For vitally important reasons, The Atlantic‘s Conor Friedersdorf isn’t voting for Obama in November. (If Friedersdorf does vote, it’ll be for Gary Johnson.)
My colleague Larry White isn’t impressed with the Market Monetarists’ case for QE3. And my former professor Randy Holcombe is even more pessimistic about it and its likely progeny. Here’s a slice from Randy’s post:
In recent posts on The Beacon I have argued that the Fed’s purchases of these securities is unprecedented, that it is an example of crony capitalism, and now am arguing that it is an example of the regulatory capture that [George] Stigler described. Just like the government’s purchase of Chevy Volts, the Fed is creating demand for a product (morgtage-backed securities) that is in weak demand, for the benefit of the industry it regulates.
When you consider that Europeans have high VATs and lower capital taxation than the U.S., the lower progessivity in Europe is almost obvious.
How did I miss this until now? My colleague Dan Klein and GMU student Harika Bartlett, back in 2008, analyzed Paul Krugman’s New York Times columns. From the abstract:
We have made a complete review of Krugman’s New York Times columns 1997 through 2006—in all, 654 columns. The pattern of policy positions and arguments do not square with his purported concern for general prosperity and the interests of the poor. Some of the evidence lies in statements made. But the more important evidence lies in patterns of statements not made.