Monthly Archives: June 2009

Quote Of The Day

Hey Newt… As one of the limited-government pro-individual-rights potential voters who has stopped voting Republican in disgust at the actions of the party over the last 8 years, I think you and I both agree that the Republicans need a concerted effort to woo folks like me back. But as an atheist, this sure isn’t the way to do it:

We are in a period where we are surrounded by paganism, and paganism is on offense.

Now, I’m going to split hairs and assume you misused the word paganism, and would clearly include an unbelieving heathen like myself on the list of folks being criticized. Either way, Newt Gingrich just alienated one potential voter who had been pretty excited about the concept of him running back in 2008. He’s moved to the center or left on policy and to the right on social issues, and that’s the wrong way on both.

A boot stamping on a human face…

…forever.  But, if San Francisco’s most famous street vendor has anything to say about it, that boot will be well-shined:

He sleeps under a bridge, washes in a public bathroom and was panhandling for booze money 11 months ago, but now Larry Moore is the best-dressed shoeshine man in the city. When he gets up from his cardboard mattress, he puts on a coat and tie. It’s a reminder of how he has turned things around.

In fact, until last week it looked like Moore was going to have saved enough money to rent a room and get off the street for the first time in six years. But then, in a breathtakingly clueless move, an official for the Department of Public Works told Moore that he has to fork over the money he saved for his first month’s rent to purchase a $491 sidewalk vendor permit.

“I had $573 ready to go,” Moore said, who needs $600 for the rent. “This tore that up. But I’ve been homeless for six years. Another six weeks isn’t going to kill me.”

The bureaucrat told Moore that she found out about his business after reading about his success in this paper.

Most amazingly, Moore was not even indignant and sought to play by the rules, only to have more barriers thrown in his path:

Moore is nothing if not dutiful. He attempted to work his way through the byzantine city government channels, although he didn’t get much help.

“I guess my gripe is that when the city came by and told him to get his papers in order but couldn’t tell him how to do it,” said Travis See, who manages the Custom Shop Clothiers on the corner of Market and New Montgomery. “This lady couldn’t even tell him which building to go to so he could stand in line and waste all day.”

When Moore found the permit application, he got a money order and headed down to the appropriate department to pay. But because he didn’t have a valid ID card, they wouldn’t take his money.

Through all this, Moore maintains a positive attitude and wants to be an upstanding citizen:

The only one who isn’t furious about this is Moore. He insists that city functionaries are giving him a break because they are letting him continue to shine shoes while he waits for a copy of his birth certificate to be sent from Kansas. Once it arrives they will allow him to get an ID card and then hand over almost every cent he has.

I feel compelled to say that Moore is a better man than I. He’s faced the tyranny of the petty bureaucrat with incredible composure, and he deserves every shred of respect and help he’s gotten for this. Fortunately for Mr. Moore, the situation seems to be working out for him:

Reiskin told him his department would help set up the permit, the Homeless Outreach Team van pulled up to see if he wanted to talk about supportive housing, and homeless coordinator Dariush Kayhan sat down in the chair as soon as Reiskin’s shoes were shined.

Moore said he was honored to see them but still charged them his usual fee, $7. (It’s $5 if you are unemployed.)

Moore has set aside the $491 for the permit, which he’ll get as soon as his birth certificate arrives from Kansas and he can get a municipal ID card.

In retrospect, it’s easy to see how this mess started. Usually when a city worker tells a street vendor to get a permit, the response is excuses and vague promises. They didn’t expect Moore to take them seriously.

But Moore is a man on a mission.

“I want to be on this corner,” he said. “But you know what? You need me on this corner. You got people in this city getting a free room and free medical but they aren’t doing nothing with their lives. I want people to see me and say, ‘There’s a guy working hard.’ ”

If you’d like to see that, stop by his stand on Market. He starts at 9:30 in the morning, although he might sleep in a little today.

“I am going to go get a room tonight for the whole week,” he said. “I deserve that. At least I think I do.”

I’m very glad Larry Moore will end up sleeping in a bed tonight, and that in the end the generosity of the people of San Francisco has made sure he will be able to pay both his rent and the city.

However, that resolution is a case of the exceptional, while the bureaucracy remains the way of life in San Francisco.  As this case shows, it’s a way of life that deserves to be questioned.  Are the people of San Francisco better off because Larry Moore had to waste time and money having a birth certificate sent 1,500 miles so the city could verify his identity? Are the people better off with $491 of this man’s money going to the city rather than a landlord?  Will Larry Moore suddenly provide service any better because he now has the benediction of the Department of Public Works?

These questions raise the most important one… Just who are these permits supposed to serve?

California Department Of Real Estate Trust Fund Nearing Deficit!

The California Department Of Real Estate oversees and administers the state’s real estate agent and broker licensing program. People, such as san francisco real estate agents, are required to make use of these licenses to operate. During the big housing boom, the fees generated by the high level of real estate activity (and the agents/brokers who were licensed to enable that activity) has caused them to build up some a nice Trust Fund. But activity is down, and there may be trouble ahead:

DRE, as the department is called, gets all its money for its 344-person department from license fees, license exam fees and subdivision fees (which are going up, too). But all those things are down because fewer people are taking the license test or getting licenses, at least in California. There has been somewhat of a migration to the East Coast because some believe that Californian real estate is on the decline. In potentially valuable places like Lynchburg real estate agents are setting up and seemingly becoming successful.

Well what about development fees, are those rising or declining? It looks like it is declining. Homebuilding has been all but mothballed, but people are still looking for homes for sale in the city of Redondo Beach and nearby areas.

All these things have taken a $13.7 million bite out of the department’s $44 million budget.

For example, license exams have dropped from around 22,000 in March 2005 to just under 2,900 this past March. And the number of licensees dropped in March for a 14th straight month.

But don’t worry! They’ve got a trust fund! They’ve lent their reserves to the state of California, so all is well!

To make matters worse, the state Legislature and the Govenator have borrowed about $10.9 million from DRE reserves. If the state doesn’t repay that loan, and if the fees don’t go up, DRE projects its reserves will dry up and it’ll run out of money next year. In just over four years, DRE would be almost $88 million in the hole.

Wait… How could that make matters “worse”? How can they just suggest that the state might not pay back that loan — or worse, the implicit notion that they might do so out of higher taxes on the rest of Californians? If they’ve loaned the money to the state of CA, what could possibly go wrong? After all, the State of CA and the California DRE have two different revenue streams, so loaning from one pocket to the other is not in any way a fiscal end-around! This fiasco could be the reason why most real estate investors decide to take a look at out of state real estate investing instead so they don’t have to worry about problems like this, especially when it concerns money.

If it’s such a bad thing for the state of CA to borrow money from the CA DRE reserves, why is it a good thing that the US Federal Government is borrowing the surplus generated by Social Security payroll taxes?

Wasn’t the “stimulus” bill supposed to keep unemployment down?

Could opponents of the stimulus bill actually have been right? Take a look at the numbers of what the Obama Administration said unemployment would look like with and without the “stimulus” compared to what it is today.


Don’t forget that the ridiculous claim by Obama Administration that 150,000 jobs have been created (total job losses since the beginning of the year are more that 2.8 million) by the “stimulus” bill after spending $112 billion. For those of you keeping score at home, that’s $746k per job “created.”

H/T: QandO

Comment of the Day: A Welcome Voice from Liberty Papers Past

Re: Mancow gets waterboarded

It’s always a treat to hear from Eric, the founder of The Liberty Papers. Its comments like this one which make me miss his “grumbles.” This comment was in response to a discussion sparked by Stephen Gordon’s post concerning waterboarding:

Interesting discussion. Chris has a very valid point about altering the meaning of the language. He also points out that waterboarding is a form of coercion and that coercion should not be used on prisoners. But, in the heated and traumatic rejection of his assertions about what torture is, the more important point he makes is lost.

The point is, coercive interrogation is wrong to do to someone who we hold prisoner. Chris said that loud and clear, but folks are so incensed that he might not agree that something is torture that they miss the fundamentally more important point. Another fundamentally important issue, if you believe in The Rule of Law, is that we don’t have clear laws on what to do with terrorist combatants and that poses a problem. One of the keys to solving the problems of piracy in the 17th and 18th centuries was to promulgate clear, consistent, logically and legally sound laws and regulations for dealing with pirates.

We don’t have that for terrorists today, and that’s a problem.

P.S. adding to the point about use of language. We used to know that torture meant causing permanent injury to someone. When we talked about the police giving someone the “third degree”, it meant physically injuring someone to coerce them to do something. The reason we said “third degree” is that there were three levels of Inquisition used during the Catholic Inquisition.

1st Degree – Discussing the crimes someone is accused of and informing them that stronger methods of inquisition can be used if they don’t cooperate

2nd Degree – Showing the accused person the methods that can be used, like racks, knives, flails and other implements of torture

3rd Degree – Actually using those implements on the accused person, i.e. the Third Degree of Inquisition.

So, the very tortured definitions of torture that folks are trying to come up are actually changing the meanings of the language in ways that support the individual’s position. This is something that Orwell argued strenuously against and that most “libertarians” argue against, as well. Except, it seems, when being for it supports their personal beliefs.

Causing PTSD does not automatically make something torture. PTSD can be caused by a car accident, by seeing your sibling die, by participating in violent combat and many other things. None of which are “torture”. I suggest that we should return to the traditional definition that doing things which would be considered “the third degree” is torture. Let’s use the language right. AND we can still agree that things which are not torture, but are inhumane or coercive, or both, are wrong for US interrogators to do to our prisoners.

Comment by Eric — June 5, 2009 @ 8:24 am

1 8 9 10 11 12 14