An attorney’s job is to be a zealous advocate for her client. I becomes a sort of theater of the absurd. It does not necessarily follow that she will retain this mentality on the bench. On the other hand, perhaps it is not so wise to turn someone who has built a career arguing on behalf of the government into a Supreme Court Justice. Habits are sometimes hard to break. Contrast with Ralph Nader’s 36 Questions for Elena Kagan, wherein the author’s first ten questions attempt to gauge Kagan’s support for free corporate speech, seemingly unawares of her very office’s zealous efforts to limit it.
The FAA has granted the company an extra 110 pounds to the LSA limit of 1,320 pounds maximum takeoff weight. Terrafugia says this will allow the extra safety equipment and a still allow the airplane to compete with other LSA aircraft in terms of range and the amount of payload it can carry.
Kudos to the FAA for getting out of the way of progress.
Saying that the solution to economic depression is to “spend more” is like saying that the solution to emotional depression is to “cheer up”. Sure. That sounds good, but how is it to be done? Why are the people not satiating desires by spending money on their own? Why do they need the government to spend money for them, and where does government get the money it spends? If the government expropriates that from the citizenry through taxation, it is difficult to argue that the citizens are getting what they actually want. If the government is borrowing the money, from whom is it borrowing, and what projects are being foregone so that we may indulge in the government’s projects? If the government is printing the money, how does this affect the people’s ability to save for the things they really do want? Those who criticize “deficit hawks” without addressing these points are wasting their time and ours. For a full rebuttal, see Thomas E. Woods: Why You’ve Never Heard of the Great Depression of 1920. (I’m currently seeking a direct response to Woods on this issue, but so far have found only this comment in an anti-Krugman blog post. If you are aware of others, please link me….)
Under this proposed system, countries would no longer have to buy up foreign currencies, as China has long done with the U.S. dollar. Rather, they would accumulate the right to claim foreign currencies, or special drawing rights, or SDRs, rather than the currencies themselves.
The special drawing rights would be backed by a basket of currencies, which would make them less susceptible to volatility in any one currency. And because the value of a special drawing right is defined by the IMF, changes in the value of any one currency could be adjusted for.
Diversification: not too bad of an idea from the UN.
This entry was posted on Sunday, July 4th, 2010 at 7:30 pm and is filed under Diigo. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.