This is a column I never expected to write. Thats because Im going to applaud Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman.
Last week, I applauded the Chairmen of the House and Senate Budget Committees for proposing budgets that complied with my Golden Rule, which means the burden of government would grow slower than the private sector.
With tax day fast approaching, its time to write about our good friends at the Internal Revenue Service.
If there was a truth-in-advertizing requirement, the OECD would be forced to admit that its mission is to promote policies that will increase the size, scope and power of government.
To be blunt, imposing a big national sales tax in addition to the income tax would be a horrible defeat for advocates of limited government. A VAT would lead to more spending and more debt.
No other nation in the world spends as much on education as the United States. According to our leftist friends, who prefer to measure inputs rather than outputs, this is a cause for celebration. I guess it shows we have the best intentions.
Earlier this year, President Obama proposed a budget that would impose new taxes and add a couple of trillion dollars to the burden of government spending over the next 10 years.
Today, lets build on our understanding of Sweden by looking at how the countrys welfare state interacts with the immigration system.
I feel a bit schizophrenic when people ask me my opinion of Republicans on Capitol Hill.
Thanks to the bubbling email scandal, we have lots of material to share.
Summarizing the federal government is not easy. Theres nearly $4 trillion of spending to disentangle. Theres a 75,000-page tax code to decipher. And theres a regulatory morass that defies understanding. So when people ask me questions about the cost of the federal government, theres never a satisfactory answer.
While I sometimes make moral arguments against the current tax system (because it is corrupt, because it doesnt treat people equally, because it provides unearned wealth for insiders, etc), my main arguments are based on economics.
In 1729, Jonathan Swift authored a satirical essay with the unwieldy title of A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Poor People From Being a Burthen to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick.
Ive pointed out that Washington is a cesspool of legal corruption. But if you dont believe me (and you have a strong stomach), feel free to peruse these posts, all of which highlight odious examples of government sleaze.
Can you think of many success stories involving government? On the other hand, we have a never-ending and ever-growing list of government failures, boondoggles, and screw-ups.
Its discouraging that Ms. Lerner wont be held accountable for criminal actions, but Will points out that at least Congress has the ability to engage in real oversight to hopefully deter further misbehavior.
Bad ideas definitely have the ability to cross borders.
Im not reflexively opposed to executive orders and other unilateral actions by the White House. A president and his appointees, after all, have a lot of regulatory authority. But heres the catch. The executive branch has to make at least a semi-plausible case that any given action is consistent with the law.
In Other News: Can We Ask Al Qaeda for a Refund on the Bowe Bergdahl Prisoner Swap? | Michael Schaus