Tuesday summary: Domitrovic on Cain; Lerhman on gold; Goolsbee on the Eurozone.

From Forbes, Brian Domitrovic highlights Herman Cain’s sound money advocacy.

On TGSN, Lew Lehrman advocates a modern gold standard.

In The WSJ, Austan Goolsbee argues without flexible exchange rates to adjust balance of payments, the Eurozone must rely on fiscal transfers or immigration.

At The Daily Beast, Bruce Bartlett applauds President Reagan’s tax and monetary achievements but argues today’s problems require different remedies:

In The WSJ, Stephen Moore reports Ted Cruz’s run-off chances in the Senate GOP primary.

From Alhambra Partners, Joe Calhoun highlights worrisome market conditions.

In The Washington Post, Robert Samuelson wonders why Greece hasn’t experienced a bank run yet.

At National Review, Kevin Williamson doubts that tax rates drives state to state migration.

Monday summary: Benko on congressional sound money legislation; Tamny on GDP; Wenzel on the Fed's tight money error of summer 2008.

From Forbes, Ralph Benko reports congressional sound money legislation.

At RCM, Louis Woodhill explains the terrible employment data.

In Forbes, John Tamny analyzes the problem of reliance on GDP.

On The Kudlow Report, Benn Steil discusses the eurozone crisis:



At The WSJ, James Bovard highlights efforts to create a happiness index to replace weak GDP statistics.

From PJ Media, David Goldman explains declining labor force participation.

On RCM, Keynesian Paul Samuelson sides with Ben Bernanke over Paul Krugman on inflation.

At RCM, Bill Frezza notes the negative economic consequences of restrictive immigration policy.

The Mises Institute features Robert Wenzel’s NY Fed speech, in which he cites his warning of the dramatic monetary tightening of summer 2008:

After growing at near double digit rates for months, money growth has slowed dramatically. Annualized money growth over the last 3 months is only 5.2 percent. Over the last two months, there has been zero growth in the M2NSA money measure.

This is something that must be watched carefully. If such a dramatic slowdown continues, a severe recession is inevitable.

We have never seen such a dramatic change in money supply growth from a double digit climb to 5 percent growth. Does Bernanke have any clue as to what the hell he is doing?

The WSJ suggests the new French president follow German chancellor Gerhard Schroder’s example.

At The NYT, Paul Krugman advocates breaking up the euro.

In The WSJ, Jon Huntsman notes the Chinese government’s profound economic insecurity.

Monday items: Kadlec urges the House GOP to claim credit for rising employment; Forbes on the dollar and oil; Wesbury doubts inflation is 8%.

From Forbes, Charles Kadlec urges House Republicans to take credit for the improving economy.

The WSJ notes the US debt burden will soar if interest rates rise from their historically low level.

In Forbes, Steve Forbes links oil’s price rise to the dollar’s decline.

On The Kudlow Report, Brian Wesbury debates the claim that everyday prices point to an 8% inflation rate:



On International Liberty, Dan Mitchell applauds Sen. Rand Paul’s (KY) plan to slow federal spending.

At Forbes, Ralph Benko reviews James Rickards’ Currency Wars.

On RCM, Louis Woodhill argues the economy is doing better because monetary and fiscal stimulus have largely stopped.

In The WSJ, Charles Calomiris advocates the Fed should increase its cash reserve requirement to restrain inflation.

From The Independent Institute, Robert Higgs predicts the deficit and monetary splurge of recent years will have long-term consequences.

On Kudlow, our pal Sean Spicer of the RNC argues the President’s policies contribute to high gas prices:



At RCM, Robert Samuelson analyzes Japan’s two lost decades but mostly avoids its soaring exchange rate versus the dollar.

On Slate, Wei Gu and Edward Hadas suggest China’s trade deficit points to a fundamental shift towards consumption in its economy.

Monday round up: Reynolds on tax rates; Benko on growth; Kaldec on monetary reform.

From Cato, Alan Reynolds responds to Robert Reich’s critique of Reynolds’ recent WSJ column.

On Forbes, Ralph Benko continues his growth vs. budget cuts debate with NRO’s Kevin Williamson.

In Forbes, Charles Kadlec advocates a quantity-based monetary policy to ensure monetary quality.

On The Kudlow Report, Steve Forbes debates cutting foreign repatriation taxes:




Also at Forbes, John Tamny suggests Americans know the economy is weak and will vote accordingly.

In The WSJ, George H.W. Bush economist Michael Boskin advises deficit hawks.

USA Today casts the 2012 election as a debate over economic philosophy.

In Newsweek, President Clinton offers ideas for improving the economy, though except for cutting the corporate tax rate, it’s mostly demand-side small ball. He omits the key ingredient of his own tenure, a stable dollar.

On Kudlow, Steve Forbes discusses the Greek debt crisis and the dollar:




At RCM, Robert Samuelson wonders why so many US jobs go unfilled.

On Bloomberg, Simon Johnson cites floating exchange rates as a vital tool to handling financial crises.

From The WSJ, James Freeman suggests Rick Perry’s job record will make him a strong candidate.

Friday items.

At The Gold Standard Now, Ralph Benko examines the Triffin Dilemma and how a gold standard would solve it.

CNN reports the IMF's call for a dollar alternative. (Hat tip: Dan Clifton, Strategas Research Partners.)

Gulf News suggests Robert Mundell supports moving away from the dollar as reserve currency.

On The Kudlow Report, Stephen Moore discusses the economy’s strength:



From Forbes, Bill Flax argues supply-side economics’ flaw is that it brings in too much revenue.

At RCM, Keynesian Robert Samuelson correctly concludes that President Reagan’s greatest economic achievement was defeating inflation, but gives Fed Chairman Volcker more credit than he deserves (see last night’s Domitrovic item), and downplays the impact of lower tax rates.

Youtube provides the new Atlas Shrugged movie trailer:



In Forbes, Reuven Brenner notes Social Security may alter the relationship of children and parents.

At The NYT, Paul Krugman derides U.S. Reps. Paul Ryan (WI) and Ron Paul (TX) for advocating sound money.

Monday items.

Editor's note: Last week due to work/travel we fell behind with updates, but as of tonight we're caught up. Thanks for your patience.

---------------------------

At Fox News, Phil Kerpen argues President Obama is coming around to supply-side economics.

On Asia Times, David Goldman sees good economic news, though mostly not in the US.

At Investors Business Daily, Paul Whitfield revisits President Reagan's success:

Cato's Dan Mitchell notes Fidel Castro's recent critique of the Cuban system and notes the reaction of some liberal writers.

At The WSJ, Paul Ryan and Arthur Brooks posit that Americans want a smaller government.

Historian and Econoclasts author Brian Domitrovic comments on the role of tax cuts on eras of economic growth:

On Hayek Center, Greg Ransom suggests supply-side economics is premised on debt accumulation.

At Reason, Tim Cavanaugh considers Paul Krugman's Japan analysis.

Robert Samuelson revisits the financial crisis and the failure of Lehman Brothers.

Monday update.

In the Cato Journal, Jude Shelton calls for a new global institution to promote currency stability.

On RCM, Louis Woodhill critiques CBO's Keynesian economic model.

At Commentary, Jennifer Rubin advocates revival of the GOP’s pro-growth wing.

But modern conservatism’s success, both in policy and electorally, did not come from being the green-eye-shade party. It stemmed from an enthusiasm and celebration of free markets and from policies that sought to unleash the potential of individuals, investors, and employers. And it was Reagan whose embrace of supply-side economics, free trade, and modest regulation unleashed an economic boom — and launched a conservative political vision that was inclusive and successful.

At Asia Times, David Goldman supports an export-led recovery.

In Forbes, John Tamny sees high government pay weakening the private sector.

At Business Insider, Gregory White explains that debt-to-revenue is more important than debt-to-GDP.

In The WSJ, Harvard's Robert Barro argues unemployment benefits contribute to high unemployment.

U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (WI) focuses on fiscal deficits in assessing the weak economy.

Keynesian Robert Samuelson diagnoses the demand-side of the economic malaise.

Bloomberg’s Caroline Baum defends Milton Friedman's monetarism.

The WSJ reports on Japan's effort to weaken its currency:

AEI’s Kevin Hassett says Gov. Chris Christie (NJ) is popular because he has cut spending and refused to raise taxes.

Regarding the

10-Year Treasury rate

chart from yesterday's NYT, a longer-term chart makes clear today's rates are close to their pre-Great Inflation level. Also note the lag: rates stayed high well into the 1980s even though gold and CPI had fallen to low-inflation levels.

Monday update.

Editor's note: Due to travel I've been unable to post in recent days, but have caught up tonight. Sorry for any inconvenience.

------------------------

Business Week reports Robert Mundell is glad to see the euro up against the dollar from its summer low of $1.18.

John Tamny notes that low taxes are necessary to prosperity, but are ineffectual when paired with a weak and unstable dollar.

On The Kudlow Report, Steve Moore discusses demand vs. supply-side economics.

The Heritage Foundation's Brian Riedl responds to critics of his claim that tax cuts did not drive the large budget deficit.

Heritage also offers a chart on employment targets vs reality.

Keynesian Joseph Stiglitz advocates a new round of spending stimulus.

Washington Post columnist Robert J. Samuelson sees low birth rates as a threat to economic security.

Mundell on deficits.

From David P. Goldman's excellent recent Asia Times column:

Paul Samuelson's most gifted doctoral student is the Canadian Robert Mundell, who won the 1999 Nobel Prize in economics. Mundell's theory is not as simple as Keynes, for it is a global model that casts a weather eye on the long run. The trouble, Mundell observed in a 1965 essay in the Journal of Political Economy, is that markets are not very good at seeing into the future. They may do a reasonable job of evaluating corporate debt (although as the former head of bond research for a major Wall Street firm I am skeptical). But they are very bad at gauging the present value of household income streams.

That, Mundell argued, is why government debt actually may represent wealth: if a well-funded public debt (to borrow Alexander Hamilton's term) is supported by future economic growth, which implies more employment and tax revenues, then an increase in debt represents wealth. It also might represent hot air. Mundell cited the case of a tax cut that leads to revenue loss, but also to economic growth. If the increase in tax revenues arising from the higher growth rate more than pays the interests on the bonds that the government must issue to cover the revenue loss, the result is an increase in wealth.