George Selgin expresses, in a most entertaining way, his love of good language and frustration with itchy-fingered copy editors. (One of my most frustrating encounters with a copy editor occurred when I discovered only too late – after publication – that my original “humanly” was changed to “humanely.”) Anyway, as indicated, George’s post is one which is enjoyable. Its one which readers should be incentivized to read. So at this point in time obtain a beverage, utilize a chair, and read on.
Art Carden makes a too-seldom made – but all-too-important – point about immigration. (I boast, compelled by my vast vanity, that my 2012 Law & Liberty essay nicely complements Art’s fine essay.)
Here’s John Cochrane on labor-market doldrums. A germane slice:
If low employment is “structural,” resulting from the worker-side disincentives as well as employer-side disincentives — policy uncertainty, regulatory threats, NLRB, Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, EPA, and so on — then the problem isn’t lack of “demand” in the first place. If the problem has nothing to do with the Fed, and if $2 trillion of QE didn’t do anything to help it, why does the solution have anything to do with the Fed?
Jim Harper is not impressed with David Brooks’s pedestrian psychoanalysis of Edward Snowden. (Brooks should read more Burke.)
And why is this pattern not evidence – evidence, note; I don’t say proof – of the proposition that minimum-wage legislation (federal, state, and local) reduces the employment prospects for young people?