Utopia, you are standing in it!

In my recent interview with John Stossel, I explained that America’s entitlement programs are unsustainable because of demographic change.

Our population pyramid is turning into a population cylinder, so there will not be enough working-age taxpayers in the future to finance all the benefits promised to the elderly. Not even close.

This inevitably and unavoidably means one or more of the following options.

• Massive tax increases.
• Massive benefits cuts.
• Massive borrowing.
• Massive money printing.
• Genuine entitlement reform.

Given those choices, entitlement reform is the only sensible path. Both for the United States and for other nations.

Some readers may think I’m exaggerating in order to push a libertarian agenda. So let’s look at some analysis from non-libertarian sources.

We’ll start with some excerpts from a recent report by the St Louse Federal Reserve Bank. Authored by Amy Smaldone and Mark L.J. Wright, it warns…

Is  anyone  feeling sorry for the Prime Minister? Here, confronted once more by an errant minister, he has had to use his disciplinary powers, but not to the satisfaction of Opposition parties.

 Michael Wood may have been one of the more effective ministers in the current administration, though that is disputed  by both National and ACT.

Certainly  the failure to dispose of  his holding of Auckland Airport shares while he held the Transport portfolio, though told to do so not once  but six times,  aroused  a  measure of  doubt about his  competency, even more so when it was subsequently revealed  by the NZ Herald that he  declined North Shore Aerodrome’s application  for airport authority status while he owned shares in Auckland Airport, a potential competitor.

Some commentators  dismiss the Wood offence  as just another “bit of creeping incompetence” that Hipkins  has had to deal with since he took over  as…

The article containing that quote, Great Myths of The Great Depression has been around since 1998, but it’s always good to put it in front of people repeatedly because there myths don’t die easily.

For example, Old Leftists like Chris Trotter will always bring up the First Labor Government in NZ and FDR’s New Deal in the USA for how they dealt to the Great Depression. What they don’t mention is that Great Britain and Australia had centre-right governments – even with Labour Party involvement occasionally – that did not go for all the industrial nationalisation, new types of welfare support, and most importantly, Keynesian spending. And yet they emerged from the Slump at the same speed as we or the USA did in terms of GDP recovery, dropping unemployment (both Britain and Australia) and so forth.

What’s also not mentioned is that in the USA, after all of…

George III (June 4, 1738 – January 29, 1820) was King of Great Britain and of Ireland from October 25, 1760 until his death in 1820. The two kingdoms were in a personal union under him until the Acts of Union 1800 merged them on January 1, 1801. He then became King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. He was concurrently Duke and Prince-Elector of Brunswick-Lüneburg (“Hanover”) in the Holy Roman Empire before becoming King of Hanover on October 12, 1814. He was a monarch of the House of Hanover who, unlike his two predecessors, was born in Great Britain, spoke English as his first language, and never visited Hanover.

George was born on June 4, 1738 at Norfolk House in St James’s Square, London. He was a grandson of King George II of Great Britain and the eldest son of Frederick Louis, Prince of Wales, and…

 Steven Levitt, famous for his Freakanomics, shows that being an economist is not just mouthing supply and demand.

• Brian Easton writes –

Anyone can call themselves an ‘economist’. Many do, despite having no qualifications in economics and hardly any formal training; they often make elementary errors. That is the result of a conscious decision of the economics profession which resists barriers to exit and entry. In contrast other professions have restrictions, often for good reasons; I am glad my medical advisers are not only qualified but also registered. However, claiming to be expert on economics to contribute to the public commentary without any expertise, is confusing to those with more humble understandings.

On the other hand there are those who have a high reputation in the economics profession but who don’t seem to be really economists. Consider Steven Levitt, who has written of himself, ‘I am having trouble…

A summary at The Telegraph of David Frost’s recent lecture, in italics with my bolds.

Some of the worst policies ever pursued in this country have been those which nearly all politicians supported at the time. Keeping Britain on the gold standard. Running down our Armed Forces in the 1930s. Demolishing our historic cities and replacing them with concrete. Joining the EU’s Exchange Rate Mechanism. Only a handful of free thinkers questioned these at the time. But when the disastrous results became clear, suddenly few people wanted to defend them.

Now, of course, consensuses can be correct, too. Most people agree that free trade is a good thing. But no one could say that that policy has been unchallenged. Indeed, although it is repeatedly attacked, both intellectual argument and real life keep proving it right.

That is why challenge and argument are so important. When everyone agrees on a…

Zero Carbon zealots attacking ExxonMobil, here seen without their shareholder disguises.

WSJ reports with a sad tone what is actually good news that investors are pushing back against ESG political correctness. Their article is: ESG Blowback: Exxon, Chevron Investors Reject Climate Measures  Excerpts in italics with my bolds.

An investor-driven climate change push at some of the
world’s largest oil companies has stalled out.

On Wednesday, Exxon Mobil and Chevron’s shareholders struck down a raft of proposals urging the companies to cut greenhouse-gas emissions derived from fuel consumption, put out new reports on climate benchmarks and disclose certain oil-spill risks, among other initiatives.

The votes were abysmal for climate activists. All but two of the 20 shareholder proposals for the two companies garnered less than 25% of investors’ vote, according to preliminary results, with some performing much worse than similar proposals put forward last year.

Among the most…

In July 2020, Ron Mark gave $25,000 of your money to the bully and narcissist Aaron Wood and his farcical organisation, ‘No Duff’. Aaron Wood bullies everyone he disagrees with, which is a very wide range of people – No Duff charity founder faces bullying allegations from former soldiers | Stuff.co.nz. He loudly claims that veterans suffer from poor mental health, and need to be treated specially and given lots of taxpayer money.

Journalists like David Fisher swallowed the BS back in 2017:

Our military’s gaps in mental health care for uniformed personnel have been exposed through internal inquiries carried out into six suicides in three years.

A slew of recommendations to improve management of mental health in the military came through Courts of Inquiry into the deaths.

Investigations by theHeraldhave found NZDF suffers the loss of one solider, sailor or air force service member to…

Debate on superannuation focuses on the eligibility age and long-term fiscal sustainability. Only rarely is the connection made between superannuation and retirement savings policies, and economic performance.

Since around 1950 New Zealand has been in relative economic decline, and its productivity has been stagnating for many years. Key to this has been low domestic saving rates, which translate into thin capital markets, investment short-termism and to a low ratio of capital to labour, constraining labour productivity. Low domestic savings rates mean high real interest rates and a real exchange rate that weakens our tradeable sector.

The National Party’s policy is that the entitlement age for superannuation goes up to 67 from 2044. In contrast, Carmel Sepuloni in her 27 May address to the Labour Party’s Congress confirmed that Labour will not lift the eligibility age for New Zealand Superannuation (NZS). She indicated it was affordable as long as we keep…

I’ve been following the defamation case which Corporal Ben Roberts-Smith brought against Australian media, who alleged that he was a war criminal and a bully when deployed in Afghanistan.

His case has been dismissed, he was not defamed, he probably did do what was alleged:

Ben Roberts-Smith VC murdered unarmed civilians while serving in the Australian military in Afghanistan, a federal court judge has found.

Justice Anthony Besanko found that, on the balance of probabilities, Roberts-Smith, Australia’s most decorated living soldier, kicked a handcuffed prisoner off a cliff in Darwan in 2012, before ordering a subordinate Australian soldier to shoot the injured man dead.

Ben Roberts-Smith loses defamation case with judge saying newspapers established truth of murders – The Guardian

From what I can gather, the testimony of Federal Liberal MP (and former SAS Captain) Andrew Hastie seems to have been key:

Assistant defence minister Andrew Hastie has told a…

Being an MP during the civil wars and interregnum came with a certain amount of danger. The decisions that MPs made often came with severe consequences. Dr Vivienne Larminie, assistant editor for the House of Commons 1640-1660, reflects on the difficult choices MPs had to make at this time and the financial and personal repercussions they faced for making the wrong decision.

Throughout the history of the Westminster Parliament, there have been times when MPs faced difficult choices which had potentially life-changing consequences. For the MPs who sat in the Commons between 1640 and 1660 there were unique challenges, unparalleled to that date and arguably since. Decisions were required in 1642 over whether to obey Charles I’s commission of array or Parliament’s Militia Ordinance; in 1644 over attendance at Westminster or the rival Parliament at Oxford; in 1648/9 over whether to continue peace negotiations with the defeated…