The Income-Inequality Myth | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

The Income-Inequality Myth | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'Poverty, of course, is a bad thing. But is inequality? After all, if we doubled everyone's income tomorrow, we would eliminate an enormous amount of economic hardship. Yet, inequality would actually increase. As Margaret Thatcher said about those who obsess over inequality, "So long as the [income] gap is smaller, they would rather have the poor poorer."

In what way does someone else's success harm me?'

'But as Nobel Prize–winning economist Gary Becker pointed out, "It would be hard to motivate most people if everyone had the same earnings, status, prestige, and other rewards."

Another Nobel Prize winner, F. A. Hayek, concluded, "The rapid economic advance that we have come to expect seems to be in large measure a result of this inequality and to be impossible without it. Progress at such a fast rate cannot take place on a uniform front but must take place in an echelon fashion, with some far in front of the rest."'

Snooker -- Democrats' Favorite Pastime | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary

Snooker -- Democrats' Favorite Pastime | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'Republicans should prepare a specific list of spending non—starters and make it known to all. They need to be clear that if any of the items are contained in a future appropriations bill or continuing resolution, they will make sure it is defeated. The list should contain only those items that would cause the president to have a politically impossible public—relations problem if he threatened to veto the specific appropriation bill or continuing resolution and thereby shut down the government if the items were not included.

Republicans could start by insisting that no expenditure for salaries could be made for people not properly appointed with the advice and consent of the Senate as called for in the Constitution — that is, phony, non—recess appointments would not be funded.

A number of the international organizations for which the United States provides major support have gone rogue and spent monies on programs of which most fiscally responsible Americans disapprove (or would disapprove it they knew about them). These programs should be cut. Examples are the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (which ignores much sound science), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s Fiscal Affairs Committee (which is attempting to create a high tax cartel) and possibly the International Monetary Fund, which keeps flirting with bailing out European economic mismanagement.

The GOP and others have rightly complained about regulatory excess, but they need to put some teeth in these complaints by refusing to allow funding for regulations that have not been justified by a truly independent cost—benefit analysis, so the Environmental Protection Agency could not get away with unnecessarily attempting to shut down many needed power plants. The cost—benefit requirement also should be applied to the Internal Revenue Service and Treasury so they could not continue such outrages as making it almost impossible for Americans living abroad to get bank accounts and driving hundreds of billions of dollars of foreign capital out of the United States.'

Will Congress Stop King Barack the First? | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary

Will Congress Stop King Barack the First? | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'The Recess Appointments Clause was, "Federalist 67" explains, merely an "auxiliary method" adopted because "it would have been improper to oblige this body to be continually in session."

That stopgap measure met the needs of an era of horseback travel, part-time Congresses, and recesses lasting between six and nine months. It wasn't supposed to let the president do regular end-runs around the requirement of Senate confirmation.'

'But the worst hypocrisy here is Obama's. "I've studied the Constitution as a student, I've taught it as a teacher," he piously intoned in 2009: "I know that we must never, ever, turn our back on its enduring principles for expedience's sake."'

No Child -- And the Latest Lost Decade | Neal McCluskey | Cato Institute: Commentary

No Child -- And the Latest Lost Decade | Neal McCluskey | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'Despite federal k-12 spending rising from $27 billion in 2001, the year before NCLB, to $38 billion in 2011, reading and math scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress — the so-called “Nation’s Report Card” — have either been stagnant, or grown at slower rates than many periods before No Child.'

'education bureaucrats around the country created wildly varying tests, definitions of “proficiency,” and played lots of other tricks that have made it nearly impossible to know if a child is truly proficient, or just so labeled by a system dodging punishment.

There’s also a serious question of whether rising test scores for historic strugglers have reflected increasing knowledge or just better testing strategies.'

Iran's Bluster Proves Its Weakness | Benjamin H. Friedman | Cato Institute: Commentary

Iran's Bluster Proves Its Weakness | Benjamin H. Friedman | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'The obviousness of Iran's bluster suggests its weakness. Empty threats generally show desperation, not security. And Iran's weakness is not confined to water. Though Iran is more populous and wealthier than most of its neighbors, its military isn't equipped for conquest. Like other militaries in its region, Iran's suffers from coup-proofing, the practice of designing a military more to prevent coups than to fight rival states. Economic problems and limited weapons-import options have also undermined it ability to modernize its military, while its rivals buy American arms.'