news

Allow People To Interact

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, The Long Journey to "More", Uncategorized , , , ,

All the noise about the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) lopping off unneeded chunks of the Federal Government and the horrified response by the big government-favoring progressive left got me thinking about what the purpose of Government is in the modern world and how we can match it to those goals.

My take on the question will shock and horrify others, but hear me out. The purpose of modern Government is to provide the structure for free and open markets to thrive. These markets are another way of saying people can freely and safely interact.

Markets are the best way to allocate resources to better the human condition. Nothing, including the various forms of socialism, mercantilism, feudalism, or tribalism, has lifted humanity more than free and open markets. If you don’t accept this, I urge you to read “Super Abundance.” As the structures necessary for markets to thrive expanded, humanity’s living standards have dramatically improved, even as its numbers have grown.

The reasons for market superiority aren’t hard to find. Billions of people using the latest information will arrive at better decisions and make them quicker than the relatively few elites in Government. In the information age, this advantage only grows.

Markets are the most democratic form of choice. People vote for their preferences. These are hard choices because their money is involved rather than theoretical. We are all human, so markets make mistakes momentarily but self-correct as new information enters the continuous exchange. We invest funds to receive a proper return. If the profit potential leaves, so do we.

Continue reading →

Changing Times

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

In line with my efforts to see all sides of an issue, I keep up with ideas on both the left and the right. CNN and Washington Post (WP) columnist Fareed Zakaria usually provides good insight into establishment thinking, especially on foreign affairs. His latest  WP column is an eye-opener. He calls into question the left’s efforts to benefit the working class.

Most noncollege graduates in Red states voted for Trump and Republicans, even though the Biden administration made significant efforts to provide job-producing projects there. Instead of appreciating their benefactors, the ingrates voted for the opposition.

Zakaria feels the left’s prevailing theory is to move away from a market-oriented economy to one with sweeping government interventions. “It passed massive infrastructure and climate spending bills, explicitly designed to help noncollege educated Americans.” Zakaria points to two congressional districts, one in Texas and the other in Mississippi, that received the most significant government-backed projects but still voted increasingly Republican.

Attributing the continuing working-class Republican migration to race, identity, and culture issues among noncollege-educated whites, he thinks the Democrats should concentrate on their “solid base of college-educated professionals, women and minorities,” and strive to add moderate swing voters. He observes, “Biden keeps touting his pro-union credentials but is increasingly speaking of a bygone era. In 2023, only 6 percent of private sector workers belonged to a union.” The votes to win are elsewhere.

Shortly after reading the Zakaria article, I read Peter Suderman, Reason Magazine’s features editor, “Biden’s Legacy: He Didn’t Build That,” “…over and over again, that’s what happened under Biden: Vast sums were spent or authorized, but nothing came of it.” Maybe that’s why the people in Texas and Mississippi aren’t thrilled if there is no lithium refinery or battery factory. Because of red tape, opposition, and slow-moving bureaucracies, building things in the U.S. takes forever or never gets done.  

Continue reading →

’24’s Leftover Mysteries

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

As we enter 2025, some ’24 mysteries remain unresolved. Donald Trump ran his successful campaign with a variety of seemingly contradictory positions. I was reminded of these when the Cafe Hayek blog pointed to economist Mark Perry’s illustration:

This contradiction made me think of other Trump contradictions. Peace and safety while withdrawing our troops from the Middle East. Without our support, the Kurds overseeing tens of thousands of ISSIS followers may face an attack by Turkish forces, rendering them unable to prevent a resurgence of the deadly group. Remember, Turkish leader Erdogan has territorial ambitions of his own. This possibility doesn’t sound peaceful to me.

We all know that politicians make all sorts of claims that step on each other, but now it’s time to introduce legislation, and conflicts remain unresolved. The idea is to write one or two big reconciliation bills containing the whole Trump program.

Inflation is a paramount issue that accounts for Trump’s victory, yet many of the president-elect’s promises are likely to raise prices. Besides tariffs that, like sales taxes, increase what you’re paying, lower taxes for favored groups, such as those working for tips or retirees, will likely result in higher interest rates or printing money. As I’ve pointed out, either will raise prices.

Unquestionably, the Biden Administration’s wild spending on the Green New Deal, infrastructure, and chips led to the highest inflation in forty years, but will Trump attempt to repeal all of this legislation? Taken together, these acts are an enormous industrial policy. Repeal all since state-directed economies have no record of success.

The question is whether Trump will tackle the problems wholeheartedly or simply piecemeal. The latter will be conflict on conflict. For instance, will Trump’s buddy, Elon Musk, stand still for eliminating his electric vehicle incentives and green tax credit sales? Will members of Congress allow the scrapping of big projects scheduled for their districts? Many businesses have sunk big money based on the Biden-era legislation. Can they continue without the promised subsidies and credits, or must they swallow significant losses on sunk costs? Even major oil companies put big bucks into green projects.

Continue reading →

Is Trump Looking for The Union Label?

Dave Davis Commentary, The Long Journey to "More", Uncategorized , , , ,

Trump’s choice of Oregon’s U.S. Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer as labor secretary got me thinking about organized Labor. The prospective Secretary voted for the highly favorable organized Labor PRO Act. This wide-ranging labor law would rein in the so-called gig economy and boost workers’ organizing rights. Along with Donald Trump inviting the Teamster union’s president to speak at the Republican convention, you have a picture of a party looking to wear the “union label.”

This turn of events made me wonder if unions are a force for good or politized entities that do more harm than good. I grew up in organized Labor’s heyday, the 1940s and ’50s, when 1 in 3 belonged. Unions enjoyed their highest favorability. One not so happy with organized Labor was my father, a part owner in a Chicago manufacturing company; he had to deal with wage demands, work rules, and strikes in his industry and those in the supply chain.

A successful furniture company listed on the American Stock Exchange was in an industry that had it with unions and moving to “right-to-work” states. My father felt the company should follow and head south, but his partners refused. Fearing the worst, he sold out his shares and comfortably retired. A decade later, the company was bankrupt. It could not compete against lower labor costs and looser work rules that allowed automation.

The migration from the unionized north had already been underway long before China opened up, so they’re not to blame. Once the class of the world, our most heavily unionized industries lost out. We used to think of U.S. steel and General Motors the way we think of Apple and Microsoft today. The government baled out G.M. and U.S. Steel for sale, maybe to a Japanese company.

Continue reading →

All We Want Are The Facts

Dave Davis Commentary, Uncategorized , , , ,

The reaction to Joe Biden’s super broad pardon of his son Hunter provoked a reaction exposing how each half of the country views things from different perspectives. Do we have any common sources of information, or do we exist in two distinct bubbles?

On one side, the president did what any father would: protect his offspring. The Justice Department prosecuted his son, Hunter, because of who he is. Nobody else goes to prison on similar charges. In any case, Hunter was on drugs when he committed the crimes, and now he’s clean and sober. Isn’t this the country of second chances?

With the holiday season upon us, forgiveness seems the right course. Other presidents have pardoned family members, so why pick on an old retiring man who spent his entire adult life in public service simply for being a loving father? A Wall Street Journal letter writer made this case, speaking for many, seeing the pardon in terms of kindness, not flouting the law.

Rather than owning up to being grinches, others see the pardon in entirely different terms. A flawed politician took action to protect family members, including himself, from exposure to his corrupt family influence peddling business. Joe Biden represents the worst of the political class. Serial lying while lining their pockets. An earlier presidential run was killed by being caught plagiarizing others’ work, but a wide array of character flaws never stopped him for long.

The volume of lies surrounding Hunter’s laptop is enough to illuminate who Joe Biden is. The computer isn’t Hunter’s; it’s Russian disinformation. The support for his contention is a letter from 51 former intelligence “experts” instigated by his campaign leader. He has yet to meet with Hunter’s clients. He never discussed business with his son. All lies. Biden built his career on a mountain of lies. Why believe him now?

Continue reading →