Tweet [1]
Cato’s Michael Tanner weighs in sensibly on the “Is Social Security a Ponzi scheme?” question [2]. He answers “yes.”
In my latest column in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, I offer further thoughts on Keynesianism [3].
EconLog’s David Henderson points us to a fine blog-post by David Friedman on global warming [4]. I would add to Friedman’s list of the three parts to the argument in favor of vigorous government action to correct global warming a fourth part, namely, the assumption that private efforts that enable us to better deal with the effect of global warming – e.g., the continuing improvement in air-conditioning, and the continuing improvement in weather forecasting – are either more costly than, or less effective than – and have worse third-party effects than – would any likely effort by governments to deal with global warming. (In Friedman’s essay this point is recognized; but it deserves to be listed explicitly as among the assumptions that global-warming alarmists make, often without thinking about it.)
George Will on 9/11 [5].