Irresponsible Foreign Policy: The Republican Establishment, Not Ron Paul | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary

Irresponsible Foreign Policy: The Republican Establishment, Not Ron Paul | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'Rick Santorum warned: as commander-in-chief Ron Paul "can shut down our bases in Germany. He can shut down the bases in Japan. He can pull our fleets back."

Why would this be bad? The European nations have a larger GDP and population than America. The U.S. faces fiscal crisis: after 66 years, it is time for the Europeans to defend themselves. Japan, long possessing the world's second largest economy, also could take care of itself.'

'Gingrich apocalyptically claimed that the U.S. "would never, ever be safe" with the current regime in Tehran. Yet America survived decades of Stalin's Soviet Union, Mao's China, and Kim Il-sung's and Kim Jong-il's North Korea. Deterrence worked. America's military power remains overwhelming; any attack on the U.S. would lead to Tehran's destruction. And no Republican has offered evidence that Iran's rulers are suicidal.'

'Paul's willingness to rethink U.S. foreign policy means he is the only candidate to propose a realistic military budget, one that supports the "common defense" of America, not the rest of the world. The other GOP candidates decry nonexistent spending cuts. Military outlays under President Obama are higher than under President Bush. Only in Washington is slowing the rate of increased called a "cut."

In real terms U.S. military outlays have doubled over the last decade. America today spends more in real terms than it did during the Cold War, Korean War, or Vietnam War. Washington accounts for roughly half the globe's military outlays, while allied with every major industrialized state other than China and Russia. America's closest competitor is China, yet Washington alone spends several times as much on the military as Beijing, and many U.S. friends in Asia are arming against China.'

What Does Being American Mean Now? | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary

What Does Being American Mean Now? | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'And, despite George Washington's warning, this legislation also would "deny suspected terrorists, even U.S. citizens seized within the (U.S.) nation's borders, the right to trial and subject them to indefinite detention." This is America?'

'The Patriot Act itself passed the Senate 98-1. The only dissenter was Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., who, on Oct. 11, 2001, on the floor of the Senate, said:

"There is no doubt that if we lived in a police state, it would be easier to catch terrorists. If we lived in a country where the police were allowed to search your home at any time for any reason; if we lived in a country where the government was entitled to open your mail, eavesdrop on your phone conversations, or intercept your email communications ... the government would probably discover and arrest more terrorists or would-be terrorists, just as it would find more lawbreakers generally"'

'In the present Congress, Rep. Paul is not the only defender of what we used to tell other countries were our fundamental value'

Obama Officials Say We Don't Trust the Government Enough. Why Would We? | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

Obama Officials Say We Don't Trust the Government Enough. Why Would We? | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'No doubt we all make mistakes in our lives. But in the last few years, we’ve seen the government invade a country that turned out not to have weapons of mass destruction, ran up $15 trillion in debt, all but bankrupted Medicare and Social Security and nudged us toward a housing bubble that nearly brought down the economy. Should we really trust a government that thought shipping guns to Mexican drug lords and giving $535 million to a money-losing solar panel company were good ideas?'

Does Constitution Allow Supremes to Hide from Us? | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary

Does Constitution Allow Supremes to Hide from Us? | Nat Hentoff | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'If I were teaching a high-school civics class, I don't know how I would explain to the students that they, like the rest of us ordinary citizens, are banned by the court from seeing and hearing how these top interpreters of our rule of law decide cases, thereby preventing us from learning who they are and how they think.'

The Debacle of Margarine's Utility - Morgan A. Brown - Mises Daily

The Debacle of Margarine's Utility - Morgan A. Brown - Mises Daily: 'It is hard to believe that there ever was a time when uttering "I can't believe it's not butter" would have provided ample warrant to arraign a hapless margarine producer for crimes against the state.'

'Peonage laws were in effect in states like Mississippi, but had other protective measures not been in place — i.e., the federal protection of butter's sacred yellow coloring — southern blacks would have made longer strides for economic success through vertical integration despite the oppressive commercial restrictions of Jim Crow.'

'The Federal and State antimargarine laws increase the cost of margarine, a food product as good and nutritious as butter. In many instances, due to these discriminatory laws, families cannot buy margarine. As we have stated, when it is purchased, the discriminatory laws force them to spend extra time in the kitchen, mixing color into margarine and wasting margarine in the process.
On behalf of the 14,300,000 colored consumers in this country, we plead with you to do away with all punitive Federal laws aimed at margarine.
The proposed color ban against margarine is as unfair and unjust as discriminatory race and class laws.

Who's to Blame for Washington Gridlock | Jeffrey A. Miron | Cato Institute: Commentary

Who's to Blame for Washington Gridlock | Jeffrey A. Miron | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'This shows that the current debate is not really over the payroll tax; it is over the size and scope of government. That is an important topic, but it is not one that will get resolved now. Both sides have too much to lose if they make concessions on policy issues that can be used against them in the upcoming elections.'

'It is tempting to blame this outcome on the "extreme" or misguided views of one party or the other (take your pick, depending on your own views). But that is too simple.

The key problem is that, in one crucial respect, all politicians are alike: They want to get re-elected. In attempting to do so, however, they face different constraints depending on the district they represent. Republicans, especially the more conservative ones, are from states or districts with conservative voters. Democrats the reverse.

Thus even if behind closed doors every member of Congress held the same views on good versus bad policies, gridlock is still likely. Given the current distribution of voter preferences in the United States, roughly half the elected politicians are going to support conservative positions and half the opposite on most issues. Democracy may be the least bad form of government, but it is far from perfect.

This stand-off will only change if voters convince politicians that, on average, their views have evolved in the direction of either bigger or smaller government. This is what the November 2012 elections may reveal. Until then, politics rather than economic common sense will dominate the policy debate.'

King Newt Takes on the Judges | Roger Pilon | Cato Institute: Commentary

King Newt Takes on the Judges | Roger Pilon | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'He claims, for example, that since the New Deal, the judiciary's power has "increased exponentially" at the expense of the political branches. Yet Franklin Roosevelt accomplished exactly what Gingrich is calling for: His infamous 1937 threat to "pack" the Supreme Court with additional justices intimidated it into discovering new congressional powers and approving New Deal legislation.'

Voters Like Paul's Honesty | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

Voters Like Paul's Honesty | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'At a time when our country is drowning in debt, the other GOP candidates seem unwilling to venture much beyond the idea of cutting “fraud, waste, and abuse.” Paul, on the other hand, has a specific plan to cut $1 trillion from the federal budget next year, including abolishing five cabinet agencies. That may or may not be practical, but it speaks to those seeking a smaller, less costly, less intrusive government, in a way that other candidates, with their 59-point plans for carefully trimming this agency or that, do not.'

Some Additional Reflections on the Economic Crisis and the Theory of the Cycle - Jesus Huerta de Soto - Mises Daily

Some Additional Reflections on the Economic Crisis and the Theory of the Cycle - Jesus Huerta de Soto - Mises Daily: 'the best way to preserve the environment is to extend entrepreneurial creativity and the principles of the free market to all natural resources, which requires their complete privatization and the efficient definition and defense of the property rights that pertain to them. In the absence of these rights, economic calculation becomes impossible, the appropriate allocation of resources to the most highly valued uses is prevented, and all sorts of irresponsible behaviors are encouraged, as is the unjustified consumption and destruction of many natural resources.'

'the credit expansion that central banks orchestrate and cyclically inject into the economic process through the private banking system' ... 'ends up placing an unwarranted strain on the real economy by making many unprofitable projects appear profitable (Huerta de Soto 2009). The result is unnecessary pressure on the entire natural environment: trees that should not be cut down are cut down; the atmosphere is polluted; rivers are contaminated; mountains are drilled; cement is produced; and minerals, gas, oil, etc., are extracted in an attempt to complete overly ambitious projects that in reality consumers are not willing to demand, etc.'

RAHN: Government spending jobs myth - Washington Times

RAHN: Government spending jobs myth - Washington Times: 'As can be seen in the accompanying chart, there is an inverse relationship between increasing the size of government and job creation.'

'there is an enormous tax extraction cost for the government to obtain each additional dollar. Estimates of this extraction cost typically run from $1.40 to well over $2.50 of lost output for each dollar the government obtains.'

'If additional government spending could create more jobs, it would be expected that over the long run, the socialist or semisocialist economies would have full employment and the smaller-government, developed economies would have higher unemployment. Again, the empirical evidence shows just the opposite.'