Tuesday items: Palast bashes Mundell; The Economist on US immigration policy; Kadlec on jobs lost to government policy.

From The Guardian (UK), Greg Palast lambasts "evil genius" Robert Mundell for his euro scheme to force government downsizing.

The Economist reports that America’s competitors do more to welcome entrepreneurial immigrants.

At Forbes, Charles Kadlec analyzes the number of jobs lost due to government policy.

On The Kudlow Report, Gordon Chang of Forbes sees trouble for China’s economy:

At NRO, Larry Kudlow highlights Marco Rubio’s defense of low taxes.

From Alhambra Partners, Joe Calhoun wonders if economic doomsaying has gone too far.

At RCM, John Tamny argues government spending hurts economic growth.

From First Trust, Brian Wesbury hopes the Supreme Court will roll back Obamacare.

On Reason, Steve Chapman argues the Fed is choking the economy with tight money.

From the Heartland Institute, Bret Swanson discusses the federal government’s mishandling of the wireless spectrum.

On Salon, Andrew Leonard uses Bloomberg's report on state income taxes to bash Art Laffer.

In The NYT, Bruce Bartlett tries to talk Republicans into supporting spending stimulus.

Monday round up: Benko on the Sound Dollar Act; Malpass on pro-growth reforms; Kudlow on the strengthening dollar.

At Forbes, Ralph Benko notes liberal opposition to US Rep. Kevin Brady’s Sound Dollar Act.

The editors of e21 analyze the tax contribution of the top 1% of earners.

At Forbes, David Malpass proposes a stronger dollar and tax reform to rev up growth.

On The Kudlow Report, Malpass discusses the unemployment report and the Fed:



From NRO, Larry Kudlow shrugs at the weak employment report.

At RCM, Louis Woodhill highlights the recent poor employment report.

On NRO, Kudlow links Ben Bernanke’s backing off QE3 to declining commodities.

In The Telegraph, Ambrose Evans Pritchard examines gold’s recent decline.

From Project Syndicate, Daniel Gros compares dollar and euro easing.

In The WSJ, Kevin Warsh argues households deserve credit for the improving economy.

Also in The WSJ, Stephen Moore highlights Gov. Bill Haslam of Tennessee.

On The Kudlow Report, Dan Mitchell debates the Bush tax cuts’ expiration:



In The NYT, Benn Steil remembers the spy scandal that gave the US leadership of the World Bank rather than the IMF.

The CSM reports illegal immigration drying up in response to the weak economy.

Wednesday round up: Breen critiques Romney's tax plan; China won't revalue its currency; IBD refutes Krugman on Reagan's Keynesian record.

At Supply-Side Forum, Ed Breen critiques the Romney tax plan.

The WSJ notes the Fed is weighing sterilized bond purchases (h/t: Larry Kudlow).

Reuters reports China refuses to bow to US pressure to appreciate the yuan (h/t: Bretton Woods Research).

On The Kudlow Report, former RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie suggests Obamacare should be central to the 2012 campaign:



IBD rebuts Paul Krugman's claim that President Reagan was a better Keynesian than President Obama.

From First Trust, Brian Wesbury highlights the French proposal to raise the top tax rate to 75%.

In IBD, James Carter and Jason Fichtner advocate the corporate tax becoming a major campaign issue.

At CNBC, John Carney contrasts Austrian economics with Modern Monetary Theory.

In Forbes, Richard Salsman advocates positive financial reforms.

At TGSN, Ralph Benko notes the monetary difficulties following abolition of the First National Bank.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform argues against legal immigration. H/t Bruce Bartlett: “As I have long said, those that are opposed to illegal immigration are really opposed to legal immigration as well.”



Businessweek reports cigarettes are the most stable international currency.

On Modeled Behavior, Karl Smith agrees with Paul Krugman that opponents of demand-side solutions to the 2008 financial crisis destructively undermined a helpful consensus.

Monday items: Kudlow, Benko and Ruddy on Newt; Mundell on a world central bank; Rago defends Romney's work at Bain.

From NRO, Larry Kudlow praises Newt Gingrich’s supply-side rhetoric and wonders if Mitt Romney will counter with a more robust fiscal package.

On The American, James Pethokoukis suggests Romney may be moving towards more tax reform.

In Forbes, Ralph Benko applauds Gingrich’s populist, progressive conservatism.

At Newsmax, Christopher Ruddy cites Gingrich’s supply-side history as proof of his conservative bona fides.

On The ASEAN Business Report, Robert Mundell advocates a world central bank, starting with a common currency for the Eurozone and US:

 

At The American Spectator, Ralph Reiland suggests the President’s policies threaten a repeat of the Great Depression.

From Cato, Alan Reynolds notes the payroll tax holiday heavily benefits upper income earners.

On RCM, Bill Frezza distinguishes between crony capitalists and market capitalists.

At RCM, John Tamny argues energy production jobs won’t lead to prosperity.

On The WSJ, Joe Rago defends Mitt Romney’s work at Bain Capital.

Also from The WSJ, my old boss US Rep. Ed Royce (CA) argues for reform of Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank:

 

The WSJ reports progress on easing restrictions on high-skilled immigrants.

Weekend edition: Reynolds on the 1990 budget deal; Benko on the historical moment and democracy; Forbes on Perry.

From IBD, Alan Reynolds argues the 1990 budget deal model is no ideal to be repeated.

At Townhall, Ralph Benko offers a provocative analysis of America’s historical moment.

On Beijing Foreign Studies University, Robert Mundell discusses the financial crisis and China.

At CNBC, Steve Forbes debates the presidential race:

 
The Financial Post (Canada) reruns part of the Mundell-Friedman monetary duel.

Business Week reports many Americans won’t do the jobs done by immigrants.

The Tennessean notes local reform efforts to keep high-skilled immigrants.

On The Kudlow Report, David Malpass discusses Italy and Greece:

 
At COAL, Paul Krugman argues supply-side solutions will not fix the current economic mess.

Weekend edition: Metzler on Keynesianism; Lewis and Forbes on Perry; Mitchell's coins his golden rule.

From The WSJ, Allan Metzler dissects the Keynesian model’s flaws.

Cato Journal features several good articles on monetary policy, including from David Malpass, Steve Hanke, and Gerald P. O’Driscoll. This one on flexible exchange rates is interesting.

At Forbes, Nathan Lewis applauds Rick Perry’s flat tax plan and wonders if he’ll adopt a strong dollar next.

In South Carolina’s The State, Steve Forbes predicts Perry will win the GOP nomination.

On Fox News, Perry provides a generally strong explanation of his economic plan:



At The WSJ, Steven Landsburg argues the death tax hurts the poor.

On International Liberty, Dan Mitchell coins Mitchell’s Golden Rule, "The private sector should grow faster than the government."

From Forbes, Peter Ferrara contrasts the Republican jobs plan with the President’s.

At Fox News, Herman Cain cites Jude Wanniski and Art Laffer among his tax plan’s influences.

On The Kudlow Report, Herman Cain advisor Rich Lowrie discusses the 9-9-9 plan:

 

At The American, Stephen Moore remembers economist William Niskanen.

The WSJ notes the immigration crackdown has led to labor shortages.

The NY Sun advocates pro-immigration policies.

Tuesday round up.

In a speech, Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Janet Yellen suggests additional quantitative easing may create new investment bubbles.

On Forbes, John Tamny argues the economy would do fine without the Federal Reserve.

At Zero Hedge, Tyler Durden scolds a former Fed member (currently at the Peterson Institute for International Economics) for recommending the U.S. government sell its gold.

On The Kudlow Report, Larry analyzes the market’s support for looser money:



Investor’s Business Daily reports 56 percent of poll respondents favor keeping all tax cuts in place.

On Jon Stewart (third segment), House GOP Deputy Leader Eric Cantor says Washington has ignored jobs and the economy. Stewart describes the agenda as “freedom and liberty, blah blah blah blah blah.” Cantor suggests Republicans got fired in 2006 because government got too big. No mention of sound money.

At Asia Times, David Goldman doubts Republican electoral gains will help the economy much.

On Forbes, Steve Forbes analyzes Albania’s economic success.

In The Washington Times, Richard Rahn dissects Australia’s winning economic formula.

At CNBC, Keynesian Stephen Roach makes a good point on the dangers of destabilizing China’s financial sector via “a sharp, ridiculously irresponsible increase in the renminbi.” He suggests a more constructive approach is to increase Chinese consumption while increasing U.S. savings and exports:



Last year, Reuven Brenner and David Goldman made a similar argument, built on a formal dollar/yuan link:

Currency policy is the key to opening the world to American exports. What seem like minor errors in Western monetary policy have devastating effects on developing economies. The large industrial economies are like oceangoing vessels designed to withstand typhoons; ten-meter waves may roll them but will not sink them. Not so for the fragile craft in their wake. As former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker once observed, the industrial nations' deep financial markets allow participants to hedge against large shifts in currency parities. Not so for the shallow, inefficient financial markets of developing nations, in which the vast majority of firms do not qualify as derivative counterparties, and the yield curve is not liquid past the two-year mark….

China, in particular, is the natural fulcrum for America's proper economic policy. China's requirements for infrastructure and capital equipment are enormous: Two-thirds of its 1.3 billion people still live in conditions of extreme backwardness. But rather than invest in its own interior, China has diverted its savings to securities in Western currencies as a rainy-day hedge against potential political and economic disruption. America should help China stabilize its currency by a solemn and formal agreement to link the renminbi to the dollar; China in turn should make its currency convertible and open its capital market to American institutions. Other countries may wish to participate in this arrangement; with the world's two largest and most dynamic economies as an anchor, a Sino-American currency agreement would quickly become the point of orientation for the rest of Asia and eventually for other countries.

China's demand for savings, to be sure, stems in part from the one-child policy, which requires Chinese to provide for their retirement with financial assets rather than offspring. But a good deal of Chinese savings is precautionary. With a nonconvertible currency and limited outlets for investment, Chinese are apt to exaggerate their rainy-day savings.

In effect, China needs to reduce its saving rate drastically while America increases hers. Why wouldn't just letting China's currency be convertible on its own, without coordinating with the United States, be part of the solution, as some propose?

The simple answer is that China's capital markets--and, by extension, its political system--are still too fragile to withstand the tsunami-sized capital flows caused by the dollar's instability. Dollar devaluation sends capital rushing into China, distorting asset prices. By contrast, a repetition of the global liquidity crisis that followed last year's failure of Lehman Brothers could provoke massive capital flows out of China, in a repeat of the 1997 Asian crisis. As long as the United States subjects its currency to extreme volatility, China cannot take the risk of making its own currency convertible.

The WSJ editorializes in support of immigration visas for entrepreneurs.

Hawaiian Libertarian offers a good list of historical quotations on the evil of fiat currency.