Must-Read: The Real Reason Why Conservatives Like Ross Douthat Oppose The Gay Marriage Ruling: "Douthat isn’t wrong that...:
...and things like this show up in my email inbox in rapid order:
Why Is FEMA Hoarding Survival Food?
You're not going to believe what FEMA just tried to pull.
You won't believe what the government is doing now...
>> Click here to watch the banned video now.
It's true, Friend. They are coming. Like it or not.
And they won't leave empty-handed.
Don't wait. You snooze, you lose.
Get the truth about what the government is trying to get away with, before they yank it offline.
>> Secret video exposes what you need to know.
PS...It's going to be every man, woman and child for themselves... food mobs will strip store shelves bare... get prepared by watching this ground-breaking video before it's taken down by government hackers...
Samuel Brittan--who I believe is extremely perceptive and penetrating (although not at all unsympathetic)--on Friedrich Hayek. From 'Hayek, Freedom, and Interest Groups,' in The Role and Limits of Government (London: Maurice Temple Smith, 1983):
The first page of the first chapter of Hayek's own Constitution of Liberty starts with the sentence:
We are concerned in this book with that condition of men in which coercion of some by others is reduced as much as possible.
J. Bradford DeLong on June 30, 2015 at 10:45 AM in Economics: History, Economics: Information, Economics: Macro, History, Moral Responsibility, Political Economy, Politics, Streams: (Tuesday) Hoisted from Archives, Streams: (Wednesday) Economic History, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth, Streams: Highlighted | Permalink | Comments (0)
| | | |
Across the Wide Missouri: Matthew Yglesias:
David Glasner: "[Murray] Rothbard’s selective quotation from the memorandum summarizing Strong’s 1928 conversation...
with Sir Arthur Salter, which I will discuss below, gives a very inaccurate impression of Strong’s position on money management...
Across the Wide Missouri: William Jordan: @WilliamJordann: How far the the country has come in a week, in National Review Online headlines:
Across the Wide Missouri: What would "civil disobedience" against the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell even mean? What does Mike Huckabee want his people to do? Run up to people's weddings and interrupt them? Grab people's marriage licenses and rip them up?
STEPHANOPOULOS: So what exactly are you calling on people to do right now? You say resist and reject this judicial tyranny. Spell out exactly what that means?
Must-Read: The curious thing about Robert Farley's piece is that he says: "today, the wiser among us recognize that 'dual containment' was, in large part, [more] a solution" rather than a problem. Why the "today"? From 1991-2003, in every sophisticated strategic discussion of the Middle East I participated in, the smart people always made the point that dual containment and the continued maintenance of the Saddam Hussein régime was bad for the people of Iraq but probably good for the people of the Middle East as a whole--and precisely for dual containment reasons.
And, of course, Cheney and Junior Bush's attack on Iraq turned out to be bad for the people of Iraq as well.
Robert Farley: The Ultimate 'What If': A World Where America Never Invaded Iraq: "In 2003, we spoke of the policy of ‘dual containment’ as a problem...
Must-Read: Erik Loomis: A Glimpse Into the Black, Shriveled Hearts of the Class Warriors: "When you think that maybe the hearts... aren’t actually that closed to compassion...
Across the Wide Missouri: Debating, on Bloomberg, a guy who had subpoenad a dead woman to appear in his committee hearing room was... creepy. Highly creepy:
Wikipedia: Thomas M. Davis: "The Terri Schiavo case. The committee subpoena...
...signed by Davis, ordered the appearance of Schiavo, her husband, Michael, and her doctors. The subpoenas specified that the witnesses bring to the hearing:
all medical and other equipment that provides nutrition and hydration...in its current and continuing state of operations.
Davis issued a joint statement with House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R-Illinois) that stated:
This inquiry should give hope to Terri, her parents and friends, and the millions of people throughout the world who are praying for her safety. This fight is not over.
Many legal scholars criticized this action as an inappropriate congressional intervention in an ongoing court case that defied the rule of law and amounted to a bill of attainder—not against the party the politicians are attempting to aid, but against the party on the other side of the courtroom.
Comment of the Day: Apropos of George W. Bush's claim that not 911 but, rather, Kanye West saying that he did not care about Black people was the worst day of his presidency:
Rick McGahey: "Here is the original Kayne West video (full of extraneous junk, typical You Tube, but look past it)...
Across the Wide Missouri: Scott Lemieux: Friday Links: The Repulsion of the Moopish Invasion: "Nice to see the conspiracy theories already heating up already...
...The reviews of Scalia’s dissent continue to come in. (Tushnet has been on this beat for a while, and his analysis looks more prescient than ever.) Lead plaintiff David King, earlier this month:
Mr. King said that he was not really worried about the outcome of the case, King v. Burwell, because as a Vietnam veteran, he has access to medical care through the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Yeah, really sorry you lost this one, buddy. Smart analysis from Brianne Gorod, Nicholas Bagley, Ian Millhiser, and Jon Cohn. Cue Nelson Muntz.
This morning, Republican-appointed Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts wrote and five of his colleagues -- Democrat-appointed Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, and Republican-appointed Kennedy -- agreed that:
Section 18031 [of the Affordable Care Act--i.e., the ObamaCare Law--] provides that “[e]ach State shall . . . establish an American Health Benefit Exchange..." [But] if [a] State chooses not to do so, Section 18041 provides that the Secretary [of Health and Human Services] “shall . . . establish and operate such Exchange..." (emphasis added [by Roberts]).... The phrase “such Exchange”... instructs the Secretary to establish and operate the same Exchange that the State was directed to establish.... Black’s Law Dictionary 1661... (defining “such” as “That or those; having just been mentioned”).... State Exchanges and Federal Exchanges are equivalent—they must meet the same requirements, perform the same functions, and serve the same purposes...A simple matter of black-letter law, no? The plain meaning of the phrase "such Exchange" means that anything legal that is true of a health-insurance exchange established by, say, the state of New York is also true of a health-insurance exchange established by the federal government for, say, the state of Florida if the state of Florida fails to establish its exchange, no?
Live from Oceana Naval Air Station: Am I wrong to be repeatedly gobsmacked and disgusted by the narcissism of the Bush clan?
No More Mister Nice Blog: That Other Time George W. Bush Suggested 9/11 Was No Big Whoop: "BooMan flags this passage...
I remember a comment George W. Bush made to me during a one-on-one, in-flight interview. He said the toughest moment of his life wasn’t what to do after 9/11 but seeing his father... defeated by Clinton. I thought for a moment he might cry, but of course he wouldn’t.
BooMan is understandably appalled:
Across the Wide Missouri: Patrick Nielsen Hayden: "You're asking me to agree that my great-grandparent and great-great-grandparents were monsters.": "I don’t think my great-great-grandfather was a monster...
Rich Lowry: Yet More on the Confederate Battle Flag: "If anyone banging on about the Confederacy at the moment on Twitter...
...were born in the 1840s in the South, outside of a few select areas, they, too, would have fought for the Confederacy. That should lend a measure of modesty to this debate.
Rich Lowry: Yet More on the Confederate Battle Flag: "If anyone banging on about the Confederacy at the moment on Twitter...
...were born in the 1840s in the South, outside of a few select areas, they, too, would have fought for the Confederacy. (UPDATE: It should go without saying that this isn’t true of blacks.) That should lend a measure of modesty to this debate.
Why should it go without saying?
Across the Wide Missouri: Christopher Grimes: Southerners Silenced too Long by Symbolism of Confederate Flag: "When I was growing up in Georgia in the 1970s and 80s...
...the Confederate battle flag was part of the visual and cultural landscape... emblazoned on everything from bumper stickers to shot glasses and beach towels.... In Tallapoosa... the flag was painted on the wall of the high school gym. Our football team was called The Rebels.... Our ‘fight song’... was ‘Dixie’. And added to all this Confederate imagery was our school mascot, a mustachioed southern gentleman dressed in the same shade of grey that famed general Robert E Lee wore to the civil war battle of Appomattox....
From Arthur Goldhammer's forthcoming translation of de Tocqueville's Recollections:
I returned to the chamber and regained my seat. Nearly all the deputies had left. The benches were filled by people from the streets. Lamartine, still at the podium and framed by the two flags, continued to harangue the crowd, or, rather, converse with it, for there were as many orators as listeners, or so it seemed to me. The confusion was at its height.
Over at Project Syndicate: As bubbles go, it was not a very big one.
From 2002 to 2006, the share of the American economy devoted to residential construction rose by 1.2 percentage points of GDP above its previous trend value, before plunging as the United States entered the greatest economic crisis in nearly a century. According to my rough calculations, the excess investment in the housing sector during this period totaled some $500 billion – by any measure a tiny fraction of the world economy at the time of the crash.
Live from Sandbridge Beach: Invictus: Red State, Blue State: Kansas & Washington: "We have interesting experiments going on in the state of Kansas and the city of Seattle...
Must-Read: Josh Marshall: Is Israel's Big Problem Jewish Journalists in America?: "The whole thing descends to a parodic, almost Dolezalesque level of gobsmacking when [Michael] Oren...
Live from La Farine: Lindsey Graham: "Part of who we are... used by people in a racist way...": "This[flag] is part of who we are...
...The flag represents — to some people — the Civil War, and that was the symbol of one side.... It’s been used by people in a racist way...
Live from Above Hetch-Hetchy: Why has King v. Burwell not been DIGed--or, at least, why haven't the lawyers and funders for the plaintiff been told to go back and get a new and different lead plaintiff?
Because at least the four justices who voted to grant certiorari are so partisan that they are willing to throw more than two centuries of Supreme Court precedent that the court decides only real cases out the window.
One does have to wonder what is going through the mind of John Roberts. How much credibility does he think he and his fellow partisan right-wing horsemen have to waste after Bush v. Gore and Citizens United, anyway?
Over at Equitable Growth: Ezra Klein has a very nice explainer on the likely consequences of the possible announcement next week of a 5-4 partisan Supreme Court vote to disrupt ObamaCare via the case King v. Burwell:
Ezra Klein: King v. Burwell Won’t Destroy Obamacare: "A ruling for the plaintiffs in King won't change anything about Obamacare...
...in California, or New York, or Massachusetts, or even Kentucky. And it won't be a long-term problem for the states using a federal exchange out of convenience rather than ideology; they'll just set up their own exchanges.... Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Delaware, and Maine are already working on backup plans. So King can't destroy Obamacare. What it can do is let Republican elected officials destroy Obamacare in states where they have a majority. That's a very different thing, and it will lead to very different political dynamics.... Resistant red states will be left with a wrecked insurance market — and a hefty tax bill.... READ MOAR
Ray Ginger: On Clarence Darrow: "Ray Ginger on Clarence Darrow, from Ray Ginger (1975), The Age of Excess: The United States from 1877-1914 (Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press: 0192486013954), pp. 358-9:
Lawyer: Clarence Darrow: The name of Clarence Seward Darrow (1857-1938) conjures up the Monkey Trial and Leopold-Loeb. He is remembered as the foremost defense lawyer of his generation, spokeman for the accused in dozens of murder trials. This view is badly distorted. He was a courtroom advocate only in his waning years. The truth is far more complex.
J. Bradford DeLong on June 18, 2015 at 07:01 AM in Economics: History, Economics: Inequality, History, Moral Responsibility, Philosophy: Moral, Political Economy, Politics, Streams: (Daily) Liveblogging History, Streams: (Wednesday) Economic History, Streams: Across the Wide Missouri, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth | Permalink | Comments (1)
| | | |
bottlerocketscience: Startup Geometry Podcast EP 004: Brad DeLong:
J. Bradford DeLong on June 17, 2015 at 12:49 PM in Economics: Finance, Economics: Growth, Economics: History, Economics: Inequality, Economics: Information, Economics: Macro, Philosophy: Moral, Political Economy, Politics, Streams: Cycle, Streams: DeLong FAQ, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth, Streams: Highlighted | Permalink | Comments (1)
| | | |
M.S.: Inequality: The 1 percent needs better defenders: "Perhaps [it was] John Kenneth Galbraith... [who] said that the way to debate...
What about today's Republican Party?
Let me give a stream-of-consciousness-personal-psychodrama-confessional-oversharing answer to that question:
I am not a political scientist. I am not an especially deep student of politics.
My government experience came from working in 1993-1995 in Lloyd Bentsen's Treasury Department, when he had just gone from being senator from Texas and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee Treasury Secretary. He and his staff, broadly, believed that what you did in order to govern--with a kinder and gentler, technocratic, equitable-growth approach to policy--was to start with a centrist block, Bentsen and his friends and allies, people from Jack Danforth on the right to Daniel Patrick Moynihan on the left. You would then call for bids from the left and right. You would ally with whichever was willing to give you better deal to build a majority. And you would then vote your bill out of the Senate Finance Committee 12-5 and roll it through initial passage, conference, and presidential signature.
Miriam Burstein: Cited by: "Dad the Emeritus Historian of Graeco-Roman Egypt...
...sent me to Donald Kagan's Jefferson Lecture. Despite Kagan's warnings against the dangers of over-generalization, his critique of contemporary historiography was so non-specific--apparently, we're still stuck in 80s crusades against DWM--that I had a hard time finding the 'there' there. I've already had an earful about this lecture from a classicist's perspective, and I'll leave his call for history as a 'sound base for moral judgments' to other historians.
Must-Must-Read: Steve Benen: The importance of setting Sessions straight: "The Senate Judiciary Committee held a... hearing...
...which became notable for one very specific reason. As much of the political world wait for the Supreme Court to issue its ruling in the King v. Burwell case, Republicans at least pretend to believe that the Affordable Care Act was written in such a way as to deny subsidies – on purpose – to consumers who enrolled through healthcare.gov. To that end, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) thought he was making an important point yesterday, addressing the Constitutional Accountability Center’s Elizabeth Wydra:
Live from Peet's Coffee: Grifters gotta grift!
"[They have] taken our economy and turned it into a sick, debt-ridden dystopia incapable of stopping the forthcoming class. In sharp contrast to President Reagan's good morning, today we are facing an economic sundown...":
That's not David "Nobody Understands These Numbers" Stockman, Director of OMB for Ronald Reagan. That's the announcer. What Stockman says is things like:
Via Arthur Goldhammer:
Alexis de Tocqueville: Democracy in America: 2.10: (Democracy in America I.2.10): "Nowadays the dispossession of the Indians...
...is often accomplished in a routine and—one might say—perfectly legal manner.
Over at Equitable Growth: The sharp Tyler Cowen writes:
Tyler Cowen: Has fiscal conservatism met an impasse at the state level?: "The latest from Louisiana is that taxes are going up...
...but in a strange way that won’t be called a tax increase.... It is even weirder than that sounds. Combine that with the recent fiasco in Kansas.... Fiscal conservatism has been stymied at the state level... for many other states, especially those governed by Republicans.... Trying to cut taxes at the state level doesn’t seem like a useful or productive way forward. If you have a better revisionist take on Louisiana and Kansas, please do put it in the comments, I would gladly read it, and if you have something really good I will pass it along. But I see myself as stating what has to be the default hypothesis for the time being--should we not all come out and admit this? READ MOAR
Live from La Farine: Steve Benen: Scalia's perfect capital-punishment case falls apart: "Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was dismissive of then-Justice Harry Blackmun’s concerns...
...about the death penalty.... Scalia had a case study in mind that demonstrated exactly why the system of capital punishment has value... Henry Lee McCollum... the perfect example--a murderer whose actions were so heinous that his crimes stood as a testament to the merit of capital punishment itself. Yesterday, McCollum was pardoned. Scalia’s perfect example of a man who deserved to be killed by the state was innocent.... The confessions appeared to have been coerced 30 years ago and new DNA evidence implicated another man whose possible involvement had been overlooked at the time. As recently as 2010, the North Carolina Republican Party used a McCollum photo on campaign fliers to attack a Democratic candidate as “soft on crime.” McCollum hadn’t done anything wrong...
Jeb Bush: I want to send a message that my campaign is like a disastrous and profoundly stupid attack that costs three casualties for every one inflicted:
Jonathan Martin and Patrick Healy: Jeb Bush Works to Recover From a Shaky Start: "Mr. Diaz... [who] seared John Kerry in 2004 and Mr. Romney in 2007...
...and other Bush aides are determined to develop new lines of attack against... Rubio... and... Walker.... By hiring Mr. Diaz, Mr. Bush wanted to send a clear signal that:
the culture of the Bush operation will now be a Pickett’s Charge engagement campaign with his main opponents
according to one Bush ally. It is a far cry from campaigning ‘joyfully,’ as he mused about doing last year...
Indeed it is a far cry from campaigning "joyfully".
As George Pickett said of Robert E. Lee--the general who ordered the charge--"That man destroyed my division!"
**Must-Read: Hillary Rodham Clinton: "Thank you! Oh, thank you all!...
...Thank you so very, very much. It is wonderful to be here with all of you. To be in New York with my family, with so many friends, including many New Yorkers who gave me the honor of serving them in the Senate for eight years. To be right across the water from the headquarters of the United Nations, where I represented our country many times. To be here in this beautiful park dedicated to Franklin Roosevelt’s enduring vision of America, the nation we want to be. And in a place… with absolutely no ceilings.
Over at Equitable Growth: Can somebody please tell me what is going on? What happened with the Obama administration and its making the case for the TPP?
I am what Paul Krugman calls "Davos Man" to a substantial degree--a card-carrying neoliberal, a believer in globalization and free trade, someone who has seen more than enough of the stupidities of places like Berkeley and so doesn't mind hippy-punching now and then. As a believer in free-trade, in the importance of harmonizing global economic regulation, and in getting intellectual and general property rights right, I ought to be a very strong technocratic advocate for the TPP. Yet I found myself having major questions about it: READ MOAR
I don't think any words are necessary. I think this passage from the Wall Street Journal's attack on the College Board's AP U.S. History curriculum speaks for itself:
Daniel Henninger: Bye, Bye, American History: "From Key Concept 1.3: ‘Many Europeans developed a belief in white superiority...
...to justify their subjugation of Africans and American Indians, using several different rationales.
Pity the high-school or college student who puts up a hand to contest that anymore. They don’t. They know the Orwellian option now is to stay down.... Weak school administrators and academics empowered tireless activists who [have] forced all of American history and life through the four prisms of class, gender, ethnicity and identity. What emerged at the other end was one idea—guilt. I exist, therefore I must be guilty. Of something. The College Board promises that what it produces next month will be ‘balanced.’ We await the event.
Which part of that Key Concept do Daniel Henninger and the Wall Street Journal editorial board believe should be contested, and wish to contest? The subjugation of Africans? The continued subjugation of African-Americans? The subjugation of American Indians? The belief in white supremacy? The link between subjugation on the one hand and belief in white supremacy on the other? The claim that there were different rationales for white supremacy in different times and places?
Inquiring minds really want to know. The Wall Street Journal--and Daniel Henninger--owe us a long-form follow-up.
J. Bradford DeLong :: University of California at Berkeley
Let me begin by thanking Matt Rognlie for doing some very serious and thoughtful digging into this set of factor-payments data. That digging leaves me in an ideal position for a discussant: There are interesting and important numbers. These numbers have not been put together in this way before. The author is wise enough not to believe he has nailed what the numbers mean to the floor. Thus I am in an excellent position to, if not add intellectual value, at least to claim a lavish intellectual-rent share of Matt Rognlie's product.
J. Bradford DeLong on June 12, 2015 at 11:06 AM in Economics: Growth, Economics: History, Economics: Inequality, Economics: Macro, Long Form, Political Economy, Politics, Streams: (BiWeekly) Honest Broker, Streams: (Wednesday) Economic History, Streams: Economics, Streams: Equitable Growth, Streams: Highlighted | Permalink | Comments (10)
| | | |
Live from La Farine: Grifters Gotta Grift!
I must say that I would be more impressed with Ted Cruz's "sacrifices" if Ted Cruz were to securitize his future Fox News Contributor and corporate board earnings, and then sacrifice by pledging those securities to his campaign...
Ted Cruz: "Dear ----- ,...
...I'm about to ask you to make a sacrifice in the next 48 hours. But before I do, I want you to know: I wouldn't ask you if I hadn't already done it myself.
Live from La Farine: Duncan Black**: Eschaton: Nobody Could Have Predicted: "I think we all assumed [Ben Carson's campaign] would be an extremely well-run and efficient grift organization:
It is very nice to see the Financial Times correction of Niall Ferguson--although it does not, in my opinion, go far enough.
A word, however, to Lionel Barber, Gillian Tett, and company: The Financial Times's only current assets are an incredibly skilled and hard-working journalistic team and a reputation as a trusted information intermediary. You are not going to be able to out-pander the Spectator, the Wall Street Journal, the Torygraph, and Fox News as a place where the rich feel comforted rather than afflicted by the news. That means you cannot risk your reputation as a trusted information intermediary by routinely publishing pieces that undermine it.
Jonathan Chait: Niall Ferguson Claims Smeared by Facts, Fights Back: "[Ferguson's] most recent example of ‘correct politicalness’ is the humiliation Ferguson suffered when...
Across the Wide Missouri: Journamalism Watch:
"Obama's failure to transcend America's partisan divide is not the result of a deliberate decision by the Republican Party to deepen that divide, but rather of Obama's failure to lead, with leadership." That is something that professional Green-Lantern "centrists" like Clive Crook and Ron Fournier have said. That is something they continue to say--even though moderate Republicans' talking point now is: Pelosi and Reid kept Obama from being the bipartisan centrist president he wanted to be.
I wonder why they have not yet smelled the coffee, and gotten the memo. It would be easy to shift to: "Obama tried to lead, but Pelosi and Reid refused to follow". It would be more plausible and not more untrue than the current position. So why not shift?
Ron Fournier: The Right Way and Wrong Way to Win the Presidency: "Hillary Clinton appears to be taking the easy path. It would be the wrong one: Democratic and Republican presidential candidates face a choice...
Comment of the Day: Lee A. Arnold: Thurday Musings on Macroeconomic Policy and "The Right": "Brad: '...not political in this sort of partisan sense: it is, rather, that the prosperity of fiscal expansion is a false prosperity'...
...to break free from all the limitations of his turn-of-the-century, Bible Belt Missouri background, his engineer’s pragmatism and exactitude, his naval officer’s dedication and discipline, his willingness to think and rethink, and his readiness to educate the young in necessary survival skills. Heinlein’s bad side has been his arrogance and egotism, his manipulativeness and concern to always have the upper hand, and -- worst of all -- his misplaced morality.
Live from La Farine: As I wrote, moderate Republicans have abandoned the claim that President Obama stiffed them and ran a partisan administration. Instead, they now say that Obama wanted to negotiate with Republicans, but that Pelosi and Reid, somehow, would not let him do so. Thus it remains very interesting that Ron Fournier continues to cling to the 2009-2011 "Obama won't let us into the room, won't listen to" Republican talking point. And it is also interesting that Ron Fournier claims that Bill Clinton began his second term "with standing to convert campaign promises into results":
Erik Loomis**: Idiocy Upon Idiocy: "Of course Ron Fournier would weigh in on the New York Times...
Hoisted from the Archives from Spring 2009: This Is Getting Damned Annoying: Will I Ever Be Allowed to Disagree with Paul Krugman Again About Anything? (Niall Ferguson Edition):
There have been two annoying things about the past decade. The first is that I feel like I have been living in a Ken Macleod novel--and one of the more dystopic ones too, at least up until January 21, 2009 (I am glad he has stopped: Ken: please don't get cranky again).
The second is that the best way to understand the world is through these two rules:
Over at Equitable Growth: I found myself debating Tom Davis--a very smart and well-trained professional--on Bloomberg TV last Friday, on the occasion of the monthly employment report. I did better than I had expected, probably because we are both on the same side of the technocratic "we badly need to do more for infrastructure" issue: READ MOAR