Even though I chose not to vote (see here and here) I can still chime in on the results of yesterday’s elections. I will be honest, I stayed as far away from politics over the last few weeks as I possibly could. But two issues were recently decided in Michigan, at least one of which is sure to wind up in the state’s Supreme Court before all is said and done.

Item 1: Voters ban affirmative action here in Michigan. Congratulations.

Central to the idea of affirmative action is the same tired Marxist screed, that there exists an objectively fair wage, or that there exist objectively fair conditions of equality. This is no more true as it regards blacks v. whites, or men v. women, than it was 134 years ago when Carl Menger exploded the fallacious labor theory of value. Value – always and everywhere – is a subjective phenomenon.

And like it or not: some of us have to work harder and smarter than others who by appearance seem our equal.

If customers don’t value the work of minorities or disadvantaged groups, customers ultimately pay the price of AA laws by being forced to accept services in a less-than-satisfactory manner, or not at all. And the market allows for disadvantaged” groups to demonstrate their ability to excel, thus earning income from the non-bigots, and when money is at stake, even the most intolerant among us are quick to set aside trivial issues of the sort in order to pinch a few pennies, or bolster the bottom line. The market does not deal kindly with entrepreneurs who place personal preference over and above consumer preference.

Item 2: The teachers’ union is going to be upset about this one (I know several teachers who were hoping it would pass), but Michigan voters decided against an annual inflation-adjusted increase in school funding. Besides, demanding COLAs in response to inflation just perpetuates the cycle: next year’s COL will be higher because wages will be higher. There are surely better ways to combat inflation. Economic arguments often fall on deaf ears, however, but the sub-heading nails it down: “Key worry: Prop 5 might mean cuts elsewhere.”

No measure of public finance is possible without either a reduction in funds allocated to another sphere, or a new tax. Opportunity cost is a cruel, cruel bitch.