People complain about both overdevelopment and the shortage of housing, writes Gene Callahan, without considering the contradiction. In housing, as in all sectors, if one does not carefully trace the problems back to their roots in a previous intervention, it is very easy to believe that yet another intervention is just the ticket for rectifying them.
The critics of free trade persist in their insistence that permitting individuals in this country the freedom to invest where they please undermines the effectiveness of the U.S. economy and ultimately leads to a lower standard of living. The implication: Americans are better off only if everyone else in the world is poor. This flies in the face of sound economics.
Drug reimportation is not a panacea, nor is it likely to have any long-term effect upon the rising costs of prescription drugs. It is at best a temporary fix for those most in need of lower priced drugs. What will have a lasting impact, however, is the extent to which the entirety of the Washington conservative and libertarian alliance was willing to bypass the larger issue of free trade.
The authors of the Time article are correct in that coming energy crises are brewing. However, they are wrong when they assume that such problems occur because of the ineptitude of capitalists and the lack of political will by members of Congress. Whether it be gasoline or the making of bread, the production of goods is best left to economic, not political entrepreneurship.
The idea behind the cuts is more or less that by forceably lowering the interest rates, the costs of businesses and households will fall, consumption and investment will commence, and profits will recover. But why hasn't it worked the former 12 times? Is there something wrong with this idea?
Be it bilateral or multilateral, dispensed directly from a government or through an international lending agency, foreign aid embodies all the failures and tragedies that have come to typify our government-run domestic poverty schemes.
This year marks the 70th Anniversary of the National Industrial Recovery Act, FDR's planning legislation that created the National Recovery Administration, the NRA. Henry Hazlitt saw precisely what the NRA would lead to, and after a dispute with the The Nation that resulted in his losing his position as literary editor, he wrote the following brilliant attack for the American Mercury.
It is always agreeable to be proved right. In an earlier review, I suggested that Thomas Sowell "had a genius for the striking fact and the apt analogy."
The New York Times recently ran a three-part series on a string of tragic industrial accidents at facilities owned by McWane Inc., a large producer of sewer and water pipe based in Alabama. The series describes nine apparently needless and sometimes especially gruesome deaths, as well as several horrendous injuries suffered by workmen. All of them are presented as taking place in an environment of such reckless irresponsibility and callous disregard for the value of human life as to strain credulity.
Consider: the government reports that job discrimination complaints against private employers increased 4 percent in 2002, to a total of 84,442, the highest level in seven years. Those filing complaints took in $310.5 million in monetary benefits. The main complaint involves race, followed by sex, but the big increase came with allegations involving religion, age, and national origin. The trend represents a huge diversion from the main goal of restoring economic growth.
