Friday, February 02, 2007

This Week on the Web (January 27 – February 2)



********************************************************************************************

Video of the Week:

Hillary on Oil Profits: "I want to take those profits"
Cspan (
via YouTube)


Editor’s note: But don’t worry, it’s all for the common good (as she defines it).

NEWS

With Iran ascendant, U.S. is seen at fault

MSNBC.com

Four years after the United States invaded Iraq, in part to transform the Middle East, Iran is ascendant, many in the region view the Americans in retreat, and Arab countries, their own feelings of weakness accentuated, are awash in sharpening sectarian currents that many blame the United States for exacerbating.

Iran has deepened its relationship with Palestinian Islamic groups, assuming a financial role once filled by Gulf Arab states, in moves it sees as defensive and the United States views as aggressive. In Lebanon and Iraq, Iran is fighting proxy battles against the United States with funds, arms and ideology. And in the vacuum created by the U.S. overthrow of Iranian foes in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is exerting a power and prestige that recalls the heady days of the 1979 Islamic revolution, when Iranian clerics led the toppling of a U.S.-backed government.

COMMENTARY

A Savings Disaster? Hardly

Investor’s Business Daily

"Savings at 74-year low," screams one headline. "Baby-boom crisis," shouts another. No question, the savings rate is low. Time to panic? No, time to stop fretting about a statistic of such marginal importance.

'People once again spent everything they made and then some last year, pushing the personal savings rate to the lowest level since the Great Depression more than seven decades ago," went the lead on the Associated Press story, typical of many others like it. But nothing could be more misleading.

It seems the media and even some economists who should know better have no problem pushing the panic button over any data that suggest the economy is struggling — but studiously ignore anything that suggests we're actually thriving economically.

One Person, One Vote?

George Will, Townhall.com

There they go again. House Democrats should at least provide variety in their venality. Last Wednesday, fresh from legislating new ethics regarding relations with lobbyists, they demonstrated that there are worse forms of corruption than those involving martinis and money.

They again voted to give the delegates to the House from Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia, and the resident commissioner from Puerto Rico, the right to vote in the House when it is sitting as the "Committee of the Whole," which is how it sits almost all the time. It is in that status that almost all debate about and amending of legislation occur.

[…]

What part of the words "several states" do House Democrats not understand? Their cynical assumption is that "the people of the several states" will not notice this dilution of their representation in the House.

[…]

The 58,000 Samoans pay no federal income taxes, but their delegate will be able to participate in raising the taxes of, say, Montanans. Samoa's delegate will have virtually the same power as Rep. Denny Rehberg, who represents all 944,000 Montanans. Obviously the Democrats' reverence for the principle "one person, one vote" is, well, situational.

Free Markets or "Corporate Social Responsibility"

Wayne Winegarden, Townhall.com

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) advocates and business magazines point to these companies and claim that CSR is not only the right thing to do, it also enhances profits. These companies can “do well by doing good!” Such simplistic claims miss the grander danger that CSR, as a movement, represents.

CSR activists start the discussion with the answer: GE should invest in wind power; Wal-Mart should pay its workers more. By its very name, “Corporate Social Responsibility” activists are advocating the socially responsible position. If you disagree with CSR policies, you are obviously socially irresponsible. The CSR activists’ policies forget one fundamental fact of life that dooms their policies from the start: scarcity.

Executive Camp: Congress tries again to hit CEO pay. Watch out, middle class

Opinion Journal

Here we go again. This week Democrats are partying like it's 1993 in the Senate, where they are about to fire what promises to be only the first salvo in their latest war on "excessive" CEO pay.

By an overwhelming majority yesterday, the Senate voted for cloture on the minimum-wage hike. But in order to get the provision past the Republican minority, Senate leaders attached it to tax cuts that are supposed to help the small businesses that stand to be hurt by the minimum-wage increase. And, in order to "pay for" those tax breaks, our solons had to find offsetting "revenue raisers"--that is, tax hikes. So, to review: To raise the minimum wage, the Senate had to cut taxes. But to cut taxes, the Senate had to raise taxes.

Specifically, to raise taxes on "the rich"--for which, read: corporate executives.

[…]

Jim Webb and his "new populist" mates can flog CEOs all they want in their speeches. But the people who will end up paying will be shareholders and the ordinary Americans who don't have the luxury of avoiding yet another millionaire's trap when it gets sprung on them.

The nonscandal of CEO pay

Rich Lowry, Jewish World Review

Once something officially becomes a crisis, that means that it is certain there will be a raft of foolish proposals to address it, and sure enough, legislative measures to crimp corporate pay already are bubbling up. There are, of course, some abuses in CEO compensation packages, but the broad picture justifies the truism, "You get what you pay for." Skyrocketing CEO pay has coincided with two decades of wondrous economic performance, during which the value of all stocks traded in the U.S. rose from $1.3 trillion in 1981 to more than $15 trillion in 2000.

The scolds of corporate pay yearn, in effect, for the bad old days of the 1970s. Then, CEOs were paid relatively small amounts, but corporations weren't particularly innovative and were run with little concern for the interests of shareholders. The hostile-takeover revolution of the 1980s changed all that. Buyout firms sought out undervalued companies, which they bought and turned around. This required top-notch managers who had to be rewarded handsomely for their performance.

As The Economist magazine puts it, CEOs had been paid like bureaucrats; now they are paid like entrepreneurs.

Big, Big Government

John Stossel, Jewish World Review

The U.S. government says its drug laws trump the states' laws, and in 2005, the Supreme Court agreed.


This is not the way it was supposed to work. The constitutional plan presented in the Federalist Papers delegated only a few powers to the federal government, with the rest reserved to the states. The system was hailed for its genius. Instead of having decisions made in the center — where errors would harm the entire country — most policies would be determined in a decentralized environment. A mistake in California would affect only Californians. New Yorkers, Ohioans, and others could try something else. Everyone would learn and benefit from the various experiments.


It made a lot of sense. It still does. Too bad the idea is being tossed on the trash heap by big-government Republicans and their DEA goons.

Drug prohibition — like alcohol prohibition — is a silly idea, as the late free-market economist Milton Friedman often pointed out. Something doesn't go away just because the government decrees it illegal. It simply goes underground. Then a black market creates worse problems. Since sellers cannot rely on police to protect their property, they arm themselves, form gangs, charge monopoly prices, and kill their competitors. Buyers steal to pay the high prices.

********************************************************************************************

Other links

The Ayn Rand Institute

The Objective Standard

Capitalism Magazine

4Commonsense.net

OpinionJournal.com

Junk Science

Activism Humor

The Intellectual Activist

Web Logs

Principles in PracticePrincipled commentary on cultural matters and current events from “The Objective Standard”

Cox and ForkumPolitical cartoons and commentary

Noodle Food

The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid – Donald Luskin

Dollars and Crosses – CapitalismMagazine.com

Rule of Reason – The Center for the Advancement of Capitalism

4CommonSense

**********************************************************************************************************

Please feel free to forward this newsletter to anyone who may be interested (or they can sign up by sending an email with “Week on the Web” in the subject line to rsmurphy@hotmail.com).

Send links to articles that you feel would be a good addition to this newsletter to rsmurphy@hotmail.com.

To receive this newsletter in Microsoft Word format, please reply to this email and include “Week on the Web - MS Word” on the subject line.

If you wish to unsubscribe, please reply to this email and include “Week on the Web - unsubscribe” on the subject line.

No comments: