If the ruling elite has its way, writes Scott Trask, we are to be faced with at least half a century of intermittent war and a further augmentation of the national security state that has been draining our wealth like a voracious vampire since 1950. There is no secret as to how they will finance it—by borrowing and inflating. If the Democrats are the party of "tax and spend," the Republicans are the party of "borrow and spend."
If the benefiting consumers from an innovation are largely outside of a given country, writes Robert Murhpy, then it is indeed true that the people in that country might actually be poorer as a result of the innovation. But in that case, no trade policy can change things. On the other hand, if enough of the benefiting consumers are inside a particular country, then the people in that country are helped (on net) by the innovation.
Beware of trade restrictions, writes N. Joseph Potts; they are often followed by war. Iraq is only one case. The United States embargoed sales of scrap iron to Japan before the war with that country began in 1941, and probably worse, secretly colluded with Britain, China, and the Netherlands (which at the time controlled oilfields in Indonesia) to deny petroleum resources to Japan, a step still cited today in Japanese accounts of the causes of its war with the United States.
Modern arguments for tariffs smack of the same old mercantilist arguments that have been refuted by economists going back to Adam Smith.
The American people have not seen widespread bank runs since 1933. In that object at least, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has succeeded. But Scott Trask asks: at what cost? To insure deposits is to invite bad banking—and worse; it is to foster reckless speculation and unsound investments, help make inflation permanent instead of intermittent, obstruct the curative powers of economic contractions, and divorce freedom from responsibility.
Gold is the best money, because for centuries, as a result of countless individual choices, it has evolved as such. It was not imposed on the market by force, but was cultivated in the soil of the market itself. Christopher Mayer explains.
By following U.S. Government policies from beginning to end, Bill Anderson writes, United and American airlines inadvertently aided those individuals who snuffed out nearly 3,000 lives through their vicious actions. Yet, we also know that to have thwarted those attacks would have turned some employees of United and American into felons.
Keynesian economics has few virtues, but Paul Krugman’s book, the bulk of which collects many of his controversial columns for the New York Times, shows that even a Keynesian can on occasion have valuable things to say.
Why do governments get into bad situations so often? The real problem is not usually out and out corruption, writes Tibor Machan. The problem is systemic. Essentially, governments lack the needed basis for assessing the relationship between their resources and their expenses. They are unavoidably ill informed because the means by which that relationship is best understood is plainly unavailable for governments.
The answer is no, says Joseph Salerno. The Fed's performance has been astoundingly bad throughout Greenspan's tenure as Chairman. Perhaps worse, Greenspan has been a relentless purveyor of economic fallacies designed to obscure and justify this egregious performance. However, his departure from the stage might not be cause for unalloyed joy among proponents of sound money—Ben Bernanke could be lurking in the wings.
