link: http://ift.tt/1pMiIwt
Hot And Trending...
Trending
- With the passing of Supreme Court justice #Scalia, Obama will nominate a replacement who will ignore rather than enforce the Constitution!
- China, as well as other countries including Russia, desperately want to reduce their dependence on the dollar. http://bit.ly/2y4vbEo
- The private/public distinction, a reply to Stringham and Powell
- Ever heard the phrase, 'get rich or die trying' ...? http://bit.ly/2qw0ELp
- Selgin on Haber and Calomiris
- Had the same 2% inflation assumption used to calculate Q1 #GDP been applied to Q2, the reported growth rate would have been just 1.6%!
- The fact that #gold has not already taken off shows just how little investors understand about what is happening. Stocks will keep falling until the Fed gives in, reverses its rate policy, and embraces QE4. The former is bullish for gold, the later is super bullish!
- Billionaire investor Paul Singer has some sage advice. "I have strong views about..." http://bit.ly/2rU3cAG
- Friedman and the Austrians - Paul Krugman
- This budget deal is a disaster. It ads 400 billion to the debt over the next 2 years. The 80 billion in disaster relief is one time (until the next disaster), but the 160 billion in spending will recur every year. Over 10 years that adds another 1.6 trillion to the national debt.
Friday, March 25, 2016
What is your opinion on Reaganomics?
It is often claimed that the statistics prove that Reaganomics failed. It is also claimed (by different people who claim the former) that Reaganomics was the closest the US has come to implementing an Austrian type approach to economic policy. If both claims are true then why should we keep trying to implement these types of policies, such as decreased taxes, other than for the moral reasons which we all are aware of. And if one, or both, of the claims are false, why ? I am posing this question out of curiosity to what this community thinks. I am not advocating that one or both claims are true or false.