Much to the horror of various interest groups, it appears that there will be a “sequester” on March 1. This means an automatic reduction in spending authority for selected programs (interest payments are exempt, as are most entitlement outlays). Just about everybody in Washington is frantic about the sequester, which supposedly will mean “savage” and […]
read more...A reader sent an email to ask “Which federal department should be abolished first?” I guess this is what is meant when people talk about a target-rich environment. We have an abundance of candidates, including the Department of Education, Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy, Department of Commerce, Department of Transportation, etc. But if I […]
read more...If you don’t want to be depressed, you should stop reading right now. You probably know that we’ve been suffering because of a rising burden of government spending. And you probably understand that much of the problem is the relentless growth of redistribution and transfer programs. But you probably don’t realize how far America has […]
read more...What’s more realistic: A unicorn, Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, or a successful government program? This isn’t a trick question. Even though I’ve presented both theoretical and empirical arguments against government spending, that doesn’t mean every government program is a failure. I suppose the answer depends on the definition of success. Government roads do enable […]
read more...Just like in the United States, politicians in the United Kingdom use the deceptive practice of “baseline budgeting” as part of fiscal policy. This means the politicians can increase spending, but simultaneously claim they are cutting spending because the budget could have expanded at an even faster pace. Sort of like saying your diet is […]
read more...This is a tough question. I obviously want comprehensive reform of all entitlement programs, so selecting just one is a bit of a challenge. Sort of like being asked to pick your favorite kid. Would I reform Social Security? That’s a logical choice. It’s the biggest program in the federal budget, so it’s presumably the […]
read more...In an ideal world, Congress would not raise the debt limit. This would force – automatically and immediately – a balanced budget. More important, it would produce a meaningful reduction in the burden of government spending. And contrary to hyperbole from defenders of the status quo, it doesn’t mean default since the federal government collects […]
read more...Good fiscal policy doesn’t require heavy lifting. Governments simply need to limit the burden of government spending. The key variable is making sure spending doesn’t consume ever-larger shares of economic output. In other words, follow Mitchell’s Golden Rule. It’s possible for a nation to have a large public sector and be fiscally stable. Growth won’t […]
read more...Obama imposed a big tax hike last year. But I’m not talking about the fiscal cliff and the President’s class-warfare trophy of higher tax rates on those evil rich people. That happened this year. Instead, I’m referring to the increase in the regulatory burden. Here are some excerpts from a report in The Hill. The […]
read more...As the rest of the world is forced to deal with imperialist US tax policy, Americans and the US economy are continuing to suffer the consequences. We’ve already written about how FATCA is causing Americans being dropped from banks in Switzerland, Taiwanese banks reducing their American holdings, and even how some are fighting back. Now […]
read more...