An antipoverty campaign that actually worked

Libertarians are often criticized for being callous (not true) about marginalized individuals – poor people. The criticisms generally stem from the fact that a libertarian view is that governments need not create anti-poverty programs to help these people (which never work anyway); they can be helped by privately funded charities. In fact a libertarian view may point to how a statist government actually aggravates poverty with wrong headed policies like minimum wage, licensing etc. which can create an underclass of dependent individuals. A libertarian might suggest that less government interference and a freer trade environment would reduce poverty and dependence.


This week in the Globe’s Report on Business, Neil Reynolds describes how Chile joined the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development), the club of 30 developed nations effectively shedding its undeveloped status. This happened as a result of policies put in place over the last 20 years by “the Chicago boys”, 25 Chilean economists who studied under Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago in the ‘70’s and ‘80’s then introduced free market reforms in the place of Chile’s statist economy. As a result Chile becomes the first country in South America to join the OECD and has seen the number of Chileans living below the poverty line decline from 46% 25 years ago to the current 14%. Chile continues to grow its wealth and stands as an example to how an effective anti-poverty program can work.

Broken Transit

Have you ever had one of those “ah ha” moments? You’ve just figured it out, now it’s just a matter of attacking the problem with your newly conceived solution.


That is what must have been going through the mind of the young chairman who runs the TTC (the People’s Transit System) in Toronto. The young chairman has been racking his brains trying to figure out why complaints against the TTC have spiked in recent months after a fare hike with no improvement in service. Apparently the people using the TTC were expecting better service for more money (not unreasonable), and not what they have been getting. Service has worsened over the years, long waits, crowded vehicles, delays and more delays and then a fare hike and a year later another fare hike and so on. It’s no wonder there are complaints.

So what was our chairman’s “ah ha” moment, simple, lets ask the “private sector” how we can improve service, and reduce complaints. Brilliant; I call that irony. Here we have a monopoly run by government that colludes with unions to set wages and fees based on the needs of the government and the union members with very little regard given to the customers – the transit riders.

In this mornings newspaper the TTC announced that it will establish a blue-ribbon panel (unpaid), led by a consultant (paid) to teach the TTC how to better serve its customers. Imagine how long such a poor business would exist if it were in the private sector, if it had to compete with another transit system. I know that is a heretical concept, but strangely private sector businesses will not hire governments to teach them how to treat customers, its not going to happen.
There is an obvious solution; it’s not going to be easy, it’s not going to be popular, and it’s not going to be pretty, but eventually the customer will be better served and the city will have fewer problems. Toronto should divest itself of the TTC (and other cities should do likewise of their transit systems), and ultimately allow competition. I know that’s not going to happen, not yet at least but a sort of competitive system already exists – taxis. Oh wait a minute; they are more expensive for the riders. Why? Because government regulates this particular private sector business by charging outrageous licensing fees to the cabbies. Catch 22, government has got you coming and going…..literally.

There is a simple principle that should be reexamined here. “Our freedom of choice in a competitive society rests on the fact that, if one person refuses to satisfy our wishes, we can turn to another;” so said Nobel economic laureate F. A. Hayek. Good advice we need more choice.

AVATAR - An Eco Epic

So we saw the movie Avatar. Spectacular, wow, how did they do that? etc. etc. etc. It really was!


Then I’m thinking to myself, “I’ve seen this movie before…the plot anyway”.

Avatar could be one of Aesop’s Fables and the movie Outlander, Star Wars and Independence Day, Dances with Wolves and the Wizard of Oz. It’s all of those movies and less and is ultimately disappointing.

My wife asks me what the point was. Actually there were three points:

1. To make money (nothing wrong with that – very admirable indeed).

2. To make a shit-load of money – ditto.

3. To make everyone feel a little guilty in the midst of escapism.

It certainly succeeds (and will succeed) at the first two, and given the current eco-mania, many will walk away from this movie thinking that it confirms that humans are blight on Earth as much as the humans are threatening Pandora and its inhabitants in search or unobtanium.

You have to hand it to James Cameron (writer and director) this is the perfect escape movie for the Great Recession, combining the new secular religion of environmentalism and a 3D romp on Pandora to escape your money woes.

The giant blue indigenous people of Pandora are the Na’vi, primitive, noble, and so linked into the ecology of Pandora that it would make Gaia blush. All of the visuals, the flora, the fauna, and the geography are spectacular. The dialogue, plot, characters and everything else is mundane. But it’s still worth seeing especially if you like Sci-Fi action movies.

Can scientists be AGW Skeptics?

In the real world of science not the bullshit world that has been manufactured by the Church of Global Warming, scientists reserve the right to be tentative about any assertion. In fact tentativeness is next to objectivity as one of the two most important scientific principles that any good scientist must covet. So if one disregards all the hype about AGW including the Copenhagen shenanigans and the political blowhards (mostly European but lets throw in Al Gore) and look objectively at the weather in Europe “its bloody cold” as the Brits would say. The satellite picture shows Great Britain covered in a frosty coat, the result of the “Arctic Oscillation”. This is reminiscent of the River Thames frost fairs of yore. Apparently there are other reasons for cooling and warming that the IPCC (UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) hasn’t fully accounted for in its rush to blame human produced CO2. There are these things called oceanic cycles that switch between “warm” (were in) and “cold” (are now in) modes. Professor Mojib Latif, a leading member of the IPCC has suggested that a large part (up to 50%) of the so-called global warming that the IPCC has noted is due to these oceanic cycles that he says could last 20 to 30 years. Prof. Latif and his colleague, heretics of the AGW Church, don’t believe in the computer models:
“I do not believe in catastrophe theories. Man-made warming is balanced by the natural cycles, and I do not trust the computer models which state that if CO2 reaches a particular level then temperatures and sea levels will rise by a given amount. These models cannot be trusted to predict the weather for a week, yet they are running them to give readings for 100 years.”

Its too bad really, I was ready to throw in the towel and join the Church of Global Warming. Oh well just when I thought the science was settled maybe it's time to be "tentative".