Relax, Weiner. And get ready for the pseudonymous “David Kahane’s” take on the Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) political comedy revue.

Pure funny!

Read the whole thing…

Amplify’d from www.nationalreview.com

“Fasten your seatbelts. It’s going to be a bumpy night.”

“That good, huh?”

“At least I didn’t get snippy or anything.”

“Sure you didn’t call anybody a jackass? Didn’t bash Dana?”

“Best behavior, I swear. I apologized to the planet. I even apologized to Huma, just like you told me to.”

“Glad we didn’t have a failure to communicate. Was she there?”

“Are you kidding?”

“Must have been tough,” I mused. “But always look on the bright side of life. Like I said the last time, I’m going to make you a bright, shining star.”

“I think I want to be alone,” he said.

This was bad: I couldn’t lose my star in a green-lit project. “Listen, Dorothy, you’re not in Kansas anymore. Or even Kew Gardens. What’s the matter?”

“Somebody shouted, ‘Bye-bye, pervert.’”

“You say that like it’s a bad thing. Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.”

“Somebody asked if I was more than seven inches.”

I had to calm him down. “I know you. You used to be big.”

“I am big,” he retorted. “It’s the pictures that got small.” He was still fuming. “Listen, Dave, I’m as mad as hell and I’m not going to take this any more.”

Read more at www.nationalreview.com

 

Catalan gets it. He most definitely gets it. The Austrian school of economics is the one branch of economics that has one theory of practice that applies from the very smallest examples at the micro end of the scale to the largest examples at the macro scale. It successfully predicted the collapse of the USSR. It predicted the failure of the stimulus in the US in 2009. And it has predicted the continuing failure of Keynesian spending and quantitative easing to do anything good for the US economy. When you switch your frame from the absurdist Samuelson version of economics, with its sharp dividing line between micro and macro and a dependence on econometric models that don’t work, to the Austrian version that uses thought experiments and derived universal truths, then the real shape of things becomes apparent.

Amplify’d from mises.org

I recently came across “Putting Economics in Its Place,” an article penned by Richard L. Heilbroner, an avowedly Schumpeter-influenced socialist.[1] Heilbroner’s main purpose is to argue that the explanatory scope of economics has been greatly exaggerated. He contends that economics does not provide a universal, underlying science of society. He exemplifies this theme by pointing to the — alleged — failure of the economics profession to predict and explain the sudden collapse of the Soviet Union.

Not only does the Austrian School not suffer from the weaknesses Heilbroner charges economics with having, but it was the Austrians who settled many of the issues Heilbroner suggests still mar the science. No less important, in reading his article through an Austrian lens, one realizes just how complete the Austrian framework is. Heilbroner, for instance, rehashes discussion on the scope and nature of the science — this discussion should have been settled with the contributions of the likes of Lionel Robbins and Ludwig von Mises.[2] Finally, an analytical union between Heilbroner’s criticisms and his own flawed conclusions buries non-Austrian economic frameworks, and as a result elevates Austrian theory above its opposition. Had Heilbroner possessed a better grasp of the many Austrian contributions to the debate, the conclusions he drew would have been considerably different.[3]

Heilbroner’s central assertion is that economics can only describe the capitalist system, and thus has nothing to offer in regards to describing noncapitalist orders, such as prehistoric and command societies. This thesis is a corollary of his belief that what defines economics is a specific technique by which man accomplishes sought ends, namely the mixture of labor and “the materials and forces of nature.”[4] From this, one can infer that Heilbroner believes that the techniques that man may employ in seeking ends in a precapitalist society, a command society, and a capitalist society are different.

But the Austrians show us just how utterly absurd Heilbroner’s position is. Society is not shaped by the techniques employed by humanity; rather, the techniques are fashioned by the underlying nature of society. Indeed, the entire purpose of economization is to organize means and ends as a method of dealing with the fundamental scarcity that characterizes society — if it were not for this scarcity, there would be no purpose for economization. The nature of this scarcity is no different whether a society is a precapitalist, capitalist, or command one; the economization technique employed is the same across the board. Indeed, economization is the technique! There is no alternative, and attempts to plan an alternative can only end in failure.[5]

Read more at mises.org

 

The campaigner in chief was in North Carolina at a confab supposedly on Jobs and Competitiveness, two things his administration has been attacking at every turn, when he made the quip that will live forever in infamy.

Amplify’d from www.investors.com
President Obama pauses Monday during a tour at Cree, a leading manufacturer of energy-efficient LED lighting. AP

The Republican National Committee could not have scripted a more damning sound bite. President Obama on Monday attended his administration’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness at an enviro-friendly lighting firm in North Carolina. Considering the dismal state of the economy, it should have been a subdued event.

But when it was explained to the president that the federal permit process for construction and infrastructure projects can cause delays ranging from “months to years,” and “in many cases even cause projects to be abandoned,” a gaffe ensued.

It was remarked to the president, “I’m sure that when you implemented the Recovery Act, your staff briefed you on many of these challenges.” A smiling Obama responded, “shovel-ready was not as . .. uh … shovel-ready as we expected.”

Read more at www.investors.com

 

I don’t have much to add to this review from Big Hollywood. First Class is a really fun movie and Fassbender as the man who would become Magneto is great in his role, just as Kevin Bacon carries the movie as the evil lunatic Sebastian Shaw.

X-Men: First Class had virtually everything going against it in pre-production– series fatigue (it’s the fifth entry in Fox’s X-Men saga), none of the original actors in starring roles, 1960s period costumes–on paper, it seemed like the ultimate studio cash-in, only to be outdone by the inevitable X-Men in Space: Electric Space Boogaloo from Space (in 3D!). Fortunately, it’s nothing of the sort.

Despite many flaws common to the superhero genre, First Class is quite possibly the best film in the series, not because it’s chock full of impressive special effects and action, but because broiling beneath its main characters’ performances are ideas–not just any ideas, but the central political and philosophical questions of the film’s time period whose minutiae our modern pundits still grapple over. This is not so much a review as a jumping-off point for discussion, so beware of spoilers ahead.

Read more at bighollywood.breitbart.com

 

Gurgaon is a thriving piece of India, despite having absolutely no government services. Those who constantly agitate for descriptions of how things get done if government doesn’t step in to provide water, policing, and to take money from the productive and give it to beggars, can learn a lot from Gurgaon.

Amplify’d from www.insideronline.org

India has stumbled onto the secret to economic growth, reports the New York Times:

In 1979, the state of Haryana created Gurgaon by dividing a longstanding political district on the outskirts of New Delhi. One half would revolve around the city of Faridabad, which had an active municipal government, direct rail access to the capital, fertile farmland and a strong industrial base. The other half, Gurgaon, had rocky soil, no local government, no railway link and almost no industrial base.

As an economic competition, it seemed an unfair fight. And it has been: Gurgaon has won, easily. Faridabad has struggled to catch India’s modernization wave, while Gurgaon’s disadvantages turned out to be advantages, none more important, initially, than the absence of a districtwide government, which meant less red tape capable of choking development.

Read more at www.insideronline.org

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.