Skip to comments.Sowell: The High Cost of Liberalism
Posted on 04/21/2014 2:03:16 PM PDT by jazusamo
Liberals advocate many wonderful things. In fact, I suspect that most conservatives would prefer to live in the kind of world envisioned by liberals, rather than in the kind of world envisioned by conservatives.
Unfortunately, the only kind of world that any of us can live in is the world that actually exists. Trying to live in the kind of world that liberals envision has costs that will not go away just because these costs are often ignored by liberals.
One of those costs appeared in an announcement of a house for sale in Palo Alto, the community adjacent to Stanford University, an institution that is as politically correct as they come.
The house is for sale at $1,498,000. It is a 1,010 square foot bungalow with two bedrooms, one bath and a garage. Although the announcement does not mention it, this bungalow is located near a commuter railroad line, with trains passing regularly throughout the day.
Lest you think this house must be some kind of designer's dream, loaded with high-tech stuff, it was built in 1942 and, even if it was larger, no one would mistake it for the Taj Mahal or San Simeon.
This house is not an aberration, and its price is not out of line with other housing prices in Palo Alto. One couple who had lived in their 1,200 square foot home in Palo Alto for 20 years decided to sell it, and posted an asking price just under $1.3 million.
Competition for that house forced the selling price up to $1.7 million.
Another Palo Alto house, this one with 1,292 square feet of space, is on the market for $2,285,000. It was built in 1895.
(Excerpt) Read more at creators.com ...
I don’t know about any of you out there in ‘realville’ but the very last thing on my list is thinking about the too high prices of a bungalow (near Palo Alto) costing $1.5 Mil, or another at $1.7 Mil, or even $2.2 Million.
I’ve read where he works at Stanford (near there). Could this be a problem that is hitting home for him, personally trying to find some new digs?
Personally, it is hard to envision someone out there in PaloWorld being down there with the struggle us ‘conservatives’ he talks about can identify with.
Yet, aside from my digression with my inability to comprehend those kind of numbers in my personal situation, and nearly EVERYONE in my little north Georgia county, I’ll relent and agree. Yeah, life is tough, things are expensive and living around liberals can cost you much, much more than vastly overpaying for a house.
And now you know why the Silicon Valley billionaires need imported labor to do the work in their companies. They can’t pay enough for an employee to live in the valley so they have to get someone who is used to living in squalor and thinks a mediocre US wage is a fortune.
The is to have everyone living in “hovels” except the liberal elite.
And btw, why are their two parts to such a short article? Sowell saving up for that Palo Alto bungalo/hovel?
Seriously, how in the world does anyone who is not a millionaire, or otherwise independently wealthy, afford to buy a house out there?
Your guess is as good as mine, it’s sure out of my range. :)
Income gaps not always unfair
By Micha Gisser / For the Journal
The Alburquerque Journal Monday, April 14, 2014
To divert attention from his mishandling of the economy and the problematic Obamacare, President Barack Obama has begun a campaign to promote income equality. We are back to the assault on millionaires and billionaires. Here are some facts and comments related to the issue.
An acceptable indicator of economic inequality is the Gini ratio. A larger Gini ratio signifies a higher level of inequality. Since 1967, income inequality has been rising. (The census neglected to specify whether their Gini ratio is before, or after taxes. Since the two Gini series swing together, neither is preferable.)
The upward trend of inequality over time is likely due to structural economic changes. Under Obamas watch the Feds irresponsible easy-money policy did nothing for economic growth, but it drove the interest rate down to near-zero levels. Consequently, people shifted their savings from bonds to stocks, and, as a result, from Jan. 20, 2009, to March 17, 2014, the Dow more than doubled (from 7,949 to 16,249).
Millionaires and billionaires had a feast and from 2009 to 2012 the Gini ratio jumped from 0.468 to 0.477.
NAME: Micha Gisser
Fiscally induced income redistribution will lead to economic losses. For example, the market compensates people with higher education for income foregone while attending school and for fewer years remaining in the labor market.
Taxing them at a higher rate would be inefficient, but more importantly, simply unfair. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2012 median weekly earnings for those with doctor, master or bachelor degrees were, respectively, $1,624, $1,300 and $1,066. The comparable figures for holders of a high-school diploma or less than a high-school diploma were, respectively, $652 and $471. Some of the differences, beyond doubt, reflect the cost of education.
Here is another illustration from the medical profession: According to a recent Profiles of Physicians Salary Survey for 2011-2012, the six-year-practicing-average salary of a pediatric surgeon was $401,000. The comparable figure for a physician in family practice was $200,000.
Some of this $200,000 difference can be attributed to the years of residency and specialization invested by the surgeon after graduation, and, also, accounting for the stress involved in performing surgery. After the necessary adjustments the pediatric surgeon does not necessarily earn that much more than the family doctor.
Likewise, those who insist that millionaires and billionaires do not pay their fair share of taxes are not necessarily promoting social justice. Consider the life story of Michael Dell who abandoned his medical studies at UT Austin and, from a rented room started winning bids to sell computers by skipping the overheads of computer stores. He took a huge risk. Had his idea proven wrong, today, rather than a physician or a millionaire, he would likely be a salesman in some electronics store.
A similar story could be told about a Turkish immigrant by the name of Hamdi Ulukaya who founded Chobani. By penetrating a competitive market he too took a big risk.
the rest of the article
The same way they do it in Japan: three generation loans at interest rates under 3%.
How can this pseudo conservative who is at war with the Tea Party movement and their representatives in congress like Mr. Ted Cruz pose as a conservative.
Mr. A.S. Sowell is a Gope interloper who is over the hill and should go back to pushing for Jeb and Chris Christie to be the nominees, they are as conservative as he is and natural born losers at the Presidential level.
Why people here care to listen to a person at war with the people who have demonstrated that they stand up for conservative values when A.S. Sowell is just a tool of the GOPe I don’t fathom.
Your constant screeds are getting boring. I suggest you ignore his columns because they will continue to be posted as long as the boss doesn’t object.
Your public call to ban Dr. Sowell from Free Republic didn’t seem to work out for you, I suggest you contact Jim Robinson from now on about banning a columnist from this forum.
Which reminds me:
I have only one firm belief about the American political system, and that is this: God is a Republican and Santa Claus is a Democrat.
God is an elderly or, at any rate, middle-aged mate, a stern fellow, patriarchal rather than paternal and a great believer in rules and regulations. He holds men strictly accountable for their actions. He has little apparent concern for the material well-being of the disadvantaged. He is politically connected, socially powerful and holds the mortgage on literally everything in the world. God is difficult. God is unsentimental. It is very hard to get into God's heavenly country club.
Santa Claus is another matter. He's cute. He's nonthreatening. He's always cheerful. And he loves animals. He may know who's been naughty and who's been nice, but he never does anything about it. He gives everyone everything they want without thought of a quid pro quo. He works hard for charities, and he's famously generous to the poor. Santa Claus is preferable to God in every way but one: There is no such thing as Santa Claus.
-- P.J. O'Rourke
That is a great analogy by P.J. O’Rourke. Thanks.
Nothing is hated here as much as the GOPe, and A.S. Sowell is the with Boner as the loudest tea party basher, and GOPe booster.
I just want to remind those who just drop in to read occasional postings by this GOPe dupe.
People should read his so Called “Conservative” musings with a gallon of salt.
Why should he be given any more credence than when Coulter backs Romney or Krispy Cream, or Karl Rove.
Why complain about Corny or Mitch when Sowell backs their play, and hates Ted Cruz and the real conservatives as much as Mitch, Boner, and Corny.
If you don’t like differing views your in the wrong place.
And never tell me or anyone what to write.
Thomas Sowell has taught economics at Cornell, UCLA, Amherst and other academic institutions, and his Basic Economics has been translated into six languages. He is currently a scholar in residence at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He has published in both academic journals in such popular media as the Wall Street Journal, Forbes magazine and Fortune, and writes a syndicated column that appears in newspapers across the country.
I strongly disagree with his very first axiom: conservatives would be miserable in a liberal run world, precisely because we known what that world would be like.
I hear you and thought he was stretching it to make a point.
Give it a rest will ya?
Inheritance from second, third or first generation, family. How do you, not suppose, upon, the line of dim-witted property owners?
I think you might be more comfortable going down the hall and taking a left.
I wouldn’t want to be on the 50th floor, when big one hits.
Not quite what he said - he said a world as envisioned by liberals. That is, the believers in the idea that we can create utopia. (Whereas conservatives tend to believe than man is fundamentally flawed and therefore should not be trusted with great amounts of power unchecked.)
No, but there’s a lot of room for more than 4 floors. And a lot of the older buildings aren’t that great for earthquake resistance. I’d rather be in a properly engineered 8 story than a crappy old 3 story.
Near the end of the Soviet Union, when everything was horribly filthy and falling apart, the Soviet tour agency was still taking starry-eyed American leftists around.
It did not matter what they were shown, because instead of a garbage mound, they saw a castle. Instead of horribly polluted rivers, they saw pristine streams, with flowers on the banks instead of rotting fish. Even the tour guides were amazed at their level of delusion, in “the people’s paradise”.
My point is that what liberals envision is not just the ideal world of the future they want; they are just as incapable of seeing reality today the way it is.
For them, America today is a horrific concentration camp, a desolate yet internationally oppressive monstrosity, when run by Republicans; and when Democrats are in charge, they are desperately trying to crawl out of that carnage, by destroying it, with Republicans fighting them every step of the way, for insidious and evil reasons.
When you show them a daisy, they do not see a daisy. If they imagine it to be a Republican thing, then it is a noxious and poisonous, genetically modified monster. But if it is a Democrat thing, it is perfect beauty, yet not in and of itself, but only in how it serves “the cause”.
Delusion all the way around.
So my point is, the world envisioned by liberals is Hell, but so is the world they would create for us today. And yet they are unaware of it all.
Yet for clear sighted conservatives, a daisy is a daisy. So a liberal anything is going to be very bad.