Muda69

https://www.cato.org/blog/jones-act-should-be-waived-more-substantive-changes-are-needed Unfortunately, only a relatively small number of tanker ships ideally suited to transport refined petroleum products are deemed coastwise compliant, meaning they meet the Jones Act’s requirements of being U.S.-flagged, U.S.-built and mostly U.S.-crewed and owned. Waiving the Jones Act would allow far more numerous—and significantly cheaper—vessels not compliant with the law to quickly move fuel from the Gulf Coast to where it’s needed. The transportation system requires maximum flexibility in an emergency or crisis, and a Jones Act waiver would help provide it. There is ample precedence for such a move. In the wake of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma in 2017, along with Hurricane Sandy in 2011, a lack of fuel supplies was deemed to be a threat to national security, thus clearing the way for the issuance of Jones Act waivers. If it was a good enough reason to justify a waiver then it should be a good enough reason now. But waivers should only be a prelude to more significant changes to the Jones Act. The law isn’t just a problem in times of pressing need, but also in everyday life. By limiting domestic waterborne transport to ships that are the world’s most expensive to build and operate, the Jones Act interferes with the efficient flow of goods within the United States. That’s particularly true of petroleum products where the law’s distortions are in abundance. For example: Refined products produced in the Gulf Coast are sent to Latin America instead of the East Coast. Refineries on both the East Coast and West Coast can find it more attractive to import oil from abroad than other parts of the United States. California can source gasoline more cheaply from distant Singapore than the Gulf Coast. At its worst, the Jones Act can even make domestic transportation outright impossible. While the United States is the world’s leading exporter of propane, Hawaii must buy it from as far away as Africa owing to a complete lack of Jones Act‐compliant ships capable of transporting it from the U.S. mainland. A similar absence of appropriate ships, meanwhile, means that Puerto Rico has no choice but to meet its bulk liquefied natural gas needs from foreign sources. These inefficiencies are not just a hit to the country’s economic pocketbook, but a threat to its security. Reduced transportation options or over‐reliance on a single method of transport can lead to significant problems when things go awry, as we are painfully finding out. Redundancy and flexibility are key to overcoming systemic breakdowns, and the Jones Act means less of both. So, what should be done? At a minimum this situation illustrates the need for a waiver system based on commercial considerations. Currently, waivers can only be issued by the Department of Homeland Security if they are deemed in the “interest of national defense” or by the Secretary of Defense in order to address an “immediate adverse effect on military operations.” That’s a high bar to clear, which helps explain why such waivers are rarely issued. Instead, Congress should create a new type of waiver allowing the use of non‐Jones Act ships if no vessel meeting the law’s requirements is available—no “national defense” justification required. Canada already has such a system. Other measures that should be on the table include a scrapping of the law’s U.S.-built requirement and permanent exemptions for parts of the United States that are uniquely dependent on maritime transportation such as Alaska, Guam, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. A Jones Act waiver could help ameliorate some of the Jones Act’s worst effects, but what’s urgently needed is the significant reform—if not outright repeal—of this failed and costly law. Bingo. Such a simple solution for an indeed failed and costly law.

Since it is a U.S. citizens duty to blame the sitting U.S. President for negative economic developments: As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/541833-as-gas-prices-soar-americans-can-blame-joe-biden

Vaccine Passports Will Outlast the Pandemic https://reason.com/2021/05/12/vaccine-passports-will-outlast-the-pandemic/ Yet another piece of security theater, ensuring the bureaucracy continues.

I like "Ulrichs" or "Adolphas": https://www.perfectdogbreeds.com/wolf-names/

Sources: Colts sign free agent left tackle Eric Fisher https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/colts-insider/2021/05/10/colts-sign-free-agent-lt-eric-fisher-according-source/4970377001/ Looks to be a decent signing if Mr. Fisher's achilles tendon is fully healed by training camp.

The FBI Seized Heirlooms, Coins, and Cash From Hundreds of Safe Deposit Boxes in Beverly Hills, Despite Knowing 'Some' Belonged to 'Honest Citizens' https://reason.com/2021/05/10/the-fbi-seized-heirlooms-coins-and-cash-from-hundreds-of-safe-deposit-boxes-in-beverly-hills-despite-knowing-some-belonged-to-honest-citizens/ This was nothing more than a heinous crime perpetrated by the FBI. And they will get away with it.

Hamilton County schools don't teach critical race theory, but it still angers some parents https://www.indystar.com/story/news/local/hamilton-county/education/2021/05/10/critical-race-theory-controversial-but-not-taught-hamilton-county/4939175001/

No, I haven't. Guess my life is incomplete. The late Tim Adams would agree.

I never said they were a requirement, was just curious as to why they choose to wear tennis visors instead of traditional baseball caps.

So girls softball is played with the players wearing tennis visors and not traditional baseball caps? Why?

IMHO a better name and mascot than a generic, run of the mill Panther. Those are a dime a dozen.

In the Name of Equity, California Will Discourage Students Who Are Gifted at Math https://reason.com/2021/05/04/california-math-framework-woke-equity-calculus/?itm_source=parsely-api Agreed. This is a bunch of horseshit.

Teachers Unions Use Political Clout To Keep Classrooms Closed https://reason.com/2021/05/07/teachers-unions-use-political-clout-to-keep-classrooms-closed/

As long as this new venue is privately funded and not a public (aka tax) funded boondoggle like Lucas Oil, U.S. Bank Stadium, etc. then I'm game.

I would prefer the mascot be named after a regional Indian tribe that used to live in the Lake County area.

Plucking Out The Eyes Of Texas: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/plucking-out-the-eyes-of-texas/ More: OK, wait a minute. If you don’t get your way, that doesn’t mean that your “opinions don’t matter.” It may simply mean that you made your case, and it wasn’t persuasive. This is childish. More: Here is background on the song and the controversy: a university-commissioned report. The song was written to poke gentle fun of an early twentieth century president of the university, who used to say all the time, “The eyes of Texas are upon you.” It was debuted at a minstrel show in 1903 — a fact the report rightly says is regrettable, while noting that minstrel shows were a popular form of entertainment at the time. Here are the full lyrics: The part of the song I know (because my wife is an alumna of UT, and she and the kids would sing the song every time we would drive back to Texas from Louisiana, and cross the border) is: I didn’t know the complete lyrics till just now. This song is totally innocent! The earlier claim that the song has some sort of connection to Robert E. Lee has been debunked. The entire controversy is because its first performance was in a minstrel show. The students, alumni, and backers of the University of Texas have been singing this song for over a century, and nobody noticed that it was problematic until recently?! This is a manufactured controversy if ever there was one. More from the Texas Tribune story: What kind of enfragilated souls find themselves traumatized by a song whose lyrics refer not to slavery or anything offensive, but which was first performed by students in a minstrel show during Theodore Roosevelt administration? Ridiculous and psychotic — a form of religious fanaticism. This therapeutic totalitarianism, under which we are commanded to cast all our history into the dustbin, including beloved cultural artifacts like a university fight song, if it strikes a privileged victim group as offensive, has to end. Yes, it does need to end. These snowflakes have effectively destroyed higher level education in this country.

College Soccer Player Suing Coach Who Benched Her After She Refused to Kneel During Protest https://reason.com/2021/05/04/college-soccer-player-suing-coach-who-benched-her-after-she-refused-to-kneel-during-protest/

The CDC's Guidance for Summer Camps Is Insane https://reason.com/2021/05/04/cdc-summer-camp-guidance-masks-covid-19/ Kids and vaccinated adults do not need to wear masks or adhere to strict social distancing while outside. The guidance should be updated immediately to reflect this reality. Failing that, it should simply be ignored. Also this "guidance" about not sharing physical objects is asinine. Studies have shown contacting COVID-19 thru the touching of physical surfaces is extremely low, like 1 in 10,000. The CDC itself even admits this: https://consumer.healthday.com/cdc-low-risk-of-catching-coronavirus-from-surfaces-2652264315.html No, exactly like the article says these recommendations are nothing by CYA virtue signaling by the CDC.

https://www.jamesgmartin.center/2021/05/school-of-journalism-or-ministry-of-propaganda/ Great Mencken’s Ghost! Has there ever been a pundit so supremely qualified to teach journalism as Hannah-Jones? Such an acclaimed hiring can mean a lot to a university department or school. Its national reputation may rise—possibly influencing its national ranking. And her position is fully funded by the Knight Foundation—with the possibility that her presence will attract other donations in the future. Ford Worthy, the chairman of the school’s foundation board, said that “a MacArthur Genius with a Pulitzer Prize who will share her perspective and skills with our students is exactly the kind of journalistic leader we believe will build the school for tomorrow.” But there is another perspective, one that almost seems to belong to another world than the one where academia resides. From this perspective, UNC’s hiring Hannah-Jones signals a degradation of journalistic standards, from one in which ethics and truth are prized to one in which a writer’s work is judged according to whether it serves a preferred political agenda. For she has been exposed as somebody whose work is less journalism than an outpouring of emotions. The crown jewel of her career—leading a rewriting of the nation’s history called “The 1619 Project”—has been attacked and ridiculed by historians of all stripes and persuasions as unfactual and biased. For instance, she claimed that “one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery” as British anti-slavery sentiment grew. There is almost no hint of that in factual history. Certainly some Southern founding fathers wished to preserve slavery—that’s how we got the Three-fifths Compromise—but that came later, after we were already a free nation, during the discussion about the details of the new Constitution. Many celebrated experts chimed in against Hannah-Jones’s take on our Founding. Historian Sean Wilentz was quoted in an article written by Adam Serwer of The Atlantic as saying: Serwer added that “the Revolution was kindled in New England, where prewar anti-slavery sentiment was strongest.” James McPherson, a former professor of history at Princeton University who won the Pulitzer Prize for his book Battle Cry of Freedom and is a past president of the American Historical Association, said in a World Socialist Web Site interview that “Almost from the outset, I was disturbed by what seemed like a very unbalanced, one-sided account, which lacked context and perspective.” And Gordon Wood, an emeritus history professor at Brown University, said in an interview with Real Clear Media that the Project’s only classroom utility is “as a way of showing how history can be distorted and perverted.” The real goal of The 1619 Project was not historical or journalistic, but political agitation. And an angry, underhanded politics at that; Hannah-Jones admitted that her underlying intent is to get “white people to give up whiteness.” That is, to make them regard their identities as something abhorrent. As Arthur Milikh of the Heritage Foundation wrote: The overriding lesson is clear: young people must learn to despise their nation—its Constitution, ideals, economic system, and its Founders. Indeed, young people—the white ones, at least—are even taught to hate themselves for the unforgivable sins of their ancestors. The 1619 Project, if adopted as a teaching tool (as it has been in many schools), will serve no other purpose than to undermine our national cohesion and turn young people against themselves and each other. Yet, despite its falsehoods and vicious anti-American stance, Hannah-Jones won the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for commentary for The 1619 Project. And what of the rest of her accolades? They were based on the same shoddy research, the same bitterness toward America, and the same biased assumptions that characterize the Project. There are indeed two differing worlds in American intellectual life today: one a world built upon impressions, reputation, and political expedience, and the other a world that rewards truth-seeking and integrity. In the world of impressions, Hannah-Jones is one of America’s pre-eminent public intellectuals, and UNC-Chapel Hill has acquired one of journalism’s leading lights. Students (and their parents) looking for a top-notch journalism program may be impressed by UNC-Chapel Hill’s Hussman School, with its award-winning new professor. But from the other perspective, the world of seeking truth and behaving with integrity, Hannah-Jones has been thoroughly discredited and all of her awards and achievements are mere illusion. Her hiring should be a signal to students seriously interested in journalism and their parents to cross Chapel Hill off their list. It is not the only disturbing move made by the Hussman School in recent years. In 2015, it drastically lowered its standards by ending requirements for: ECON 101, which introduces students to the basic concepts of both micro- and macro-economics HIST 128, which surveys U.S. history from 1865 to the present, POLI 100 (now 200), which introduces students to the U.S. federal government, and POLI 101 (now 205), which does the same for the state and local levels of government The school said at the time the requirements were changed that university-wide general education requirements sufficed to give the sufficient background knowledge an aspiring journalism student would need. That claim did not hold up upon closer inspection, as general education requirements are so broad and vague as to be meaningless. Students in 2015 could replace ECON 101, for instance, with a vast array of social science courses, including such non-essential pablum as: African, African American and Diaspora 50: Defining Blackness Anthropology 51: Environmentalism and American Society Communications 53: First-Year Seminar: Collective Leadership Models for Community Change Religion 246: Supernatural Encounters: Zombies, Vampires, Demons, and the Occult in the Americas Sociology 51: Emotion and Social Life The history and political science courses could be replaced in the same fashion. As a result, valuable knowledge has been replaced with ignorance and superficiality for UNC’s J-school graduates. And now, Hannah-Jones brings to the Hussman School an ugly strain of bias and deceit—upheld as “genius.” None of these facts matter in the world of reputation. Academia is part of a powerful coalition with Democratic socialists, the media, and “woke” crony capitalists; the coalition has been in the ascendance for several decades, and it may be that it can continue this intellectual charade indefinitely. But let us hope that the world of facts and integrity somehow wins out, and schools of journalism that encourage superficiality, ignorance, hatred, and bias collapse through exposure of their lack of rigor and ethics. And that more grounded journalism schools restore truth-seeking as the purpose of journalism. Yes, we can only hope.

Agreed. Other travesties of government aggression like Waco come to mind.........................

I propose an entry on the GID and it's history.

We can only hope.

Biden Believes in Science — So Long as the Teachers’ Unions Approve https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/05/biden-believes-in-science-so-long-as-the-teachers-unions-approve/

https://mises.org/wire/how-trillions-newly-printed-money-created-labor-shortgage Even government employers—who tend to offer more job security and a lot more vacation time than private firms—are offering extra cash to get more applicants in the door. Millions of Workers Have Also Left the Labor Force An endless stream of unemployment checks isn’t the only thing fueling the worker shortage. Record numbers of Americans are leaving the labor force entirely. In January 2020, 96 million American adults were outside the labor force. That shot up to 104 million in April of last year. But as businesses opened up and increased hours, there were still 100 million Americans not in the labor force. In other words, over the past year an additional 4 million workers exited the labor force. These people are not actively looking for work, are not on unemployment, and are not factored into the unemployment rate. Of the 100 million adult Americans who are out of the labor force, 6.5 million say they “want a job now.” Yet, for whatever reason they're not collecting any wages, even in a time when we're being told anyone can walk into a restaurant and get immediately hired. In other words: yes, millions of Americans are being paid to stay home, but that's not the whole picture. Millions more have given up looking for work altogether. The Illusion of GDP Growth This contrasts with the rosy picture of employment that the regime is now trying to paint. For example, we’re being told that the employment situation is excellent because the headline unemployment rate has fallen over the past year from 14.4 percent to 6.2 percent. That’s certainly a big improvement, but it also suggests that the number of unemployed job seekers remains high. An unemployment rate of 6.2 percent, after all, puts unemployment at a higher level than anything experienced between 1994 and 2008. It’s not exactly a “low” rate, and it’s nearly double the unemployment rate of April 2019 (3.3 percent). The narrative of an employment boom is so sketchy that even Fed personnel—i.e., Minneapolis Fed president Neel Kashkari—admits the unemployment rate is more like 9.5 percent. And then there’s the unconvincing overall narrative of economic growth. As noted last week by Daniel Lacalle, one should naturally expect big increases in GDP when massive amounts of monetary stimulus have been pumped into the economy. GDP is based largely on spending, and spending goes up as trillions of new dollars are printed. Lacalle writes: A Temporary Labor Bubble So why the labor shortage? As with GDP overall, it's helpful to look to money printing as a partial explanation—we should absolutely expect to see a surge in demand for employment as a result of the central bank printing up trillions of dollars. In our money printing–based economy, printed money is being substituted for production. Thus, millions of workers can stay home while demand remains steady, or even increases. Idle workers still have a lot of dollars to spend. Demand continues upward even as production falls. Contrast this with how a labor market works in a normal economy. In a normal economy, the fact millions of workers are electing to stay home rather than produce anything should have a depressing or stabilizing effect on the demand for labor. That is, 10 million or so idle workers would mean workers have far fewer dollars to spend. This in turn would mean less demand for goods and services such as restaurant meals and retail sales. This would then tend to keep wages flat as well. As Say’s law reminds us, production must precede demand in a functioning economy. It is the act of producing goods and services which produces the income necessary to increase demand. So what are the prospects for this labor bubble? In the short term we can hazard some guesses about what happens. Demand is likely to continue to increase, as is price inflation. As Warren Buffet recently highlighted at a shareholder meeting, "We are seeing very substantial inflation…. We are raising prices. People are raising prices to us and it's being accepted." In the medium and long term this will mean reduced purchasing power for those relying on unemployment checks. How the employment bubble will play out beyond this summer, however, will depend somewhat on whether the federal government again extends benefits and at what payment level. If benefits remain flat, then the real value of benefits will decline and at least some workers are likely to more enthusiastically seek work again. In any case, we're still in the early stages of a boom fueled by unprecedented amounts of money creation. Trillions have flowed into households via "stimulus" checks and unemployment checks. Yet although there are growing signs of price inflation, consumer prices in many cases are still adjusting to the new realities of money supply greatly outpacing production. For those looking for a chance to build some job experience, now is the time to do it. This wage and employment bubble is unlikely to last. Another excellent analysis by Mr. McMaken. This bubble will burst, as all bubble do. And it will cause pain and suffering for our children and grandchildren.

https://reason.com/2021/04/29/how-the-nfl-and-the-players-union-screw-draft-picks-out-of-millions/ Yet another example of a labor union failing a good percentage of it's membership.