Just a few thoughts that have struck me on a variety of issues…

f Among my least favorite words in the English language may now be added the term “relapse”. The unfortunate reality is that the caprices of the human mind and body sometimes outstrip the capabilities of modern science. At the same time, I never cease to be amazed at the phenomenal array of substances that modern science and private industry have developed to address the frailties of the human condition.

f Yet again I am infinitely grateful that this country has withstood the demands for universal healthcare. In the last couple of months, I somehow managed to blow out the rotator cuff in my left shoulder, making such tasks as typing a painful chore, and my daughter was diagnosed with a rapidly growing fibrous mass in one of her breasts. I was able to get an X-ray even before leaving the building after seeing my doctor and, when that did not detect the problem, got an MRI (which apparently stands for “Must Re-harm the Injury”, but I digress) not long after. My daughter got a mammogram and had the mass (benign, thank God) removed in short order. Neither of us experienced the long waits for diagnostic and surgical treatment that are the norm in countries with socialized medicine. Consider, for example, the case of Jennifer Bell, a 22-year old English woman who died waiting the necessary 13 weeks for a “relatively urgent” MRI.

f Never forget the law of unintended consequences. The governmental response to the economy has been eminently predictable. First, it – specifically the Fed - caused the problem by pumping vast amounts of excess liquidity into the marketplace by holding interest rates well below the historical cost of capital. Once these funds had been dispersed – malinvested – throughout the economy, primarily in the form of mortgages, the problem was exacerbated by the Fed (again), which raised interest rates above the historical cost of capital. For those keeping score at home, this is exactly the type of behavior, albeit at a much greater scale, that caused the Great Depression.

But wait, there’s more! The Federal government responded – as it typically does – with a whole series of completely wrongheaded “solutions”. First, it responded by shooting the nearest bystander – the lending industry, based upon the brilliant theory that an entire industry – or at least a large part of it - would go out of its way to place its own resources at risk in such a way as to cause more foreclosures and inevitably lose them large sums of money. Second, it put forth a stimulus (sic) package based on the long debunked theory of the benefits of feeding “aggregate demand” which, of course, is really just another increase in governmental spending (which is the real problem). Third, it has chosen to place significantly more power in the hands of the Fed.

Oh, and as a side note, one of the impacts of the sudden infusion of stimulus checks into bank accounts is a sudden reduction in fee income to the banking industry (in the several billions) reducing the amount of capital available to banks at a time adequately described as a “credit crunch”. Brilliant.

f Along the same lines, the Center for Responsible (sic) Lending (CRL) has convinced the Fed to crack down on “abusive overdraft loans”. Actually, when the Fed is hit from the political side (i.e., Barney Frank) to address some “injustice” in the banking industry, it sends out proposals in the hopes that member banks will either solve the problem or give it sufficient justification for foregoing some action. This particular proposal was embedded in a proposal sold as a means to curtail abuses in the credit card industry (which politically, of course, cannot be ignored no matter who else is really affected by the fine print).

What’s “abusive”? Well, in the event that the bank chooses to accept the financial risk and actually pay the item that overdrafted the account, the CRL has decided that the overdraft fee – a fee that would be assessed even if the item were not paid and Joe Accountholder’s mortgage didn’t get paid – is really an interest charge. The unintended consequence is that, during a “credit crunch”, either $15.8 billion of funds made available to account holders will vanish or billions of dollars in bank fees will be removed from banking capital or, more realistically, both because a “consumer advocacy” organization has completely mischaracterized an issue. Who could possibly have seen that coming?

f It seems I am forever defending the “bad guys”: employers, lenders, oil companies, pharmaceutical companies, and more. I am vigorous in my defense of bar owners to do what they will with their property, including *gasp* accommodate smokers. I am unwavering in my condemnation of courts that interfere with the rights of homosexual couples to do what they will with their property including disposing of that property exactly as they might if they were a married heterosexual couple. At the same time, I will continue to make the argument that even the most unsavory bigot that doesn’t wish to cater to anyone but WASP males (a group to which I am not a member) should be permitted to exclude from the use of his property anyone he damn well pleases. I wouldn’t want to associate with such an individual, but that is not the point. I am unyielding in my defense of the free speech rights of radio stations who wish to – perish the thought – determine their own content.

Put simply, I trust the property rights of the individual with the most outrageous of thieves before I trust them to the average politician. The thief can typically only harm a relatively small group of people at a time and he typically doesn’t pretend that he’s fleecing you in your own interest when he does it or, worse, pretend that such is the case even after he has been caught robbing you blind.

f My father-in-law, an Old World, inner city, union, government worker for decades until he retired gentleman with whom I simply do not discuss economics or politics in the name of family amity, recently demanded, “How can gas stations raise the price on what they already have in the tank? It’s the same gas?!” I didn’t answer for reasons already mentioned, but I might have asked, “How can you sell your house for more than you bought it for 20 years ago? It’s the same house.” Of course, it would cost more to buy the next house, too. Well, any business that does not take into account the replacement cost of its inventory is doomed to failure and then those bad guys who do nothing but take you to the cleaners are no longer there to take your money … or, for that matter, provide access to the means to power your vehicles.