Fake News and Gingerbread Bunkers

It is comical to hear about the supposed concern over fake news.  I read that there is a proposal to spend millions so that some extraordinarily wise public custodians can discern what news is fake and block our access to it (this probably sounds familiar to people from former communist countries and China).

So in the interest of combating fake news, and considering it's December 7th, I will make a small contribution to this effort by briefly discussing FDR and Pearl Harbor.

FDR: Purported to be a great president but was really an enemy of the Constitution and freedom.

FDR considered Joseph Stalin, one of history's most brutal dictators, an ally, and fondly called him "Uncle Joe."

An accurate understanding of history is necessary because so much of what is promulgated today is justified by what has previously supposedly transpired.  A great example are economic policies like "cash for clunkers" or farming subsidies that are justified by distorting the real effects of similar policies during the Great Depression of the 1930s.

Pearl Harbor, like the "Civil War," is another huge propaganda ladened topic I was force fed while in public school.  Years ago I met an 88 year old man who left the Navy in 1944 after leaning of some of what follows.  His story caused me to investigate what was left out of my history books:

1. FDR wanted to involve the US in WWII despite claiming the contrary.  FDR goaded Japan into attacking Pearl Harbor (via oil and steel embargoes, freezing financial assets, aiding the Chinese and even sailing destroyers between the Japanese isles) so that what we now know materialized into a horrific tragedy would cause Americans to support military involvement in foreign countries.

2. FDR's administration knew of Japan's plans to attack Pearl Harbor, it had access to decrypted intercepts of Japanese diplomatic and military radio communications.

3. FDR was so strongly convinced of the impending attack that instead of preparing to stop the Japanese fleet, he arranged to have only WWI ships docked at Pearl Harbor to limit the losses to vintage ships.  A "vacate sea" order was also issued to clear Japan's path on its way to Hawaii.  (What an amazing disregard for the lives of others, and for the sorrow so many families would have to endure.)

Much more can be read about how FDR facilitated the attack here.

Now on to revisit an old custom of this blog to move on to a totally unrelated topic: Gingerbread Bunkers.

One of my girls recently employed a concept that never crossed my mind when I built gingerbread houses as a kid.  During a recent Christmas social with friends to build houses, instead of doing the conventional "make it look like a house as much as possible," she... essentially built a bunker and stuffed it with candy:

Squeeks and the gingerbread bunker with Otto the dog providing over-watch; ready to alert her to threats to the treasure inside.

A brilliant idea, especially if one desired to smuggle a bunch of candy out of such an event.

Be Thankful For Our... Comforts?

I recently decided that if I hear another Christian claim we have so many freedoms in this country I'm going to have to address this in a post.  It just happened last night.

So here it is: Unfortunately Christians confuse "comfort" with "freedom."

Maintaining vehicles, organized sports for the kids, innumerable shopping options, decorating our houses, indulging in favorite foods, 500 TV channels to choose from, access to our favorite over-priced coffee, going to the game, etc. has nothing to do with "freedom." These are all "comforts" we experience as long as we regularly surrender our wealth in the form of "taxes" or fines to avoid being subject to violence and being placed in cages by people in official looking costumes.

I suspect this sounds foreign to many.  Ask Mariza Reulas of what I'm referring to or a myriad of others who have tried to avoid the following forms of expropriation (or violations of our rights) and are now suffering for it:

Purchase of a permit, license or tax when fishing or hunting, operating as a beautician, operating a trash service or nursery, conducting business as a realtor, day care provider, electrician, taxi or dog groomer, maintaining an elevator, selling eggs or milk to the public, making jam in your kitchen and selling it, building a house, paying a cellular, water, electricity, trash or any bill, etc., etc., etc.

Securing a permit for a garage sale or your kid's lemonade stand, purchasing gubmit mandated health care, paying the exorbitant "fees" for developing a medicinal product or brewing and selling beer.

Collecting the mandated tribute from customers you sell to (aka "sales taxes") or disclosing on a form how much you've paid them.

Paying the gubmit thousands of dollars every time you purchase a new or used car or pay for the annual stickers and "registrations."

Paying real estate "taxes" (note that no one owns their home, they rent it from local bureaucrats) which fund the indoctrination of children in the precepts of statism, socialism, amoral and abnormal sexual behaviors, Islam and also promulgates acceptance of the aforementioned examples of theft.

Or, simply do one of the following:

Assert the fourth amendment at the airport.

Don't wear a seat belt or exceed posted speed limits, or remove components of your emission system so you pollute less by burning less fuel.

Drive a car without the required papers and mandated insurance. (Imagine what our founders would have thought of being forced to maintain "papers" in order to leave your home and run errands).

I am not suggesting that anyone do these things, I'm simply offering clarification - .yearly paying tens of thousands in protection money to keep yourself out of a cage in order to fund things that are antithetical to a healthy society, or so politicians can buy votes with social programs, or for bureaucrats to expand their power in exchange for enjoying experiences or pursuits that are basic to human existence is... slavery.

Distortions In Dairy

What follows are excerpts written by Calvin for an upcoming debate tournament.  It explains how to rectify dysfunction in the dairy industry.  I'm posting it because the solution he offers applies to all dysfunctional markets:

Got milk? Well the US certainly does. To be more specific, the US has a dairy glut right now. According to Vox news source “The United States is currently in the midst of an epic cheese glut — with 1.2 billion pounds of cheese sitting in cold storage.” It goes on to say that “America’s dairy farms are expected to produce a record 212 billion pounds of milk this year — and there aren’t nearly enough customers to buy it all.” Why so much dairy? Well according to the article the US used to have a big overseas customers, mainly being China and Europe. But as of late China's economy has taken a dive, the EU has started producing more dairy, and Russia has slapped trade sanctions on foreign cheese. Yet even though the dairy market has lost some substantial customers, why according to the USDA's statistics does the US keep producing more milk that it ever has been before? Why hasn't the market yet solved for this overproduction problem? The answer can be fond in the fact that dairy producers are so heavily subsidized. The American Action Forum reported in an article regarding the 2014 farm bill that “The dairy market is so tightly controlled that it is completely unresponsive to consumer demand.” So I invite you judge, to please join me and my partner as we affirm that the United States government should substantially reform its agricultural and/or food safety policy by reforming it's broken dairy support program.

FACT 1. The Dairy Producer Margin Protection Program (DPMPP) is a subsidies program (editor's note: "subsidy" is a euphemism for redistributed wealth). AMERICAN ACTION FORUM, Feb. 2014: The DPMPP pays dairy farmers when the national margin on milk sales falls to below a set threshold. Margin insurance is highly subsidized—the premiums are fixed—and ripe for abuse from farmers seeking the maximum payout.

FACT 2. The Dairy Product Donation Program does not rectify the problems created by FACT 1. AMERICAN ACTION FORUM, Feb. 2014: The 2014 farm bill also directs the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a Dairy Product Donation Program.  The Secretary is authorized to purchase excess dairy products at market prices for distribution to low income groups. The supply management program was intended to be a counterbalance to the new margin insurance program, which could encourage overproduction and drive down prices.

So exactly what problems does a dairy policy create?

1. Burden of cost from overproduction is placed on taxpayers, not farmers. AMERICAN ACTION FORUM, Feb. 2014:  Current federal dairy programs are the antithesis of free market. Despite the massive overhaul this farm bill proposes, pricing will continue to be set by the federal government rather than the market. The new margin insurance program proposes to shift more risk to farmers, but the heavy subsidies and fixed premiums keep the burden on taxpayers. The dairy product donation program is flawed as well. While donations to low income groups are laudable, buying up excess supply in order to further manipulate the dairy market is absurd. The dairy market is so tightly controlled that it is completely unresponsive to consumer demand. Daren Bakst Research Fellow in Agricultural Policy Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic PolicyStudies, Sep 2016: Ultimately, both programs influence the prices consumers pay for both milk and milk-based products, impact the costs of other federal safety net programs, and make taxpayers subsidize dairy producers instead of requiring them to improve the efficiency of their operations or otherwise manage their operating risks.

2. Dairy policy encourages massive waste. FOX NEWS, Oct. 2016: America’s dairy farmers are crying over spilled milk — the 43 million gallons of it they have dumped in fields and elsewhere over the first eight months of the year as the US deals with a massive milk glut. It’s the most discarded milk in at least 16 years.

3. Dairy policy causes the milk market to be unresponsive to consumers. John Stossel, host of Stossel, on FOX Business Network, Sep. 2013: The price of milk is decided by regulators, using complicated formulas. They set one price for wholesale milk used to produce "fluid" products and another for milk used in making cheese. It's a ridiculous game of catch-up, in which the regulated prices never change as fast and efficiently as they would in a market.

How do we solve this problem? 

1. Congress votes to cancel the Dairy Producer Margin Protection Program and Dairy production donation program and any other subsidized dairy insurance programs.
2. Funding is a net reduction in federal spending because programs are eliminated.

How will these actions manifest themselves?

1. The free market (demands of consumers) will create efficiency by reallocating the work of producers to where they are needed most. VOX, Oct. 2016: If there’s a glut of milk out there, that means there are too many dairy farmers. The most economically efficient option is to let the excess dairy farmers go out of business and find other consumer needs to meet (e.g., poultry, beef, etc.), rather than pay them to keep milking their cows, exacerbating the glut. (see also reason.com / Baylen J. Linnekin). CNN, reporting on the USDA's use of taxpayer funds to buy up some of what it referred to as our "massive cheese stockpile," attributed the cause of our oversupply of cheese to "increased milk inventories, higher European exports, low prices, sluggish demand and shifting consumption habits." In any normal industry, certainly any one in which the free market is given even lip service, these factors would signal producers about the need to change:

2. Responses to market demand lead to better practices. AGRILAND, Jan. 2016: “After the dropping of New Zealand’s agricultural subsidies “Herds were consolidated, and breeds that reflected market demand—producing leaner milk, for instance—rose to prominence. And benefits to the land were dramatic. Pesticide use declined by 50%. Soil erosion, land clearing, and overstocking also declined. The entire agricultural sector was forced to shift toward better practices that increased efficiency and yield.” In the words of law school professor and food lawyer Baylen J Linnekin, “who can get us out of this mess? Expecting those same farm lobbies, Congress, and USDA bureaucrats to break the wheel is a fool's errand.” We can't rely on government intervention to change this curdled catastrophe.

It is time to debunk this myth that subsidies are required. "The distortions caused by federal farm policies have long been recognized. In 1932 a member of Congress noted that the Agriculture Department spent "hundreds of millions a year to stimulate the production of farm products by every method, from irrigating waste lands to loaning and even giving money to the farmers, and simultaneously advising them that there is no adequate market for their crops, and that they should restrict production." That sort of folly is similar eight decades later, except that subsidies have increased from "hundreds of millions" to tens of billions of dollars. The Federated Farmers of New Zealand argues that New Zealand's experience "thoroughly debunked the myth that the farming sector cannot prosper without government subsidies." That myth needs to be debunked in the United States as well.”

What Happened?

I know we have some 'splaining to do, some have wondered why we departed from the farm after three years.

It started in late August of '15. Within three months the Lord provided me with an IT opportunity, we sold our animals and associated equipment, relocated the family and moved all of our belongings.  We also found a great church and started making new friends.  We suddenly went back to suburban life for a number of reasons:

1. We could not generate sufficient income fast enough.  Because the effort started with endeavors that no one involved had previously proven to be successful, by the time one was found we were already 2+ years into the effort (the pig endeavor had the potential to generate sufficient income, there were ~150 and counting by the time we left).

There were also two "macro" reasons that affected income generation in our new environment that I had never been exposed to before:

A. The local economy was dysfunctional.  Approximately half of the people in our area were on some type of welfare, so half of the people had essentially withdrawn themselves from contributing in any meaningful way to the economy and served as a drain on those who were productive.  It bred a type of "hand out" / entitlement mentality and strange ideas on how a economy supposedly functions.  It wasn't uncommon for people to ask for an additional discount on something that was already reasonably priced; as if prices should be set based on people's means and not on the cost of production.  For example, in order to expedite our move I listed things inexpensively.  I asked $85 for three used electric fence reels with poly wire that retailed for $275.  The first day I received five calls and all wanted me to drop the price further.  Since I had enough of this behavior I increased the price at $125 and sold them in two days.

Much more could be written about the difference in rationale in areas where people are industrious and areas where they are not.  While previously working in IT and in a suburban area I never perceived how the structure of a local economy can change the way people think and behave.  For example, in areas where people are dependent, they support and clamor for gubmit to force the appropriation of other people's wealth to meet their needs (and thanks to public schools they've been conditioned to believe that's somehow "fair" or it's necessary to "level the playing field").  I've wondered how much different they are from Bolsheviks.  For some reason they can't make an association between the failure of grand redistribution schemes (like East Germany, Communist Russia and currently Venezuela) and the economical malaise they live in.

Hard to change topics before mentioning at least a few more goofy ideas (especially since I'm talking about the belt buckle of the "Bible belt!!!").  Occasionally you'd hear of the need for a business to "give back to the community," as if there was something inherently negative about them and they needed to make amends for it. Hearing this was like the sound of fingernails on a chalk board (or at least like that feeling after realizing you just used a permanent marker on a dry erase board).  Most locals couldn't comprehend that businesses ALREADY gave and give back EVERY DAY simply by providing products and services people want. Another favorite really flawed perspective was hearing farmers complain about those living off of the rest of us by collecting "welfare" and then lamenting that the farm bill needed to get passed - which is nothing more than welfare for farmers!

B. Too much regulation / Dept of Agriculture interference and unnecessary costs.  (At least too much for me, there are some who were still able to do well in the environment we left and I admire their perseverance.) For example, with pigs, did you know that feeding them table scraps could destroy all of the agriculture in the US? (If that sounds like crazy talk, good; your ability to reason is not impaired).  This piece of fear mongering came from a director at the Dept of Agriculture.  I've learned that this type of interference and central planning in the "home of the free and land of the brave" exists in most areas of our economy today, from selling eggs (see HERE) all the way to mundane things like buying insurance or natural gas.  I think most of us don't realize to what extent central planning exists because most of us have been employees all of our lives.  The missed opportunities and keen awareness of the costs of regulation or the fines, fees, licenses, permits and other excuses made for expropriation seem to only be appreciated by the self employed or employers.

The challenge with pigs was to reduce feed costs.  Near the farm there were institutions that were filling landfills with literally tons of food each day.  One was a college that we approached about collecting the left-overs from student's plates.  I was told it was "illegal." I was incredulous and thought surely, this person was misinformed.  To my dismay I discovered that it was true - feeding pigs table scraps and then selling those pigs really was illegal.  I was told by a wise central planner (most likely a political appointee who admitted they had no experience in raising pigs or other animals as a business) that the practice of raising pigs on table scraps, which has been done since time immemorial, was dangerous because it could sicken my pigs and spread an illness to the entire country and destroy the US pork industry (I'm not making this up.  We can probably thank the public school system for this person's education).  To that I politely explained that we've got a big problem - her health inspectors were allowing restaurants all over the state to serve food unfit for pigs.  My epiphany was completely ignored of course.  I have not done the research but I strongly suspect the impetus of the regulation was the big meat producers (i.e., crony capitalism, they line the pockets of politicians and regulators who then create regulations that favor the pocket liners). Regulations like this protect the market share of large producers by severely hindering the ability of small producers to exist and eliminate choices for consumers (we also saw a small local competitor crash and burn after state and local public "custodians" fee'd and regulated them out of existence).

And there are also a few "micro" reasons:

2. I trusted the natives.  I was so naive that I didn't realize I was among natives.  They looked just like me (except for those in the pic).  And from stories I've heard from missionaries, my experience was not unlike being in a 3rd world country.  What I did not realize was that in an environment where the economy is impaired, others will see you as a threat and they'll either take advantage of you or marginalize you.  It was like being back in high school.  They're cordial and gracious in your presence, but ruthless behind your back as they "bend the ear" of others.  It wasn't until six months into the endeavor that another successful farmer from whom I started gaining insight from noted that I was working with hillbillies who were trying to eliminate me.  I noticed it in town also.  I had to replace a truck tire and ball joints and the shop tried to overcharge me $300.  Initially I didn't want to believe it because after all we had moved to the "Bible belt."  Another time it was at a land auction, I was told the day before the auction that the owner had settled the debt so it would no longer be available.  The next day I overheard the same person mention that it had sold that morning.  I inquired as to why I was told it would not be available and surmised that since I wasn't a local they didn't want me to participate.  Lesson learned: if you're ever in a new environment work thru someone you can trust until you understand the inter-personal landscape.

Also the native's reliance on "tradition" was a problem.  There is a line in a Twenty One Pilots song that appears to be about the bleak life in a small town called Hometown and says to put away the gods your father serves.  It reminds me of their weird stubbornness, or insistence in doing things a certain way that was based on some perceived tradition.  For example, when we were tapping trees, TJ did the research, consulted with others who had experience, and inexpensively procured the appropriate hardware (items that incorporated efficiency and taps designed based on the latest understanding of what works best for sap collection).  The natives whittled taps out of wood and there was mention of how things used to be done "around here" I guess about 100 years ago.  Besides unnecessarily wasting a lot of time whittling, there was another reason to prefer non-wood taps since wood encouraged the presence of bacteria that would compromise the quality of the syrup.  TJ also used tubes and lids to cover the sap as much as possible.  The natives did not, their collection system was exposed and occasionally would offer surprises like dead squirrels or mice.

"Yes, it's sweet but has an interesting taste - like that of wild game with a hint of acorn."

3. Too much in-efficiency.  And when issues were realized, it was extremely difficult and costly to recover from the effects of poorly designed systems.  A good example was the water system discussed in previous posts that the natives implemented ("mechanized" and extremely time consuming).

So for now, farming is behind us but we do miss its benefits.  Especially, those opportunities to teach the kids how to drive...

Liberty: "ok Sammy, it's going straight now, more gas!"

Sammy: "Whaaat? Back to processed foods!?"  (Thankfully no, there is always someone relatively nearby who will sell you food from their farm.)

And even though we're back in suburbia, there are still farm-like chores like dropping trees (watch for the piece of wood that almost tags Trins the camera girl)...