Re: [RC] Re: In Defense of Europe's Technocrats

[David R. Block]

Title: ORourke1 Signature

I sent before I was done last night. My dog does not like Thunderstorms and we had one. So I slept with the dog a little, not because I was in trouble though... :-) I was once a blue-dog Democrat, but eventually joined most of the Texans of German descent in the Republican Party. Several elections were pretty easy for me. Go in, close the curtain, pull the lever marked "Republican," open the curtain, go home. I have done every Republican Texas Primary before I left the state in 1980 and since i returned in 1995, and even a few Republican county conventions. I moved to Louisiana in 1980 and it's totally different. Texas doesn't register by party, Louisiana does. So I marched in to the voting registrars office and put down Republican, much to the amusement of the clerk. I did not know that out of 4 million or so registered voters that there were only about 200.000 registered Republicans at that time. That number never rose very much until the Clinton Administration. Since David Duke (KKK-Metarie) ran as a Republican in 1991, Democrats wagged that he got every Republican vote. The Republican rejoinder was that since he got 650,000 votes and there were only 250,000 registered Republicans, then almost twice as many Democrats as Republicans voted for him even if he got all of the Republican votes. And since he didn't get mine, one would still need another Democrat. Things would suddenly get very quiet. I do not have trouble with technocrats, as long as they really know the technology that they are trying to regulate and employ. If they no longer know (or never knew in the first place) what they are regulating or applying, then they probably shouldn't be in the position of regulating or applying. So I don't think that an PhD in English literature should be dictating oil well fracking regulations. As outlandish as some of those regulations have been, you would think that some (most?) of the regulators have no experience in geology or petroleum engineering. David "Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine."--P. J. O’Rourke On 11/21/2011 9:28 AM, Mike Gonzalez wrote: I'm just a centrist, as unwelcome in the liberal camp as the conservative camp. I was a Democrat once, but became a Republican because, even though Republicans tend to be critical of "RINOs", it's nothing compared to Democrats who find out that one of their own doesn't support inequality before the law, partial birth abortions, large amorpheous programs that don't actually solve problems, and "free spirits". Furthermore, there's a history of the Republican party serving as a platform for different political movements (progressives, libertarians, evangelicals, neocons, etc.), while the Dems have a history of serving as a tent for their special interests. Anyway... Before I start: I'm not going to be the guy who's going to support the existing system. I've found, though, that most administrative actions proceed from some problem (either real or theoretical), and these actions should be evaluated based on, a) whether they solved the problem, b) the cost of solving the problem compared to other possible solutions, and c) the externalities they create. My criticism is not to the existence of regulation, but an unwillingness to look at other potential solutions before adding the onerous paperwork. As for the issues you've raised, here's what I've found: Mankiw, and other emininent economists, support pigouvian taxes to eliminate damaging behavior. In the case of cigarette taxes, I think a drop to $0 revenue (thus, an elimination of smoking) is more the government's final goal than any sharp increase in government revenue from smokers. Some states, like Pennsylvania, have decentralized and privatized their DMV offices. Might work better, might be worse... I don't have any experience with it. I can only really support any privatization, decentralization, or deregulation, though, when we can empirically show that the result is better. Is the service in PA somehow speedier? Are the lines shorter? The skyrocketing of insulin costs appears to be due to regulatory inaction to allow for generic entry, brought about due to heavy lobbying by the pharmaceutical industry, rather than actual regulation. Basically, the government is propping up a monopoly or duopoly. No defense of the EPA from me. I have no defense of Obama. He lost me when he derailed NASA and his cabal stripped down the NSF. It's readily apparent that the President prefers political points today to preparing the country for the future. Of everyone in the field, I think only Huntsman or Romney could get the train back on the tracks. -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org