Almost exactly ten years ago, a National Commission on Social Security Reform headed by Greenspan proposed a package of benefit cuts and tax increases, which Congress enacted with little change, and which turned out to be one of the most oppressive—and underhanded—things Congress ever did to younger Americans over Social Security. It also failed to solve Social Security's long-term problems.
No other currency, national or international, can conceivably take the place of the American dollar. They all suffer seriously from the same ideological malady: they are the creation of political concern and authority. Whatever we may think of gold, it always looms in the background, beckoning to be used as money, as it has been since the dawn of civilization.
The classical economists were opponents of paper money. And yet in their positive case for commodity money, they made two great errors: believing that an additional supply of notes on the market confers some social benefit and believing that money's value needs to be stable in order to meet the needs of trade. These errors inadvertantly paved the way for political intervention.
The private sector is good at satisfying consumer demand, but it's not much good at guessing what's in that grab bag that we call a budget deficit, writes Roger Garrison. The uncertainties associated with large federal budget deficits warn against exclusive focus on the total spending done by government. It does matter how that spending is financed.
The latest economic data indicate that the prospects for a sustained economic recovery have been further delayed, writes Frank Shostak in a wide-ranging review of the current economic moment. The low interest rate policy of the Fed remains the major factor behind the continued deterioration.
With the dollar down and gold up, both trends obviously related to growing fear of economic troubles ahead, the question again arises: why shouldn't the dollar itself be good as gold? It would be if the views of the classical-liberal tradition held sway. This tradition stands solidly behind a commodity money standard, like silver or gold, as the very definition of sound money.
Does the phenomenon of "reswitching" refute the Austrian theory of capital and interest? Contra Samuelson, no Austrian ever claimed that reswitching was mathematically impossible, writes Robert Murphy. Indeed, Austrians do not normally think in those terms at all, except when forced to in response to mainstream challenges.
Contrary to Keynesian dreams, there are several undeniable realities of a recessionary environment, writes Lew Rockwell. Wages tend to fall. Businesses tend to be liquidated. Resources are withdrawn from investment and put into savings. Consumers spend less. Stock prices fall. All of these tendencies may seem regrettable but they are necessary to bring all sectors back into realistic balance with each other.
The cry of the Wall Street reformer is always the same: Let's have more regulators and regulations to correct the problem of prior regulators and regulations! Gregory Bresiger reviews Arthur Levitt's new book.
Coercive transfers are wasteful, inefficient, and inequitable. The Left uses Demand-Side Dogma to instill false legitimacy into these policies, writes D.W. MacKenzie. The Right, including the Bush administration, plays along with this rhetoric all too often.
