Tag Archives: political economy

False Choices

Posted on by
Reply

The Wall Street Journal‘s Editors are correct that, as their subheadline says,

Helping Kyiv won’t rob weapons to fight Hamas or Hezbollah.

This is in response to some otherwise reasonably intelligent politicians insist on that false choice—that it’s either Ukraine or Israel. Senator Josh Hawley (R, MO), for instance:

Israel is facing existential threat. Any funding for Ukraine should be redirected to Israel immediately[.]

This is a foolishly false dichotomy, for all that, in Hawley’s case, it centers on his disdain for Ukraine and his lack of understanding of the threat the Russian barbarian hordes present.

The false choice representation is broader than that, though.

It’s also a false choice between either Israel or Ukraine, and our southern border, and it’s a false choice between any of those and supporting the Republic of China in deterring the People’s Republic of China or in fighting the PRC if they go ahead and invade.

What’s necessary—and more generally beneficial—is a reallocation of existing expenditures. That requires the Progressive-Democratic Party Representatives and Senators to either get out of the way or work with Republicans in a serious manner to do the reallocations.

It also requires timid Republican Senators to get out of the way or work seriously within their party and for the Republican House caucus to deal, with finality, with the Chaos Gang led by Florida’s Matt Gaetz and Texas’ Chip Roy and get serious about leading the House.

Racing to the Bottom

Posted on by
Reply

So far, Ireland is winning, and that’s paying off big for the Irish.

In the past eight years, the country of five million has watched its corporate tax income triple to the tune of 22.6 billion euros last year, equivalent to almost $24 billion—giving it a budget surplus last year of a comfortable €8 billion euros when many governments are suffering from a postpandemic debt hangover.

And

Ireland became a hot spot for US companies by slashing its corporate tax rate from 40% to 12.5% starting in the late 90s, and offering a well-educated workforce and a tariff-free way into the European Union.

That’s a lower rate than the European Union wants, and it’s lower than the 15% tax, globally applied and agreed among some 136 countries, and that Yellen is so desperate to get the US trapped into.

The Irish, though, are raking in the tax revenues because of—not despite—their lower tax rate regime: they’re leaving business’ profits increasingly in the hands of those businesses for business use, they’re attracting foreign businesses, and all that lower tax-induced increasing economic activity produces, on net, more revenue for the Irish government.

This is the wealth and prosperity that Progressive-Democrat President Joe Biden, his Progressive-Democrat Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, and the rest of the Progressive-Democratic Party cronies want to deny us ordinary Americans as they demand United States’ participation in a global tax cabal that lets the cabal avoid economic competition in favor of power.

One more thing: the Irish are considering throwing all of their prosperity into a cocked hat in favor of joining the high-tax cabal; they’ll do that at their own severe economic peril.

Energy Subsidies

Posted on by
Reply

This table shows the size of the subsidy for the indicated energy source along with the size of the subsidy per trillion BTU produced by that energy source.

Million$/ TrillionBTU Million $ Trillion BTU
Solar 4.153 7,522 1,811
Geothermal 1.665 353 212
Wind 0.947 3,592 3,791
Coal 0.072 873 12,033
Biomass 0.06 312 5,171
Nuclear 0.048 390 8,065
Oil & Nat Gas 0.033 2,304 68,804

The table is constructed from data in the EIA report, Federal Financial Interventions and Subsidies in Energy in Fiscal Years 2016–2022.

Notice that the Solar subsidy is orders of magnitude greater than those for coal or for oil and natural gas. The wind subsidy is similarly bloated.

Despite these actual facts, the Mainstream Left keeps pushing the myth of too much subsidy for hydrocarbons.

 

H/t: DrBob2 at The Motley Fool.

Why Lend?

Posted on by
Reply

How can a financial entity lend? Progressive-Democrat President Joe Biden now is moving to hide individuals’ medical debt from potential lenders.

[P]roposed regulations would prohibit consumer reporting companies from including medical debts and collecting information on consumer reports that creditors use to make underwriting decisions. Creditors would also be barred from using medical collections information when evaluating borrowers’ credit applications.

This on the heels of his constant attempts to render student debt holders unaccountable for their debt.

Since lenders are increasingly being denied recourse, and now they’re to be denied useful information about a potential “borrower’s” ability to repay a debt a priori, why—how—could any lender make a decision to lend, other than to raise its interest rate very high, commensurate with the very high risk being inflicted on that lender by Government?

Look for the Biden administration to start trying to cap lending interest rates, next.

Biden’s Lack of Concern

Posted on by
Reply

There is a growing number of Progressive-Democratic Party politicians—governors and mayors—who are starting to decry their Party’s President, Joe Biden’s, lack of performance with our southern border. It’s an open question whether they’re actually beginning to recognize the problem or, in this election season, only posturing for public consumption and their own reelection chances. In either event, they’re still shifting all blame to the Feds:

Governor JB Pritzker (D) joined a growing number of Democrats who have criticized Biden’s border policies when he sent a letter to the president on Monday with a list of demands outlining how the federal government’s response to the border crisis is inadequate.

He, and others of Party, are continuing, though, to avert their faces from their own contribution to our border problem: their status as enthusiastic, openly inviting, sanctuary States and cities.

One thing, though, stood out for me in that article, which otherwise was centered on State and city Leftist politician…outcry.

Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson (D) had a call with White House chief of staff Jeff Zients, senior adviser Tom Perez, and officials from the Department of Homeland Security.

Notice that. Biden couldn’t be bothered to pick up the phone himself, or even to join the call. He sent his underlings to talk.

This is the degree of concern Biden has for what’s going on at our southern border (and increasingly our northern border) and the impact that’s having on our cities and towns—even those in Party-run cities and towns, and States. Pritzker, Johnson, Adams, Hochul, et al., can rightfully be called out for putting their spyglasses to their blind eyes. Biden, though, simply doesn’t give a rat’s patootie.