Tag Archives: John Stossel

Ending An Idea That Simply Did Not Work

Posted on by

Since man has walked the earth, he has been in search of a perpetual motion machine. The laws of physics make the possibility of him finding that machine non-existent. Reaching a goal of net zero carbon emissions probably falls in the same category as the perpetual motion machine.

On Saturday, John Stossel at Hot Air posted an article about the end of net zero.

The article reports:

What a difference a few years make.

 Not long ago, politicians said climate change was going to kill us, so we must move to “net zero” emissions. 

This is theoretically possible. Since vegetation removes carbon, we could get to net zero by burning fewer fossil fuels.

Governments everywhere pledged to do just that.

President Joe Biden and European leaders promised “net zero by 2050.”

For a while, it seemed like it might happen. Spain invested billions into its solar power grid. Germany and Spain claimed to get most of their power from renewables.

But now they realize that they made a mistake.

European businesses closed as electricity costs rose, and last year, Spain’s electricity supply shut down for 16 hours.

It was a wakeup call for the green dream.

The article notes that as a result of banning air conditioning in several European countries, according to Reuters there were 10,000 excess deaths during a heatwave in June.

The article reports:

A majority of Americans have air conditioning, but only about 20% of European homes have it.

In Britain, some homeowners were even ordered to tear out air conditioners under climate laws.

“This is just the pure religious nature of the climate catastrophist movement,” says Epstein. “It has one commandment: ‘thou shalt not impact nature.’ They just think that everything good is a happy climate god and everything bad is a vengeful climate god.”

The article notes:

“Why aren’t wind and solar enough?” I ask. “The solar panels keep getting cheaper. Batteries last longer.”

“Because the electricity grid has to be built around the worst day,” he replies.

When there’s no wind or the sun doesn’t shine, countries need reliable, steady power to back up renewable power.

Now, countries like Germany, Sweden and the United Kingdom are walking back their net-zero push.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz now says rules must “better align climate targets, market realities, companies and jobs.”

Common sense has entered the climate change debate.

Short-term Gains At The Expense Of Long-term Gains

Posted on by

On Sunday, John Stossel posted an article at Hot Air about America’s ports. In the fall, the International Longshoremen’s Association went on strike asking for higher wages and a ban on automation. A strike was avoided when the current contract was extended until January 15th. President Trump takes office on January 20th. The Longshoremen’s strike will be one of the first things he has to deal with. I am hoping he follows the example of Ronald Reagan’s handling of the air traffic controllers’ strike.

The article at Hot Air reports:

America’s ports have fallen behind. Not a single one ranks in the top 50 worldwide.

A big reason is that dock unions stop innovation.

This fall, the International Longshoremen’s Association shut down East and Gulf coast ports, striking for a raise and a ban on automation. They got the raise.

 Now union president Harold Daggett says longshoremen will strike again in January if they don’t get that ban on automation.

His statement in my new video makes it clear that he knows how badly his strike would damage other Americans.

“Guys who sell cars can’t sell cars, because the cars ain’t coming in off the ships. They get laid off,” says Daggett. “Construction workers get laid off because materials aren’t coming in. The steel’s not coming in. The lumber’s not coming in. They lose their job.”

Obviously, labor leaders aren’t necessarily “pro worker,” says Mercatus Center economist Liya Palagashvili.

“They’re saying, ‘We don’t care if these other jobs are destroyed as long as we get what we want.'”

Daggett is unusually clueless. He doesn’t understand that a ban on automation will also hurt his members.

As Palagashvili puts it, “They’ll save some jobs today, but they’ll destroy a lot more jobs in the future.”

The article also notes:

That’s because today’s shippers have options. Daggett’s union only controls East and Gulf coast ports. Shippers can deliver their products to ports that accept automation. 

“We’re going to see less activity in ‘Stone Age’ ports,” says Palagashvili.

“Stone Age?” 

“They want to ban automated opening and closing of port doors,” she points out, requiring workers to pull heavy doors themselves.

Weirdly, the union boss makes his demands while also pointing out that dockworker jobs are dangerous.

“Very dangerous … We’ve had 17 people killed in the last three years!”

That’s terrible, but it’s an argument for automation! Using machines instead of vulnerable humans protects human workers. Daggett’s arguing against himself!

I see why he wouldn’t agree to an interview.

“It’s backwards,” notes Palagashvili. “(If) you care about the safety of these workers, you should enhance their jobs and make them safer and better. And the only way you can do that is with technological advancements in automation.”

Other countries have used automated cranes for years. They’re 80% faster than the human-operated cranes in many American ports.

It will be very interesting to watch the outcome of this strike. If the union gets its wage hikes and ban on automation, business may go to other ports and the ports involved may lose traffic. If the unions go on strike, business will go to other ports. I think that if I were a union member, I would want a new leader.

How The Pilgrims Succeeded

Posted on by

As someone who lived in New England for 45 years, the thought of coming to Massachusetts in November without the luxuries of central heating and indoor plumbing is horrifying. But somehow the Pilgrims survived. I recently posted the story of Samoset and Squanto (article here), but there was another aspect to the survival of the Pilgrims–private property rights.

On Sunday, John Stossel posted the following at Hot Air:

As we gather this Thanksgiving, it’s easy to take abundance for granted.

        Leftovers are practically guaranteed.

It wasn’t always this way.

For most of history, there were no Thanksgiving feasts. Hunger, if not starvation, was the norm.

Today, supermarkets are stocked with exotic foods from all over the world. Most of it is more affordable than ever. Even after President Joe Biden’s 8% inflation, Americans spend less than 12% of our income on food, half of what they spent 100 years ago

Why?

Because free markets happened. Capitalism happened.

When there is rule of law and private property, and people feel secure that no thief or government will take their property, farmers find new ways to grow more on less land. Greedy entrepreneurs lower costs and deliver goods faster. Consumers have better options.

Yet today many Americans trash capitalism, demanding government “fixes” to make sure everyone gets equal amounts of this and that.

But it’s in countries with the most government intervention where there are empty store shelves and hungrier people.

The article recounts some early American history:

This week, we celebrate the Pilgrims, who learned this lesson the hard way.

When they first landed in America, they tried communal living. The harvest was shared equally. That seemed fair.

But it failed miserably. A few Pilgrims worked hard, but others didn’t, claiming “weakness and inability,” as William Bradford, the governor of the colony, put it.

They nearly starved.

Desperate, Bradford tried another approach. “Every family,” he wrote, “was assigned a parcel of land.”

Private property! Capitalism! Suddenly, more pilgrims worked hard.

Of course they did. Now they got to keep what they made.

Bradford wrote, “It made all hands very industrious.”

He spelled out the lesson “The failure of this experiment of communal service, which was tried for several years, and by good and honest men proves the emptiness of the theory … taking away of private property, and the possession of it in community … would make a state happy and flourishing.”

The free market works–crony capitalism does not. It will be the job of the Trump administration to restore the free market economy and end crony capitalism. It won’t be easy, and they may not be able to complete the job, but we need them to begin.