a number of reasons, whether it is because it encourages non-procreative sex, abortions, sexual assault, or the assertion that it is bad for one's health. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2015/08/india-pornography-ban-gets-shaft-should.html">I made a case</a> against pornography bans in 2015, and I will do so again today. I will also be using <a href="https://www.econlib.org/the-simple-economics-of-pornography/">economic arguments</a> from Economics Professor Art Carden throughout. </p><p>1) <b>What is pornography? What is obscenity?</b> This might seem like a given or a no-brainer. As Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said with regards to obscenity, "I know it when I see it." However, it is not so cut-and-dry. Determining a neutral standard for sexual expression is impossible given the variety of sexual tastes and sensibilities. What constitutes pornography is in the eye of the beholder. Does it apply to certain hardcore pornography? Should a ban include softcore pornography? Would we ban romance novels or Game of Thrones? How about sexting on a dating app? Or is a photo of a woman who is showing her ankles beyond the pale? </p><p>To quote the <a href="https://iea.org.uk/publications/research/prohibitions">Institute of Economic Affairs</a>: <i>"Intractable definitional problems are inherent in any effort to single out for prohibition of any category of sexual expression based on its alleged harm to the minds of its viewers, in contrast with some more concrete, ascertainable harm. In effect, this kind of prohibition creates a 'thought crime'...Such thought crimes are inherently inconsistent with individual freedom."</i></p><p>That being said, I do want to scrutinize the notion that pornography could cause "concrete, ascertainable harm."</p><p>2)<b> Pornography does not increase sexual assault. </b>A concern from the naysayers is that pornography will lead to more sexual crimes because pornography would either create or encourage fantasies of sexual violence. From the 1990s to the 2010s, sexual assault rates were overall <a href="https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm">declining</a> as porn consumption <a href="https://ballardbrief.byu.edu/issue-briefs/pornography-use-among-young-adults-in-the-united-states">was increasing</a>. More to the point, the University of Texas at San Antonio <a href="https://www.utsa.edu/today/2020/08/story/pornography-sex-crimes-study.html">released</a> a meta-analysis on the topic (<a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1524838020942754">Ferguson and Hartley, 2020</a>). Guess what they found? After examining over 50 studies, there is no correlation between pornography and violent sex. No correlation means no causation, i.e., <u>pornography does not cause an increase in sex crimes</u>. </p><p>3) <b>Claiming that pornography is bad for one's health is mixed at best and inaccurate at worst</b>. While some people undergo negative effects with [excess] pornography consumption, <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/banning-porn-bad-idea-there-are-other-ways-improve-internet-opinion-1547795">there is also research</a> to show that there are neutral or positive effects:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Pornography can improve sexual comfort and self-acceptance, as well as reduce anxiety, shame, and guilt over sexual behavior. It also has been linked to increased arousal and orgasm responses (<a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/26318318221088949">Hakkim et al., 2022</a>).</li><li>Pornography can open communications and improve one's sexual relations (<a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0265407517743096">Kohut et al., 2018</a>).</li><li>"Pornography use is associated with health-promoting behaviors, including increased intimacy, 'safer' sexual behaviors (e.g., solo masturbation), and feelings of acceptance (<a href="https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305498">Nelson and Rothman, 2020</a>)."</li><li>How the pornography is consumed matters. Research indicates that those who experience negative effects (e.g., sexual risk behaviors, mental health issues) could mitigate the harm with proper sexual education (<a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32348268/">Davis et al., 2020</a>; <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jcom.12341">Vandenbosch and van Oosten, 2017</a>). <a href="https://www.healthline.com/health/healthy-sex/is-porn-bad#negative-effects">Being able to distinguish</a> between pornography and reality is a major factor into whether pornography is harmful. </li><li>Watching more pornography is associated with greater sexual arousal, not erectile dysfunction (<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/sm2.58">Prause and Pfaus, 2015</a>).</li><li>Pornography does not degrade relationship satisfaction or closeness, nor does it affect loneliness (<a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0265407519841719?journalCode=spra">Hesse and Floyd, 2019</a>).</li><li>Pornography can help with masturbation (<a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-019-1397-6">Prause, 2019</a>), which is important because masturbation <a href="https://www.verywellmind.com/masturbation-for-stress-relief-benefits-6751548">can help with</a> stress and anxiety. </li><li>Contrary to previous research, more methodologically sound research found that pornography consumption does not diminish interest in one's sexual partner (<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022103116304371">Balzarini et al., 2017</a>).</li><li>Pornography has the ability to help people explore their sexuality or understand their sexual identity (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5603964/">McCormak and Wignall, 2017</a>).</li></ul><p></p><p>Two researchers from Boston University <a href="https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305498">outlined how</a> pornography is not a public health crisis. They concluded that labeling pornography a public health crisis could actually make outcomes worse due to stigmatization. Even if there are negative health factors, it does not matter. I will elucidate upon that point further in Part II. </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-88448857390504826282024-02-01T09:17:00.001-05:002024-02-20T08:20:01.367-05:00Some Inconvenient Truths In Response to the "Gaza Is an Open-Air Prison" Argument (Part II)<p>Last week, I began to scrutinize the argument that "Gaza is an open-air prison." <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/01/some-inconvenient-truths-in-response-to.html">In the first part</a>, I pointed out a few inconvenient truths:</p><p></p><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>The purpose of Israel's blockade and border fence is not to collectively punish Gazans, but rather to protect Israeli citizens from terrorist attacks.</li><li>Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, which means that the "Israel was occupying Gaza" argument can readily be dismissed. </li><li>Hamas has been governing Gaza since 2007. As such, Hamas is responsible for the day-to-day well-being of Gazans, not Israel.</li><li>Egypt shares a border with Gaza. Egypt chose to build a border wall on the Egypt-Gaza wall for the same reason as Israel: national security. </li><li>Neither Egypt nor Jordan are accepting Palestinian refugees, thereby closing off options to Gazans. </li></ol><p></p><p>I am going to continue with some other inconvenient truths in Part II, with particular focus on mobility, economic growth, and Hamas' corruption. Part of what makes a prison a prison is a [near] non-existent flow of people in or out of the confines. As such, net migration is another metric to determine whether or not Gaza is an open-air prison. Looking at data from the <a href="https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SM.POP.NETM?locations=PS">World Bank</a> and the <a href="https://esa.un.org/miggmgprofiles/indicators/files/Palestine.pdf">United Nations</a>, what we see is that there is a net migration out of the country, which implies that Gazans have been able to leave the country. Gazans looking to emigrate to Turkey, for example, <a href="https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/poor-living-conditions-trigger-mass-migration-from-gaza/3009581">have to deal</a> with Hamas' slow bureaucracy that makes it more difficult to leave Gaza.</p><p>It is not only in terms of migration or emigration in which the prison argument does not withstand scrutiny. As previously stated, the responsibility for governing the Gazans is Hamas', not that of Israel. Even so, Israel still helps out, which is impressive given the circumstances. Prior to the current Israel-Hamas War, Israel issued over <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/thousands-gazan-workers-sent-back-israel-occupied-west-bank-witnesses-2023-11-03/">18,000 work visas</a> for Gazan citizens to earn up to 10 times what they could in Gaza. This finding can be confirmed with <a href="https://www.ochaopt.org/content/movement-and-out-gaza-update-covering-august-2023">data from</a> the United Nation's Office for the Coordination of Human Affairs (OCHA). If someone is in a prison, that person is not allowed to leave and come back. Yet there had been a flow of Gazans entering Israel for work purposes prior to Hamas initiating a war against Israel.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAceIxGHxFM7PyxVt-G5YGnZqWlUwk2-N2vvOtBJ_OygToDFmQUwUoEsUJ6Xl_yt8av5Jqtg_Bo5nDStmYLgtKaCKzbm_jDG-j5Rl6KblC8BaU5VwsanXZhTbIUU7OM6Gc042nwRY_OVkkTuXuj7ry0lnXa2QA4ZWMXsx7_6Mc3Q5n5U1E-9un-Ta70A/s1000/crossing-august-2023-exit-to-israel.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="379" data-original-width="1000" height="242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAceIxGHxFM7PyxVt-G5YGnZqWlUwk2-N2vvOtBJ_OygToDFmQUwUoEsUJ6Xl_yt8av5Jqtg_Bo5nDStmYLgtKaCKzbm_jDG-j5Rl6KblC8BaU5VwsanXZhTbIUU7OM6Gc042nwRY_OVkkTuXuj7ry0lnXa2QA4ZWMXsx7_6Mc3Q5n5U1E-9un-Ta70A/w640-h242/crossing-august-2023-exit-to-israel.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p><br /></p><p>It is not only people that are allowed to enter Israel to work, but also goods that are allowed to enter Gaza (see OCHA data below). During the current war, Israel has allowed humanitarian goods to enter Gaza. As we see from UN data, more goods were allowed to flow to Gaza in 2023 than it did in previous years. Here is another consideration. Israel providing what it does <a href="https://jcpa.org/article/is-israel-bound-by-international-law-to-supply-utilities-goods-and-services-to-gaza/">exceeds any expectations</a> set in the Fourth Geneva Convention (<a href="https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-23/commentary/1958?activeTab=undefined">Article 23</a>) and the First Protocol of the Additional to the Geneva Conventions (<a href="https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-70/commentary/1987?activeTab=undefined">Article 70</a>). International law notwithstanding, on what planet is it normal or reasonable to ask a country to provide water and electricity to its enemy when that enemy <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/13/middleeast/hamas-weapons-invs/index.html">has been using</a> water pipes to create rockets that then kill Israelis? This brings me to my next point.....</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIMieSU6vTQ8bPLA6eihiXxFOyoOPOAfX7VAlerxTXp22zMgDQQ5Bm7iiTZnNRNEMFCLMnYxHdWKu2iRWmtddIFGfZ7JWRERKO-ZgrdpbGvxkz7KB35zQDh4UpCZJ7pdSaiYB7lFU2faJSz4UQNgWDT145eA8jgsvlAxhaT_4WCYmjl55rVJFV7NvGcw/s1000/crossing-august-2023-incoming-goods.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="403" data-original-width="1000" height="258" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIMieSU6vTQ8bPLA6eihiXxFOyoOPOAfX7VAlerxTXp22zMgDQQ5Bm7iiTZnNRNEMFCLMnYxHdWKu2iRWmtddIFGfZ7JWRERKO-ZgrdpbGvxkz7KB35zQDh4UpCZJ7pdSaiYB7lFU2faJSz4UQNgWDT145eA8jgsvlAxhaT_4WCYmjl55rVJFV7NvGcw/w640-h258/crossing-august-2023-incoming-goods.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p><br /></p><p>Considering the adversarial nature of Hamas, it is generous that Israel would provide an economic lifeline at all. If Gaza were a true prison, Israel would have either greatly confined the flow of people and goods, or alternatively, completely shut off movement of labor or goods. Hamas <a href="https://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/2018/05/24/media-coverage-israeli-palestinian-clash-built-myth/634250002/">refuses to</a> "accept any international laws or set of rules that would allow peaceful interaction with its neighbors." Imagine what economic development there would be between Palestinians and Israelis <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/hamas-is-symptom-not-source-of-what-is.html">if most Gazans did not hate Israel or Jews</a>. My educated guess is that <b><i>Gaza would not be nearly as prison-like if it were able to maintain positive relations with Israel instead of wanting to kill Jews.</i></b> As I like to say, "those who trade together stay together." </p><p>Speaking of economic development, Gaza's economy was on par with the West Bank's before Hamas got into power. Once Gazans elected Hamas, United Nations data (<a href="https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/gdsapp2020d1_en.pdf">see below; UN, p. 2</a>) show that economic growth in Gaza declined. The U.S. State Department <a href="https://www.state.gov/reports/2023-investment-climate-statements/west-bank-and-gaza/">recognizes that</a> "businesses in Gaza have reported instances where Hamas courts and officials have employed coercion or have otherwise acted outside the legal system when engaging with private business." In layman's terms, an economy with corruption, bribes, fear, and intimidation break down economic growth. The fact that corruption erodes economic growth is commonly understood in the public policy world, as is illustrated by this research from the <a href="https://www.imf.org/EXTERNAL/PUBS/FT/ISSUES6/INDEX.HTM">International Monetary Fund</a> and <a href="https://www.transparency.org/files/content/corruptionqas/Impact_of_corruption_on_growth_and_inequality_2014.pdf">Transparency International</a> (also see <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0176268019301156">Gründler and Potrafke, 2019</a>; <a href="https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w19483/w19483.pdf">Bai et al., 2013</a>).</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioFy1zfulHN96KBqzb79I1IvOF6OGMwA3AtYcNJTbnqL9jdA8cS00_heMY6TW40B_o51xwtNySXnSmDSAx0VaQp3Olk49vbew_iZOTg-5W5PIEiB4fVd7ZqRME2a5oQuXW6uJg_Uv08a-ZiV8ZMBKvGA0505UjvUCXnvYEj5iD9xfLXRQBvDdRFpbOag/s932/Screenshot%202024-01-24%20at%2011.24.39%E2%80%AFAM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="562" data-original-width="932" height="386" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioFy1zfulHN96KBqzb79I1IvOF6OGMwA3AtYcNJTbnqL9jdA8cS00_heMY6TW40B_o51xwtNySXnSmDSAx0VaQp3Olk49vbew_iZOTg-5W5PIEiB4fVd7ZqRME2a5oQuXW6uJg_Uv08a-ZiV8ZMBKvGA0505UjvUCXnvYEj5iD9xfLXRQBvDdRFpbOag/w640-h386/Screenshot%202024-01-24%20at%2011.24.39%E2%80%AFAM.png" width="640" /></a></div><p><br /></p><p>If there is a reason that Gaza has prison-like conditions, look at how Hamas rules Gaza. Per <a href="https://freedomhouse.org/country/gaza-strip/freedom-world/2023">this report from Freedom House</a> that examines Gaza's political freedom, Hamas is a corrupt organization that quashes the people's political and civil rights. Women, gay people, and whatever non-Muslims that may exist in Gaza's borders are oppressed. If Hamas did its job of governing over the Gazans instead of pouring its resources to kill Jews, maybe, just maybe conditions in Gaza would not be so dire. </p><p><b><u>Postscript</u></b>: Before there was the alleged "open-air prison," the argument over settlements, or so-called "occupied territories" (they are <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/to-support-hamas-is-to-support-genocide.html">actually disputed territories</a>), the majority of Arabs in the Levant region have hated Jews. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/hamas-is-symptom-not-source-of-what-is.html">As I brought up before</a>, there have been multiple times where the Arabs were offered "land for peace." Palestinian statehood has been offered <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2023/11/08/if-palestinians-wanted-peace-and-prosperity-theyd-already-have-it/">in exchange for</a> recognizing Israel's right to exist and renunciation of violence. Apparently, co-existing with Jewish neighbors was and remains to be too big of an ask for most Arabs in the Levant region. </p><p>Yes, Israel imposed a blockade and beefed up its border security. However, Israel did so in response to Hamas' terrorist activities that have become more and more of a national security threat to Israel. Labeling Gaza an "open-air prison" ignores Hamas' <i>raison d'être</i> of destroying Jews to the point of neglecting the needs of everyday Gazans. It neglects that most Gazans still support Gaza enough where Hamas has a <a href="https://pcpsr.org/sites/default/files/Poll%2090%20English%20press%20release%2013%20Dec%202023%20Final%20New.pdf">higher approval rating</a> in Gaza than <a href="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/">President Joe Biden has</a> in the United States. It avoids the reality that Egypt also has a border wall on its border with Gaza because Hamas is a threat to all of its neighbors, not only Israel. </p><p>Calling Gaza an "open-air prison" is nothing more than a cudgel that attempts to shift all the blame to Israel while attempting to render Hamas and Gazan citizens as <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/to-support-hamas-is-to-support-genocide.html">guileless victims</a>. Yes, Gazan citizens lamentably face high levels of unemployment, poverty, and less mobility than other citizens in the world. Conversely, it is not so immobilizing to constitute as a prison, as is seen by mobility data of Gazans to and from Israel, Gazan migration data, and data of goods flowing in and out of Gaza. The extent to which Gaza is prison-like is primarily due to oppressive rule of Hamas, followed by the Gazans who voted Hamas in power and the Arab nations that refuse to help the Palestinians. While there is enough blame to go around, we should shift most of it to where it is due: in the direction of Hamas. </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-13222472091508555472024-01-29T10:53:00.000-05:002024-01-29T10:53:24.936-05:00Biden's Overdraft Fee Cap Would Harm the Consumers It Was Meant to Protect<p>As the election cycle commences, one would think that President Biden would be occupied with urgent matters. This is why I am perplexed by what his administration proposed. A couple of weeks ago, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) <a href="https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-proposes-rule-to-close-bank-overdraft-loophole-that-costs-americans-billions-each-year-in-junk-fees/">announced a rule proposal</a> that would close a loophole on bank overdraft fees. Yet it makes sense as an election move. While inflation is not what it was in 2021-22, inflation is still on the minds of the American people since consumer prices have not decreased to pre-2020 levels. The Biden administration attacking bank overdraft fees could be seen Biden fighting against price increases. Biden <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1747631477443936361?s=20">went as far as</a> calling overdraft fees exploitation. Calling a policy exploitation is nothing new. It is a saying that has been made against sweatshops, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2013/04/making-case-for-legalizing-market-in.html">donating one's organs for pay</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2012/11/how-price-gouging-laws-cause-even-more.html">price gouging</a>, and <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2014/04/getting-my-hooks-into-idea-of-property.html">privatized fisheries</a>. Karl Marx <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/why-so-many-on-woke-progressive-left.html">believed that success</a> was inherently exploitative. As nice of a sound byte as it makes, Biden's critique sidesteps the purpose of overdraft fees and basic economics.</p><p>An overdraft takes place when there are insufficient funds in an account to cover a payment or withdrawal. It is the extension of credit from the bank to the customer. The interest for this loan typically comes in the form of a one-time fee per overdraft. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2019/05/note-to-sanders-and-aoc-capping.html">As I have brought up before</a>, banks are financial institutions, which means their business literally is money. The fee helps a bank cover the payments that would otherwise be rejected. What would happen if an overdraft fee cap were to be imposed? </p><p>First, we should ask what the purpose of overdraft fees. Yes, the overdraft fee provides the bank with a source of income. However, <a href="https://reason.com/2023/05/04/the-government-wants-to-cap-credit-card-late-fees-it-will-hurt-the-poor/">the primary function</a> of overdraft fees is to lower and offset the risks of lending. Overdraft fees provide an incentive to not spend more than you have, <a href="https://reason.com/2023/05/04/the-government-wants-to-cap-credit-card-late-fees-it-will-hurt-the-poor/">much like</a> late fees on credit cards provide an incentive to pay credit card bills on time. </p><p>This is because instead of simply charging the fee on an <i>ad hoc </i>basis, <a href="https://twitter.com/FinancialCmte/status/1748001362585989370">it could mean</a> shutting down the services completely, especially for those banking at smaller banks. A research paper from the New York Federal Reserve had the following to say (<a href="https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr973.html">Dlugosz et al., 2023</a>): "When constrained by fee caps, banks reduce overdraft coverage and deposit supply, <b><i>causing more returned checks and a decline in account ownership among low-income households</i></b> (p. 22)." This is not a call for exorbitant fees <i>per se, </i>but showing what happens when fee caps are imposed<i>. </i>What the research does show is that fee caps hamper financial inclusion for the people these caps are meant to help rather than enhance it. Even Biden's acting Comptroller of the Currency Michael Hsu <a href="https://www.occ.treas.gov/news-issuances/speeches/2021/pub-speech-2021-129.pdf">warned that</a> "limiting overdrafts may limit the financial capacity for those who need it the most."</p><p>We should ask ourselves <a href="https://www.cato.org/blog/cfpb-targets-overdraft-fees-bidens-war-prices">what the alternative is</a> if the banks get hit with an overdraft fee cap. Much like with what employers doing <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/05/more-evidence-against-minimum-wage-why.html">with minimum wage laws</a>, banks can find a workaround to circumvent the fee cap. The banks could increase other fees. Banks could also remove such offerings as low-cost checking accounts or travel rewards. As previously mentioned, removing an option such as low-cost checking accounts could lead to more unbanked individuals. Why? </p><p>An overdraft fee cap is an example of a price control, which is something that <a href="https://www.thesling.org/its-time-to-revisit-price-controls-beginning-with-limits-on-overdraft-fees/">proponents readily admit</a>. I have talked about price controls before, whether it is <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2019/05/note-to-sanders-and-aoc-capping.html">consumer loan interest rate caps</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/12/pasadena-voted-for-economically.html">rent control</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/08/drug-price-controls-in-inflation.html">drug pricing</a>, <a href="http://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2012/11/how-price-gouging-laws-cause-even-more.html">price gouging</a>, or <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2015/01/was-switzerland-right-in-removing-its.html">fixed exchange rates</a>. A price control below the equilibrium point, much like an overdraft fee cap, creates a shortage because the demand exceeds the supply. The shortage exists because some banks do not have the luxury of reducing or eliminating their overdraft fees. </p><p>The Left-leaning Brookings Institution <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/agenda/2021/06/24/bank-overdrafts-big-business-small-banks-495688">points out</a> that it is smaller banks in particular that make the bulk of their profits from their overdraft fees (<a href="https://www.brookings.edu/articles/a-few-small-banks-have-become-overdraft-giants/">Klein, 2021</a>). This leads to a valid point that the Cleveland Reserve Bank brings up in its research on the unbanked (<a href="https://www.clevelandfed.org/publications/economic-commentary/2022/ec-202207-unbanked-in-america-a-review-of-the-literature">Boel and Zimmerman, 2022</a>). While overdraft fees exclude some from the system, the overdraft fees also provide the revenue stream to make low-balance accounts more profitable. This is all the more so for smaller banks. Banks are more incentivized to open accounts for a wider range of customers, including low-income households, when they have this revenue stream. It would explain how overdraft fees help lead to greater financial inclusion of lower-income households on net. </p><p>Much like it is <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/05/paying-rent-during-covid-19-pandemic-my.html">with landlords</a>, it is politically expedient to malign banks, regardless of what they have actually done. What needs to be recognized is that banks are for-profit entities. If they continue to operate at a loss, they cannot stay in business. Banks thus have to make decisions as to whether it is worth it to have smaller accounts with smaller overdraft fees. Some of them decide it is not worth it, hence the shortage that price controls cause. At best, an overdraft fee cap <a href="https://www.aei.org/op-eds/junk-fees-or-junk-policy/">is asking</a> customers with stable finances to subsidize higher-risk customers. At worst, such a shortage <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/01/24/cap-overdraft-fees-hurt-poor-families/">can drive low-income households</a> to such sub-optimal options as <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/07/payday-loans-are-not-ideal-but-they.html">payday loans</a>, pawn shops, loan sharks, or taking out a second mortgage on their home. This unfortunate phenomenon has been observed <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2019/05/note-to-sanders-and-aoc-capping.html">with consumer loan interest caps</a>.</p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj63wX1y6XTrHRiHmTPmHX9DrkTYj4f7PQUj72HvUS4aoZzFUJfiyaNwjix-P0CfeL2JDBjIB_L7ZGs2f-wEOwrGKm_iOh5cUzjd5q7SwORYowb3Z0NntuNKdJBcloAmL1je5Tt_mvF-xdCRTLbQS7gZRu9ionV967g4ePdnGbX55JExJ9TMGz1-8T9zg/s975/Overdraft%20Graphic.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="609" data-original-width="975" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj63wX1y6XTrHRiHmTPmHX9DrkTYj4f7PQUj72HvUS4aoZzFUJfiyaNwjix-P0CfeL2JDBjIB_L7ZGs2f-wEOwrGKm_iOh5cUzjd5q7SwORYowb3Z0NntuNKdJBcloAmL1je5Tt_mvF-xdCRTLbQS7gZRu9ionV967g4ePdnGbX55JExJ9TMGz1-8T9zg/w640-h400/Overdraft%20Graphic.png" width="640" /></a></p><p><br /></p><p>These arguments also need to consider the market trend of overdraft fees. Overdraft fees have <a href="https://www.cato.org/blog/cfpb-targets-overdraft-fees-bidens-war-prices">been on the decline</a>, from $30.9 billion in 2008 to $12.1 billion in 2023. With the <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/10/corporate-profits-are-not-main-cause-of.html">rhetoric on the Far Left</a>, you would think that banks only care about greed and lining their pockets by exploiting the working man more and more. So why the historical decline in overdraft fees? </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuPfS9O-4phJR7RxmwvFMNUUFn-DF7tXvUCB8RJ6jH0yliSU_GVywYv-96mS2Vf3RzuDiZLf9GTPopBJ0u2dWSSxYRFv1JamyjhT9r49OcuF6aq-Kk85dKfw-Z5OUfQZ9VZQ7iu0IuR3IEIpZxvd82mDVP1U-G-yQvNynAfGgVUgtn-VVGmwcIcys2Bg/s1450/Screenshot%202024-01-25%20at%2011.15.24%E2%80%AFPM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1234" data-original-width="1450" height="544" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuPfS9O-4phJR7RxmwvFMNUUFn-DF7tXvUCB8RJ6jH0yliSU_GVywYv-96mS2Vf3RzuDiZLf9GTPopBJ0u2dWSSxYRFv1JamyjhT9r49OcuF6aq-Kk85dKfw-Z5OUfQZ9VZQ7iu0IuR3IEIpZxvd82mDVP1U-G-yQvNynAfGgVUgtn-VVGmwcIcys2Bg/w640-h544/Screenshot%202024-01-25%20at%2011.15.24%E2%80%AFPM.png" width="640" /></a></div><p><br /></p><p>To quote the <a href="https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/2023/mar/is-era-overdraft-fees-over">St. Louis Federal Reserve</a>, "Competition, from other banks and nonbank providers such as fintech firms, arguably have affected overdraft practices more than anything else." This competitive pressure <a href="https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/599085-junk-fees-or-junk-policy/">can incentivize</a> banks to restructure how it approaches these fees. There have been <a href="https://www.bankrate.com/banking/checking/banks-eliminated-overdraft-fees/">multiple banks</a> that have either eliminated or reduced their overdraft fees without government intervention, including Bank of America, BMO Harris, Capital One, Citibank, and PNC Bank. The bank Vero <a href="https://www.bankrate.com/banking/challenger-banks-reinventing-overdraft-fee-after-killing-it/">allows for</a> up to $50 in overdraft and automatically takes that loaned money back when the customer adds more funds to their account.</p><p>As long as fraud is not occurring and people can freely opt into overdraft protection or other banking services, we do not need Biden's latest proposed rule when a competitive marketplace is already reducing overdraft fees. The most probable outcome of such a policy would be limiting the supply of financial services to lower-income households. An overdraft fee cap will only hurt the people it is supposed to help, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2019/07/the-left-needs-more-than-good.html">which is a pattern</a> with economic policies on the Left. Consumers should not have to suffer simply because the President wants to score political points in an election year.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-63072163546808600822024-01-25T11:49:00.000-05:002024-01-25T11:49:02.638-05:00Some Inconvenient Truths In Response to the "Gaza Is an Open-Air Prison" Argument (Part I)<p>As the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza continues, the pro-Palestinian side naïvely advocates for a ceasefire thinking it will end the fighting in the Middle East <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/01/israel-should-not-and-probably-will-not.html">when it will do nothing of the kind</a>. Since Israel militarily responded to Hamas attacking, kidnapping, torturing, raping, murdering, and decapitating hundreds of Israeli civilians, pro-Palestinian activists have been on the warpath to make Israel look bad. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/12/for-umpteenth-time-accusations-that.html">It fallaciously lobs</a> the accusation of Israel committing genocide, which has become especially <i>en vogue </i>since October 7. Other such untrue accusations as <a href="http://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2015/06/why-anti-israel-bds-movement-is-simply.html">occupier</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/to-support-hamas-is-to-support-genocide.html">colonizer</a>, and <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2016/03/no-there-is-not-israeli-apartheid-in.html">apartheid state</a> have been part of the verbal arsenal of the pro-Palestinian side for some time now. </p><p>An article from the Right-of-center <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/america-helps-make-gaza-an-open-air-prison-palestinians-policy-war-zone-refugees-0e5a9b28#">Wall Street Journal</a>, of all places, made another claim earlier this week: Gaza is an open-air prison. The premise of this argument is that the citizens of Gaza have such restrictions in movement, whether physical or economic, that Gaza <i>de facto </i>acts as one large prison. What this language invokes is the image of Israel acting as a warden oppressing Gazans. This argument is nothing new; it has been made by <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/06/14/gaza-israels-open-air-prison-15">Human Rights Watch</a>, <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/10/damning-evidence-of-war-crimes-as-israeli-attacks-wipe-out-entire-families-in-gaza/">Amnesty International</a>, and the <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/10/how-gaza-became-an-open-air-prison.html">Left-leaning Slate</a>, amongst others, over the years. The Gaza Strip was not always riddled with poverty, unemployment, and corrupt terrorists running the government the way it is now. How did we get here? </p><p>The current version of <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/gaza-fence-was-not-designed-to-prevent-mass-assault-on-its-own-builder-said-in-2018/">fence between Israel and Gaza</a> was built in 2002 and fortified in 2005 after the IDF's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza. In 2007, Israel imposed an economic blockade. Why a blockade? In early 2006, Hamas defeated its political rival, Fatah, in political elections. In June 2007, Hamas took over Gaza. Shortly thereafter, Hamas <a href="https://www.csis.org/analysis/gaza-why-war-wont-end">started attacking Israel</a>. Hamas has not been what we would call friendly towards Israel. Since its founding in 1988, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/to-support-hamas-is-to-support-genocide.html">Hamas has called</a> for the destruction of Israel and indeed all Jews. <a href="https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-hamas#chapter-title-0-2">Since 1993</a>, Hamas has employed suicide bombings against Israel. As for launching rockets, Hamas has been at it <a href="https://www.hrw.org/report/2009/08/06/rockets-gaza/harm-civilians-palestinian-armed-groups-rocket-attacks">since 2001</a>. And let's not forget the violent and death that came with the First and Second Intifadas. With that level of animus, <a href="https://toputitbluntly.com/2023/10/21/whats-the-truth-behind-the-charge-the-root-cause-of-hamas-terrorism-is-israels-blockade-of-gaza-which-has-turned-gaza-into-an-open-air-prison/">it is understandable</a> that Israel would impose a blockade and a border wall on its borders with the Gaza Strip to protect its citizens.</p><p>This leads to <a href="https://jewinthecity.com/2023/10/five-misconceptions-about-the-war-in-israel-and-gaza-and-how-to-respond-to-them/">the first inconvenient truth</a>: <b><i>The purpose of the border fence and blockade is not to keep civilians locked in Gaza or to enforce "collective punishment" out of vindictiveness, but rather to <u>prevent terrorists from entering Israel's borders and wreaking havoc</u></i></b>. Hamas has posed a militaristic threat <a href="https://www.ajc.org/news/how-to-respond-to-common-misconceptions-about-the-attack-on-israel">since it</a> took over Gaza in 2007. This level of national security would be a basic precaution that any country with an antagonistic neighbor who is hellbent on wiping out one's entire citizenry would take. The United Nations, which has typically been antagonistic towards Israel, accepted in its Palmer Report that Israel's blockade exists for legitimate self-defense purposes (<a href="https://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/Palmer-Committee-Final-report.pdf">UN, p. 40</a>).</p><p>This brings us to the second inconvenient truth: <b><i><a href="https://www.britannica.com/event/Israels-disengagement-from-Gaza">In 2005</a>, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) unilaterally withdrew from Gaza</i></b>, which means the accusation of Israel being an occupying force in Gaza <a href="https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/debunking-25-left-wing-and-arab-myths-from-a-left-wing-arab-perspective">loses any merit</a>. Before the IDF left Gaza in 2005, American Jewish donors gave Gaza 1,000 greenhouses valued at <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/18/nyregion/how-old-friends-of-israel-gave-14-million-to-help-the-palestinians.html">$14 million</a>. These greenhouses were producing millions of dollars of revenue in flowers and agricultural products. What did Gazans do? Shortly after the IDF disengaging from Gaza, Gazan citizens <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna9331863#.U8bdoJRdXng">destroyed the greenhouses</a>. This was before Hamas was ever in charge of governing over the Gazan people or before Israel imposed a blockade. </p><p>Yet another inconvenient truth: <i style="font-weight: bold;">Hamas has been running the show for well the better part of two decades, not Israel</i>. Gazans voted Hamas into power in 2006. As the governing entity of Gaza, Hamas is the one responsible for the day-to-day well-being of Gazans, not Israel. Hamas could have taken that international aid it received from various countries and international organizations to build schools, hospitals, and infrastructure to provide amenities for its people. What has Hamas <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2023/11/08/if-palestinians-wanted-peace-and-prosperity-theyd-already-have-it/">decided to do</a> instead? It has mainly invested in rockets and building tunnels to attack Israel, meanwhile grinding everyday Gazans into a state of poverty when it is not <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/12/for-umpteenth-time-accusations-that.html">using its citizens as human shields</a>. Hamas continues to bombard Israel with rocket attacks to this day. Hamas leaders, who have a <a href="https://nationalpost.com/news/world/israel-middle-east/hamas-money">net worth of $11 billion</a>, are living the high-life in Qatar while its people suffer. Ultimately, Gazans <a href="https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/debunking-25-left-wing-and-arab-myths-from-a-left-wing-arab-perspective">had two choices</a> after the IDF's disengagement from Gaza: build a prosperous economy or use that newly found freedom to attack Israel because hating Jews is a bigger priority than living peacefully. The Gazans opted for the latter. The fact that was the choice they made is not Israel's fault. </p><p>Here is an inconvenient truth that has to do with some basic geography. Israel is not the only country that shares a border with Gaza. <b><i>Egypt also shares a border with Gaza.</i></b> There has been a border wall on the Egypt-Gaza border <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna10688786">for the better part of two decades</a>. While it is convenient for the pro-Palestinian side to blame Israel, the reality is that the Egyptian government completes the enclosure. Why does Egypt make the choice to not let Gazans cross into Egypt? For a very similar reason that Israel does.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVZrF8Pww42Ho7fXoEWBNlAuxNTM5nzeqNIJffxJjYdo21LkTlW4lXSiF-TOFr6YcIZuN3U3sq7NhhQYnokMzr60kyS6OM32ztn29Km1i9PyuOTD8r9kd1BR6XvMnDPveDb2t6CBCefcRq9FduYK4ApfsaPM6izr3ujwVoiZs0hzJgYZfcv0s9kNuabw/s2000/Gaza-strip-political-map-boundary.jpg.webp" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2000" data-original-width="1398" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVZrF8Pww42Ho7fXoEWBNlAuxNTM5nzeqNIJffxJjYdo21LkTlW4lXSiF-TOFr6YcIZuN3U3sq7NhhQYnokMzr60kyS6OM32ztn29Km1i9PyuOTD8r9kd1BR6XvMnDPveDb2t6CBCefcRq9FduYK4ApfsaPM6izr3ujwVoiZs0hzJgYZfcv0s9kNuabw/w448-h640/Gaza-strip-political-map-boundary.jpg.webp" width="448" /></a></div><br /><p><br /></p><p>In January 2008, Hamas demolished the border wall that previously between Gaza and Egypt. Shortly after, Egypt started building a steel wall with the help of the United States. <a href="https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/egypt-builds-wall-changes-its-tune-israels-barrier">The concern was</a> that Hamas would team up with the Muslim Brotherhood, which would have destabilized Egypt. Much like with Israel, Egypt realizes that securing one's land borders is a standard part of national security. Even now, most pro-Palestinian advocates have not even thought to ask <b><i>why Egypt or other Arab nations are not helping out their Arab brothers and sisters in their hour of need</i></b>. </p><p>Non-rhetorically, <a href="https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/why-egypt-wont-open-border-its-palestinian-neighbors">that would be a combination</a> of not being able to absorb the influx of refugees along with the instability that would come with allowing Hamas terrorists and sympathizers into the country. While I do not disagree with Egypt's or Jordan's decision to deny Palestinian refugees access to their countries, it does mean that the indecision of the Arab nations has been contributing and continues to contribute to the plight of Gazans. Yet you do not hear for the pro-Palestinian side accusing Egypt of committing genocide or being an apartheid state. The pro-Palestine puts all the onus on Israel <a href="https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2023/11/insights-from-israel-saying-israel-made-gaza-an-open-air-prison-is-a-smokescreen-for-antisemitism/">while ignoring the fact</a> that Arab nations (Egypt in particular) also place restrictions on Palestinians entering their countries. </p><p><br /></p><p><b><span style="font-size: medium;">In the next Part, I will discuss additional inconvenient truths that undermine the "Gaza is an open-air prison" argument.</span></b></p><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-73685744406116001722024-01-22T09:54:00.002-05:002024-01-22T12:03:59.436-05:00Mandated Gender-Neutral Toy Aisles Is Another Instance of California's Woke Virtue-Signaling <p>California started off the New Year with a mandate for retail stores selling toys or childcare items to have gender-neutral aisles. This mandate stems from a <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1084">2021 California law</a> stating that any retailer with a physical presence in California and 500 employees is to maintain "a gender-neutral section or area to be labeled at the discretion of the retailer." Retail stores that fail to comply pay $250 for the first infraction and $500 for subsequent infractions. <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/01/us/gender-neutral-toy-aisles-are-now-law-in-california/index.html">The idea behind this law</a> is to allow children to express themselves without being hindered by traditional gender norms. That might sound congenial, but here are some issues:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Retail stores are attuned to the supply and demand of its customers. Retail stores not need such a mandate to tell them that California is a Left-of-center state in which there has been an increased demand for gender-neutral consumer goods. Target dropped its gender-specific sections in 2015, and other such stores as Toys 'R Us followed suit. Even toymaker Hasbro removed the "Mr." from its Potato Head line. </li><li>You would think California has bigger problems to contend with, such as crime (including shoplifting in retail stores), homelessness, preventing dangerous wildfires, a population exodus, or its budget deficit. </li><li>To properly enforce this law, the State of California would need to hire someone to regularly inspect toy stores to make sure they are compliant with this law. If the law is unenforceable, it ends up being superfluous virtue-signaling at best. At worst, enforcement is a waste of taxpayer dollars that needlessly punishes retailers. </li><li>Why does the government feel the need to mandate how businesses display and market their merchandise? Such decisions should be left to business owners. </li></ul><p></p><p>As I already brought up, there are more pressing matters in the world than gender-neutral toy aisles. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2016/12/should-toys-be-gender-typed-or-gender.html">I wrote a piece seven years ago</a> as to whether toys should be gender-specific or gender-neutral. If parents want to buy gender-neutral toys for their children, they should be allowed to do so. The same goes for those who want to buy gender-specific toys for their children. It is partially the absurdity of the law that prompted me to write this blog entry on a solution in search of a problem. After all, satire website Babylon Bee <a href="https://babylonbee.com/news/california-bill-prohibits-stores-from-selling-toys-that-dont-actively-confuse-childrens-sexuality">called it before</a> California legislators proposed the bill. What concerns me is not the overall influence this bill will have on the lives of Californians. <a href="https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-09-15/editorial-rearranging-the-toy-shelves-is-not-state-gov">It is setting an eery precedent</a> and a tone that signals to woke lawmakers that they can feel entitled to manage every aspect of private commerce to their liking. I do not want to live in a world that encroaches on private businesses in such a fashion. Legislators should think twice before imposing their values onto customers and businesses in such a fashion.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-46305388501527249252024-01-18T12:12:00.003-05:002024-01-20T13:29:03.073-05:00Fauci Admits Social Distancing Rules Were Likely Not Based on Data: Another Erosion of Trust in Public Health Officials<p>Dr. Anthony Fauci made the spotlight again as he sat in front of a closed-door congressional subcommittee last week for questioning on the pandemic response. Fauci <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/release/wenstrup-releases-statement-following-dr-faucis-two-day-testimony/">made some interesting admissions</a> during his latest testimony. He gave credence to the theory that COVID was engineered and accidentally released from a lab in Wuhan. He conceded that the <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/09/10-reasons-why-bidens-federal-vaccine.html">COVID vaccine mandates</a> that he personally advised likely increased vaccine hesitancy. There was one more interesting admission from Fauci during his testimony. Fauci professed that the six-foot social distancing rule was likely not based on data, and that the social distancing rule "just sort of happened." </p><p>According <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20793561-leopold-nih-foia-anthony-fauci-emails">to Fauci's emails</a> that were released by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), <a href="https://brownstone.org/articles/the-purpose-of-social-distancing-was-not-to-wait-for-a-vaccine/">Fauci stated</a> in early March 2020 that the purpose of social distancing was "not geared to wait for a vaccine." For Fauci, the goal of social distancing was to "prevent a single person who is infected to readily spread to others." In other words, Fauci had a draconian, zero-Covid approach to pandemic policy. To even attempt such a policy would either require a vaccine or mandatory human separation into perpetuity. </p><p>He ran an untested, far-flung theory and had enough clout to thrust it onto the American people, which is ironic coming from the man <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/557602-fauci-attacks-on-me-are-really-also-attacks-on-science/">who said</a> "attacks on me are attacks on science." The six-foot recommendation affected recommendations for capacity limits in establishments, face masks in certain jurisdictions (e.g., <a href="https://coronavirus.dc.gov/maskorder">Washington, DC</a>; <a href="http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/acd/docs/WhenToWearAMask.pdf">Los Angeles</a>), influenced the decision to implement lockdowns, and <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/ease-restrictions-schools-dont-close-them/617146/">was the single largest barrier</a> for re-opening public schools. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/12/we-didnt-know-is-invalid-argument-for.html">We had epidemiological knowledge</a> and pandemic recommendations prior to the pandemic that lockdowns were not going to work. As for the six-foot social distancing rule (not to mention <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/05/school-closures-were-unnecessary-during.html">school closures</a>), we had evidence early on in the pandemic that the recommendation was not based on science. The following is from the leading medical journal <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3223/rr-28"><i>The BMJ </i>in August 2020</a>:</p><p style="text-align: center;"><i>Rigid safe distancing rules are an oversimplification based on outdated science...SARS-CoV-2 transmission [is based on] multiple variables: indoors and outdoors (and, for the former, level of ventilation), room occupancy (low or high), time spent tighter (short or long), vocalization (silent, speaking, shouting, or singing, and masking (yes or no). </i></p><p>What was Fauci doing in August 2020? He <a href="https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/public-health/dr-fauci-outlines-5-ways-blunt-covid-19-pandemic-s-resurgence">was still recommending</a> social distancing of six feet, which was contrary to the science laid out in <i>The BMJ </i>article. Fauci did not fare better as the pandemic proceeded. In November 2020, Fauci <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/16/fauci-why-still-need-masks-social-distancing-after-covid-19-vaccine.html">recommended</a> social distancing even after getting a vaccine. This is the same Fauci <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/12/fauci-is-dead-wrong-about-indefinitely.html">that said in late 2021 that he wanted us</a> to wear masks on airplanes indefinitely, even <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/02/n95-masks-are-not-effective-at.html">though best evidence</a> has since shown that face masks are ineffective in slowing down COVID transmission. </p><p>Why should we care about Fauci's social distancing recommendation now that the pandemic is over? It is more than a key health official <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/release/wenstrup-releases-statement-following-first-day-of-dr-faucis-testimony/">said over 100 times</a> in a single congressional testimony last week that he "did not recall" pertinent information, which is Beltway-speak for covering his tracks. Fauci <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/12/fauci-is-dead-wrong-about-indefinitely.html">got a number of key facets wrong</a> during the pandemic, including face masks, herd immunity, lockdowns, school closures, vaccines <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/10/pfizer-director-on-covid-vaccines.html">being able</a> to stop COVID transmission, and now social distancing. </p><p>What makes this worse is that the problem goes beyond a single risk-averse octogenarian. As I <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/02/cdc-directors-february-2023-testimony.html">pointed out last year,</a> former CDC Director Rochelle Walensky did not care about the science of face masks, as well as having been off-base on outdoor COVID transmission, the threat of breakthrough cases, and lockdowns. The Biden Administration also <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/03/biden-administration-ignores-science-on.html">ignored the science</a> on natural immunity. </p><p>Why Fauci's testimony is so important after the pandemic is because it shows the systemic failures that not only caused considerable harm to millions of Americans, but have led to the rot within public health agencies. The establishment chose fear and extreme risk-aversion <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/04/when-follow-science-during-pandemic.html">over science</a> and changing their advice as new findings came along. Dissenting opinions were vilified and often suppressed during the pandemic, even though the so-called "conspiracy theorists" were by and large correct. It is little surprise that such politics <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/02/cdc-directors-february-2023-testimony.html">have rightfully resulted</a> in diminished trust of public health officials. </p><p>While it is a step in the right direction that Fauci recognizes the lack of science behind the six-foot rule, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/02/questions-us-government-should-answer.html">we need to ask</a> how we got here and what lessons are to be learned. In the likelihood of a future pandemic, our response must be based on facts and actual science. Otherwise, history will repeat itself and cause immeasurable harm in the name of "Science."</p><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-29333835055120814802024-01-15T11:37:00.002-05:002024-01-15T11:37:12.021-05:00Meta-Analysis Shows That "Systemic Racism" Does Not Really Exist In U.S. Criminal Sentencing<p>Today is Martin Luther King Day. It is hard not to think about the man and the legend. MLK had to face Jim Crow laws, which <i>de jure </i>forced racial segregation between black and white people. MLK was arrested <a href="https://nmaahc.si.edu/explore/stories/5-things-know-surprising-facts">29 times</a>, including the <a href="https://mississippitoday.org/2023/10/19/on-this-day-in-1960-martin-luther-king-jr-was-arrested-after-atlanta-sit-ins/">so-called "crime"</a> of sitting at a lunch counter with white people. Even after the Civil War, the justice system treated African-Americans unfairly in more ways than one. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a turning point for civil liberties, which included overturning the Jim Crow laws. I would not expect changes for racial attitudes to happen overnight, but it has been about six decades since the Civil Rights Act. I have to wonder if the criminal justice system has improved since then. </p><p>If you listen to the Far Left, the answer to that question is a resounding "No!" <a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2020/06/65585/">Their thesis is</a> that systemic racism is epidemic in the criminal justice system, and as such, is rotten to its core because of how it treats racial minorities. For advocates of this theory, the fact that the overtly racist laws by and large no longer existing does not matter. Those arguing that systemic racism exists either argue that it comes in form of there being implicit bias within the system or that institutional factors result in systemic racial disparities in the judicial system. In spite of removing <i>de jure </i>racism, proponents argue that the system <i>de facto </i>remains racist and White supremacist.</p><p>Part of my issue of the "systemic racism" argument is <a href="https://newdiscourses.com/2020/10/theres-no-such-thing-as-systematic-racism/">with the framing</a>. Racism depends too much on intent and belief, which is an issue because the vast majority of criminal justice laws being scrutinized are not <i>de jure </i>or explicitly racist. It assumes that any disparity is <i>prima facie </i>discrimination or racism, a concept that <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/05/disparity-doesnt-automatically-mean.html">I refuted last year</a>. The other issue with framing is that "systemic" is too vague of a term to describe anything meaningful. As African-American linguist and Columbia University professor John McWhorter <a href="https://johnmcwhorter.substack.com/p/can-we-please-ditch-the-term-systemic">points out</a>, "this usage of 'systemic racism' is more rhetorical bludgeon than a simple term of reference."</p><p>My bigger contention is the fact that the argument violates the logical fallacy of begging the question, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/beg_the_question">which is an argument</a> in which the premise assumes the truth of the conclusion. In the context of critical race theory and the "systemic racism" argument, <a href="https://www.nas.org/academic-questions/35/2/critical-race-theory-in-six-logical-fallacies">it means that</a> those who question the theory are "systematically deceived" because they are not "in the know":</p><p><i>If someone begs the question and foreswears any counter-evidence, then the idea becomes unfalsifiable. This is irrational. Every challenge to one's viewpoint can then be dismissed a priori...When a claim is taken to be impervious to criticism, it loses rationality given its irrefutable dogmatism. </i></p><p>I know that people on the Far Left <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/07/the-smithsonians-take-on-white-culture.html">like to argue</a> that logic or objective, linear thinking are part of "white culture" or "white supremacy." It means that their arguments about systemic discrimination cannot be criticized.....or so they think. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/09/why-we-should-be-skeptical-and-critical.html">I value logic, facts, and rationale</a> over emotion grasping towards one's preconceived notions, especially when talking about public policy. That means I am going to scrutinize the theory, especially when it has major implications for criminal justice policy. </p><p>We should be asking ourselves here whether the facts line up with a story about systemic racism or not. This is exactly what two scholars from Stetson University did when they published their meta-analysis last month on the topic of race, class, and criminal adjudication (<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359178923000927">Ferguson and Smith, 2023</a>). These scholars examined 51 studies that have been published on the topic since 2005. Their main finding was that <i style="font-weight: bold;">"neither class nor race biases for criminal adjudications for either violent or property crimes could be reliably detected." </i>The exception noted in the meta-analysis was drug crimes, which is significant because drug crimes often have strict sentencing. Even then, the effect sizes were very small (i.e., 1.6-1.8% of the variance in criminal adjudication). </p><p>I am not here to say that discrimination is nonexistent in the criminal justice system. There are other aspects to consider, such as arrest rates, innocence rates, or rates at which certain people are stopped by police officers. Conversely, sentencing is a major aspect of the criminal justice system because it determines how badly one is ultimately punished for committing a crime. </p><p>The <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/article/is-there-racial-bias-in-criminal-sentencing">near absence of sentencing bias</a> in terms of class and race are surprising given what "conventional wisdom" is on the topic. Yet it makes sense why I have not seen people clamoring to laud these findings. Much like with <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/09/why-we-should-be-skeptical-and-critical.html">climate change</a> or <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/05/title-42-was-shoddy-public-health-and.html">COVID</a>, it would not make for good news if something is not in crisis mode. For the Far Left, it means losing <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/01/the-woke-left-controlling-language-will.html">control over the political narrative</a>. I talked about this concept <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2024/01/new-robust-research-shows-that-hysteria.html">a couple of weeks ago</a> when covering how growing income inequality has not really been a thing in the past six decades. </p><p>If the criminal justice system is not in the disarray that the "systemic racism" crowd is purporting, it means they have less political power. This is more than having an arguably cynical view about political power, although I honestly would call it "being realistic." As the authors of the study also point out, such a view is detrimental to society because reduces public confidence, creates more social discord, and reduces community cooperation with criminal justice authorities, all of which erode the criminal justice system and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/mega-study-finds-that-minorities-dont-receive-harsher-criminal-punishments-but-that-academics-said-so-anyway">have the potential</a> to increase crime. Plus, it perpetuates our post-truth world when political narratives matter than reality.</p><p>This is not to say that reforms could be made, a topic which <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/search/label/Criminal%20Justice%20Policy">I have written in past pieces</a>. On the whole, I am frankly relieved at the finding in these studies. Mitigating and ultimately eliminating racial bias should be something every free, democratic society should aspire towards. For me, it is marvelous that the United States is, in at least one aspect, becoming a more perfect union. I hope that we as a society can continue towards this trend in a more neutral, impartial criminal justice system. </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-6137453948710666212024-01-11T06:46:00.000-05:002024-01-11T06:46:09.222-05:00Maine to Show How Partial Prostitution Decriminalization Will Give the Shaft to All Parties Involved<p>Although I aspire to keep apprised of everything going on in the world, the truth is that it is not possible. There is only so much time and effort one can dedicate to current events. Sometimes current events do not come up on my radar until later. That is how I felt when I read <a href="https://reason.com/2024/01/03/maines-bad-prostitution-law-could-be-coming-soon-to-your-state/">an article from Reason Magazine</a> entitled <i>Maine's Bad Prostitution Law Could Be Coming Soon to Your State.</i> Prior to reading it, I did not know that Maine enacted a law to partially decriminalize prostitution or that in July 2023, it was the first state to do so. </p><p>Maine adopted what is referred to as the Nordic [Criminal] Model. Why is it referred to as the Nordic Model? Because Sweden was the first to adopt it in 1999. Norway and Iceland later adopted the model in 2009. Essentially, the Nordic model is an approach that criminalizes prostitution customers but not sex workers. The idea behind this approach is that punishing the clients will reduce demand for sexual services. I take multiple issues with this legal approach to sexual activity. </p><p>The first is that it makes the paternalistic assumption that all sex workers are victims and are incapable of consenting to sexual activity, whereas clients are exploitative and unscrupulous. Instead of empowering sex workers (most of whom are women), such an approach infantilizes them. This is not to minimize the prevalence of human trafficking or child prostitution, both of which are ethically problematic due to their coercive nature. It does, however, exclude and ignore the reality that there are consenting adults that are willing to pay for sex or willing to get paid to have sex. After all, there is a reason why prostitution has been referred to as the "world's oldest profession." Sex is a highly pleasurable act, and as such, there is an understandably high demand for sexual services.</p><p>Under the Nordic Model, it is clear that the client gets punished because the client is still <i>de jure </i>punished for paying for sex. By not legally punishing sex workers, it seems like the Nordic model helps sex workers. However, that is far from being the case. The fact that purchasers of sexual services are punished still keeps the market an underground market. This means that most of the aspects of criminalizing prostitution remain intact. While some find criminalization acceptable, I do not and I have not since <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2013/08/why-legalizing-prostitution-wouldnt-be.html">I wrote a piece on legalizing prostitution in 2013</a>. The Nordic Model presents a few issues for sex workers:</p><p>1. While proponents state protecting sex workers as a benefit of the Nordic Model, the Nordic Model exists to reduce demand for prostitution and <a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2021-02-10/why-the-sex-trade-should-only-be-partially-decriminalized">ultimately eliminate</a> the demand for commercial sex services. Tangentially, this reasoning falters considering that the Nordic model does not reduce the demand for sexual services (<a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10611-018-9795-6">Kington and Thomas, 2018</a>) because again, people really like sex. But let's get back to the crux of the issue here. Sure, the sex workers do not get sent to jail for being sex workers under the Nordic Model. For those who rely on that revenue to pay their bills, that provides little comfort for sex workers because fewer clients means less income for them. Plus, this means accepting worse work in the sex trade, which brings me to my next point...</p><p>2. The clientele under the Nordic Model is reduced to those who are willing to break the law, which <a href="https://theowp.org/reports/how-different-legislative-approaches-impact-sex-workers/">increases the likelihood</a> of high-risk and/or violent encounters. This is not mere conjecture. A 2023 study from the University of Chicago shows that prostitution legalization lowers rape rates, whereas criminalization, notably under the Nordic Model, proliferates sexual violence (<a href="https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/720583?journalCode=jle">Gao and Petrova, 2023</a>).</p><p>3. <a href="https://reason.com/2024/01/03/maines-bad-prostitution-law-could-be-coming-soon-to-your-state/">Under decriminalization</a>, <a href="https://www.rstreet.org/commentary/what-it-would-mean-to-decriminalize-sex-work/">it is still illegal</a> for sex workers to work together and provide mutual assistance, to work in safe locations, or the employ people to help keep them safe. Plus, clients will be more reluctant to undergo screening processes prior to having sex. This means that sex workers cannot take basic measures to help ensure their occupational safety, as was the case in the Canada case study (<a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36414310/">McDermid et al., 2022</a>). <a href="https://www.lse.ac.uk/News/Latest-news-from-LSE/2022/l-December-22/policy-makers-must-not-look-to-nordic-model-for-sex-trade-legislation">A report from</a> the London School of Economics found not only did the Nordic Model make clients more dangerous for sex workers, but also that sex workers were more likely to face eviction or deportation (<a href="https://www.lse.ac.uk/women-peace-security/assets/documents/2022/W922-0152-WPS-Policy-Paper-6-singles.pdf">Vuolajärvi, 2022</a>). By keeping prostitution in the underground market, it makes it more difficult for sex workers to gain a sense of empowerment. </p><p>4. According to a study from Reframe Health + Justice Consulting (<a href="https://www.reframehealthandjustice.com/resources/attacking-demand-escalating-violence-the-impact-of-twenty-years-of-end-demand-implementation-on-people-who-trade-sex">D'Adamo, 2021</a>), the impact on sex workers from implementation of the Nordic Model included the following: shifting power balances to favor clients, increases in violence and stigma towards sex workers, decrease in income, increased use of substances, and decrease in health outcomes (e.g., increased stress and fatigue). A report from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) similarly found that the Nordic model increased stigma and discrimination of sex workers while reducing health services (<a href="https://www.aclu.org/publications/sex-work-decriminalization-answer-what-research-tells-us">ACLU, 2020, p. 10</a>).</p><p><b style="text-decoration: underline;">Postscript.</b> Endangering sex workers and lowering their quality of life <a href="https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/partial-decriminalization-sex-work-could-cause-more-harm-good">is not exactly a ringing endorsement</a> of the Nordic Model. Aside from sex workers and clients, this Model also screws over law enforcement. Why? Because they are spending time and resources to police private, consensual sex acts. This argument is all the more important considering that Maine, much like the rest of the United States, <a href="https://www.mainepublic.org/courts-and-crime/2023-01-06/amid-an-ongoing-police-shortage-maines-safe-reputation-is-proving-to-be-a-recruitment-tool">has endured</a> <a href="https://www.pressherald.com/2023/09/05/americas-small-towns-are-disbanding-police-forces-citing-hiring-woes">police shortages</a> since the pandemic. Last year, the towns of <a href="https://www.newscentermaine.com/article/news/local/public-safety/limestone-police-department-close-staffing-shorage-applicants/97-a55cdf29-cff2-45ff-9f40-a1bc75cc5e42">Limestone</a> and <a href="https://wgan.com/news/074470-maine-police-department-temporarily-closes-due-to-shortage-of-officers/">Dixfield</a>, Maine had to shut down its police stations due to shortages. The police could be pursuing actual crimes instead of victimless ones. </p><p>Conflating consensual adult behavior with exploitation is a direct assault on bodily autonomy specifically and freedom generally. To respect sex workers and their profession, we need to fully decriminalize sex work and treat it as if it were any other economic service. Only then will we take the right step in civil liberties as far as sex work is concerned. </p><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-28738315209177908402024-01-08T07:57:00.004-05:002024-02-21T20:41:16.821-05:00Israel Should Not and Probably Will Not Accept a Ceasefire: January 2024 Edition<p>It has been about three months of fighting in Gaza since Hamas attacked Israeli civilians on October 7. Needless to say, there has been a growing voice of disapproval towards the Israeli counteroffensive in response to Hamas' carnage from October 7, 2023. Last month, a large majority in the United Nations General Assembly <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144717">voted in favor</a> of a ceasefire. A month later, there is still no ceasefire. That would explain why King Abdullah II of Jordan <a href="https://news.yahoo.com/blinken-jordan-seeking-avoid-regional-075415462.html">is pressing</a> U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken for a ceasefire, even in spite of the fact that this is very same King <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/king-abdullah-gaza-no-refugees-jordan-no-refugees-egypt-2023-10-17/">has refused</a> to accept Gazan refugees. </p><p>The premise of the call for a ceasefire is to stop the rising death toll, the continued displacement of Gazans, and to allow for humanitarian aid in Gaza. While that sounds all well and good, there are a number of reasons to be against the idea of a ceasefire. </p><p>1) <b>Past history tells us that ceasefires do not work. </b>Ceasefires have been attempted multiple times between Hamas and Israel. If a ceasefire were a lasting mechanism to bring peace, we would have seen positive results by now. At best, a ceasefire has been an exceptionally temporary concession. At worst, it does nothing to induce peace talks, which is true given the number of ceasefires since the last attempted peace talks took place in 2013. During the last <a href="https://www.cfr.org/blog/cease-fire-broke-itself-part-ii">Gaza War in 2014</a>, what did Hamas do? Violate the ceasefire. The same <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/world/middleeast/25mideast.html">with 2008</a>. What about <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-palestinians-hamas/hamas-armed-wing-breaks-truce-idUSL2463054220070424">April 2007</a>? It broke the truce by firing rockets. Hamas' October 7 attack was a violation of a ceasefire. </p><p>Does anyone else notice a pattern here? Shortly after agreeing to a ceasefire, Hamas breaks the ceasefire. And when Israel decides to retaliate, the Palestinian side blames Israel. Blaming Israel only makes sense if you erroneously view Palestine <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/why-so-many-on-woke-progressive-left.html">as the personification of being oppressed</a> and as <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/why-so-many-on-woke-progressive-left_27.html">such a blameless victim</a> that kidnapping, raping, torturing, murdering, and decapitating Israeli civilians is acceptable. This also forgets the inconvenient fact that the Israeli Defense Forces unilaterally withdrew from Gaza <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2018/05/contextualizing-2018-gaza-border.html">in 2005</a>, which is to say that the real oppressor in Gaza is Hamas, not Israel. </p><p>2) <b>If Hamas were given a ceasefire, what would Hamas most likely do?</b> Regroup and rearm. That has been the <i>modus operandi </i>of Hamas, <a href="https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/i-might-have-once-favored-cease-fire-hamas-not-now">as is illustrated</a> by Hamas doing so in 2009, 2012, 2014, 2019, and 2021. A ceasefire would only be an opportunity for Hamas to replenish its arsenal, rebuild its tunnels, and reorganize its troops. A ceasefire would not bring lasting peace to the Middle East. A ceasefire would serve to lengthen the fighting. <a href="https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4290273-why-a-ceasefire-in-israel-would-backfire/">If anything</a>, emboldening Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran with a ceasefire would help ensure a more violent future in that region of the world.</p><p>3) <b>A ceasefire ignores that Hamas only wants one thing: the destruction of Israel</b>. Hamas has <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/to-support-hamas-is-to-support-genocide.html">made its genocidal intents clear</a>. The fact that <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/hamas-is-symptom-not-source-of-what-is.html">Palestinian survey data</a> show that most Gazans do not have moral qualms with Hamas' <i>raison d'être </i>or with killing Jews is indeed problematic for those calling for a ceasefire. Plus, Hamas is so hellbent on destroying Israel that it does not care about the wellbeing of Gazans. Otherwise, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/12/for-umpteenth-time-accusations-that.html">why would Hamas</a> use its citizens as human shields and launch military operations from civilian sites, thereby maximizing civilian casualties? Hamas has an established history of brutality. If the events on October 7 demonstrate anything, it is that they are more resolute on wiping out the Jewish state than they have been before. Israel is under no obligation to stop firing at an enemy that has made it abundantly clear of its intent. </p><p>4) <b>Why this war is not like the others</b>. In previous conflicts, <a href="https://time.com/6341993/israel-hamas-ceasefire-war/">the goals were</a> to contain Hamas and maximize Israel's regional deterrence. That is because prior to October 7, Hamas was viewed as a second-tier threat. The October 7 attack has shaken Israelis' sense of security to its core. Israelis are still reeling from the horrid attack. To call the October 7 attacks "another 9-11" <a href="https://aish.com/10-7-was-not-israels-9-11/">is a woeful understatement</a>. While Israeli citizens are dealing with political polarization, <a href="https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2023/12/the-trouble-with-a-cease-fire.html">they are united</a> on at least one topic: the destruction of Hamas. In this war, Israel's goals are to eradicate Hamas, bring the remaining hostages home, and defend its land. Since these goals will take more effort, a ceasefire will squander the military advantages that the IDF has, which the Israel government cannot tolerate. </p><p>5) <b>Pressuring Israel with a ceasefire could backfire</b>. This point cannot be stated enough. International calls for a ceasefire go beyond being tone-deaf given the context of the region. Calls for ceasefire increase the pressure to destroy Hamas "while it still can." This increased pressure means that the IDF will not be able to complete a slower, more thorough campaign. When a country faces an increasingly existential threat, it is less likely to use restraint. Rather than end the fighting, a ceasefire <a href="https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2023/12/the-trouble-with-a-cease-fire.html">would very likely</a> increase the magnitude of civilian deaths. Even if the ceasefire were successful, it would probably result in greater fortification of Israel's border with Gaza, as well as restricting humanitarian aid to Gaza. In either case, the calls for a ceasefire do not serve the citizens of Gaza well. </p><p><b>Postscript.</b> The premise behind a ceasefire is a political framework to secure a more peaceful future. A ceasefire implies that fighting will end and that postwar planning and reconstruction could take place. There are times in history where Muslims co-existed with Jews. Even in 2024, Israel is a nation with 1.7 million Muslims. As already pointed out, most Palestinians are unwilling to live side-by-side with an Israeli neighbor. It is not only Palestinian reluctance that is an issue with regards to a ceasefire. </p><p>Since October 7, eradicating Hamas has become a more essential goal for Israeli national security that has broad support across the Israeli political spectrum, which says something given how much Israelis and Jews disagree on a multitude of other topics. The purpose of a ceasefire is to cease firing of weapons. It is literally in the name of the peace mechanism. Until the threat to Israeli civilians no longer exists, how do you expect Israel to agree to a ceasefire? </p><p>Implementing a ceasefire would be one-sided. The "Ceasefire Now" crowd is not calling for Hamas to lay down its weapons or release hostages. Nor is this same crowd calling for Hamas to stop withholding humanitarian aid or to stop oppressing its citizens in a totalitarian fashion. It is a call for Israel to lay down its arms and subject itself to other attacks akin to October 7. Israel cannot and will not abide <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/21/opinion/ceasefire-israel-gaza.html">by total capitulation</a>. It would only be a short pause that would only buy time for Hamas to rearm and carry out the fighting. While the ceasefire comes with good intentions from many calling for a ceasefire, the current conditions between Gaza and Israel cannot precipitate a viable ceasefire. While it would not solve everything, destroying Hamas would be a first necessary step to help ensure peace in the long-run. </p><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-75972371106137474052024-01-04T16:36:00.000-05:002024-01-04T16:36:57.782-05:00Deregulation Hasn't Really Been a Road Taken for Argentina, But Milei's Efforts to Do So Are the Right Path<p>Even before Javier Milei was elected, numerous media outlets have vilified Milei. At the Financial Times, he is a <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/782197c9-35dd-42e4-96f3-910cf60e9ecf?fbclid=IwAR0pXjcs3tV3WtHZYBLljKh3NeZ0-014qdFgBoISM1kdzCDnp0nZe9xUh8I">radical right-winger</a>. For the Left-leaning organization Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), Milei <a href="https://fair.org/home/milei-is-really-as-extreme-as-you-get-in-right-wing-libertarian-ideas/">is deemed</a> "really as extreme as you get in right-wing libertarian ideas." One article in Forbes <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2023/09/30/javier-milei-the-destroyer-and-fear-of-the-unexplainable-in-argentinas-presidential-elections/?sh=410b3dfb7fb6">designated him</a> a destroyer. France 24 <a href="https://www.france24.com/en/americas/20231120-chainsaw-in-hand-anarcho-capitalist-javier-milei-upends-argentina-s-politics">labels him</a> an "anarcho-capitalist." After reading these articles, it would not shock me if these journalists read my blog and similarly lobbed <i>ad hominem </i>attacks at me. </p><p>It is not like Milei is an uneducated idiot. Milei was an economics professor for 20 years and wrote more than 50 academic papers. He was also a chief economist at Máxima AFJP and a senior economist at HSBC Argentina. His style and delivery are more Trump-esque in nature, as is illustrated by Milei <a href="https://www.france24.com/en/americas/20231120-chainsaw-in-hand-anarcho-capitalist-javier-milei-upends-argentina-s-politics">using a chainsaw</a> to illustrate how he would cut inflation if elected. However, his policy views widely diverge from Trump. Trump is a nationalist and protectionist who limited immigration and free trade during his four years in office. Milei is a minarchist (i.e., advocates for minimal government) while being influenced by the Austrian school of economics. He certainly has <a href="https://www.bloomberglinea.com/english/who-is-javier-milei-the-central-bank-hating-economist-who-upended-argentine-polls">no love for</a> Argentina's central bank. </p><p>Last week, Milei sent an omnibus law to the National Congress of Argentina entitled <i>Bases y puntos de partida para la libertad de argentinos </i>(Translation: Basic Law and Starting Points for the Freedom of Argentinians). Admittedly, I have not read the bill yet, but you can view <a href="https://www.lanacion.com.ar/politica/el-texto-completo-del-dnu-que-anuncio-javier-milei-nid21122023/">the 183-page bill here</a> if you want to read it. What I can gather is <a href="https://www.cato.org/blog/argentina-one-most-regulated-countries-world">that it entails</a> much deregulation, ranging from <a href="https://reason.com/2023/12/26/argentina-will-deregulate-airlines-america-should-do-the-same/">the airlines industry</a> and <a href="https://www.econlib.org/argentinas-offensive-against-crony-capitalism/">protectionist measures</a> of industries to end price controls and the prohibition on exports. A plurality of these regulations <a href="https://twitter.com/fedesturze/status/1738223342967304274?s=20">were implemented under</a> the dictator Juan Carlos Ongangía, which says a lot.</p><p>The truth of the matter is that Argentina's economy is in disarray, something which I wrote about in <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2014/08/dont-cry-for-argentina-and-its-latest.html">2014</a> and <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2019/03/a-look-at-projections-for-argentinian.html">2019</a>. The Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom <a href="https://www.heritage.org/index/pdf/2023/countries/2023_IndexofEconomicFreedom-Argentina.pdf">has Argentina ranked</a> 144 out of 176. Aside from the political interference and poorly functioning judicial system, Argentina ranks so low because it has lots of fiscal spending, price controls, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2019/09/macri-imposed-capital-controls-when.html">capital controls</a>, and has other regulations to discourage entrepreneurship. </p><p>The Cato Institute's <a href="https://www.cato.org/human-freedom-index/2023">Human Freedom Index</a> is no less flattering. This Index looks at both personal freedom and economic freedom. At least for personal freedom, Argentina ranks 38 out of 165, although it would be nice to see improvement in rule of law. This finding on personal freedom lines up with Freedom House's <a href="https://freedomhouse.org/country/argentina/freedom-world/2023">Freedom of the World Index</a>, which fortunately ranks Argentina as "Free" in terms of political and civil liberties. As for economic freedom, we see below that Cato Institute's Index ranks Argentina as <a href="https://www.cato.org/blog/argentina-one-most-regulated-countries-world">one of the most regulated</a> countries in the world. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinQgoDmCW3kLyexJ-XuvwfNz0WXDZh89Jq_m09H0VEsZeWQT2W_CP8gM7R1dHtzRZLEqIQ0yqiEKh-I8fZgMozTQbNtEFFwLXE-kqYOY3DO3Nn6GTz0Qq2_BCWkqTGwWxsbj3764WGwTj6_oJm1Ngqv_d_KU6sB8TLVvGLnV-uaXmRrQEAXUJ7OmRFwA/s1260/Argentina%20Human%20Freedom%20Index.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1120" data-original-width="1260" height="568" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinQgoDmCW3kLyexJ-XuvwfNz0WXDZh89Jq_m09H0VEsZeWQT2W_CP8gM7R1dHtzRZLEqIQ0yqiEKh-I8fZgMozTQbNtEFFwLXE-kqYOY3DO3Nn6GTz0Qq2_BCWkqTGwWxsbj3764WGwTj6_oJm1Ngqv_d_KU6sB8TLVvGLnV-uaXmRrQEAXUJ7OmRFwA/w640-h568/Argentina%20Human%20Freedom%20Index.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>As the adage goes, "desperate times call for desperate measures." Milei was right to declare a decree of necessity and urgency (<i>Decreto de necesidad y urgencia</i>, DNU) on December 20, 2023. Years of regulations, increased government spending, and printing pesos as if money grew on trees has caught up with Argentina. My theory is that mainstream media outlets are so keen on lambasting Milei because his election and pending reforms undermine the idea that "government knows what is best." </p><p>I doubt that I would agree with literally every single one of Milei's proposals. As ideologically similar as I am to him, it is not possible to agree with someone on everything. As happy as I am that Argentina has elected a libertarian president, I am not going to automatically agree with simply because it is Milei's proposal. I will base any policy analysis on the merits of the argument or policy itself, much like I already have <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/12/why-argentina-needs-to-ditch-its-peso.html">with Milei's proposal to dollarize Argentina</a> or being perplexed as to why Milei would <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/argentinas-milei-signs-decree-boost-exports-deregulation-2023-12-21/">raise taxes on grain</a>. I will say that based on what I have seen, Milei is by and large on the right path. </p><p>With opposition controlling the majority of the Argentinian Congress, it begs the question of how likely Milei's reforms will pass. However, <a href="https://reason.com/2023/12/29/milei-brings-his-chainsaw-to-argentinas-regulatory-state/">if successful</a>, I would wager that freer trade, fewer regulations, and less profligate government spending will help make Argentina the economic powerhouse <a href="https://fee.org/articles/heres-everything-you-need-to-know-about-peronism/">that it once was</a> prior to Juan Perón.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-26556734065218402702024-01-02T11:12:00.002-05:002024-01-02T11:12:59.818-05:00New Robust Research Shows That Hysteria About Rising Income Inequality Is Unfounded<p>When people find out that a firmly held belief they have is false, there is this grieving process, ranging from denial to sadness to anger. At least for me, I prefer to adhere to sound research methodology, logic, reason, and facts. That way, if new information or evidence comes along that challenges previously conceived notions, it is less of a shock to my worldview and I do not deal with such a grieving process because I do not believe that personal is political. I do my utmost separate the political arguments from the person. For those who believe that the personal is political, this grieving process can rattle one's cage. </p><p>Take income inequality for example. CNN tells us that income inequality <a href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2020/10/10/is-economic-inequality-crisis-snowballing.cnn">is snowballing</a>. Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/02/06/how-rising-inequality-hurts-everyone-even-the-rich/">posits that</a> income inequality harms everyone, including the rich. The famous economist (or infamous, depending on your point of view) Thomas Piketty <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/8c23c566-cb73-4983-9773-b20917bc323f">popularized the narrative</a> that the rich made of like bandits because, according to their research, the top 1 percent's share of income increased from 8 percent in the 1980s to 27 percent in 2021. Even the centrist Council on Foreign Relations <a href="https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-inequality-debate">depicts income inequality as</a> "one of the defining challenges of this century." </p><p>All we hear about is how income inequality has continued to rise in recent decades and how awful it has been. What would you think if it turns out that income inequality has barely budged in the past sixty years? It would run counter to so much of what we have heard, especially since the Occupy Wall Street movement in the 2010s. </p><p>A study published in the <i><a href="https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/728741?journalCode=jpe">Journal of Political Economy</a> </i>last month scrutinizes the narrative and turns it on its head (<a href="https://davidsplinter.com/AutenSplinter-Tax_Data_and_Inequality.pdf">Auten and Splinter, 2023</a>). The authors of this study are far from being lightweights in tax policy. Gerald Auten has been an economist at the U.S. Treasury <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/gerald-auten-5518807b/">for nearly four decades</a>. David Splinter is a senior economist at the Joint Committee on Taxation. </p><p>Why do I prefer this analysis over the likes of Thomas Piketty? In short, it better contextualizes what is going on and measures it more accurately. In terms of context, Auten and Splinter take into account the reforms from the Tax Reform Act of 1986. This Act lowered the statutory rates and broadened the tax base. The higher statutory tax rates created incentives to shelter income inside corporations. Without these adjustments, top income shares from the 1960s are understated (p. 3).</p><p>Auten and Splinter also accounted for decline in marriage rates. Why is this important? To quote the authors, "This increased the total number of tax units, thereby increasing the number of high-income tax units in the top one percent. This differential decline in marriage rates overstates top income shares in recent years (ibid)." </p><p>In addition to making these adjustments, the authors sensibly accounted for two other factors. One is that they adjust for post-tax income. Pre-tax income tells a certain story, but post-tax tells a more practical story since post-tax income is what one <i>de facto </i>earns and takes home. The second adjustment is with regards to including government transfers. Whether it is welfare benefits for low-income households or tax breaks for high-income households, these funds need to be factored in to determine actual purchasing power. </p><p>When the authors factored in all of these adjustments, the picture surrounding income inequality looks quite different. What we see with the share of income for the top 1 percent is much more modest than Piketty depicts. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibNjA7ZJX-mWiAT-_H9CHat9m0ZrmhsdutMRSZl0AvDcyMZfJiri-B6zqXKgR2il-FinwXVxuqVnFgjG5QGQmAdRT9eANC0AgTzOBocp_9SlJU8rDzmBkyfTJjCh7UdKVnd-yGNESxJL_HvFrz_Yp-yKSzJS_VYWWU8OhWFSZ421InIonsVgNol-XRCw/s1456/Top%201%25%20Income%20Shares.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1214" data-original-width="1456" height="534" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibNjA7ZJX-mWiAT-_H9CHat9m0ZrmhsdutMRSZl0AvDcyMZfJiri-B6zqXKgR2il-FinwXVxuqVnFgjG5QGQmAdRT9eANC0AgTzOBocp_9SlJU8rDzmBkyfTJjCh7UdKVnd-yGNESxJL_HvFrz_Yp-yKSzJS_VYWWU8OhWFSZ421InIonsVgNol-XRCw/w640-h534/Top%201%25%20Income%20Shares.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>It is not only the Top 1 percent that are faring better, but also individuals in lower income brackets. The authors looked at the data by quintile. One key trend is that income shares for the middle and lowest quintiles did not change. The second more notable change is that income [in 2019 dollars] went up for those in the lower quintile (p. 26).</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh83JshteWNcpPRhtFwRkVSrXQNWwS_t0ZOOvZK2XIskQ8amUyNq9mB3OjLtct4Vgl8soNjWCD9KxObCK4RimXfKSDQTZsrTeEvOdzk1XZ9O4eCqWj4ZhWsN2u2G44eUhGljuE1vrJeGV17qQJ6SMS4NWh4iUJjz6XJoNwIvBuVzviZksvgxSEuux1aaA/s1532/Income%20Shares%20by%20Quintile.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="906" data-original-width="1532" height="378" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh83JshteWNcpPRhtFwRkVSrXQNWwS_t0ZOOvZK2XIskQ8amUyNq9mB3OjLtct4Vgl8soNjWCD9KxObCK4RimXfKSDQTZsrTeEvOdzk1XZ9O4eCqWj4ZhWsN2u2G44eUhGljuE1vrJeGV17qQJ6SMS4NWh4iUJjz6XJoNwIvBuVzviZksvgxSEuux1aaA/w640-h378/Income%20Shares%20by%20Quintile.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p>It should be no surprise that Piketty and his colleagues <a href="https://wid.world/document/comment-on-auten-and-splinter-2023-wid-world-technical-note-2023-09/">take issue with</a> the findings from Auten and Splinter. I am also not surprised that Splinter <a href="https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2023/12/the-piketty-saez-zucman-response-to-auten-and-splinter.html">was able to refute</a> the flaws in Piketty's response, especially since Piketty did not address most of Auten and Splinter's criticisms of Piketty et al. in the first place. Furthermore, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2014/01/harvard-study-suggests-that-single.html">I remember analyzing</a> a Harvard study from 2014 showing that single-mother households had significantly more impact on income mobility than income inequality. </p><p>This is more than academic sparring or quibbling over methodological differences. The findings from Auten and Splinter have real-world implications. Forget for a moment that income has increased for lower-income households after adjusting for inflation. After all, measures of income inequality or wealth inequality do not tell us about the well-being of poor people, as this <a href="https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/exploring-wealth-inequality#poverty-matters-not-inequality">2018 Cato Institute report</a> on wealth inequality reminds us or as I brought up in 2014 <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2014/12/does-income-inequality-cause-decreased.html">when scrutinizing the Gini coefficient</a>. </p><p>What does it mean that income inequality has stayed by and large stable over the past 60 years? I am sure it has similar implications to finding out that <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/09/why-we-should-be-skeptical-and-critical.html">climate change is not a crisis</a> or that COVID-19 <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/06/two-more-systematic-reviews-confirm.html">would not have been so much worse</a> had we not implemented lockdowns. It means that the narrative of "the super-rich continue to get richer at the expense of the poor" is a falsehood. It means that the political Left cannot propagate the <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2022/09/why-do-studies-show-people-on-left-are.html">politics of envy</a> by focusing on relative gains (as opposed to everyone getting a bigger piece of the pie) or dividing people into the haves versus the have-nots. It means that such policy recommendations as the <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2019/01/eight-reasons-why-elizabeth-warrens.html">wealth tax</a> or a <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2021/04/yellen-and-global-minimum-taxation.html">global minimum tax</a> lose justification. Ultimately, it means that the political Left loses power. I will conclude today's piece with concluding thoughts <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/8c23c566-cb73-4983-9773-b20917bc323f">from the Financial Times</a>:</p><p style="text-align: center;"><i>One conclusion is that methodology matters in such research. A more profound one is that if income inequality has not risen, we have been asking the wrong questions about U.S. society. Instead of asking how to curb the power of the super-rich, perhaps there are better questions. For example, why has a rise in redistribution been so ineffective in solving the U.S. societal ills? And do we want so much of redistribution to be undertaken through healthcare rather than providing poorer households with more money?</i></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-79521972654134506142023-12-29T06:55:00.002-05:002023-12-29T06:56:32.401-05:00Top "Libertarian Jew" Blog Entries from 2023 and Reflecting on the Politics of 2023<p>As another year comes to a close, I think about how the world has ceased to be crazy <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2020/12/top-5-blog-entries-of-libertarian-jew.html">since the pandemic started in 2020</a>. Instead of surpassing the pandemic, it looks like we as a society are still reeling from it. In February, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/02/n95-masks-are-not-effective-at.html">I wrote about</a> how the golden standard of research, the systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT), showed that face masks are ineffective at spreading COVID transmission, including the N95 masks. That did not stop former CDC director Rochelle Walensky from clinging onto face masks <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/02/cdc-directors-february-2023-testimony.html">at a congressional hearing</a>, thereby showing us why we should not trust the CDC to give the American people health guidance. The Biden administration showed similar disregard for the science when it <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/03/biden-administration-ignores-science-on.html">came to natural immunity</a>. Meanwhile, the evidence for how awful and horrid lockdowns were <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/06/two-more-systematic-reviews-confirm.html">continues to accumulate</a>.</p><p>Dealing with a post-pandemic world had its effects in making the world topsy-turvy. One notable area was after Hamas attacked Israeli civilians on October 7. Here you have <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/to-support-hamas-is-to-support-genocide.html">an anti-Semitic, homophobic terrorist organization with genocidal intent</a> that carried out an actual pogrom. Hamas terrorists raped, kidnapped, tortured, murdered, and decapitated hundreds on that day. I came to a realization about Hamas. Even if Israel were to get rid of Hamas, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/hamas-is-symptom-not-source-of-what-is.html">Palestinian survey data still show</a> that most Palestinians hate Jews and do not want a two-state solution. This undermines the narrative that Hamas is some minority, rogue party as opposed to being a reflection of the majority of Gazans. </p><p>Even before the Israeli Defense Forces began its ground attack on Gaza, there were many eager to blame Israel and have declared Hamas to be the good guys. I noticed that many on the Far Left in particular embraced anti-Semitism and Hamas. I had to ask myself why, which resulted in a three-part blog series (<a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/prefatory-remarks-on-anti-semitism-that.html">Part I</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/why-so-many-on-woke-progressive-left.html">Part II</a>, and <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/why-so-many-on-woke-progressive-left_27.html">Part III</a>). I noticed the Far Left/woke doublespeak on Middle Eastern politics, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/12/for-umpteenth-time-accusations-that.html">especially with the word "genocide."</a> Here is Israel, a country who is trying to minimize civilian casualties in a densely populated urban war zone, falsely accused of genocide. Meanwhile, the Far Left is content on ignoring the entity that has been calling for genocide and ethnic cleansing of Jews since its founding, i.e., Hamas. </p><p>The Israeli-Arab conflict is not the only instance in which the woke crowd plays fast and loose with the meaning of words. It goes beyond the Woke Left being <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/05/disparity-doesnt-automatically-mean.html">incapable of distinguishing</a> between correlation and causation, which helps explain why the Woke Left likes to view nearly everything as racist. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/01/the-woke-left-controlling-language-will.html">As I pointed out in January</a>, it is part of a greater strategy to render words meaningless all the while gaining power. This doublespeak exists <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/08/the-argument-that-colorblindness-is.html">when they call colorblindness racism</a>. The phrase "gender-affirming care" comes under great scrutiny considering <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/05/evidence-base-for-youth-gender.html">there is not evidence</a> to show that it is truly affirming care. </p><p>Speaking of the LGBT community, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/06/human-rights-campaigns-state-of.html">I was flabbergasted</a> as to how the Human Rights Campaign could declare a "state of emergency" for LGBT rights when 2023 was far from the worst year for LGBT rights in the United States. This is what happens when people declare everything a crisis to score political points. </p><p>This crisis mentality was clear with climate change. I reached the point where <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/09/why-we-should-be-skeptical-and-critical.html">I had to write about how</a> we should be skeptical of climate change fear-mongering. This was especially acute when the media was <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/08/it-was-hot-july-but-we-shouldnt-give.html">freaking out about heat waves</a> this summer. I did something which very few, if any, climate change activists have done, which is ask <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/08/net-zero-is-pie-in-sky-solution-that-is.html">what it would actually take to implement Net Zero</a>. None of this stopped the Biden administration from trying to implement energy policy based on such hysteria, whether that was <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/01/why-gas-stove-bans-should-go-up-in-smoke.html">gas stove bans</a>, stricter emission standards <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/04/what-shock-biden-proposed-emissions.html">to encourage electric vehicle purchases</a>, or <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/08/bidens-water-heater-energy-efficiency.html">rigorous water heater energy efficiency standards</a>.</p><p>Other forms of craziness this year included <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/02/roald-dahl-is-another-target-of-woke.html">bowlderizing Roald Dahl's texts</a>, conservative moral panic <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/03/is-debate-on-drag-queen-story-hour.html">on Drag Queen Story Hour</a>, French citizens protesting an <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/05/protests-in-paris-about-raising.html">increase in the retirement age</a>, the Supreme Court ruling <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/07/using-race-based-college-admissions-is.html">affirmative action as unconstitutional</a>, a TikToker's <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/07/time-blindness-tiktoker-is-another.html">rant on time blindness</a> showing a pervasive victimhood mentality in society, the U.S. credit rating <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/08/us-credit-downgrade-by-fitchs-reminder.html">being downgraded again</a> because of Congress' fiscal irresponsibility, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/12/denmark-banning-quran-burning-is-sign.html">blasphemy laws in Denmark</a>, the Federal Trade Commission going after Amazon (see <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-ftc-has-no-business-trying-to-break.html">Part I</a>, <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-ftc-has-no-business-trying-to-break_9.html">Part II</a>, and <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-ftc-has-no-business-trying-to-break_16.html">Part III</a>), and woke K-12 educators removing <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/11/removing-honors-classes-is-yet-another.html">honors classes</a> and <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/10/oregon-suspends-basic-skills.html">basic skills requirements</a> to water down education. </p><p>As the previous paragraphs illustrate, I researched and analyzed a wide variety of issues this year. My takeaway from it is a greater disregard of freedom, words being rendered meaningless, and lowering standards to the point where mediocrity and people's feelings are more important than emotional resilience, work ethic, moral decency, or facts. As we put 2023 behind us, I hope that we can look forward to a better year than this one.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374945593972878840.post-91770073960103145032023-12-26T09:38:00.003-05:002024-01-07T07:52:09.990-05:00The Endangered Species Act at 50: Should the Act Become Extinct?<p>This week is the fiftieth anniversary of President Richard Nixon signing the <a href="https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/endangered-species-act-accessible.pdf">Endangered Species Act</a> (ESA) into law. This law <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/why-some-lawmakers-want-to-reform-the-endangered-species-act">is hailed as</a> the most comprehensive law in preserving endangered species, which makes sense given how comprehensive it is in terms of the history of environmental conservation. As lauded as ESA is by environmentalists, I have to wonder if the ESA has been worth the cost. </p><p>Speaking of costs, let us start the conversation there. The think-tank Competitive Enterprise Institute <a href="https://cei.org/studies/whatever-the-cost-of-the-endangered-species-act-its-huge/">released a thorough report</a> in 2018 on the many costs that come with the ESA, including the bureaucratic process costs (see GAO report <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2014-12-05/pdf/2014-28536.pdf">here</a>) and recovery costs. In terms of annual government costs, CEI put the number at $1.5 billion [in 2018 dollars]. CEI also illustrated various economic impact report of the ESA regulations, with annual costs ranging from $0.8 million to $113 million per species. </p><p>The Congressional Research Service (CRS) brings up a series of other considerations <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46677">in its ESA research paper</a>, including the ESA's effects on private property and landowners, litigation related to the ESA, the cost of listing species and the resulting economic impacts of the ESA, and the delays in listing, delisting, and reclassification of species under the ESA (CRS, p. 53).</p><p>Some could argue that the cost the ESA is worthwhile, even in spite of the high price tag. I have to wonder if the benefits of the ESA exceed the cost. <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2016/10/honeybees-and-my-two-cents-on.html">I analyzed the ESA seven years ago</a>. Much like I did then, I bring up what should be viewed as the primary metric of success. What if you go with extinction rate? As of October 2020, 11 species out of 2,400+ species listed under the ESA went extinct (<a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46677">CRS, 2021, p. 53</a>). In 2023, this figure <a href="https://www.fws.gov/press-release/2023-10/21-species-delisted-endangered-species-act-due-extinction">increased to 21 species</a>. In either case, it would mean that over 99 percent of species under the ESA did not go extinct. One could argue that keeping species alive is a worth goal.</p><p>However, the ESA does not simply exist to prevent extinction of species. A major provision in <a href="https://www.fws.gov/laws/endangered-species-act/section-3">Section III of the ESA</a> defines conservation as "to use and the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this Act are no longer necessary." In other words, the Act itself states that preventing extinction is not enough. To be deemed successful by the Act's own terms, there needs to be recovery of the species under the ESA. </p><p><a href="https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/us-fish-and-wildlife-service-proposes-delisting-23-species-endangered-species-act-due">As of October 2021</a>, 54 species under the ESA were delisted due to recovery. By this metric, this would mean that <b><i>the ESA's success rate is under 3 percent</i></b>. That high failure rate does not consider the possibility that there are reasons outside of the ESA that species were successfully recovered. <a href="https://www.edf.org/media/25-years-after-ddt-ban-bald-eagles-osprey-numbers-soar">For example</a>, the EPA's DDT ban prior to the passage of the ESA was more likely to positively contribute to the bald eagle population. <a href="https://www.perc.org/2023/10/17/failure-to-recover/">Another example</a>: plants do not receive the same level of protection as animals under the ESA, yet nearly two dozen of these species delisted were plants. Since a species can be re-listed, there are three instances of duplicates, thereby bringing <a href="https://www.perc.org/2023/10/17/failure-to-recover/">the count down to 51 species</a>.</p><p>As we see <a href="https://perc.org/2023/10/17/the-endangered-species-act-at-50/">from the research</a> conducted by environmentalist think tank Property and Environment Research Center (PERC), the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) struggles to meet its recovery objectives by FWS' own assessments. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtSTLiurqLymfAH-2xo7AWTEU6DlyyaJiJUG3x_ThCoyXh6Vfkes9IZPK3h-ncT66jF-SQ06FJQHlZP99ESHZsV6wxd5rLsWravU-Ln4NjiZn61GfKNQ1K7zTCQO7RArknanzrm8CNblfIhrRUs7wJIbg0ZFnqwy7wXwD3kPU2-NNc1IK2vZb82Vetiw/s1200/ObjectivesProgress_1200x744.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="744" data-original-width="1200" height="396" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtSTLiurqLymfAH-2xo7AWTEU6DlyyaJiJUG3x_ThCoyXh6Vfkes9IZPK3h-ncT66jF-SQ06FJQHlZP99ESHZsV6wxd5rLsWravU-Ln4NjiZn61GfKNQ1K7zTCQO7RArknanzrm8CNblfIhrRUs7wJIbg0ZFnqwy7wXwD3kPU2-NNc1IK2vZb82Vetiw/w640-h396/ObjectivesProgress_1200x744.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p><br /></p><p>The ESA is not a true success since most species remain on life support, much like it is not an example of success if human beings are perpetually dependent on welfare benefits. It might take more than 50 years to recover certain species, but the FSW data show that recovery progress under the ESA remains slow. Excess regulation in protecting species does not surprise me because it is something mainstream microeconomic theory would predict. If the government penalizes a certain behavior, there will be less of it. Who is being punished? Private landowners. </p><p>As a report from PERC entitled <i><a href="https://www.perc.org/2023/09/20/a-field-guide-for-wildlife-recovery/">A Field Guide for Wildlife Recovery</a> </i>illustrates, the ESA creates perverse incentives to preemptively destroy habitats before it attracts endangered species (PERC, p. 24). The ESA's provisions are exclusively punitive. They do nothing to encourage or reward habit restoration or other recovery efforts (PERC, p. 44). What I really enjoyed about reading this report is that suggested a myriad of alternatives to recover species, whether it is to streamline voluntary conservation programs for landowners, not limiting the states' flexibility to manage experimental populations, or compensate land owners for restoring habitat. </p><p>Alternatively, privatization <a href="https://libertarianjew.blogspot.com/2023/06/how-government-subsidies-caused.html">would work for fish</a> and other species that could be farmed (e.g., <a href="http://ti.org/pdfs/APB121.pdf">the black-footed ferret</a>). There is also the option of <a href="https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa630.pdf">converting federal lands into fiduciary trusts</a>. If you are going to reform the ESA, it needs to be done in a way that aligns the incentives of landowners with the interest of rare species. Otherwise, the ESA's punitive approach will continue to fail at its ultimate objective of recovering species.</p><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0