is an under-estimate.  And most of them are nasty.

In a recent column in the New York Times, Jane Brody quotes a nutrition professor lamenting the fact that “restaurants have resisted her suggestion to serve half the amount of food for about a third the price.”  The professor might have thought more about economic behavior. (Even if she had suggested cutting the price to half for one-third the food, it still would not have been good economic analysis. The labor costs of preparing and serving half the food are probably nearly identical to those of serving the full amount.)  

In a competitive industry this means that her proposal would lower average cost per serving by less than half, making it impossible to cover costs if prices are cut by 2/3.  A profit-maximizing monopolist wouldn’t cut price by 2/3 either.  The nutrition professor’s only hope is that restaurants would cut prices this much out of altruism or to set examples for others. I wouldn’t bet on that — and the professor should not have been surprised.

in other news, I'll be teaching Contracts, Torts and Ethics starting 4/17.  Contracts?  Those are the basic elements of commerce.  They are voluntary agreements consisting of an offer, acceptence, and an exchange of consideration (along with a couple other thins.)  See that first part? "Voluntary"?  NOT forced or required.  If it's forced or required it's not per se a contact and not really part of commerce.  

Just sayin'.

about the POTUS/SCOTUS dust up because .... it REALLY pissed me off.  Much has been written.  Some of it good.  But here's the best.

Federalist 78 by some guy named Hamilton.  Really.  Go read it .

NOW!

10 days off.  More posts?  Doubt it, but don't be surprised.  Students are pissed.  Failed one over plagarism (she copied whole paragraphs from the 'net) and nother because his class project included a paragraph informing me that it was written by his roommate!  A third one got a 75 on her final exam - she's an A student.  Was a takehome and her answers weren't responsive to the questions!  Lots of hand holding.

 Now off to mow the law, do some spring cleaning, get out the lawn furniture, eat some peeps and watch some movies.

Beer may occasionally be involved.

from BigPolitics.com  Where else?

In a campaign speech on Friday in Vermont, as reported by CNSNews.com, President Obama ripped into “you’re-on-your-own-economics” and actually suggested that hard work and personal responsibility were not supreme Biblical values. Instead, he suggested, “Hard work, personal responsibility – those are values. But looking out for one another. That’s a value. The idea that we’re all in this together. I am my brother’s keeper. I am my sister’s keeper. That’s a value.”

Apparently, being his brother’s keeper does not actually mean his brother’s keeper – President Obama’s half-brother lives on less than a dollar per month.

-----

Beyond the obvious, Obama’s interpretation of Biblical stories leaves something to be desired. In the story of Cain and Abel, Abel offers a sacrifice and so does Cain; God is pleased with Abel’s and not with Cain’s. In a fit of jealousy, Cain kills Abel. When God asks Cain about it, Cain replies, “Am I my brother’s keeper?”

The moral of the story isn’t that Cain ought to redistribute his wealth – in fact, Cain is the proletariat character in the story. The moral is that Cain shouldn’t have killed his brother out of wealth spite. Or, precisely the opposite of the message Obama is fond of promoting. Leave it to Obama to completely misinterpret a Biblical passage to back his own agenda. After all, it took God six days to complete the world; according to Obama’s supporters, it only took Barack Obama one day to fundamentally transform it with his election.

The list of potential vice presidential picks for presumed Republican nominee Mitt Romney is narrowing dramatically. First, Marco Rubio begged off, stating he wouldn’t be on the ticket; now, South Carolina Governor and Mitt Romney backer Nikki Haley is saying she wants no part of the ticket.

Ran today.

it sucked.

That is all.

so First Things sends us this:

Joe Biden, bless his heart, reveals that he never wanted to be a Mayor or anything like that, because that’s too much like having a real job, requiring real work and, you know, real accountability:

Vice President Joe Biden offered a frank assessment of his career in remarks at a Democratic fundraiser in Chicago Thursday night. According to a White House pool report, Biden, surrounded by the city’s movers and shakers, praised former Mayor Richard M. Daley and then said: “I never had an interest in being a mayor ’cause that’s a real job. You have to produce. That’s why I was able to be a senator for 36 years.”

Biden was elected to the Senate in November 1972, when he was 29 years old. When he took office in January 1973, he had turned 30, the minimum age set in the Constitution for membership in the Senate. Biden served in the Senate from that time until January 2009, when he became vice president.

Just warms the cockles of your hard-working, private-sector heart, doesn’t it?

related?  I was listening to a podcast which mentioned "California's gaping defcit hole" and INSTANTLY pictured Nancy Pelosi.

ick.

been a VERY busy week:

‘Kill Zimmerman’ Twitter Account Launched. “Barack Obama has remained silent as the usual suspects have been busy stirring up hate aimed at George Zimmerman, the Florida Hispanic involved in the shooting death of 17 year-old Trayvon Martin. Now the anger has taken a new twist, breaking out on Twitter with an account named ‘Kill Zimmerman.’ It features an image of Zimmerman in crosshairs.”

JIM TREACHER: Has Obama called David and Elaine McClain to make sure they’re holding up okay? “They’re the elderly Florida couple whose address Spike Lee tweeted because he thought it was George Zimmerman’s. Presumably because he wanted people to go there and discuss things calmly. . . . ‘Fearful for their safety, and hoping to escape the spotlight, the couple have temporarily moved to a hotel.’”

Plus: “Somebody please try to justify this. Seriously. Tell me why this is okay. Tell me why this doesn’t matter. Tell me how this helps. Tell me how anyone involved in this fiasco expects us to just forget what they’ve said and done.”

Also: “And remember Obama’s $35K-a-plate fundraiser at Spike’s house just two months ago? I’m sure they’d both prefer if you didn’t.”

JOHN HINDERAKER: “President Obama has fanned the flames of hatred in the Trayvon Martin case, and has not said a single critical word about the outrageous actions of the New Black Panthers, who offered a $10,000 bounty on George Zimmerman–the same New Black Panthers on whose behalf Eric Holder quashed a federal criminal prosecution; or of Spike Lee, who tweeted a wrong address for Zimmerman, presumably to facilitate harassment or even murder; or of the many liberals who have posted on the @killzimmerman Twitter feed; or of the many other Democrats and liberals who have indulged in an orgy of hate with respect to Mr. Zimmerman. President Obama’s interest in the victims of violence is selective: he cares if they look like the hypothetical son he doesn’t have.”

In other words, he’s a racist hatemonger. Just to be clear. So much for hope and change.