Author: George Noga

Climate of Confusion – Part II Case for Manmade Warming – 97% Scientific Consensus

George Noga
What are the sources for the 97% metric; is there really any scientific consensus?
Climate of Confusion – Part II
Case for Manmade Warming – 97% Scientific Consensus
By: George Noga – October 23, 2019

        This is the second of seven parts; read the first part on our website: www.mllg.us.

The most frequent, and likely strongest, argument by believers in manmade warming is the existence of a near-unanimous (97%) consensus of climate scientists. It is therefore critical to deconstruct this assertion, including its origin, accuracy and scope.

        The original and most referenced source is a 2013 study by John Cook, who runs a website promoting catastrophic climate change. Cook wrote that 97.1% of the papers he surveyed agreed the earth is warming and human emissions of greenhouse gasses are the main cause. Cook took data, much from non-scientists, from the internet using the search phrase “sea ice climate change“. Cook counted papers stating there was manmade warming but not how much and included papers he believed implied it. Only 2% of the papers explicitly stated humans were the main cause of warming.

        Cook’s work was reviewed by four professors who read the same papers; their findings, published in Science and Education magazine, concluded only 41 of all 11,994 papers (0.3%) endorsed the claim that human activity causes most warming. Many scientists Cook included protested and asked their papers not be counted.

       The National Academy of Sciences published a survey by Stanford University student William Anderegg, who used Google Scholar to survey the 200 most prolific authors on climate change. He determined 97% to 98% believed man was responsible for most warming. His survey included only 200 out of many thousands published.

         NASA’s website cites Cook and Anderegg for its 97% scientific consensus claim, thus lending its imprimatur. The media then glom on repeating the claim as coming from NASA. After that meme is repeated year after year by government, politicians, media and educators, many people (especially youth) unquestioningly adopt it as their mantra. Nonetheless, those who cite NASA really are relying on Cook and Anderegg. Note: NASA has also stated that changes in the solar orbit of earth, along with alteration to its obliquity (axial tilt), are responsible for changes in climate.

 

        There are a few other sources alleging scientific consensus. A two-question online survey published in Eos claimed 97% of climate scientists agree temperatures have risen and humans are a significant contributing factor. Only 79 of 3,146 respondents claimed to be climate scientists. Last, in Science Magazine Naomi Oreskes alleged 75% of abstracts in scientific journals supported the view that human activity is responsible for most warming. However, many dissenting articles were excluded and the methodology was flawed. When subsequent researchers (Peiser, Schulte, et. al.) attempted to replicate the study, they found only 33% and not 75%.

         Readers can judge the veracity of the 97% scientific consensus, which alleges only that the planet is warming and man is the main cause. That the earth is warming is uncontested and hence meaningless. Man as the main cause means only at least 51%. Thus, the putative consensus, which includes only a tiny number of climate scientists, extends only to humans causing at least 51% of warming – no other consensus.

        It is imperative to understand what is not included in any claimed consensus: there is no scientific consensus about whether or not: (1) benefits from warming outweigh the harm; (2) warming is an existential, or even dangerous, problem; (3) we should attempt mitigation; (4) more CO2 is harmful; (5) CO2 significantly affects climate; (6) combatting warming is a high priority; (7) mitigation is preferable to adaptation; and (8) we should spend trillions today for uncertain and infinitesimal benefits in the distant future. None of these things are part of any claimed consensus.

Many Scientists Reach a Different Consensus

          The Environmental Science & Policy Journal published a study reporting most climate scientists question climate data and computer models and believe climate science can’t predict future climate change. An American Meteorological Society survey reported that only 39% believe manmade global warming is dangerous.

           In a particularly damning riposte, 31,487 physicists, 9,029 with PH.Ds, signed a petition stating: “We urge the US to reject the Kyoto Protocol. The proposed limits on greenhouse gasses would harm the environment and damage the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence human release of CO2 is causing, or will, in the foreseeable future cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric CO2 produce many beneficial effects upon the plant and animal environments of Earth.”

           The 2018 Nobel Prize in Economics was awarded to William Nordhaus for his work on the economics of climate change. His work demonstrated economic policies necessary to limit warming do far greater harm to humans in reduced economic output and that it is better for governments to do absolutely nothing about climate change.

        Finally, progressive arguments for scientific consensus ring hollow. Progressives embrace science when it suits their purpose but cynically deny science when it doesn’t as in, inter alia, nuclear energy, rent control, and minimum wage, all of which enjoy a genuine scientific consensus well above 90% opposed to their policies.

Next on October 27th is Part III – other arguments for manmade warming.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

Climate of Confusion – Part I

George Noga
If manmade warming poses an existential threat, why isn’t secular warming existential?
Climate of Confusion – Part I
Introduction – Anthropological vs. Secular Warming
By: George Noga – October 20, 2019

        Welcome to Climate of Confusion, our most ambitious effort ever. Our first posting in 2007 was about global warming and we have written about climate change more than any other subject. Despite harboring strong opinions, we tried hard to present an objective, fact-based, principled and logical analysis. We ask readers similarly to suspend their opinions and to consider climate change on a de novo basis as they read this series, presented in 7 consecutive parts over the next 20 days.

Part I        Introduction and Anthropological vs. Secular Warming

Part II       Case for Manmade Warming – 97% Scientific Consensus

Part III      Remainder of the Case for Manmade Warming

Part IV      Scientific and Logical Case Against Manmade Warming

Part V       Economic, Political, Religious Case Against Manmade Warming

Part VI      Global Scope, Green New Deal, Green Energy, Adaptation

Part VII     It’s Not About Climate; It Never Was

        We titled our series Climate of Confusion because many people are confused. Climate change is complex, involving science, economics, politics and religion with existential overtones. Manmade warming proponents rely heavily on the existence of a scientific consensus, UN-IPCC pronouncements and media reports. They also cite temperature data, extreme weather, shrinking ice caps and receding glaciers.

      Manmade warming opponents cite the failure of myriad climate scares to materialize and the computer model debacle. In 30 years of apocalyptic predictions, nothing dire has occurred and all scares proved exaggerated and unfounded. Opponents cite different data, which conflict with those of proponents, whose data they assert are politicized, biased and even fraudulent. They argue that spending trillions now for uncertain and infinitesimal benefits in the distant future makes no sense.

        Let’s establish a few basic truths. Yes – climate is changing, but it always is changing; climate change is a fatuous tautology intended by proponents to transform every weather event into a proof. Yes – global warming is real and has been occurring for nearly 200 years. Yes – mankind can affect climate, such as in urban heat islands. Yes – carbon dioxide is increasing and can affect temperature, although current research shows a much smaller effect than earlier believed. Yes – warming may be caused in part by man; it is impossible to prove a negative. And yes – a moderately warmer climate with more CO2 is a net benefit to life on Earth.

Anthropological or Secular Warming: What’s the Difference?
 

        We begin by posing a profound question we never have seen asked. Believers in manmade warming argue it is an existential threat justifying unlimited spending and regulation at the expense of all other human and environmental needs even if it entails sacrificing our lifestyle. The most ardent believers state we have only a few years remaining to avert Armageddon. In a gross misapplication of the precautionary principle, they demand we act immediately even without certainty about causation.

      This begs the obvious question: if warming is the greatest calamity in human history, does it matter whether its cause is secular, anthropological or a combination? Won’t the harm be just as existential? Shouldn’t we combat warming  just as vigorously regardless of cause? If humans can mitigate manmade warming by reducing CO2, shouldn’t we also be able to mitigate secular warming? If warming truly is a threat to life on Earth, why not focus on it instead of debating its causation?

        Yet, manmade warming proponents never argue warming per se is the problem. They oppose only manmade warming, even while acknowledging warming is, at least in part, attributable to solar activity. Could it be that it really isn’t about climate?

Look for Part II of Climate of Confusion in just a few days – on October 23. 
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

Happy Columbus Day 2019

George Noga
Progressives weaponize history and use holidays to riddle Americans with guilt.
Happy Columbus Day 2019
By: George Noga – October 13, 2019

        TRIGGER WARNING: This post is beyond politically incorrect; it is radioactive! We at MLLG unabashedly wish you a happy Columbus Day – and not Indigenous Peoples Day, Aboriginals Day, Native Americans Day, First Nations Peoples Day or any other such PC claptrap. This post is the antidote to the progressives’ weaponization of history and to their mantra that western civilization (and therefore you) is hateful and genocidal and that all indigenous people were peace loving and noble.

          What happened following Columbus’s discovery of America was the same thing that occurred throughout human history whenever any aboriginal people encountered a more technologically advanced society. Through a 21st century prism this is seen as evil; but it is manifestly unfair to single out Columbus or western civilization for condemnation of a human behavior unchanged since men lived in trees. What would happen even today if we encountered a primitive people on a resource rich planet?

      Let’s address liberals’ favorite “G” word. Most native deaths resulted from infectious diseases brought from Europe, many of which first migrated from Asia; yet, no one accuses Asians of genocide. There were many one-sided beat-downs and brutal battles, but never any American or European government policy of genocide. What you learned in school and from the media was fake, weaponized PC history. Let’s look at just one  example – the progressive shibboleth that Wounded Knee was a massacre.

          The Indians suffered 197 casualties (146 killed, 51 wounded); the US Cavalry 64 casualties (25 killed, 39 wounded), for a ratio of 3 to 1. In the Iraq War, 50,000 Iraqis died to only 4,421 for the US – a ratio of 11 to 1. History is chock full of battles with far higher ratios. Henry V at Agincourt lost only 400 men to 6,000 French dead (ratio: 15 to 1). You decide: was Wounded Knee a massacre and, if so, why did the cavalry care for the 51 wounded Indians? Were Iraq or Agincourt massacres? For the record, real massacres were committed by the Apaches, Comanches and many other tribes.

        How do you believe a tiny number of  Europeans was able to conquer vast territories? Columbus allied with the Arawaks against the Caribs, who were vicious cannibals. Cortes, with only 500 conquistadors, conquered the Aztecs because he had 50,000 allied natives who feared the Aztecs’ ritual human sacrifice and enslavement. To be fair, the Europeans carried out their share of lese majeste acts, but it is dishonest to focus on those while ignoring the equal or worse atrocities of indigenous peoples.

Without Columbus There Would Be No Latinos

       Although the latte-left regards Columbus as an oppressor, he remains highly esteemed throughout Latin America. In Puerto Rico, Columbus is celebrated twice each year – on the federal holiday and again on November 19th commemorating his second voyage when he landed on that island. While his statues are being defaced or torn down in the USA, new ones are being erected in the rest of the hemisphere. In 2016 Puerto Rico erected a new Columbus statue taller that the Statue of Liberty.

         Throughout Latin America, the day Columbus landed is celebrated as Dia de la Raza, or Day of the Race. Without Columbus and the Spanish colonization of Latin America, Latinos as a people would not exist. The rich Latino culture incorporates skin colors and physical characteristics of Spanish, Africans and the indigenous people. By honoring the courage and daring of Columbus, Latin Americans celebrate their own place in a world he made possible. Without Columbus there are no Latinos.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

           Christopher Columbus is not the issue; he never was. The circus surrounding Columbus Day is a campaign by progressive Svengalis to indoctrinate your children to despise America and all of western civilization. Happy Columbus Day 2019!

Next week we begin our blockbuster multi-part series on climate change.
      .
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

California’s Condor Cuisinarts

George Noga
Birds provide a gripping illustration of the hypocrisy of progressivism.
California’s Condor Cuisinarts
By: George Noga – October 6, 2019

        Progressivism is a bundle of inconsistencies, contradictions and outright lies, often taking opposite sides of the same issue when suiting its narrative. We have written on this topic before; visit our website www.mllg.us to see our posts of December 2, 2018 entitled Liberals Believe the Strangest Things and, if you have time on your hands, see our May 8, 2014 post www.mllg.us, Liberalism is for the Birds. Many other issues showcase liberal intellectual bankruptcy, but none finer than birds.

        Libs go gaga over birds whenever it suits their purpose. The Audubon Society estimated 2,300 birds were killed from the BP accident during which the media saturated us with photos of a pelican dripping with oil, only to later find the photo had nothing to do with BP. They hyped bird safety to try and kill offshore drilling.

        A pipeline leak, which killed a handful of ducks, became a progressive feeding frenzy to stop all new pipelines. Bird safety was a major part of the latte-left effort to halt the Keystone XL Pipeline and to oppose every fossil fuel project including fracking. Activists used the Endangered Species Act to list the prairie chicken and sage grouse as threatened species to try to stop all drilling on federal and private land.

          Now, let’s see how liberals regard birds when they don’t fit into their narrative.

         Saving the California condor was the holy grail of avian causes until condors ran afoul of an even holier progressive shibboleth – green energy. Over half the condors released in the wild have been killed, most by wind turbines; they are part of the million birds killed yearly by turbines, including bald eagles, hawks, golden eagles and owls. California wind farms have become veritable condor cuisinarts.

Liberals argue we must kill 126,000 eagles in order to save them.

        Just one wind farm (Altamont Pass near Oakland) kills 80 golden eagles each year. Progressives support the issuance of a federal taking permit to allow wind farms legally to kill 4,200 bald eagles each year for the next 30 years; that’s 126,000 eagles. In support of the taking permit, environmentalists argue climate change ultimately will kill even more eagles; therefore, we must kill eagles now in order to save them.

          In contrast, all fossil fuel activity kills about 1,000 birds a year versus 1 million for wind energy, i.e. 1,000 birds are slaughtered by wind farms for every bird killed by fossil fuels. Nonetheless, the Obama Administration filed criminal indictments against three oil companies for inadvertently killing 6 ducks. Liberals give the wind industry a get-out-of-jail-free card, while criminalizing oil companies for infinitesimally less.

          Solar energy projects also exterminate birds. The Ivanpah project, which covers five square miles (350,000 mirrors) in California’s desert, scorches birds, including peregrine falcons and great hawks, that fly overhead with its 1,000 degree heat. Solar farms also end up killing huge numbers of threatened desert tortoises. Just as with wind farms, progressives acquiesce while threatened species are savaged.

         Earlier this year in Scotland, a white-throated needletail was sighted for the first time in 22 years. Excited birdwatchers flocked to the Hebrides to catch a glimpse. While they were watching, the rare bird flew into a wind turbine and was killed. No doubt, progressives view this as a necessary avain sacrifice on the altar of wind energy. Imagine how they would have reacted if the needletail was killed in an oil spill.

         Progressivism is a lie and birds are but one way to showcase its hypocrisy.

Next up is our gloriously politically incorrect post honoring Columbus Day.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

Greatest Social Thinker of the 20th Century

George Noga
“There is no such thing as a mixed economy midway between capitalism and socialism.” 
Greatest Social Thinker of the 20th Century
By: George Noga – September 29, 2019

           Today marks the 138th birthday of Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, who died in 1973 at age 92. I have read economics for over a half century and von Mises has influenced me more than anyone.  I consider him not only the best economist, but also the greatest social thinker of the last century. I honor his birthday by presenting a small sample of his writings, very lightly edited for modernity and length.

        Sovereign consumer: “The common man is the sovereign consumer whose buying, or abstention from buying, determines the quality and quantity of what is produced, and who in preceding ages were serfs, slaves and paupers. They are the customers for whose favor businesses compete and who always are right. Wealth is only acquired by serving customers in a daily plebiscite in which every penny gives the right to vote.“

       Anti-capitalist mentality: “Laissez-faire capitalism has raised living standards to unprecedented levels. A nation is more prosperous the less it puts obstacles in the way of free enterprise. The US is more prosperous than all other countries because its government embarked later than others on policies that obstruct business. The bias and bigotry of public opinion manifests itself by attaching the epithet ‘capitalistic’ exclusively to things abominable but never to those of which all approve.“

      Socialism: “The champions of socialism call themselves progressives, but they recommend a system which is characterized by rigid observance of routine and by a resistance to every kind of improvement. They call themselves liberals, but they are intent on abolishing liberty. They call themselves democrats, but they yearn for dictatorship. They call themselves revolutionaries, but they want to make government omnipotent. They promise the blessings of the Garden of Eden but they plan to transform the world into a gigantic post office – every man a clerk in a bureau.”

       Foreign aid: “Making underdeveloped nations more prosperous cannot be solved by material aid. It is a spiritual and intellectual problem. Prosperity is not simply a matter of capital investment. It is an ideological issue.”

     Von Mises Sampler: “If history teaches anything, it is that private property is inextricably linked with civilization. . . . All rational action is in the first place individual action. . . . Every government intervention creates unintended consequences which lead to further interventions. . . . Every socialist is a disguised dictator. . . . Tyranny is the political corollary of socialism as representative government is the political corollary of a market economy. . . . . Worship of state is the worship of force. . . . . . Socialism is not what it pretends to be. It is not the pioneer of a better world, but the spoiler of thousands of years of civilization; it does not build, it destroys.“

Following is the conclusion of von Mises’ magnum opus, Human Action

     “Economic knowledge is an essential element to human civilization; it is the foundation on which all moral, intellectual and technological achievements of the last centuries have been built. It rests with men whether they will use this rich treasure, or leave it unused. But if they disregard its teachings and warnings, they will not annul economics; they will stamp out society and the human race.”

Note: The Ludwig von Mises Institute is an outstanding source of information; it has a free daily email newsletter (available at articles@mises.org) to which you may subscribe. It is one of only a very few publications I read every day. Try it; you will be glad you did.

Next on October 6th is “Condor Cuisinart” or, liberalism is for the birds.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

Principles for Peace in the Middle East

George Noga
“Peace will come when Arabs love their children more than they hate us.” (Golda Meir)
Principles for Peace in the Middle East
By: George Noga – September 22, 2019

          The Trump Administration is poised to reveal its much ballyhooed peace plan for the Middle East now that the September 17th Israeli election is history. Not to be outdone, MLLG has its very own plan for peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

          All prior wannabe peacemakers have gotten everything wrong, especially US presidents with visions of Nobels dancing in their heads. Israel has been pressured into ever more concessions despite it being incandescently obvious that the Palestinians would never take “yes” for an answer. The US and Israel wanted to make a deal (any deal) so badly that the Palestinians simply pocketed the cascade of concessions, justifiably believing they would only accrue interest and improve over time.

           Learning the lessons from the failure of all past peace efforts, MLLG identified five key principles that should form the basis of an enduring Mid East peace.

         Principle #1 – Benign neglect: Ignore Palestinian political leaders, who know they can have a reasonable peace deal anytime they want it. This means no more offers, negotiations, kow-towing, recognition, honors or state visits. Israel, with help from its friends including its Arab friends, should work to create conditions that cause the Palestinian people to choose peace. If their political leaders never opt for peace – it simply won’t matter. In the end, peace can be achieved with or without them.

         Principle #2 – Make time an ally: There is a pervasive sense that time is on the side of the Palestinians due to external pressure on Israel to make a deal. This must be reversed so that time works toward peace. Peace terms should be less favorable going forward, increasing pressure on Palestinian leaders. There must be adverse consequences to doing nothing and the status quo should be the enemy of peace.

        Principle #3 – Business and not charity or government: Peace ultimately has economic and political dimensions. Trump’s $50 billion Peace to Prosperity plan is a good start on the economic part. The Marshall Plan succeeded spectacularly because it was focused on private business – not charity or government. The Trump plan provides Palestinians access to capital and infrastructure. Importantly, it seeks to make it easy to start a business, employ workers, enforce contracts and to protect investors.

           Principle #4 – One state solution: A Palestinian state and peace deal are not what Palestinians want. There is an economic principle, revealed preference, that posits you can know what people want by the choices they make. Palestinian leaders constantly choose the status quo over sovereignty; they prefer victimhood and martyrdom over statehood. A single state with reasonable autonomy for Palestinians should be the goal.

          Principle #5 – Achieve peace unilaterally: Make it clear that the 1967 borders are not sacrosanct; annexing the Golan Heights was a good start as was moving the US embassy to Jerusalem. Continue annexing West Bank settlements while developing public facilities in the Palestinian areas. Focus on prosperity and good government.

        Implementation of these principles changes the calculus in the Middle East and puts time firmly on the side of peace. There already are signs Palestinians are beginning to see a brighter future with greater prosperity, freedom and security as an autonomous part of Israel and that they love their children more than they hate Israel.

Next on September 29th, we celebrate Ludwig von Mises’ 138th birthday.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

Happy Constitution Day 2019

George Noga
Over 50% of  constitutions fail within 20 years; ours is 232 years old Tuesday. 
Happy Constitution Day 2019
By: George Noga – September 15, 2019

          How well do you know our Constitution? Read on and you may be surprised. First off, it is the oldest charter of government in force; the next oldest is Norway’s, 38 years younger. Over 50% of constitutions fail within 20 years; ours is 232 years old Tuesday. It is pure genius because it embodies a fundamentally correct understanding of human nature and includes effectual checks and balances on the use of power. It is the best document ever created to define the relationship between man and the state.

          The Declaration of Independence established the moral foundation of our nation by asserting that governments are instituted to secure the rights of the people; the Constitution’s raison d’etre is to protect those rights. Since man first walked upright, fewer than 1% of the 115 billion humans who have trod this earth lived in liberty. Here are ten things you may not know or fully appreciate about the Constitution.

1. We the people: The most extraordinary words in the Constitution are the first three, which are the only ones in supersized script. In an era of monarchs and despots, nothing was more radical than the notion that all power flowed from we the people.

2. Coining money: Article I, (section 10) authorizes states to coin money provided it is in gold and/or silver. Private banks and even individuals can issue currency; hence, cryptocurrencies and private currencies like Libra pass constitutional muster.

3. Impeaching justices: Justice Kavanaugh cannot be impeached for conduct before his confirmation. Article III (section 1) states judges hold their office during good behavior. They can be impeached only for crimes committed in office. Moreover, Congress has no constitutional oversight over the judiciary except for impeachment.

4. Counting slaves: The Constitution always refers to slaves as “persons“, not 3/5 of a person. Southerners wanted to count 100% of slaves to achieve equal representation in the House. Northern abolitionists didn’t want to count any – hence, the three-fifths compromise; it had nothing to do with the putative human worth of a slave.

5. Firing government workers: Article II (section 2) implicitly gives the president power to remove executive branch employees. This does not conflict with civil service laws, none of which challenge a president’s powers. Madison said: “If any power whatsoever is in its nature executive, it is the power of controlling those who execute the laws“. Recall that President Reagan once fired nearly all air traffic controllers.

6. Trump and treason: Article III (section 3) specifically defines treason as “only in levying War against [the United States], or in adhering to their enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort“. This constitutional definition rules out treason by Trump.

7. Electoral College: The founders established an Electoral College to: (1) reduce fraud by containing it within small jurisdictions; (2) reduce federal power over elections; and (3) discourage regionalism. They created it to achieve stable government that protects our liberty. They well understood that a popular vote can better actualize the people’s will – just like in the French Revolution. How did that work out for the French?

8. No debt default: The 14th amendment (section 4) forbids any default on federal debt. In the recent past, a president and treasury secretary (neither of whom I will name) threatened to default – disregarding their oaths to uphold the Constitution.

9. Constitutional republic: The United States is a constitutional republic. The word “democracy” appears nowhere in either the Declaration or the Constitution. We don’t pledge allegiance to the USA and to the democracy for which it stands; we don’t sing the Battle Hymn of the Democracy; and we don’t have a Statue of Democracy. Article IV (section 4) guarantees every American “a republican form of government”.

10. Unamendable: There is only one part of the Constitution that cannot be amended. Article V states: “No state without its consent, may be deprived of its equal suffrage in the senate.” This means there is no way to change the structure of the senate – despite the babbling of certain young congresswomen and other know-nothings.

      After signing the Constitution, Franklin was asked what form of government had been established; he famously quipped, “A republic, if you can keep it.” And so it remains today. The Constitution is 232 years old but it will survive only if it remains in the hearts and minds of the American people. Happy Constitution Day!

Next week, we present our first ever plan for peace in the Middle East.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

MLLG Back-to-School Special Shattering the Myth About Teacher Pay

George Noga
We debunk one of the most vacuous myths of all time, i.e. that teachers are underpaid.
MLLG Back-to-School Special
Shattering the Myth About Teacher Pay
By: George Noga – September 8, 2019

           We are fortunate to have many readers who teach or have family members who teach; hence, we derive no pleasure whatsoever from any negativity about teachers. Unionized teachers are paid primarily on longevity, not merit; therefore, truly good teachers are underpaid while poor teachers are vastly overpaid. Nonetheless, when taken in the aggregate, teachers are not underpaid for the following reasons.

1. Logic: Underpaid teachers is a canard promoted by the liberal media. No other job in America has been so consistently asserted to be either overpaid or underpaid. Such a systemic imbalance simply cannot persist for long in a market economy.

2. Apples-to-apples: Those claiming underpayment use false comparisons. They disingenuously assume STEM degrees, earned by students in top deciles of their class, are worth the same as education degrees earned by those mostly in lower deciles.

3. Not results oriented: Teacher pay is based on seniority, not merit. All teachers from best to worst are equal – as is the case in most unionized jobs. In the real world, pay is tied to results. Union rules severely penalize the best teachers and reward the worst. Moreover, what value do unions add if its members truly are vastly underpaid?

4. Private school salaries: If unionized public school teachers truly were underpaid, we should expect to see private school teachers earning more. Instead, nonreligious private school teachers earn 15% to 20% less than their public school counterparts.

5. Objective surveys: Studies document teachers are not underpaid. The BLS National Compensation Survey showed no underpayment. Forbes listed the 25 most underpaid jobs in America; teachers were not among them – same with most other surveys.

6. Post teaching pay: When teachers quit to accept non-teaching jobs, their pay does not increase; this seems to make a prima facie case that they were not underpaid.

7. Lifetime employment: Teachers have guaranteed lifetime employment, a perquisite no one in the private sector enjoys. They can’t be fired for incompetence or even if they are a danger; instead, they are put in rubber rooms with full salary and benefits.

8. Overpaid government workers: Study upon study shows public sector workers are paid about 25% more for the same work than those in the private sector. Since teachers are government workers, it stands to reason they also are overpaid by that amount.

9.  Benefits: Teachers receive lifetime health care for their entire family, uber-generous government guaranteed pensions paid early, and lots of vacation and holidays.

10. Public sector unions: Teacher pay is set by public sector unions based on highly coercive bargaining, is paid with tax dollars and is not driven by markets. As is the case with public sector unions, the pay is higher than comparable private sector jobs.

             Stories about low teacher pay are mostly promulgated by the liberal media that are allied with public unions and government. All objective data and logic point to the opposite conclusion, i.e. teachers actually are somewhat overpaid. To repeat, the pay of good teachers is dragged down by the larger cohort of not so good teachers.

         In an ideal world, all parents would receive vouchers to choose any school. Teachers’ compensation would be determined solely by markets – not tenure. Teachers would be paid according to individual merit, with truly outstanding teachers richly compensated. Poor teachers would be fired and all rubber rooms abolished.

Our next post honors Constitution Day, which is September 17th.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us   

Labor and Capital Day 2019

George Noga
Capitalism is an economic democracy in which every penny has the right to vote.
Labor and Capital Day 2019
By: George Noga – September 1, 2019

          Tomorrow, as we properly honor labor, we should equally celebrate capital, which enhances labor by making it more productive and hence more remunerative. Throughout history, mankind’s labors have resulted only in poverty for the masses. But when capital alloys with labor, it puts labor on steroids and eliminates poverty. Despite capitalism’s astounding achievements, it gets no respect from the media, the public or the academy and only derision from progressives; following are ten reasons why.

1. Capitalism is an economic system; as such, it is without equal. Most (if not all) shortcomings attributed to it by liberals are really political. The role of capitalism is to maximize the economic pie; the role of politics is to divide the pie as, and if, needed.

2. Progressives make false comparisons. They compare ideal socialism (never achieved anywhere) to capitalism as practised.  As demonstrated in our March 24, 2019 post (go to www.mllg.us), capitalism beats socialism in theory, practice and morality.

3. The media are ignorant and biased. Capitalism has stamped out poverty and vastly improved the human condition, but is widely condemned – even by the Pope. Surveys show 95% of Americans are ignorant of capitalism’s stunning accomplishments. The only plausible explanation is ignorance and bias in academia and the media.

4. Capitalism evolved organically. No intellectual wrote a capitalist manifesto. Adam Smith didn’t invent capitalism, he merely explained what occurs naturally, no eggheads required. No one controls capitalism, whereas socialism requires controllers, i.e. progressive panjandrums, who believe they know what is best for everyone.

5. Self interest (greed) is the basis of capitalism. Greed is an inseparable part of the human condition. The genius of capitalism lies in channeling greed into incentives to serve your fellow man, whereas socialism channels it toward destructive ends.

6. Consumers are sovereign. Intellectuals and progressives enjoy no special status; the common man holds all the power. Sovereign consumers’ decisions about what to buy (or not) makes suppliers rich or poor. Wealth is achieved only by serving consumers.

7. Capitalism doesn’t need intellectuals. Professors are not highly esteemed by markets to which their exalted education and lofty intentions are superfluous. Academics prefer regulation to the chaos of markets and believe their pet theories should override the free decisions of consumers – if necessary, by using the police power of the state.

8. Capitalism is egalitarian. Uneducated blokes can make fortunes by say recognizing markets for cheaper used parts and stripping equipment to harvest them. They repulse elites by both their success and the obscene manner they spend their fortunes. They got rich because they took risks and provided services consumers valued. Meanwhile, poor overeducated pointy-headed progressives go unrewarded and unrecognized.

9. Capitalism brooks no excuses for failure. Success is based solely on one’s ability to provide value to his fellow man. Capitalism is an economic democracy in which every penny confers the right to vote. Its credo is: to each according to his accomplishments, not to his ideas or intentions. Those who fail are found wanting by their fellow man.

10. Progressives covet control over others. They don’t grasp why the poor, unwashed, ignorant rubes in flyover land believe they know what’s best for them. Progressives fancy themselves as heroic emancipators, crushing greedy capitalists, saving helpless victims and then rollicking in the just approbation and adulation of all mankind.

          Capitalism has created a cornucopia of wealth unprecedented in human history, virtually eliminating extreme poverty. Nearly every metric of human well-being is the best ever and continues to improve. Average folks live better than monarchs a few decades ago. Luxuries a short time ago are now affordable at Walmart and Costco. These miracles were created not by, but in spite of, government and progressivism.

         Let’s continue to honor labor on the first Monday in September. As the world’s greatest capitalist nation, let’s also celebrate capitalism and the capitalists who had an impossible dream, took great risks and had the determination to see it through.

Next on September 8th is MLLG’s back-to-school special about teacher pay.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

MLLG Fall Preview – Microtopics – Joe Biden

George Noga
MLLG Fall Preview – Net Neutrality – Campus Crackpots – Robocalls – Biden
MLLG Fall Preview – Microtopics – Joe Biden
By: George Noga – July 28, 2019

         We are taking a short summer break in August; hence, this is our last scheduled posting until our Labor/Capital Day special on September first; however, we may decide to write some impromptu postings during August if the force so moves us.

         Our September 1st post will be followed by a back-to-school blog September 8th and a Constitution Day posting September 15th. We also plan a September posting honoring Ludwig von Mises’ 138th birthday and an ultra special Columbus Day issue in October that is gloriously and triumphantly politically incorrect.

          This fall we tackle, for the first time in 12 years of blogging, the Mideast conflict by presenting our very own MLLG peace plan. Other likely topics include: (1) modern monetary theory or MMT; (2) condor cuisinart, i.e. liberalism and the birds; (3) electoral college/popular vote; (4) laboratories of democracy; and (5) universal basic income or UBI. Also look for updates about the 2020 election and the spending crisis.

        However, the highlight this fall undoubtedly will be our multi-part series on climate change slated to begin in mid to late October. This will be like nothing we have written before on this topic and features a fresh, new look and analysis of this divisive topic. It will be non-political and as factual and objective as humanly possible.

Net Neutrality – Campus Crackpots – Robocalls – Biden

             Net Neutrality: It’s been a full year since Trump abolished net neutrality amidst opposition claims it would usher in poor service, higher cost and a corporate feeding frenzy. The opposite has happened; chalk up another victory for markets.

           Campus Crackpots: Amherst College Office of Diversity and Inclusion emailed students a 36-page common language guide. Capitalism was defined as “An economic arrangement leading to exploitative labor practices, which affect marginalized groups disproportionately”.   But the piece de resistance is homonationalism defined as: “Why cis-gay and lesbian Iraq War veterans were celebrated for American exceptionalism in contrast to racist/orientalist Iraqi combatants in Central Asia racialized outside of U.S. understandings of whiteness“. Can you imagine 36 pages of this drivel?

          Robocalls: The biggest complaint Americans have is robocalls, of which there are nearly 100 billion each year. This scourge can be ended quickly with a penny tax on outgoing calls above 10 per day. No ordinary American would ever pay this tax but it would cost robocallers $1 billion/year. If a penny tax is insufficient, keep raising it until robocalls are in history’s rear view mirror. This is a simple and elegant solution.

          It’s Just Joe Being Joe: Throughout his 47-year government career, Biden has  been touchy-feely, gaffe prone and susceptible to outrageous, awkward and, at times, bizarre behavior. But he always skated by with people shaking their heads saying, “It’s just Joe being Joe“. Yet, that also was his greatest appeal; people knew and felt comfortable with Biden. Now, the far left crowd has Biden making 180-degree changes to life long positions. Suddenly, it’s no longer “Joe being Joe“. There is only one thing worse politically than “just Joe being Joe” and that is: Joe not being Joe.

Our next post is scheduled for September 1st – to honor Labor and Capital Day.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us