FEE: Why Is There a Dole for Farmers?

            by DOUG BANDOW             Uncle Sam is broke. After running up $5 trillion in deficits over the last four years, Washington is borrowing another $845 billion this year. And assuming Congress neither adds expensive new programs nor expands expensive old ones, the federal government will run up another $7 trillion in red ink over the next decade.             Government outlays must be cut. But when the sequester hit, reducing the $3.6 trillion budget by a paltry 2.3 percent, much of Washington reacted in shock and horror. The savagery, the inhumanity! Of course, the standard response to most any proposed cut …

Share
Continue Reading

Menckenism: Critics: White House Playing Politics with Air Travel (With Video)

            by BILL FREZZA             Flight delays are piling up around the country because air traffic controllers are being forced to take days off due to budget cuts.             Those automatic cuts came as a result of the so-called sequester, when Congress could not reach a deal to trim deficit spending.               To see Bill Frezza’s interview on the topic, go here.  

Share
Continue Reading

Tsarnaev Update & Civil Liberties

            Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, admitted to his role in the Boston bombings just over a week ago.  Upon being read his Miranda Rights, he has remained silent.  This raises the question as to whether or not Tsarnaev should have been labelled enemy combatent–which opens the can of worms.   Is the USA technically a warzone in the War on Terror?  With the NDAA, how much strength does the Bill of Rights still have in protecting citizens?  Considering The USA Patriot Act and Martial Law in Boston, how much privacy remains in America?

Share
Continue Reading

Cafe Hayek: TANSTAAFLOA

            by DON BOUDREAUX             Here�s a letter to a reader who describes herself as a high-school teacher in Iowa:                 Dear Ms. __________:             You object to my favorable mention, on my blog, of Richard Epstein's criticism of mandated paid sick leave.  The crux of your objection is that Epstein �ignores the likelihood for businesses to pay for the expenses of [paid sick leave] from their profits.�  You concede that businesses might respond as Epstein argues, but regard such a response as �not likely� because �businesses need workers.�             With respect, I believe that the possibility that you regard as a �likelihood� is …

Share
Continue Reading