Tag Archives: Cato

I, and 200+ Economists, Respectfully Disagree

Posted on by
Reply

“There is no disagreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan that will help to jumpstart the economy.”

— PRESIDENT-ELECT BARACK OBAMA, JANUARY 9 , 2009

Well, I disagree. But, then, I’m only a lowly computer jock. How about over 200 economists who do disagree?

Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance. More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan’s “lost decade” in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policy makers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.

The Cato Institute took out a full-page ad, with the above statement, in several major newspapers today.

Check here to see the full ad and signatories, in PDF.

-k-

Update: The House of Representatives either didn’t read the ad or disagreed with it, as the Spending Bill passed, 244-188. Here’s hoping the Senate has more backbone. I also hope to win the lottery, attend the night race at Bristol, and ride a pony. Maybe the pony will be included in the Senate version.

Crises Near and Far

Posted on by
Reply

I’m in front of the teevee in tbbs World HQ, watching coverage of the Minneapolis bridge collapse. MSNBC’s coverage of the incident was reminiscent of old-time reporting, i.e., just the facts. Interviews with eyewitnesses, photos from local media outlets, and a noticeable lack of talking heads, experts, and pontificators. Just the news; tragic, but news.

Meanwhile, in the mid-level of our place, SWMBO is ministering to a neighbor lady, recently divorced, extremely depressed, who expressed suicidal tendencies when I answered the door just a few minutes ago.

This evening could go on a while longer.

-k-

Happy Belated 275th, George Washington

Posted on by
Reply

I wanted to post this on February 22, but sometimes general hecticness and pointless flailings related to life get in the way.

This post about George Washington from Cato@Liberty popped up in my feed reader. Here’s a snippet:

George Washington was the man who established the American republic. He led the revolutionary army against the British Empire, he served as the first president, and most importantly he stepped down from power….

[Washington] held “republican” values – that is, he believed in a republic of free citizens, with a government based on consent and established to protect the rights of life, liberty, and property.

And another:

Give the last word to Washington’s great adversary, King George III. The king asked his American painter, Benjamin West, what Washington would do after winning independence. West replied, “They say he will return to his farm.”

“If he does that,” the incredulous monarch said, “he will be the greatest man in the world.”

I think it ironic that the very people we would love to have in office are the same people who serve a brief stint, contribute, and return to a normal life.

There are no such leaders today, and it’s our loss.

-k-
H/T: Constitution.org, for the graphic.

Technorati Tags:

The Bums were not Thrown Out

Posted on by
Reply

According to Cato@Liberty, very few incumbents actually lost their offices last Tuesday. According to the post:

Consider that there were 435 races in the House and Senate with an incumbent trying to retain his or her seat. Only 26 – 6% — of challengers in these races have won. That’s pretty low for a “throw the bums out” election. Pending the outcome of three or four yet-to-be-determined races, this year’s 94% incumbent reelection rate appears to be slightly higher than the 90% rate of 1994.

So, before anyone celebrates “change”, “working in a bipartisan manner”, and other such-like euphemisms, remember that the new Bozos are a lot like the old. In most cases, it’s still the same Bozo. And we all know how that turned out.

-k-

Technorati Tags: , ,

Why Not?

Posted on by
Reply

As much as I hate to steal an entire post, sometimes they’re just too good:

There are two beliefs that animate government R&D policy in the energy arena.

Belief #1: If you subsidize it, it will come. Wanting technology x to succeed in the market is a simple matter of throwing government money at technology x.

Belief #2: Politicians have every right to tell market actors what to invest in and what to buy. George Bush’s preferences for what Detroit ought to build (engines powered by hydrogen-powered fuel cells) and his preferences for what we ought to put in our fuel tanks in the meantime (200 proof grain alcohol, which goes by the moniker “ethanol”) should rule the day.

OK then, why not both subsidize the creation of — and mandate the production of — cars run by air? It’s doable. It’s carbon-free. And what possible environmental complaint might anyone have? Sure, it might be costly, and the car might not perform all that well, but government dough is like magic — all will be made right.

Link to the air car is in the article. My mind reels. My pocketbook is tightening its sphincter.

-k-

Best Two-Faced Political Stance of the Week

Posted on by
Reply

That award goes to Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), who voted for a bill he believed to be unconstitutional.

So, he has it both ways, like any other politician; he was against it, until he voted for it. As Cato@Liberty said in the cited post:

too many people seem to think that the Constitution will somehow automatically check the government when it goes too far. Not so. The Constitution cannot enforce itself.

And, speaking of oaths and so forth, the Senate’s Oath of Office:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

That oath is found here.

Maybe Arlen could check that out sometime.

-k-

Technorati Tags: ,

False Market Forces

Posted on by
Reply

From the Cato Institute, pointage to the state of government-sponsored health care in the UK. The article provides startling and frightening insight into the false economies that inevitably result from government intervention in areas where they don’t belong. Apparently, UK hospitals are being forced to introduce minimum waiting times, as long as 120 days in some cases, for treatment of non-emergency, non-cancerous conditions. Because payments to hospitals are fixed by the government, the more productive health care facilities are forced to cut back on service, to avoid exceeding the government-mandated budget for the current year. From the article:

After years of Government targets pushing them to cut waiting lists, staff are now being warned against “over-performing” by treating patients too quickly. The Sunday Telegraph has learned that at least six trusts have imposed the minimum times.
In March, Patricia Hewitt, the Secretary of State for Health, offered her apparent blessing for the minimum waiting times by announcing they would be “appropriate” in some cases. Amid fears about £1.27 billion of NHS debts, she expressed concern that some hospitals were so productive “they actually got ahead of what the NHS could afford”.

….

Doctors are also resigning. One gynæcologist said that he spent more time doing sudoku puzzles than treating patients because of the measures.

And if you think that can’t happen here, the California assembly passed legislation which would have established state-run health care for the Golden State, funded, of course by

… an 8 percent payroll tax and a 3 percent individual income tax.

To his credit, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has announced he will veto the measure.

A close call; but be forewarned, we haven’t heard the last of such nonsense.

-k-

Technorati Tags: , , ,