Monday, June 15, 2009

Cool, the Lakers Won -- Let's Riot!

As it became clear during Sunday night's game that the Lakers would win the NBA Championship, I knew there would be a riot outside Staples Center. I just knew it. Even though Staples Center has stopped showing big games on their outside screens due to the riots in 2000, that didn't stop L.A.'s best and brightest from showing up there and getting their vandalism on.

To be sure, this year's riot was far smaller than the 2000 riot, but the fact that it happened at all is a shame and an embarrassment to the people of L.A. It wasn't spontaneous this year. The people who caused trouble outside Staples Center made a special trip over there to light fires, mess up cars, and smash store windows. This is what people in L.A. do when they're happy. This is what people in L.A. do when they're angry. This is... just what people in L.A. do.

Let's hear it for all the Angelino thugs out there! Give yourselves a pat on the back. Your pride in the city of L.A. is admirable. If anyone deserves to trash their city in a victory riot, it is certainly you.

This is why I own guns and know how to use them.

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Gov't Seizes Control of Tobacco Industry

The U.S. federal government massively increased its power yet again last week: The Senate passed a bill on June 11 that put the tobacco industry under the regulation of the Food and Drug Administration. The House passed a similar bill in April.

As Ron Paul points out in this video clip, this bill that has effectively given the FDA control over the tobacco industry will eventually result in prohibition and thus the emergence of a black market in tobacco.

This is yet another dark day for capitalism and freedom in America. What leaves me flabbergasted is the fact that the nationalization (either direct or indirect) of so many industries and facets of our lives by our federal government is becoming a normal daily occurrence that no longer seems to alarm people or put them in a defensive mode. It's just... normal now.

What the hell has happened to this country and the people who inhabit it? The body remains, but the spirit has left it.

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

The New Three Rs: Reading, Writing, and Relief

This morning on the way to work I was listening to a radio news segment covering the impact of California's budget woes on the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), L.A. County's beloved public school system. (A brief introduction: LAUSD serves 694,000 students: 73% Hispanic, 11% African-American, 9% non-Hispanic white, 6% Asian and Filipino. It is the second-largest employer in Los Angeles County after the county government.)

The reporter on the radio show was basically delivering a sob story about all the badly needed services, programs, and facilities that would be endangered by a severe budget cut for LAUSD -- pretty typical. But then the report shifted gears a bit and took a disturbing angle I hadn't anticipated at all. The reporter said the budget cuts might drastically scale back the following two services for LAUSD students:

  1. Free lunches
  2. Free after-school and summer programs

She proceeded to explain why that would be very, very bad. Scaling back free lunches would be disastrous because countless single parents who send their children to LAUSD schools are very close to the poverty line and factor those free lunches into their daily food budget. And scaling back after-school and summer programs would be unthinkable because it would put the children (whose parent or parents work all day) back on the streets without any adult supervision, thus likely increasing the amount of gang violence.

What that report conveyed to me was that evidently we're not actually talking about education cuts here -- we're talking about welfare cuts. Free lunches funded by LAUSD are glorified food stamps, and free after-school and summer programs funded by LAUSD are glorified babysitting.

I'll venture a few guesses here as to the main reasons why LAUSD is in a world of hurt right now, and none of them have anything to do with the economic meltdown:

  • Single parent homes, especially fatherless homes
  • Parents having children when they are not in a financial position to take care of them
  • Parents having children when one parent or relative cannot stay at home to raise them and instill values in them
Isn't it clear how the above three factors contribute directly to the problems of poverty and gang violence? When a family defers having children until its finances are in order, free lunches funded by LAUSD are not necessary. And when a family has two parents, it is more likely that at least one of the parents will make sure that a boy grows into a man rather than a baggy-jeaned thug, and that a girl grows into an honorable woman rather than a pregnant teen.

Come on, LAUSD. Reading, writing, and relief isn't the answer. Placing emphasis on values for once -- nuclear families, financial prudence, hard work, excellence, achievement, independence -- there's your guaranteed winning strategy for the long term if you have the courage to commit to it.

Thursday, June 4, 2009

"At Least California's Government is Productive..."

I was having a discussion with one of my friends this past weekend regarding the economy and the results of California's recent special election. We were discussing the fact that all five of the propositions on the ballot that would have raised taxes were rejected by the voters. Which means the California state government is still suffocating under a bloated $21 billion budget deficit. It failed in its attempt to increase taxes as a way of reducing the deficit, and unlike the federal government, it lacks the politically expedient ability to create money out of nothing. So it would appear that California's two remaining options are to (a) reduce spending or (b) beg for a federal bailout.

I joked that Obama would be California's sugar daddy soon, fully expecting my friend (who has been a staunch conservative for years) to join me in my disgust at the idea of a federal bailout of our state government. But he didn't. To my extreme surprise, he actually said a bailout of California would be a good thing. To paraphrase what he said, "I wish this string of bailouts had never gotten started in the first place, but if the federal government is going to bail somebody out, it should be California, not GM and Chrysler. Those car companies have allowed themselves to be strangled by the unions, and they no longer make cars that people want to buy. They're not productive. At least California's government is productive."

Come again? The state government is running a $21 billion deficit, yet it's still productive? I think I hear the Mad Hatter's voice echoing in the distance...

In rough terms, being "productive" in the economic sense means producing (or enabling the production of) more goods and/or services than one consumes. If GM and Chrysler are considered unproductive because they are going into debt rather than turning a profit, then for the same reason mustn't we also consider California's government unproductive since they are going into debt rather than generating a surplus? Or is that a little too logical to be true?

Shortly after my "conservative" friend made his unexpected comment supporting the idea of a California bailout, it suddenly made sense to me. I remembered -- he is employed by the local government. A famous quote by Upton Sinclair popped into my head (yes, Sinclair was a bit of a socialist, but even socialists can occasionally stumble upon nuggets of wisdom):

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.

I can almost guarantee you that if my buddy were employed in the private sector, he would be singing a different tune regarding the so-called "productivity" of California's government.

As California goes, so goes the nation. If the federal government bails out California, more states will follow, and soon the entire nation will be centrally organized and operated. The relentless destruction of this once-great United States will accelerate at an even greater pace.