Vincent Geloso nicely explains the Peltzman effect. A slice:
None of the parties involved provide answers about whether the regulation will reduce propagation. More importantly, the arguments being invoked by all sides reveal a depressing pretence of knowledge on the part of everyone involved.
Notice that, in the statement above, I do not say that masks are ineffective at reducing propagation. The evidence suggests that they are. Rather, I am suggesting that compelling the use of masks may end up increasing propagation even though masks, by themselves, reduce the risks of transmitting the infection and reduce very mildly the risks of catching the infection.
GMU Econ alum Dan Mitchell unveils the flaws in a recent United Nations analysis of poverty. A slice:
And it assumes politicians can deftly re-slice a shrinking pie so that poor somehow get more than they have now (while ignoring Thomas Sowell’s sage warning that wealth can only be redistributed one time).
Nick Gillespie explains that Joe Biden wraps cronyist predations in green camouflage.
Chelsea Follett writes about the Uyghur genocide and its connection with neo-Malthusianism. A slice:
Sadly, the view that some groups are less worthy of having children than others has often gone hand in hand with neo‐Malthusianism, both historically and today. China’s government subjects Uyghurs to strict enforcement of the country’s two‐child limit, using overpopulation concerns about resource scarcity in part as a cover to make forcibly decreasing the population of a minority more palatable.
Here’s David Henderson on Jeff Hummel and Roger Garrison on Keynes (and on Richard Posner).
Scott Sumner writes sensibly about government budget deficits: even interest rates of zero do not render deficit spending costless. Here’s Scott’s conclusion:
The science of economics always regresses during a depression. We saw that in the 1930s, in the 2010s, and we are seeing it again today.
