Now, I know. Sci Fi has announced that they will be running a prequel along side Battlestar Galactica. Great way to Jump the Shark, by diluting and distracting their talent and tiring out their audience.

More is not always better. Just ask Paramount, owners of the played out Star Trek franchise, or Donald Trump and his rapidly waning Apprentice.

• Five Secrets of Job Growth has an interesting summary of a Fed report.
• How to Watch CNBC for companies not to invest in.
• Why its ok for GM to die. Creative destruction works.

• Coytote Blog follows up on the Unfairness of price gouging laws.
• Mises Econmics Blog illustrates how markets work in the wake of Katrina. No regulation required, thank you.
• Financial Methods has The Thanksgiving Lesson You Should Have Learned in School.
• Union Cars vs. Forign Cars points out the collective hypocrisy of trying to legislate what others do when you aren't willing to do it yourself.

Enjoy.

• Entrepreneurs Needed asks why weren't pumpkin carving kits around when I was a kid?
• Politicians and Prioritization points out how absurdly politicians and bureaucrats act when asked to make budget cuts.
• Comparative Advantage in a Changing World suggests that we need to be friendlier to small businesses.
• Blackballed - you are the brand illustrates the need to represent yourself well to represent your company well.

• Social Mobility. Is the US a meritocracy?
• Rates are Too High -- So Lets Limit Competition looks at payday loans.
• Managing Bureaucrats offers suggestions for moving the immovable object.
• How I could afford my house by renting out the basement. Making a silk purse out of a sow's ear?

Oh, my Protectionist Republican post is listed in this weeks CotC.

Thats what protectionism is. The government deciding that some jobs are more worthwhile than others and redistributing wealth to those special interest groups at the expense of others. Worst of all, protectionism is regressive. It places proportionately more of a burden on those with lower incomes.

There are two angles to fight poverty. One is to concentrate on the income side. While nobody is overtly anti-job, I think there are ways of increasing personal income and ways of creating jobs that most Republicans would dislike such as direct subsidies and make work jobs. A minimum wage falls into the misguided, but well-meaning category. Protectionism does too.

A second angle to fight poverty is to increase buying power by decreasing prices. What does it mean to be poor if you have a place to live, enough to eat and have cable tv? Cheap prices are the free trader's welfare system.

Sugar is the poster child for free trade issues. One famous case study is the move of the lifesavers plant from Michigan to Canada. Here are some of the factors involved in the decision to move from a progressive viewpoint:

Boyd said a recent survey by his firm indicates Life Savers will pay nonunion workers in Mount Royal about $12.50 an hour--$3 less than their counterparts in Holland. With the Canadian government picking up the tab for health coverage, the savings come to about $6.5 million a year.

"Labor costs dominate the equation," Boyd said. "They account for at least 70% of all operating costs. . . . That's the real driver in the site selection process."

Workers and city officials remain convinced that the culprit is sugar. They blame the closing on a combination of federal tariffs, trade quotas and loans that benefit U.S. sugar beet and sugar cane farmers by keeping the price of domestic bulk sugar at 21 cents a pound, compared to 6 cents on the international market. That makes a big difference to Life Savers, which uses 113 tons of sugar a day. Each Life Savers candy is 95% sugar.

Last year, Brachs candy cited high domestic sugar prices in announcing that it would close its 77-year-old west Chicago plant and move 1,100 jobs overseas, one of several candy-makers to do so. Kraft isn't saying how much it will save on the crucial ingredient. State and local officials estimate it will be $6 million a year.

Sugar prices may not be the only factor in this decision, but one thing remains clear. American consumers are over paying for sugar. Since a person can only consume so much sugar in a year (the 2001 average was 64 lbs of sugar and 81 pounds of corn sweeteners), this represents a regressive redistribution of wealth. The poor consumers of the US, of which there are many, are directly subsidizing the US sugar industry, of which there are few. Do you know anyone who works in the sugar industry? Do you know anyone who does NOT consume sugar?

Another example are the steel industry protections that Bush enacted in the middle of his last term in order to score points in politically valuable Pennsylvania. The result? A huge loss of manufacturing jobs further down the value chain in states like Ohio, which became the swing state in the election. It turns out that there are far more workers in the industries that use steel than in the industry that makes it.

Here is the thing, as consumers, we are all downstream in the "value chain." Protectionism harms the economy as a whole in order to favor special interest groups with political muscle.

That doesn't sound very Republican to me.

Two things you should check out from this week:

Ford, Hardee's and Government: Vendor Management gives some insight on why government is inefficient.

Doing the right thing: Bravery at what cost takes on the fear of litigation.

• A random walk through the world of buying small businesses covers some of the process around selling a small business. Found the list of characteristics of unserious buyers especially interesting.
• The wisdom fallacy makes a good point about management. Everyone thinks they can do it. This isn't true about math and computer programming (or professional basketball). What makes management different?
• Are dense cities economically inefficient? I love theory #2. Its the chicken and the egg argument.