The final gathering of about 60 people who are helping to find the economic future of Collier County are resolving to make a report by January 1st. One thinks the problem of economy is more a political problem of control over what economy can be done. When community affairs management, environmental protection management, water management, economic development management, impact fee taxation, and regulation get in the way, what economic freedoms and opportunities can be respected?
The Collier County Commission sidestepped its responsibility once again by scooting away with a directive to a workshop to write some recommendations. The culture of “big business and relaxation” must give way to small business enterprise of whatever industry, and that is ensured by the conservative law-making of the Collier County Commission. The Naples Daily News summarizes, and Peter Gaddy opines,
While most agreed there are problems that need to be addressed, some have no faith in the officials elected to do so.
“There is a culture of corruption and it has been in Collier County for years,” said Peter Gaddy, 66, of Golden Gate Estates. “We need to stop having workshops and make some changes.”
Creating jobs means for the public sector to allow the private sector to create jobs. The public sector supports the real creators of jobs. People and businesses create jobs, and people need schools for families’ children. It’s all a family and business-oriented approach. There are no wealthy persons who come from inside or outside this county who can create the economy that they would like to see. If this is the hypothesis, it will end up negative. It is better to hypothesize what the people, the demographics, of Collier County can do. Then, the approach should be to study the current demographics of Collier County and what it could enterprise.
If the inertial economy of Collier County becomes momentum, the market will stay in motion and flourish through it’s own people.
[Author's Note: one must pass this response to the appropriate workshop.]
Economic Freedom & Quality of Life: This Needs To Be Edited Into A TV Ad (Watch) | RedState | Erick Erickson
The Charles Koch Foundation has come up with a web ad on economic freedom. It is an important message. I cannot stress enough that you need to watch this. It is only 2 minutes. But more importantly, the Koch Foundation needs to turn this into a 1 minute television advertisement. It’ll require some work to do, but this is a message that needs to get out to the greater masses. If you are a radio show host, you should just play the audio. It is fantastic.
The best thing about this ad is that unlike Little Lee Fang, the kid from Center for American Progress who spends a lot of time writing about things the kid doesn’t even understand, this is extremely fact based and shows the dangers of the policies Little Lee and his teenage cohorts advocate.
The number of Hispanics living in the United States is of tremendous importance to business. It is less so to politics.
The number of Hispanics who live in the United States is 50.5 million. That means that more Hispanics live in the United States than in Spain, Colombia or Argentina. Only Mexico has a larger Hispanic population.
From a business perspective, there is one key decision to make. Do you market to them in English or do you do so in Spanish? Politicians have many more variables to consider, and the census does not provide the answer they need.
The first problem comes from the term Hispanic. By law, all Americans are equal. But not all Hispanics are equal. Much depends on where they are born and why they live in the United States. Most are citizens; many are not.
First, subtract the 11 million Hispanics who are estimated to be undocumented. Then set aside those who have Temporary Protected Status that allows them to live and work in the United States but does not provide a pathway to citizenship. Then subtract those who have U.S. citizenship but are younger than 18 and therefore cannot vote.
It doesn’t end there. There are other critical distinctions to make.
Puerto Ricans can vote — if they live in the United States. They are U.S. citizens by birth. But if they live on the Caribbean island, they cannot vote in U.S. elections. Puerto Ricans in New York, the Northeast and Chicago are solidly Democratic. Those tend to make decisions on the candidates, not so much the party. Finally, Puerto Rican voters in the island live their politics every day of every year. In the United States, they do not have the same passion.
Then we have Cuban Americans. There are 1.8 million of them in the United States, and two-thirds of them live in Florida. Because of a 1966 law, Cubans who enter the United States legally can become resident aliens a year and a day after arriving in the country — and citizens after that. Because they are so heavily concentrated in a key swing state, their importance is disproportionate to their number.
Mexican Americans make up 63 percent of all Hispanics in the United States. Traditionally they have lived in California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado — and voted for Democrats. In Texas, they have elected several Hispanic Republicans to Congress. In 2010, Mexican Americans helped elect Republican Hispanic governors in Arizona and Nevada.
Furthermore, Mexican Americans are now more likely to live in other areas of the country. There are large Mexican-American communities in Atlanta, Chicago, Virginia, North Carolina and Florida.
Yes, it’s pretty dizzying. That’s why Hispanics are easier to reach out to as customers than as voters.
Author: Guillermo I. Martinez
In all of the discussions about our current economic state, a possible regression or double dip recession, out-of-control debts, and continued high unemployment there is one conversation those who frame the media, generate the news, and pass around their opinions as “objective” pontiffs and prognosticators of politics will never engage in.
I am of course talking about the failure of Keynesian economic policies.
Now, if Ronald Reagan were president or George Bush were president or any other Republican were president, or if the Republicans were able to get their legislative initiatives out of Congress, the headlines in the same economic climate would be “death of supply side economics.” In fact, we can see that in history.
After Republican losses in 1982, the television and newspaper pundits immediately following the election suggested that Reagan’s economic vision and voodoo economic policies had been rejected by the voters. In 1992, voters were still rejecting Republican economic policies. In 2006, suddenly voters were no longer conservative. 2008 confirmed for many in the media and Democrats that the nation had drifted to the left.
This does not happen when Democrats are defeated at the polls. When Jimmy Carter was defeated in 1980, it was because of economic malaise and the Iranian hostage crisis, not Jimmy Carter loving embrace of failed British economic policies. 1994 was about gays in the military and Bill Clinton’s inability to handle politics and policy concurrently. 2010 was because the Democrats got the message wrong and did not focus on jobs. They made the tragic, unfortunate, horrible mistake of socializing medicine before creating jobs.
It is, if you will, because the job is too big for one man, not because of the man’s policies. Never mind that the job is too big for only two men, Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama.
It is never because of the Democratic economic policies. It is never because Keynesian economics does not work. The only time economic policy does not work in the mind of the mainstream media is when voters punish Republicans at the polls. The reason for this is quite plain and quite simple.
Those people who form the news, shake the news, give voice to what’s happening as an objective commentator, and report on the daily happenings in the world tend to lean left. Consequently, they believe that in economic downturns the appropriate solution is for more government spending. These people believe that Herbert Hoover did nothing and that is what caused the great depression, never mind the massive spending Herbert Hoover implemented. These people believe the economic myths of the left and, many of them, have never worked in the free market.
This is why should you go on CNBC or the Fox Business Channel or read the Wall Street Journal or Investors Business Daily or encounter any media geared towards the free markets, you will find a healthy dose of skepticism toward Barack Obama and Keynesian economics. But should you read any other news publication or watch any other news channel or engage with those nightly talking heads on the big three networks, rarely will you encounter any sense of skepticism regarding the president’s economic policies. About the only thing you’ll find is a lament that the president is not doing more to create jobs as opposed to a recognition that the government has no idea how to create jobs.
All of this relates to the media’s worldview, which largely mirrors the Democrats’ worldview. It is a worldview premised on the idea that the more government does the better we all are. This worldview influences their coverage of the news, their coverage of Republicans in Washington, their skepticism of smaller and more limited government, and the idea that any bipartisan compromise no matter how terrible it is for the American people must definitionally be congratulated because it is a sign of good government when the parties come together.
As you continue to watch the news coverage of the deteriorating economic climate, just remember that most of the premises that will be made and enunciated are that the government must do more, not less. It will be coupled with a healthy believe that if only the government would spend more money more jobs would be created and the world would be a better place. This has nothing to do with reality and has never truly been shown to work. In fact, history shows Keynesian economics tends to lead countries into greater debt with less to show for it. Instead, the media and the Democrats should be embracing Milton Friedman and freeing up the American people to innovate, create jobs, and not be punished for being successful.
Keynesian economics does not work. Every few decades we must again bury the zombie that is John Maynard Keyes. Now is the time for us to do it again and instead invest our talents and time in resurrecting zombie Milton Friedman. Of course, should that happen, the next time the voters punish Republicans for doing something stupid and at odds with their limited government, less spending philosophy, the media will yet again begin its call that this is a rejection of Milton Friedman and free markets, in spite of all history and all evidence to the contrary, and that John Maynard Keyes be resurrected and put to work to destroy the American economy in the name of government creating jobs and a better future.
Immokalee, FL: Jerry Blocker’s right! The Collier County Commissioners want to take over private property in Immokalee to comply with the goal of the Immokalee Area Master Plan.
The goal of the master plan is to encourage growth that will result in economic diversity and prosperity for Immokalee, while honoring the town’s culture.
Jerry and Kimberlea Blocker own the Immokalee trailer park, and it’s their private property at stake, so they’ve sued the County Collier Commission for trying to take over their private property. The U.S. Constitution, amendment V (fifth) protects the Blockers from eminent domain by Collier County:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Commissioner Jim Coletta has some accountability to the U.S. Constitution in attempting eminent domain of Jerry Blocker’s property.
Jerry Blocker said:
Don’t try to kick people out of their homes to try to fix Immokalee.
And the goal of Collier County’s Immokalee Area Master Plan is upside down: there is no proof that the plan shall result in economic diversity and prosperity. The culture of Immokalee, while it has many, can improve itself. The Immokalee Area Master Plan is a red herring from the embodied want of bureaucrats who depend on local, state and federal funding for their failed programs and occupations.
Collier County’s agency is the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency directed by Penny Phillippi.
South Carolina governor Nikki Haley held a press conference with business leaders and Republican lawmakers today, where they demanded President Obama address the National Labor Relations Board’s attempt to drag Boeing kicking and screaming out of right-to-work South Carolina, back to the unions of Washington State.
The NLRB maintains that Boeing tried to open its new Dreamliner production line in South Carolina as part of an illegal attempt to “punish” the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, which has gone on strike against the company in the past.
Governor Haley called this “an unbelievable attack on not just right-to-work states, but every state that is attempting to put their people to work.”
“On one hand,” added South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, “the federal government is telling businesses if you move to a right-to-work state then we will come after you. On the other hand, the NLRB is telling businesses if you move to a union state, you’re stuck and cannot expand elsewhere.” He said the NLRB complaint against Boeing makes union states “the economic development equivalent of a roach motel: you can check in, but you can’t check out.”
“It is absurd in this country that represents free enterprise that one unaccountable, unelected, unconfirmed acting general counsel can threaten thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in investments,” said South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint. “This is something that would happen in a third world country, not in America. I can’t believe the administration is sitting on the sidelines, pretending they had nothing to do with it.”
The unconfirmed acting general counsel DeMint referred to is Lafe Solomon, who wants to prosecute Boeing under the unprecedented assertion that the National Labor Relations Act gives workers a “fundamental right to strike,” which the government must enforce by pinning targeted corporations in place and forcing them to suffer the effects.
Back in the 80s, Craig Becker, now a member of the NLRB, wrote in the Harvard Law Review that the right of labor to engage in collective action “implicitly entails legal restraint of the freedom of capital.” He concluded that the greatest threat to “labor’s collective legal rights” was “the mobility of capital, which courts have held immune from popular control.”
In other words, a company like Boeing can move its capital away from a predatory labor union, and seek a more equitable arrangement with non-union labor in a different state. The government is therefore obliged to use legal force to freeze Boeing’s capital in place. No escape for you, enemy of the worker. Might as well make yourself comfortable in that roach motel.
This kind of tyrannical government over-reach puts the very notion of ownership at risk. Boeing doesn’t actually plan to “move” a production facility to South Carolina – they’re not shutting down any operations in Washington State. They’ve decided to open a new facility to build Dreamliner aircraft in South Carolina instead of Washington. The NLRB is essentially saying that Boeing doesn’t even own its intellectual capital fully. Even the mobility of the Dreamliner concept must be restricted. Even ideas must be frozen in amber, for the benefit of Washington State unions, at the expense of South Carolina workers eager to win Boeing’s business.
Over the past hundred years, government has gone from the buster of trusts and destroyer of monopolies, to the most powerful anti-competitive force in America. Unions will be less reluctant to flex their muscles with strikes and excessive demands if they know they are protected from vigorous competition in right-to-work states. The NLRB is telling Boeing that it must purchase its labor from an absolute monopoly, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. Removing the competition from capitalism through such practices produces a lifeless disaster called “capitalism” only by politicians seeking to escape responsibility for its creation.
The mobility of capital is an essential component of ownership. That makes it offensive to government bureaucrats who think they own everything. Boeing’s plight recalls that of property owners who find their land rendered worthless by government regulations. Of course they still “own” their land, but they can’t do anything with it. You do not own something you cannot use, or move.
Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) has called upon President Obama to withdraw Lafe Solomon’s appointment to the NLRB. Governor Haley and her colleagues in South Carolina want the President to speak up on behalf of Boeing. If he leaves Solomon in place and remains silent, then Barack Obama is the one killing those jobs in South Carolina. As Attorney General Wilson put it, “The President’s silence is his consent.”
Note: I incorrectly attributed the “mobility of capital” article to Lafe Solomon, when it was actually written by Craig Becker. I have corrected the reference, and apologize for any confusion.
Truly wasting money, water districts in Florida do not govern well and are just an arm of “environmental friendly contractors.” The time has come to let them go. Water districts think they have a great task before them. But this task was closely engineered over time. It’s called a make-work program. Besides, it’s not like the water districts are essential. They don’t break the law of neighborhood effects. The law of neighborhood effects says that no other entity could do as good a job as the water districts. There are private concerns that could do a good job more efficiently and less costly than the public sector. It’s a start that the current Florida legislature reduced the water districts’ budget by 30%. Hopefully, it will continue to be reduced over the next and continuing legislative cycles.
The water districts aim to balance flood control and water conservation on some undefined goals, costs, and benefits.