Rush Limbaugh in the NY Times

The last place I’d expect to find a long article heaping praise on Rush Limbaugh is the New York Times Magazine, but there it is.

I like the Rush Limbaugh presidential platform:

1. Open the continental shelf to drilling. Ditto the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

2. Establish a 17 percent flat tax.

3. Privatize Social Security.

4. Give parents school vouchers to break the monopoly of public education.

5. Revoke Jimmy Carter’s passport while he is out of the country.

6. Abandon all government policies based on the hoax of man-made global warming.

Besides disagreeing on point #3, I’m behind it. (Well, point #4 also requires some clarification.)

UPDATE ON PRIVATIZING SOCIAL SECURITY

I've written before on why it's an incredibly dumb idea, so I don't have much more to say about that, except to point out that even the arch-conservative Rush Limbaugh doesn't propose eliminating Social Security, but complete elimination is the only way to truly privatize it. In the absence of elimination, the government is forcing you to do something with your money that you'd otherwise not do. That doesn't in any way seem "private" to me.

Comments

[anonymous 1]

point 4 is stupid. it's based on the blank slate paradigm. if u import a ton of low iq students to an otherwise good school, you'll get, at best, a marginal effect on the low iqs school performance and a school that used to be a good school. i can't believe how many republicans buy the school voucher approach. it's as stupid as the head start idea turned out to be.

1 & 6 are good ideas though.
other than that, the falt tax is a good idea but steve forbes lost on it and i doubt anyone will successfully push it.

[New Anon]

"i can't believe how many republicans buy the school voucher approach."

Yes!

Middle and Upper middle class Republicans go out of their way to avoid sending their children to NAM dominated schools. Vouchers will simply make it easier for NAMs to flood into private schools and the remaining good white suburban public schools.

[PA]

1. Open the continental shelf to drilling. Ditto the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

No. The gas price squeeze is salutatory for our natinal character.

Fuck the developers who tear up the American landscape. Fuck the fat whales in their obscene SUVs. Fuck the abandoning of our cities and inner suburbs to NAMs. Fuck the pollution. Fuck the cheap-gas fueled Civil Rights generosity.

[PA]

4. Give parents school vouchers to break the monopoly of public education.

No. Just leave people alone when they want to develop their own home-schooling networks.

[David Alexander]

Fuck the abandoning of our cities and inner suburbs to NAMs.

You do realize that despite having few black people to flee, Canadians and Australians developed land use patterns with low density and high automobile usage? Even if there were no black people, you'd still have a considerable movement of Americans from dense urban areas into the suburbs.

Fuck the cheap-gas fueled Civil Rights generosity.

So in other words, you want white people to hate black people...

[PA]

No David, I don't want white people to hate black people. I just want the white elites to stop accumulating theri own power by being overindulgent toward the worst tendencies in many black people at the expense of non-elite white people.

[Buckwheat]

OK, what does "NAM" mean?

PA,
You realize that if/when fuel prices/supplies become so expensive/limited that whites are forced to live in close proxmity with blacks on a large scale as never before, that conflict is practically inevitable? I won't let myself get shot like some stupid liberal in his hipster neighborhood either. Be careful what you wish for, and you'd better be ready for it too. And I'd just say fuck Civil Rights generosity anyway, cheap gas or not.

[PA]

whites are forced to live in close proxmity with blacks on a large scale as never before, that conflict is practically inevitable? I

Probably. This happened in some areas affected by Katrina when lawlessness took over. There was a photo of a group of Redneck men with firearms, guarding an entrance to their street, holding a sign "you loot - we shoot." I'm sure no one fucked woth those guys, no matter how "proximate" they were.

[Acronym]

OK, what does "NAM" mean?

Non Asian Minority.

You know what a MILF and SHTF refer to, right?

[Buckwheat]

"You know what a MILF and SHTF refer to, right?"--Acronym

Thanks for defining nam, and, no, I don't know what milf & shtf mean.

[Turambar]

You are all wrong about vouchers.

I cant see any reason why HS would object to #3 since the current system obviously cant work but 401K's do.

The only points I'd modify would be to change "abandon" to "suspend" in #6, and while #5 is a would have a positive effect and keep hope alive for our children (and our childrens' children), it isnt legal. IT is amusing that the Times reporter didnt know how to take it.

[Acronym]

MILF: Mom I'd Like to Fuck
In other words, a "Hot Mom."

Used in a sentence(s): "Dude, Buckwheat, that's your mom?! She is a total MILF. She looks kind of like Cameron Diaz! You're dad is really lucky."

SHTF: The Shit Hits The Fan
In essence, really, really bad stuff happening, like Katrina/LA riots, 9-11, mass mayhem, crazy violence, insane combat situations, natural disasters, etc...

Used in a sentence(s): "We were patrolling Sadr City during Ramadan and I thought things were cool, but after the first truck bomb went off, shit really hit the fan! It was fucking raining grenades!"

[PA]

Why doesn't Limbaugh say anything about immigration?

[David Alexander]

but 401K's do

I've never understood the purpose of 401k and related counterparts. I'd rather my employer give me the funds that would have passed into my 401k directly so I can invest with an (Roth) IRA that gives me considerably more leeway in terms of my investments options and ability to make qualified withdrawls for various purposes. OTOH, given the current realities of the stock market, I would very hesistant to trust the stock market for my retirement. IIRC, the only real benefit to private social security accounts, is that the invested amount is inheritable if the investor dies early. That would create some interesting effects in communities with low life expectancy, or for those who are childless. Had private accounts been in effect, my cousins and I would have inherited even more money from my unmarried childless aunt when she passed away several years ago. Mind you, that presumes that her investments weren't wiped away by foolish or unlucky stock market decisions.

[Anon]

point 4 is stupid. it's based on the blank slate paradigm. if u import a ton of low iq students to an otherwise good school, you'll get, at best, a marginal effect on the low iqs school performance

There is some blank-slate thinking behind it, but there are benefits that private schools can offer that have nothing to do with grades.

1. Parochial schools put up with far less crap and are much more likely to graduate an inner city kid with a greater degree of self-discipline.

2. A dollar sent to a private school means a dollar that does not get taxed by the teacher's union.

3. Privatization of public services can add to the gdp by removing inefficiencies. I'm not for privatizing all services but public schools are a good candidate since private schools already exist.

4. To provide an alternative. Some public schools are worse than others, some kids just don't belong in a high school that has 5000 students.

[David Alexander]

Alert: David Alexander is a product of parochial schools, and his neice is currently attending a charter school in urban New Jersey.

- Parochial schools tend to dump unwanted students in public school. Students with severe discipline problem are generally kicked out of the school. Parochial schools also avoid children with special needs.

- Purchases of non-profits, and purchases by those non-profits add to GDP?

- Parochial school teachers make less than their unionized counterparts. There have been strikes at some Catholic schools here in New York.

- Parochial and charter schools are great for poorer inner city parents and middle class residents who are not allowed to move away from the city for financial or regulatory reasons (employment residency clauses).

- Charter and parochial schools tend to attract parents who are highly interested in the education of their children. It's a self-selected group that also tends to make the best use of any social welfare programme.

- Charter schools in mixed ethnic cities are a great way for the somewhat smart kids who can't get into gifted programs to meet each other, and hopefully develop a healthy tolerance for each other, but without the forced bussing that both blacks and whites don't like.

BTW, I thank everyday that my parents sent me to Catholic school. It was certainly well worth their sacrifices. I support charter schools, but I'm very apprehensive about the idea of developing a government subsidy for religious schools. I don't want my money funding a Protestant school, and I'd imagine HS wouldn't like his money funding a madrassaMuslim run academy of learning.

[Anon]

Purchases of non-profits, and purchases by those non-profits add to GDP?

Huh? Who was talking about purchasing non-profits? The economic benefits of privatization are typically from making the organization more efficient by removing unneeded positions and developing innovative, cost-saving solutions. Those savings can then be invested which translates into an increase in gdp.

Parochial school teachers make less than their unionized counterparts. There have been strikes at some Catholic schools here in New York.

Would you please read my postings more carefully? Did I ever claim that private school teachers make more? No, I didn't. I pointed out that there is a benefit in not funding the teacher's union. Some of us would like to eliminate public employee unions, mainly because of the political power they yield through involuntary financial contributions, which you could also call legal extortion.

I support charter schools, but I'm very apprehensive about the idea of developing a government subsidy for religious schools.

I'm not religious, but since I view liberalism as a secular religion for urban whites I would see it as a trade of one religion for another.

I don't care enough to reply to your other points, mainly because I really don't care enough about other people's children. I also don't think it matters much to the economy if the average person is only educated at a 9th grade level. Our current policy of encouraging everyone to go to college is a waste.

If I ever have kids I will send them to a snobby little white school for the offspring of pricks like myself. Unlike liberals I will feel zero guilt over this.

[Buckwheat]

David

Would you agree that African Americans, almost singlehandedly, are responsible for the destruction of urban public schools?

And please tell me what kind of an education is right for an 85 IQ person--technical or academic?

[Buckwheat]

addendum

Do teachers in urban locales need a union? Hell, yes, because teaching in a place like Newark or Detroit is like going into combat without armor

[Half Sigma]

Loss of middle class values among the low IQ population is the reason why urban public schools are bad, not because of the particular skin color of the low IQ children.

Just because children aren't smart enough to learn how to do well on math and reading tests is no excuse for their destructive and anti-social behavior.

[Buckwheat]

HS

I look forward to the results of the Human Genome Project. Until then, all we can do is speculate. I do, however, appreciate your optimism. I understand that quite a few bad-ass inmates can be transformed through religion. Perhaps it could work for children and adolescents.

[PA]

arch-conservative Rush Limbaugh

Say what? what does Rush have to say about immigration (other than a few tepid comments on "illegal immigration"?)

What does he say about Islam? No Child Left Behind? Spreading Democracy in the Middle East? Affirmative Action? Obama's wierd background?

"Arch-Conservative" applies to Lawrence Auster and Jared Taylor, and maybe to Tom Tancredo and Rick Santorum. I'll also add that their kind of "arch-conservative" was two generations ago known simply as "normal."

[Turambar]

I've never understood the purpose of 401k and related counterparts. I'd rather my employer give me the funds that would have passed into my 401k directly so I can invest with an (Roth) IRA that gives me considerably more leeway in terms of my investments options and ability to make qualified withdrawls for various purposes.

The 401K predates the Roth IRA by quite a bit. Also you can put far more into a 401 per year and the contribution is tax deferred, which a Roth is not. And there is probably an employer match if you ever get your act together (seriously, join the military).

The other point is that you probably should not be twiddling around (oops "leeway") with your retirement investments at the micro level the way an IRA allows. An asset allocation is fine, but do you real need to piling up on individual oil stock or krugerrands?

[Gil]

Still isn't R.L. a REAL Conservative? Points 1 & 6 are anti-environment, points 2, 3 & 4 are anti-Socialist and apparently point 5 is an in-joke.

[David Alexander]

And there is probably an employer match if you ever get your act together (seriously, join the military).

Actually, my current employer offers a match right now to all of its employees, and I actually take advantage of it. So far, a paltry 3% of my salary is placed into my 401k, and there's a 50% match from my employer. I would prefer a Roth IRA since I'm in the lowest tax bracket right now, and my earnings will only go upward with time so it makes sense to pay the tax now instead of later. Now, if I was making real money, I'd obviously go with a standard IRA and pay the taxes later.

An asset allocation is fine, but do you real need to piling up on individual oil stock or krugerrands

I want to load up on oil ETFs to ride the market, and my frigging 401k only has third rate mutual funds that only know how to bleed cash. Hell, even ING's paltry interest rates on savings accounts and CDs for IRAs look more attractive than playing around in the bear market and bleeding cash.

[Turambar]

Then your quibble may be with your limited choices in your plan not with the concept of a 401K. Since this is retirement money, actively managing it for quarter to quarter (or even YTD) growth is dumb.

As far as oil funds, I'd stay away. As soon as all the dummys are in, its sheep shearing time. I think all you'd be doing is helping the levered longs get some liquidity on their bets.

You do have a point about short longevity people. If wonder if it would be possible to suss out one of these families where genetic conditions make it common for decedents to only make it to their 40's and 50's and figure out how much they have lost from the social security scam. I do remember a case on Dr 90210 where a 19yo had gone in for an unnecessary double mastectomy because she had lost her mother, grand mother and aunts to breast cancer.

[David Alexander]

Since this is retirement money, actively managing it for quarter to quarter (or even YTD) growth is dumb.

But I want to speculate and become paper rich now!

Seriously, I'd rather have the IRA because I want a greater range of investment options. The 401ks are limited to medium grade stuff which doesn't have any attraction for me. I'd rather have an IRA that I can use split between extremely safe (savings accounts and CDs), less safe (stocks), and very small portion for speculatory investments that may or may not pan out.

As far as oil funds, I'd stay away.

The market is bleeding cash, so oil ETFs look good for now. Since you say they're not safe investments, where can I make some quick short-term speculatory investments? I want a quick return now, not a long-term investment.

You do have a point about short longevity people.

Besides the ability to inherit the private accounts of the deceased, what is the magical benefit of privatized social security?

[GOP Lurker]

David, if you're going to go all-in on oil/gas, just make sure to place a stop loss. Have a plan for when they do to oil what they just did to coal.

A big benefit of a privatized social security (of any degree, even menu style) is that the money is out of the hands of the Federal government. They can't spend it, they can't lower your benefit in the future, they can't borrow against it.

IIRC McCain has gone back to what Al Gore called "social security plus". The more I think about it, it is irrelevant whether the private portion is theoretically in or out of one's SS-wage tax because the future return of SS is going to be lower anyway. It's a little less honest than taking a chunk out of the current wage tax, but it'll get the job done. McCain can even say he's the real moderate, with Gore's social security plan and Bill Clinton's free trade policies.

Besides the ability to inherit the private accounts of the deceased, what is the magical benefit of privatized social security?

Well there is the issue of better return, but the big issue is that social security is a ponzi scheme. You arent going to see that money again.

Since you say they're not safe investments, where can I make some quick short-term speculatory investments? I want a quick return now, not a long-term investment.

That is not the function of a retirement fund. If you want excitement, play on line poker.

The other thing for you to evaluate is if you have the temperament for stock investing. You have a lot of negativity which is good from a healthy skepticism standpoint but if you can only see the negative you'll never get your money off the rail and into play.

Right now there is probably money to be made in financials. And fortunately everyone doesnt agree. Most people probably do agree that Apple is well positioned for a move into handsets, which will probably be more profitable than computers ever were. I think they will have the highend prestige handset market sewn up, at least in the US for years, for years to come. But since people agree on this its already priced in and there isnt money to be made.

[Vim]

I don't really like the privite/public dichotomy. I think there are lots of things in between. I am looking forward to mathematical/technical/political advances that make it possible to design markets according to game theory principles. We need to start taking into account that markets aren't perfectly competively in a nontrivial way.

My other big reservation is people aren't robots and they aren't perfect. It's impossible to keep track of every single thing in your life and some of those things you don't have energy to keep track of are important. You can't be extremely well-informed on flood risk, fire risk, crime risk, schools, food safety, drug safety and so on and so on. However, the industries that focus on these things can afford to be extremely informed and vigilant. A lot of modern life consists of being screwed into taking things that work out for the corporations that aren't very bad for us but aren't particularly good for us eithe and being too tired with everything to worry about it.

I agree that some things like flying a plane which almost any nonexpert can judge whether it was a good experience or not and where people are so disrupted from their daily routine that they pay attention and notice good service is, this is helped by privatization. I don't think people really know what a good banking service is and it shows.

[Turambar]

I am looking forward to mathematical/technical/political advances that make it possible to design markets according to game theory principles. We need to start taking into account that markets aren't perfectly competively in a nontrivial way.

I for one am not. Robert McNamara's type of academic approach to complex reactive problem sets was disastrous. I see no reason to relive those painful lessons.

Something like Sunstein "Nudge" will produce all sort of perverse and unexpected incentives when applied. Of course there will then be an Academic/bureaucrat partnership to address that problem.

[Pogue]

You can't be extremely well-informed on flood risk, fire risk, crime risk, schools, food safety, drug safety and so on and so on.

Oh bullshit, of course you can. People do it all the time.

[Captain Beefheart]

"5. Revoke Jimmy Carter’s passport while he is out of the country."

The reason why the NYT published this praise of Limbaugh is their desire to bash Carter. Carter wrote a book that drew attention to Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. This is a BIG no-no in American politics, and ex-President or not, you're just not supposed to do this.

Limbaugh of course is a hack for the Israeli-first power structure. The fact that Carter met with Israel's enemies is irrelevant. I'm pretty sure that the NYT wouldn't publish any calls for revoking John Kerry's passport when he met with the North Vietnamese during Vietnam? NO, that's because the NYT wished for the humiliation of the US during the Vietnam war.

Do you think Limbaugh would ever call Nelson Mandela a "terrorist?" Of course not, because despite being a white Christian himself, Limbaugh has more loyalty to the Israelis than he ever would with the white Christian South Africans. And becuase they didn't teach you this in school, Mandela was arrested for having bomb making materials on his person in South Africa. He was/is no different than Hezbollah or Hamas, the only difference is South Africans don't own the NYT.

Nothing symbolizes the sickness of our times more than hearing people call up Chicken Hawk Limbaugh and telling him that he's such "a great American."

[Dmytro Kornilov]

Limbaugh's list just shows what's wrong with the conservative movement. Duck as much as possible the politically incorrect important stuff for the sake of arguing about stuff that will let you get profiled in the New York Times as the face of conservativism.

[SFG]

You can't be extremely well-informed on flood risk, fire risk, crime risk, schools, food safety, drug safety and so on and so on.
Oh bullshit, of course you can. People do it all the time.
Tell me the expected value (in the probability sense) of the losses to flooding and fire in each county in your state. Tell me the risk of a drug containing a harmful manufacturing error or synthetic side product for every drug on the market. That's information you'd need several people working full-time to gather...which the corporations do.

You might know SAT scores by district, but that's about it.

SFG,
Let me guess, when bought a home, you just threw a dart at a map, right? Don't be so stupid.

[h-man]

The "real" purpose behind school vouchers, is that blacks will prefer to send their children to black majority private schools (likewise of course for whites), therefore you will have re-segregation of schools. There can be accomodation in the law to provide funds for home schooling. If school vouchers don't accomplish that, then it is a waste of time.

[Shokan]

h-man,
I think liberals are terrified of school choice/vouchers because they fear that their nice, white public schools or private schools will be full of blacks/hispanics. The idea and hope that blacks would chose black schools is too risky, hence liberals oppose vouchers big time. Segregation already exists in schooling and that suits liberals just fine.

[Jody]

I am looking forward to mathematical/technical/political advances that make it possible to design markets according to game theory principles.

Vim: shoot me an email (james DOT neel AT crtwireless DOT com) and I'll send you a working draft of a paper I'm writing on essentially that topic.

It's on how to create a market economy for intelligent agents controlling radio networks. While that allows me to sidestep messy issues like assumptions of rationality, one of the upsides to the implied mechanism is convergence to near optimal states with imperfect information.

[Vim]

I am not sure why people find it so hard to accept what I said previously. On a lot of issues that are vital, we just can't be that well informed even if we spend a month reading up on it, all day every day ... and most of us really don't have that kind of spare time and energy anyway.

I think a lot of people feel good about 'doing ok' by which they mean "I can identify parts of the population that I believe I do better than so I am satisfied with my results". That's a really sad thing to have to settle for.

It's more likely that people would be sufficiently well informed to make a good decision as a consumer on two or three of the areas which require major research but not on most areas.

It's more likely that people would be sufficiently well informed to make a good decision as a consumer on two or three of the areas which require major research but not on most areas.

Like banking and air travel?

[Vim]

My point isn't all of the people, all or even some of the time; my point is most of the people, most of the time.

[Half Sigma]

Vim:

On a lot of issues that are vital, we just can't be that well informed even if we spend a month reading up on it, all day every day ... and most of us really don't have that kind of spare time and energy anyway.

I think a lot of people feel good about 'doing ok' by which they mean "I can identify parts of the population that I believe I do better than so I am satisfied with my results". That's a really sad thing to have to settle for.

Vim is 100% correct.

I would also point out that businesses profit from asymmetry of information. Businesses have a whole staff of people who devote their lives to knowing how to rip off their customers. There's no way you can compete against that.

When the buyer has the same bargaining power and knowledge as the seller, the seller doesn't make a profit.

There are only two ways to make money: (1) asymmetry of information; (2) have a monopoly, or at least a cooperative oligopoly.

[Jody]

When the buyer has the same bargaining power and knowledge as the seller, the seller doesn't make a profit.

On what basis do you believe that the buyer will capture the entirety of the consumer surplus when information & power is symmetric?

From my perspective, complete surplus capture by the buyer should only happen in monospony.

[Buckwheat]

"There are only two ways to make money: (1) asymmetry of information; (2) have a monopoly, or at least a cooperative oligopoly."--Sigma

What about talent--as in the drunk advertising executive who was just given a Bic pen in the 1960s--he writes on his cocktail napkin: "Bic. Writes first time, every time." That's talent, and it should be highly rewarded.

[Turambar]

When the buyer has the same bargaining power and knowledge as the seller, the seller doesn't make a profit.

There are only two ways to make money: (1) asymmetry of information; (2) have a monopoly, or at least a cooperative oligopoly.

This is just so wrong there are an embarrassment of counter-examples and I am hard pressed to think of any examples in favor of your statement.

[Half Delta]

Turambar:

The stock market, the phone companies, the cable companies, cellular companies. Although Half Sigma's statement about oligopolies is a bit broad, I mean it is a truism that cooperative oligopolies make money and the way he put is as if all industries require ripping off consumers. The cell phone industry can just as well be used to justify a successful free market as oligopolies cooperation lasts only in as far as industry standards. For instance no one is going to offer you truly unlimited on a residential plan. Data companies compete on price all the time though so it is all a matter of degrees.

[Jody]

Half Delta: We're not contesting that monopolies make money or that restricting competition helps you make *more* money, we're objecting to it being the *only* way to make money.

Read again what HS wrote [emphasis mine]:
There are *only* two ways to make money: (1) asymmetry of information; (2) have a monopoly, or at least a cooperative oligopoly.

[Turambar]

I mean what are the markets where I cannot make money unless I have an asymmetry of information or a monopoly?

Obviously I could run a lemonade stand profitably even thought everyone knows the ingredients.

But what are the markets I cant make a profit in?

Phone service? The 10-10 numbers were profitable and Vonage has the potential to be.

Cable TV? DirectTV, Echostar? Or you could look at NetFlix which had net income of $67M while competing against an oligopoly.

Same thing with cell phones. You could get a Tracfone (07 net income $157M) or use Virgin pay as you go, even though there is no tower infrastructure that these companies own.

[unemployed]

Does anyone know if Rush's employer intends to fill out a 1099 for 400 million dollars?

"Survivor" Richard Hatch Goes To Prison For Failure To Pay Taxes!

The news came out today that the winner of the first season of "Survivor" has been sent to a federal prision in Oklahoma as he serves his 51 month sentence for failure to pay taxes on the $1 million won on the show. 51 months is a long time to have to be in prison. Here's a few thoughts on Mr. Hatch's receiving such a stiff sentence.

1. There's no doubt that Hatch did an incredible stupid thing by not reporting his income from the show. It's really hard to believe that he thought he could get away with such. I mean, the producers of "Survivor" must have issued a 1099 with Hatch's earnings on it so it was extremely easy for the IRS to find that the income was not reported. So, was Hatch really stupid, or, did he develop such an ego that he thought that the IRS would not come after him, or, only give him a slap on the wrist if the IRS did catch him?....

[Anon]

There are only two ways to make money: (1) asymmetry of information; (2) have a monopoly, or at least a cooperative oligopoly.

That's all? What about providing something of value? Your view of capitalism is a tad bit cynical.

[Vim]

I think HS was just being a bit over-the-top with his point. Nitpicking the overstatement to death just wastes time and doesn't advance the conversation. Is there then a form of his comment that is reasonable? I think so ... So,

There are only two ways to make money ...

might become,

Two of the most effective, prevalent and dependable ways of making money are ...

I would remind people that innovation and invention is also a form of information asymmetry.

I would add one more idea to HS's list, resource asymmetry. There are many strategies that would never work if you had $1,000 but if you try the exact same strategy with a billion dollars it works just fine. There is sometimes a law of large numbers effect where the variance drops as the number of transactions or units increases.

[Somedude]

Re: David Alexander:

One benefit of a 401k is that the employer has to match to a certain percentage what you have put in your 401k. You don't get that with a Roth IRA

[Buckwheat]

"There are only two ways to make money: (1) asymmetry of information"--HS

Mr Sigma, wouldn't you opine that the term "asymmetry of information" is uncontitutionally vague, sort of like an Obama speech on "race"?