Constituting America has begun their 90-Day Essays for 2019. This year, they are centered on "Boundaries on Federal Government" and will cover our federalist form of government, including the state Constitutions. I'll be writing the essay on the Nebraska Constitution.
“The infant periods of most nations are buried in silence, or veiled in fable, and perhaps the world has lost little it should regret. But the origins of the American Republic contain lessons of which posterity ought not to be deprived.” —James Madison
Monday, March 11, 2019
Wednesday, March 6, 2019
Capitalism beats socialism ... every time
Socialism takes from people who produce to give goods and
services to the "less fortunate." It is done under the premise of
fairness. Everyone should benefit from the largess of the wonderful world that
surrounds us all.
The prior paragraph may sound appealing, but there are three
fatal errors embedded in the premise.
1. Fortune has little to do with income
2. Fairness is in the eyes of the beholder
3. The world is dangerous, not wonderful.
The term “less fortunate” makes it sound like success
depends on luck. Except, what happens to “luck” under a socialist system. Under
socialism, scarcity is the order of the day. Even commodities like toilet paper
are in short supply. If “luck” brought all these goods to market under
capitalism, why doesn’t “luck” deliver the goods under socialism?
If a person produces something through brawn, wits, or
practiced skill, that person believes that fairness dictates that they should
be able to keep what they produce. It doesn’t matter whether that “fortunate”
person is a plumber, entrepreneur, or NFL player. Socialism sees fairness
differently. People with more must give their “fair share” of what they produce
to others. The recipient probably thinks it’s fair, but producers feels abused.
Advanced societies live in a wonderful world, but its
wonders are due to capitalism. Our hardscrabble world offers no “largess” free
for the taking. Before Adam Smith, the hoi polloi found food scarce, work
backbreaking, bug-ridden shelters unpleasant, support systems nil, and life
short. That was the world before capitalism. In fact, that’s the world today in
the underdeveloped world. Life is harsh without capitalists to scrape the burrs
off.
Those who can’t demand more than minimum wage want to
believe that their problems result not from sloth, but from ill fortune, theft,
or a rigged system. Socialism appeals to the indebted, the lazy, and the
unskilled. For a period, socialism works, but socialism soon converts the
productive into the skillfully lazy. Everyone is equal, but equally without.
Except for the commissars and their friends and family. They live well. You
see, socialism is really about trading places. The politically powerful trade
places with the people who used to build stuff, create nifty things, or get it
to market. The operative phrase in that sentence is used to. They no longer own
the product of their sweat or wits, so they live off their already accumulated
wealth, move, or cozy up to the state. Thus, no toilet paper.
Whenever capitalism and socialism are pitted against each
other, capitalism always wins. Wherever and whenever free markets are allowed
to reign, people are better off. All the people. Inequality grows, but
inequality grows under socialism as well. The difference is that the socialist
ruling class disguise their lifestyle while under capitalism, the rich revel in
it. Why does capitalism work so much better than romanticized socialism? I can
explain in one word.
Rewards.
That’s why capitalism wins. Always. Rewards for hard work.
Rewards for being clever. Rewards for endless training in a sport or performing
art. Rewards for taking risks. Rewards for developing skills needed by society.
Even rewards for showing up on time.
Socialism? Not so much. Under socialism the only rewards are
for exercising raw political power or being connected to raw political power.
That’s why socialism sucks. Big time.
Wednesday, November 7, 2018
Franklin's Hidden Role at the Constitutional Convention
Ran across this article at Franklin on Freedom.
Emotions ran high at the Constitutional Convention and the delegate who sooth tempers was usually Ben Franklin. He often did this with a humorous quip, but once filibustered a nonsensical proposition until tempers eventually abated.
Franklin did more. He also teamed with Washington for behind the scene negotiations to keep the convention from collapsing. Reading Madison's notes, it appears arguments often escalated from about mid-week to reach a crescendo on Fridays. Many sessions were recess for the weekend with acrimony high, but on Monday, with little discussion, a compromise or procedural change would resolve or delay the issue. Obviously something had been negotiated outside the chamber. Most likely, the deal would have been struck under the mulberry tree in Franklin's yard.
Benjamin Franklin was one of our greatest Founders and this article is a fun read about an interesting historical character.
Tuesday, September 4, 2018
Tempest at Dawn Review
I normally don't post Amazon reviews to my blog, but this one highlighted one of my favorite aspects of the book. In researching Tempest at Dawn, I read multiple books about lifestyles in the 1780s. I wanted to not only reflect what happened in the Constitutional Convention, but how the delegates lived. Separate state currencies were only one element of daily life that I wove into the political story.
Being a tremendous fan of early American history, this book immediately appealed to me. After reading it, I found there were several things I still hadn't realized about early America. The biggest was that every state had their own currency (which I'm sure restricted travel further than the fact that it could conceivably take days to travel from Connecticut to New York by wagon, depending on where in Connecticut you lived) and that there was an exchange rate between states that was figured out by...? All states still took British currency, which I suppose makes sense but I figured states frowned on dealing with British currency after the war.
At any rate, even though this is a fictional story of a real event, it held my attention and it wouldn't surprise me that all of the back room deals in the story actually happened. That was politics then as it is now.
It was also sad that with the country's imminent demise, there were politicians who still refused to give up their perceived power. Again, fictional story aside, I highly recommend this book if you like reading about early American history. Great job!
You can read the 216+ reviews (4.4) for Tempest at Dawn here.
Thursday, June 21, 2018
Friday, June 8, 2018
Thursday, June 7, 2018
Here’s an idea on how to fix Congress!
My grandson graduated from middle-school, so I’ve been in
New York City for the last week. My visits are always fun because my three New
York grandchildren will have it no other way. Sometimes we get time to do
something other than attend school events, sport games, and dance recitals.
Yesterday, I met an old friend from Arizona for lunch. Michael E. Newton wrote Alexander Hamilton: The Formative Years and
other nonfiction history books. Hamilton, of course, played a major role in Tempest at Dawn, so despite my emphasis
on fiction, we developed a friendship based on a shared love of history.
After discussing book marketing, writing projects, and American
history anecdotes, Michael shared a modern-day political idea that has shown some recent popularity. A congressperson
today represents an average of 710,000 people. When we adopted the
Constitution, each member represented no more than thirty thousand people. Michael
suggested that we return to an upper limit of thirty thousand constituents. I
laughed. That would make the United States Congress as large as the Star Wars
Imperial Senate. I told Michael I didn’t want to pay taxes for a building large
enough to hold so many representatives. He asked why they needed to be in a
single building? In fact, why did they need to be in Washington D.C at all?
The intent of this movement is to make the House of Representatives once
again answerable to the people. If congresspersons remained in their districts and participated electronically with Congress as a whole, then they would be surrounded by their constituents rather than lobbyists and the House leadership. Further, if a congressperson only represented thirty
thousand citizens, individuals would have more personal contact with their representative
and greater influence over legislation. If we could pull this off, we would decrease the power of lobbyists and
the establishment by geographically decentralizing the House, while increasing
the power of the people by making their representative a neighbor.
An additional benefit is that staff salaries
and office expenses would siphon money out of the richest zip codes in America
and disperse it to the hinterlands, from where it came in the first place. I
count that as win/win.
Are there negatives? Of course. The senate would undoubtedly
be further captured by lobbyists, the media, and party apparatchiki. They’ll
probably even become haughtier, if that’s possible. But wait, there’s more. We
could send senators out to state environs, as well. Maybe we require them to
work in the state capital, maybe even the capitol itself. The Framers wanted
the Senate to protect the states, and this might move us closer to the Framers’
vision. Although senators would remain popularly elected, proximity to local
politicians would provide the states with additional influence over their prima
donnas.
The whole idea is a pipe dream, but an intriguing pipe dream
nonetheless. Maybe we could bribe them to go along by doubling their salary. It
would be a bargain at twice the price.
Wednesday, May 30, 2018
Today's Essay at Constituting America
Today, I again had the privilege of participating in Constituting America's 8th annual 90-Day Study. This year, their study looks at the Founders’ vision and purpose for a legislature that belongs to, is comprised of, and serves the American people.
Tuesday, May 29, 2018
In 1862, a sixty-five day downpour pummeled the western United States. California suffered the brunt of the storm. Almost a third of the state was under water, roads were impassible, telegraph lines down, rivers overflowed, hundreds of people died, and hundreds of thousands of animals drowned. Sacramento remained under water for six months, forcing the state government to move to San Francisco.Geological evidence shows that a flood of this magnitude hits California every one to two hundred years.
What if it happens again?
I took a break from Steve and his friends to write a disaster story. This one's a corker. I didn't know I could imagine such mayhem.
For Steve Dancy fans, I have started Coronado, A Steve Dancy Tale and it should be available before the end of the year.
Back to Deluge. Greg Evarts and Patricia Baldwin are back from The Shut Mouth Society. The stories are unrelated, so Deluge is not a sequel. The novels just shares the same cast and locale. The characters have changed, of course. Greg is now chief of police in Santa Barbara. Patricia is still a history professor, but has transferred from UCLA to UCSB. When the sky falls on California, our two heroes must once again save the day. There's rain, inept and ept politicians, murading street gangs, cage fighters, spies, and collapsed dams that send mountains of rolling water toward everything we hold dear.
Deluge will be available in print and Kindle formats on June 4th. Happy reading.
![]() |
| Can a 150-year-old conspiracy be unraveled before it’s too late? |
Monday, May 14, 2018
Essay at Constituting America
| Today's Essay |
Today, I had the privilege of participating in Constituting America's 8th annual 90-Day Study. This year, their study looks at the Founders’ vision and purpose for a legislature that belongs to, is comprised of, and serves the American people.
Saturday, March 10, 2018
Boston Libraries and Tempest at Dawn
Matador contributing editor Sarah Park has “curated” two galleries of fascinating libraries around the world. These links will take you to some interesting buildings dedicated to the written word.
![]() |
| Boston Public Library |
I’ve used the Boston Public Library to illustrate this post because I spent untold hours in this room. Actually, I found my greatest treasure in the basement of this building. I was researching Tempest at Dawn and discovered Christopher Collier’s doctoral thesis on Roger Sherman. Collier is the coauthor of Decision in Philadelphia, among other books. I was able to speak to him on the phone, and he had no idea that his thesis had been preserved on microfiche or that it was retained by the Boston Public Library. Since information on Sherman was relatively rare, it was fortuitous to find this academic profile about the architect of the Great Compromise at the Constitutional Convention.
Since I’m writing about my time in Massachusetts, there were two other libraries that had an impact on my writing— the Concord Free Public Library and the Boston Athenæum. One is public and home to great literary traditions and the other is one of the oldest private libraries and cultural institutions in the country. I suggest Sarah Park do a third gallery of libraries dedicated to unique institutions in the United States.
![]() |
| Boston Athenæum |
![]() |
| Concord Free Public Library |
Thursday, March 1, 2018
Essay at Constituting America
Today, I had the privilege of participating in Constituting America's 8th annual 90-Day Study. This year, their study looks at the Founders’ vision and purpose for a legislature that belongs to, is comprised of, and serves the American people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)










