The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid is a trademark of Donald L. Luskin

Latest
Media Infiltrations:

Republicans and the Populist Temptation
Wall Street Journal
February 9, 2010
Why Taxing Stock Trades Is a Really Bad Idea
Wall Street Journal
January 6, 2010

Krugman Truth Squad logo, courtesy Tom Miller, Atomic Art: admin@atomicart.com

Peter Sellers and Peter Bull in ''Dr. Strangelove'' Columbia Pictures, 1964 -- Click to order!

"What has been your worst blogging experience?
Donald Luskin."
-- Brad DeLong

"That's a guy who actually stalks me on the Web and once stalked me personally."
-- Paul Krugman

"I'm saying this...guy's a jerk."
-- Charlie Gasparino

What I'm reading:
cover
The Happy Body
Aniela and Jerzy Gregorek

What I'm listening to:
cover
Langley Schools Music Project

What I'm watching:
cover
Star Trek

What I'm playing:
cover
Speed Racer

Order these from Amazon.com
at Amazon's normal low prices...
and a fraction of your order goes
to help support this site.
Thanks!

Thanks to Irwin Chusid, public editor.

Copyright 2002 thru 2009
Donald L. Luskin
don-at-luskin-dot-net
All rights reserved.
"The Conspiracy to
Keep You Poor and Stupid"
and "Krugman Truth Squad"
are trademarks of
Donald L. Luskin
www.poorandstupid.com

Logo by Tommy Carnase 1995

"The road is cleared," said Galt.
"We are going back to the world."
He raised his hand
and over the desolate earth
he traced in space
the sign of the dollar.

From Atlas Shrugged
by Ayn Rand

From each as they choose,
to each as they are chosen.

From Anarchy, State and Utopia
by Robert Nozick

"there is some shit I will not eat"

From i sing of olaf glad and big
by e. e. cummings


In Association with Amazon.com

Powered by Blogger Pro™

Chronicle of the Conspiracy
Join us as we discover, document, expose and challenge the bad people, the bad institutions and the bad ideas that stand in the way of wealth creation -- and show you how to fight back!

Friday, March 09, 2007

OOPS...   Paul Krugman's New York Times column this Monday:
When Salon, the online magazine, reported on mistreatment of veterans at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center two years ago, officials simply denied that there were any problems.
So did Krugman. From his column from September 4, 2006:
...the Veterans Health Administration, is a stunning success...
Thanks to several readers for pointing out this, uh, inconsistency...

Update... Several other readers have pointed out that Walter Reed is run by the Army, not the Veterans Administration.

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 1:01 PM | link  

USEFUL IDIOT LIBERALS   Democratic appropriator Obey blows a gasket on his own base...

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 12:32 PM | link  

NEGATIVITY IS IN THEIR BLOOD   Great news this morning. The unemployment rate fell to 4.5%, which means that fewer people as a fraction of the workforce are without jobs. The headline from the Wall Street Journal?
Jobless Rate Slips to 4.5%
To "slip" is bad. A "slip" is a fall or decline in which to fall or decline is bad. "Uh oh, doctor, the patient's white count has slipped!" When a number falls or declines and that fall or decline is good, on the other hand, we don't say "slipped." We find some other term. "Thank God, doctor, the size of that tumor has been reduced." But not if we reflexively have bad news on the tip of our tongue.

Update... Reader Dan Dean adds,

That same infectious negativity can be found over at the AP (surprise!). The key to their sentiment can be found in that doozy of an opening:
“The nation's unemployment rate dipped to 4.5 percent in February even as big losses of construction and factory jobs restrained overall payroll growth.”
Can’t let a little good about the economy seep out without first tempering it a the harsh reality according to the AP. Also note their third line
“The slight decline in the politically prominent jobless rate, from 4.6 percent in January, came as hundreds of thousand of people left the work force, a development that economists also believe was related to the bad weather in February that made it difficult to get out and look for jobs.”
The decline can only be called “slight,” but were it to jump say, .1 percent, you can be sure the lede would read “Unemployment surges.”

Why, it’s almost as if they begrudged this economy for doing so well under a Republican administration...


Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 9:03 AM | link  


Thursday, March 08, 2007

THE QUALITY OF INEQUALITY   The debate about income inequality statistics rages on, with a terrific dialog on the subject hosted at Cato Unbound. The star of the show is Alan Reynolds, who has committed the heresy of questioning the validity of the Picketty/Saez and CBO data that, despite manifest flaws, is always cited as definitive. Here's a note from Alan on the latest round:
Everyone keeps missing the point. For example:

David Wessel, Wall Street Journal February 15 says, "It's simple: Taking all federal taxes into account -- including payroll as well as income taxes, and allocating corporate profits and taxes paid on them to those who hold shares -- the CBO says those in the bottom fifth pay an average of $4.50 in taxes for every $100 they take in. Those in the top 1% pay $31.10 in taxes for every $100 they take in."

That's wrong. The CBO does not allocate corporate profits to those who hold shares. The CBO doesn't know who owns shares, but they're trying to estimate who owns capital (including capital that isn't taxed, like IRAs and munis and homes).

Robert Frank, in the Wall Street Journal February 2 says, "The nation's richest 1% controlled 51% of the country's individually held stocks in 2004, the latest period measured. That was up from 41% in 1989."

That's wrong. Individually-held stock was 32% of the total in 2004, down from 47% in 1990 and 58% in 1980. Most of the indivdiually held stock is taxable, but most IRAs, 529s & 401ks are in mutual funds and won't be taxable for a long time, if ever.

After fixing those mistakes, the CBO data show the top 1% with about 11% of pretax income and not a rising share at that.

Since their after-tax estimate was already flat from 1988 to 2003, the top 1% has a falling share of net income.


Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 11:30 AM | link  

ICELAND: A LITTLE LAFFER LABORATORY   From the Wall Street Journal editorial page:
...Iceland's 300,000 citizens became some of the world's wealthiest people...after it opened up the economy, privatized state companies and slashed marginal taxes...

Happily, the government can't seem to get enough of a good thing. It convened a special task force in 2005 to look into ways of transforming Iceland into a financial hub. Headed by Sigurdur Einarsson, chairman of Kaupthing, the country's biggest bank, the committee recommended in November that the corporate-tax rate be reduced to 10% from the current 18%. That's below the 12.5% in that other European economic powerhouse surrounded by water -- Ireland.

The benefits of low taxes are on full display in Iceland, which provides an almost perfect demonstration of the Laffer Curve. From 1991 to 2001, as the corporate-tax rate fell gradually to 18% from 45%, tax revenues tripled to 9.1 billion kronas ($134 million in today's exchange rate) from just above 3 billion kronas. Since 2001, revenues more than tripled again to an estimated 33 billion kronas last year. Personal income-tax rates were cut gradually as well, to a flat rate of 22.75% this year from 33% in 1995. Meanwhile, the economy averaged annual growth rates of about 4% over the past decade.


Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 8:56 AM | link  

"REARRANGE" = "RAISE"   Charlie Rangle wants to "rearrange" taxes, not raise them. He wants to "redirect" the 2003 tax cuts, not "repeal" them. Right... and I hope he steps "near" a bus. It's all about the Alternative Minimum Tax, which is scheduled under current law to go up this year, and for technical reasons will mostly affect people in blue states which have high state and local taxes (which is to say: Democrats). Someone should remind Rangle that in 1999 the Republican-led congress passed a law repealing the AMT altogether -- and President Clinton vetoed it.

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 8:47 AM | link  


Wednesday, March 07, 2007

SINCERITY IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING   If you can fake that, you can accomplish anything. Thanks to reader Jameson Campaigne for the link.

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 4:23 PM | link  

PROPERTY RIGHTS INDEX   The Hernando DeSoto Fellowship Program has produced a report on property rights around the world, ranking each country quantitatively in an International Property Rights Index. The United States scores well, but we're not at the head of the pack. We rank 14 out of 70, beaten by some surprising countries such as socialist Sweden. The element that brings our score down the most is "political stability," in which we score only 5.1 out of a possible 10. The world's overall winner is... the envelope please... Norway!

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 10:08 AM | link  


Tuesday, March 06, 2007

LEST WE FORGET   Our correspondent "Irrational Exuberance" reminds us that it's Alan Greenspan's birthday, and the 25th anniversary of Ayn Rand's death.

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 1:11 PM | link  

THE DENIERS INDEX   Here's a good series from Canada's National Post on the people and the ideas behind the insurgency standing against the global warming religion:
Statistics needed -- The Deniers Part I
Warming is real -- and has benefits -- The Deniers Part II
The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science -- The Deniers Part III
Polar scientists on thin ice -- The Deniers Part IV

The original denier: into the cold -- The Deniers Part V
The sun moves climate change -- The Deniers Part VI
Will the sun cool us? -- The Deniers Part VII
The limits of predictability -- The Deniers Part VIII
Look to Mars for the truth on global warming -- The Deniers Part IX
Limited role for C02 -- the Deniers Part X
Thanks to reader "Z" for the links.

Reader Rick Gaber points to this hilarious spoof at the always fablous "People's Cube."

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 9:07 AM | link  

PROGRESSIVE OR OPPRESSIVE?   One of the schmoos on the Huffington Post is worried that his commitment to "progressive" ideals -- which he shamelessly defines as bigger government -- is being undermined by the reality that most Americans don't really want bigger government.
The newest Democracy Corps polling/focus group report...just scares the shit out of me, and ought to scare anyone who cares about the broader progressive agenda.

Look at some of these numbers:...

A. Government does more to help people get ahead in life.
30% agree

B. Government mostly gets in the way of the economy and job growth.
57% agree

A. Government mostly stimulates the economy and job growth.
34% agree

B. Government mostly gets in the way of the economy and job growth.
54% agree

...Which statement do you identify more with?

A. I want Congress to first invest in areas like health care, education, and energy, even if it means spending additional money.
36% agree

OR:

B. I want Congress to first focus on cutting wasteful spending and making government more accountable.
58% agree

But never mind what those pesky citizens actually want -- "progressive" ideals aren't about meeting people's needs or preferences, just the needs of people who have "progressive" ideals. So our Huffington Poster happily concludes,
...there are still enough of the swing voters...to decide elections.
Thanks to reader Robert Paci for the link.

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 8:57 AM | link  


Monday, March 05, 2007

JOKE OF THE DAY 3  

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 11:22 PM | link  

JOKE OF THE DAY 2  

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 1:43 PM | link  

YOU CAN'T EXPECT A BUNCH OF IGNORANT PEASANTS TO UNDERSTAND   Congressman Charles Rangel on Fox News Sunday:
WALLACE: Treasury Secretary Paulson is on a trip to China right now. What should he be doing when he gets to Beijing?...

RANGEL: This is an ancient society. It's very difficult for them to understand our economy...


Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 12:54 PM | link  

JOKE OF THE DAY  

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 10:11 AM | link  


Sunday, March 04, 2007

YOU'D THINK THIS WOULD KEEP PRICES FLAT   Fed chief Ben Bernanke says,
...globalization may also have affected the operation of monetary policy by changing the relative importance of the various factors that determine the domestic inflation rate.3 As national markets become increasingly integrated and open, sellers of goods, services, and labor may face more competition and have less market power than in the past. In particular, prices and wages may depend on economic conditions abroad as well as on conditions in the local market.
Uh oh! What does this Bloomberg story portend for US inflation?
Tortilla Prices Spark Inflation, Driving Down Mexico's Peso

...Tortilla prices jumped 5.9 percent in January, the most in eight years, after costs climbed for corn, the main ingredient. That increase fanned inflation...

"There's a big risk that tortilla price increases will lead to higher wage demands and fuel inflation," said Eduardo Perez, head bond trader at Mexico City-based brokerage Valores Mexicanos SA, the country's largest independent brokerage. "Foreign investors don't like this environment and are selling...."

Thanks to reader Dan Benisz and our correspondent "Irrational Exuberance."

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 7:55 PM | link