I think some theories are controversial only because the people who start the controversy have never maintained a household. Anyone who maintains a system, whether a computer or a household, knows that an ordered system tends toward disorder, and that disorder tends to encourage further disorder.

The acceptable level of disorder varies, but the trends should be obvious.

(Of course, it may be they simply have no ability to recognize the obvious, or prefer to argue against the policy prescriptions derived from the observation, rather than the against the theory itself.)

The development comes days after The Associated Press reported FDA tests found traces of melamine in the infant formula of one major manufacturer [Mead Johnson] and cyanuric acid, a chemical relative, in the formula of a second major maker [Nestle].

This all begs the question, why is melamine in food to begin with?

Many of the progressives, judging themselves lovers of peace, had assumed that they would be the wrong sorts of people to run a war. …. But to their surprise, and in some cases to their dismay, the progressives discovered they were the ideal war administrators. The reformist temperament in American life has always hidden a coercive streak: if people won’t shape up voluntarily, they should be encouraged, even compelled, to do so. [emphasis mine] (p. 111)

This captures exactly my disagreement with progressive thought.

I prefer to let people suffer the consequences of their actions.

In response to Gladwell, and to clear the air for Yglesias, let me proffer some trite observations.

• Nothing succeeds like success.
• It helps to be in the right place at the right time.
• It’s not what you know, but who you know.

I think most people can only juggle about 50 or so acquaintances, so when the time comes to think of others, either to fill out a list in The Economist, to help pull a TARP over a pile of shit, or to fill open posts in a new administration, one selects from those 50.

Moneychangers offer wads of new US dollar notes, the only currency that matters in a country that has been in chaos for almost two decades.

The world’s reserve currency indeed.

Suppose, for example, that you are in favor of providing a free education to all citizens. If the town pays for it, then the town will need to float a bond issue, or raise taxes, or otherwise find the funds to provide the education. If the Federal government pays for it, then money’s not an issue.

If the Federal government pays for it, then control is not likely to be local.

It’s simpler if there’s just one set of rules.

From what I can discern so far, there are two sets of economic rules: Those for mere mortals, and those for the Royal Mint. The former are constrained by a scarce resource; the latter are not.

The costs are terrifying.

Why, just today I learned that because a meat packer closed two plants it is now near impossible to find a kosher brisket!