Posts
Johnson adhering to watchdog pledge | thenorthwestern.com | Oshkosh Northwestern: "Johnson is co-sponsoring a proposal DeMint intends to put on the table next week that would bar Senate Republicans from seeking earmarks for two years. The proposal puts old-guard Republicans and McConnell on the spot.
House Republicans already have an earmark ban and are expected to extend it when they caucus next week."
Friday, November 12, 2010
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Banks Are Lending More (to the Government) | Alan Reynolds | Cato Institute: Commentary
Banks Are Lending More (to the Government) | Alan Reynolds | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Talk of 'quantitative' easing makes it sound as if there will be a larger quantity of credit available to somebody somewhere. But the Fed is offering more credit only to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the U.S. Treasury."
"The next time you hear politicians or government officials complaining that banks are not lending enough to consumers or small businesses, just remind them that banks are much too busy lending tens of billions — to the U.S. government."
"The next time you hear politicians or government officials complaining that banks are not lending enough to consumers or small businesses, just remind them that banks are much too busy lending tens of billions — to the U.S. government."
Private Social Security Accounts: Still a Good Idea | William Shipman and Peter Ferrara | Cato Institute: Commentary
Private Social Security Accounts: Still a Good Idea | William Shipman and Peter Ferrara | Cato Institute: Commentary: "They were unfortunate to retire just one year after the worst 10-year stock market performance since 1926. Yet their account, having earned a 6.75% return annually from 1965 to 2009, would still pay them about 75% more than Social Security would have."
"It is a mathematical fact that the least expensive way to provide for an almost certain future liability is to save and invest in capital markets prior to the onset of the liability. That's why state and local pension funds, corporate pension plans, federal employee retirement plans and Chile's successful Social Security personal accounts (since copied by other countries) do so. It is sound practice.
And it's why Mr. Obama is wrong to assert that personal Social Security accounts are 'ill-conceived,' and why each of us should have the liberty to opt into one."
"It is a mathematical fact that the least expensive way to provide for an almost certain future liability is to save and invest in capital markets prior to the onset of the liability. That's why state and local pension funds, corporate pension plans, federal employee retirement plans and Chile's successful Social Security personal accounts (since copied by other countries) do so. It is sound practice.
And it's why Mr. Obama is wrong to assert that personal Social Security accounts are 'ill-conceived,' and why each of us should have the liberty to opt into one."
Blockading with Trade Restrictions | Jim Powell | Cato Institute: Commentary
Blockading with Trade Restrictions | Jim Powell | Cato Institute: Commentary: "He realized that if tariffs were really good, then civilization would have begun where people were cut off from the outside world by mountains, oceans, deserts and other natural barriers. But, he explained, 'it is where trade could best be carried on that we find wealth first accumulating and civilization beginning. It is on accessible harbors, navigable rivers and highways that we find cities arising and the arts and sciences developing.'
George wrote Protection or Free Trade because he hated monopolies. They could be maintained only if there were government-enforced restrictions that prevented people from dealing with alternative suppliers. He concluded that the most effective antitrust policy was free trade — consumers and businesses able to shop the world for the best values.
He explained why trade restrictions mainly harm nations that impose them: 'Every tariff that raises prices for the encouragement of one industry must operate to discourage all other industries into which the products of that industry enter. A tariff that raises the price of lumber necessarily discourages the industries which make use of lumber, from those connected with the building of houses and ships to those engaged in the making of matches and wooden toothpicks; a tariff that raises the price of salt discourages the dairyman and the fisherman; a tariff that raises the price of sugar discourages the fruit-preserver, the maker of syrups, and so on.'
George observed that nations try to prevent adversaries from trading, and a blockade is considered an act of war."
"George's most famous lines: 'Protective tariffs are as much applications of force as are blockading squadrons, and their object is the same — to prevent trade. The difference between the two is that blockading squadrons are a means whereby nations attempt to prevent their enemies from trading. Protective tariffs are a means whereby nations attempt to prevent their own people from trading. What protection teaches us is to do to ourselves in time of peace what enemies seek to do to us in time of war.'"
George wrote Protection or Free Trade because he hated monopolies. They could be maintained only if there were government-enforced restrictions that prevented people from dealing with alternative suppliers. He concluded that the most effective antitrust policy was free trade — consumers and businesses able to shop the world for the best values.
He explained why trade restrictions mainly harm nations that impose them: 'Every tariff that raises prices for the encouragement of one industry must operate to discourage all other industries into which the products of that industry enter. A tariff that raises the price of lumber necessarily discourages the industries which make use of lumber, from those connected with the building of houses and ships to those engaged in the making of matches and wooden toothpicks; a tariff that raises the price of salt discourages the dairyman and the fisherman; a tariff that raises the price of sugar discourages the fruit-preserver, the maker of syrups, and so on.'
George observed that nations try to prevent adversaries from trading, and a blockade is considered an act of war."
"George's most famous lines: 'Protective tariffs are as much applications of force as are blockading squadrons, and their object is the same — to prevent trade. The difference between the two is that blockading squadrons are a means whereby nations attempt to prevent their enemies from trading. Protective tariffs are a means whereby nations attempt to prevent their own people from trading. What protection teaches us is to do to ourselves in time of peace what enemies seek to do to us in time of war.'"
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
After November 2 | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary
After November 2 | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Therefore, if this election is going to be the start of a long-term trend and not a one-time blip, the new Republican-dominated Congress is going to have to deliver. In particular, Republicans are going to have to follow through on their promises to reduce government spending and the deficit."
Highlights of deficit reduction proposals - FoxNews.com
Highlights of deficit reduction proposals - FoxNews.com: "Highlights of proposals by leaders of President Barack Obama's bipartisan deficit commission:"
"— Increase the Social Security retirement age by one month every two years after it reaches 67 under current law. It would reach 68 around 2050 and 69 around 2075."
"— Overhaul individual income taxes and corporate taxes. For individuals and families, eliminate a host of popular tax credits and deductions, including the child tax credit and the mortgage interest deduction. Significantly reduce income tax rates, with the top rate dropping to 23 percent from 35 percent.
— Reduce the corporate income tax rate to 26 percent from 35 percent, and stop taxing the overseas profits of U.S.-based multinational corporations."
"— Reduce congressional and White House budgets by 15 percent, freeze federal compensation at non-defense agencies for three years, cut the federal work force by 10 percent, eliminate 250,000 non-defense contractors and end money for commercial space flight.
— Eliminate noncompetitive spending bills known as 'earmarks.'
— End grants to large and medium-sized hub airports; require airports to fund a larger portion of the cost of aviation security.
— Cut funding for the public broadcasting."
Those sounds like good ideas.
"— Increase the Social Security retirement age by one month every two years after it reaches 67 under current law. It would reach 68 around 2050 and 69 around 2075."
"— Overhaul individual income taxes and corporate taxes. For individuals and families, eliminate a host of popular tax credits and deductions, including the child tax credit and the mortgage interest deduction. Significantly reduce income tax rates, with the top rate dropping to 23 percent from 35 percent.
— Reduce the corporate income tax rate to 26 percent from 35 percent, and stop taxing the overseas profits of U.S.-based multinational corporations."
"— Reduce congressional and White House budgets by 15 percent, freeze federal compensation at non-defense agencies for three years, cut the federal work force by 10 percent, eliminate 250,000 non-defense contractors and end money for commercial space flight.
— Eliminate noncompetitive spending bills known as 'earmarks.'
— End grants to large and medium-sized hub airports; require airports to fund a larger portion of the cost of aviation security.
— Cut funding for the public broadcasting."
Those sounds like good ideas.
Shipping Out Jobs | Daniel Griswold | Cato Institute: Commentary
Shipping Out Jobs | Daniel Griswold | Cato Institute: Commentary: "In 2008, US companies sold more than $6 trillion worth of goods and services through overseas affiliates — three times what US companies exported from America. And, no, those affiliates aren't mainly 'export platforms,' set up to ship goods back to the United States: Almost 90 percent of what they produce abroad is sold abroad.
It's not about access to 'cheap labor,' either: More than three-quarters of outward US manufacturing investment goes to other rich, developed economies like Canada and the European Union. That's where they find the wealthy customers, skilled workers, open markets, efficient infrastructure and political stability to operate profitably.
Indeed, US manufacturing companies invest a modest $2 billion a year in China, compared to $30 billion a year in Europe.
Nor do jobs created by those investments come at the expense of American workers. In fact, the more workers US multinationals hire abroad, the more they tend to hire at their parent operations in America."
It's not about access to 'cheap labor,' either: More than three-quarters of outward US manufacturing investment goes to other rich, developed economies like Canada and the European Union. That's where they find the wealthy customers, skilled workers, open markets, efficient infrastructure and political stability to operate profitably.
Indeed, US manufacturing companies invest a modest $2 billion a year in China, compared to $30 billion a year in Europe.
Nor do jobs created by those investments come at the expense of American workers. In fact, the more workers US multinationals hire abroad, the more they tend to hire at their parent operations in America."
Obama's Imaginary Tax Cuts | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary
Obama's Imaginary Tax Cuts | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary: "The tax increase of $725.7 billion dwarfs the tax cuts of $373 billion, leaving a net tax increase of $352 billion. But it gets worse. Just $107.6 billion of the tax cuts are permanent — the rest are temporary — but all of the $725.7 billion increases are permanent."
"The vast majority of these tax increases fall on middle- and lower-income people."
"'If Democrats are being truthful, why did they not enact the tax cuts before adjourning to campaign for re-election, when such an act would have been to their political advantage?' The answer is that they did not have a majority of Democrats who could agree on any specific tax-cut measure.
Remember, the lame-duck Congress will contain the same members who have been serving, even though, perhaps, 50 or 60 of them will have lost the election. What incentive do they have at that point to agree suddenly to tax cuts they previously opposed? Yes, the people might have spoken in favor of the cuts through the electoral process, but many of these defeated members will be more interested in returning home well before Christmas rather than spending time in Washington, debating tax-cut legislation. They also would be beholden to the president for appointments to new jobs."
"The vast majority of these tax increases fall on middle- and lower-income people."
"'If Democrats are being truthful, why did they not enact the tax cuts before adjourning to campaign for re-election, when such an act would have been to their political advantage?' The answer is that they did not have a majority of Democrats who could agree on any specific tax-cut measure.
Remember, the lame-duck Congress will contain the same members who have been serving, even though, perhaps, 50 or 60 of them will have lost the election. What incentive do they have at that point to agree suddenly to tax cuts they previously opposed? Yes, the people might have spoken in favor of the cuts through the electoral process, but many of these defeated members will be more interested in returning home well before Christmas rather than spending time in Washington, debating tax-cut legislation. They also would be beholden to the president for appointments to new jobs."
Monday, November 08, 2010
Mindless Partisanship Gets in the Way of Fighting Big Government | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary
Mindless Partisanship Gets in the Way of Fighting Big Government | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary: "In a 1988 survey, over half of self-identified 'strong Democrats' believed inflation had increased under President Reagan, when it had actually come down nearly 10 points. Half of the Republicans in a 1996 poll believed Bill Clinton had increased the deficit, though it dropped steadily during his tenure. Political scientist Adam J. Berinsky puts it starkly: 'In the battle between facts and partisanship, partisanship always wins.'
In 2004, psychologist Drew Westen took a look at the partisan mind through an MRI scanner. He presented 15 'strong Democrats' and 15 'strong Republicans' with negative statements about their favored candidates and watched which parts of their brains lit up.
'None of the circuits involved in conscious reasoning were particularly engaged,' Dr. Westen reported — it appeared 'as if partisans twirl the cognitive kaleidoscope until they get the conclusions they want.'"
In 2004, psychologist Drew Westen took a look at the partisan mind through an MRI scanner. He presented 15 'strong Democrats' and 15 'strong Republicans' with negative statements about their favored candidates and watched which parts of their brains lit up.
'None of the circuits involved in conscious reasoning were particularly engaged,' Dr. Westen reported — it appeared 'as if partisans twirl the cognitive kaleidoscope until they get the conclusions they want.'"
The Tempting Path of Protectionism | Jim Powell | Cato Institute: Commentary
The Tempting Path of Protectionism | Jim Powell | Cato Institute: Commentary: "By inflaming nationalist sentiment against the United States, Smoot-Hawley encouraged many governments to retaliate by enacting exchange controls that further throttled trade. By 1935, there were exchange controls in Afghanistan, Argentina, Austria, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Danzig, Ecuador, El Salvador, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Poland, Romania, Uruguay, Venezuela and Yugoslavia.
American farmers, who had lobbied hard for Smoot-Hawley, were among the biggest losers from all this. They saw their exports plunge from $1.8 billion in 1929 before Smoot Hawley to $590 million just four years later."
American farmers, who had lobbied hard for Smoot-Hawley, were among the biggest losers from all this. They saw their exports plunge from $1.8 billion in 1929 before Smoot Hawley to $590 million just four years later."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)