It was great to see John Stossel on Bill O’Reilly tonight. I’m not sure if John was completely unprepared or if he was intentionally deferring a bit to Bill in his first appearance on his new network… In any case, he was weak. And even admitted it.

In their discussion on legalizing drugs O’Reilly used as his primary argument the harm that drugs do and several times used as an argument that people buy pot legally in California medicinal clinics and sell it to school kids in order to buy their own hard drugs. And THAT is why we need to continue our war on drugs.

Let’s consider… With our current 40 to 50 year old war on drugs we have a worse drug problem than any country in Europe. Our war is doing absolutely nothing to stem to flow of drugs in to the U.S. nor to reduce the abuse of drugs. Our war though is leading to hundreds of innocent deaths every year such as the recent killing of Jonathan Ayers. By most estimates over 90% of corruption in our law enforcement community is related to vice prohibition laws (drugs, prostitution, gambling, and underage alcohol). Generals in Afghanistan and Iraq have estimated that over 60% of funding for the Taliban and al Qaeda has come from illicit drug sales, mostly to the U.S.

Perhaps more damning is that it’s easier for high school folk in the U.S. to obtain drugs than it is for them in countries such as The Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland who are taking a much different approach. About twice as many of our high school students smoke pot as do those in Amsterdam!

I’m looking forward to seeing this debate again with a much better prepared Stossel.

There are so many stories like this of government meddling in people’s lives doing more harm than good. Whatever happened to simple common sense?

http://www.startribune.com/local/64672702.html

Unintended consequences can be fascinating. Let’s look at Cash for Clunkers.

A key selling point is that it will reduce carbon emissions. Well it will, by about one one-hundredth of one percent. Or put another way by 1/9,260th of our current carbon emissions. That’s a start, just not much of one for the cost.

On the flip side, environmentalists have raised 3 concerns that they say may actually make it a negative rather than a positive for the environment:

– Cars traded in must be immediately rendered useless and un-repairable. The preferred method of doing this is to run chemicals such as liquid glass through the engine until it dies. This process can create potentially dangerous air pollution. They have also raised concerns about the long-term impact of these chemicals left in the engines in dumps though I think this is unlikely.

– Energy used and pollution created in scraping the cars once rendered ‘useless’.

– Many of the vehicles being traded in would still be good for tens of thousands of more miles. The additional energy used by these cars over a more fuel efficient car in this period is potentially much less than that consumed in the manufacture of the new more efficient replacement vehicle. The same goes for pollution. Overall we’d use less energy and create less pollution by driving many of these cars a few more years and then replacing them with a more fuel efficient vehicle.

In other words, we may actually increase our carbon emissions by more than the one one-hundredth of one percent that the program will save. AND, the bigger we make the program, the more our unintended created emissions will be over the reductions.

Just the act of removing these cars is having unintended consequences. The vast majority are perfectly good cars, most still in very good shape according to dealers.

– Many would be excellent cars for the working poor and not so poor who can’t afford a more expensive car. In some cases the lack of affordable transportation is preventing these folks from being able to get or keep a job. This sure is benefiting a lot of people.

– Repair-A-Wreck charities who repair cars to give to those in need are beginning to report a decline in the number of vehicles being donated as people instead trade them in to be euthanized.

– Auto repair shops are also beginning to see a decline in business as people trade cars in to the clunkers program instead of repairing them. Shops are beginning to lay off workers. The cost of even more workers on welfare will come out of taxpayer pockets as well.

Abuse of the Cash for Clunkers system is yet another unintended consequence. Some auto dealers have reported that families with perhaps one low mileage SUV and one higher mileage car are trading in the SUV for a new higher mileage car to get the $4500 taxpayer incentive and then trading in their current higher mileage car for a new lower mileage SUV. In many of these cases the families overall carbon emissions and fuel mileage don’t change or at best is only increased by one or two miles per gallon.

A couple of dealers have said that they’ve seen friends and neighbors come together to do something similar.

How about government efficiency?

This program was sold to us as $1 billion to generate 250,000 additional sales of more fuel efficient vehicles. Reality is something quite different.

First comes administrative costs. Many have estimated this at 25% of the $1 billion. The numbers put out by the Obama administration put this cost at 18%, which, as admin goes isn’t terrible. Instead of 250,000 new vehicle sales though this leaves enough for 205,000. The average incentive of $4,000 thus costs taxpayers $4,878.

How many are actually newly incented sales though? According to the auto dealers association there are about 70,000 new vehicle sales on trade-ins each month that meet the criteria. EG, trade-ins that would have happened anyway, without Cash for Clunkers. So, for the first month of this program this reduces the newly incented sales to 135,000 vehicles. Now each $4,000 incentive that generated a new sale is costing us $7,407.

Edmunds.com estimates that over 100,000 people delayed purchases they had planned to make earlier in the summer until the Cash for Clunkers program was implemented. I’ll generously assume that half of these will, as a result of the incentive, choose a more fuel efficient vehicle than they had originally planned which leaves us with 50,000 people who would have made a trade that met the program criteria anyway. This reduces incented sales to 85,000 vehicles, each costing taxpayers $11,764.

What about future sales that simply got moved forward? EG, someone who’d begun thinking about trading in their low mileage vehicle for a more fuel efficient one, would have done it sometime in the coming months, and with this program was spurred to do it a few months earlier. The trade-in would have happened without the incentive, our program just got them to do it a month, two, or four earlier. We won’t really have a good idea about this number for several months, until after we see sales numbers before, during, and after the program period. My guess is that once the program has ended we’ll see a significant decline in these sales for several months. Not just a decline from high program levels to what sales would normally have been, but a decline to below normal levels. EG, people who would have traded in their car for a new more fuel efficient car in November did it in August instead.

Though I think the number is likely much higher, let’s assume that 30,000 moved planned purchases up a few months to take advantage of the taxpayer funded program. This leaves us with 55,000 newly incented sales. So…

Each $4,000 incentive that actually incented a new trade-in for a more fuel efficient vehicle will cost taxpayers $18,182.

By the time I get this posted I’m guessing that the program will have increased to 3 billion of our dollars. This will increase the administrative efficiency from about 18% of funding to perhaps 16%. Over the now 2 months the program will run we would have had 140,000 normal sales which spread out through $3 billion is better than 70,000 spread out over $1 billion. Previous sales delayed to take advantage of the program will not be effected. Future sales brought forward to take advantage of this taxpayer funded incentive will increase slightly as some who would have done a similar trade in early 2010 now do it in 2009. Accounting for these changes the $3 billion program will likely generate 180,000 new trade-ins that would not have otherwise happened and will cost us about $16,666 for each $4,000 average incentive payment. That certainly is better isn’t it.

Now that we know that the original 250,000 vehicle estimate was off, let’s revisit the environmental impact. At best, that the original $1 billion program would have incented 50,000 and the extended program will incent 180,000 trade-ins. An estimated 10,000 of these will be ‘family neutral’ as we discussed earlier which leaves us with 170,000 incented trade-ins. The environmental gains then are actually 32% less with our spending $3 billion than the promises were for our originally spending $1 billion.

Another supposed benefit of the program was to help US Autoworkers by spurring new sales of US made vehicles. The latest figures on trade-ins through the program indicate that 55% of trade-ins are for foreign autos with Toyota and Honda leading and 45% are for US autos (GM, Ford, and Chrysler.) Of the 55% foreign sales an estimated 40% of those are actually final assembled in the US with approximately 30% of the underlying parts coming from US suppliers. So at best 51% of the program benefits US workers and 49% benefits foreign autoworkers, mostly Japan.

I have not had time to figure out how many of the US vehicles are actually assembled outside the US but assuming this is any more than 4% (and I’d guess closer to 35%) that puts less than 50% of the program benefiting US workers.

I don’t have anything against helping Japan other than that I don’t think we can afford over $1.5 billion in US taxpayer money going to help Japanese and other autoworkers when we need that money in our own economy.

A final interesting consequence of this program is that it’s resulting in more foreign cars on our roads. Less than 10% of the cars being traded in and destroyed are foreign (over 90% are thus far GM, Ford, and Chrysler) but 55% of the new vehicles purchased with our tax dollars are foreign. Overall Cash for Clunkers will result in a net increase of 598,000 more foreign cars on our roads than US cars.

And we’re spending $3 billion for this?

Well, not exactly. We don’t have any of that $3 billion. We’re borrowing it. From Asia. Primarily China. And there’s interest on top of that $3 billion. This has got to make Asia smile. We’re borrowing $3 billion from Asia, paying them interest on it, and then using about half of it to incent people to buy Asian made vehicles.

Perhaps not as easy a determination as some might think. At least it’s not for me.

Officer Crowley, in uniform and responding to a report of a burglary at Gates house, asked Gates for ID. Rather than provide ID Gates screamed “NO I WILL NOT”, “THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS TO BLACK MEN IN AMERICA.” At this point the cop has no proof of any sort that Gates is the homeowner and not the reported burglar and Gates screaming certainly isn’t helping any. (Note, when I accidentally set off the alarm at our home and the cops come to check on things the first thing they always do is ask for my ID to prove that I’m the homeowner and not a burglar. It’s not a big deal.)

Gates continued with insults against the officer and comments about the officers mother. Gates stepped outside and began screaming “THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS TO BLACK MEN IN AMERICA” to passerby who were beginning to congregate. From all available evidence, including from all witnesses both black and white, this was not even in the realm of racial profiling. It was either immature over-reaction on the part of Henry Lewis Gates Jr. or intentional actions on Gates part to provoke a racial response from the officer.

Service or disservice?

Service: Some Blacks are quick, just like Gates and Obama, to claim the race/victim card. It has become a convenient excuse for anything and everything. Obama thought this was the case to show how Blacks are mistreated and victimized by police. Instead it is showing just the opposite – how some Blacks over-react and claim to have been racially profiled or victimized when nothing of the sort happened.

Disservice: Unwarranted racial profiling is real, though fortunately declining. Abuse of power by police is real, and unfortunately increasing. Now racial profiling will be treated more like the boy who cried wolf. Even real instances of it will be met with skepticism. Rather than someone being viewed as unfairly victimized they’re just over-reacting as Henry Lewis Gates Jr. and President Obama did.

We might not know which for months or years. Lets look at three other recent events for some more perspective.

First is of a white state trooper, Daniel Martin, in Oklahoma pulling over black ambulance driver Maurice White as White was taking an elderly woman to the hospital.

I won’t rehash everything, but this clearly appears to be a case of abusive behavior by the trooper. This cop should be fired and never hired in a position of authority again – he was instead given a 5-day suspension. I have no idea if race played any part in this incident and there is no proof or indication that it did. I suspect it may have though, but that’s just my opinion. Racially motivated or not State Trooper Daniel Martin is not someone any of us should trust.

Second is an incident last week in MN. A white undercover cop, Le Sueur County Sheriff’s investigator Todd Waldron, followed a pickup truck driven by a 24-year-old man suspected of robbery. When the pickup pulled in to a parking space at the man’s apartment the cop pulled in behind and ordered the two men out of the truck. Witnesses said that at no point did he identify himself as a cop. According to witnesses the two men got out of the pickup, both wearing nothing but bathing suits, a scuffle ensued between the driver and the undercover cop, when the driver noticed the cops badge on his belt he jumped up with his hands in the air. The cop pulled his gun and shot the unarmed driver 3 or 4 times, killing him.

Both men in the pickup truck were white. I can assure you that if the driver had been black this would have made national news as racially motivated – true or not. In partial defense of the cop the driver had a history of 19 arrests, 3 for felony assault. This cop, in my opinion, should be tried for murder. I’d think the exact same thing if the driver had been black.

Third is the recent decision by the US Supreme Court that caused the promotion of several White and Hispanic firefighters and explicitly did not promote Black firefighters.

Many successful Blacks in the US are in a continuous war to prove that they deserve the position they’re in. They’re constantly fighting the perception that they are where they are only because of Affirmative Action and the color of their skin and that if they didn’t get their way they’d scream that they were victims of racism.

Affirmative Action programs have indeed given Blacks and other minorities a sometimes preferential leg up, and this was needed. For a time. It helped numerous Blacks get in to high schools, universities, careers, and career positions that they otherwise might not have; because of racial and gender discrimination or a family who did not believe in the benefits of education.

Note: We all need the assistance of others. I cannot list the number of people who have helped me in my life. People who overlooked a mistake and gave me a second chance. People who have stood by me through struggles and who have given of their own time and resources. People who have given me a promotion when I’m not sure I was ready or deserving of it.

One result of Affirmative Action though is that it casts a pale over nearly every successful Black. If a University was admitting 100 students to a program and there were only 2 Blacks in the top 100 they’d go down the list to find others. Companies would do the same in hiring and promotions. In trying to achieve a certain mix of minorities they’d sometimes, or often, promote less qualified candidates who met minority criteria.

And to a limited extent this is OK. Universities creating a class with diversity of backgrounds or companies doing the same isn’t a bad idea. At least as long as the minority candidates still fully meet the criteria.

Problem number one though is when every Black in a university is suspected of being there, not on their own merit, but because they are Black. Had they really earned the right to be there? And worse, they are suspected of having taken the place of someone who had earned the right to be there by their own merit and hard work rather than via minority preferences. This carried over in to the business world where many Blacks and Women were, and sometimes still are today, viewed as having attained their position not by their own merit and hard work but by gender or the color of their skin, true or not.

Many Blacks who’ve achieved a lot are truly deserving. They have the ability and have worked hard to get where they are. Yet they’re still unfairly saddled with a perception of being there only through racial preferences.

Others? Well, here’s where we encounter problem number two. When someone is promoted in to a position for which they do not possess the proper ability they often don’t do very well. When this happens to a lot of people in a very identifiable group, Blacks for instance, it makes it appear that Blacks in general are less capable. They’re not. It’s just that, to meet quotas, so many were promoted in to positions beyond their ability that it sometimes appears that way.

And this has been wholly unfair to Blacks, both as a community and individually. For far more important than actual position or power or income is the respect of others – how well someone is regarded by those around them and how well they regard themselves.

A person who is highly successful as an individual contributor is much more highly regarded than someone who is unsuccessful as a manager or executive.

Let’s look at a flip side of this. During the tech boom many people from India came to the US to work. When I was reviewing resumes, someone with an Indian name nearly always made the cut, almost by default. My experience, and that of others, was that folks from India were extremely bright (and of good character, integrity, work ethic, etc). I became an expert in the H1B visa process. In the late 90’s reality started arriving. It wasn’t that people from India in general were so bright, but that we’d been seeing only the very best and brightest, the top 1%. During the 90’s we worked our way through the best and brightest and started seeing the above average and then started seeing the mediocre and then occasionally the below average. But extremely few were ever in positions beyond their ability. Most were in positions below their ability and they shined. The result is that folks from India are today still viewed as being well above average.

Likely, all of these instances will eventually work out to the benefit of the Black community in the US.

With the SCOTUS decision we may eventually begin to know that a Black person in a lecture hall at Harvard or Alabama or Whittier Community College earned the right to be there. They aren’t there because of the color of their skin but because they deserve to be there. And they’ll be regarded by others as deserving of being there. And perhaps most important, they’ll regard themselves as deserving of being there. They’ll know that they truly earned the right, equally, with everyone else.

Thanks to Oklahoma State Trooper Daniel Martin and Le Sueur County Sheriff’s investigator Todd Waldron in MN maybe we can put law enforcement on further notice that unfair treatment really will not be tolerated. That Driving While Black or Terrell While Black are not crimes. And maybe we can start to realize that cops grossly abuse their power with Whites and Blacks (and Hispanics, and Asians, and …) somewhat equally. That just because a cop is white and the victim of their abuse is black doesn’t mean that there was any racial motivation.

And, thanks to Henry Lewis Gates Jr. and Barack Obama (and Jeremiah Wright, and…), and their combined over-the-top over-reaction, the race card and victim card can die. Blacks won’t play the card, successfully anyway, and eventually they’ll loose the boy-who-cried-wolf element and when someone does claim to have been the victim of racism they’ll be taken seriously instead of shoved to the side as just another Gates/Obama over-reaction.

And this will filter in to the workplace over the coming decades. If a Black is promoted to commander or chief in a fire department everyone will know that they truly deserve the position and have the abilities necessary to do well. They didn’t need a preferential leg up because of their ethnicity. They didn’t utilize a preferential leg up to get where they are. They didn’t claim racism when there was none. They earned their position. They’ll have the respect of those around them and those they’re commanding. Eventually Blacks will no longer have to fight a war of everyone wondering if they’re in a position purely because they’re Black.

And better yet, this will filter down to succeeding generations. Someone who is highly regarded by those in the community and who respects themselves for what they themselves have accomplished will pass this down to their kids and grandkids and nieces and nephews and others in the community. In the end this will do far more to strengthen the Black community and add to it’s success than any preferences or screaming racial bias ever will.

Well, sort of. So I’ve been doing some research for my next project. Part of this involves finding out what other similar books are already out there, how well are they selling, etc. This morning I stopped in one of my favorite little indy bookshops and inquired about books on my topic and they recommended a great one that I hadn’t seen online or in any of the chain bookstores. BUT, they wanted $70 when I can get it from Amazon for $52 w/ free shipping. Little bookstore will have it to me by next Thu (today is Fri), Amazon will have it to me by Mon (for $18 less!).

Well, without my favorite little bookshop I wouldn’t have even known this book existed (that is until a publisher asked me why I hadn’t included it in my query). As I have numerous times in the past I swallowed and paid extra for the knowledge I’d been the benefactor of from my favorite little bookstore.

Last year we got a new ski boat. We keep it moored in a marina not far from our home. One time last summer I found the cover sunk down in one corner and filled with water but otherwise it seemed to do a really good job of keeping rain out of the boat. This year we’ve had less rain and no real downpours but I’ve found I have to go by the Marina after every rain to bail water out of the cover.

What happened between last year and this year?

Josh.

Josh managed the marina last year and I just realized and confirmed with another boat owner that he went around every day and checked on everyone’s boats. All 200 of them. He made sure they were moored OK and that all looked well. And he went around after every rain and bailed water out of all the covers that had water pooled in them.

I had a couple of occasions last year to buy he and his friends a beer; for assistance with a dead battery and help swapping the prop after I’d discovered some rocks. I wished I’d known how much else he did and could tell him how much it is appreciated. Even more, I wish I could tell him how encouraging it is to have known him, someone who cares about others, takes initiative, and goes above and beyond the call of duty. All just because he thought it the right thing to do. Josh took far better care of the Marina’s customers than the owner who is trying to manage it himself this year along with his new restaurant.

And it’s not as if Josh didn’t have anything else to do. He was in his late 20’s or early 30’s, had a wife and baby whom he truly adored, and had a number of friends he loved to party with.

Josh, if you ever happen to read this – you were greatly appreciated and are greatly missed by all the boat owners.

For about 3 decades Northwest Airlines has been my airline of choice. Last year they agreed to be acquired by Delta. OK. 3 weeks ago I received a letter in the mail from US Bank stating that they were immediately ending their Visa Signature Card alliance with Northwest. Now things are impacting me. In reality Delta kind of ended it for them by choosing to partner exclusively with American Express, but they weren’t going to end the contract until August. US Bank choose to pitch a hissy fit and ended things earlier. Well, until Northwest filed suit and forced US Bank to continue the program for a bit longer.

In any case, it’s interesting to me that my own choice of preferred airline going forward, whether I continue with Delta/Northwest or switch to someone else, isn’t really a choice between the airlines themselves, but which credit card partner of theirs I prefer. In choosing between Delta, United, Continental, and American I’m actually deciding based on American Express (Delta), Chase (United), Citi (American) or Chase (Continental). What’s most interesting is that the airlines themselves are driving me to do this. Rather than each airline selling frequent flyer and elite qualifying miles to several credit card companies and letting them duke it out, they’re placing their future in the hands of a single card issuer.

In this particular case Delta may very well loose my (and others?) business because of Amex. ‘And they don’t take American Express’ is more than just a commercial, it’s true. I can’t charge nearly as much on an Amex card, and thus receive as much frequent flyer benefit, as on the Visa or Mastercard offerings of other airlines. For many people Amex is a good card, for my spending habits it doesn’t appear that it would be. Stories are also swirling on discussion forums that Amex is severely limiting credit lines of former Northwest flyers switching over from the Visa Signature to an Amex.

This isn’t a rant against any airline or card issuer, just something that I found rather fascinating. I wonder how many others choose an airline primarily based on their preferred card issuer rather than on how well the airline provides their own service?

Headline: 300 Afghan women find their voice. If you read this story it sounds like a fairly peaceful protest march. No mention of bearded men lining the streets and pelting the women with rocks. Interesting…

On vacation but had to post this from a sign at a teaparty.

A Taxpayer Voting for Obama is like a Chicken Voting for Colonel Sanders.