Kitty Says Moo

You may recall that moment, twenty-some years ago, when Ronald Reagan made a joke before a press conference to the effect that “the bombing begins in five minutes.” He was poking fun at his supposed reputation as a warmonger, and it was a private joke shared with the Washington press corps. Or so he thought. By that night the remark was being carried by every newspaper and television network as though it were a serious declaration of war.

Yesterday, Hillary Clinton made what sounds like a serious threat to “totally obliterate Iran” should they fire nuclear weapons at Israel. (Reaction so far from the major media: None.)

In related news, Barack Obama, asked for his reaction to Jimmy Carter’s attempt to play diplomat with Hamas, said- and this is a direct quote- “Can’t I just eat my waffles?”

I think the Democrats are really spoiled for choice this time around.

Imagine, for a minute, that auto insurance was more like health insurance. What would that be like?

First of all, there’d be no deductible. Insurance would pay the first penny of every claim. It would also cover things that you expected to have to take care of, like yearly oil changes, brakes, tire replacement, wiper blades, and so forth. You couldn’t just buy liability insurance, or just liability and fire and theft. All policies would have to cover collision, too, with no deductible.

States would pass laws mandating that these things were covered. You couldn’t opt to get a simpler policy that would cost less. Some states would mandate that all auto insurance policies would also have to cover any mechanical problems, regular detailing, tuneups, and some custom parts.

Of course, this would make it extremely expensive. A lot of unions would negotiate car insurance into their employment contracts. Many people wouldn’t buy insurance at all, figuring that the chance of needing it was pretty slim. And some states would allow you to buy auto insurance to cover a pre-existing mechanical problem or collision damage. This would push the cost of insurance even higher, as policies would have to cover the full cost of the existing liabilities as well as any yet to come.

Insurance would also be required to cover alternative car treatments- practices that weren’t approved by the manufacturers but were popular with a growing number of car owners. Things like installing crystals in the car to focus energy, and having an expert choose the right color for your car.

Of course, with all this money being tossed around, automotive malpractice would be a major concern. Most mechanics would have to carry a lot of insurance, which would be reflected in their charges, as would the cost of their insurance overhead. They’d spend a lot of time writing up justifications for replacing headlights and changing oil, using manufacturer’s replacement parts instead of generic parts and so forth.

No doubt many politicians would demand that the government should take over the auto insurance business, as well as the car repair business, like they do in some other countries. Sure, there might be some waiting times for repair- and some cars might be deemed not worth repairing, but everyone would get the same treatment.

That would be pretty bizarre, wouldn’t it?

Now imagine that medical insurance was more like auto insurance.

People would cover their expected or planned medical costs themselves. Insurance wouldn’t pay for checkups, or inoculations, or maternity care. There’d be a reasonable deductible for all drugs and care. You’d only draw on your insurance for really big and unexpected medical hosts, like hospitalization, surgery, serious illness- expenses that exceeded, say, 4-5% of your annual income. Most doctor visits would be paid for with cash. There’d be very little paperwork. YOung people in good health would decide that medical insurance was a pretty good bet, since they could get it very cheaply.

Now that would really be bizarre.

Hilary Clinton has been citing a trip she made to Bosnia as proof of her foreign affairs bona fides, noting that it was in a war zone, and they were warned that “there might be sniper fire.”

Perhaps. But if so, why was she bringing along Sinbad, Cheryl Crow, and daughter Chelsea? Personally, if I were a soldier or foreign service officer posted to, let us say, Bagdhad, I doubt my first instincts would be to take along a comic, a singer, and my teenage daughter.

“You know my method. It is founded upon the observation of trifles.”

— Sherlock Holmes

Today’s fun quote from the past:

“We must welcome and promote truly free trade.”

— Al Gore, 2000 Nomination acceptance speech

Consider this recent news item:

NEW YORK (AP) — A former Pace University student who twice threw copies of the Koran into a toilet at the school after disputes with Muslims pleaded guilty Monday to disorderly conduct in connection with the incidents.

Stanislav Shmulevich, 24, pleaded guilty as part of a deal in which he must do 300 hours of community service. He has completed about 80 hours of the service at a hospital, his lawyer said.

Shmulevich, of Brooklyn, admitted he tossed the Muslim holy books into toilets at Pace on Oct. 13, 2006, and Nov. 21, 2006. A criminal complaint says the Koran that was recovered in the October incident “was covered in feces” [...] Shmulevich, a business major and immigrant from the former Soviet Union, initially was charged with two counts of criminal mischief as a hate crime. The charge is a felony punishable by up to four years in prison.

And this event from several years ago:

In 1989, a photograph called “Piss Christ” by Andres Serrano, which depicted a crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist’s urine, was on show at the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. The exhibition received funding from the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA).

So how come Shmulevitch doesn’t get an NEA grant, too?

In one of his recent TV ads, Senator Obama promises that if elected, he will “slow the development of future combat systems.” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl32Y7wDVDs). Maybe he thinks having better weapons is, I don’t know, unfair?

And on the other side, Sen. Clinton promises if elected she will freeze all variable rate mortgages for 5 years, and allow the government to renegotiate the terms of other loans. That should certainly take care of this glut of home financing we’re seeing right now.

I just learned that William F. Buckley died today. Although usually referred to as a conservative, many of his views would be more properly described as libertarian. He did not share many of the socially conservative views of a Mike Huckabee, or an Ann Coulter. He was greatly opposed to the bipartisan “War on drugs”, for example.

And that got me thinking- none of the candidates have said a word about the “war on drugs.” Between elections this used to be a real hot-button issue among activists on the left- how so many people are rotting in jail for the possession of something that hurt no one but themselves, and something that should be a personal choice. Moreover, the prohibition on drugs has created much of the criminal enterprise surrounding it, by raising the price of drugs as well as the desperation of those who distribute them.

So you’d think that liberals and conservatives alike would be looking for an alternative to draconian punishments for drug use and sale, and yet every four years the debate gets very, very, quiet. None of the major contenders for the presidency is saying anything about changing the severe penalties that were enacted under Bill Clinton. The only sane voice I’ve read this year on drug laws is that of Ron Paul- and when Ron Paul is the sole sane voice in a debate, well, that’s a pretty scary thought in and of itself.

Press releases from One Laptop Per Child indicate that the much-ballyhooed $100 laptop will soon be shipped, except it will cost $200. Unless you factor in all the donated hardware, software, shipping and other factors, in which case the true cost is around $1,000 per laptop, or about twice what a good low-end laptop from Dell costs. The OLPC people say this isn’t true- but they are still restricting sales to government and charitable agencies, which does suggest that they’re selling them at a loss.

Putting aside the question of why having a laptop will help students in countries where few complete the sixth grade, I still wonder why a country that won’t spend $2 for mosquito netting to prevent malaria or $20 for AIDS treatment will spend $100 or $200 to buy students a computer.

I’d love to be proven wrong, but I’m guessing that no more than a few tens of thousands of these will ever be distributed, and most will end up on the black market But that doesn’t mean I’ve given up hope. I am anxiously awaiting the One Car per Family project, which will deliver basic transportation throughout the Third World at a cost of only $40,000 per.

They held Live Aid the other day, and literally hundreds of would-be greens watched B-list rock stars who jetted in from around the globe to endorse Al Gore’s vision:

“This is going to be the greenest event of its kind, ever,” former Vice President and Live Earth partner Al Gore told The Associated Press. “The carbon offsets and the innovative practices that are being used to make this a green event, I think, will set the standard for years to come.”

I.e., this could be the event that kills fashionable green politics. BTW, about those carbon offsets- they were purchased from Native Energy, a Native American (extra cultural points!) owned operation that… well, it’s unclear exactly what they do. They say they fund renewable energy projects, but that phrase covers a lot of ground. Their web site says:

…NativeEnergy is majority-owned by the non-profit Intertribal Council On Utility Policy, although we are organized and operate as a for-profit company….

…and perhaps someone could explain that to me. In their FAQ, they ask the question, “How much goes to the projects?” and they reply:

Our business model is really very simple: We make otherwise insufficiently profitable renewable energy projects profitable enough to get financed and built. We do it buying their long-term renewable energy credits (RECs) and/or CO2 offsets up front, and selling shares of those RECs and offsets up front, thus buying down their initial investment costs and increasing their investment return. So a partial answer to “how much goes to the projects” is “enough to get them financed and built.”

…which again I find a little confusing. I am also more than a little reminded of Milo Minderbinder, the character in Catch 22 who somehow sets up a huge for-profit organization inn the middle of a war zone, and whose sole justification seems to be “everyone gets a share!”, even as he contracts with the Germans to bomb his own base.

Back to NativeEnergy’s financial model:

When you offset with NativeEnergy, you are purchasing property (RECs and other CO2 offsets are property) and you are donating that property to Clean Air-Cool Planet for it to further its charitable purpose of reducing global warming by retiring the credits or offsets. Think of it like you are buying soup from a grocer (NativeEnergy) and donating it to the local food drive (CA-CP) for it to give to hungry people. The general rule under the Internal Revenue Code is that when you donate property to a qualified charitable organization (CA-CP is a qualified 501(c)(3)), you are entitled to deduct the fair market value of that property from your income…

So basically you’re donating money to this organization, who in turn invest some undisclosed fraction of it in for-profit alternative energy projects that otherwise wouldn’t be financially viable. In the business world this is called throwing money away. But in this case, the principles of NativeEnergy get their cut, and the donors, like their predecessors in the Middle Ages, are buying indulgences to pave their way to Green Heaven, even as they continue to drive SUVs, air condition their multiple homes, and charter private jets.

And everyone gets a share!