George Will is not much impressed by the new book by historian David Goldfield. A slice:
Goldfield’s grasp of contemporary America can be gauged by his regret that the income tax, under which the top 10 percent of earners pay more than 70 percent of the tax and the bottom 50 percent pay about 3 percent, is not “genuinely progressive.” He idealizes government as an “umpire,” a disinterested arbiter ensuring fair play. Has no liberal stumbled upon public choice theory, which demystifies politics, puncturing sentimentality about politicians and government officials being more nobly and unselfishly motivated than lesser mortals? Has no liberal noticed that no government is ever neutral in society’s allocation of wealth and opportunity? And that the bigger government becomes, the more it is manipulated by those who are sufficiently confident, articulate and sophisticated to understand government’s complexities, and wealthy enough to hire skillful agents to navigate those complexities on their behalf? This is why big government is invariably regressive, transferring wealth upward.
My Mercatus Center colleagues Christine McDaniel and Eileen Norcross offer some sound advice.
Jeff Jacoby wonders why the voluble Elizabeth Warren has been so quiet recently about the tax cut.
How informed is the typical American about corporate profits? Not very.
Pierre Lemieux asks if size matters.
Getting educated about labor unions.
