3 04 2015



Except for rich, Americans’ incomes fell last year


But broken down into quintiles, those in the top 20 percent of incomes saw their money stream grow by 0.9 percent to $166,048 on average.

Every other group lost ground, with the bottom 20 percent losing the most: their average income dropped 3.5 percent to $9,818.

Thank goodness our elected officials have a solution:  Import more people and give them work permits.

The top 20% really isn’t that rich, $101,000 is the household income threshold for that the highest quintile.  $101,000 really doesn’t go that far in expensive metro areas.  However, I bet that if you narrowed the top percentile metric to smaller and smaller percentiles, the higher percentages their incomes grew.

The God That Costs

20 10 2014


I now think like HHH that democratic republicanism is defective by design.  Unlike HHH, I’m not so sure that classical monarchy is the solution.

However, I couldn’t help but think of this video and HHH’s assertion that democratic republicanism has actually retarded quality economic growth when I read this story this morning.  And since I found it on Instapundit, you knew Glenn Reynolds would end with with a short editorial, in this case:

But all that regulation — while making the country much poorer — has vastly enriched the parasite class. They have a bigger slice of a smaller pie, and they like it that way because it makes them feel important.

And this parasitism that has benefited the parasite class at the expense of having a $32 trillion economy instead of a $17 trillion economy is blood on the hands of duhmocrazy.

I also think one of the prime offending elements to explain why the growth of American GDP per capita is far slower than it might be is that, thanks to the 1965 No Borders Act and similar subsequent legislation and the non-enforcement of what little immigration law remains, the denominator of “capitas” is way higher than it should be.

As an aside, HHH in this presentation brought up the concept of hereditarian ownership of a house. He was right in what he said, but he forgot a crucial element: The people that genuinely own their house (even if “ownership” is in the mortgage and equity accruing sense) don’t have just an interest in maintaining their house for their own distant future and for the future of the people that are destined to inherit it and future generations of their own gene line, they have a direct incentive to make sure the entire neighborhood remains quality and livable and pleasant. Extrapolating that to an entire country run by a hypothetical patriotic nationalist hereditarian monarchy, the incumbent king or queen isn’t just invested in good government or good governance at the moment, he or she wants a consummately quality country. Just as the hereditarian homeowner wouldn’t want a black-filled Section 8 apartment complex to be built on an empty parcel over in the next block, the hereditarian governor wouldn’t want the cores of his or her cities to become a conga line of Bell Curve Cities.


Another example via Instapundit on how duhmocrazy retards genuine growth and innovation.


30 05 2014


In spite of some really questionable fluffy duff metrics being classified as GDP recently, and in spite of government spending being as high as ever, don’t forget that it’s counted in GDP ( = Consumption + Investment + Government Spending + Exports ), and in spite of fracking for certain fossil fuel natural resources whose crude prices are still pretty high, the American economy shrank in 1Q14 over 4Q13.

Imagine how bad it would be if they told the truth, and the kook left had its way all the time on fracking.

Ball of Confusion

17 03 2014

Washington, D.C.

Computer World headline and sub-headline:

Gates sees software replacing people; Greenspan calls for more H-1Bs
Both agree that U.S. secondary education system needs much improvement

Translation: People will be less and less necessary over time, so the solution is to import more people. And also…fix the schools.


As you can see, Sailer took this story up after a certain snarky birdie whispered in his ear.  After reading this article again, this part suddenly jumped out at me:

“We cannot manage our very complex, highly sophisticated capital structure with what’s coming out of our high schools,” said Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve.

Well pardon me, Al, but when did we ever expect the typical high school graduate to manage our complex sophisticated capital markets?  Hint:  The answer is never.  Not even in the days when a high school diploma actually meant something.

I guess Bill & Al think that the junior and senior years of high school should cram in a combination of B-school, grad school in economics and a near John Nash level math curriculum.  If that’s what they want, fine.  But realize it’ll have a disparate impact on NAMs, and just about everyone else for that matter.

Schaeffer’s Number

1 02 2014


I’m going to re-post something I wrote on AR earlier today.  Something which has been bothering me about Schaeffer’s Number and the whole concept, but I haven’t been able to get off the tip of my tongue until today.


$3 trillion for health care expenses divided by 250 billion person-hours worked, both in a year, comes to $12 an hour.

$1 trillion for all K-12 public education, and that’s another $4 an hour.

The problem with Schaeffer’s Number and the economic and policy implications that people draw for it is this: Not all economic value added goes to labor. Not all Federal revenue collection comes from personal income taxes.

It’s mawkish to say and think that if you make $15 an hour, that you’re not even pulling our own weight with regards to education and health care alone. That’s because the economic forces from which you earn your $15 an hour are themselves productive and adding to the economy. And while lots of people are under Schaeffer’s Number, there are lots of people over it, pulling their own weight and the lot of other people’s weight.

While I think the Gross Domestic Product figures are questionable because they count too much intangible snake oil as productivity, (and it gets worse all the time), let’s play along. The $15.68 trillion GDP in 2012 divided by 250 billion person-hours worked makes $62.72 an hour. The real Schaeffer Number economy-wide is $62.72, which means if you make less than that, and almost everyone does, you’re not pulling your own economic weight. That much an hour works to $130,457 a year, which puts whoever earns it at the 96.3 percentile, i.e. the top 3.7% of individual income earners. So the whole economic-philosophical basis behind Shaeffer’s Number, taken to its logical conclusion, is that 96.3% of us are slackers and aren’t pulling our weight, and therefore, in the opinion of some (cough, cough, won’t say Ron Unz, cough cough), the minimum wage should be raised to $62.72 an hour.

Who really believes that?



Supply and Demand

3 12 2013

New York

H/T V-Dare.

NYT bashes Unz’s “immigration control via minimum wage hike” proposal, mainly because Unz is motivated by trying to keep Hispanics from flooding into the country.

Except they’re both wrong.  You simply can’t hack your way around the law of supply and demand with a different price floor or price ceiling.  Without real immigration control and enforcement, all raising the MW will do is create a lot more violations of the MW, which official American will duly ignore.

With real immigration control and enforcement, you really won’t even need a MW law, because the wage and salary equilibrium will be significantly higher.

For proof of that, the effective minimum wage based on economics in oil boom towns of western North Dakota is around $15 an hour.  Why?  High demand for and low supply of employees.  What’s the official MW in the state?  No higher than the Federal MW, $7.25 an hour.

If we left the immigration laws passed in 1924 both in terms of number and national origin unchanged, equilibrium wages all over would be much higher than what they are now, and even higher in more expensive parts of the country.

Give Us This Day Our Daily Debt

18 10 2013


Front of Drudge:  Debt jumps $328B in one day

That’s because with the debt ceiling lifted, the Yankee government quit lying ended its series of extraordinary measures to hold the apparent total national debt pretty much steady for the last few months to avoid “legally” running into the debt ceiling.

Now that they’re telling the truth again extraordinary measures are no longer necessary, the national debt is officially $17,078,127,027,486.08 as of a few minutes ago, I can now figure that, since the national debt was $8,677,214,255,313.07 on the day Nancy Pelosi took over as House Speaker on January 3, 2007, as of right now, 49.2% of our national debt has been run up since Nancy Pelsoi was Speaker and/or Barack Obama has been President.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,335 other followers