Nature does not bestow virtue;
to be good is an art.
Seneca
Dedicated to the Fed: Printing Money Out of Nothing at All
Pro-Liberty Thought of the Day
"Social justice" is about as realistic as my chances to date this woman:
 |
| Courtesy of Laissez-Faire Capitalism |
Jay Leno has a recurring feature called jaywalking featuring ordinary Americans saying not-so-bright things in interview clips. I'm going to do something similar to economically illiterate things said by "progressives" or social liberals (versus classical (economic/individualist) liberals, like me). This comes via the Being Classically Liberal page on Facebook
Perhaps these ladies from the Paul Krugman School of Luddism will next explain how their little brothers hitting baseballs through neighbors' glass windows stimulate the economy. Excuse me while I go through my speedy self-checkout lane at the Home Depot while these ladies stand in checkout lines they could otherwise spend working or doing anything more constructive than waiting in line. Even Homer Simpson wanted to weigh in on the ladies' contribution to the economy:
After Bush/Obama, We've Gone From #2 to #17?
... while Russia has gone up 12 places, has a flat tax, has 6% unemployment, and the national debt is 8% of the economy (ours is over 100%). Russia, at #101, still has a way to go (but leads the rest of the BRIC countries).
 |
| Courtesy of the Fraser Institute Via Agora Financial |
Russ Roberts, Don Boudreaux's co-blogger at Cafe Hayek, the host of Monday's weekly hour-plus Econtalk, is back to posting and has written a recent string of posts on Krugman, more specifically Krugman's cheerleading the Democratic Left's populist views of more government spending and regulation. (I have only incidental contact with Roberts; for example, I was once trying to email him and in my browser his link showed Don Boudreaux's email address. I emailed Boudreaux and asked him to forward to Roberts; Roberts replied in a polite but defensive manner. I seem to recall he was arguing something like I couldn't be experiencing the problem because he was getting emails from the link. I did discover I got the correct link using a different browser.) I think both Roberts and Boudreaux go out of their way to criticize GOP politicians for violating free market principles, and one time when I was doing some reading on market monetarism and hadn't seen a recent talk with Scott Sumner, and he curtly responded he had already interviewed Sumner. (I don't think he enclosed links. I recently listened to one of the Sumner podcasts but I don't think that interview discussed monetary policy.) He probably thinks I'm a crank and didn't comment, as of this point, on my comment, although I posted mine a few hours after most other comments.
Roberts and I have different styles; Roberts goes out of the way to show a more humble approach, admitting for instance has more of a classical liberal perspective and wanting to control for any of his own biases in reading the work of others. He is very tactful in disagreeing with others. I'm more direct but not deliberately provocative; I think I have more patience than most people and avoid ad hominem arguments (I am, of course, judgmental about Obama, but I have studied his proposals and rationales. I will poke fun at him if and when I think he's a little too full of himself (but I also poke fun at myself), but I do not reference what I regard as disrespectful material, but I go out of my way to lay out my perspective and my differences.).
Roberts in this piece thinks that Krugman is overplaying his hand in arguing "austerity" is responsible for current poor economic performance. Roberts talks about other economic factors like regulatory policies (say, wage controls, benefit mandates), morally hazardous social policies (say, overly generous unemployment insurance), uncertainty (e.g., tax policies), etc. But Krugman is arguing that moderating the $1T increase of the budget in less than a decade--essentially less than pocket change in GDP--is the "cause". Keep in mind we've had historically low interest rates, and a tripling of our national debt over the last dozen years--and we had more robust recovery in the past after depressions and recessions without even these tools available (as familiar readers are well-aware). I think Roberts thinks as a first-rate economist, Krugman out of respect for his profession should not participate in a unsupported form of leftist economic populism and be ludicrously dismissive of salient factors....
From a non-economist: A Bastiat-style parable. The man in the street vs. the pickpocket. The man no longer carries his wallet in his pocket. From the perspective of the pickpocket, the economy is failing. But the man in the street gets to spend or save more of his own money.Bad Elephants of the Year Repeat Nominees: John McCain and Peter King
I think it's safe to say my annual choice will be from among McCain, Graham, and King, although who knows what idiocy could surface in the fourth quarter, just a few days away. In reference to Ted Cruz and particularly his recent filibuster to defund ObamaCare, King was quoted referring to the action of "governmental terrorism" and a McCain aide recently let it slip that McCain "f***ing hates Ted Cruz".
Other Comments: Pope Francis on The Libertarian Republic
Sigh. The last thing I want to do is get sucked up into some inane forum thread like in my low-carb days in 2003-2004. Apparently the editor of the blog is promising a hatchet job on Pope Francis (the hatchet job is implied by other comments he has made implying that he is aware of some "evidence" and asks other sympathetic commentators for evidence); my responses to the alert and related comments are in red).
"Is the new Pope a Marxist? New piece coming soon..."
As a Catholic, not happy with his populist nonsense about the unemployed workers demanding jobs. I wrote a recent blog post asking "Is the Pope Catholic?" I think his theory of the papacy is to stir the pot; any publicity is good publicity. I personally don't like the papacy by gimmick; we already have an American President by gimmick. Looking at some of the other comments, no, he's not a communist or socialist, but he's more collectivist than individualist and probably favors some statist redistribution schemes. No, the Church does not promote proponents of liberation theology. It is true some early Christian communities had socialist aspects, but other than, say, some monasteries or religious orders, it never persisted. I think some early communities expected an imminent Second Coming, so you don't acquire property if the world was going to end tomorrow."Liberation Theology has been ruling the Catholic church since the 1960's. You bet he's a marxist."
From a Catholic News Agency story, "One of Pope Francis' former teachers, Argentinean Jesuit priest Fr. Juan Carlos Scannone, has said that the Holy Father never supported a Marxist-based liberation theology.""He is actually right he is attacking crony capitalism and corporatism which is fascism, in my opinion he defends the free market."
Not a chance. He is stereotyping a culture he sees as focused on money.. Make no mistake: he is attacking capitalism directly, not just corrupt relationships between business and government. I did a simple Google search on "pope" and "anti-capitalist" and just on the first page picked up stories on John Paul II, Benedict and Francis.Laissez Faire Capitalism FB: A Government Shutdown _?_
My suggestions:
- would liberate the private sector....
- means that we don't have to pay federal employees for doing nothing...
 |
| Courtesy of Reason |
Chart of the Day: Economic Freedom vs. Corruption
 | ||||
| Courtesy of Alejandro Antonio Chafuen at Laissez Faire Capitalism on Facebook |
This designation is a tongue-in-cheek reference to more liberal trade status.
Current Selections:
- Rand Paul, U.S Senator (R-KY)
- Tom Coburn, US Senator (R-OK)
- Justin Amash, US House of Representatives (R-MI)
- Bobby Jindal, Governor (R-LA)
- Ron Paul, US House of Representatives (R-TX)
- Mitch Daniels, Governor (R-IN)
- Daniel Hannan, British Conservative MEP
- Calvin Coolidge, US President
- Grover Cleveland, US President
- Robert Taft, U.S. Senator (I-OH)
- Howard Buffett, US House of Representatives (R-NE)
- Lady Margaret Thatcher, British Prime Minister
Not a Most Favored Politician: Abraham Lincoln
Gary North cited Abe Lincoln's first political speech in 1832. At least Abe got the last one right but killed a lot of Americans in the process:
“Friends and Fellow-Citizens:The first one is a variation of the Fed Reserve, the second is anti-consumer, and the third is noncompetitive, centralized infrastructure building.
“I am plain Abe Lincoln. I have consented to become a candidate for the legislature. My political principles are like the old woman’s dance-short and sweet. I believe in a United States Bank; I believe in a protective tariff; I believe in a system of internal improvements, and I am against human slavery. If on that platform you can give me your suffrages, I shall be much obliged. If not, no harm done, and I remain respectfully yours, ABE LINCOLN.”
In Honor of the Cruz Defund ObamaCare Filibuster
Civil Forfeiture = Government Theft
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of Gary Varvel and Townhall |
Musical Interlude: Motown
Mary Wells "My Guy" /The Temptations, "My Girl"
