Friday's interesting reads

"When Government Is Stupid, Be Grateful for Its Inefficiency" by Jacob Sullun at Reason Online (HT: Club for Growth):

"According to a new report from the Government Accountability Office, since 2001 U.S. Customs and Border Protection has failed to collect more than $600 million in duties that should have been imposed on imported goods "to remedy injurious unfair foreign trade practices." Specifically, the goods, mainly food products from China, were sold at "unfairly low prices," thereby violating "anti-dumping" rules. Due to CBP's dereliction of duty, American consumers presumably paid less than the government thinks they should for garlic, honey, mushrooms, and crawfish tail meat. This is the sort of bureaucratic inefficiency I can get behind."

How does one determine what is "unfairly low prices"? This was the main argument behind trust-busting back in the day: smaller companies can't compete when the larger companies can sell it so cheaply. Consumers aren't complaining about lower prices, only competitors. I really liked ones of the comments: "Protectionists - keeping the poor from enjoying better standards of living since the 1700's."

"Common Ground in New Orleans" by Kimberly Hendrickson with City Journal (HT: Club for Growth):

"For all the good sense of these recommendations, though, the most interesting piece of Mercatus’ work is what it calls its “socio-cultural studies.” As Boettke explains, at the core of the project is a deep interest and faith in civil society and a rejection of the pessimistic view of social capital popularized by Robert Putnam...

There is no shortage of commentary on the Gulf region about social divisions and bigotry. What is unique and inspiring about Mercatus’s work is that it accentuates the benefits gained by belonging to a particular group and the social capital generated by shared neighborhoods, shared values, and shared history. The free-market advocates are, in other words, reminding students of city politics that the story of race, ethnicity, and religion need not always be the story of ill will and oppression. They are also reminding their libertarian friends that there is more to healthy cities than properly functioning markets: culture matters."

She's talking about a project of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University studying the reconstruction of Louisiana and Mississippi after Katrina and Rita. What I think she doesn't realize is that libertarians don't necessarily believe that culture doesn't matter, only markets. There is, in fact, a "market" of culture. Culture emerges on its own and doesn't need to be mandated by government. This is what libertarians believe: that if left alone, the needs of society will largely be provided by society without the central direction of government. The desire for people to feel part of a group is real. "Social capital and neighborhood activism " as she refers to it as, simply don't need to be planned.

"When In Pain, Find Someone to Blame: NAFTA!" by Terry Paulson at Townhall (HT: Club for Growth):

"The American dream is not dead! Wealth is still out there; it is just on the move. Instead of throwing up protectionist walls, we must help Americans meet the challenge of change. As my great uncle on the farms of Illinois used to say, “It’s easiest to ride a horse in the direction it is going.” In short, it’s wise to develop skills that will produce what customers are going to need. If you’re good at something someone needs done, you will do well!

His second advice: “If the horse is dead, get off it!” In practical terms, don’t send around resumes for skills that are no longer needed. Instead, master new competencies or lose out to those who are willing to refocus and retool to take advantage of change.

Instead of whining about the economic cards you have been dealt or waiting for the government to save you from becoming obsolete, develop your own recovery program. In fact, always invest time in your Plan B, a “What I could do next” Plan."

A lot of comments didn't like what he was saying, so they complained a lot about free trade. I posted the following comment:

"a call to end free trade
i believe free trade is too devisive. it should eliminated in all forms. if i lived in minnesota, instead of georgia, i would push my representatives to pass laws that prevent companies from foreign states, like georgia, from buying my state's assets. it's egregious. have you heard how many of good minnesotans who work for northwest will be out of a job through no fault of their own? like a 1000. also, i just know they're going to try something sneaky, like plant someone on the city council there in st. paul or something. even though i'm from georgia, i just know it'll happen. that's what people who are only driven by money and profits do.

i also heard that texas has more fortune 500 companies headquartered there than any other state. if any of those companies had tried to move out of my state, you can bet i'd be calling my representatives. that's destroying jobs, i'd have said. you can't let them do that. if a company can just up and move from one state to another, it just isn't fair. they just shouldn't let that happen.

and while we're on the subject of companies moving around, we need to talk about people. i ran into one of those dirty alabamans the other day (i should know how dirty they are; i grew up there). anyway, i'm seeing way too many of them nowadays. at some point you've just got to say "enough. no more. we're full." they're a strain on our infrastructure and all. have you heard about the water problems we've had lately? i'm just glad i got here first, when, you know, the problems hadn't really begun. not only that, but they're competing for our jobs, too. (apparently the economy in alabama isn't doing so hot, but is that my problem?) scoundrels. we ought to pass a law to keep them out."