Michael Lind has written a long article in Politico (where he is a contributing editor) on the future of the Republican party. I’ll save you the trouble of reading all of it. At the end, it suggests that the rational thing for the party to do is to accept today’s “progressive” welfare state, but just try to tilt the government payments to white middle class workers and businesses, in other words the core voters and the core financiers of the party.
The rise of both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump clearly reflects the increasing desperation of large numbers of American voters. They know something is terribly wrong with the economy. They just can’t figure out what it is.
In supporting Sanders they confuse capitalism with the increasingly out-of-control crony capitalism that world governments have foisted on us. In supporting Trump, they seem to hope that the best way to guard the henhouse against the foxes is to put a fox in charge.
More about us.
We have had some bones to pick with Governor Walker in the past. He seemed to us to be too close to some corporate interests (see our 8/11/15 story), which made us worry that he was too comfortable with crony capitalism. But we also admired the way he fought some other special interests, most notably public sector unions. He was determined, courageous, and effective. We also admired the way he made his way in life without a college degree.
Do we want sustainability? Yes, real, not fake sustainability.
Many economists today do not have kind words for Michel de Montaigne, one of the most famous authors of all time, but not much of an economist.
Economist Ludwig von Mises coined the term “Montaigne Fallacy” to describe the famous 16th century French essayist’s blunder in describing market transactions as inherently exploitative. Mises’s student Murray Rothbard similarly took Montaigne to the woodshed in his History of Economic Thought.
In his new book, The Forgotten Depression, economic writer James Grant, editor of the prestigious Grant’s Interest Rate Observer, gives us the history of the depression of 1920-21.
It was a very deep depression, as deep as the one that succeeded in 1929. But in this case, the government did not intervene, and it was over in less than two years.
The principal author of our current economic ills doesn’t seem to know history any better than monetary policy.
When the Obama administration announced that it was planning to replace Alexander Hamilton on the ten dollar bill with an unspecified woman, former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke leapt into the fray. He said he was “appalled” by the decision since Hamilton “was without doubt the best and most foresighted economic policy maker in US history.” He proposed that Andrew Jackson be removed from the twenty dollar bill instead.
Has he considered that the Obama Administration, which he supports, has greatly fostered this trend? How? First by making workers so much more expensive by encouraging state minimum wage increases, by increasing the healthcare costs of a worker by about $3-5 dollars an hour, and by making overtime and related rules tighter and tighter. All this makes employees too expensive to hire. Second by encouraging the Federal Reserve to keep interest costs artificially low. Those giveaway interest rates encourage investment in robots to replace people.
Unfortunately this team seems to be covering up a possible risk to black children.
You may not be able to keep it for long.
In a September 11 Bloomberg article, economist Noah Smith claims that John Maynard Keynes, the architect of today’s government economic policies around the world, wasn’t a “‘socialist’” or even a “‘progressive.’” He did not favor “a command economy.”
Yes he “was in favor of some amount of wealth redistribution and government intervention into the economy.” But “Keynesian policies are fundamentally … about economic stability,… about smoothing out the fluctuations in the economy, reducing risk for everyone concerned.”
Most Keynesian economists do not want to admit that we are in another depression. They find the word painful.
Good for her. She’s letting us know where she stands. No oily evasiveness for her, or at least less than usual from politicians.
Here are her eleven tenets of today’s progressivism, outlined in a July 18 speech before Netroots Nation . Below each tenet are a few questions for her.
And even that is doubtful.
Is he right?