A brief piece from Thoughts on Freedom , the Libertarian blog hosted by our colleagues "down under": [Before you read, to get the context right, you have to remember that "liberal" in Australian politics is much more accurately equated with "conservative" in an American context] ‘Big government is bad for economic growth.’ No shit, Sherlock, i hear you cry. But this isn’t my view, nor one of a neo-liberal free market think tank. It’s from that respected inflation-fighting institution, the European Central Bank, which has come to this conclusion all by itself. No surprise to readers of this blog but papers like this will help spread the gospel of smaller government. The paper concludes that each additional 1% of government spending reduces growth by 0.13%. One interesting finding. The taxes that have the least harmful effects on growth are income taxes. Those that hinder growth the most are consumption taxes and government subsidies. Something to chew on. S...

Mexico's President Vicente Fox said May 16, 2002 at Club 21 in Madrid: "Eventually, our long-range objective is to establish with the United States, but also with Canada, our other regional partner, an ensemble of connections and institutions similar to those created by the European Union" (or as Gorbachev refers to the EU, the "European Soviet"). My response: "In matters of conscience, stand like a rock." Thomas Jefferson "Rather than jingle like the jade, Rumble like the rocks" Lao Tzu Dear Señor Fox, Let me be frank, thanks for clarifying your vision of a North American Union similar to the European Union, but that vision is flawed because it does not include the rest of the Americas . If we want Pan-Americanism , that is fine, free bilateral trade and respect for each other as a group of power blocks is also fine. To do it Vicente we need to ensure it is big enough, free enough and productive enough to fulfill Jefferson's vision of...

Given that the European Union economy and population are comparable to that of the US, it is pretty normal to find Americans from all political ideologies making comparisons. This week, for example, Dana questions why we don't consider bank nationalization on the Swedish model, while the latest judicial attack on free speech leaves Becky believing that Europe is lost . My point today is not to argue that either of them is right or wrong, but to illustrate the fact that such comparisons are often less than useful, because in many important ways America is not like Europe at all . Let's start with a basic difference of political economy, true since the early colonial days: in Europe, land was expensive and labor was cheap--so cheap, in fact, that the people on the land (or at least their labor obligations) were often sold with the land). In America (not counting those pesky Indians), land was cheap and labor was expensive, a situation pertaining right up through the heavy in...

Yes, once upon a time Alan Greenspan was a Libertarian, a devotee of Ayn Rand and gold-based currency--back when Senator Robert Byrd was still wearing a hood and Ronald Reagan was a Democrat. Nonetheless, says Slate's Jacob Weisberg in Newsweek , Greenspan (along with Phil Gramm and Chris Cox) is decisive proof that Libertarian ideas brought down the financial markets: We have narrowly avoided a global depression and are mercifully pointed toward merely the worst recession in a long while. This is thanks to an economic meltdown made possible by libertarian ideas. I don't have much patience with the notion that trying to figure out how we got into this mess is somehow pointless—Sarah Palin's view of global warming. As with any failure, inquest is central to improvement. And any competent forensic work has to put the libertarian theory of self-regulating financial markets at the scene of the crime.... Neglecting to prevent the Crash of '08 was a sin of omission—less the...

One of the less enticing characteristics of the Delaware blogosphere is the vituperative tendency of posters (anonymous and otherwise) to attack those they disagree with by parodying their political positions. Sometimes it's funny in a biting, over-the-top way, but it rarely moves the argument forward. I'm a Libertarian, and I expect to have to make my arguments stand or fall on their own merits, not the flawed perceptions of a Libertarian point of view that other people have. So it's always annoying when somebody bases his or her argument on, "well, those fringe Libertarians who believe in letting people starve are at it again...." All of which brings me to Dana Garrett and social democracy. Dana pulls the trigger as fast as anybody, and he doesn't equivocate about his beliefs, your beliefs, or my beliefs. And, as a result, he gets portrayed as either a Marxist, a Collectivist, or a Socialist no matter how much he sputters that what he is closest to bein...

Human rights groups couldn't wait to give the new Secretary of State a boatload of criticism over her down-playing of human-rights issues with China: WaPo : BEIJING, Feb. 20 -- Human rights violations by China cannot block the possibility of significant cooperation between Washington and Beijing on the global economic crisis, climate change and security threats such as North Korea's nuclear program, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday. "We pretty much know what they are going to say" on human rights issues such as greater freedoms for Tibet, Clinton told reporters traveling with her on a tour of Asia. "We have to continue to press them. But our pressing on those issues can't interfere" with dialogue on other crucial topics. Clinton's remarks elicited sharp condemnation from Amnesty International, which has urged her to move human rights near the top of the U.S.-China agenda. The organization accused Clinton of saying "that huma...

The Era of the Empire is over. Let's make no mistake. We live in a multipolar world. No nation should play those European power politic games again. Whether we like it or not, the rest of the world does not welcome American Aid as much as we would like them to. That is not a bad thing. We need to reaffirm the institutions of civil society at home, and worry about our own nation. While we question things like "why they hate us" "they" have moved on and continued development at a fast clip. This is also a good thing, despite that it requires a serious adjustment in foreign policy and I know many people are looking to Democratic Party to do that. At a time when we desperately need non-interventionist, and non-interference and removal of all blockades to peaceful development, we got the first the Bush doctrine. So what will the Obama doctrine look like.... if the past is any precursor of the future, the future is not very bright. The sad reality is that the k...