• Where to Cut? Anywhere, Everywhere (Lew Rockwell, LRC): “There is no way to know what cuts are economically rational and what cuts are not. There is no real test to gauge this question. It all comes down to political whim, which is to say that all budget cuts in government are economically arbitrary.

 WASHINGTON (Reuters)- The number of Americans filing an initial claim for jobless aid fell last week to its lowest level in eight months, the government said on Thursday in a report that offered a hopeful sign layoffs were easing.

Yesterday, I cited Granger and Sims for trying to convert a fallacy into a principle by introducing a purportedly more sophisticated version of the fallacy.

Today, I accuse Granger and Newbold of abusing the English language, quoting myself from a 1993 essay:

The Washington Times, which is basically a neocon paper, although it does give some play to free market writers, has once again tried to convice its readers that the steel tariffs have been good for the economy.  The justification is this: the tariffs have not hurt us as badly as some people predicted.  Yes, that is the justification, so help me.  Tariffs are good because they are only a little bit harmful.

Regulations are good for the economy, says the Bush administration, according to the CSM.

The popular press has adopted a more optimistic tone regarding economic conditions. The reasons for this are clear. It appears that the current recovery is picking up pace. Recent reports indicate that second quarter GDP for this year increased by 3.3%, instead of the earlier 3.1% estimate. This is more than double the GDP growth rate from the preceding two quarters.

The University of Missouri’s College of Business recently filled several endowed chairs. According to the college website, “Five of the endowed positions are funded through an estate gift made by Sherlock Hibbs, who graduated from the college in 1926. . . . His estate gift provided $5 million in support of three chairs and three professorships emphasizing the philosophy and tenets of the Austrian School of Economics.” (Read the full announcement)

• American and Briton Win Nobel Economics Prize (NYT): American Robert F. Engle and Briton Clive W.J. Granger won the 2003 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences Wednesday.

Clive Granger is best known for his so-called “Granger causality tests.” Christopher Sims was one of the early users of this new statistical technique. He explains its essence in a 1972 AER article: “The method of identifying causal direction employed here [i.e., Granger causality tests] does rest on a sophisticated version of the post hoc ergo propter hoc principle.” (”Money, Income and Causality, vol. 62, no. 4; September, 1972, p. 543.)

Thanks to the efforts of Roderick Long, there is now an English translation of the articles on the Mises Institute in Le Monde. (original here)