For its 125th anniversary issue, the WSJ asked "If you could propose one change in American policy, society or culture to revive prosperity and self-confidence, what would it be and why?" Oh, and you have 250 words.
My answer, along with some great other essays here at the WSJ as "Ideas for Renewing American Prosperity."
I asked my son what to do. He answered quickly, "wish for more wishes." That's pretty much what I did.
Tuesday, July 8, 2014
6 comments:
Comments are welcome. Keep it short, polite, and on topic.
Thanks to a few abusers I am now moderating comments. I welcome thoughtful disagreement. I will block comments with insulting or abusive language. I'm also blocking totally inane comments. Try to make some sense. I am much more likely to allow critical comments if you have the honesty and courage to use your real name.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Broken link to WSJ?
ReplyDeleteFixed, thanks.
ReplyDelete“Big businesses, public-employee unions and the well-connected get subsidies and protection, in return for political support. And silence: No insurance company will speak out against ObamaCare or the Department of Health and Human Services. No bank will speak out against Dodd-Frank or the Securities and Exchange Commission. Agencies from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Internal Revenue Service wait in the wings to punish the unwary.
ReplyDeleteThis is crony capitalism, far worse than bureaucratic socialism in many ways, and far more effective for generating money and political power. But it suffocates innovation and competition, the wellsprings of growth.” - John Cochrane
Love the smell of public choice theory in the morning……….
For me, my first choice would be to attack the use of artificial structures and transactions which have the effect of moving American profits offshore.
ReplyDeleteMy second choice would be to hand large sums of money (tens of billions per year) to DARPA and ask them to spend it on research as they thought best in the national interest.
Handing DARPA a bushel basket of money is a recipe for disaster. Right now this group succeeds only because they are small enough to "fly under the radar". As soon as a congressman realizes that a constituent in his/her home district could use a $10M grant to study the mating habits of the common earth worm or some equally "valuable" subject, then the "national interest" is out the window. For evidence, just look at the percentage of money appropriated as a part of Hurricane Sandy relief that did nothing to provide Hurricane Sandy relief.
Deletea constitutional amendment. "No citizen shall be prevented, by any legislation, taxes, or requirements not strictly necessary for public safety, in being employed or self employed in any occupation or capacity they so desire. "
ReplyDelete