In this post, I disagreed with Menzie Chinn and argued that CBO estimates of the impactof the stimulus are not estimates. Charles Steele writes in a comment:

CBO’s approach *is* an analysis of what stimulus actually did; such analysis necessarily requires a counterfactual, based on an underlying model of what would have happened otherwise.

Here’s the abstract of George Selgin’s excellent new article, “Central Banks as Sources of Financial Instability,” published  in The Independent Review:

The present financial crisis shows how central banks can fuel the financial booms that make severe busts possible. Unfortunately, theoretical discussions of central banking badly neglect its role in fostering financial instability, in part because they ignore its history and political origins.

Writing in Investor’s Business Daily, Robert Higgs documents the fact that private investment is drying up in the U.S. – and he explains why.  Here’s a key selection:

Here’s a letter that I sent to the Wall Street Journal:

Bret Stephens interprets Iraq’s recent democratic election as proof that western modernity, with all of its marvels and freedoms, is dawning in that country (“Iraqis Embrace Democracy. Do We?” March 9).  And, of course, the Great Liberator who rescued Iraqis from barbarism’s clutch is none other than George W. Bush.

Menzie Chinn invokes the CBO “estimates” to argue against those who say the stimulus didn’t work. Did the stimulus help turn the economy around and create jobs?  I’m skeptical on logical grounds but I confess that I do not have strong empirical evidence on my side.

8 March 2010

Mr. Barack Obama
President, Executive Branch
United States Government
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC  20500

Dear Mr. Obama:

CBS radio news this morning ran a clip of one of your recent speeches.  In it, you criticize insurance companies because they “ration coverage … according to who can pay and who can’t.”

Daniel Kuehn comments on this post about how United States Sugar used environmentalism to exploit the taxpayer:

From a purely environmental perspective, the move does make a lot of sense. The location of the refinery is very damaging for the everglades. And my understanding is it has been talked about and planned since Jeb Bush was governor – so it’s not purely for the sake of U.S. Sugar during a tough time.

Shocking. Not.

Florida’s plan to save the everglades really saved United States Sugar. The New York Times reports:

Nearly two years later, the governor’s ambitious plan to reclaim the river of grass, as the famed wetlands are known, is instead on track to rescue the fortunes of United States Sugar.

Here’s a letter to the New York Times:

Paul Krugman says that it is “bizarre” during today’s downturn to worry that unemployment benefits reduce people’s incentives to find jobs — indeed, that this concern is even at odds with “textbook economics” (“Senator Bunning’s Universe,” March 5).

Here’s my letter to the NYT on the op-ed by Alan Tonelson and Kevin Kearns: