If we are to survive the looming catastrophe, we need to face the truth - Telegraph

Link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/janetdaley/8685945/If-we-are-to-survive-the-looming-catastrophe-we-need-to-face-the-truth.html (via shareaholic.com)

The Tea Party faction within the Republican party was demanding that, before any further steps were taken, there must be a debate about where all this was going. They had seen the future toward which they were being pushed, and it didn't work. They were convinced that the entitlement culture and benefits programmes which the Democrats were determined to preserve and extend with tax rises could only lead to the diminution of that robust economic freedom that had created the American historical miracle.
And, again contrary to prevailing wisdom, their view is not naive and parochial: it is corroborated by the European experience. By rights, it should be Europe that is immersed in this debate, but its leaders are so steeped in the sacred texts of social democracy that they cannot admit the force of the contradictions which they are now hopelessly trying to evade.
No, it is not just the preposterousness of the euro project that is being exposed. (Let's merge the currencies of lots of countries with wildly differing economic conditions and lock them all into the interest rate of the most successful. What could possibly go wrong?)
Also collapsing before our eyes is the lodestone of the Christian Socialist doctrine that has underpinned the EU's political philosophy: the idea that a capitalist economy can support an ever-expanding socialist welfare state.
As the EU leadership is (almost) admitting now, the next step to ensure the survival of the world as we know it will involve moving toward a command economy, in which individual countries and their electorates will lose significant degrees of freedom and self-determination.
We have arrived at the endgame of what was an untenable doctrine: to pay for the kind of entitlements that populations have been led to expect by their politicians, the wealth-creating sector has to be taxed to a degree that makes it almost impossible for it to create the wealth that is needed to pay for the entitlements that populations have been led to expect, etc, etc.
The only way that state benefit programmes could be extended in the ways that are forecast for Europe's ageing population would be by government seizing all the levers of the economy and producing as much (externally) worthless currency as was needed – in the manner of the old Soviet Union.
That is the problem. So profound is its challenge to the received wisdom of postwar Western democratic life that it is unutterable in the EU circles in which the crucial decisions are being made – or rather, not being made.
The solution that is being offered to the political side of the dilemma is benign oligarchy. Ignoring national public opinion and turbulent political minorities has always been at least half the point of the EU bureaucratic putsch. But that does not settle the economic predicament.
What is to be done about all those assurances that governments have provided for generations about state-subsidised security in old age, universal health provision (in Britain, almost uniquely, completely free), and a guaranteed living standard for the unemployed?
We have been pretending – with ever more manic protestations – that this could go on for ever. Even when it became clear that European state pensions (and the US social security system) were gigantic Ponzi schemes in which the present beneficiaries were spending the money of the current generation of contributors, and that health provision was creating impossible demands on tax revenue, and that benefit dependency was becoming a substitute for wealth-creating employment, the lesson would not be learnt. We have been living on tick and wishful thinking.
So what are the most important truths we should be addressing if we are to avert – or survive – the looming catastrophe? Raising retirement ages across Europe (not just in Greece) is imperative, as is raising thresholds for out-of-work benefit entitlements.
Lowering the tax burden for both wealth-creators and consumers is essential. In Britain, finding private sources of revenue for health care is a matter of urgency.
A general correction of the imbalance between wealth production and wealth redistribution is now a matter of basic necessity, not ideological preference.
The hardest obstacle to overcome will be the idea that anyone who challenges the prevailing consensus of the past 50 years is irrational and irresponsible. That is what is being said about the Tea Partiers. In fact, what is irrational and irresponsible is the assumption that we can go on as we are.

Paul Krugman is rewriting history now that the eurozone, beloved by US liberals, is going down in flames – Telegraph Blogs

Paul Krugman is rewriting history now that the eurozone, beloved by US liberals, is going down in flames – Telegraph Blogs

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman is right about one thing, when he says: “now, with Italy falling off a cliff, it’s hard to see how the euro can survive at all”.
But the rest of his analysis of the crisis in Europe, as well as the causes, is in the realm of pure fantasy. In his recent piece entitled “Legends of the Fail”, Krugman rejects the idea that “Europe’s woes reflect the failure of welfare states in general, and that Europe’s crisis makes the case for immediate fiscal austerity in the United States”.

Krugman cites Sweden as an example of a social welfare success in Europe, but fails to mention two important points. Firstly, in recent years, Sweden has begun rolling back the welfare system and government expenditure while adopting important free market reforms. Secondly, Sweden decided to stay out of the eurozone, another key reason why it has so far kept out of the financial mess engulfing southern Europe. As Johnny Munkhammar, a Swedish member of parliament noted in a piece for The Wall Street Journal in January, Sweden owes its success not to welfare statism but to reforms that have increased economic freedom, including greater competitiveness in the provision of health care and other public services:

There is only one path Europe can take if it is to avoid economic meltdown: dramatic cuts in public spending, the dismantling of its welfare states, the removal of crippling taxes and business regulations, the downsizing of the public sector, and a return to self-determination for EU member states. It is Europe’s lack of fiscal responsibility, economic freedom, and national sovereignty, that are at the heart of the current economic crisis, and the United States must do all it can to avoid European-style decline.

Creationist Belief in Europe:

Creationist Belief in Europe:

By Jonathan Adler

The theory of evolution may face greater resistance in the United States than most of Europe, but creationist belief is strong in European nations than many might think. From the February 27, 2009 Science:

News coverage of the creationism-versus-evolution debate tends to focus on the United States, where surveys consistently show that less than half of Americans accept the theory of evolution. But in the past 5 years, political clashes over the issue have also occurred in countries all across Europe. In Italy, Silvio Berlusconi's government briefly tried to halt the teaching of evolution in schools in 2004. In 2006, a deputy Polish education minister called the theory of evolution "a lie." In 2007, the education minister of a major German state courted controversy by advocating that creationism and evolution be taught together in biology classes. . . .

Even the birthplace of Charles Darwin is struggling with evolution, despite the myriad celebrations for the 150th anniversary of his On the Origin of Species. "Creationism is on the rise in the U.K.," says James Williams, a lecturer in science education at the University of Sussex. "Creationists have adopted the attitude that if you get to children young and early, you can indoctrinate them before they even start talking about evolution in schools." Williams cited a December 2008 Ipsos Mori poll of 923 primary and secondary school-teachers in England and Wales: 37% of the respondents agreed that creationism should be taught in schools alongside evolution. Even among biology and science teachers, the number was 30%.Survey data also shows that anti-evolution sentiment is particularly strong among Muslims in Europe.

While Europe has its share of anti-evolution sentiment, what it seems to lack is the organized, active resistance to evolution. Is this simply because European nations tend to be less religious than the United States? Are Europeans, as a whole, just more scientifically literate? Or is there some other reason Americans have been more likely to accept the (erroneous) notion that evolutionary theory is inherently incompatible with religious belief?

Europe self-destructing?

Caroline Glick, of the Jerusalem Post, thinks so.

Wednesday's decision by Britain's University and College Union to call for a boycott of Israeli universities and colleges was not only hypocritical. It was suicidal.

....

By calling for a boycott of Israeli universities, Britain's academic establishment is turning its back not only on Israel, but on Britain. When Britain's professoriate rejects Israel's right to exist as a Jewish, democratic nation-state and glorifies Palestinian society which supports global jihad and the destruction of Western civilization, it is rejecting the British state.

They are embracing a culture founded on a rejection of the culture and traditions that have formed Britain since the Magna Carta was issued in 1215. For the past 800 years, Britain has stood for individual liberty and freedom of inquiry - at least for the British themselves. In universities like Oxford and Cambridge, it was this humanist spirit and the justified national and cultural pride it nurtured which facilitated Britain's rise to international power. By boycotting Israel, which itself embodies these British ideals, the British are abrogating their own traditions of openness. Consequently, they are destroying themselves.

AND BRITAIN is not alone in its self-destruction. Britain's rush to oblivion is part of a wider trend overtaking all of Western Europe. Take Sweden for example.

Reaction to execution in Europe

Stanley "Tookie" Williams is dead, executed for his murder of four people a quarter of a century ago. Reaction in Europe reinforces my belief that the E.U. should be pronounced "Eeewwww".

Leaders of Austria's opposition Green Party even called for Mr. Schwarzenegger to be stripped of his Austrian citizenship...

In Graz, Mr. Schwarzenegger's hometown, local Greens said they would file a petition to remove the California governor's name from the city's Arnold Schwarzenegger Stadium. A Christian political group suggested it be renamed for Williams.

Secret CIA Prisons

Mr Frattini, commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security, said that under EU law, if reports of secret CIA jails were true, states would face "serious consequences, including the suspension of the right to vote in the council".

As I've noted elsewhere, one of the problems with overly stringent laws against torture, especially if they wind up forbidding reasonable methods of interrogation, is that it may wind up increasing the amount of torture that actually happens. If a country that is found to have a secret CIA jail is threatened with losing its rights in the Eeewww EU, these prisons will wind up being established in countries that don't care.

But how likely is a country to lose voting rights? Maybe not very.

A suspension of voting rights for a member country would take the EU into uncharted territory. It would require the unanimous backing of all the other member states plus the approval of the European Parliament, said an EU source familiar with the bloc's workings.

So if more than a couple of countries are worried that the same thing could happen to them, you won't get unanimity.

Jihad

While I'm at it, Mark Steyn sees the rioting as at least partial fulfilment of his prediction:

Ever since 9/11, I've been gloomily predicting the European powder keg's about to go up. ''By 2010 we'll be watching burning buildings, street riots and assassinations on the news every night,'' I wrote in Canada's Western Standard back in February.

The NY Times articles quote sources blaming the riots on "harassment" on the part of French police. It seems they've been checking IDs and questioning immigrant youths. But they may have had a good reason to question people:

In the no-go suburbs, even before these current riots, 9,000 police cars had been stoned by "French youths" since the beginning of the year; some three dozen cars are set alight even on a quiet night. :There's a civil war under way in Clichy-sous-Bois at the moment," said Michel Thooris of the gendarmes' trade union Action Police CFTC. "We can no longer withstand this situation on our own. My colleagues neither have the equipment nor the practical or theoretical training for street fighting."

In trying to quell the riots, it's going to be tempting to offer concessions. Steyn has a prediction about the results of that tack, as well:

...the rioters aren't doing a bad impression of the Muslim armies of 13 centuries ago: They're seizing their opportunities, testing their foe, probing his weak spots. If burning the 'burbs gets you more "respect" from Chirac, they'll burn 'em again, and again.

Paris: City of Jihad

It appears that Zyed Benna, age 17, and Bouna Traore, age 15, are going to have fifteen days of fame.

At least, it's their deaths which have sparked more than ten days of rioting in the outskirts of Paris. The two boys were apparently hiding from police in transformers at an electrical station when they completed a circuit.

Now, according to the NY Times, "youths" are shooting at the police, with two officers in the hospital.

"This is just the beginning," said Moussa Diallo, 22, a tall, unemployed French-African man in Clichy-sous-Bois, the working-class Parisian suburb where the violence started Oct. 27. "It's not going to end until there are two policemen dead." He did not say whether he had taken part in the vandalism.

But then again, how much of this is outrage, and how much is an excuse to make trouble?

While everyone seems to agree that the latest violence was touched off by the deaths of the teenagers, the unrest no longer has much to do with the incident. "It was a good excuse, but it's fun to set cars on fire," said Mohamed Hammouti, a 15-year-old boy in Clichy-sous-Bois, sitting Sunday outside the gutted remnants of a gymnasium near his home. He said he had not participated in any violence.

I recall a quote in one of the news magazines shortly after the Los Angeles Riots. A rioter was quoted as saying, "Who's Rodney King?"

Stingy Americans

(Hat tip: Clayton Cramer.)

You've undoubtedly heard how stingy we Americans are. You've also heard, no doubt, how we gobble up 80% of the world's resources (or is it 90%? One made up statistic is probably as good as any other), to support our 5% of the world's population.

We do consume a disproportionate share of resources, but we handle a disproportionate share of the world's defense. In battle against the bad guys, we provide a great deal of the armament, and a disproportionate number of our soldiers die.

And our hardware gives us the ability to project resources into disaster areas that is second to none.

Today, during an afternoon conference that wrapped up my project of the last 18 months, one of my Euro collegues tossed this little turd out to no one in particular: "See, this is why George Bush is so dumb, theres a disaster in the world and he sends an Aircraft Carrier..." After which he and many of my Euro collegues laughed out loud. and then they looked at me. I wasn't laughing, and neither was my Hindi friend sitting next to me, who has lost family in the disaster. I'm afraid I was "unprofessional", I let it loose - "Hmmm, let's see, what would be the ideal ship to send to a disaster, now what kind of ship would we want? Something with its own inexhuastible power supply? Something that can produce 900,000 gallons of fresh water a day from sea water? Something with its own airfield? So that after producing the fresh water, it could help distribute it? Something with 4 hospitals and lots of open space for emergency supplies? Something with a global communications facility to make the coordination of disaster relief in the region easier?

We're "stingy" because at first, we allocated only a small amount of money in "foreign aid" to the areas hit by the tsunami. I wonder how much it costs to dispatch an aircraft carrier? If you had to pay by the hour, what would the tab run? You've got fuel, depreciation, maintenance, and a highly-trained crew each of whom gets paid far less than he'd get in private industry for the same job.

One page shows the annual cost of running a nuclear aircraft carrier at $444 million. That's about $1.2 million per day, or $50,650 per hour.

I don't thinki that includes the cost of any aircraft on the carrier – it would make sense that those are costed out separately. I was just looking at the cost of operating a helicopter, and it runs anywhere from $1200 to $3000 per hour. Compared to aircraft carriers, choppers are cheap.

Fifteen million dollars in assistance? That's twelve and a half battleship-days, not counting aircraft. How many battleships have we sent?

Clayton does not include the comment from the "Hindi Friend". I think it's worth including.

"Can you let your hatred of George Bush end for just one minute? There are people dying! And what are your countries doing? Amazon.com has helped more than France has. You all have a role to play in the world, why can't you see that? Thank God for the US Navy, they dont have to come and help, but they are. They helped you once and you should all thank God they did. They didnt have to, and no one but them would have done so. I'm ashamed of you all..."

They say love is blind. So is hatred.

Now go read the rest of it.

Europe thinks we're nuts...

An article appearing on The American Thinker is "An Open Letter to Europe".

The first line is, "Hi, are you nuts?"

Across Europe, the reaction to the re-election of George Bush has been ... interesting. I, personally, have listened to a non-American describe the US as acting like a small child throwing a tantrum. This same sentiment echoes across much of Europe, as ... it ... throws itself on the floor, kicks, screams, and threatens to hold its breath until it turns blue.

(Hmmm... Are the blue states suffering from oxygen deprivation?)

One great point, though...

Of course, you are entitled to whatever views about us that you care to hold. (And lucky for you we Americans aren't like so many of the Muslims on your own continent; as the late Dutch film maker Theo van Gogh just discovered, make one nasty crack about them and you're likely to get six bullets pumped into your head and a knife plunged into your chest).

Now go read the rest of it.

Tax cuts

President Bush has taken a lot of flak over his tax cuts. Now, we begin to see signs of praise, or at least sincere flattery.

President Bush's tax cuts over the last four years were strongly opposed by liberals, and even many moderates saw them as controversial, at least. So it is interesting to discover, according to a new report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, that governments of the left in Europe have been doing pretty much the same thing as President Bush has done here.

It will be interesting to watch the GDP of the countries involved.