As an advocate of small government, I’m often distressed that I sometimes have to rely on Republicans in Washington to fight statism.
Why am I distressed? Because some of the worst people in Washington are GOPers. They may give lip service to fiscal responsibility when campaigning, but then conveniently forget that rhetoric when it’s time to make decisions.
Which helps to explain why spending grew faster under Bush than Obama.
But as bad as Republicans are, there’s no way they could be as bad as the faux Conservative Party in the United Kingdom.
Consider the fundamental debate about whether big government is good and whether we have a moral obligation to maximize the amount of money we turn over to politicians.
Normal people think government is too big and they don’t want to reward a corrupt political class with extra revenue.
And they have strong legal standing for that position. Here’s what Judge Learned Hand famously opined in 1947.
Over and over again courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging one’s affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich or poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands: taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions. To demand more in the name of morals is mere cant.
Judge Hand obviously is correct. It is nonsense to argue that taxpayers have an obligation to pay more than is legally required.
But not everybody is guided by common sense. And if there was a prize for an absence of common sense (as well as a prize for absence of integrity or principles), the David Cameron government in the United Kingdom would be a strong contestant for that award.
Hussman's Open Letter to the Fed; The Problem with Bubbles; Textbook Pre-Crash Bubble; Reflections on Not Chasing Bubbles; Integrity vs. Respect | Mike Shedlock