Weekend edition: Lewis on current account deficits; IBD on the dollar and oil; Brannon on capital gains taxes.

From Forbes, Nathan Lewis suggests huge, permanent current account deficits are no problem.

IBD links the dollar’s foreign exchange value and the oil price.

At Forbes, Ike Brannon argues low taxes on capital gains and dividends are essential to productivity and wage growth.

On CNBC, former US Sen. Jim Talent (MO) discusses Mitt Romney’s ties to US Rep. Paul Ryan’s (WI) budget plan:



In The WSJ, Phil Gramm and Steve McMillin note the US has the most progressive tax system in the world.

At TGSN, Ralph Benko reports new data that suggests Milton Friedman drastically overestimated the gold standard’s cost.

From The Gatestone Institute, David Goldman links oil prices to the S&P.

At The American, James Pethokoukis highlights the weaken-than-expected March employment figures.

In Forbes, Peter Ferrara predicts the Supreme Court will strike down Obamacare.

The WSJ quotes the great Henry Hazlitt on the dangers of even a mild inflation.

In The WSJ, Ronald Coase and Nina Wang explain China’s success is due to liberalization not state control.

On Forbes, Tim Worstall notes rumors of a currency union between Australia and New Zealand.

In The WSJ, Antonis Samaras reports the dire effect on Greece of contraction plus austerity.

In Forbes, Steve Forbes highlights the Chinese highway partnership between public and private sectors.

At Bloomberg, Forbes critiques the US Federal Reserve:



In The NYT, Paul Krugman derides inflation hawks:

For at least three years, right-wing economists, pundits and politicians have been warning that runaway inflation is just around the corner, and they keep being wrong. Do you remember the tirades about “debasing the dollar” around this time last year? Do you remember the scorn heaped on Mr. Bernanke last spring when he argued that the bulge in inflation taking place at the time was just a temporary blip caused by gasoline prices and would soon recede? Well, he was right. At this point, inflation is once again running a bit below the Fed’s self-declared target of 2 percent.

At Fiscal Times, Bruce Bartlett suggests earmarks are less important than some conservatives suggest.

Monday update.

Today, the National Association for Business Economists predicted GDP growth of 3.2 percent in 2010 and 2011. While this rate is certainly better than recent years, it should be remembered that after a deep recession, the economy requires 7-8 percent growth for a year or two to reduce unemployment. When he was interviewed last month by Larry Kudlow, Prof. Robert Mundell called four percent growth this year and next “awful” and “terrible,” and said “that’s not anything like enough to bring the unemployment rate down,” (at 7:25).

Larry Kudlow says the dollar’s sharp rise on forex has stopped inflation in its tracks.

John Tamny argues that a U.S. debt default would be a good thing.

Steve Hanke, architect of Bulgaria’s currency board system, suggests that nation isn't ready to join the European Union.

The Foundation for Economic Education is running a 1977 article by libertarian economist Henry Hazlitt that argues high deficits cause inflation.

Supply-sider Nathan Lewis disagrees here, here, here and here.

At National review Online, Avik Roy defends the gold standard.

Apropos Kevin Williamson’s recent Goodbye Supply Side article, when I reviewed the Kudlow/Mundell interview above, I noticed that the first thing Mundell says is, “Of course you can’t say that all… lower tax rates will increase revenues, but at a certain point on the [Laffer] curve, when tax rates get up to very high levels, there will be a tax rate at which a lower tax rate will increase revenues. There’s a maximum point on that curve.” In other words, Williamson knocked down a view not held by supply-side’s founding father.