Paul Krugman: Gov. Regulation Caused the Housing Bubble

Mr. Krugman writes:

To appreciate Georgia’s specialness, you need to realize that the housing bubble was a geographically uneven affair. Basically, prices rose sharply only where zoning restrictions and other factors limited the construction of new houses. In the rest of the country — what I once dubbed Flatland — permissive zoning and abundant land make it easy to increase the housing supply, a situation that prevented big price increases and therefore prevented a serious bubble.

Don’t worry, that’s as close as he gets in blaming government in this article. Later he returns to how consumer protection regulations actually saved “homeowners [from treating] their homes as piggybanks”.  Despite this curious phrase, he notes predatory lending was really to blame.  It must be hard for him to walk such a fine line between logical thinking and completely opposite conclusion making.

Rising Taxes: VAT (Consumption) & Income

George Will’s opening paragraph says it clearly:

When liberals advocate a value-added tax (VAT), conservatives should respond: Taxing consumption has merits, so we will consider it — after the 16th Amendment is repealed.

Food, Inc. vs. Reality

This image still says much about what is wrong with the 2009 movie, Food, Inc.:

Obviously, this is a dramatization and not an actual documentation of something.  I remember when the word documentary brought to mind amazing shots in the wild of a bear catching a salmon.  This movie seems to be more of a feature length activist message promoting a particular point of view.  Of course, there’s nothing wrong with that, but it isn’t really a documentary or high-minded journalism.

Besides my gripe with the format, it was an interesting show.  To the extent that the information presented is believable, it is at least food for thought.  However, the conclusions the movie makers draw is puzzling to say the least.

The overriding theme seems to be that big multi-national food corporations are engaging in bad, unsafe activities and they are covering it up.  Yet, nearly every example trotted out by the movie’s producers of bad corporate behavior can be traced to the abuse of government power.  In fact, the movie itself constantly sites how corporations get their power, from the government: government laws crafted for the food industry; market distorting subsidies from government to the food industry; food industry insiders being appointed to high level government positions; and government courts ruling in favor of the food industry.

The government is often the common denominator of power abuse.  Let’s be crystal clear, without the force of government on their side, the consequences of bad actions by certain individuals and corporations would be drastically reduced.

What Is President Obama’s Philosophy ?

Over the last couple of years, I’ve heard President Obama’s political policies described as: socialist, fascist, corporatist, and statist.  I don’t know which one best describes his policies, but (YIKES) who would want to be described by that list?

Of course, the world being a messy place, his policies are probably some mixture of several different philosophies. Socialist is most commonly attributed to him, but it doesn’t fully take into account all of his initiatives. For example, ObamaCare requires coverage by private companies. This would seem to make him a Corporatist, but it too doesn’t account for his strong belief in central planning by the social elite. Maybe he is guided by Statism, but this term seems far too nebulous to really describe much.

Sadly, that list doesn’t seem to have much in common with freedom for the people and thus doesn’t allow for policies that ultimately respect the people.

‘Socialism’ Definition

From my Mac’s dictionary, socialism:

a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

policy or practice based on this theory.

It goes on to say, “it implies an opposition to the untrammeled workings of the economic market”.