Month: August 2010

Means and Ends

by Conor Friedersdorf

Tim Lee writes:

Personally I’m not interested in “limited government” as an end in itself, but as a means to greater individual liberty. I’m opposed to government programs that waste taxpayer dollars because higher taxes restrict my freedom. But I’m much more opposed to government programs that use taxpayer dollars to restrict freedom directly. I’m not interested in joining a “limited government” movement that considers the two equivalent. And I’m definitely not interested in being part of a movement that gives torture and preemptive war a free pass under the heading of “national defense” while it focuses instead on fighting the tyranny of SCHIP and unemployment insurance.

(Hat tip: League Of Ordinary Gentlemen)

Police, Firefighters, And Their Salaries, Ctd

by Patrick Appel

Cohn returns to the subject and makes a couple worthwhile points. A reader focuses on NYC:

I don't know much about compensation in the rest of the country but I do know about New York and its cops and firefighters. I grew up with them. My father (retired), both brothers, best friend from high school (retired on medical) are all FDNY. The (suburban) block I grew up on had 11 houses: 5 firemen and two cops. The significant other of the fireman who wrote in presented a version of things that doesn't really square with my experience.

The firefighters that I know are all hard working people who do or did a tough and nasty job. They've all seen very terrible things that generally do not intrude upon my workday. Bad, bad stuff. They are very well compensated for this. It's a good job. Some people like it and some don't. Whether or not its worth it to any particular person is up to that person but the line is long to get a spot and the pension is no small part of the draw.

Starting salary is modest, $39k base plus overtime (you're most likely in your early to mid 20s), but it steps up every year until full pay and is $76k base after 5 years (your most likely in your late 20s, maybe early 30s). That's about what I make now (early 40s, comfortable). Both my brothers make a good bit more. The fireman makes about $100k and the lieutenant closer to $125k. Not counting the side jobs. They can easily afford to live in my very nice middle-class Brooklyn neighborhood but have chosen, as my parents did, to live in very nice middle class suburbs. Not because they have to but because they like it there (kids, schools, etc).

They'll probably retire in their mid 40s not because they're broken men but because that's when they come due for their pensions. If you can take 50% of your total compensation (base + OT), exempt from state and local tax, and go do something else you'll be making more money— even if you can make only about half of your current take home doing that something else (teacher; consultant, either security or fire safety; small business; trades). If you can take 75% (tax exempt) even better and not at all unusual. And that's what most of them do.

I'll skip the who deserves what nonsense. Very tough job, very well compensated. It's silly to deny either. I don't think the city can afford to continue to pay the civil service as well as it has. The city's share of paying the retirees costs as much as paying the active payroll. That's a little nuts. They've already made cuts but they can really only hit the new guys coming in. Big boat, slow turn.

Why Mehlman Matters, Ctd

by Chris Bodenner

Dan Savage pulls no punches:

Mehlman would like us to believe that he didn't know he was gay back then. And, I'm sorry, but that doesn't pass the smell-my-finger test. Mehlman rose quickly through the ranks of the GOP, wound up on top, cashed the checks, made the contacts, did real and lasting harm to other gays and lesbians, and Mehlman knew damn well what he was and what he was doing.

However, he agrees with John Aravosis:

Ken Mehlman now wants to use his contacts and influence to help me win the right to marry. I don't care if he ripped the heads off baby bunnies back in 2004, if he's willing to help us now. My enemy's enemy is my friend. And if Ken Mehlman wants to be my friend, and start on the path towards making up for all the bad things he did in the past, I'm not going to spurn his help, and set our movement and community back by missing this incredible opportunity, simply because the guy (rightfully) pisses me off.

Dan is on a bit of a blog roll lately; today he reacts to a new poll showing 75% (!) public acceptance for ending DADT, and checks in on those kooky Mormons.

The California Scene

by Conor Friedersdorf

Since so many Dish readers write me from California, I thought I'd mention two very exciting journalistic efforts that are based in the Golden State, though of sufficient quality that outsiders will find them enjoyable too. One is the site California Is a Place. Its excellent videos blend the styles of photojournalism and art photography to produce some stunning pieces.

And then there is Slake, a new Los Angeles based quarterly that I described here. Its Web site recently launched. Cool photos here.

As long as we're talking Southern California, I should note that the swells have been big recently, and I took the opportunity to go down to The Wedge with my girlfriend to watch surfers and boogie boarders braver than me. Its difficult to do the place justice in words, except to say that most places one watches surfing for epic rides, whereas at The Wedge on a big day there can only be epic wipe-outs.

Here are some of them.

The Longer Libertarian Game

by Conor Friedersdorf

In his latest column at The Washington Examiner, Tim Carney argues that President Obama and his hostility to libertarianism are evidence that Brink Lindsey's project to encourage an alliance between liberals and libertarians failed.

The column is pegged to Mr. Lindsey's departure from the Cato Institute.

Mr. Carney writes:

Libertarian donors tend to be small-businessmen, and when they look at the nation's increasing debt, regulation and taxes, they begin to see Obama as the devil.

Obama's excesses are making free-marketeers more partisan. The same entrepreneurs who two years ago cursed Republican overspending and Bush bailouts are now asking one question: How can we drive Obama, Pelosi and Reid from power?

In such an environment, ambiguity about Obama – maybe he's not the devil – comes across as lukewarmness for liberty. This is a problem, because it means Republicans – no heroes on limiting government – could get a free pass from donors and activists.

Blissfully removed from Washington DC, I haven't any idea whether or not Mr. Carney is correct in his speculation about why Mr. Lindsey and Cato parted ways. But his column, and the libertarian donors he is channeling, make the same mistake (one he astutely recognizes in their case): operating on an inadequately short time horizon. I don't know if a liberaltarian alliance is ever going to be a reality, or if the project is doomed to fail, but it's folly to evaluate it based on two years of a single presidency. This is especially so when practically speaking, pursuit of the liberaltarian project is perfectly compatible with staunch opposition to President Obama and every aspect of his agenda.

Mr. Lindsey's project has never been about the 2010 midterms, or the 2012 presidential election, it's been about gradually reorienting America's ideological coalitions in a way that makes liberals more friendly to libertarian ideas, and libertarians less captive to the worst aspects of conservatism. Libertarian donors ought to fund efforts to oppose President Obama in the short term. They also ought to invest in intellectual projects with longer time horizons that only bear on particular electoral and legislative outcomes indirectly. If they can't distinguish between those projects, or if they actually display thinking as immature and counterproductive as "Obama is the devil" and "maybe he's not the devil" equals "lukewarmness for liberty," they're inadvertently sabotaging their own cause. Were I a wealthy man, I'd help fund Mr. Lindsey if only to avoid keeping all the libertarian eggs in the right's less than reliable ideological basket (the short time horizons apparently extend backward too).