Brad Polumbo asks if the panic over income inequality was based on a mistake (or appallingly sloppy scholarship). Two slices:
Few topics have animated more intense mainstream-media coverage and outrage from progressive politicians than the idea that income inequality has skyrocketed over the past 60 years in the United States. The left-wing senator Bernie Sanders, for example, has decried income inequality as the “great moral, economic, and political issue of our time.” Meanwhile, CNN coverage suggests that “America is suffering from ever-worsening income inequality.”
But what if this was always all based on a series of mistakes?
That’s the radical implication of a groundbreaking new study published in the prestigious, peer-reviewed Journal of Political Economy out of the University of Chicago. In it, authors Gerald Auten and David Splinter find that, when accurately measured, “income inequality” has actually barely changed since 1962.
…..
“The proper takeaway from the literature is that we do not have a good estimate of what has happened to inequality,” economist Brian Albrecht, who has analyzed the research in this area, told me. “The problem is that the most sensational number gets the headlines. So if ten economics papers find numbers between zero change and doubling, the media will focus on the doubling result.”
Eric Boehm says “let foreign airlines serve domestic routes in the U.S.” A slice:
More capacity equals lower prices. Hey, that might be something that federal aviation policy makers should keep in mind.
Here’s something else: Over the weekend, Argentina’s new, libertarian President Javier Milei announced a so-called “open skies” initiative that will scrap many of the regulations prohibiting foreign airlines from operating flights between Argentinian cities. Combined with the abolition of government price controls on airfares, the new rules will allow foreign airlines to directly compete with Aerolineas Argentinas, the national airline that has managed to lose an estimated $8 billion since 2008 despite having a monopoly on domestic flights.
Also writing about Argentina is Marcos Falcone.
John Stossel explains “why charity is better at solving problems than government.”
David Post decries the “selective historical memory” about Israel, Gaza, and Palestine.
The facts ultimately vindicated Dr Bhattacharya’s POV, but that isn’t the point.
The point is his POV should’ve been protected from government/tech collusion to suppress.
The 1st Amendment is downstream from Culture. We must embrace speech, especially when it challenges dogma.
