Monday round up: Benko on the Sound Dollar Act; Malpass on pro-growth reforms; Kudlow on the strengthening dollar.

At Forbes, Ralph Benko notes liberal opposition to US Rep. Kevin Brady’s Sound Dollar Act.

The editors of e21 analyze the tax contribution of the top 1% of earners.

At Forbes, David Malpass proposes a stronger dollar and tax reform to rev up growth.

On The Kudlow Report, Malpass discusses the unemployment report and the Fed:



From NRO, Larry Kudlow shrugs at the weak employment report.

At RCM, Louis Woodhill highlights the recent poor employment report.

On NRO, Kudlow links Ben Bernanke’s backing off QE3 to declining commodities.

In The Telegraph, Ambrose Evans Pritchard examines gold’s recent decline.

From Project Syndicate, Daniel Gros compares dollar and euro easing.

In The WSJ, Kevin Warsh argues households deserve credit for the improving economy.

Also in The WSJ, Stephen Moore highlights Gov. Bill Haslam of Tennessee.

On The Kudlow Report, Dan Mitchell debates the Bush tax cuts’ expiration:



In The NYT, Benn Steil remembers the spy scandal that gave the US leadership of the World Bank rather than the IMF.

The CSM reports illegal immigration drying up in response to the weak economy.

Thursday items: Mundell discusses exchange rates and tax cuts; Tamny defends the euro; Woodhill opposes QE3.

From Bloomberg, supply-side guru Robert Mundell argues QE3 isn’t necessary but argues for a steady expansion of the money supply and against more spending, and that commitment to a 20% corporate tax rate and making the Bush tax cuts permanent will lead to a strong US recovery.

In The Telegraph (UK), Ambrose Evans-Pritchard interviews Mundell on the euro.

At RCM, John Tamny defends the euro against criticisms from Evans-Pritchard and National Review editor Rich Lowry.

On C-SPAN, the Steve Forbes media blitz continues with an extended discussion of the economy, with the dollar as his top issue:




At Forbes, Louis Woodhill opposes QE3.

On NRO, Ramesh Ponnuru defends looser monetary policy.

From Forbes, Steve Forbes sees positive political change coming.

The WSJ counters Keynesian claims of US austerity.

From earlier this month, Stephen Moore debates liberal Thomas Hartmann on entitlements and taxes:




In The WSJ, businessman Warren Stephens suggests Sarbanes-Oxley has damaged small companies.

At Reuters, Jimmy Pethokoukis notes Gov. Mitt Romney’s (MA) updated position on global warming.

In Forbes, Jerry Bowyer outlines the religious basis for classical economics.

Wednesday items.

The Washington Post reports the House of Representatives has voted to raise tariffs on China if it doesn’t raise its currency's value.

At Zero Hedge, Tyler Durden lashes the “House of Idiot Representatives.”

At Café Hayek, Don Boudreaux comments here, here, and here.

On The Kudlow Report, former GW Bush advisor Glenn Hubbard and China basher Peter Navarro discuss the need to improve U.S. exports through a lower dollar relative to the yuan:




At Smart Money, Don Luskin worries the China tariffs could trigger a trade war on par with Smoot-Hawley.

From 1999, Jude Wanniski argues the Smoot-Hawley tariff caused the Great Depression.

At The Financial Post, Alan Reynolds responds to income inequality claims:



At NRO, Larry Kudlow critiques the Fed’s monetarist policy.

On Asia Times, David Goldman suggests China’s slow accumulation of gold will help keep U.S. interest rates low.

At The WSJ, Stephen Moore examines the middle-class impact of expected tax increases.

At the National Center for Policy Analysis, Bob McTeer reports a recent Art Laffer comment:

I was on a program recently with Arthur Laffer, who said some things about the Laffer Curve that I wasn’t fully aware of. There was no handout, but, as I recall, he said that careful examination of IRS tax records indicates that below the highest income levels there is no Laffer-Curve effect i.e., marginal tax-rate reductions at those levels would not fully pay for themselves. On the other hand, at the highest income level, there is a strong Laffer-Curve effect, since “the rich” can afford accountants and tax lawyers to avoid or defer taxes.

Also at The Journal, Moore suggests the current Congress is responsible for rising deficits.

In Australia, Steve Forbes advocates a flat tax or reduction of the top tax rate.

UK Telegraph columnist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard regrets supporting the Fed’s monetary expansion.

Wednesday round up.

In The Washington Times, Richard Rahn compares Obamanomics to Reaganomics.

From Monday, Larry Kudlow explains the flaws in David Stockman’s NYT attack on tax cuts.

On The Kudlow Report, David Goldman and Wayne Angell analyze Fed policy.

At First Things, Goldman comments further on demographics and deflation.

Brian Wesbury suggests the economy is better than some commentators let on.

Pajamas Media's Roger L. Simon compares this week's op-eds by Treasury's Tim Geithner and Art Laffer.

The Financial Times' Ambrose Evans-Pritchard points out that despite not having Fannie/Freddie, the Community Reinvestment Act, or an "artificially low" Fed Funds Rate, some European nations suffered greater real estate bubbles than the U.S.

Amity Schlaes suggests tax policy should focus on raising revenue, not influencing behavior.