Drop Pretension to Supremacy | Benjamin H. Friedman and Christopher Preble | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Hawks and defense industry trade groups say this spending is essential to U.S. security. But much of Washington's military spending is geared toward defending others and toward the dubious proposition that global stability depends on U.S. military deployments.
If our military had less to do, the Pentagon could spend less — at least $1.22 trillion less over the next 10 years, according to a Cato Institute report released Tuesday.
Washington confuses what it wants from its military (global primacy or hegemony) with what it needs (safety)."
"Making large spending cuts without reducing military commitments is a recipe for overburdening service members. Nor should Washington embrace strategic restraint just for budgetary reasons. A force reduction strategy would make sense even without deficits, however, because it could enhance security."
Monday, October 18, 2010
Foolhardy Tax Hikes | Alan Reynolds | Cato Institute: Commentary
Foolhardy Tax Hikes | Alan Reynolds | Cato Institute: Commentary: "As puny as it is, the official $34 billion estimate of the revenue from Obama's crusade against high incomes is wildly optimistic. To begin with, it fails to take into account how taxpayers would react. To make matters much worse, if there are any adverse effects on the economy at all, the net effect would be to reduce, rather than increase, federal, state, and local tax receipts in 2011. Are these risks worth taking in the foolhardy hope of paying for nine days' worth of deficit?"
Conflict-of-Interest Bugaboo | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary
Conflict-of-Interest Bugaboo | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary: "George Soros, who gives even more money to the Democrats and left-leaning causes, is treated as a benevolent hero. Mr. Soros made his money in financial bets against the success of government policies (i.e. shorting currencies); he was betting on economic failure and, in one case at least, with inside information. The Kochs, by contrast, have companies that produce products that are useful to people, such as carpets and paper towels. The Kochs have a vested interest in the success of the American and world economy. Too bad Mr. Soros cannot say the same."
"if you omit from your sample all of those environmental scientists who are on a government tab — salary or research grant — and those relatively few environmental scientists who are on the tab of an oil company or some other vested private industry, you are likely to have a much smaller ratio between those who agree versus those who disagree about global warming. If you are a professor at a state university and write a research paper showing that global warming is not a problem, how long do you think your government funding will remain?"
"The political class and the media decry the growth of lobbyists in Washington. Yet why is it so hard to understand that as government increasingly gives away more money and dispenses more favors, it attracts greater numbers looking for those benefits?"
"if you omit from your sample all of those environmental scientists who are on a government tab — salary or research grant — and those relatively few environmental scientists who are on the tab of an oil company or some other vested private industry, you are likely to have a much smaller ratio between those who agree versus those who disagree about global warming. If you are a professor at a state university and write a research paper showing that global warming is not a problem, how long do you think your government funding will remain?"
"The political class and the media decry the growth of lobbyists in Washington. Yet why is it so hard to understand that as government increasingly gives away more money and dispenses more favors, it attracts greater numbers looking for those benefits?"
More Proof We Can't Stop Poverty By Making It More Comfortable | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary
More Proof We Can't Stop Poverty By Making It More Comfortable | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Combined, these 122 programs spent more than $591 billion in 2009, and are projected to cost even more this year.
That amounts to $14,849 for every poor man, woman and child in America. Given that the poverty line is $10,830, it would have been cheaper just to mail every poor person a check for $11,000."
"We focus far too much on making poverty more comfortable, and not enough on creating the prosperity that will get people out of poverty.
Observers have known for a long time that the surest ways to stay out of poverty are to finish school, not get pregnant outside marriage and get a job, any job, and stick with it."
"An enormous amount of evidence and experience shows that private charities are far more effective than government welfare programs.
While welfare provides incentives for counterproductive behavior, private charities can use their aid to encourage self-sufficiency, self-improvement, and independence. Private charities can individualize their approaches and target specific problems that are holding people in poverty."
That amounts to $14,849 for every poor man, woman and child in America. Given that the poverty line is $10,830, it would have been cheaper just to mail every poor person a check for $11,000."
"We focus far too much on making poverty more comfortable, and not enough on creating the prosperity that will get people out of poverty.
Observers have known for a long time that the surest ways to stay out of poverty are to finish school, not get pregnant outside marriage and get a job, any job, and stick with it."
"An enormous amount of evidence and experience shows that private charities are far more effective than government welfare programs.
While welfare provides incentives for counterproductive behavior, private charities can use their aid to encourage self-sufficiency, self-improvement, and independence. Private charities can individualize their approaches and target specific problems that are holding people in poverty."
Pelosi's False Tax Choice | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary
Pelosi's False Tax Choice | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Speaker Pelosi is presenting us with a false choice: higher taxes or more debt. Spending cuts just aren't part of her lexicon."
The Empirical Case against Government Stimulus - Robert P. Murphy - Mises Daily
The Empirical Case against Government Stimulus - Robert P. Murphy - Mises Daily: "What's really amazing about the [European Central Bank] piece is that it stressed that spending cuts were a much better way of closing a budget hole than raising taxes."
"Our analysis is based on new data on forty-four countries spanning about two hundred years. The dataset incorporates over 3,700 annual observations covering a wide range of political systems, institutions, exchange rate arrangements, and historic circumstances. Our main findings are: First, the relationship between government debt and real GDP growth is weak for debt/GDP ratios below a threshold of 90 percent of GDP. Above 90 percent, median growth rates fall by one percent, and average growth falls considerably more. We find that the threshold for public debt is similar in advanced and emerging economies."
"The anti-Keynesians point to actual success stories as evidence of the potency of their policies. The Keynesians, in contrast, point to awful economies and claim that they'd be even worse were it not for the Keynesian 'medicine.'"
"Our analysis is based on new data on forty-four countries spanning about two hundred years. The dataset incorporates over 3,700 annual observations covering a wide range of political systems, institutions, exchange rate arrangements, and historic circumstances. Our main findings are: First, the relationship between government debt and real GDP growth is weak for debt/GDP ratios below a threshold of 90 percent of GDP. Above 90 percent, median growth rates fall by one percent, and average growth falls considerably more. We find that the threshold for public debt is similar in advanced and emerging economies."
"The anti-Keynesians point to actual success stories as evidence of the potency of their policies. The Keynesians, in contrast, point to awful economies and claim that they'd be even worse were it not for the Keynesian 'medicine.'"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)