Tweet [1]
As the narrative goes, without Ex-Im many foreign companies would buy Airbus rather than Boeing; hence the need for support. This is a weird argument at many levels. First, as a believer that the government’s job is never, ever, ever to prop up private companies, I would say, “And so what?” But in this town, where people believe it is totally normal for Uncle Sam to work overtime so that a company will make extra private profit, that argument doesn’t go very far.
I have others. Doesn’t it bother anyone how little faith in Boeing those who are claiming that without Ex-Im airlines wouldn’t buy Boeing planes have? Effectively what these guys are saying is “This is a bad product that people wouldn’t want without with Ex-Im.” If this is true, why should the federal government ask us to stand behind Boeing?
James Peron warns of the danger to liberty posed by some who pose as friends of liberty [3]. A slice:
The GOP is no party of free enterprise. They are led by a corrupt advocate of cronyism, worse than any stereotype the Bernie Sanders of the world could invent. The GOP may vote for protectionism, for big government, and for the regulatory state — provided it redistributes wealth to their favored groups — but in the minds of many voters, especially young people with limited experience, they think Republicans are the standard bearers of liberty.
More fracking? Or more war? [4]
Jeffrey Tucker is among the fans of Downton Abbey [5].
George Will ponders what Hong Kong’s resistance means for Taiwan [7].
Wendy Kaminer is unimpressed with an attempt to make a case against free speech [8].
Chris Preble remembers Earl Ravenal [9].