Winning Whose Future? | Edward H. Crane | Cato Institute: Commentary

Winning Whose Future? | Edward H. Crane | Cato Institute: Commentary: "The question is, whose future? In a society based on individual liberty, each of us should decide what our goals are and what constitutes a life well lived."

"We don't need politicians winning the future for us — whatever that may mean. As Americans become ever more dependent on a bankrupt, intrusive and inept government, what we need is to liberate the future."

Should Governments Subsidize Health Insurance? | Jeffrey A. Miron | Cato Institute: Commentary

Should Governments Subsidize Health Insurance? | Jeffrey A. Miron | Cato Institute: Commentary: "The natural way to balance these concerns is to subsidize health insurance for the poor, but for no one else. Roughly, this mean eliminating Medicare, Obamacare, and the tax-subsidy for employer-provided insurance, but retaining a (scaled down) version of Medicaid.

This approach insures everyone against the worst case scenario in which poor health makes it impossible to earn income. This approach also means that even among the non-poor, some people will pay higher health insurance premiums than others."

Creating Palestine on the Slit Throat of a Baby? | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary

Creating Palestine on the Slit Throat of a Baby? | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary: "'Gaza residents from the southern city of Rafah hit the streets Saturday to celebrate the terror attack in ... Itamar. ... residents handed out candy and sweets, one resident saying the joy 'is a natural response to the harm settlers inflict on the Palestinian residents in the West Bank.''

I join the curt response to the Gaza delight in the blood-soaked bedrooms in Itamar that Bret Stephens wrote in the March 15 Wall Street Journal:

'Just what kind of society thinks it's 'natural' to slit the throats of children in their beds?'"

Campaign For Liberty — Middle Class

Campaign For Liberty — Middle Class: "If tough labor laws, pro-union government, and wealth redistribution were the pathway to prosperity, then it would be Mexico building that wall on our southern border, not us. Skills, not union propaganda, are the pathway to the middle class"

Clarence Darrow on Freedom, Justice, and War - Jeff Riggenbach - Mises Daily

Clarence Darrow on Freedom, Justice, and War - Jeff Riggenbach - Mises Daily: "the emphasis in punishment must be not on paying one's debt to 'society,' whatever that may mean, but in paying one's 'debt' to the victim. Certainly, the initial part of that debt is restitution. This works clearly in cases of theft. If A has stolen $15,000 from B, then the first, or initial, part of A's punishment must be to restore that $15,000 to the hands of B (plus damages, judicial and police costs, and interest foregone). Suppose that, as in most cases, the thief has already spent the money. In that case, the first step of proper libertarian punishment is to force the thief to work, and to allocate the ensuing income to the victim until the victim has been repaid. The ideal situation, then, puts the criminal frankly into a state of enslavement to his victim, the criminal continuing in that condition of just slavery until he has redressed the grievance of the man he has wronged.

We must note that the emphasis of restitution-punishment is diametrically opposite to the current practice of punishment. What happens nowadays is the following absurdity: A steals $15,000 from B. The government tracks down, tries, and convicts A, all at the expense of B, as one of the numerous taxpayers victimized in this process. Then, the government, instead of forcing A to repay B or to work at forced labor until that debt is paid, forces B, the victim, to pay taxes to support the criminal in prison for ten or twenty years' time. Where in the world is the justice here? The victim not only loses his money, but pays more money besides for the dubious thrill of catching, convicting, and then supporting the criminal; and the criminal is still enslaved, but not to the good purpose of recompensing his victim."

Should We Use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve? | Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren | Cato Institute: Commentary

Should We Use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve? | Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Thus the entire narrative about the embargo and the need to protect ourselves against foreign policy blackmail was never true. Nor is it true today. The development of an oil futures market, which did not exist in 1973, allows consumers and firms to insure against the financial consequences of oil shocks through contracting."

Over to You, H. Parker Willis - James Grant - Mises Daily

Over to You, H. Parker Willis - James Grant - Mises Daily: "Though the Fed's monetary and credit bridges collapsed two years ago, few have demanded a fundamental accounting of the ideas that undergird Chairman Bernanke's $2.2 trillion balance sheet and inform his interest-rate policy."

Ignorance Makes Us Poorer | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary

Ignorance Makes Us Poorer | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Should we have protective tariffs on pencils? As simple as a pencil is, it contains materials from all over the world (special woods, paint, graphite, metal for the band and rubber for the eraser) and requires specialized machinery. How much would it cost you to make your own pencils or even grow your own food? Trade means lower costs and better products, and the more of it the better.

Adam Smith explained that trade, by increasing the size of the market for any good or service, allows the efficiencies of mass production, thus lowering the cost and the ultimate price to consumers. The economist David Ricardo in 1817, building on Smith's work, popularized the understanding of the concept of 'comparative advantage,' which shows that trade is beneficial, even when one person or country can produce everything less expensively."

"It is easy to see the loss of 200 jobs in a U.S. textile mill that produces men's T-shirts, but it is not as obvious to see the benefit from the fact that everyone can buy T-shirts for $2 less when they come from China, even though the cotton in the shirts was most likely grown in the United States."

"A loss of 200 jobs in one industry can easily translate to the imperceptible gain of 2,000 jobs in 100 other domestic industries as a result of the cost reductions from free trade."

"It is possible to grow high-cost and inferior coffee in South Florida and not buy it from Colombia. A free-trade agreement with Colombia means that nation will buy more U.S.-built Caterpillar tractors and wheat grown in the American Midwest and U.S. consumers will buy more Colombian coffee, fruit and textiles. The consumers in both countries will benefit from lower prices and better products, and more workers will be employed in each country, doing the things that they can each do best."

"If free trade really causes most jobs to move to low-wage countries, why do countries such as Mexico and Bangladesh have huge unemployment rates and very high-wage places such as Virginia and Switzerland have almost full employment?"

By What Authority Has Obama Gone to War with Libya? | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary

By What Authority Has Obama Gone to War with Libya? | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary: "On the campaign trail in late 2007, [Obama] told reporter Charlie Savage that the president lacks the constitutional power 'to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.'

Then-candidate Hillary Clinton said much the same: 'The Constitution requires Congress to authorize war.'

It is 'a great principle in free government,' James Madison wrote in 1793, 'that those who are to conduct a war cannot in the nature of things, be proper or safe judges, [of] whether a war ought to be commenced.' The Constitution leaves that question to Congress."

Economic Efficiency | Peter Van Doren | Cato Institute: Commentary

Economic Efficiency | Peter Van Doren | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Recent estimates by economists suggest that electricity prices would have to increase by 1.4 cents per kilowatt hour from their current 9.1 cents per kilowatt hour to account for environmental damages. That's not enough to make it economically worthwhile to buy many of the energy-efficient appliances and lights bulbs adored by the would-be regulators."