As Andrew Sullivan points out in a blog post today, things are not looking good for Charlie Crist’s nomination for the Florida senate seat. I drew a cartoon on this subject not long ago about how Crist and other moderate republicans are being forced out of the party. Here’s another cartoon after Lindsay Graham voted to confirm Sotomayor.

It looks like both parties are moving to the right at the moment – the Democrats are incorporating more independents and blue dogs, and the Republicans are beating the drum of conservative credentials, to the point of even considering a mandatory loyalty exam to receive GOP campaign support. Suddenly Michael Steele is the voice of reason.

A commenter on the site, Turino, posted this video in response to a discussion that stemmed from my cartoon “Palin for President” (November 14, 2009). I love Ted talks and this particular presentation is certainly thought-provoking. Jonathan Haidt brings up some intriguing psychological studies that illuminate morality and group behavior.

Mr. Haidt challenges us to escape our own self-righteousness, which he describes as the “natural state” of humans on questions of morality. Easier said than done, but I think it’s something worth reminding oneself on a regular basis.

Thanks again to Turino for the tip!

The esteemed art critic Robert Hughes has covered developments in the art world since the early 1970s. He has been one of the loudest voices protesting the art-for-the-art-market’s-sake that has dominated museums and auction blocks in the last twenty years.

Personally, I find myself in utter agreement with Mr. Hughes:
-What is the message of this generation of artists? I would argue that they are intellectually and aesthetically bankrupt.
-If the ‘artist’ serves only as a conceptual genitor (ordering teams of interns to actually create the art), what is the point of creating it at all? Apparently, so that it can be sold.

The program “The Mona Lisa Curse,” for which I have created a youtube playlist and embedded it below, succinctly outlines the incestuous relationships between ‘artists’ such as Damian Hirst and Jeff Koons and their ignorant, super rich clientele. The real danger, Mr. Hughes shows, is that this fad for art as a collectible is pushing out the meager budgets of museums and leaving them at the whim of rich collectors. These wealthy collectors, now the main buyers of works available at auction, can lend their property to museums to increase its worth, and thus control the narrative of the art world.

Joe Windish, tech editor at The Moderate Voice, posted today about a California program called “ReadyReturn,” which takes the information that banks and your employer already are required to send to the state and plugs it into a tax return for you, eliminating the most onerous part of filing.   It also has cost-saving benefits:

California does it, and it’s a real money saver. They say it costs $2.59 to process a paper return; 34 cents to process a “ReadyReturn.” Funny thing, though. The state only spends $10,000 to promote it.

The New York Times offers an explanation as to why the program is so under-touted:

“Publicity remains one of the most formidable obstacles,” said John Chiang, the state’s controller.

California has budgeted only $10,000 for getting word out. The meagerness of the funds allotted for the ReadyReturn program reflects the strength of its political opponents, Mr. Chiang said. The most vigorous opposition comes from companies that sell tax-preparation software, “principally, Intuit,” he added.

INTUIT, which publishes TurboTax, does not dispute this description.

“We’re a California company and actively participate in the political process,” said Julie Miller, a company spokeswoman. “Our position has consistently been that ReadyReturn duplicates what is already available.”

I, for one, would love to have a simpler tax filing process in place.  This is, unfortunately, a circumstance in which a market inefficiency is present – California is providing a service free of charge, but political opponents are doing everything they can to prevent consumers from accessing full and complete information.  Intuit would rather keep taxpayers ignorant in order to fleece them for another $35, rather than see the market for tax filing be truly free, thus leading to the demise of TurboTax and their other products.

This is a pretty clear example of a market inefficiency promoted by a dominant industry player…