The Cash for Clunkers program, which Congress passed in June 2009 and burned through its $3 billion budget in under two months, destroyed functional wealth on a national scale, and somehow they called it "stimulus."
The mechanics were simple: trade in a working car, receive up to $4,500 toward a new one, and watch government employees pour sodium silicate into the old engine to make it seize permanently. Around 700,000 vehicles got crushed. These were not rusted-out death traps. The eligibility rules required the trade-in to be drivable and insured. You were watching the state systematically annihilate usable capital because Keynesian demand theory told it that destruction generates recovery. Frederic Bastiat explained why this is wrong in 1850, in an essay short enough to read on your lunch break. Congress ignored it.
The ripple effect hit people the government never mentioned in its press releases. Mechanics lost repair work. Used-car dealers watched their inventory evaporate. Low-income buyers who depend on the sub-$5,000 market faced prices that jumped roughly 10% in the years after the program. Free market economists call this "seen versus unseen." Politicians only showed you the gleaming new Chevy Malibu driving off the lot. They never showed you the single mother in Akron who needed a $3,000 Corolla and found nothing affordable left on the lot.
Even the environmental justification collapsed under basic scrutiny. A 2009 study by Resources for the Future calculated that the program cost between $237 and $365 per ton of carbon dioxide reduced. The voluntary carbon credit market at the time priced a ton around $10 to $20. The government spent up to thirty times the market rate to achieve an environmental outcome the market was already pricing far more efficiently.
This is what central planning always does. It takes your money, destroys real assets, and transfers wealth from the poor to auto manufacturers and their financiers. The program's designers received awards. The Akron mother paid higher prices. The engines sat crushed in junkyards. Nobody in Washington answered for any of it.
The idea that this "celebrates the strength of American values" is laughable. George Washington vehemently (and successfully) opposed a plan to put his face on a coin because he didn't want to be treated like a king. This embarrassing worship is *antithetical* to American values.
@billybinion That's just the thing though, Billy. People DON'T have principles...at least not the ones that make the news.
So so much of the current news cycle, human discourse, etc. exists because of people who lack principles.
My warm take on birthright citizenship:
Wholly defensible to be against it as policy and wholly reasonable to want to reform it in some way.
Also intellectually defensible to say that the 14th amendment is being misinterpreted. Doesn't mean I agree, but I don't think it's crazy either.
But even if you win that argument, you still need to deal with century+ of precedent and statutory language that codifies it and has created massive reliance interests.
I consider it an open question whether Congress can repeal or modify birthright citizenship.
I think it is absolutely nuts and dangerous to think a president can repeal it through executive order, and defending the E.O. because you agree with the underlying policy is itself indefensible.
That's it. That's my take.
How is "the vast reserve army of socially liberal but fiscally conservative voters" the great snipe hunt of American politics? Is "vast" the operative word here?
There are dozens of us...
@JonahDispatch
@KWAPT Making that decision is one of the worst things ever, but watching him suffer isn't any better
Ialways found sharing him with others, seeing how they remember him, is the closest thing to comforting.
Can't believe I watch that lil guy grow up on Twitter, haha. He's a good one.
My grad student @Adam0mary (about to defend his thesis) is now working for Human Progress. His first essay: What You Need to Know About Humans to Advance Human Progress https://t.co/CqnqMrov5Z via @HumanProgress
@KWAPT@LOCeltics I can't really get into podcasts. I spoke with John at a Mavs game his first year traveling with the team. I also sent Chuck a Rondo Dallas Mavs poster and bobble head! With you 3, Rich, Mike, and Liam...and that comment section. The pinnacle of Celtics coverage for me.