Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway. 

Jerry Pournelle explains the “rebate”.

 A government running a deficit has no money to “rebate”; it has to borrow the “rebate” money, and that means it must collect it back along with the interest it cost to borrow it. Why be astonished?

In the US the problems are two-fold. First the housing bubble, caused by government pumping money out and financial rulings that allow lenders to sell off shaky loans packaged with sound ones. The intention was to make it easier for people to own homes; the result was the inevitable bubble. Another result was to put temptation in the way of people who would not normally be thieves. If you allow someone to loan money with no consequences for making bad loans, and pay them according to the number of loans they make, then you have put enormous temptation in their path; and this is not an age of Saints.

Read it. Of course. That’s how they buy votes.

Read it.

Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway.

Read it. God forbid somebody should break a public employee’s rice bowl. This is why conservatives want to shrink the government, and libertarians would like to eliminate it. Apparently some people think that “public service” means “help yourself to what belongs to the public”.

Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway.

Read it. Of course. No matter what rationalization is used, it’s just the government passing out “free” money (and they hope you’ll exchange a vote for it), so everybody wants a dip, whether they fit the bill or not. It’s like everybody wanting a refund from Nordstrom, even if they didn’t buy something there. As Nordstrom found out, you can’t keep that up forever.

Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway.

Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway.

Read it. We’re from the government, and we’re here to help … ourselves.

Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway.

Read it. This is extremely silly. Your tax dollars are paying these idiotic judges, folks.

Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway.

Inside Politics.

At the worst of it, Wadsworth and other Obama supporters were yelling insults about Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, while the heavily Latino Clinton caucus was trying to shout them down with chants of “Hillary!’ “

Inside the Beltway.

Read it. Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway.

Read it. As long as politicians have access to your wallet they’re going to use tax dollars to try to buy your vote. This is not a concept difficult to comprehend.

Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway.

Read it. Votes are more important than principles, it would appear.

Inside the Beltway.

Inside Politics.

Read it. As is traditional, government interference (from the best of motives, natch) hinders rather than helps.

Read it. Count the number of lies Congressman Frank puts in the first paragraph. (Or else he’s just terminally stupid — which I’m willing to believe.)

Note to the ignorant: The Financial Times is the British equivalent of the Wall Street Journal … if the Wall Street Journal were run by socialists.

Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway.

Inside the Ring.

Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway.

Inside Politics.

Inside the Beltway.

Read it. Just another attempt on the part of the government to avoid doing what’s in the public interest, i.e. buying the least expensive equipment that will do the job.

How soon after the government publishes its requirements will there be companies founded to game those requirements into profitability at the taxpayers’ expense? I estimate about 3.2 seconds.

Not including, of course, those “friends of the system” who get a head start through leaks from “friends in the system”.

Read it.

Read it. But will Bush have the balls to do it? Stay tuned.

Read it. Especially all you cynical folks out there who think it’s all about enhanced citation revenue.

The problem appears to be that red-light cameras cause more people to slam on the brakes at the last second, leading to more rear-ender collisions. Plenty of studies have shown that if you really want safer intersections, the solution is rather simple: increase the length of time for yellow lights and include a pause after a light turns red before the cross-traffic signal turns green.

But that doesn’t make any money … for anybody ….

A big part of the problem is that red-light cameras are big money makers for municipalities, who share the revenue with the makers of the cameras — who have every incentive in the world to set the traffic lights to encourage more violations, rather than fewer.

Oh, say it ain’t so.

Read it. Remember, guys, you’re all paying for this.

Brian Carney chronicles the advance of the Nanny State.

WSJ (sub required, but well worth the money).

The subprime industry succeeded in defeating state efforts to limit risky lending to borrowers with weak credit during the housing boom. Ameriquest, until recently one of the biggest lenders, distributed over $20 million in political donations and swayed lawmakers in New Jersey and Georgia.

That’s the way the system works — the government causes a problem, and then makes a big deal about how they have to step in and “fix” it.

Read it. I don’t even need to say anything, do I? Except to point out that you’re paying for all of this. Aren’t you proud?

Read it. All of my illusions, shattered.

Inside Politics.

Read it.

 As an aside, while I was in St. Louis we had dinner with a retired doctor. She told of an incident where, as a patient, she went to see a dermatologist about a rash. The dermatologist looked at her and told she was fine. This proved to be correct. However, he billed Medicare for $700 for surgery. She called Medicare to report the fraud, and, after she finally got through after considerable time in voice-mail hell, the person told her that, “No, everything is fine. Our records show that you had the surgery.”

You’re paying for this, folks. Hope you’re proud.

Read it. And attempt to figure out how this local government differs from any other local government — if you can.

IS MONTGOMERY County so jazzed about snagging a world-class music hall for downtown Silver Spring that it is about to finalize a sweetheart deal that treats taxpayers’ dollars like Monopoly money?

A good point. Wonder how the Washington Post can publish something like this and still give the Feds a pass — this sounds like a classic “earmark” to me. Or you could substitute “sports stadium” for “world-class music hall” and plug in the name of any major metropolitan behavioral sink with no cognitive dissonance whatsoever.

Read it. Don’t they have Skraelings in Paris?

Read it. Remember, you’re paying for all of this.

Read it. A year of Democrat control of Congress and no tax increase? I call that a win for the American people.

Read it. The unasked question, of course, is: Who cares? Who, outside the pigs at the federal tax money trough, give a shit about the FEC? Has it ever done anything about illegal campaign practices, other than “fine” campaigns after the fact and after the damage (if damage there be) is done? If there were ever a poster child for expensive but ineffectual government action, the FEC is it.

Read it. Ross Douthat comments on the New Orleans public housing protests.

Read it. That would take balls; has Bush got ’em? The historical evidence is mixed.

Read it. I’m shocked, I tell you, shocked.

I wonder when the people of the world are going to wake up to the fact that the UN is just a sort of international Tammany Hall?

Read it. And ponder that there is no conceptual difference between this and what Democrats want to do to your wallet through taxation. “Well, we think it would be more useful doing something else, so we’ll just take it.”

Read it. Millions for earmarks, but pocket change to control illegal immigration. Thanks, Democrat Congress.

Read it. Statism creeps in on little cat feet….

Read it. I have a question: Why is this any of the business of the U.S. government? Are we supposed to be Nanny State to the World along with everything else?

Read it. My, what a surprise. Aren’t you surprised? I’m sure surprised.