Minimum Wage

The Secret History of the Minimum Wage

The eugenicists' favorite economic regulation

|

Illiberal Reformers: Race, Eugenics and American Economics in the Progressive Era, by Thomas C. Leonard, Princeton University Press, 264 pages, $35

What to do with George, your dear progressive friend who stoutly defends the minimum wage? One idea is to point out how it excludes low-productivity workers from jobs. (To the smart-aleck supposition that "monopsony" is widespread, and so the minimum wage raises employment, Café Hayek's Don Boudreaux has challenged George to pick up the unlimited profits implied by the supposition. No dice so far.) Another idea is to try to explain the difference between a minimum wage, which interferes in voluntary deals, and a minimum income, which economists such as Milton Friedman and James Tobin have proposed. If you don't like the income that poor people have, then tax yourself to give them money; don't make it impossible for them to get employment by making it illegal to offer them the amount their labor is worth.

In his elegant and persuasive book Illiberal Reformers, the Princeton economist Thomas C. Leonard presents a third idea: Tell him where the minimum wage came from. After all, George uses the historical argument that the Industrial Revolution was caused by exploiting workers, and he thinks that we got rich subsequently by struggling against the exploitation. As 1066 and All That put it, "Many remarkable discoveries and inventions were made [in the early 19th century]. Most remarkable among these was the discovery (made by all the rich men in England at once) that women and children could work for 25 hours a day…without many of them dying or becoming excessively deformed. This was known as the Industrial Revelation." It's mistaken, but no matter. George clearly believes a history is relevant to the assessment of a present result.

All right. Leonard shows in detail that the minimum wage arose in the early 20th century as a Progressive policy designed to screw low-wage workers. Designed. And unlike many other laws "designed" to achieve a result (for example, protective tariffs designed to enrich America), the minimum wage achieved what it was after.

The first minimum wage was in Victoria, Australia, in 1894, but it quickly spread to other places. The minimum wage, writes Leonard, was "the holy grail of American progressive labor reform, and a Who's Who of progressive economists and their reform allies championed it." The inability to command a wage 50 percent above the going unskilled rate would keep out the riffraff. "Removing the inferior from work benefited society by protecting American wages and Anglo-Saxon racial purity."

"Of all ways of dealing with these unfortunate parasites," wrote the British socialist Sidney Webb in 1912 in the University of Chicago's Journal of Political Economy, "the most ruinous to the community is to allow them to unrestrainedly compete as wage earners." What was to become of them when the minimum wage excluded them from employment? Henry Rogers Seager, a Progressive economist at Columbia, gave in 1913 the usual reply: "If we are to maintain a race that is to be made up of capable, efficient and independent individuals and family groups we must courageously cut off lines of heredity that have been proved to be undesirable by isolation or sterilization."

By 1919, 15 American states had enacted minimum wages, focused especially on women. In the U.K. a minimum wage, supported by Sidney and Beatrice Webb, was instituted in 1907. Back in the U.S., E.L. Godkin of The Nation had articulated the now-libertarian complaint that the minimum wage is a bad interference in what workers are worth, and that if income is undignified taxpayers should make it up. The present-day readers of The Nation, among them George, would not agree. In 1923, the Supreme Court's decision in Adkins v. Children's Hospital briefly challenged the doctrine that it's a good and proper purpose of public policy to prevent the allegedly inferior (women, blacks, immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe, the third "generation of imbeciles") from having a job. But in 1938 a non-packed Court reversed itself and acceded to the federal minimum for men and women.

"Race suicide" theory, adopted with rare exceptions by most social scientists before National Socialism shamed it, held that the inferior races with low wage "standards" would drive down wages of "Saxons," thus reducing their fertility—unlike the wretched blacks and immigrants, who would always have large families. Leonard notes that the low-wage folk, including women, were simultaneously objects of pity and objects of fear, a "strange and unstable compound of compassion and contempt." He summarizes the argument about a "race to the bottom," that "the decent capitalist…who wanted his workers to have a living wage…could not compete with unscrupulous rivals, who hired low-standard women, children, immigrants, blacks, and the feeble-minded."

The race-to-bottom argument is still heard from amiable and well-meaning people on the left, such as former Labor Secretary Robert Reich and Harvard professor Michael Sandel. But not only on the left. That economic growth started in Northwestern Europe has often been spun into a theory of racial superiority of the Saxons, despite the crushing evidence that highly non-Saxon folk, such as the Chinese and the Indians, if they adopt libertarian policies, can do it too. The Euro-centric theory is still heard in conservative circles, a notion that European superiority started deep in history, back in the Germanic forest.

The minimum wage was the easiest to administer of a host of eugenic proposals put forward a century ago, such as Oriental exclusion (the oldest), literacy tests (for Jim Crow), voter registration, head taxes, the outlawing of contract labor, celibate labor colonies, deportation, restrictive union rules, and sterilization. By the end fully 30 states had forcible sterilization laws, Indiana being the pioneer in 1907. Democratic Gov. Woodrow Wilson signed New Jersey's law in 1911. It was not Nazi Germany that led the way: Progressive Norway and Sweden down to 1970 sterilized more people as a percentage of their populations.

American Progressivism was part of a worldwide rejection of laissez faire, briefly regnant among the clerisy of artists, intellectuals, journalists, professionals, and bureaucrats in the mid-19th century. "By the late nineteenth century," notes the historian Jürgen Kocka, "capitalism was no longer thought to be a carrier of progress." The ethical case against "capitalism" was summarized by Reverend H.H. Williams of Oxford, writing on "Ethics" in the 11th edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica in 1910: "The failure of 'laissez-faire' individualism in politics to produce that common prosperity and happiness which its advocates hoped for caused men to question the egoistic basis upon which its ethical counterpart was constructed."

Even in 1910 Reverend Williams' mistake was factual. Trade-tested betterment had by then begun to yield common prosperity and happiness. Yet the clerisy, such as Williams, had long since turned against the bourgeoisie and its doctrine of spontaneous order. According to the Progressives, who were disproportionately the children of Protestant preachers, laissez faire was too slow in its eugenic effects—and amorally so, rewarding market-tested betterment, which the Progressives such as Thorstein Veblen regarded as a wholly irrelevant guide to social efficiency. The Progressives wanted to speed up social evolution, and to moralize it, and to engineer it, as in Prohibition.

They wanted in short to "interfere on behalf of the really fittest" (as argued by the Progressive writer Herbert Croly—who later turned against social engineering, too late, too late). One of the numerous problems with such engineering lies in the phrase "really fittest": How do you know? A defect now may turn out to be an advantage later. In Darwin's theory you know what works only after the event. The alleged inferiority of people with sub-Saharan African blood, for example, is about to be radically embarrassed. The genetic variability of such people means that when laissez faire has raised their income to European levels, the world's leading mathematicians, entrepreneurs, novelists, musicians, and athletes will have high levels of skin melanin.

American economists were in the lead—influenced, Leonard shows, by the German Historical School against "English" laissez faire economics. A distressingly high percentage of the restrictionists were elected from the leading universities to the presidency of the American Economic Association.

"Liberal"—a word that libertarians can now seize back, because their friend George has fled it in favor of "progressive"—means equality, both before the law and in social hierarchy. The Progressives in the United States favored inequalities and hierarchies in all directions, such as race, class, gender, IQ, expertise, wages. No one who reads the Progressives can doubt their illiberality. Read any dozen pages of Leonard's book and a true liberal will weep. "It is well known," Leonard notes, "that modern liberalism permanently demoted economic liberties." Then for good measure, in aid of a eugenic program, the Progressives "assaulted political and civil liberties, too." The right to open a shop was hedged by zoning and building codes, because after all economic rights are trivial, and then the right to make a wage bargain or to keep one's income or to keep one's property was similarly restricted in furtherance of the general will. No problem. Eminent domain and civil forfeiture, hurrah.

Today, the greatest threat is not terrorism or global warning or the race to the bottom or a low minimum wage or America's decline. The greatest threat is youth joblessness, worldwide. Unemployment was 47 percent among young black men in Chicago in 2015. Greece and Spain and South Africa show equally stunning statistics. Unemployment is not caused by insufficient aggregate demand or by inadequate education, the policy excuses of progressives nowadays, as in 1910. The problem has been that all manner of "job protection" for the middle-aged—the impossibility in South Africa, for example, to fire anyone once they are employed—has extended the Progressive list of unemployables from immigrants, blacks, women, and the handicapped to, now, youth. As Eric Hoffer, the San Francisco dockworker and sage, argued in The True Believer, it is unemployed young men who constitute the storm troopers and communist cadres.

Beware. Wake up, George. Read Leonard.

NEXT: N.C. court strikes down ban on posting 'personal or sexual information' about minors 'with the intent to torment'

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. a minimum income, which economists such as Milton Friedman and James Tobin have proposed

    That’s how progressives lie about Friedman’s negative income tax which, in one sense, is the exact opposite.
    Is this satire? Or another Reason screwup?

    1. HIHN-SPIRACY!

    2. For anyone else who may be confused about Friedman’s negative income tax, this 1968 interview may help you sort it all out.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtpgkX588nM

      It would go to only people on relief, a cash check instead of however many programs they’re on. This eliminates 90% of the welfare bureaucracy.

      Then, as that person moves up, their check is reduced by the negative income tax. Under the current system, each program has different eligibility levels. Some benefits decline slowly as one’s income increases. Others pay at or near 100% of the benefit, then go to zero at $1 over the eligibility level. . So a sincere person working their way out of welfare, they have several different deductions as they move up, or they lose $100 at the eligibility level. Friedman essentially considers the declining benefits the same as a tax, but at a very high marginal tax rate. And if high marginal tax rates are a disincentive to middle-class and higher, they’re obviously disincentive to people on welfare.

      As a side benefit, it would eliminate any excuses for a minimum wage at all. Progressives argue that a higher minimum wage reduces government benefits for low-income workers. But that just shifts the cost to an employer, which destroys jobs, which INCREASES the welfare caseload.

      1. In America, civil discussion bans the use of reason and rational explanation of workable models over feel good models. Friedman was really quite easy to understand. People just don’t want to hear it.

        When the lunatics officially rule the roost, your type of conversation will surely have you arrested.

  2. I wish this article was more tightly written…. it contains a number of useful insights, in the way that a hash made from the week’s leftovers contains a number of delicious flavors… yet is still not something you would serve to guests..

    1. I thought the same thing. His unusual style was difficult for me to read.

  3. What to do with George, your dear progressive friend who stoutly defends the minimum wage?

    Cunt-kick.

  4. The alleged inferiority of people with sub-Saharan African blood, for example, is about to be radically embarrassed. The genetic variability of such people means that when laissez faire has raised their income to European levels, the world’s leading mathematicians, entrepreneurs, novelists, musicians, and athletes will have high levels of skin melanin.

    Hahahahaha.

    1. Fuck off, scum.

      1. The author can’t begin to support that statement. It’s laughable. Regardless of their genetic variability in some alleles, the IQ gap between sub-Saharan Africans and Whites or Asians — including Sub-Saharan Africans living in the U.S. — persists across income and educational boundaries.

        I’ll buy that they’ll be leading musicians and athletes. We already see that. But it takes something they don’t have enough of to generate leading mathematicians, entrepreneurs and novelists in great numbers.

        1. You are so strong.

        2. Yes, there were similar statements about Jews and Italians back in the last century. The repeated demonstration of error will never dissuade bigoted losers who have to have something to feel any self-esteem.

          1. I, for one, look forward to the disinterested and intellectually engaging discussion of Dar-Nimrod and Heine (2011) that shall occur in this thread.

            1. What the hell would YOU know, Mr. Genetically Inferior?

              Oh sorry, I forgot. DR. Genetically Inferior.

              1. If only you understood statistics. The existence of a mean IQ gap between races does not preclude the existence of extremely intelligent people of those races. There are thousands of genius-level blacks in the U.S. alone. But they represent a smaller proportion of the black population than of the white and asian populations.

                1. Ever notice that prior to Tiger Woods there were no great black golfers? Is that because blacks suck at golf because or their inferior genes, or because their culture did not encourage the pursuit of golf?

                  There is a hint in there.

                  1. And?

                    1. “And?”

                      I knew you would miss it.

                    2. Or your supposed point doesn’t really say anything informative about whether there are genetic racial differences and whether they impact performance in different realms of endeavor.

                  2. I am reminded of reading T. Sowell who explained that when he grew up in a segregated school system he was held to the same academic standards as the white students resulting in very comparable rates of success for he and his classmates as the white students.

                  3. Not to discount your point, Suthen, but you also got to acknowledge the the whole “no Blacks, no Jews” policy of many country clubs in the past, the PGA being White-only until 1961, and folks like Lee Elder receiving death threats when he made the Masters thing.

                  4. I mean, there are outliers in every sport. PK Subban and Jordy Nelson come to mind. Plus Tiger is half black, half East Asian (Thai I believe). It can be simultaneously true that individuals of whatever race can fall to one end of the bell curve in athletic or intellectual ability and that general trends can be observed when looking at groups. There is a reason that there isn’t a single white guy playing cornerback in the NFL.

          2. Maybe if you had some facts.

          3. is it racist to say people with sub-Saharan blood are genetically superior?

            1. I think it’s the dictionary definition, bro.

            2. In any respect that it’s true, no. The truth can’t be racist. It’s apparently true that a very large proportion of the great sprinters and long-distance runners are African. One supposes they are genetically superior in that respect.

              1. You realize that HM is so much your intellectual superior that it is laughable that you even presume to talk to him, correct?

                1. Entirely possible that he’s my intellectual superior. Whether it’s laughable that I even presume to talk to him is a moral judgment, so I dispute that.

                  Has anyone ever explained to you the difference between an individual case and an average?

              2. You realize that HM is so much your intellectual superior that it is laughable that you even presume to talk to him, correct?

                1. I believe we’ve moved on from intellectual superiority to skeletal muscle fiber-type superiority, of which, I am saddened to report that I am only heterozygous on the R577X SNP on the ACTN3 gene, giving me a mixture of fast-twitch and slow-twitch muscle fiber. In the words of SNPedia, this is “normal for white people“.

                  1. That blows. Enjoy your 22″ vertical, chump.

              3. A large proportion of piano-makers are German. It must be genetic.

                1. Better to ask why sub-Saharan Africa has never produced an invention that even approaches the complexity and genius of the piano.

                  1. It remains a fair question to people willing to discuss.
                    There are clearly certain acumens that are demonstrated among certain races or cultures.
                    Asians at the university level display an obvious and high level of understanding of mathematics and technology.
                    Indians would appear to be better businessmen than muslims displayed by their argued domination of the small retail and hotel industry. muslim law has been a hinderance to their ability to excel at market economics for some time because it does not embrace the profit motive or contract law.
                    A great many of the world’s most beneficial technological inventions and innovations arose from western Europe and nearby countries.
                    Is there some sort of privilege suggested in things that are obviously around us. I am not mad at Asians or Indians for being good at stuff.

          4. about Jews and Italians

            Not to mention the Irish, which you didn’t.

            1. I’m boycotting the Irish because they hate Negroes. Well, one of them does, anyway.

    2. “Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism.”

      -Ayn Rand

      1. It’s not racist if it’s true.

  5. the now-libertarian complaint … that if income is undignified taxpayers should make it up

    Uh, I don’t know too many libertarians who say that.

  6. A defect now may turn out to be an advantage later.

    So …. Vote Hillary?

  7. Did the orange here just become orange?

    1. Oranger. Fucking phone.

    2. Looks the same to me. Have you been getting enough vitamin A?

    3. Looks the same to me.

    1. NBC law enforcement expert Jim Cavanaugh … said it is possible the shooter was someone who regularly attended the gay bar or someone banned from the club and came back with a plan to massacre club-goers.

      And it is possible Cavanaugh … well, you know.

      1. Sounds like a White Hate Group name to me.

    2. The guy was Islamic. They so wanted it to be some right winger. Now they are going to mumble something about gun control and get it out of the news as soon as possible. Surely someone will kill a gorilla or want to use the wrong bathroom or something. We can’t let this distract the country from the important issues

    3. Omar Mateen was a registered Democrat since 2006 whose parents were from Afghanistan. I can’t find any reference to this or ties to Islam on CNN. I’m sure tomorrow we will have renewed pleas for “common sense gun safety measures” and how conservative home-grown white extremists like these are the real problem and not the peaceful religion of Islam.

      http://voters.findthedata.com/…..que-Mateen

      1. I guess we will never know why he did this horrible thing.

        1. Tom “I’m a gun owner” Brokaw is on MTP calling for we’ve got to do something about guns.

          1. We need to get guns out of the hands of these damned Tea baggers. If it wasn’t for the Tea baggers irrational love of guns, this wouldn’t have happened.

            That about right?

            1. TRUMP MAEK ATOSMPHERE OF HATE!!!11!!!

              1. Forgot to mention his full name is “Omar Mir Seddique Mateen,” a decidedly white, conservative, likely christian, gun-nuttedly name.

                1. Positively screams white-hooded-wonder.

            2. Since presumably a large number of the patrons of that club actually are teabaggers, more guns in their hands could have done a lot of good.

        2. I guess we will never know why he did this horrible thing.

          I know! He owned guns because he was compensating for having a small penis and not having enough sex with that small penis. And, because as everyone knows all gun owners are severely repressed gays, Omar saw gays having lots of bigger-penis gay sex and was mad because 1) it wasn’t him having all the gay sex (although he would never admit that, being so repressed and all), and 2) US Christian homophobia filtered into his consciousness from living here, making him kill the gays. After all, how many gay clubs get shot up in the Middle East, hmmm?

          1. That is a great point. This kind of thing never happens in a place like Saudi Arabia.

      2. Wonder who that Nov 6, 2012 vote was for.

      3. My favorite comments:

        MoiraMVee says:
        June 12, 2016 at 10:06 am
        You are factually incorrect. Most mass shooters are registered Rep but identify as Libertarian- ie McVeigh, Louisiana theatre shooter, PP CO shooter, Dylan Roof. This has been a topic of discussion for years and the FBI has confirmed it time and time again. That does not mean Rep are bad, it just means you’re attempting to pin it on the wrong ideology.

        Amar says:
        June 12, 2016 at 9:41 am
        I would not be surprised if this is Trump and the GOP paying a militant Islamist to create terror in a potential swing state. The victims were gay and it was a Latino club. It wouldn’t be the first time Republicans aided Islamic Terrorists ? Bush personally let Saudis leave the country immediately after 9/11 ? they knew even that early on that the Saudis were involved.

        Anything for a vote, anything for a war.

        1. Good lord there is crazy out there.

            1. I like to think we’re not AS crazy.

              1. Ummm… Alice Bowie?

                1. Yeah but for every Alice there are like dozens of them anywhere else.

                2. Michael Hihn?

        2. “Trump and GOP paying a militant Islamist”

          They’re so used to their own top men giving money to militant Islamists they assume everyone does it.

          1. They’re so used to their own top men giving money to militant Islamists they assume everyone does it.

            BOOM. You win. Everything. You win everything.

            1. Bwahaha, thanks

      4. Trump is going to win in a landslide.

        1. You know the media and the Democrats are going to respond to this by lying and just insulting people’s intelligence. If they were anything but mendacious assholes and were willing to at least admit it when reality didn’t fit their fantasy narrative, this kind of stuff might not do as much political damage to them as it does.

          1. Not sure it’s still possible to insult the general public’s intelligence.

      5. Hmmm … it occurs to me that banning firearms all registered Democrats could have prevented this atrocity without interfering with the 2nd Amendment rights of those who care about it. Yeah, I know it wouldn’t have really worked, but progressives make this sort of argument all the time.

    4. Apparently, the guy slipped past DHS because the lawyers assigned to track these guys were too busy posting stupid comments on Reason during their work hours to actually do their jobs.

      1. Maybe you should call DHS and complain Mary. Or right them a stern note.

        1. I assume your entrance exam to Nick Riviera’s “I Can’t Believe It’s A Law School” didn’t include a writing portion.

          1. Do the world a favor and take an overdose of your meds and die Mary. You are never going to get any better.

            1. You spelled all the words correctly this time (I’ll be kind and not mention the lack of punctuation)! Good boy, John! This is progress. Perhaps in another year, you’ll be able to count to 11 without having to open your fly.

              1. Maybe some day you will take your meds and get better. It can’t be fun going through life as an obsessive lunatic.

    5. I posted this in the overnight thread before I noticed a new one and I think it bears repeating.

      First time I looked at the roll call count for the original Brady Bill. Lot of bipartisan action on this shit. Hillary will throw in something about how Republicans and Democrats came together during Bill’s presidency to do something.

      1. I am sure she will. And given the record of this Congress, I see no reason why the Republicans won’t roll over and give her what she wants.

      1. In fairness to the cops, they seem to have actually taken action and shot the guy instead of waiting around until he ran out of ammunition or killed himself and then swooping in to terrorize the survivors and clean up the bodies, which is what they usually do.

        1. I have not read about the details of the shooting yet, but I assume that patrol officers confronted the shooter, not Sergeant SWAT.

          1. I haven’t either. I just heard that he was shot. I assume some cop did that, but it may have been a regular person. Florida as sane gun laws. If it was a cop, the cops do deserve credit for going in after the guy. time and again cops have been cowards and stood around outside during these kinds of events.

      2. Impressive! If only the police dressed like that all the time no incidents would ever occur.

        1. Time and a half or double time? Cracking skulls gets a bonus?

      3. It seems like the club turned into a hostage situation, that SWAT breached the door, and that one cop’s life was saved when a bullet ricocheted off his Kevlar helmet.

        Way to ruin my snark.

  8. What’s this progressive friend, George, shit!!!

      1. George likes spicy chicken!

        1. Montreal chicken seasoning isn’t overlyt spicy.

          1. I haven’t had my second cup of coffee yet!

            1. I have been told I have a face and voice for radio.

      2. Thank you. But I would have told Oliver to fuck off since I have to pay for college for my sons!

    1. George

      Except Progressive George isn’t curious at all. His feelings are all he needs.

  9. According to local authorities 50 people are dead now. How the fuck does one person kill 50 people?! That makes no sense.

    1. “Assault weapons” have only one purpose.

      1. Live news on the scene just trotted out someone who said we “need to do something about these mass shootings.” And he was asked if this was a mass shooting versus a hate crime. I guess because mohammedans cannot kill gays out of hate? What is the difference between killing gays en masse and killing them out of hate? I guess that question makes Progs go apoplectic.

        Serious question: Why does the Left apologize for Islamic extremism? Is it due to their desire to have them as a voter base, or is it a reverse psychology type of conspiracy. Meaning, they let all the militant muslims in, let them kill lots of people with firearms, and then expediently plea for new control measures in the carnage’s aftermath?

        1. It’s all about Team. Team Red takes a position on something, Team Blue has to be against it, and vice-versa.

    2. He just kept pulling the trigger is how. Radical Islam is a utopian death cult like communism before it. How does someone go around murdering entire families of Kulacks for the crime of hoarding food during a famine? How does someone spend months killing prisoners with hoes in the Killing Fields? They do it because they have convinced themselves doing so is cleansing the world and ushering in paradise on earth. This guy thought killing those people was not only his ticket to heaven but also his contribution to the greater cause of remaking the world into something better.

      The greater the good someone convinces themselves they are helping to accomplish, the more hideous the evil they will feel justified in committing in its name.

      1. I mostly mean I don’t understand how one man in a room full of people manages to kill that many without someone rushing him as he reloads.

        1. Because they have made people into sheep. It is astounding to me too. How does someone just agree to die on their knees like that. Fuck it, if you have to die at least die a noble death trying to kill that bastard. I honestly can’t understand the mentality that causes people to stand around and die like that. I don’t believe Americans in the past would have acted like that. Something is seriously wrong with our culture.

    3. John Rambo killed like an entire town.

      1. You did everything to make this private war happen. You’ve done enough damage. This mission is over, Rambo. Do you understand me? This mission is over! Look at them out there! Look at them! If you won’t end this now, they will kill you. Is that what you want? It’s over Johnny. It’s over!

        1. Nothing is over!

    4. They will keep calling it an assault rifle, but my first thought was that he had an automatic rifle and sprayed the crowd.
      A rifle that is already illegal unless the guy had a license.

      It seems unlikely but not impossible that he could have laid that many down even with a semi-auto.

      So far the only thing I have heard is that he had an ‘AR style assault rifle’.

      50 dead, 53 wounded. It had to be an auto.

      1. If the event took place over enough time and nobody was fighting back a semi could do it?

      2. Idk, suthen. One FMJ 5.56 will zip right through several people pretty easily, and in a tight space like that, even a ricochet off the concrete floor or wall could be deadly.

        1. If it was a crowded club, some people may have been trampled to death in the resulting panic as well.

          1. True. It’s an enormous tragedy either way.

        2. Duke – yes, it will zip right through at range, but up close like that no so much. Longer bullets like a 55-68 grain .22 won’t stabilize inside around 150 yards.

          1. Like everything else in terminal ballistics, it depends. Depends on the weight and construction of the projectiles used, rifling twist, MV, impact velocity (pretty much the same, at those ranges, at least for the first impact) phase of the moon…

            Depending on those, 5.56 will ice pick through people, or blow up within the first several inches of tissue, and lots of wound patterns in between.

            No armed security at the club? Off-duty cops are real common working security at nightclubs in Houston.

            1. My cousin uses a 223 for deer. Zips right through them with a tiny hole. I’ve shot a lot of deer (with larger calibers) and it’s very predictable that a centerfire round will travel through several targets. Yes, there’s the prospect of the bullet exploding on impact at close range since the velocities are high and some bonded or ballistic tip bullets are fragile at high velocity.

              However, the modern AR-15 has rifling twist rates that create a much more stable bullet in flight which increases accuracy. They say the first M-16 variants had slow twist rates that did not stabilize the bullet, and that they were no accurate, but were devastating on human targets because of that instability.

    5. From 20 to 50? Holy shit.

    1. This is just fucking horrible. It is bad enough when you have terror attacks that just target random people for the crime of being Americans. This, however, is worse because it targets people engaged in particular activities. Kill random people and people’s behavior doesn’t change because doing so doesn’t make you any safer. Kill people engaged in certain activities, people rationally stop doing those things out of concern for safety. Do it enough and people stop doing those things all together. Start with gays who are open about it in public and then move on to people who drink or whatever. The whole thing makes me want to vomit.

      1. I agree and I think the targeting of specific behavior is the main thing that points to this being motivated by radical Islam, so of course the media and administration will completely ignore it.

        1. From what I can tell so far they’re mostly pushing the GUNZ angle but they’re not ignoring the terrorism angle.

    2. “The majority of Americans want common-sense kissing control.”

    3. “We are apologizing for the whole incident.”

      Gee, thanks.

  10. I like to remind people that one of the first acts FDR took to stimulate the economy out of the Not-Yet-Great Depression was to impose price floors and production restrictions on food. That’s right – at a time when people were actually going hungry, FDR deliberately made food more expensive in order to raise farm income. He was literally willing to see people starve to death in order to benefit his voters. And people applauded and praised his efforts to help the poor working man. (And then later he seized all their gold and built concentration camps for Yellow Americans and that was a fine and wonderful thing, too. Transforming the role of government from defender of liberty to dispensary of free shit and getting people to believe they are somehow owed – are entitled to as a human by-god right – a good job, a good education, food, housing, healthcare, retirement pay, ad infinitum, even though that necesssarily means other people are somehow born into servitude in order to supply those entitlements was the worst thing that bastard did, though. We are so screwed by an entire population who seriously does not understand that whatsoever the government supplies it must first take from someone else, that does not understand when you insist that you are entitled to something you are saying that someone else has a duty to produce that thing and you can go right to hell if you think the purpose of my existence is to provide for your welfare you slaver piece of shit.)

    1. He also set agricultural production ceilings that put hundreds of thousands of black share croppers out of work and left them evicted from their homes. The share croppers didn’t own the land they worked and lived on and depended on growing a crop every year to pay their rent. FDR went around and took huge swaths of land in the South out of production leaving the black share croppers who worked that land homeless and destitute. It is not an exaggeration to call the Agricultural Adjustment Act a crime against humanity.

      1. It (and things like confiscating everyone’s gold) does make you wonder whether the Businessmen had a point with FDR.

      2. That he interned Japanese-Americans and left Southern blacks destitute does not make FDR a racist. He also also had white Blue Ridge mountaineers dispossessed and evicted in order to make way for the Shenandoah National Park. Same with the TVA. In both cases, they were given a pittance for their property and thrust into an exceptionally poor economy in which they were ill-prepared to adapt. The more uncooperative mountaineers were adjudicated mentally defective. The mountaineers’ audacity in asserting their rights to property in defiance to FDR’s state was sufficient to demonstrate their mental defect.

        FDR despised any person who stood in the way of his vision regardless of race, creed, or color.

    2. FDR deliberately destroyed food while people went hungry. When I was a child that seemed absurd, but my government school teacher told me that he had to do that because poor farmers would lose their farms otherwise. That explanation was good enough for the test of the adequacy of my indoctrination afterwards, but the whole thing still seemed absurd. Then I went to university and took economics, and now I understand that by assuring farmers higher prices for growing less and less, the government increases consumption demand by putting more money in the hands of farmers. If the government can replicate this policy throughout the economy, it can thereby jump-start the economy by producing less and less at ever higher prices. The wonders of vulgar Keynesian never end, and they only seem to fail every time because stupid people don’t understand Keynes’ genius and won’t regulate, subsidize, and price control enough.

      1. Keynesianism is an easy sell to the sheep. Once the us school system has indoctrinated you for 12 years, believing in Keynesianism by the time you are old enough to really fathom market economics is a given.

        They have won and will continue to win because the population has been successfully propagandized.

  11. Google news is showing outlets are starting to call it a terror attack.

  12. Unreal. They say 50 people dead now. This is very sad. I’m also afraid of the tidal wave of gun control measures that are coming. As long as the media can control the narrative that this was not tied to ISIS or Islam, then it makes their pleas for gun registration, AR-15 bans all the more compelling.

    Even if the shooter was tied to islam — it won’t matter to the left. They will blame the “lone wolf’s” easy access to “weapons of war” for being able to kill so many people so quickly.

    1. CNN trotted out an Imam at the press conference. The police spokesman said they haven’t positively identified the shooter yet. So an obviously silly reporter asked, “Then why do you have an Imam speaking here?”

      1. Yes, that’s the guy I was referring to. Incidentally, Ramadan started June 5 and ends July 5. Not sure if coincidence or not, but it’s disgusting how the entire American media is part of this vast conspiracy to squelch any association of domestic terror with Islam.

        You can bet that if the guy had claimed to be christian, that is all you’d be reading and hearing across the national media.

      2. CNN trotted him out or the authorities did?

        1. Heroic “Nikki” Mulatto. But, you’re right.

          1. No…I was wondering if CNN had the balls to editorialize that blatantly.

            1. Nah, It was the usual state sponsored wall of dour faces putting on a post tragedy press conference, egos inflated with self importance.

  13. So how long was FBI/DHS watching this guy, that we already know his name, ideology, and that it was a case of domestic terrorism, not six hours after he shot up that club? Every other time some asshole’s killed a bunch of people with a rifle, details trickle out over the next several days, but not in this case.

    And how many other people are DHS similarly watching with this level of detail, and what, if anything, should be done about them?

    Lastly, does this have anything to do with that ISIS Florida “hit list” that was making the news rounds a few days ago?

    1. Until he walked in and pulled the trigger, what could they pick him up for? He was a natural born American citizen. For every person who exhibits the characteristics he did and acts on them, there are dozens or perhaps hundreds who never do anything beyond maybe talking shit on a message board. So what do you do?

      It is a tough problem with no good or easy answers.

      1. Easy. Ban all people suspected of being a terrorist from buying a gun. Why won’t the NRA and its lackeys in Congress consent to this common-sense safety measure?

        This will be the talking point moving forward because the same people that said Bush was “letting the terrorists win” by signing the Patriot Act is now totally onboard with unconstitutional restrictions of people’s freedoms if it means gun control.

    2. I think it’s because reporters just have to find the perp’s Facebook, these days. It’s rather astonishing, how much info is readily available.

  14. To the smart-aleck supposition that “monopsony” is widespread, and so the minimum wage raises employment

    Wait, does anyone actually believe that? MW by itself is enough of a stretch in denying basic economics like market clearing and price floors, who honestly believes that not only are laborers underemployed by piker employers not willing to pay enough, but more employment is achievable if we set the price floor high enough? Is this some of that Keynesian crap?

  15. OT: “Euro 2016: England and Russia given disqualification warning”

    Amazing that both countries aren’t immediately kicked out but what’s a little blood running in the streets when there’s a lucrative tournament at play.

  16. I’m afraid I’m already starting to have not so nice feelings about Islam. I hope the president speaks up soon to remind me to practice tolerance for my peaceful Muslim brothers.

  17. … the minimum wage arose in the early 20th century as a Progressive policy designed to screw low-wage workers. Designed. And unlike many other laws “designed” to achieve a result (for example, protective tariffs designed to enrich America), the minimum wage achieved what it was after.

    The whole purpose of Leviathan is to screw people for the benefit of the political elite who run Leviathan. The state-imposed minimum wage is an example of this, but so is the protective tariff. The protective tariff wasn’t designed to enrich America, neither was it intended to protect the interests of ordinary people: it was designed to enrich and empower the ruling elite. As Robert Higgs has observed: when viewed from a certain perspective, there is no such thing as a failed government program.

  18. Funny, how the ideals and motives of the regressives can change, but their policy decisions cannot.

    Just because they can come up with new grievances, doesn’t mean they’re creative enough to come up with new policies.

  19. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser
    ? ? ? ? http://www.MaxPost30.com

  20. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser
    ? ? ? ? http://www.MaxPost30.com

  21. Evan . if you, thought Gladys `s story is impossible… on saturday I got a new Alfa Romeo since getting a check for $5834 recently and-in excess of, ten thousand this past-munth . it’s definitly the best work Ive ever done . I began this 4 months ago and almost immediately started bringing in at least $80.. p/h . you could look here …
    ………………….. http://www.MaxPost30.com

  22. I’m making over $9k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do…. Go to tech tab for work detail..

    CLICK THIS LINK=====>> http://www.earnmax6.com/

  23. I’m making over $9k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do…. Go to tech tab for work detail..

    CLICK THIS LINK=====>> http://www.earnmax6.com/

  24. 4″I quit my 9 to 5 job and now I am getting paid 100usd hourly. How? I work-over internet! My old work was making me miserable, so I was forced to try-something NEW. After two years, I can say my life is changed-completely for the better!Learn More From This Site…

    ======> http://www.Today70.com

  25. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.Reportmax20.com

  26. my roomate’s step-mother makes 60 each hour on the internet and she has been out of work for seven months but last month her check was 14489 just working on the internet for 5 hours a day, look at ..
    Read more on this web site..

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.maxincome20.com

  27. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.selfcash10.com

  28. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.selfcash10.com

  29. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.selfcash10.com

  30. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.selfcash10.com

  31. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.selfcash10.com

  32. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.selfcash10.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.