Tuesday round up: Laffer favors Newt's tax plan; McGurn advises Romney to focus on his opponents ideas; Tamny says the Fed is damaging the economy.

In The WSJ, Art Laffer supports Newt Gingrich’s tax plan over Mitt Romney’s.

Also in The Journal, Bill McGurn advises Romney to counter or co-opt his opponents ideas rather than character attacks:

The most constructive way for Mr. Romney to kill off his rivals while bringing the party together is simple: Steal their best ideas. Mr. Gingrich has done precisely that with Ron Paul by calling for a commission to study the gold standard. Mr. Romney could easily do the same, echoing Mr. Paul's call for an honest dollar or adopting Mr. Gingrich's flat tax.

At The American, James Pethokoukis tells Gingrich to specify spending cuts.

On The Kudlow Report, Laffer discusses the Gingrich and Romney tax plans:



At RCM, John Tamny argues the Fed’s loose money is hurting the economy.

NPR reports the Republican debate over gold.

The blog of hippie guru Timothy Leary's coauthor highlights Ralph Benko’s gold advocacy.

From Alhambra Partners, Joe Calhoun argues the Federal Reserve is “the 400 pound gorilla in the economic living room.”

The Tax Foundation notes income inequality was higher during the Clinton years.

On The Kudlow Report, a panel discusses the dollar’s fall in the last month:



On Slate, Matthew Yglesias reports China’s consumption boom.

Bloomberg’s editors respond to Paul Krugman’s critique of British austerity.

In The NYT, Bruce Bartlett continues to advocate tax reform.

Monday items: Tamny advises the GOP to advocate sound money; Moore, Kudlow and Forbes on Perry's tax plan; Lewis on downsizing banks.

From Forbes, John Tamny suggests President Obama can’t win if Republicans advocate sound money.

In The WSJ, Stephen Moore reports details of the Perry flat tax plan.

On NRO, Larry Kudlow argues the Dow likes the GOP tax debate.

In The NY Post, Steve Forbes praises Rick Perry’s flat tax.

On The WSJ site, James Taranto discusses Mitt Romney’s “guilty Republican syndrome”:

 

At New World Economics, Nathan Lewis reports from Utah’s monetary conference earlier this month.

On NWE, Lewis advocates a radical downsizing of US banks.

At RCM, Joe Calhoun challenges Matthew Yglesias’ claim that malinvestment doesn’t harm the economy.

In The WSJ, Paul Moreno argues the President’s blame-business strategy follows FDR’s 1937 example.

At AEI, Alan Reynolds discusses income trends over the last three decades:

 

In The Nation, Ari Berman explains how the "austerity class" dominates Washington.

The Washington Post, liberal EJ Dionne argues Republican tax proposals would raise taxes on the poor.

Thursday update: Lehrman on the gold standard; Goldman says don't panic; Jacoby on immigration.

In The American Spectator, Lew Lehrman suggests the choice of monetary policy is between Robert Mundell’s idea for an exchange rate peg between the dollar and euro versus the gold standard.

From Asia Times, David Goldman predicts slow growth but sees no reason to panic.

At The American Spectator, Peter Ferrara sees the US falling into depression if the Bush tax rates lapse after 2012.

On The Kudlow Report, Tamar Jacoby debates the economics of immigration:




In The WSJ, Dan Henninger notes the President’s political weakness on the economy and the strength of Tim Pawlenty’s pro-growth message.

At The NYT, Matt Bai suggests the President’s reelection message, don’t change horses in midstream, is a loser.

On Future of Capitalism, Ira Stoll reports McCain economist Doug Holtz-Eakin saying 5% annual growth rates are impossible.

On Kudlow, guests discuss possible deflationary pressures in China:




At the liberal Mother Jones, Kevin Drum suggests the Left could like supply-side economics if it raised revenues as fast as advertised.

On Think Progress, Matt Yglesias takes up Drum’s point but argues the Left won’t support tax cuts due to inequality concerns.

In The NYT, Jackie Calmes reports the flagging economy is leading Democrats to push for additional spending stimulus despite high deficits.

At TNR, Jonathan Chait notes the President’s consideration of a payroll tax cut.

IBD argues Keynesian spending is ineffective.

On TGSN, Ralph Benko notes Daniel Webster’s support for gold and silver as money.

The Des Moines Register reports Herman Cain having second thoughts on the gold standard. (Hat tip: Ralph Benko).

From Project Syndicate, Raghuram Rajan argues loose money is bad for the economy.

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.

Thursday items: Woodhill on inflation; Luskin on the rising dollar; Mundell on the euro.

From Forbes, Louis Woodhill provides a satirical look at inflation.

At RCM, John Tamny reviews CJ Maloney’s book on FDR.

On The Kudlow Report, Don Luskin suggests bin Laden’s death has strengthened the dollar:





At Asia Times, David Goldman detects a whiff of deflation.

The WSJ notes silver’s steep decline this week.

At FX Street reports Robert Mundell expects European debt restructuring but that the euro will emerge intact.

From last week at COAL, Paul Krugman argues most of the federal deficit comes from revenue lost in the contraction, as opposed to higher spending:



At NRO, Larry Kudlow wonders if it’s time to withdraw from Afghanistan.

In The NYT, conservative Keynesian Martin Feldstein advocates eliminating tax expenditures while keeping rates the same.

Cato’s Dan Mitchell critiques Feldstein’s argument.

From Think Progress, Matthew Yglesias sees dollar devaluation as good for the economy.

Wednesday round up.

At The American Spectator, Peter Ferrara presents a terrific review of Brian Domitrovic's Econoclasts.

Hilariously, The Spectator heads this supply-side history with a photo of monetarist Milton Friedman, rather than supply-side pioneer Robert Mundell.

Cato's Alan Reynolds repudiates Alan Blinder and Mark Zandy.

Brian Wesbury advocates fiscal austerity.

At The Kudlow Report, Dan Mitchell debates deficits and tax cuts.

Also on Kudlow, Stephen Moore discusses job creation.

At Noot's Observatory, noot rebuts Martin Wolf's recent attack on supply-side economics.

Again, what Wolf sees as a failure of supply-side I see as a failure by Republican and Democratic leadership alike to reduce spending, especially in the entitlement area. Sure, “starve the beast” is a farce, and Republicans did nothing about spending when they had the chance — save their effort to privatize Social Security — but if you subtract the “tax cuts pay for themselves” element from the rest of supply-side theory, are you left with nothing? Or are you left with the idea that low taxes on businesses and individuals foster economic growth without producing mass inflation? I don’t see that those ideas are dependent on one another, and I don’t see how the deficits of the Bush and Reagan years are evidence of the abject failure of supply-side economics.

The WSJ reports a poll that says a plurality favors extending the Bush tax cuts to all income groups.

A Reuters poll indicates dollar strength is the second indicator after employment for rating the economy (question 7).

Progressive Matthew Yglesias suggests supply-side policies leads to lower growth.

Mint.com features an interesting graphic on U.S. debt ownership.