- Cafe Hayek - https://cafehayek.com -

Some Links

Tweet [1]

My Mercatus Center colleague Dan Griswold reacts to Donald Trump’s latest diatribe against immigrants [2].  A slice:

As much as I disagree with Mr. Trump on the substance of his immigration plans, his uncompromising speech has the virtue of presenting Americans with a clear choice on the issue. The anti-immigration wing of the Republican Party has its man at the top of the ticket. Nov. 8 will be a test of whether their inward-looking, nativist vision of the party is a winning formula for a national election.

On the substance of his proposals, Mr. Trump’s argument relies on two big fallacies — that illegal immigrants make working Americans less well off, and that illegal immigrants are responsible for a wave of violent crime.

K. William Watson reacts to Trump’s recent visit to Mexico [3].  A slice:

One big problem with this approach [of Trump to trade] is that there is no economically rational or morally justified line to tell us who belongs in the us group and who is them.  Nationalism is a politically convenient sort of tribalism, but there’s no objective reason why Michigan and California should be considered economic friends on a team that fights against Mexico.  Just as socialists have to claim that class lines are hard and objective, nationalists have to convince people that some lines on a map matter more than others.

Citing work by my colleague Larry White, David Henderson correctly and rightly disputes Ben Bernanke’s praise for the economics espoused by Alexander Hamilton [4].

George Will rightly condemns the executive branch of the U.S. Government unconstitutionally helping itself to money that it has no business helping itself to [5].

Jeffrey Tucker understandably praises Ludwig von Mises’s 1922 book, Socialism – the best, in my opinion, of all of Mises’s books [6].

Nick Gillespie ponders Clump’s proposed immigration restrictions [7].

David Boaz identifies some ominous parallels [8].