Overheard in Nashville
I heard two women discussing Osama bin Laden. They were both glad that it would help Obama get re-elected, because otherwise he would have taken flak for escalating the war in Afghanistan. One then said this:
My son asked me, “Mom, is it right to kill somebody?” And I said, “Look I can only think to explain it like this. If someone broke into our house, and was going to kill you and [your sisters], and the only way I could stop him was to shoot him, then I would do that and it would be okay.”
OK, that would have been a good answer if her son has asked why (according to the official accounts) Osama bin Laden shot at the Navy SEALs who burst into his house and killed his family member(s). But that’s not what her son was asking.
==> Yes I am aware of major differences in the two situations. The answer still struck me as rather ironic.
==> I am a pacifist and I understand that my views are in the minority. But it really disturbs me how joyful Americans are over this. Glenn Greenwald linked to this particularly good illustration.
Murphy Twin Spin
On Monday I kept it real by discussing slushy drinks at Mises.org.
Then today I ripped Paul Ryan’s budget plan in the WSJ MarketWatch blog. Left-leaners take note: I criticize Republicans too:
Even using the Ryan plan’s own numbers, it doesn’t expect to actually balance the federal budget until 2038. In other words, even if everything goes exactly according to plan, the Ryan budget would have the federal government continuously run deficit after deficit for almost three decades. In just the first 10 years of its implementation, the Ryan plan calls for adding $5.1 trillion to the federal debt held by the public, an increase of 45 percent. These disturbing numbers are all the more depressing when we consider they are unrealistically optimistic.
…
Yet another weakness is that the Ryan approach gives the goodies (reductions in tax rates) upfront, while deferring the politically painful changes to entitlement spending down the road. Why should we expect future Congresses to be more willing to anger senior citizens than current politicians, especially when this demographic is growing in relative size and influence?
…
There aren’t any magic-bullet solutions to the tremendous fiscal hole into which the U.S. government has dug itself. Spending has risen to astronomical levels because it’s popular; people enjoy getting money from the government. The only path away from crisis is the obvious one: Washington needs to drastically cut spending to its current revenues. It needs to live within its means and stop racking up additional debt.Tea party activists who put into office alleged budget hawks need to hold their feet to the fire. Rather than raise the debt ceiling on the basis of “promised” future spending cuts, true reformers would keep the debt limit where it is. This need not cause economic calamity or require a default on existing debt obligations, if Congress simply cut spending in other areas. Rather than saddle future legislators with the tough decisions, the current Congress should tackle the crisis now.
This Nick Rowe Is an All-Right Guy
I don’t know too much about him, but anybody who flatly tells Brad DeLong he made a mistake in discussing Walras’ Law in a comment involving the good “unobtainium”–and where the comment lives to tell about it–is a force in the geeconosphere.
Pot Calling the Kettle a Pot
A news blurb when I signed into Yahoo!
“AP – Angry mobs attacked Western embassies and U.N. offices in Tripoli Sunday after NATO bombed Moammar Gadhafi’s family compound in an attack officials said killed the leader’s second-youngest son and three grandchildren. Russia accused the Western alliance of exceeding its U.N. mandate of protecting Libyan civilians with the strike.”
(BTW I am criticizing the Western alliance, not Russia, with the blog post title.)
Someone Needs to Send Jon Stewart a Book on Public Choice
He can’t understand why Goldman executives make money for the company, but then “screw up” when they are running the Fed and government.
Night of Clarity Episode III
All your wildest dreams fulfilled. Come to NashVegas on Friday, July 22nd to hear a star-studded cast headlined by Tom Woods talk about the only guy to slay a central bank and pay off the national debt.
All the details are here. You at least need to check out the artwork. And if you stick around the next day, you can party with everyone at Andrew Jackson’s mansion and look at his grave. (For real.)
(I am calling this Episode III because technically this is third “Night of Clarity” Carlos Lara has hosted in Nashville, but the first one was pretty low-key. The big shin dig last summer was the second Night of Clarity, but most people think of it as the first.)
Calling All Adobe Experts
I love conspiracy theories. What do you think, kids? I can’t even get my MacBook to print (yet), so I’m clearly not the guy to evaluate this.
Pour Another One, Barkeep
Arnold Kling vents:
…I blame Stan Fischer (nice gentleman that he is), and Thomas Sargent (outstanding theorist that he is). And Olivier Blanchard (he’s not really responsible, but he is emblematic, and, well, I just feel like blaming him). They created a monoculture, they had cleverness but lacked wisdom, and in my opinion, the profession suffered for it, and suffered gravely.
Recent Comments