Quotation of the Day

From The History of England from the Ascension of James II by Thomas Babington Macaulay, Vol. 1, Chapter 1 (Kindle Edition):

"As we cannot, without the risk of evils from which the imagination recoils, employ physical force as a check on misgovernment, it is evidently our wisdom to keep all the constitutional checks on misgovernment in the highest state of efficiency, to watch with jealousy the first beginnings of encroachment, and never to suffer irregularities, even when harmless in themselves, to pass unchallenged, lest they acquire the force of precedents."

Quotation of the Day

From The History of England from the Ascension of James II by Thomas Babington Macaulay, Vol. 1, Chapter 1 (Kindle Edition):

"Everywhere there is a class of men who cling with fondness to whatever is ancient, and who, even when convinced by overpowering reasons that innovation would be beneficial, consent to it with many misgivings and forebodings. We find also everywhere another class of men, sanguine in hope, bold in speculation, always pressing forward, quick to discern the imperfections of whatever exists, disposed to think lightly of the risks and inconveniences which attend improvements and disposed to give every change credit for being an improvement. In the sentiments of both classes there is something to approve. But of both the best specimens will be found not far from the common frontier. The extreme section of one class consists of bigoted dotards: the extreme section of the other consists of shallow and reckless empirics."

Quotation of the Day

Is from Adam Smith's 'Theory of Moral Sentiments', Part III, Chapter 3: Of the Influence and Authority of Conscience:

"It is needless to observe, I presume, that both rebels and heretics are those unlucky persons, who, when things have come to a certain degree of violence, have the misfortune to be of the weaker party. In a nation distracted by faction, there are, no doubt, always a few, though commonly but a very few, who preserve their judgment untainted by the general contagion. They seldom amount to more than, here and there, a solitary individual, without any influence, excluded, by his own candour, from the confidence of either party, and who, though he may be one of the wisest, is necessarily, upon that very account, one of the most insignificant men in the society. All such people are held in contempt and derision, frequently in detestation, by the furious zealots of both parties. A true party-man hates and despises candour; and, in reality, there is no vice which could so effectually disqualify him for the trade of a party-man as that single virtue."

Quotation of the Day

Something to keep in mind if you're heading to the polls tomorrow:

"For between the state, which is hugely generous with impossible promises, and the general public, which has conceived unattainable hopes, have come two classes of men, those with ambition and those with utopian dreams.  Their role is clearly laid out by the situation.  It is enough for these courtiers of popularity to shout into the people’s ears: “The authorities are misleading you; if we were in their place, we would shower you with benefits and relieve you of taxes.”

And the people believe this, and the people hope…."

That is from page 100 of of Volume 2 (“The Law,” “The State,” and Other Political Writings, 2012) of Liberty Fund’s The Collected Works of Frederic Bastiat; specifically, it’s a passage from Bastiat’s September 1848 essay “The State”.

Hat tip to Don Boudreaux.

Taxes & Laffer Curves

I would like to expand slightly on my last post, with the following observation:

The purpose of taxes and tax policy should not be to "raise as much revenue as possible", i.e. to transfer as much money as possible from private individuals to the government.  Rather, the aim of tax policy should be to raise only the amount of tax necessary to fund the services which we collectively wish the government to supply.

This comes with additional caveats, such as publicly funded projects should be required to meet certain minimum criteria for funding, such as passing cost-benefit analyses.

Chris Dillow on Laffer Curves

Chris Dillow blogs on Laffer Curves over at Stumbling and Mumbling.

A slice:

"8. There are two contrary but tenable positions here.  One is "the revenue-maximizing tax rate might be high, but high taxes are undesirable because they infringe freedom."  The other is "The revenue-maximizing tax rate could be low, but high taxes are justified to reduce the adverse effects of inequality."  Both of these positions are rare - which makes me suspect that there's quite a lot of motivated reasoning on both sides."

My position is something akin to the former, i.e. "the revenue-maximizing tax rate might be high, but high taxes are undesirable because they infringe freedom."

Worthwhile reading the whole thing, it is short and contains a lot of clear insight.

Tyler Cowen's Three Laws

He posts them here.

The more I learn on any topic the more law #1 rings true:

"1. Cowen’s First Law: There is something wrong with everything (by which I mean there are few decisive or knockdown articles or arguments, and furthermore until you have found the major flaws in an argument, you do not understand it)."

Cheryl must be a politician as she can't answer a straight question

There's a little logic puzzle that's been doing the rounds on the internet for the past few days, that probably everyone has already seen by now.  Seemingly it's come from some Singaporean schoolchildren's homework.  It is a rather fiendish puzzle and seems to having been given a lot of adults difficulty.

Here is the question:

"Albert and Bernard just become friends with Cheryl, and they want to know when her birthday is.  Cheryl gives them a list of 10 possible dates.

May 15, May 16, May 19, June 17, June 18, July 14, July 16, August 14, August 15, August 17

Cheryl then tells Albert and Bernard separately the month and the day of her birthday respectively.

Albert: I don't know when Cheryl's birthday is, but I know that Bernard does not know too.
Bernard: At first I don't know when Cheryl's birthday is, but I know now.
Albert: Then I also know when Cheryl's birthday is.
So when is Cheryl's birthday?"

If you want to have a go at figuring this out for yourself and don't want to know the solution stop reading now.


There are loads of solutions to this problem posted all over the internet and in various news outlets now, but having seen a few of them and worked through the problem myself, none of the explanations I've seen seem particularly clear or well explained - the best one I've seen so far has been on the NY Times website.

Here is my attempt to explain the solution:

After giving her list of ten possible dates, Cheryl tells Albert the month and Bernard the day of her birthday.

Albert and Bernard both have more information than we have.  The key to figuring this out is to keep this in mind and to pay very close attention to the statements made by Albert and Bernard and the information that they (inadvertently) reveal.

Albert states that he doesn't know the exact date of Cheryl's birthday, but he knows that Bernard doesn't know it either.  However, Bernard could have known the exact date if it had been May 19 or June 18, as in our range of dates these are the sole occurrences of these specific days (18 & 19), therefore if it had been either of these dates Bernard would have known the exact date right away.  The fact that Albert is so confident that Bernard doesn't know the exact date of Cheryl’s birthday reveals (to us and to Bernard) that Albert knows the month isn't May or June (and therefore must be either July or August).

This leaves us with the following possibilities:

July 14, July 16

August 14, August 15, August 17

Bernard then declares that at first he didn't know, but now (following Albert’s first statement) he’s figured it out.  So, Cheryl’s birthday can’t be on the 14th of the month, otherwise Bernard wouldn't have been able to narrow down whether it was in July or August.

This leaves 3 possibilities:

July 16

August 15, August 17

Albert then claims to have figured it out as well, which means that it can’t be either of the dates in August, otherwise he wouldn’t have been able to narrow down the day.  This leaves July 16 as the only possible date of Cheryl’s birthday.

Meanwhile, in Norway...

Bastøy Prison in Norway is home to some 115 criminals, including the the country’s most dangerous, convicted of crimes such as murder, rape and drug dealing.  However, this is not your conventional prison:

"There are no barbed-wire-topped walls or electrified fences circle the island, nor do armed guards and attack dogs patrol the grounds. Prisoners live in brightly painted small wooden cottages, and tend to farm animals, grow crops and chop wood. For recreation, there's a beach where prisoners sunbathe in the summer, plenty of good fishing spots, horses for riding, a sauna and tennis courts."

They seem to be doing something right:

"Only 16% of prisoners who come out of Bastøy reoffend within two years of being released, compared to Norway's national average of 20 percent, and the European average of 70%."

"Arne Kvernvik Nilsen quotes several inmates saying “The time I have spent here has made me to realize that I’m not such a bad guy. And I have decided that I will change my way of living”.  "This is not something that we can punish them into discovering,” said Nilsen."

Open Borders Manifesto

"Freedom of movement is a basic liberty that governments should respect and protect unless justified by extenuating circumstances. This extends to movement across international boundaries. 

International law and many domestic laws already recognise the right of any individual to leave his or her country. This right may only be circumscribed in extreme circumstances, where threats to public safety or order are imminent. 

We believe international and domestic law should similarly extend such protections to individuals seeking to enter another country. Although there may be times when governments should treat foreign nationals differently from domestic citizens, freedom of movement and residence are fundamental rights that should only be circumscribed when the situation absolutely warrants. 

The border enforcement status quo is both morally unconscionable and economically destructive. Border controls predominantly restrict the movement of people who bear no ill intentions. Most of the people legally barred from moving across international borders today are fleeing persecution or poverty, desire a better job or home, or simply want to see the city lights. 

The border status quo bars ordinary people from pursuing the life and opportunity they desire, not because they lack merit or because they pose a danger to others. Billions of people are legally barred from realising their full potential and ambitions purely on the basis of an accident of birth: where they were born. This is both a drain on the economic and innovative potential of human societies across the world, and indefensible in any order that recognises the moral worth and dignity of every human being.  

We seek legal and policy reforms that will reduce and eventually remove these bars to movement for billions of ordinary people around the world. The economic toll of the modern restrictive border regime is vast, the human toll incalculable. To end this, we do not need a philosopher’s utopia or a world government. As citizens and human beings, we only demand accountability from our own governments for the senseless immigration laws that they enact in our name. Border controls should be minimised to only the extent required to protect public health and security. International borders should be open for all to cross, in both directions." 

That is from http://openborders.info/open-borders-manifesto/

Happy Open Borders Day!  Spread the word.