Thursday items: Malpass on the rising dollar; Shlaes on austerity; Forbes on NR's opposition to Newt.

From Forbes, Chris Barth reports David Malpass argues the dollar should rise due to tighter money, not the falling euro.

In Bloomberg, Amity Shlaes challenges Paul Krugman on fiscal austerity.

A reader comments:
Amity Schlaes pens an austerity-can-lead-to-growth op-ed, dismissing Paul Krugman's call for more Keynesian spending, but commits a startling error:

...There is evidence that austerity did lead to growth in the past, and that it did not cause fascism. These examples may be less known, but they suggest that austerity can bring recovery faster than spending can.

A strong example in U.S. history is the recession of the early 1920s. Responding to a downturn, the federal government didn't spend; it cut itself in half. Recovery followed so rapidly few people even remember that recession.

Brian Domitrovic has written how there was virtual consensus between Presidents Wilson's and Harding's money men on reducing top marginal rates before the election, so how could Shlaes forget Mellon’s tax cutting agenda that kicked off the Roaring Twenties? The Revenue Act of 1921 brought the top marginal tax rate down to 58% in 1922 from 73%, and with subsequent reductions, Mellon was able to get that top tax rate down to 25% by 1925. The austerity of the 1920s did not take place without efforts to foster economic growth. In this, Shlaes was sloppy.

On NRO, Larry Kudlow reports Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (KY) pushing for the Keystone Pipeline in exchange for the payroll tax cut.

On The Kudlow Report, Steve Forbes discusses National Review’s editorial opposing Newt Gingrich:



From Forbes, Louis Woodhill argues pro-growth policies explain Gingrich’s rise.

At The American, James Pethokoukis suggests Gingrich’s Iowa lead is softening.

In The American Spectator, Ben Stein predicts President Gingrich and Vice President Huntsman.

At The WSJ, Dan Henninger portrays Gingrich as Mitt Romney’s sparring partner, toughening the former governor up to debate President Obama.

On NRO, Elise Jordan sees Jon Huntsman failing to capitalize on recent opportunities.

At Forbes, Jerry Bowyer highlights the role of interest rates to functional economic and financial systems.

From First Trust, Brian Wesbury predicts unemployment will be down to 8% by Election Day.

On The WSJ, Steve Cortes argues the Chinese economic model won’t work in the long run:



In The WSJ, conservative Keynesian Martin Feldstein pans the Eurozone economic deal.

On C-SPAN, PIIE’s C. Fred Bergsten – Keynesian and key intellectual driver of the 1970s dollar devaluation and subsequent Great Inflation – argues more American jobs will come from rebalancing world trade by lowering the dollar’s exchange rate to a competitive level (around minute 13).

Weekend edition: Danker links the debt downgrade to fiat money; Pawlenty withdraws; Ferrara sees a crash coming.

From The Des Moines Register, Rich Danker suggests the S&P debt downgrade is the inevitable result of leaving the gold standard 40 years ago.

The LA Times reports growth advocate Tim Pawlenty’s withdrawal from the Republican presidential race.

At NRO, Larry Kudlow interviews Sen. Pat Toomey (PA) about a grand bargain on the debt and taxes.

On The Kudlow Report, James Pethokoukis analyzes the GOP debate:




At RCP, US Rep. Ron Paul (TX) advocates a gold standard at last week’s GOP debate.

On The Washington Monthly, Steve Benen expresses astonishment that the gold standard is being discussed by Republican candidates.

From Forbes, Peter Ferrara predicts the end of loose monetary policy, combined with new Obamacare taxes and the Bush tax rates’ expiration, will cause an economic collapse in 2013.

On Fox Business News, Steve Forbes suggests bond yields will rise due to higher borrowing and the low dollar:




In The WSJ, Glenn Hubbard advocates tax reform to get the economy moving.

On The American Spectator, John Berlau chides Europe for suspending short sales.

At New World Economics, Nathan Lewis ties tax and monetary error to the rise and fall of great nations.

On CNN, Paul Krugman wishes for an alien invasion that would justify increased government spending and expansionary monetary policy.




The Washington Post reports that after months of deficit obsession, the House Republican majority looks vulnerable.

At Forbes, Reuven Brenner suggests educational reform to get the US growing again.

Reason asks various experts how to fix the economy. Only Amity Schlaes zeroes in on monetary reform as the top priority. Notably, former supply-sider Bruce Bartlett argues the US is in a Keynesian liquidity trap requiring inflation and increased government spending.

Monday items: Grant on deficits and gold; Schlaes on growth; The WSJ on tax increases.

From Sunday’s Washington Post, James Grant argues a gold standard will restrain US trade and budget deficits.

At Bloomberg, Amity Schlaes suggests increasing economic growth will enable budget cuts.

The WSJ notes the President’s tax increase proposal comes on top of previous tax increases.

On The Kudlow Report, Don Luskin discusses Italy's economy:




At Forbes, John Tamny reviews Reckless Endangerment.

On Washington’s WMAL, Stephen Moore discusses the debt ceiling.

From World Magazine, Christian conservative Alex Tokarev supports the gold standard (h/t: Ralph Benko).

On The Laura Ingraham radio show, Speaker Boehner (OH) confirms his opposition to tax increases.

Tuesday update: Domitrovic on stagflation; Tamny on easy money; Kudlow discusses purposeful inflation.

From Forbes, Brian Domitrovic recommends supply-side measures to counter the current stagflation.

At RCM, John Tamny rebuts the claim that Wall Street loves easy money.

On The Kudlow Report, WSJ columnist Brett Arends proposes raising CPI to 5% to devalue the debt and bolster the economy:




The Atlantic reports Newt Gingrich will give a speech Wednesday on the dollar and the Fed.

At NRO, Larry Kudlow cheers the Supreme Court’s decision on Walmart.

From Bloomberg, Amity Schlaes suggests Paul Volcker’s sky-high interest rates are what we need now.

On Fox News, Steve Forbes argues the weak dollar is behind the weak economy:




In The NYT, Bruce Bartlett expands his argument that taxes are low.

On Kudlow, James Pethokoukis discusses the slow economy and Bruce Bartlett’s tax analysis:




On NRO, Kevin Williamson continues to respond to critics of his growth agnosticism.

In The WSJ, Keynesian Alan Blinder argues spending cuts will hurt the economy.

On MSNBC’s The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, Bruce Bartlett appears to refute Republican “lies” about tax cuts, but then confirms some parts of their claims:




At Bloomberg, UVA’s Joseph Thorndyke dredges up arguments that the Reagan Boom starting in 1982 was due to Fed loosening and deficit spending.

Tuesday summary: Domitrovic contextualizes the recovery; Tamny on the weak dollar; Rutledge sees China inflation as a warning for the U.S.

From Forbes, Brian Domitrovic contextualizes the current recovery's extraordinarily slow growth.

On RCM, John Tamny argues the weak dollar is responsible for the economy’s weakness.

At Forbes, John Rutledge sees China’s inflation as a warning for the U.S.

On The Kudlow Report, Republican candidate Tim Pawlenty highlights his pro-growth message:




The Washington Post notes the President’s softening poll numbers and Mitt Romney’s rise.

From NRO, Kevin Williamson responds to critiques of his focus on austerity versus growth by arguing we need both.

On RCM, Steve Forbes discusses the dollar and gold:




From Bloomberg, Amity Schlaes challenges Paul Krugman’s view of 1937’s recession within the depression.

At The NYT’s Economix blog, Bruce Bartlett suggests U.S. taxes are similar to Western European nations when healthcare costs are included.

In The Washington Post, Glenn Kessler challenges the President on the auto bailouts’ success.

Wednesday round up: Tamny and The Sun on gold; Kudlow is pessimistic on a budget deal; Wesbury on the end of QE2.

On RCM, John Tamny notes that $1,500 gold signals a major problem.

The NY Sun urges the President to address the falling dollar.

At NRO, Larry Kudlow suggests Treasury Sec. Tim Geithner is overly optimistic about a budget deal.

On The Kudlow Report, Brian Westbury discusses the end of QE2:




From Bloomberg, Amity Schlaes notes that lower tax rates often boost government revenues.

From Hoover, Richard Epstein argues against income redistribution.

Smart Money Europe explains that the euro is strong because the dollar is weak.

The WSJ reports Vladimir Putin calling U.S. monetary policy “hooliganism.”

“Look at their trade balance, their debt, and budget. They turn on the printing press and flood the entire dollar zone — in other words, the whole world — with government bonds. There is no way we will act this way anytime soon. We don’t have the luxury of such hooliganism,” he said.

Even as Putin blamed the U.S. for printing money — something for which Russia was criticized during periods of hyperinflation in the 1990s — other Russian officials said there is no alternative to the U.S. dollar and declined to discuss cutting the country’s dollar holdings.

On TGSN, Daniel Ryan suggests the gold standard empowers the people.

At the Atlanta Federal Reserve’s Macroblog, Dave Altig cites this Robert Mundell paper to suggest Mundell is not a critic of Keynesianism (h/t: COAL).

On COAL, Paul Krugman challenges the notion that inflation is expansion of money and credit.

Think Progress reports U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (WI) got booed at a constituent meeting for opposing raising tax rates on the wealthy to address the deficit.

Weekend round up.

At RCM, Larry Kudlow sees Reaganomics making a comeback.

On Supply-Side Economics Today, Brian Domitrovic responds to Scott Sumner’s criticism of John Tamny.

At CNBC, Don Luskin predicts investment will shift towards stocks away from gold and treasuries:




The WSJ editorial board is optimistic about Washington's policy direction.

At NRO, Amity Schlaes argues the tax deal doesn’t provide significant stimulus and weakens Social Security’s viability.

Also in The Journal, France’s Finance Minister outlines measures to defend the euro.

On Fox News, Charles Krauthammer offers a demand-side analysis of the tax deal by suggesting its $1 trillion deficit will create a “sugar high”:




A Heritage Foundation report suggests pro-growth tax code changes.

Jon Shure of the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities disputes Art Laffer’s analysis of state tax rates.

A blog fact checks Media Matters for America's dismissal of supply-side economics.

Tuesday update.

Sorry for the recent site trouble. Google/Blogger had some kind of problem. Thanks for your patience.
----------------------------

In Forbes, Reuven Brenner examines the ideas that lead to prosperity.

At RCM, John Tamny analyzes the factors behind the Clinton boom.

On The Kudlow Report, Stephen Moore debates the President’s turn toward growth economics:




At Forbes, Ralph Benko argues Tea Party populism stems from relative world peace.

On The Washington Times, Richard Rahn debunks tax-the-rich rhetoric.

In three parts on Forbes, Charles Kadlec opposes tax-the-rich arguments, here, here, and here.

On Kudlow, David Goldman analyzes the economy:




On Bloomberg, Amity Schlaes sees the payroll tax cut as a significant flaw.

On Lew Rockwell, Bob Murphy comments on David Frum’s analysis that Chicago school economics have lost ground to Austrian economics.

Thursday items.

On Forbes, historian and Econoclasts author Brian Domitrovic explains that dollar instability led to Social Security’s creation.

In The WSJ, Charles W. Kadlec suggests that after four decades of evidence, the floating dollar experiment can be ruled a failure.

From 1947 through 1967, the year before the U.S. began to weasel out of its commitment to dollar-gold convertibility, unemployment averaged only 4.7% and never rose above 7%. Real growth averaged 4% a year. Low unemployment and high growth coincided with low inflation. During the 21 years ending in 1967, consumer-price inflation averaged just 1.9% a year. Interest rates, too, were low and stable—the yield on triple-A corporate bonds averaged less than 4% and never rose above 6%.

What's happened since 1971, when President Nixon formally broke the link between the dollar and gold? Higher average unemployment, slower growth, greater instability and a decline in the economy's resilience. For the period 1971 through 2009, unemployment averaged 6.2%, a full 1.5 percentage points above the 1947-67 average, and real growth rates averaged less than 3%. We have since experienced the three worst recessions since the end of World War II, with the unemployment rate averaging 8.5% in 1975, 9.7% in 1982, and above 9.5% for the past 14 months. During these 39 years in which the Fed was free to manipulate the value of the dollar, the consumer-price index rose, on average, 4.4% a year. That means that a dollar today buys only about one-sixth of the consumer goods it purchased in 1971.

Interest rates, too, have been high and highly volatile, with the yield on triple-A corporate bonds averaging more than 8% and, until 2003, never falling below 6%. High and highly volatile interest rates are symptomatic of the monetary uncertainty that has reduced the economy's ability to recover from external shocks and led directly to one financial crisis after another. During these four decades of discretionary monetary policies, the world suffered no fewer than 10 major financial crises, beginning with the oil crisis of 1973 and culminating in the financial crisis of 2008-09, and now the sovereign debt crisis and potential currency war of 2010. There were no world-wide financial crises of similar magnitude between 1947 and 1971.

Concerning quatitative easing, WSJ columnist David Wessell asks, What Would Milton Do?




On NRO, Larry Kudlow reports the Federal Reserve may be backing off its plans for aggressive easing.

At Forbes, Steve Forbes predicts new technologies will make energy plentiful for decades to come.

Also on Kudlow, Stephen Spruiell and Robert Reich debate how to cut the deficit:




At Bloomberg, Amity Schlaes relates the death tax to the story of Secretariat.

On Forbes, AEI’s Alex Brill and Chad Hill analyze tax policy’s impact on growth.

Weekend items.

On New World Economics, Nathan Lewis challenges Keynesian and Austrian economics.

At Imprimis, Amity Schlaes compares the government’s response to the Great Depression versus today.

On You Tube, former White House economist Keith Hennessy rebuts Austin Goolsbee’s recent white board presentation:



On Meet The Press’s press panel, David Brooks advocates budget austerity and tax hikes, including total rollback of the Bush tax cuts.

At The Telegraph (UK), Jeremy Warner counters Paul Krugman’s attack on British austerity.

In a report from The American Action Forum, Douglas Holtz-Eakin and Cameron Smith oppose a VAT tax.

Capitol Confidential reports David Malpass has started a PAC.

Wednesday items.

At CNBC, Larry Kudlow writes that dollar decline doesn’t help the economy.

On Gordon Liddy’s radio program, John Tamny discusses gold and the falling dollar.

From China’s CCTV, Robert Mundell opposes raising the yuan.

The NY Times’ David Leonhardt explains several reasons why a higher yuan won’t help the US, but supports doing it anyway. He omits that a significant yuan rise will push down Chinese prices, cancelling out the impact on global trade.

In The LA Times, Peter Navarro – who, oddly, calls himself a supply-sider – urges Congress to punish China for its yuan/dollar peg.

On Kudlow, David Goldman debates Fed policy:



At Asia Times, Goldman comments further.

On Forbes, U.S. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (WA) suggests easy Fed policy enables government debt.

At CNBC, David Malpass analyzes his Senate campaign and the state of the economy:



Bloomberg’s Amity Schlaes estimates total top tax rates will rise above 50 percent if the President’s tax proposal takes effect.

At NRO, Kevin Williamson distinguishes between Keynesian tax rebates and long-term supply side tax cuts.

Also on Kudlow, Allen Sinai discusses his study on cutting capital gains taxes:



On The Frum Forum, Scott Winship argues income inequality arguments are overstated.

Tuesday round up.

In The Washington Post, Ezra Klein solicits experts on what top tax rate maximizes revenue. As several commenters note, there's a difference -- at least in the short run -- between the rate that maximizes government revenue and the rate that maximizes growth.

Richard Rahn expands his argument that supply-side economics yields superior results to demand-side spending.

On The Kudlow Report, David Goldman discusses Federal Reserve policy:

Goldman also considers today's disappointing productivity numbers.

John Tamny explains that credit is tight because the quality of money is poor.

On Fox Business News, Tamny discusses auto bailouts:

Amity Schlaes rebuts the claim that tax hikes will improve confidence and lower the deficit.

In The Wall Street Journal, Glenn Hubbard defends lower tax rates on capital.

Also in The Journal, Henry Olsen argues unemployment is higher than conventional estimates, and must be countered with pro-growth policies.

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.

Wednesday round up.

At IBD, Jed Graham explains how growth rates impact fiscal deficits.

Michael J. Boskin debunks the President's economic analysis.

Brian Wesbury predicts solid economic growth.

At Fox News, Greta Van Sustern interviews The WSJ's Stephen Moore.

Rebelyid.com compares Laffer and Krugman.

CEO Jim Prevor rebuts Keynesian Alan Blinder.

Calwatchdog.com analyzes tax rates and budget deficits.

Rich Karlgaard wonders why more pundits don't ask employers why they aren't hiring.

Bloomberg's Caroline Baum examines employment statistics.

At NRO, Amity Schlaes challenges Conrad Black's analysis of FDR.

Megan McArdle suggests substituting spending for tax cuts is weak stimulus.

Newt Gingrich assesses barriers to job creation.

Congress presses the Fed to provide more monetary stimulus.

To increase exports, President Obama will pursue stalled trade deals.

Coin dealers are up in arms about a new tax on gold coins.

This site has a collection of Friedrich von Hayek interviews.

Wednesday articles.

Bret Swanson analyzes China's internet development.

David Goldman explains why he is bearish on bank stocks.

Stephen Spruiell interviews Allan Meltzer on inflation.

Amity Schlaes suggests expansive government threatens prosperity.

In Forbes, Brian Wesbury and Robert Stein argue trade deficits aren't a threat.

At The Freeman, Mark W. Hendrickson opposes protectionism.

Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein comments on Sen. McConnell's view that the Bush tax cuts didn't diminish revenue.

At Newsweek, Daniel Gross claims growth will help solve the deficit.