After reviewing the latest economic news and the Oxford study conducted on the poverty level, I think that the only appropriate responses are as follows. Congratulations! You ignorant liberals who vote based on envious idle-minded delusions of “fair” collectivist societies have been living in an alternate reality. But now it is time to wake up, that is if it’s not too late, because your allergy to truth and reason has destroyed the middle-class.
U.S. first quarter GDP growth, not surprisingly, was more tepid than previously estimated in the first quarter. Economists are citing that the economy was held back by a moderate pace of consumer spending, weak business investment and declining exports.
The markets posted big gains on Tuesday as traders heralded strong U.S. economic data. Home prices in 20 major U.S. metropolitan areas climbed 2.5% in April from March, on a non-seasonally adjusted basis, topping expectations of a 1.1% gain. Prices were up 12.1% from the year prior, beating forecasts of a 10.6% jump.
UPDATE: The latest economic news just keeps getting worse. While President Obama is off playing with his social-democracy friends in Europe and abroad, the country is is political and financial turmoil.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average is in free fall, down 350 points. The economy simply cannot handle easin gof QE3. Every single stock in the Dow is in the red.
As promised, here is Alex Nowrasteh from CATO, who has disputed the Heritage study on the basis of its failure to account for GDP growth as a result of immigration. And here in lays the crux of the immigration reform argument.
Advocates of central bank reform must examine why central banks emerged and what forces sustain them. They did not arise in an institutional vacuum, and will not be reformed in an institutional vacuum. The historical origins of central banks explain how they came into existence. The forces sustaining and feeding their growth may differ from those explaining their origin.
Plans to abolish central banks constitute an extreme reform. It is doubtful that such plans can succeed without broader institutional change, occurring either first or simultaneously. That is likely true regardless of the strength of evidence on central bank performance. I examine these issues in what follows.