Dolphin safe tuna law

What about the tuna, right? The animal murder law proposed by the Ulman administration is not as injudicious and ignorant as the typical fare you can expect from someone who thinks they are smart enough to protect us from ourselves. The only real changes to the current law is that it increases the distance for shots made on the ground to 300 yards (tree stand shots are still allowed at 150 yards) and essentially says that it is a crime to shoot a building while attempting to murder an innocent animal (i.e. it is now a crime to shoot toward a building within the gun’s maximum range). The only practical way this law would ever be enforced is if you actually shot a building.

The measure seeks to double to 300 yards the minimum distance for firing a weapon near a building. The minimum remains 150 yards for those at least 10 feet off the ground in a tree stand and firing downward.

The measure also would ban firing a gun toward any building or camp designed for people within the gun's maximum range, or within 100 yards from a public road.

These changes will have almost no impact to responsible animal murders. In fact, most animal murders will probably be completely unaware of the law after a few years. The threat of lawsuit and a genuine desire not to shoot anyone is still the primary force keeping the public safe. This law, like the current law, is really just a dog and pony show that allows political figures to beat their chests like gorillas and say “Look at me protect the public. Oooga booga. Vote for me.”

The law will not impact responsible animal murders, yet the public will eat it up. Some people, although not me, would call that win-win. I still think that no law is best, even though I am personally against hunting. If you give these pricks an inch to ban 'unpopular social ill X', the next thing you know they ban drugs and certain marriages (among a zillion other things).

I'll go if Dr. House is there

County Executive Ulman and County Health Officer Dr. Beilenson are co-hosting a county-wide health care reform discussion(.pdf) in Columbia on December 29. The gathering is intended to provide a forum for discussion about the lack of access to health care and the reasons behind it.

As I have stated before, if government regulation worked then the health care industry should be the smoothest running industry in the country. Unfortunately, health care is one of the messiest. This is not the case despite the government intervention; it is the case because of government intervention. Labor unions, like the American Medical Association, and government licensure limit the supply of doctors. Yes, they make sure that the supply of doctors that do exist are very high quality, but there are not enough of these doctors to go around. Eons ago, Milton Friedman wrote a paper that explained why doctors made approximately a third more in income than dentists (at the time). This paper was completed in 1941 but was not published until 1945. This delay was partly caused by the war but mainly caused because one of the conclusions reached was so controversial. That conclusion, which seems common sense to us now, was that the difference in pay was due in part to AMA barriers to entry in the medical field, whereas no such barriers existed (at the time) in the dental industry. Restricting and regulating the supply of doctors is always done under the guise of protecting patients, but the reality is that it hurts patients and protects doctors’ paychecks.

If you have a case of poison ivy, there is no reason that you should have to see a full fledged doctor to get the medicine you need as you do under the current system of regulation. There is no reason that the FDA should be regulating medicines. There is no reason that marijuana should be regulated so that those who need it for medical reasons (or any other reason) cannot have access to it. Regulation does not work.

The only fair and efficient way to allocate health care is to deregulate it and let the market decide the allocation. Everyone wants health care to be free, but life does not work that way. If our government officials find a way to allocate health care in a manner that is more fair and efficient than the allocation that arises from the voluntary transactions of individuals, then government should apply that same methodology to every other allocation of scare resources from pencils to clothes to computers to cars to houses to airplanes. However, the record of history clearly suggests that the only fair and efficient way to allocate resources is in a freed market.

Best tech toy of 2008

One of my last posts of 2007 was to give praise to Google Reader. A new year brings new technological goodies. The must have piece of technology that I discovered in 2008 is the iPhone. I got one several months ago, and I am just as impressed with it then as I am now. To call an iPhone a “cell phone” is like calling Santa Claus an old white dude. Technically it’s true, but it leaves out the best parts. In addition to being a good mobile phone with all the standard mobile phone stuff (texting, camera, etc.) it is also has visual voicemail, an iPod, a GPS device, a portable e-mail device, a portable internet device and with all the stuff you can get at the App Store (much of which is free) it is so much more. Plus, it has a really cool touch screen and friendly interface. It’s totally freaking awesome!

12 Days of Bailouts

Video star

Ken Ulman appears to have made a youtube enemy. I think that Ulman is a terrible executive, but I have to say that these videos are not very good attacks on Ken. One of the attacks on Ken is because he closed GTV (actually it’s still around but HCC is doing most of the work). I think that eliminating GTV redundancies to save taxpayers something like $500,000 was one of the few good things that Ken has done. The only other good thing that Ulman has done that I can think of at the moment is putting an end to the take home cars for most employees. I like the spirit of this video person, but he or she needs to step up the merits of the criticisms.

I have no way of knowing but it is probably a disgruntled former GTV person producing these videos. I have three reasons to think this: they are videos which are something that GTV people would be very comfortable with; one of the videos mentions the closure of GTV as if it was a bad thing; and the same video mentions lay-offs of county employees which only affected the GTV people. Of course, let me be very clear that these reasons are very lame, and this is really pure speculation. I honestly have no idea at all who is producing these videos. Ken has made a lot of enemies and it could be any of them.

The biggest ponzi scheme ever

I am surprised how much of a big deal everyone is making about Bernard Madoff. Sure, he created a ponzi scheme that took unsuspecting investors for $50 billion. That sucks. However, there is a much bigger ponzi scheme going on in this country; one so big that Madoff is a flea in comparison. If you have a job, you are forced by law to participate in this ponzi scheme.

Obviously, I am talking about Social Security. If a private company created a ponzi scheme like Social Security, they would be locked up for life. Furthermore, there is no more regressive a tax than Social Security taxes. Most people think that the employee pays 6.2% and the employer pays another 6.2%. However, the economics of the situation is that the employee pays all or nearly all of the tax. Essentially, the government steals 12.4% of your income and gives it to those who are retired. 12.4%! When you retire, the government will steal money from future workers to pay you. The only problem is that the Social Security program is expected to go broke sometime around 2040 because there will be more people drawing on the fund than putting in.

Social Security was implemented by FDR in response to the crisis of the great depression. Hmmm. I guess the government really shock doctrined us.

Happy Holidays, if that's how you roll

Watch Hammerdance videos and dance lessons at DanceJam.com

Threat of government regulation prevents doctors from providing good medical care

Another sad day for freedom in our so-called "free country". The threat of harassment from state regulators has caused Charter Internal Medicine to delay its switch to concierge medicine. It appears that the imbeciles at the Maryland Insurance Administration are concerned that boutique medicine may cross the line and be considered insurance. I have to wonder if the insurance administration even knows what insurance is. The underlying concept of insurance is risk pooling. How are risks being pooled with retainer fees?

“The central issue is whether any of these arrangements cross the line to trigger obligations as an authorized insurer,” state Insurance Commissioner Ralph Tyler said in the release. The agency “wants to be sure it understands these arrangements and will review the need for additional oversight or regulation.”

Dr. Peter Beilenson, county health officer, said he does not think boutique medicine amounts to insurance, but said it is likely the state review process will not be over quickly.

Hopefully, other doctors will continue to move forward with the boutique model, and give the insurance commission the legal ass kicking that it desperately needs.

Blago my eggo

What is the big deal with Blagojevich? With the exception of his unapologetic brazenness, his crass language and bad hair, nothing he did is outside the norm of an elected official, especially for an official at that level. True, most politicians would not have basically held a public auction for Obama’s Senate seat, but they do sell stuff that does not belong to them. Many of our local politicians sell privileges to developers and other special interest groups in exchange for campaign contributions. They also sell jobs and other benefits to key supporters. Many people may disagree with this next one, but they sell other people’s money in the form of libraries, swimming pools, schools and other crap that could be provided easily in a freed market.

In my view, at least Blagojevich is not trying to hide what he is doing. His dumb ass doesn’t even think he is doing anything wrong. And neither do his colleagues.

Ocassionally Flamable

I should not make fun of this, since my wife is constantly finding spelling and grammar errors that I make on this blog and elsewhere, but a letter to the editor pointed out that there is a spelling mistake on the large blue recycling containers. The word "occasionally" is misspelled as "ocassionally". When I went to investigate this, my wife noticed that the word "flammable" is misspelled as "flamable". In fairness to the county, it was the manufacturer who made the mistakes. I am not a fan of the bins, so I find this all very funny.

Also kind of funny is that the error is actually spelled correctly in the letter. I am sure the automatic spell check fixed it without realizing that it was supposed to be spelled wrong (hence the [sic]).

Fire! Ready! Aim!

The hunter who shot out the window of the daycare facility will be charged with negligent hunting and failure to report harvest of a deer within 24 hours. While I am against hunting, I do hate hunters slightly less than other meat eaters because the hunters have the blood on their own hands- literally. The people I really cannot stand are the ones who complain about hunting but see nothing wrong with eating a hamburger.

I think that Ken Ulman’s desire to want to increase the distance that hunters have to be from buildings is very foolish. Any hunter with a minuscule amount of responsibility can safely hunt two feet away from a building. Obviously, the hunter’s back must be to the building and the zone in which the hunter will fire upon must be clear of obstructions. If the hunter is firing directly toward a building, then that hunter would probably have to be 1,500 yards or more away to be safe. If a hunter lacks responsibility, no law is going to keep the public safe. It is not possible to identify a "safe" distance.

You can’t legislate being a good neighbor, and you can’t legislate stupidity. Likewise, you cannot simply legislate that hunters must be X feet away from a building and think that you are making the public safe. The current law is 150 yards. It is an arbitrary number and increasing it to another arbitrary number does not make sense. We'll see what kind of legislator that Ulman is based the law he comes up with.

Referendum

Wordbones recently blogged about the referendum drive to overturn the council decision on CB 58. Although I think the council made the right decision on CB 58 and I would not sign my name in support of a referendum, I do think that increased citizen participation could be a good thing. The time to bring decisions to the citizens, however, is not after their representatives have already decided the matter (at least not for a piss-ant sized zoning matter like CB 58).

I think the optimal solution to the recurring problem of certain people feeling ignored by the decisions of their representatives is to increase public representation. Instead of a winner take all election every few years, where one council person from each of the 5 districts takes all the votes, have more council people for each district. The ideal solution would look something like this.

He's going the distance

Ken Ulman wasted no time in wanting to put distance between hunters and buildings. The current law is 150 yards. I know a little bit about guns since I own a bunch, but I always thought that 150 yards was a really long shot for a shotgun, even with a slug. Just doing some random internet searches, it appears that slugs can have an "effective range" of 150 yards, whatever that means. According to another study I found, slugs can actually travel farther than a .30-06 rifle projectile when you factor in the ricochet, although I am a little skeptical of that claim:

Ah, but the big surprise comes at 0-degrees of elevation which would be more or less a typical shot at a deer on level terrain. Here the rifle, shotgun and muzzleloader projectiles travel 1,408', 840', and 686' respectfully plus ricochet distances of 3,427', 4,365', and 3,812' respectfully. Now the total distances traveled by the projectiles are 4,835' for the rifle, 5,205' for the shotgun and 4,498' for the muzzleloader.

"The smaller cross sectional area of the .30-caliber projectile and its shape contributes to a higher loss of energy on impact and, after ricochet, the 30-caliber projectile tends to tumble in flight with a high drag. Test data confirm that the 50-caliber projectile's larger cross sectional area and its shape contribute to less energy loss on shallow angles of impact and, after ricochet, the projectile exhibits less drag which results in a greater total distance traveled.

As far as I am concerned, the proper use of a firearm is shooting people, not defenseless animals. At the end of the day, I am against hunting but I think that hunters using their common sense and being subject to legal liability for any damage that they cause will do more to protect unintended targets than a law will. Of course, I understand that it is hard for many people to swallow that claim.

Get down tonight...

Today in Clarksville, deer hunters shot out the window of a day care center. The day care employees moved the children to the bathroom and called the police. The hunters will not be charged since they were further away from the building than the 150 yards that the law requires.

Note to self: must move sniper location more than 150 yards away...

Health Howard Health Plan is so far a flop

The Healthy Howard Access Plan is off to a pathetic start. Enrollment has been open since October 1, and out of over 1,100 applicants, only 45 have qualified. That is about one-half of one percent. Interestingly, 1,080 of the applicants were disqualified from HHAP because they qualified for government sponsored health insurance, such as Medicaid. These enrollment numbers are really quite dismal because HHAP was released with a good deal of fanfare and good publicity.

Although it is not insurance, the intent of the program is to give the uninsured access to basic health care. For a small monthly fee, you get access to something like six doctor visits a year, discounted prescription drugs, a draconian health coach to boss you around, etc. The $2.8 million program is funded with $500,000 of tax money, and the rest of the funding comes primarily from participant fees.

It seems likely that Ulman, Beilenson and friends really did not understand the needs of the people they were trying to help and were naive in developing this program. Beilenson is proud of the fact that over 1,000 residents were enrolled in health insurance programs as a result of their application to HHAP, but that is no metric in which to measure the success of HHAP. That is moving the goal posts pretty darn far.

One could argue that the state of the economy will increase enrollment, but I believe that you have to be without health insurance for a year before you qualify for the program. That does not do much for someone who loses their job today. Maybe that rule will be changed to try and salvage the plan, but I recall that rule was put in place because they were afraid small private employers would drop coverage and encourage their employees to enroll.

Greg Fox is calling for as much money to be cut from the program as possible. This time next year, I predict there will be serious discussion of pulling the plug altogether or wildly reworking the concept.

New blog

There is a new blog that has entered the local blogging fray, Columbia Now. The blogger is a smart cat who has interesting things to say about the issues facing Columbia.

Serenity Now! Uh, I mean Columbia Now!

Driving Miss Daisy to the poorhouse

The video below, which was posted to the Chrysler website, is one idiotic rationalization after another. At this point, I'd rather give the money to Toyota or Honda. At least they produce stuff that people want, and do so at a profit. Why reward failure?

Urine or you're out

I think that all drugs should be legal, so I have no problem at all with people who choose to use drugs. Although I think that everyone should have tremendous personal freedom to do with themselves what they wish, they should also have to accept any consequences that result from their personal decisions. I certainly would not want anyone who can't get a job because they prefer to get high all day to be on the public dole. Quite often, in the gummint's attempt to help those in need, they create a moral hazard problem in which people have an incentive to make bad decisions.

With that in mind, I appreciate the sentiment expressed in the chain e-mail below that someone forwarded me:

Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test with which I have no problem. What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test.

Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their A--, doing drugs, while I work. . . . Can you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?

Pass this along if you agree or simply delete if you don't. Hope you all will pass it along, though. . Something has to change in this country -- and soon!!!!!!!
I guess we could title that program, 'Urine or You're Out'.

How quickly the world owes us something

This is a funny video featuring Louis CK that speaks to how we take the most amazing technologies for granted. It is very cynical of technology cynics. Yay technology!

Taxpayer subsidized dog grooming facilities are next

I get such a kick out of government officials and employees that fail to understand basic economic concepts. Case in point: Gary Arthur, Director, Department of Recreation and Parks. Mr. Arthur had this to say in response to the aquatic feasibility study:

“As we suspected, the Aquatic Feasibility Study determined that there was a need for additional aquatic facilities in Howard County,” said Gary Arthur, Director of the Department of Recreation & Parks. “We realize that some citizens are not served by the 27 pools run by the Columbia Association and community pools located throughout Howard County. We will be trying to rectify that in the future.”

First of all, the government has no business providing swimming pools. Swimming pools are rival and excludable, therefore they are not under-produced in a freed market. Ignoring this material fact, Mr. Arthur thinks that if demand exists for a pool, the county has an obligation to meet that demand. Hell, demand exists for in Howard County for Lamborghini convertibles- I have a huge demand myself- but I don’t think it is a proper use of tax dollars to try and provide everyone with everything that they demand. The best way to allocate scarce resources is by charging people for what they consume. If there is demand for a pool, the market will provide it. If not, that means that people would rather spend their money on other items. There is no need for the county to be involved in this matter, not by taxing directly or even by trying to partner with CA.

Mr. Arthur gets a grade of F- for his piss-poor understanding of simple economics.

A House of Vicodin

The show “House” is one giant argument in support of massive pharmaceutical regulation overhaul. Basically, the show is about a curmudgeon (his irritability is rivaled only by my own) who is a brilliant physician, but he has constant leg pain that he medicates with tremendous amounts of Vicodin. His demeanor is only tolerated due to his uncanny ability to diagnose the most bizarre medical conditions (he once told a patient that he knew she was a gymnast because she had a nice ass, no boobs, and palms like a longshoreman. Nice!) However, without the drugs the leg pain is so intense that he cannot function. On some of the more recent episodes, the long arm of the law is trying to lock up the good Dr. House for taking drugs without a prescription.

Obviously, the show is fictional. But let’s assume that such a scenario existed in real life. Why shouldn’t Dr. House be able to take all pharmaceuticals that he wants as long as patients are comfortable with his abilities? For Christ’s sake, the guy is a doctor- who was licensed by the state to practice medicine. Even the most arrogant politician could not possibly be stupid enough to think that he or she knows more that freaking doctor about medicines. Ultimately, the healthcare options available to patients should only be between their doctors and themselves. Politicians have no business in the medical field.

Public service announcement for those living under rocks

Does the county government think that we are all stupid? After reading this bit about gift cards, I am really convinced that they do. I mean really, is there anything in this blurb that does not belong in the "no crap, Sherlock" category?

I despise gift cards, especially those that are merchant specific. They always have a lower value to the recipient than cash which contributes to the deadweight loss of the holidays (although maybe not as much as other types of gifts). If you saw a $50 bill on the ground next to a $50 gift certificate to X merchant, and you could only pick one of them up and knew that both were genuine, who on Earth would reach for the gift certificate? Plus, there is the obvious risk of the merchant going out of business, as what happened with my Bun Penny gift certificate last year. I ended up with the world's worst tasting bottle of wine from their well picked-through selection a few days before they closed. This scenario will be repeated all over the country with many other stores this year, for sure.