Live from La Farine: Duncan Black is anxious:
Duncan Black**: Hard to Kick the Habit: "Hope to be wrong, but suspect that team Clinton (very broadly defined)...
...will still be talking about BernieBros in September. I'm quite happy for Hillary Clinton to be the nominee, as I always thought she would be. I'm not happy with the months of 'we would have won it easy if not for these meddling kids who won't vote in November' rhetoric. Better figure out how to appeal to them. Stop calling them immature and stupid. The goal is to win, not to make early excuses for why you're going to lose.
Nah. After yesterday the word--and the obvious thing--is to stand down.
Mind you: The day will come when it will be time to gleefully and comprehensively trash people to be named later for Guevarista fantasies about what their policies are likely to do. The day will come when it will be time to gleefully and comprehensively trash people to be named later for advocating Comintern-scale lying to voters about what our policies are like to do. And it will be important to do so then--because overpromising leads to bad policy decisions, and overpromising is bad long-run politics as well.
But that day is not now. That day will be mid-November.
J. Bradford DeLong on April 27, 2016 at 10:06 AM in Economics: Growth, Economics: Inequality, Economics: Macro, Moral Responsibility, Obama Administration, Philosophy: Moral, Political Economy, Politics, Streams: (Monday) Smackdown Watch, Streams: Across the Wide Missouri, Streams: Cycle, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth | Permalink | Comments (21)
Yesterday I wrote:
"You are not doing enough in the way of promiscuous link-sluttage", my conscience says to me, occasionally. "You are not doing enough in the way of making people who come to your weblog aware of very smart people whom they ought to be paying attention to--but are not. You have an obligation not only to punch up, but to extend a hand down--to promote people who, by accidents of chance and historical contingency, are just as smart (or more) and are as (or more) worth reading as you are."
Over at Equitable Growth: First, everybody needs to start here: Christina and David Romer: Senator Sanders's Proposed Policies and Economic Growth.
Paul Krugman weighs in, with another point for model-building as an intuition pump rather than as a filing system--if the model doesn't produce the results you want and think belong in your filing system, you should worry rather than simply throwing it out and getting another model. Plus a bunch of other issues--empirical, methodological, political, and--alas!--moral. Read MOAR
Comment of the Day: PGL: Links for the Week of April 24, 2016: "'In economics, stimulus spending ran aground on Robert Barro’s Ricardian equivalence theorem'...
...This is from Cochrane attack on Krugman (how he got it so wrong). Of course we know Cochrane is the one gets this theorem incredibly wrong as did Robert Lucas in his 2009 attack on Christina Romer.
Over at Equitable Growth: Typically smart thoughts by Paul Krugman on carbon pricing:
Paul Krugman: 101 Boosteris: "I see that @drvox is writing a big piece on carbon pricing...
...I don’t want to step on his forthcoming message, but what he’s said so far helped crystallize something I’ve meant to write about... ‘101 boosterism’... a takeoff on Noah Smith’s clever writing about ‘101ism’, in which economics writers present Econ 101 stuff about supply, demand, and how great markets are as gospel, ignoring the many ways in which economists have learned to qualify those conclusions in the face of market imperfections. His point is that while Econ 101 can be a very useful guide, it is sometimes (often) misleading.... My point is... even when Econ 101 is right, that doesn’t always mean that it’s... the most important thing.... Economists... delight in talking about issues where 101 refutes naïve intuition, but that doesn’t... mean... these are the crucial policy issues.... Read MOAR
J. Bradford DeLong on April 24, 2016 at 10:44 AM in Economics: Growth, Economics: Inequality, Philosophy: Moral, Political Economy, Politics, Science: Climate, Streams: (Monday) Smackdown Watch, Streams: Cycle, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth, Streams: Highlighted | Permalink | Comments (6)
Google Ngram Viewer: https://books.google.com/ngrams/
The phrase: "political economy":
Live from the BernieBro Asylum: Today's exhibit on why we need a better press corps: Adam Davidson. He says that it's "useful" to bullshit your voters by promising them that your policies will have effects that they will not:
Adam Davidson: Bernienomics Might Not Be Feasible — But It’s Useful: "On this most fundamental question--about the potential [of Bernie's policies] to transform the economy, to blow past trade-offs and constraints...
Over at Equitable Growth: Today, in 2016, Raghu Rajan thinks helicopter drops are "a step too far into the dark..."
His predecessor 83 years ago at the University of Chicago, Jacob Viner, thought they were one of the obvious technocratic steps to take, along with further raising the monetary base (i.e., in his day going off of the gold standard) even with short-term safe nominal interest rates at the zero lower bound (as they also were in his day).
Raghuram Rajan 2016): "If you read the writings of economists...
...it is not clear what’s keeping us still so slow, seven or eight years after the crisis. Ken Rogoff would say it is still the debt overhang and the deleveraging. [Robert] Gordon and others might say it is low productivity and still others may say it is the poorly understood consequences of population aging. But what do we do? And here I think there is more of a consensus that monetary policy pretty much has run its course. There are still guys who are looking for helicopter drops of money but I think that is a step sort of too far into the dark, where I am not sure there is a political consensus to do that in the major economies, if it comes to that... Read MOAR
Over at Equitable Growth: Many people are looking. Jared Bernstein is one:
Jared Bernstein: I’m not the only one seeking a new path forward on trade: "Larry Summers lands where I do... the ‘revolt against global integration’...
...can lead to regressive Trumpian protectionism or to a new, more inclusive approach to expanded trade. Larry lays out the benefits of expanded trade both in terms of consumer benefits and ‘economic integration as a force for peace and prosperity.’ But, after suggesting people don’t always adequately recognize these upsides, he notes:
The core of the revolt against global integration…is not ignorance. It is a sense--unfortunately not wholly unwarranted--that it is a project being carried out by elites for elites, with little consideration for the interests of ordinary people. They see the globalization agenda as being set by large companies that successfully play one country against another. They read the revelations in the Panama Papers and conclude that globalization offers a fortunate few opportunities to avoid taxes and regulations that are not available to everyone else. And they see the kind of disintegration that accompanies global integration as local communities suffer when major employers lose out to foreign competitors.... Read MOAR
Live from the Great Stagnation: Why in the past two centuries hasn’t there been a tea blend developed that I like more than Earl Grey? What is wrong with our innovation system—or with me?
Wikipedia: Earl Grey: "In one case study, a patient who consumed four litres of Earl Grey tea per day reported muscle cramps, which were attributed to the function of the bergapten in bergamot oil as a potassium channel blocker. The symptoms subsided upon reducing his consumption of Earl Grey tea to one litre per day."
Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations (WN) from years of prior research by several others, as well as his own labors (20 years), going back to early classical times. If he had not done so, others eventually would have replaced him and WN. Ideas about political economy became a small flood in the 19th century—today it's a raging tsunami of competing ideas and explanations, much of them non-scientific, often twisted for ideological purity; much of what the tsunami of daily drivel sweeps up as representative of Smith’s ideas is quite false. Hence, the title of my first book: Adam Smith’s Lost Legacy (2005).
Calvin Sims: Next, the Federal Reserve and how the Fed makes decisions. Current Fed chair Janet Yellen was joined by Ben Bernanke, Alan Greenspan, and Paul Volcker. This is one hour 15 minutes. [applause]
Calvin Sims: Welcome everyone. I am the president of -- we are excited this evening to have the fabulous four Fed chairs -- fabulous four Fed chairs. It is going to be spectacular for a variety of reasons. I want to take a cue for Adam McKay. He wants said there is nothing that people love more than a Federal Reserve joke. [applause] I will tell you a joke. It is a joke by a Federal Reserve chair, who served from 1951 to 1970. You may have heard this but it is worth restating. He said the job of the Federal Reserve is to take away the punch bowl just before the party gets going. [laughter] We will learn the process of taking away the punch bowl, or adding something to the punch in the bowl.
Over at Equitable Growth: As I told my undergraduates yesterday:
Y = μ[co + Io + NX] + μG - μIrr
J. Bradford DeLong on April 14, 2016 at 02:14 PM in Economics: Finance, Economics: Macro, Moral Responsibility, Obama Administration, Philosophy: Moral, Political Economy, Politics, Science: Cognitive, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth, Streams: Highlighted | Permalink | Comments (8)
Over at Equitable Growth: This, from Paul Krugman, strikes me as... inadequate:
Paul Krugman: Why Monetarism Failed: "Right-wingers insisted--Friedman taught them to insist--that government intervention was always bad, always made things worse...
...Monetarism added the clause, ‘except for monetary expansion to fight recessions.’ Sooner or later gold bugs and Austrians, with their pure message, were going to write that escape clause out of the acceptable doctrine. So we have the most likely non-Trump GOP nominee calling for a gold standard, and the chairman of Ways and Means demanding that the Fed abandon its concerns about unemployment and focus only on controlling the never-materializing threat of inflation. READ MOAR
*Dan Tompkins writes: *Joseph Schumpeter and Max Weber, Cafe Landtmann, Vienna, 1918: "'The conversation turned to the Russian revolution...
J. Bradford DeLong on April 13, 2016 at 04:05 AM in Economics: History, Information: Better Press Corps/Journamalism, Moral Responsibility, Philosophy: Moral, Political Economy, Politics, Streams: (Wednesday) Economic History, Streams: Across the Wide Missouri, Streams: Cycle, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth | Permalink | Comments (6)
Live from SF: In fact, San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank President John Williams simply stands mute at the podium for thirty minutes...
Livesquawk: Fed's Williams does not comment...:
Fed's Williams does not comment on economy or monetary policy outlook in his remarks— Livesquawk (@livesquawk) April 12, 2016
Over at Equitable Growth: I just hoisted [a piece I wrote fifteen years ago1—a follow-up to my “Triumph of Monetarism” that I published in the Journal of Economic Perspectives. I think of it as my equivalent of Olivier Blanchard's “The state of macro is good" piece… Read MOAR
However, it is, I now recognize, clearly inadequate. It is quite good on how's today's New Keynesians are really Monetarists and how today's Monetarists are really Keynesians. But it misses completely:
The Monetarist Counterrevolution: April 2001:
Last year I published an essay (DeLong, 2000) arguing that modern Keynesians are really monetarists. Even if they--we--do not really like to admit it, most of the key elements in how modern "new Keynesian" economists view the world are derived from or heavily influenced by the work of Milton Friedman.
But that essay left me unsatisfied, for it was only half of the story.
J. Bradford DeLong on April 12, 2016 at 07:10 AM in Economics: History, Economics: Macro, History, Long Form, Streams: (BiWeekly) Honest Broker, Streams: (Tuesday) Hoisted from Archives, Streams: Cycle, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth, Streams: Highlighted | Permalink | Comments (0)
The excellent Ryan Avent, from four years ago:
Monetary policy: Try overshooting for once!: "DAVID BECKWORTH points us to Janet Yellen...
...vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, who points, in turn, to the obvious:
[R]esource utilization rates have been so low since late 2008 that a variety of simple rules have been calling for a federal funds rate substantially below zero, which of course is not possible. Consequently, the actual setting of the target funds rate has been persistently tighter than such rules would have recommended. The FOMC's unconventional policy actions--including our large-scale asset purchase programs--have surely helped fill this "policy gap" but, in my judgment, have not entirely compensated for the zero-bound constraint on conventional policy. In effect, there has been a significant shortfall in the overall amount of monetary policy stimulus since early 2009 relative to the prescriptions of the simple rules that I've described.
Must-Watch: Joe Gagnon et al.: Event: Macroeconomic Policy Options for the World Today: "Joseph E. Gagnon... Jay Shambaugh... Patrick Honohan... Carlo Cottarelli...
...The Peterson Institute will hold an event on April 12, 2016, to discuss the capacity and prospects for macroeconomic stimulus ahead of the spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank... possible monetary policy options for major central banks... the Obama administration's perspective on the fiscal space globally and potential stimulus policies...
Comment of the Day: Howard: 101ism in Action: "[The American Enterprise Institute's] Mark Perry has been producing months of lies...
...on the Seattle minimum wage increase: I don't know how to copy and paste a link on my phone, but search 'busted: the sad data manipulation of professor mark Perry' on the Big Picture blog.
Over at Equitable Growth: Last September, the illustrious Simon Wren-Lewis wrote a nice piece about the Bank of England's thinking about Quantitative Easing: Haldane on Alternatives to QE, and What He Missed Out.
Simon's bottom line was that Haldane was not just thinking inside the box, but restricting his thinking to a very small corner of the box:
[neither] discussion of the possibility that targeting something other than inflation might help... [nor] any discussion of helicopter money...
And this disturbs him because:
We rule out helicopter money because its undemocratic, but we rule out a discussion of helicopter money because ordinary people might like the idea.... Governments around the world have gone for fiscal contraction because of worries about the immediate prospects for debt. It is not as if the possibility of helicopter money restricts the abilities of governments in any way.... [While] it is good that some people at the Bank are thinking about alternatives to QE, which is a lousy instrument.... It is a shame that the Bank is not even acknowledging that there is a straightforward and cost-free solution... Read MOAR
Live from La Farine: What would a HRC administration do for the health-care sector, anyway? My view is that--with the exception of implementing a public option on the exchanges, and aggressively enforcing our antitrust laws--it is not worth expending political capital here until we can see how ObamaCare turns out: we have placed a lot of bets, so let them ride until the ball settles in its slot, and then re-optimize.
But they think differently. And Larry Levitt points me to interesting and reasonable things...
Larry Levitt: "New Clinton Health ideas: Tax credits for OOP costs/premiums...
Must-Read: Noah Smith waxes wroth about really lousy economics perpetrated by Alex Tabarrok, Mark Perry of the invariably-execrable American Enterprise Institute (sorry Norm Ornstein: you inhabit a really bad neighborhood), and a guy who puts things on the internet while remaining anonymous. It need not to be said that randomly tweeting art put on the internet by guys who do not have real names rarely ends well...
But it does need to be said that, for Noah, "Econ 101ism" involves pretending that Econ 101 says things that it does not--that it involves getting the elementary economics 180 degrees wrong, all the while claiming that you are merely parroting elementary economics.
I suggest renaming it: "False-Flag Econ 101ism". But Noah is right on the big point. This one is a beauty, for Econ 101--the real Econ 101--tells us that the first-order effect of a minimum wage is to transfer wealth from consumers and business owners to low-wage workers...
Brad DeLong : No, Silicon Valley Did Not and Does Not Partake of the Anarchist Utopian Nature. Why Did You Imagine It Did?: I would be smarter if I read more Unfogged comment threads...
Courtesy of an unknown lurker informing the Mineshaft that "Graeber, on Twitter, sourced [his] Apple claim to his memory of a lecture by Richard Wolff", and of bjk commenting on More on Graeber, I am led to the… unusual opinions… of neo-Althusserian structuralist wingnut--and guy who made it pleasant to be at U.Mass--Richard D. Wolff:
Economic Crisis from a Socialist Perspective: Beginnings for the "reform plus" strategy: The contradictions of capitalism offer us partial yet useful examples of the democratization of enterprise advocated by this “reform plus” agenda. One of these, recurring in California for decades, can illustrate our argument.
A Note on the Likelihood of Recession: With global inflation currently more than quiescent, there is no chance that global recovery will be—as Rudi Dornbusch used to say—assassinated by inflation-fighting central banks raising interest rates.
As for recovery being assassinated by financial chaos, we face a paradox here: Financial risks that policymakers and economists can see are those that bankers can see and hedge against as well. It is only the financial risks that policymakers and economists do not see that are truly dangerous. Many back in 2005 saw the global imbalance of China's export surplus and feared disaster from a fall in the dollar coupled with the discovery of money-center institutions having sold massive amounts of unhedged dollar puts. Very few, if any--even among those who believed US housing was a massive bubble likely to pop—feared that any problems created thereby would not be rapidly handled and neutralized by the Federal Reserve. READ MOAR
Robert Solow (2015): The Future of Work: Why Wages Aren't Keeping Up: "One of the more puzzling and damaging features of the American labor market in the last few decades...
...has been the failure of real (i.e. inflation-adjusted) wages and benefits to keep up with the increase in productivity. In the years after the Second World War, real wages generally rose at the same rate as output per hour worked. This rough balance was made explicit in what came to be called the Treaty of Detroit: the agreement between the United Auto Workers and General Motors (followed by Ford and Chrysler) that the average annual rate of wage increase would be the percentage increase in productivity plus the percentage increase in consumer prices. This norm spread beyond the auto industry. It had the arithmetic consequence that the share of total value added in industry going to labor would stay roughly constant, with the rest going to the capital side.
Weekend Reading: Cardiff Garcia: Productivity and innovation stagnation, past and future: an epic compendium of recent views: "Maybe you’ve even read Robert Gordon’s new book...
...or just one of the many summaries and critical reviews — and you worry gravely about what this means for future living standards. And maybe you’re also at least somewhat aware of the endless arguments about whether productivity growth is measured appropriately, whether all the ‘low-hanging fruit has been picked’, whether anyone understands the relationship between total-factor productivity growth and investment, and (of course) whether automation will destroy or bolster the labour market of the future. But you have a social life.
Niall Ferguson: An Open Letter to the Harvard Community: "Last week I said something stupid about John Maynard Keynes...
...Asked to comment on Keynes’ famous observation “In the long run we are all dead,” I suggested that Keynes was perhaps indifferent to the long run because he had no children, and that he had no children because he was gay. This was doubly stupid. First, it is obvious that people who do not have children also care about future generations. Second, I had forgotten that Keynes’ wife Lydia miscarried.
J. Bradford DeLong on April 07, 2016 at 07:31 AM in Economics: History, Economics: Macro, History, Long Form, Moral Responsibility, Philosophy: Moral, Political Economy, Politics, Streams: (BiWeekly) Honest Broker, Streams: (Wednesday) Economic History, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth, Streams: Highlighted, Twentieth Century Economic History | Permalink | Comments (6)
Henry Blodget writes:
Ferguson's underlying source appears to be a rather remarkable screed by Gertrude Himmelfarb in a rather McCarthyite vein--a screed that manages to get a lot about Keynes's economics and his family life substantially wrong in a very short space. It appears, in turn, to be based on the views of Joseph Schumpeter:
J. Bradford DeLong on April 06, 2016 at 03:12 AM in Economics: History, History, Moral Responsibility, Political Economy, Politics, Streams: (Tuesday) Hoisted from Archives, Streams: (Wednesday) Economic History, Streams: Cycle, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth | Permalink | Comments (3)
Live from Riverside Drive: Paul Krugman: Cities for Everyone: "Remember when Ted Cruz tried to take Donald Trump down by accusing him of having ‘New York values’?...
Live from the Rumpublicans' Self-Made Gehenna: Kevin Drum: Americans Aren't Anxious About the Economy. So What Are They Anxious About?: "One possibility is angst over illegal immigration, but...
Cosma Shalizi: In Soviet Union, Optimization Problem Solves You: "Both neo-classical and Austrian economists make a fetish (in several senses) of markets and market prices...
...That this is crazy is reflected in the fact that even under capitalism, immense areas of the economy are not coordinated through the market. There is a great passage from Herbert Simon in 1991 which is relevant here:
Suppose that [‘a mythical visitor from Mars’] approaches the Earth from space, equipped with a telescope that revels social structures. The firms reveal themselves, say, as solid green areas with faint interior contours marking out divisions and departments. Market transactions show as red lines connecting firms, forming a network in the spaces between them. Within firms (and perhaps even between them) the approaching visitor also sees pale blue lines, the lines of authority connecting bosses with various levels of workers. As our visitors looked more carefully at the scene beneath, it might see one of the green masses divide, as a firm divested itself of one of its divisions. Or it might see one green object gobble up another. At this distance, the departing golden parachutes would probably not be visible.
J. Bradford DeLong on April 05, 2016 at 01:19 PM in Books, Economics: History, History, Moral Responsibility, Philosophy: Moral, Political Economy, Politics, Streams: (Tuesday) Hoisted from Archives, Streams: (Wednesday) Economic History, Streams: Cycle, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth | Permalink | Comments (5)
An updated graph that Claudia Goldin had me make two and a half decades ago. The nonfarm unemployment rate since 1890:
Then it was 1890-1990, now it is 1869-2015.
I think Paul Krugman gets this one right:
Paul Krugman: Aggregate Supply and Depression Economics: "Robert Waldmann follows up on the question of who got what wrong in the late 1990s analysis of Japan’s liquidity trap...
...As he says, the extremely stripped-down nature of the model I used may have led some readers — like, surprisingly, Brad DeLong — to suppose that I had forgotten about the supply side. Actually, though, I still don’t really understand the confusion — I explicitly began with a flexible-price model, then considered the effects of temporarily fixed prices, so how could that have been unclear [to people like Brad DeLong]?
Robert Waldmann: Brad DeLong Marks His Beliefs about "The Return of Depression Economics" to Market: "Brad DeLong...reposted his review of Krugman's 'The Return of Depression Economics' from 1999...
...'Just in case I get a swelled-head and think I am right more often than I am ...' Way back in the last century, Brad thought he had a valid criticism of Paul Krugman's argument that Japan (and more generally countries in a liquidity trap) need higher expected inflation. I think the re-post is not just admirable as a self criticism session, but also shows us something about the power of Macroeconomic orthodoxy. Brad is just about as unorthodox as an economist can be without being banished from the profession, but even he was more influenced by Milton Friedman and Robert Lucas than he should have been.... Japan had slack aggregate demand at a safe nominal interest rate of 0--that i,s it was in the liquidity trap. Krugman argued that higher expected inflation would cause negative expected real interest rates and higher aggregate demand and solve the problem. Brad was unconvinced (way back then):
Must-Read: Max Auffhammer: No More Berning of Fossil Fuels: "Of the GOP front runners, only Marco Rubio has an energy or climate plan on his website...
Just in case I get swelled-headed and think I am right more often than I am...
Brad DeLong (1999): Review of Paul Krugman, The Return of Depression Economics: Paul Krugman (1999), The Return of Depression Economics (New York: W.W. Norton: 039304839X).
This is a book that anyone interested in international economic policy and the possible destinies of the world economy needs to read. Paul Krugman is, as I have said before, the best claimant to the mantle of John Maynard Keynes: an extremely knowledgeable professional economist, an excellent writer, and an incisive critic of what international economic policymakers are doing wrong.
J. Bradford DeLong on April 01, 2016 at 06:48 PM in Economics: Finance, Economics: History, Economics: Macro, History, Long Form, Philosophy: Moral, Political Economy, Politics, Streams: (BiWeekly) Honest Broker, Streams: (Tuesday) Hoisted from Archives, Streams: Cycle, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth, Streams: Highlighted | Permalink | Comments (6)
Robert Waldmann: Dynamic Inefficiency: "This is a post about macroeconomic theory...
It is technical and I honestly don’t know how much is already in the literature. The aim is to address an important policy question: Is public debt a burden on future generations?
Must-Read: Whenever I look at a graph like this, I think: "Doesn't this graph tell me that the last two years were the wrong time to give up
sniffing glue the zero interest-rate policy"? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
And Narayana Kocherlakota agrees, and makes the case:
Narayana Kocherlakota: Information in Inflation Breakevens about Fed Credibility: "The Federal Open Market Committee has been gradually tightening monetary policy since mid-2013...
...Concurrent with the Fed’s actions, five year-five year forward inflation breakevens have declined by almost a full percentage point since mid-2014. I’ve been concerned about this decline for some time (as an FOMC member, I dissented from Committee actions in October and December 2014 exactly because of this concern). In this post, I explain why I see a decline in inflation breakevens as being a very worrisome signal about the FOMC’s credibility (which I define to be investor/public confidence in the Fed’s ability and/or willingness to achieve its mandated objectives over an extended period of time).
J. Bradford DeLong: Pragmatism or Perdition: BERKELEY – Almost every single observer who looks of the progress of the US economy over the past 40 years comes away severely disappointed.
The US today spends roughly 4% of GDP more on health sector administration and 2% more on overtreatment than it used to. The U.S. gets nothing of real value for these immense expenditures. Other North Atlantic economies do fine–do substantially better, in fact–in providing health to their citizens without these overhangs.
Debunking America’s Populist Narrative: BERKELEY – One does not need to be particularly good at hearing to decipher the dog whistles being used during this year’s election campaign in the United States. Listen even briefly, and you will understand that Mexicans and Chinese are working with Wall Street to forge lousy trade deals that rob American workers of their rightful jobs, and that Muslims want to blow everyone up.
All of this fear mongering is scarier than the usual election-year fare. It is frightening to people in foreign countries, who can conclude only that voters in the world’s only superpower have become dangerously unbalanced. And it is frightening to Americans, who until recently believed – or perhaps hoped – that they were living in a republic based on the traditions established by George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt. READ MOAR
"Therefore shall ye lay up these my words in your heart and in your soul, and bind them for a sign upon your hand, that they may be as frontlets between your eyes. And ye shall teach them your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt write them upon the door posts of thine house, and upon thy gates..."
“The Market” as an Institution: