Walter Block on the Mythical Pay Gap

Professor Walter Block on the mythical wage gap:

The second nail emerges when we consider the exotic implications of the employer discrimination hypothesis of the pay gap. If this analysis were true, one would expect to find a systematic and positive relationship between profit levels and the number of women in the firm or industry.

It the idea that, all things equal, men and women have a level of parity when compared equally is ine worth considering. If employer discrimination were an issue, any such firm would be driven out of the market by an entrepreneur willing to hire a worker discriminated against. Men and women are equal, but also quite different, in regards to abilities and specialities. If not for those differences, we may see female construction workers and firefighters. In reality, women are better at a great many things, men excellent in a few as well...

From the Mises Institute:

His thesis is that discrimination -- choosing one thing over another -- is an inevitable feature of the material world where scarcity of goods and time is the pervasive feature. There is no getting around it. You must discriminate, and therefore you must have the freedom to discriminate, which only means the freedom to choose. Without discrimination, there is no economizing taking place. It is chaos.

The market embeds institutions that assist people in making the wisest possible choices given the alternatives. In this sense, discrimination is rational and socially optimal. For the state to presume to criminalize it based on social and political priorities amounts to a subversion of the market and of human liberty that leads to social conflict.

More: http://mises.org/document/6078 (don't give me any poor excuse for turning down a free book)

Block reminds us that there was a time when discriminating meant having the desirable ability to make an educated, informed choice.

Nothing more.  

Negative discrimination is purged from the free market, yet promoted by the state. Minorities will prosper by firms willing to hire minorities at lower rates, undercutting gluttonous competitors and driving themfrom the market. If we are to rid the world of it's evils, we must give ourselves the chance to do so. Block's Case reminds us that a better future is worth the fight. Those discriminated against find friend in liberty, not disparity. 

There's no state like no state.

And I feel like a nerd-punk voluntaryist fanboy:

Parents, the State, and Collectivism

Something that has bothered me about involuntary societies since fully understanding the idea has been the inherent lack of choice, and the subsequent lack of learning from the act of making individual choices, be they positive or negative.

Life is an opportunity, not a guarantee, with the opportunity to fail also delivering the potential for cognitive growth. What life gives us in these opportunities is the chance to excel in a higher capacitive reasoning potential. By learning from failure today, we have the chance to succeed tomorrow. As parents, we are charged with raising our children to be the keepers of tomorrow's world, and without our knowledge, experience, and guidance, how can we expect to hold a legitimately optimistic view of what tomorrow's world will hold? 

I say this not only as a parent, but as inequality who teaches his children to respect others by respecting ourselves, but by trying to pass that understanding on to other parents. As George Carlin said, "don't just teach your children, teach them to question everything." How else can we make the future better than the present? 

One of the most malignant features of modernity since the French Revolution has been the attempt by the State—left or right, fascist, nationalist, socialist, or communist—to take over control of children's education from parents and local agencies—such as churches and municipalities—and direct that education in the interest of grandiose, intellectually neat, or more efficient plans and aims. The Philosophes and Jacobins of "Enlightenment" and Revolutionary France were the chief originators and evangelists of this program, but its subsequent development has had left-wing, right-wing, and even innocuous-seeming democratic or patriotic forms.

With the rise of the state in opposition to individuality, along with the learning experience facilitated by the consequences of bad choices, we see an erosion of natural rights, whereby individuals are discouraged from recognizing the failures of collectivism. There is hardly anything democrat about a society without an opt-out policy. Modern governments are more than willing to use violence against the peasants to show that the oligarchy shall not be questioned. By withdrawing consent to be governed, we effectively relegate laws against victims of victimless-crimes to the history books, a distant reminder of a world when common sense was anything but. I may disagree with the faithful on the origin of the effort, but the goals are not entirely dissimilar; an end to violence.

In the aftermath of World War II, after a century and a half of ultimately tragic and destructive attempts by left-wing, right-wing, or simply radically-secular states to wean children from their parents and local and religious loyalties and influences in the interest of state-directed education, many Western European nations and the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights (1948) clearly asserted that "parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children," in the words of the Declaration. With the fall of Communism, after 1990 new national constitutions in eastern Europe affirmed the provision their Western neighbors had made in the preceding decades, a noble story told well by Charles L. Glenn in Educational Freedom in Eastern Europe (1995). This provision included forms of tax relief or support that would enable parents to make such choices.

More: Parents vs the State

I believe that to best serve our children, we need to foster in them a critical view of the world, every aspect, and hope that they can find the best in everything. 

By removing the ability to learn from our experiences (even failure), we are truly being teachers for our children. What happens in a society in which repercussions are suppressed (in both social and economic realms) is that we don't learn from our experiences. 

With problems like drug addiction, where historically abuse of a substance is statistically insignificant until the state see fit to enact regulatory prohibition of some sort, is that we see a spike in instances of such issue. As with a child, telling them not to do something and teaching them about the consequences of the same action have quite varying outcomes. When we tell our children not to smoke or drink alcohol, where teaching about the negative consequences of the same action result in caution and consideration. Historically, issues like drug usage and firearm violence rise with prohibition. 

If we expect our children to succeed, shouldn't we prepare rather than hindering them?

Milk Subsidies Need to go Over the Fiscal Cliff

Rich and Happie Larson's brood goes through 14 gallons of milk per week, minimum.

So the prospect of starting 2013 paying as much as $8 per gallon for milk would have far-reaching consequences for the Davis County family, which has 11 children at home.

"That's over $110 a week just on milk. I love my kids and they need to eat well, but if you have to choose between a gallon of milk and a nice dinner with meat for my family, I'm going to choose the nice dinner with meat," Happie Larson said.

The farm bill expired three months ago. Unless Congress passes legislation renewing federal support for agriculture programs, milk prices could spike to between $6 and $8 per gallon, according to some estimates.

This is exactly what is needed to stabilize the milk market. The problem with subsidies (or one of many) is that they suppress natural cues to producers to alter the volume of goods produced for the market. This natural action tells producers if they are over- or under-producing, and is what sets the market price. Subsidies suppress this natural signal and cause production to remain high well after demand drops. 

It must be those mean capitalists driving up costs to increase profits...

Fifth-generation Weber County dairy farmer Ron Gibson is of two minds about the possibilities.

"It's really a double-edged sword. It would be nice to have $8 a gallon for milk. (Consumers) can't afford to do that long term," Gibson said. "The bigger concern we have is that it could kill demand for our product. How many people will quit buying milk and start buying something else?"

We need this natural market reaction so that firms will look at the market and decide whether to continue producing milk or exit the market. 

Milk is just part of the dairy market. If the price of milk goes up, so goes the price of cheese, ice cream, sour cream and other dairy products, he said.

The dairy industry has worked hard to partner with the food service industry to encourage restaurant chains to use more cheese on home-delivered pizza or sandwiches.

Higher prices could result in the various chains cutting back on their orders, which would further pinch dairy farmers who are already struggling with higher feed prices due to the drought, Gibson said.

Higher prices are exactly what we need to stabilize the milk market, or the intervention into the sugar industry could have long term effects similar to the Great Sugar Shaft. How long since you had a Coca Cola with real sugar?

Congress is at an impasse over how much to cut food stamps, how much the government should subsidize crops and debate over how dairy prices should be stabilized.

Or we can continue a policy of market intervention insanity that could lead to the following:

Unless Congress resolves the stalemate over the farm bill by the end of the year, the federal government would have to follow a 1949 law that would require the U.S. Department of Agriculture to buy milk at roughly twice the current market price to maintain a stable market.

More: deseretnews

Teacher Quits Over Standardized Testing

A second-grade teacher in Providence, R.I., has issued a very public resignation that is making its rounds online.

"I've had it, I quit," Stephen Round says in his resignation video, posted to YouTube last week. "I would rather leave my secure, $70,000 job, with benefits, and tutor in Connecticut for free than be part of a system that is diametrically opposed to everything I believe education should be."

Round first applied to be a teacher in Providence Public Schools in 1999, and "it was a great fit for several years," he says. But things started to change for the worse, until he couldn't take it anymore. Fed up with standardized testing, Round says the district's rigid structure and lofty standards created an environment where creative teaching and alternative learning were not tolerated.

"It was purely frustration. It got to the point where I can't stand by and watch kids not learn, and I have the key to help them," Round told WPRI. "They want us to follow the book to the letter."

His mid-year departure, Round adds, was the best move for his students, who were not benefiting from his gripes with school officials.

In response to Round's resignation, the Providence school district released the following statement to WLNE:

As a matter of practice, Providence Schools would not comment on the specifics of an individual's resignation letter. We regret that Mr. Round has found his recent professional experience dissatisfactory, but we thank the hundreds of teachers in our schools who continue to make learning exciting and enjoyable for their students every day.

The Providence teacher's scathing departure is not unlike another: A September post by former Boston teacher Adam Kirk Edgerton about why he quit rapidly became an Internet hit. Edgerton wrote that he was "no longer willing to operate under the old rules while the weight of our educational bureaucracy crushes our country ... I was tired of feeling powerless."

Standardized testing, especially, has come under attack as an inaccurate measure of student achievement, coupled with schools' heavy dependence on those measures to make critical decisions -- like determining teacher salaries and bonuses, as well as district and school funding.

Just last month, the American Federation of Teachers launched a campaign to end what it calls the "fixation on standardized testing" that has developed out of accountability measures required by the federal No Child Left Behind law.

In his video, Round makes those grievances against testing clear, walking through a number of points ranging from the culture of teaching to the test, to the evolution of a stringent school schedule that minimizes social interactions.

"Unfortunately, in the attempt to conform and abide by the misguided notions of educrats, the school system in which I had so much pride drastically changed," he says. "Rather than creating lifelong learners, our new goal is to create good test takers. Rather than being recipients of a rewarding and enjoyable educational experience, our students are now relegated to experiencing a confining and demeaning education."

Stephen Round, Providence Teacher, Quits Over Standardized Testing In Viral YouTube Video

Rhode Island teacher speaks out and resigns

Rhode Island teacher in the Providence School Department says, "I quit!"

Stephen Round, a 2nd grade teacher in the Providence School Department for 15 years has spoken out with a You Tube video. He tried to read his letter of resignation at a school committee meeting last week, but was not given the opportunity. He decided to make the video to read the letter of the resignation.

He addresses the Human Resources department of the Providence Public Schools with his resignation letter. education philosophy is to teach children to be life-long learners. The current school atmosphere does not allow him to meet that goal.

Children no longer are allowed to have breakfast in the cafeteria. Breakfast is now in the classroom while students are supposed to be doing some type of learning. There is no time for socialization during breakfast. Lunch and recess are being used as a tool to force children to behave in class and to be quiet.

He explains that most of his students had some type of behavior problems. The students that most needed socialization and recess were losing that opportunity, creating more behavior problems. Anything fun is gone, field trips are gone and even the ability to tutor his students after school is gone.

Anything that is not in the designed curriculum, even if it works is not allowed. I would rather leave my $70,000 per year job with benefits than be part of a system that is opposed to what I believe education could be, says Mr. Brown.

Many parents believe that with the high numbers of student with disabilities now being taught in the regular classrooms, Mr. Brown may not be the only motivated and experienced teacher that Rhode Island will be losing, unless something changes.

Rhode Island teacher speaks out and resigns - Providence special education | Examiner.com

Does Prohibition Cause Increases in Certain Activities?

Certain substances have been show to have significant usage increases after their prohibition in varying cultures historically, so if "more gun freedom would deter violent crime and drug legalization would allow people to get treated, do you think legalizing prostitution and etc would diminish sex crimes?" There is an interesting discussion thread over at r/Libertarian reddit on this very topic right now. Given the reality of unintended consequences of interventionist policies, it's worth diving into the discussions to debate statism with statists. 

Will the ‘regulatory cliff’ cause another economic collapse in the U.S.?

I think that the analogy of the impending financial troubles ahead as revenues decline and spending increases is somewhat inaccurate. The "financial cliff" that so many have been referencing as of late doesn't really put the current situation into perspective in a way that normal, economically-ignorant people can fully appreciate, but partisan views like this do more to encourage that divisive disregard for a need to address the underlying issues:

It seems the entire talk is over the fiscal cliff, but some Republicans in Washington and several business groups are discussing the upcoming "regulatory cliff" that many say could be just as damaging to the United States economy. 

The level of intervention into voluntary exchanges by both Republicans and Democrats is beyond unacceptable, with both doing immense damage to local and global economies that would function efficiently when left in their unencumbered states. One side focuses on economic liberties, the other on civil, but neither understands that both are necessary in a free society. I suppose it's more likely that the back and forth between the Left and Right will continue, along with the distractive methods used to maintain a centralization of power in the hands of the ruling class, rather than a move toward an agoristic society. But I can dream...

Individualism, Out of Step

People are first and foremost individualistic, no prone to collectivism without force being applied. It can also be called ethical egoism, when the goal of the individual is not to thrive at the expense of others (property, labor, liberty, etc.). Ayn Rand is often criticized for Objectivism for ethical reasons that self-interest is not conducive to Mutualism (the epistemological arguments are a bit beyond me unfortunately at this point), but more than anything these people are recognizing and acting upon the inherently individualistic choices we make in our daily lives through voluntary exchanges. Individuality is what drives progress and innovation, not regulation and collectivism. By homogenizing the population, we cull out those individual traits that drive progress. These positions and arguments are the reason that I have not been keen to allow myself to be labeled since I was a child. I can not associate everything I do with one group or culture, everything I am with a political ideology or religious theology. I'm more inclined to strive to be Out of Step than mold myself to fit a label. One of the failures of individualism within social ideologies (such as liberal or conservative), is that it is based upon the non-consensual submission to authority through the state, which is a form of oppression, and is hardly individualism in application.