Friday, May 31, 2013

FEE: Cities and Emergent Order

            by THE FREEMAN

            By definition, cities are places where a lot of people want to live. So we thought it would be interesting to explore and celebrate them.

            Cities are, after all, like coral reefs, or maybe rainforests. That is, not only are cities emergent orders of the sort we often admire here at The Freeman, but we want to communicate the idea that human beings aren't some sort of invasive species. We are a part of nature, of course, and cities are our version of termite mounds or anthills. They are complex. We also think they can be fascinating and beautiful.


Cities are more than just the residue of people pursuing their lives, though. They're more, in fact, than any one of us can really comprehend, whether we're looking at them from the outside or hustling around in the streets. Order emerges somehow, and within it, each of us has to negotiate the endless tradeoffs (public or private, social or individual, desires or resources) that life brings and that city life presents with more variables.

In his strange, dreamlike book Invisible Cities, Italo Calvino writes,

The people who move through the streets are all strangers. At each encounter, they imagine a thousand things about one another; meetings which could take place between them, conversations, surprises, caresses, bites. But no one greets anyone; eyes lock for a second, then dart away, seeking other eyes, never stopping . . . something runs among them, an exchange of glances like lines that connect one figure with another and draw arrows, stars, triangles, until all combinations are used up in a moment, and other characters come on to the scene. 

These lines that connect us are the real blueprints of cities.

In our more robust interactions, we may actually contribute to the erecting of skyscrapers once locked in dreams. The architects busy themselves with creating the spaces that will help us live together more closely and more comfortably, defying the scarcity of space on the surface. Then we fill and connect and reconfigure the spaces, defining ourselves and our cities in the process. It can elevate us metaphorically and physically.

And of course, none of this is possible without free exchange among consenting adults. Exchange of glances. Exchange of words. Exchange of ideas. Exchange of goods. Even the urban "planners" and municipal functionaries who feast like parasites on the extended order (while fancying they can design it) have to admit that Jane Jacobs is right when she writes, "There is a quality even meaner than outright ugliness or disorder, and this meaner quality is the dishonest mask of pretended order, achieved by ignoring or suppressing the real order that is struggling to exist and to be served."

Nothing this complex and ongoing can be simply beautiful, however, and the overall order that defines a city encompasses a lot of ugliness and disorder. These are parts of life; they're particularly visible in cities, where so many lives are concentrated. But ugliness and disorder are the frequent results of actions taken by what Adam Smith called "the Man of Systems," with all his grand visions, paternalistic instincts, and bureaucratic processes.

Sometimes, though, ugliness is something dreary or unseemly that is really just in the process of becoming. And the beauty of it all can be glimpsed for a moment on a fire escape, behind a clothesline on the 27th floor—at least until the cigarette is spent.


*** 


In this month's interview, we talk to Rod Lockwood, who's trying to build an independent city to rescue Detroit "and all of the United States"from government-induced decline.

The beauty of cities emerges from paradox, says Troy Camplin. Understanding this fact will make us as at home in them as we should be.

Austin only seems weird, says Max Borders, because it's so much more interesting "and tolerant" than most other places.

The unemployment rate is determined by political realities as much as economic ones. Wendy McElroy has the count.

Are intellectual property rights a government-created impediment to creativity, or is all property intellectual at root? In the debut of The Arena, our monthly debate feature, Adam Mossoff and Jeffrey Tucker duke it out.

People usually think they have Thomas Malthus figured out. Ross Emmett introduces "Bob" Malthus, a friend of liberty and markets.

Prohibition has driven the development of ever-stronger drugs, whereas a free market would see a proliferation of lighter options, says B. K. Marcus.

Our columnists have been bustling like cities. Sandy Ikeda says what really makes a city is the order that emerges from the lives lived within it, and it's too big for any one person to comprehend. Tom Bell says the key to keeping city streets safer is holding the government accountable in fair "that is, non-governmental" courts. Jeffrey Tucker says Atlanta's school-cheating scandal is only what should be expected from the distorted incentives created by top-down impositions. Doug Bandow says the taxpayers can't afford welfare for farmers, and farmers don't need it. Sarah Skwire says a story of life in prewar Lodz, Poland, illustrates how much more complex human lives are than any philosophy or religion. And Michael Nolan says New York is home for reasons as ultimately resistant to explanation as the city itself.

Dwight Lee reviews a book arguing that some things are too important to be dealt with via market mechanisms.

Milton Friedman teaches Monetary Policy

 


Menckenism: Once The Obama Narrative Implodes, Reality Breaks Through

            by BILL FREZZA

            Shock may best describe the Chicago Cabal's reaction to recent events as the narratives these political operatives spent a lifetime constructing lie in tatters, revealing an ugly reality long held at bay. While Barack Obama's presidency may yet recover "especially if the White House can win back the mainstream media's active support" the ability to frame, spin, distract, blame, deny, distort, demonize, and prevaricate on any issue unchallenged has been compromised. As the president continues to do everything but his job, more and more mainstream journalists are finally starting to do theirs.

            That it has taken a trifecta of scandals to awaken the minions of the press to their duty speaks volumes on how successfully prevailing narratives define what the public accepts as truth. Only the dogged pursuit of the Benghazi, IRS, and AP stories by alternative media forced the legacy press to stop averting its eyes. As the administration's incoherent responses continue to undermine its own credibility, now is a good time to step back and look at the big picture.



What is reality?

The idea that facts are just a social construct and that reality is malleable is a fundamental tenet of postmodern thought. While this obscurantist rejection of objective truth and the Enlightenment virtue of reason was originally confined to literature, architecture, and the arts, since reaching its apex in the middle of the last century it has crossed over into politics. The driving force for that shift was an influential 1966 treatise, The Social Construction of Reality by sociology professors Peter Berger andThomas Luckmann, which described the creation of "symbolic universes" used to manage a society's accepted perceptions of truth and knowledge.

In particular, Berger and Luckmann's theory of "Universe-maintenance" has served as a template for much of the modern progressive movement. It purports to describe how elites legitimize the institutional structures whereby they "construct" the reality they feed into the minds of non-elites. Contra John Adams's admonition, Berger and Luckmann maintained that facts have meaning only within the context of the prevailing narrative, which allows "truth" to be manipulated to serve a larger purpose. In the hands of progressive politicians, that purpose became the empowerment of a benevolent elite tasked with ushering in an age of peace, equality, prosperity, and social justice.

This all may sound like academic gobbledygook, but it is a mistake to believe that these ideas are powerless. All it took was for a generation surreptitiously indoctrinated into these notions to come of age for the masters of narrative creation to get their hands on the levers of power. The end result? Through a confluence of brilliant marketing, appeals to right past racial wrongs, a global financial catastrophe, and a political backlash against a prior failed presidency, we handed the most powerful office in the world to an inexperienced, untested, unvetted community organizer trained, mentored, and advised by a cabal of socialist agitators.

That is why we've got a president who runs his administration not by practicing chief executive skills he never acquired, but by doing the one thing he knows how to do best  ceaselessly campaign around the country while empowering his surrogates to craft a stream of narratives to paper over his failures.

The problem is, these surrogates have asked the American people to accept so many tall tales that we can't keep track of them anymore. To wit: that wealth is created by spending, that money is created by printing, that our inalienable rights include a long list of free stuff, that the Arab Spring will bring peace and democracy, that this is the most transparent administration in history, that government "investment" can usher in a new age of energy, that a reduction in the official unemployment rate is good news even though that's only so because more people have stopped looking for work, and that this is the worst economic recovery in American history because — well, it's Bush's fault!

To cap it all off, the cognitive dissonance created by clashing narratives that the president is simultaneously so wise and powerful he can and should rule by executive action, yet has no knowledge or control of his subordinate agencies, has made Universe-maintenance-as-usual an impossible task.

And hence, the narratives implode and objective reality breaks through. At least for a while. Will the White House be able to put the Humpty Dumpty press corps back together again? We'll find out soon if journalists who get thrills up their legs resume taking the president at his word, singing hosannas to hope and change. If the American people let them get away with it, we will deserve our fates.

Thursday, May 30, 2013

Henry Hazlitt on the Role of Government


HenryHazlittSun_edited-1



Cafe Hayek: Slavery "Even Temporary" Is An Offense Against Humanity

            by DON BOUDREAUX

Here's a letter to the Wall Street Journal:


Gen. Stanley McChrystal joins the discordant chorus of anti-American voices calling for mandatory national service ("Lincoln's Call to Service - And Ours," May 30).

Of course, Gen. McChrystal is convinced that government coercion of young people to "serve" in programs designed by politicians and operated by bureaucrats is pro- rather than anti- American.  But he's mistaken.  What's more central to the American creed than the manifesto in the Declarartion of Independence that every individual possesses "unalienable Rights" which include "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" "and that government's sole purpose is — to secure these rights?"


Not even the most twisted reading of the Declaration can make Jefferson's words consistent with a practice of robbing young people temporarily of their liberty.  That foundational declaration of American principles simply leaves no room for any policy of enslaving, even if only for a year, young people to serve Gen. McChrystal's (or anyone else's) notions — however high-minded in principle, if always arrogant in practice — of "citizenship" or "service" or "commitment" at the expense of these young-people's pursuit of their own happiness as they themselves judge it.

Slavery, even for a limited time, is an atrocity.  Gen. McChrystal's proposal deserves the same scorn that America's founders unleashed on their would-be masters in Britain in 1776.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030

I've made it crystal clear to my son that if any government ever attempts to conscript him — no matter the purpose, no matter the circumstances, no matter the conditions, and no matter the promised duration — I will literally fight to the death, if necessary, to prevent his enslavement.  He is not "just as no one else is" born to serve any government.

Jim Bashline gives Gun Tutorial

 


Wednesday, May 29, 2013

FEE: The Man Who Outsourced the Government

            by THE FREEMAN


            Oliver Porter created and implemented the public-private partnership (PPP) model for Sandy Springs, Ga.�a city of 100,000 people near Atlanta. He has served as the principal advisor for many other new cities and for cities considering the conversion to the PPP model, both in the United States and Japan. He has authored three books on this subject and has agreed to sit down with The Freeman.


The Freeman: Can you describe in a nutshell what Sandy Springs, Georgia, has been able to do�that is, provide a sketch of your model?


Porter: The Sandy Springs model is a public-private partnership (PPP) in which the city contracts with private industry for all of its basic services other than public safety�that is, police, fire, and courts. The model has been an outstanding success, both financially and in response to citizens� service needs, over the seven years since the city�s incorporation. Financially: The city has not increased tax rates at all; has paid for a major capital improvement program from savings in the operating budget; has built a $35 million reserve fund despite a recession; and has no long-term liabilities�that is, no loans, no bonds, and of most importance, no unfunded liabilities for pensions and other benefits.


The Freeman: How much money has the model saved taxpayers there?




Porter: Initially about $20 million per year�40 percent of the budget for the �basket� of services being provided. These services include: administration; human resources; finance; accounting; purchasing; information technology; the backroom operations for the police, fire and courts; parks and recreation; transportation (road and sidewalk maintenance, traffic design and control); community development (planning, zoning, permitting, and enforcement); and management of the capital program. Over the life of the contracts, I am comfortable in saying that over $140 million of the taxpayers� dollars have been saved.


The Freeman: That is truly staggering. But what about the quality of the services?


Porter: Services have been substantially improved under the PPP model. Surveys, both internal and national, have generally rated Sandy Springs services as excellent.


The best indicator of citizen satisfaction may be that in the first election (four years) after the city was formed, the lowest vote total that any incumbent received was 84 percent. That certainly indicates a high level of voter satisfaction with the efficiency and responsiveness of the model.


The Freeman: The New York Times, not known for its affinity for anything private, wrote a pretty favorable story about your outsourcing work in Sandy Springs. There were certainly grudging admissions. But one worry the author expressed is that it only worked because Sandy Springs is an affluent area and that outsourced government services are not feasible in poorer areas. What do you think about this concern?


Porter: First, let me say that although Sandy Springs is relatively affluent, it is not a rich enclave. Unfortunately, there were areas of the city that were well below the average income of the metropolitan area. Sandy Springs is a melting pot with a population that includes 30 percent minorities�a growing segment�and over 55 percent apartment dwellers. Five other new cities with varying levels of affluence have been formed, each adopting the PPP model, and all have done well. In my opinion, the model is even more suited for less-affluent communities. These communities need the savings that the model offers, even more than richer areas.


By the way, everything that I am saying about city governments applies equally to counties. 


The Freeman: Detroit, Michigan, is insolvent. It�s a city that is essentially dying. If you could say anything to the new �emergency� manager there�Kevyn Orr�what would you say?


Porter: I hope to have the opportunity to meet him in the next month. I would say to him, �If you are in a deep hole, quit digging!� In a crisis, small, incremental steps are not sufficient. Bold initiatives are required. First, look for alternative service methods such as a PPP to produce operating savings; and second, consider the privatization of the city�s assets, to raise funds to be applied to the debt.


The Freeman: Some ideological purists who read this publication might not like the idea of public-private partnerships like those you�ve established. But among those purists, some will have reasonable concerns about corrupt relationships between business and government forming over time. Do you worry about the system in Sandy Springs being corrupted?


Porter: No. All governments have shown an Achilles heel that allows for corruption. 


The traditional model for cities is not immune. However, there is less opportunity under the PPP model than would normally be the case. The fact that the elected officials are prohibited from meddling in the day-to-day operations�including the bidding of contracts, hiring and firing of employees, and the granting of license and permits, etc.�is a deterrent to improper dealings. All contracts are granted through competitive bidding that is open to public scrutiny. The initial contract bids were thoroughly scrutinized by a citizens� committee, then by a volunteer group appointed by the governor, and finally by the elected council.


On a continuing basis, PPPs diminish the opportunity for such unacceptable behavior. Unlike traditional cities, the private contractors have a profit motive that serves as a natural incentive to reduce costs and operate efficiently. Therefore, behaviors such as preferential hiring of friends and relatives, or palm-greasing, that are sometimes prevalent in traditional governments, become a non-issue in the PPP model.


The Freeman: Has anyone copied your model?


Porter: Yes, At least five other cities. There are thousands of existing cities and counties that could benefit from the model. The only barrier to the adoption of the PPP model is politics. Officials, who have been elected under the traditional form of government, are scared to consider a new model even though it offers better service at lower costs. When I interact with such groups, I point out that their principal job is to serve the citizens�not to provide jobs�and that a part of their job description should be to constantly consider alternative methods for providing service.


The Freeman: We hope to publish this conversation in an issue on the subject of power. And as you know, the way political power works, in part, is that it protects entrenched interests, most of whom have a lot to lose from change in the status quo. It seems to us that the biggest obstacle for people adopting your model is that very power and those who benefit from its existence. What does it take to dislodge these special interests so that the people can see the benefits of privatization?


Porter: Unfortunately, it may take a financial crisis: bankruptcy or near ruin. A number of our cities are near that point. If unfunded liabilities are properly recognized, many more are approaching the crisis state.


For the cities not yet in crisis, there are several steps that should be taken to open the door to efficiency: First it takes a hero, an elected official, or prominent citizen, who is willing to take the heat that may come from those with vested interests. Such sponsorship should lead to a low-cost study that compares current operational costs, and this is very important, costs for pensions and other benefits, of the traditional city versus the PPP model. There is no risk to the city for such a study. And the cost is quite low compared to the potential payoff. If the study shows the potential for substantial savings, the city should issue RFPs [requests for proposals] for the PPP. Again, there is no risk. If the bids do not show substantial savings (and in most cases they will), the city has no obligation to proceed.


The Freeman: Can state governments do anything to help municipalities adopt your model?


Porter: To date, the states have done little; however, there is much that can be done. Obviously the most effective step would be a requirement that cities, at least, consider alternative models. Funding of comparative studies would be an even more helpful step. Removal of legal barriers to the PPP model that exist in some states is, of course, necessary and desirable.


May I add that not-for-profit organizations and media outlets should also take up the cause of municipal reform. The Freeman is to be commended for opening the subject.


The Freeman: Oliver Porter, it�s been a pleasure to speak with you.

Porter: Thank you. I hope that the conversation will not end with this interview. I welcome contacts from interested citizens across our nation.


Read more: http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/the-man-who-outsourced-the-government#ixzz2UhAU3p5T