Think tank Policy Exchange has stirred up a hornet's nest with the suggestion that people in poorer Northern areas should quit backing a loser and head for the South-East, or the Golden Triangle.
Or the Golden Circle:
Isn't this the rational, liberal-economic thing to do? Or is mankind something more than a calculation in money terms? Is there any one measure for Man?
Are liberal economists rational? Do they describe the world as it is, or as they think it should be? Would it be dangerous for us to follow their prescriptions, if others elsewhere took a different view?
An after-thought: would it not be more rational to head for Scotland? Free tertiary education, more money spent on care for the elderly, etc?
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Are the poor too rich?
I read a piece in Cafe Hayek a while back, lamenting the rise in the US minimum wage. I left a short quotation: "Qu'ils mangent de la brioche."
I didn't expect much response, even though Americans owe one of their most famous symbols and (in part) their very Revolutionary victory to the French. But I had a glance at the comment thread this morning and there was indeed a riposte:
"Jonah Golberg wrote a really good editorial on this about four years back. Good stuff and good Economics & History lesson, too!"
Can the realtor (estate agent) who posted this, and the salaried economics professor who hosted it, be right? Are the working American poor really so feather-bedded by their £3-something per hour earnings? Does anyone have a different Economics & History lesson?
Does even the slightest concern for the poor make me (the son of a refugee from the murderous ravages of the Red Army in East Prussia) a no-good pinko Commie son-of-a-gun?
I shall read my newly-acquired Sloman's "Essentials of Economics" and then I'll know the answer.
I didn't expect much response, even though Americans owe one of their most famous symbols and (in part) their very Revolutionary victory to the French. But I had a glance at the comment thread this morning and there was indeed a riposte:
"Jonah Golberg wrote a really good editorial on this about four years back. Good stuff and good Economics & History lesson, too!"
Can the realtor (estate agent) who posted this, and the salaried economics professor who hosted it, be right? Are the working American poor really so feather-bedded by their £3-something per hour earnings? Does anyone have a different Economics & History lesson?
Does even the slightest concern for the poor make me (the son of a refugee from the murderous ravages of the Red Army in East Prussia) a no-good pinko Commie son-of-a-gun?
I shall read my newly-acquired Sloman's "Essentials of Economics" and then I'll know the answer.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
What is inflation?
One answer is to look at alternative currencies. Here's an FT article, originally from 1983, on the Mars Bar Index. Any more detailed updates?
Dearieme says "Mars Bars were 99p per pack of five in our Co-op recently. Bargain!" Is this proof of deflation?
Dearieme says "Mars Bars were 99p per pack of five in our Co-op recently. Bargain!" Is this proof of deflation?
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Blogger helps Georgia overcome cyber onslaught
Civil.ge, the Georgian news site, is "under permanent [cyber] attack." So they've switched their operations to one of Google's Blogspot domains, to keep the information flowing about what's going on in their country. (Wired Blog Network, 11 August)
Here's the Blogger site for Civil.ge
Here's the Blogger site for Civil.ge
Monday, August 11, 2008
Liberty
The greatest liberty is the right to change yourself.
Recently I've put on a few pics of women, the lovely creatures, and get concerned comments from Nick Drew and Pej. This is entirely a natural response, but it is also an example of what I call the homeostatic principle. You know: try to lose weight and people say you're not fat, just pleasantly plump; forswear alcohol or tobacco, and they advise you to cut down a little instead, but just for now go on, have one etc.
We worry (rightly, of course) about the tyranny of big government, but there is also the long, slow, grinding tyranny of the small (and small-minded) community, and the dysfunctional family. And we, too, are so often, unconsciously and instinctively, the oppressors.
Simone de Beauvoir (who was led a dance right royally by her liberated lover Sartre) said that every book is a cry for help. Mostly, that cry will go unanswered, and few will rally to your home-made flag. We enjoy our blogging, but delude ourselves if we think the world will change much as a result, or perhaps should change much.
If you want a major, exhilarating change, go for action direct: change your own life. And if you are a libertarian, watch for how even you try to hold others back.
Recently I've put on a few pics of women, the lovely creatures, and get concerned comments from Nick Drew and Pej. This is entirely a natural response, but it is also an example of what I call the homeostatic principle. You know: try to lose weight and people say you're not fat, just pleasantly plump; forswear alcohol or tobacco, and they advise you to cut down a little instead, but just for now go on, have one etc.
We worry (rightly, of course) about the tyranny of big government, but there is also the long, slow, grinding tyranny of the small (and small-minded) community, and the dysfunctional family. And we, too, are so often, unconsciously and instinctively, the oppressors.
Simone de Beauvoir (who was led a dance right royally by her liberated lover Sartre) said that every book is a cry for help. Mostly, that cry will go unanswered, and few will rally to your home-made flag. We enjoy our blogging, but delude ourselves if we think the world will change much as a result, or perhaps should change much.
If you want a major, exhilarating change, go for action direct: change your own life. And if you are a libertarian, watch for how even you try to hold others back.
On me fait tort
In the Post Office just now, I glanced at the leaflet rack and there were all these savings products labelled The People's Instant Saver etc.
I remember watching Tony Blair announce the death of Diana, and how he half-choked on "the people's princess", as though some wiser part of him at the back of his throat was trying to save him from a ghastly, laughable gaffe. He seems to have got away with it, though (as my wife pointed out at the time) she was the daughter of an Earl. (Note, by the way, how his speech began the first two paragraphs with the first-person personal pronoun. Everything was always about him, was it not?)
I suppose this is all part of the Gramscian cultural deforestation in preparation for the Garden of Eden that will be Cool Britannia. I also suppose that when we have become the PRGB, the country will be disunited and the people will have less say than ever.
If, by then, we have enough money (for clearly that's all that matters, now), we may move to Jersey, which at least recognises Her Majesty's rule under her title of Duke of Normandy. When we visited there years ago, we learned that as in ancient times, if you feel you have been wronged, you may make an appeal direct to your ruler: you drop down on one knee, spread your arms and call out "Aro, aro, aro, mon Prince! On me fait tort!" The Jersey Council must then hear your case.
But Her writ does not run here, or will not for much longer, if we continue in this direction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)