Link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124640626749276595.html

This article trashing all the stupid liberal arguments for Obamacare is very very very very very good. Read it.

Link: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/06/30/alice_in_medical_care_97231.html

Here is Sowell’s take on the rush towards socialized medicine. I especially liked the following paragraph:

Politicians may talk about “bringing down the cost of medical care,” but they seldom even attempt to bring down the costs. What they bring down is the price– which is to say, they refuse to pay the costs.

Link: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/06/25/tilting_at_green_windmills_97168.html

This article by George Will shows how ridiculous the “green jobs” excuse for government spending is. He cites a Spanish study (I had mentioned this study in a previous post) that concluded that each green job cost the government $1.4 million and was responsible for the loss of 2.2 private sector jobs. Better hope that green jobs don’t make it to America.

It also exposes the mindset of the administration, when, confronted with the study, they simply say that the study must be wrong because we are already importing wind turbines from Spain. I don’t know what’s worse: that they have such pre-school logic or that they have such totalitarian arrogance. But the combination of the two is something to fear.

Link: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/06/24/could_australia_blow_apart_the_great_global_warming_scare_97148.html

I am not very well read about the global warming (or climate change, as it is called now) issue, but I have always prejudged it as a typical left-wing spiritual fad with no deep intellectual support.

In the linked article we see that global warming finally crystallized as a political issue in Australia, and that what once seemed a slam dunk for the march of green now looks like a collapsing house of cards. This is especially troubling for proponents of cap-and-trade in the United States, as Australia has a more pervasive green culture. The fact that it is imploding there means that public support for efforts to fight global warming is a mile wide and an inch deep.

To me, the intellectual hurdles for justifying any public policy targeted at global warming are these:

1. Prove that global warming is occurring consistently.
2. Prove that it is not part of a natural development or cycle and that it is caused by human activity.
3. Prove that it is on balance detrimental to the ecosystem in general and human welfare in particular.
4. Prove that public policy measures can reliably reduce either the source of the problem (warming) or the symptoms which are detrimental to human welfare.
5. Prove that these policy measures are worth the costs and are economically efficient.

From what I have read, the global warming crowd are having trouble clearing (1) and (2). They have not gotten anywhere near (3), (4), and (5). This is so similar to the way the left-wing approaches many other issues. From nuclear disarmament to gun control to alleviating poverty, they attack the perceived or obvious ill with new laws or taxes, with no perception of the long-term effects of their policies on human behavior, incentives, or innocent bystanders. It is all about feeling good about doing something, whether or not that something is positive, effective, and worth the cost.

Link: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23637.html

Think California’s budget outlook is bleak? Someone wants to bring the same to the rest of us …