Abolish the Department of Homeland Security | David Rittgers | Cato Institute: Commentary

Abolish the Department of Homeland Security | David Rittgers | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'Shockingly, the cost of the new headquarters roughly equals what we've averaged annually on homeland security grant programs to cities and states. That's part of the political appeal of "homeland security." It allows politicians to wrap pork in red, white and blue in a way not possible with defense spending. Not every town can host a military installation or build warships, but every town has a police force that can use counterterrorism funds to combat gangs or a fire department that needs recruits or a new fire station.'

'A study by professors John Mueller and Mark Stewart found that in order to survive a cost-benefit analysis, the past decade's increased homeland-security expenditures "would have to deter, prevent, foil or protect against 1,667 otherwise successful [attempted Times Square car bomb]-type attacks per year, or more than four per day."'

Is Social Security a Ponzi Scheme? - Robert P. Murphy - Mises Daily

Is Social Security a Ponzi Scheme? - Robert P. Murphy - Mises Daily: It's possible for everyone in the entire community to "live below his means," that is, to consume less than his income and to save. The economy is then physically capable of reducing the output of consumption goods (TVs, sports cars, steak dinners, etc.) and increasing the output of investment or capital goods (drill presses, fertilizer, MRI machines, etc.). In the future, the larger quantities of various tools and equipment make the workers more productive than they otherwise would have been. That's why the standard of living can rise; the community is physically capable of cranking out more goods and services because of the past investments.

A Teachable Moment Courtesy of Solyndra | Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren | Cato Institute: Commentary

A Teachable Moment Courtesy of Solyndra | Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'The fact that federal loan guarantees were even necessary for Solyndra tells us that few, if any, lenders thought that giving the firm money was a very good idea. Given the fact that lenders who bet "right" on companies with strong prospects but insufficient capital are lenders who will make money, we can rest assured that hundreds if not thousands of bank loan officers took a long, hard look at Solyandra and said ... no thanks. Are we to believe that President Obama knows more than all of these profit-hungry capitalists about Solyndra's real prospects in global solar energy markets?'

'systematic evaluations of federal programs find no evidence that 60 years of federal energy tech spending have produced more benefits than costs.'

The Real Solution to the Debt Problem - David S. D'Amato - Mises Daily

The Real Solution to the Debt Problem - David S. D'Amato - Mises Daily: 'within a fiat-money system, public debt increases "at a much faster rhythm" than even the distended money supply. Pointing to the United States since 1971 as an example, Professor H�lsmann notes that while the money in circulation "increased by the factor 6," the federal government's debt grew by a factor of 20.'

Taking Liberties: Bright Lights, Big Trouble | Fox News

Taking Liberties: Bright Lights, Big Trouble | Fox News: '“It's illegal because you're warning someone,” he explained. “It's the same thing as saying, 'run, here comes the cops,' You're obstructing a cop from doing his lawful duty.”'

It's illegal to warn someone?!?

Job-Killing Politicians, Modern Military Hawks, and Hapless Central Banks | Edward H. Crane | Cato Institute: Commentary

Job-Killing Politicians, Modern Military Hawks, and Hapless Central Banks | Edward H. Crane | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'Someone did a review of the employment growth during the tenures of the various GOP presidential candidates who have been governors. That would include Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney, Jon Huntsman, Rick Perry, and Gary Johnson. You remember Johnson, don't you, the former two-term Republican governor of New Mexico, a dark blue state? Well, it turns out that the highest percentage increase in employment was in New Mexico!

When asked to take credit for this, the libertarian Johnson demurred. I didn't do anything, he said, other than get out of the way and let the entrepreneurs create jobs.'

At Least Ponzi Didn't Force People to Enroll | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

At Least Ponzi Didn't Force People to Enroll | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'Some defenders of the current system insist that it is not because, well, as USA Today editorialized, "Ponzi schemes are a criminal enterprise; Social Security is not." But this is simply a tautology that says nothing about the program's structure. Those young workers who will be forced to pay more in taxes while getting less in benefits will not take much comfort from Social Security's legality.

But those taxes and benefit cuts do point out one area where Social Security is different from a Ponzi scheme. Though it's usually a swindle, people sign up for a Ponzi scheme voluntarily. Once Ponzi was unable to talk enough people into investing with him, his scheme collapsed. People participate in Social Security because ... the government makes them. And if the Social Security system begins to run short of people paying into the system, as it is now, it can always force those people to pay more.

That's what the program has done more than 40 times since it began. Even after adjusting for inflation, Social Security payroll taxes have increased by more than 800 percent since the program began.'

'Under current law, if nothing changes, a 30-year-old worker today can expect to receive just 76 percent of the benefits that he has been promised. That will be far less than the amount of money he could have had if he had been able to invest his Social Security taxes privately. In fact, many young workers will be lucky if they receive back as much in benefits as they pay into the system.'