Not Just My Sister's Cat

Over Thanksgiving weekend, Maurice Clemmons murdered 4 police officers in a town just south of Seattle.  Clemmons had been granted clemency by Mike Huckabee in 2000 when Huckabee was governor of Arkansas.  Only the revelation of Tiger Woods' 11-over par mischeviousness kept this from being an even bigger media frenzy.  Still, a number of folks have said that Huckabee's chances for future political office are over.  I disagree.  On Monday, Huckabee penned an op-ed in the Washington Post explaining the clemency decision.  It's worth reading.  http://http//www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/07/AR2009120702333.html

Did Christianity Cause the Crash?

The Atlantic recently asked this question in an article highlighting the connections between the so-called prosperity gospel and the housing crisis that led to the economic downturn.  Read the article here and my response below.

Christianity claims no connection between faithfulness and material blessing. Nearly half the pilgrims, driven to the new world by Christian conviction, starved, froze, or succumbed to illness during those first winters. If anyone deserved a monetary blessing it was Mother Theresa, yet she enjoyed few luxuries. Lesser saints have foregone more lucrative options to do ministry, teach, or serve in the military, willfully prioritizing certain values over income and, not surprisingly, living on less. And, of course, millions of Christians live in abject poverty in Africa, Asia, Central America, South America, and elsewhere.


The Bible includes a story in which Jesus tells a rich man that to inherit eternal life he must sell everything he owns and give it to the poor. There is another one about a poor widow who gave just two coins to the church, but Jesus commends her above much wealthier contributors. Then there is Zacchaeus, the tax collector who became rich by cheating the people, who, upon spending time with Jesus, decides to pay back everything he had stolen at four times the amount. Jesus was offered "the slendor of all the kingdoms of the world" but turned them down for a destiny of torture and crucifixion.

The true "riches" of Christian faith are eternal in heaven, but also include the blessing of a life humbly submitted to the authority of a God who loves you and wants nothing more than to allow you the opportunity to be in love with Him. This is what Jesus means when he tells Peter, who has just witnessed the incident with the rich young ruler, "no one who has left home or family for the sake of the kingdom of God will fail to receive many times as much in this age, and in the age to come eternal life." If Jesus meant that Peter could expect money, then he is a liar. Peter spent the rest of his life homeless and was eventually crucified. He spent his final years preaching the true gospel, luxuriating in an abundance of love and peace that no amount of money, or power, or anything could ever match.

The question of whether “Christianity caused the crash” prompts an interesting discussion about the role of our faith in economic crises. I have been learning a lot about the financial crisis since September 2008. That month marked the beginning of a new podcast from NPR called “Planet Money” that brings a “This American Life” style to economic journalism. In December they published a show called “The Big Pile of Money” that provided the single most helpful thing I’ve found to date for understanding the market crisis, including explaining in plain terms things like “liquidity” and “credit default swaps.” In October 2008 I attended a conference on legal issues in higher education and listened as the keynote speaker outlined his forecast of the economy at literally the same time that Bear Stearns, AIG, Citi, and the other finance giants were declaring bankruptcy and being taken over. Of course, since August I’ve been exposed to a lot more here at AEI, including having the opportunity to attend a conference at Wheaton featuring the VP of Goldman Sachs discussing the moral causes of the financial crisis.

In sum, what I’ve learned is that the financial crisis was caused by both sin and imprudence. Greed, on the part of bankers at the highest levels of national economies and mortgage brokers on Main Street, was a huge factor. The failure of legislators with oversight responsibilities over financial institutions and markets led to increasingly irresponsible practices. The impatience and materialism of many consumers fed all of this, although the tendency of politicians to enact legislation that encouraged people to buy homes they could not afford must not be forgotten.

The average price of a home in the United States increased 90% between 2000 and 2006, from about $100,000 to $190,000. By contrast, between 1987 and 1997 the average increased from about $62,000 to just over $80,000. What happened during the first half of this decade is a textbook financial “bubble.” Everyone convinced themselves that the U.S. housing market was going to grow perpetually and made a lot of stupid decisions. Of course, like the dozens and dozens of bubbles in housing and other industries in the last hundred years, this one popped, and when it did the economy tumbled.

Christianity ought to have mitigated all of this. After all, temperance and prudence are virtues that can be found in scripture. The fruits of the spirit in Galatians include patience and self-control. In Titus, the characteristics required of church elders include self-control and discipline. Interestingly, putting these virtues into practice is a solid strategy for wealth creation. Warren Buffett, one of the wealthiest people in the world, reminded shareholders:

“In the 20th century alone, we dealt with two great wars, a dozen or so panics and recessions, virulent inflation that led to a 21.5% prime rate in 1980, and the Great Depression of the 1930s. In the face of these obstacles – and many others – the real standard of living for Americans improved nearly seven-fold during the 1900s.”

Quit Monkeying Around!

 In the trial of the 19th Century a science teacher was sued for teaching his students about evolution.  The monkeying around has continued ever since whenever the possibility for publicity and politicization of justice exists.  This morning in an editorial in the Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer paints a clear picture of the farce that is Attorney General Eric Holder's "Trial of the Century" of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed.

Holder assures us (by way of testimony before a Senate committee) that there's no way KSM will be acquitted.  When asked about the possibility by Senator Kohl, Holder replied, "Failure is not an option."  But, Krauthammer points out, the whole point of this to demonstrate to the world the renewed virtue of the American criminal justice system.  In his announcement about the trail, Holder stated, "For over 200 years, our nation has relied on a faithful adherence to the rule of law to bring criminals to justice and provide accountability to victims. Once again we will ask our legal system to rise to that challenge, and I am confident it will answer the call with fairness and justice."

Fairness and justice in our country requires the presumption of innocence.  It requires an impartial jury.  It requires a unanimous jury decision.  So, actually, failing to convict KSM is a very real option.  And, if it isn't an option, then there isn't really justice going on. If that's the case, the American taxpayers are spending $100 million (according to estimates by Senator Chuck Schumer and the NYC Chief of Police) on a publicity stunt intended to show the world (OK, not that world so much as Western Europe) that the days of President Bush's secret military tribunals are over. 

Krauthammer ends his piece by noting that publicity and politicization rarely go hand-in-hand with justice.  You need look no further than the last "Trial of the Century" featuring O.J. Simpson to see that.

A Wish List for Obama

Dr. Valerie Elverton Dixon wants more from President Obama. She wants the President to declare that “health care is a human right and as such ought not to be subject to profit making.” For thoughts on health care as a human right, see Jay Richards here. No word on her plans for Presidential interference into “profit making” ventures exploiting the human right to shelter or clothing.

However, she has some thoughts about the right to food. Dixon wants Obama to propose a consumption tax on such items as “junk food, sugary drinks, alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and ammunition.” Such a tax would have to be substantial to overcome the price difference between healthy and unhealthy foods (think McDonald’s v. Whole Foods). It would also disproportionately burden the poor, who tend to consume a lot of junk. This could force the lower class into healthier choices, which is fine if you believe in enforcing eating habits through regressive taxation. Another issue, as Jacob Goldin of the Tax Policy Center points out, is that defining exactly what constitutes “junk food” can be problematic.

Dixon can’t help but take a shot at guns (no pun intended), though she stops short of taxing orange camouflage hats and duck decoys. That would be silly.

The wish list goes on to include an individual mandate, full coverage for undocumented workers, dental and optical coverage, and electronic medical records. None of this tops Dr. Dixon’s most quixotic desire:

“I want privately owned and operated wellness centers in every neighborhood where people can see a primary care physician, learn meditation techniques, yoga, Tai Chi, and nutrition. I want the government to pay for this.”

The idea poses some questions. First, the goals of private ownership and operating control and full government funding are contradictory. Current recipients of federal funds in any industry would point out that these monies always come with stipulations that influence operations. Also, why stipulate private ownership, given that private business owners tend to be in it for the “profit making?” A “business owner” who is guaranteed an income and faces zero competition is not a business owner. They are a de facto bureaucrat.

Also questionable is the assumption that these holistic wellness centers would be used. Tai Chi, chai tea, and nutritional counseling may be all the rage in the urbane circles of the ultra-educated and in places like Georgetown, but these activities do not translate into “every neighborhood.” Nor should they.

However, let’s assume there is an unmet demand for these holistic wellness centers. Isn’t this a perfect opportunity for enterprising citizens of neighborhoods where the demand exists? Envision an innovative, popular, profitable wellness center in the middle of an otherwise undeveloped neighborhood. The success of the center leads another enterprising person to meet the resulting demand for nutritious juice blends by franchising a Jamba next door. Meanwhile, some neighbors enthused by the new health rage have established a vegetable co-op and community garden. Soon, hardware and sporting goods stores spring up to meet the demand for shovels and spandex exercise pants. Before long, a new crop of wealthy community business leaders are mentoring students and teaching free business classes in the evening.

Dr. Dixon has the best of intentions. But we all know about the road to hell where, as Winston Churchill famously notes, they already have socialism. The most unfortunate thing about the opinions of Dixon and others on the Religious Left is not the disdain of profits or the lack of understanding of basic economics. It’s the lack of foresight. There is an unwillingness to consider that the evils associated with capitalism are the natural consequences of any activity conducted by fallen human beings, economic or otherwise. Opponents of free markets do not see the potential power of markets to enable individuals to utilize their God-given talents, creativity, and ingenuity to create wealth that benefits us all.