Thursday update: Kadlec, Kudlow and Lehrman on the dollar's tightening; Woodhill on the President's revealing gaffe; Laffer on California.

From Forbes, Charles Kadlec sees tightening money slowing growth.

At NRO, Larry Kudlow suggests the dollar’s rise against the euro is creating deflationary headwinds for the economy.

On Fox Business, Lew Lehrman notes the dollar tightening since the end of QE2 (h/t: TGSN):

At Forbes, Louis Woodhill challenges the economic philosophy behind President Obama’s view of government-created jobs.

The Heritage Foundation charts relative growth rates of the private sector versus local, state and federal government.

At City Journal, Art Laffer argues for tax reform in California.

In The WSJ, Edward Lazear argues the President can’t blame his predecessor for the weak economy.

At C-SPAN, Bill Kristol suggests Republicans would be better off without Ron Paul, but says he is “mildly pro gold standard” (h/t: Free Banking):

On International Liberty, Dan Mitchell chides Jeb Bush and Lindsey Graham for putting tax hikes on the table.

Reader Supported News reports Bernie Sander’s release of Fed bailouts.

In The WSJ, Stephen Moore notes continued sugar subsidies.

The WSJ Asia's editors discuss China’s slowdown:

In The WSJ, Brian Carney reviews Edward Conard’s Unintended Consequences.

Monday round up: Benko and Kadlec on Cain; Lazear and Moore on austerity; Reynolds on executive pay.

From Forbes, Ralph Benko and Charles Kadlec applaud Herman Cain’s new book for its focus on the gold standard.

In The WSJ, Edward Lazear argues the supply-side view of austerity – cut spending, keep taxes low -- is correct.

At Cato, Alan Reynolds explains that today’s higher executive pay is due mainly to past tax reforms thatreduce penalties for declaring income.

On The Kudlow Report, Stephen Moore discusses austerity vs. stimulus:



In Forbes, John Tamny opposes the estate tax.

The NY Sun recounts the history of the Federal Reserve's founding.

On The Daily Beast, David Frum highlights Charles Kadlec debating the gold standard.

In The WSJ, Stephen Moore notes strong poll numbers for Gov. Scott Walker (WI).

At PJ Media, David Goldman applauds Germany for insisting upon Greek budget cuts.

In The WSJ, Matthew Sinclair outlines ideas for British tax reform.

From Heritage, Rob Bluey summarizes the 2013 tax increases.

Tuesday round up: Domitrovic applauds Bernanke; Kadlec, Kudlow & Grant on the dollar; Selgin on the Fed.

From Forbes, Brian Domitrovic applauds Ben Bernanke for repudiating the Phillips Curve.

In Forbes, Charles Kadlec highlights the systemic risk created by the unstable dollar.

On The Kudlow Report, Larry Kudlow debates the dollar:



The NY Sun applauds James Grant’s recent speech at the NY Fed.

At Forbes, Ralph Benko wonders why politicians don’t learn from President Reagan.

On International Liberty, Dan Mitchell speculates whether the President believes Bill Clinton was a social Darwinist.

From Alhambra Partners, Joe Calhoun sees economic weakness ahead.

At The WSJ, Ed Lazear notes the recovery’s unusually slow pace.

From The Atlas Sound Money Project, George Selgin recounts the Federal Reserve’s history:



In The NYT, Bruce Bartlett analyzes budget gimmicks.

Weekend edition: Kudlow on Romney; Newt names Lehrman and Grant to Gold Commission; Santorum bashes gold.

Newt Gingrich’s campaign names Lew Lehrman and James Grant to its Gold Commission.

From Newt.org, Lehrman and Grant accept Gingrich’s offer.

CBS News reports Rick Santorum bashing Gingrich for his Gold Commission proposal:

"One is, well, a little radioactive in the sense of you just don't know what he's going to do or what he's going to say," Santorum said, citing Gingrich's comments earlier in the day that he'd like to reexamine the gold standard.

On The Kudlow Report, Stephen Moore responds to Paul Krugman on the tax rate paid by millionaires such as Romney:




On NRO, Larry Kudlow applauds Mitt Romney’s attack on crony capitalism.

In The NYT, David Leonhardt notes that most US taxpayers pay less than Romney’s 15%.

The WSJ breaks down taxes paid by income groups.

On Fiscal Times, Bruce Bartlett examines Romney’s tax arrangements.

At Forbes, Nathan Lewis explains gold’s role in establishing a stable currency.

In The NYT, former Obama car czar Steven Rattner chides progressives for minimizing deficits, comparing them to “fiscally irresponsible” supply-siders.

At The WSJ, Steve Hanke notes the positive property tax treatment in growing football playoff cities New York, San Francisco, and Boston versus Baltimore, which is stuck with high tax rates and a low population:





In The WSJ, Edward Lazear explains that despite the lower unemployment rate, it’s not any easier to get a job.


On RCP, John Tamny defends investment banking from Occupy Wall Street criticism.

At TWS, Matthew Continetti reviews Jeff Bell’s new book on social conservatism, The Case for Polarized Politics.

Monday items: Tamny on high commodities; Lazear notes employment is still soft; Bartlett says the GOP's anti-tax position is untenable.

From RCM, John Tamny predicts a crash in commodities when the dollar rises.

In The WSJ, GW Bush economist Edward Lazear notes that while net employment numbers are good, gross employment is still subpar.

On Reuters, James Pethokoukis downplays debt ceiling fears.

At Asia Times, David Goldman reports small business confidence is better, but still weak.

On The Kudlow Report, John Tamny discusses the IMF:




On Capital Gains and Games, Bruce Bartlett suggests the deficit has made the Republican anti-tax position untenable.

On Economics21, Charles Blahous argues Republicans should turn the tables by cutting entitlements for the wealthy.

Future of Capitalism notes that Bloomberg mischaracterized its own poll:

It's not until the 20th paragraph of the news article that the reporters make the following stunning admission: "Investors are split over whether Obama or congressional Republicans offer the better budget solution, with 39 percent favoring the president's approach and 38 percent that of the Republicans. Still, there are strong regional differences. U.S. investors favor congressional Republicans' position in the budget deadlock over Obama's by 62 percent to 24 percent."

At Money Watch, Conrad deAenlle reports Newt Gingrich talking tax rates on the stump.

The WSJ reports Gingrich opposes U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan’s (WI) Medicare overhaul.

On Kudlow, Larry interviews House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (CA):




The WSJ reports economists don’t see inflation as a major threat.

At TGSN, Daniel Ryan explains that gold-backed money enables long-term planning.

On Think Progress, Matthew Yglesias comments on a Heritage scholar’s call to sell the U.S. gold supply.

At COAL, Paul Krugman suggests inflation hawks are repeating the errors of 1937.

Monday items.

In advance of Wednesday’s congressional vote on China, Nobel Laureate and supply-side economics creator Robert Mundell says forcing the yuan significantly higher would be disastrous for China and the U.S.

In The Financial Times, Mundell student Komal Sri-Kumar argues for expanded access to Chinese markets, rather than yuan manipulation.

In pioneering work on exchange rates done during the 1960s, my Columbia University doctoral dissertation adviser, Robert Mundell, showed that if exchange rates are fixed, adjustment by the trading economies occurs in terms of changes in domestic costs and prices. The inflationary pressures evident in China validate Professor Mundell’s theories. There is, therefore, nothing “manipulative” about simply maintaining fixed exchange rates. Keep in mind that under the Bretton Woods system of exchange rates from the end of the Second World War until the early 1970s, keeping the rates fixed with respect to the dollar was a sign of good economic housekeeping!

The conservative Heritage Foundation releases its own detailed policy agenda. Sound money is not included:



At Bloomberg, Steve Forbes predicts weak growth but doubts a double dip recession.

On Forbes, John Tamny suggests emulating rather than bashing the rich.

At NRO, Kevin Williamson makes the vital distinction that production, not consumption, is the heart of economic progress.

The problem of economic policy is not getting people to consume. It is getting them to produce. You can train a monkey to consume. (In fact, he requires no training, especially once you get him coked up on the taxpayers’ dime.) Americans are extraordinarily productive people, but our economy has taken a hit because we have a couple of trillion dollars’ worth of capital locked up in dead real estate, dead securities, and the swelling sovereign debt upon which our pet Leviathan battens. If you have a trillion dollars locked up in residential real estate that still is over-valued — its inflated price being sustained by hook and by crook by the geniuses in Washington — that capital can’t be put to real productive uses. (Also, people who could otherwise buy or rent cheap real estate will be paying too much for housing, taking yet more potentially productive capital out of the markets.)

At Econ Log, Arnold Kling discusses Paul Volcker’s early-1980s tenure as Fed chairman.

The WSJ reports on policy differences among European policy makers on how to save the euro.

Also in the Journal, former GW Bush economic advisor Edward Lazear suggests limiting federal spending to inflation minus one percent will balance the budget in less than a decade.

Cato’s Dan Mitchell promotes spending cuts, not faster economic growth, as the key to balancing the budget.