Magnifisyncopathological

Copperas Cove Chamber of Commerce Vice President Betty Price said, short of the school system and city services, the development corporation will become one of the town's biggest employers.

Copyright ©2009TWEAN News Channel of Austin, L.P. d.b.a. News 8 Austin

The above News8Austin article is frustratingly short on details of how the EDC lured Cinergy Cinemas to Copperas Cove. Was it a tax break? Property sold below market rates as a result of a tax seizure, condemnation, or eminent domain? Special treatment by waiving local business regulations? The EDC autofellatio is just as light on how they accomplished this; their 2008 annual report (PDF) also suffers from "Lookit us, we're awesome!" syndrome. Even if their efforts were limited to promoting the city's relative attractiveness compared to other areas, they were only able to do this through a "1/2 cent sales tax" imposed on businesses in the city limits. However, it appears they will go much further (PDF) if they want.

It is important to note how this is portrayed. The PR (both the news article and the EDC material) speaks only of the superficial consumer benefits and pays no attention to the means used to secure these benefits. This sets up a red herring the moment you voice opposition to the project. How could I be against the area's first R-rated theater, fancy new ways to enjoy movies, and a big source of jobs? I must be anti-growth or something!

Wrong. I'm anti-state and this project smells like typical state intervention into the market.

A government-funded and government-run education system. A government-funded and government-run utility and civic services system. Spillover effects from the largest US Army base in the world. Now, a huge entertainment venture that was convinced to break ground as a direct result of government intervention and will round out the top employers in the area.

I bet people over there think they live in a free market system and routinely talk about freedom and liberty.

Posted by drizzten at 11:24 AM | Permalink

Posted by drizzten at 02:59 PM | Permalink

[Updates below.]

Joe, it is possible that Mr. Olivia cares more -in this instance- about the protection of certain values from cultural erosion. It's the same rage I feel when I hear interventionism advocated by someone claiming the title of free market defender. These days, words are at best used to obscure meaning. With increasing frequency, they are used in direct contradiction of their clear meaning. When we're talking about people's lives and property, it is worth getting upset now and then.

But, Mr. Cowen's statement is not defensible on free market grounds. Obama is a typical statist with atypical persuasive skills. Press him hard enough and he will attempt to protect and preserve government power. He's awful on economics and that's because he's awful in other aspects of his philosophy. He thinks collective coercion is routine, unquestionable on pragmatic grounds.

This isn't some mean pox I'm trying to cast on him. This is something probably supported by 98% of the world.

And I'm under no illusions about where the direction of things points. While being nice and polite has it's place and should be used when one has specific tasks, that formality has value because not everyone deserves it. GMU has a public reputation for being libertarian. Not everyone there rejects collective coercion against the peaceful affairs of individuals using and exchanging legitimate private property. Press me hard enough and that's my standard before I'll accept someone as a market fundamentalist. I get the sense Mr. Olivia shares a similar minimum qualification.

People who call interventionists defenders of free markets, radical capitalists, or extreme libertarians should be called out on it.

Interventionists should be honest enough to reject the titles.

UPDATED 5/12/2009 8:55am
Someone pulled the blog post from the von Mises site but you can see the Twitter post that brought it to my attention here:

Tyler Cowen, Resign!: Tyler Cowen: "I do not agree with Obama on all points but he understands economic policy b.. http://tinyurl.com/o5yv7s

Posted by drizzten at 02:04 AM | Permalink

Short of making the most difficult economic changes, however, there is the matter that even blue-dog Democrats ought to be able to handle without flinching: establishing the government as employer of last resort.

[...]

There is no natural rate of unemployment. But there is a natural – that is, fundamental – right to work. The social and economic costs of unemployment – lost income, crime, broken families, physical and mental health problems, interrupted educations, shattered retirements, social unrest – ought to be plenty to make providing full employment a slam dunk for politicians supposedly in tune with their constituents.

Once again, Meteor Blades demonstrates he knows jack shit about economics.

Posted by drizzten at 10:34 AM | Permalink