Here below are the Top 10 most popular articles viewed on HHCapitalism.com in the past 30 days:
#10: "Why Government Interference in Markets Always Fails"
Few economists have illustrated as plainly and logically as Ludwig von Mises why price controls (and by extension, all types of interventions in free markets) don't work, never achieve their stated goals. For this reason we present here an excerpt from the chapter 'Interventionism' from his book 'Economic Policy'
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2012/11/why-government-interference-in-markets.html
#9: "Health Care a Human Right?"
A moral obligation to help the less fortunate does not justify massive transfers of power and money to a privileged and unaccountable Washington D.C. bureacracy.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/health-care-human-right.html
----------------
See also: "Post-Obamacare Reform"
Obamacare is now a dead letter. Here is a detailed, incremental health care policy reform proposal.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/howard-hyde/post-obamacare-reform/
#8: "Why be a Republican?"
Many people who see clearly the anti-constitutional and socialist path of destruction that our generation’s Democratic Party is taking us down, nonetheless are often reluctant to identify themselves as Republicans, much less get involved in Republican political organizations. Why should they?
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/why-be-republican.html
#7: "Nothing New Under the Sun"
Living in America in 2014 we have a tendency to flatter ourselves into believing that we are so much more sophisticated and intelligent than our forebears because we can download an app to our iPhone, but the truth is that most of our brilliant new original ideas are nothing more than a rehash of things that have been thought of and worked out many times over and in many nations throughout history.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/nothing-new-under-sun.html
#6: "Libertarianism and Republicans"
Is the rise of the international Libertarian movement and the Liberty Caucus a good or bad thing for Americans in general and Republicans in particular? Just what is Libertarianism? Where does it come from? What does it mean?
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/libertarianism-and-republicans.html
----------------
See also: "What is Capitalism?"
A working definition of Capitalism, to counter the popular misconceptions about exploitation of the poor and privileges for the rich.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2006/08/what-is-capitalism.html
#5: "Takeaways from CPAC"
Highlights from one couple's experience attending the Conservative Political Action Conference, March 6-8 2014
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/takeaways-from-cpac.html
#4: "Campaign Finance Regulation Lightens"
Implications of the April 2 McCutcheon vs. Federal Election Commission Supreme Court decision. Nancy Pelosi shrieks "Existential Threat!" Clarence Thomas says the decision didn't go far enough in lifting restrictions on political speech.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/campaign-finance-regulation-lightens.html
#3: "President of Southern California Republican Women and Men"
Incoming 2014 President Howard Hyde delivers his inaugural message to members, guests and newsletter subscribers.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/president-of-southern-california.html
----------------
See also: http://www.FaceBook.com/SCRWM
#2: Iron Firewall Descends on Ukraine
HHCapitalism.com has long been especially popular with readers from Ukraine. But recently traffic from that beleaguered nation has gone silent.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/iron-firewall-descends-on-ukraine.html
#1: "The CPAC Experience"
Top tweets from the Conservative Political Action Conference from the editor.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/the-cpac-experience.html
If you found this article valuable, consider making a donation of $1 today to encourage more work like it. Visit our Donate Page or click:
Showing posts with label immigrants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label immigrants. Show all posts
Sunday, May 04, 2014
Friday, September 09, 2011
Top Articles
- Remembering 9/11: Capitalism under attack
The innocent victims of 9/11 died for living, and thereby defending, freedom and capitalism. Among the honors we give to them, let us continue to defend the same principles.
- Nothing To Do About Jobs
The one thing the government hasn't tried for at least 3 years is to get out of the way.
- Hispanic Voters, Immigration and the Republican Party
The Hard Right and Extreme Left both need to give way to the Sober Center
- A Well-Deserved Defeat for Leftism
The Left cannot admit that capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system.
- It's the Over-regulation, Stupid!
God help you if you don't do with your money what the Left thinks you ought.
- The Left’s Secret Debating Weapon: Shallowness
While the conservative assembles focused logic and facts, the Leftist sprays vacuous clichés in all directions.
- Is There Hope for Califrancia?
The Left kept California in 2010, so they own the bankruptcy.
- Republicans and the Immigration Trap
The next elections are too important to sacrifice over illegal gardeners.
- Environmental Hoaxes and Immigration
Human beings living under liberty and the rule of law are the ultimate resource.
- 121 Reasons to Reject Obama-Reid-PelosiCare
It's Unnecessary, it's destructive and it won't work.
- Bozo Peace Prize
The Nobel Peace committee humiliated the president. Does he know it?
- Public Billionaires vs. Private Millionaires
Why do politicians who command billions want us to envy and resent people who earn 1/20,000th as much?
- Illegal Immigration, 1806 -2006
The Homestead Act of 1862 demonstrates how law can eventually catch up with reality.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Hispanic Voters, Immigration and the Republican Party
The Hard Right and Extreme Left both need to give way to the Sober Center
Two of the most miserable groups on the American political scene, especially in my beloved California, are Republicans on the one hand and Hispanic immigrants on the other; Republicans because in spite of the Tea Party wave sweeping the nation they face nearly insurmountable challenges (bordering on impotence and irrelevancy in California), and Hispanic immigrants because they can’t get their legal status normalized despite the power of their supposed friends in Washington DC. Caught in the crossfire are Hispanic American citizen voters and libertarian-minded Republicans who want the Tea Party movement to succeed in rolling back bloated government, ObamaCare, public employee union privileges and the rest, but favor a (classical-) liberal free-market approach to immigration policy.
There can be little room for compromise on restoring limited, constitutional government, low taxes, sane regulation, fiscal responsibility and with them renewed job growth and economic strength. But the immigration issue is one where the extremes must be reined in towards the center, for their own good and for the good of the country.
To the Republicans it must be repeated: There are 20 million Hispanic voters (US citizens, not talking about illegal aliens) in the US, and Hispanics are the single fastest-growing sector of the population, up 43 percent in the last decade. Republicans can’t win elections without gaining the hearts and minds of a substantial percentage of this diverse population. They will continue to fail if they appear hostile to Hispanic voters’ cousins.
Even so, to the undocumented immigrant population it must be told: You won’t succeed without Republican support at the national level. Notice that you got nowhere – and late – with Democrats when they had all the power in 2009 and 2010. Fortunately the most compelling arguments in favor of legal normalization are those that spring from the principles of free markets, limited government, individual responsibility, work ethic, familiy values, free trade and capitalism. These are (or should be) guiding principles of the Republican party. If you can embrace these and discard the false promises of socialistic welfare policies offered by the Democrats (the effects of which after all are what you fled from in Latin America) then you will find allies and solutions.
Unfortunately, much of the self-appointed political activist immigration reform movement elite are out for power for themselves first and tend to lean hard Left. For that reason, Republicans must make their appeals and outreach directly to the people at large rather than wasting too much effort trying to make nice with adversarial power brokers.
The Obama-Reid-Pelosi administration may have blundered fatally by ramming the government takeover of healthcare down the throats of the American people before they (the Democrats) had shored up support of the Hispanic voting bloc. Imagine if they had poured half as much energy into pushing the Dream Act or some other sweeping immigration reform in 2009. After the smoke from that battle had cleared, unlike healthcare the political body count likely would have emerged as a net gain for Democrats, who would then still have ammunition to spare to pass ObamaCare in 2010 with greater support left over for its defense in the aftermath. Instead they gave the flesh-and-blood people they had shed so many crocodile tears for the short stick while pouring all of their energy into a largely abstract goal of comprehensive health care ‘reform’ first. They ticked off not only their enemies but also their supposed friends.
This is a blunder upon which Republicans can and must capitalize. The Republican share of the Hispanic vote rose again in 2010 to 38% (in congressional races) from its low of ~20% in 2008. The question is whether Republicans can maintain the momentum or if they will do what they have been too good at in the past, which is to alienate people with emotional rants foaming at the mouth against illegal aliens, providing ample fuel for the Democat-Academia-Media machine to exploit.
Republicans opposed to compromise on immigration restrictions, border enforcement, amnesty etc. need to consider priorities. This country has serious problems, which were NOT caused by immigrants. Cap and Tax, Card Check, profligate ‘stimulus’ waste, too-big-to-fail bailouts, public employee union Ponzi-scheme pension liabilities and out-of-control administrative agencies like the EPA are greater threats than gardeners and house cleaners. The violence associated with narcotraffic is not an immigration issue; it is the radioactive fallout of the prohibition of substances that Americans demand and support with their dollars at a rate three times greater per capita than the nearest rival country. ObamaCare threatens to fundamentally alter the relationship between the federal government and the citizen in ways not seen since the Constitution was ratified.
These are the priority battles that must be fought without taking prisoners. Immigration calls for moderation and a sober, dispassionate look at the economic and social impact.
Two of the most miserable groups on the American political scene, especially in my beloved California, are Republicans on the one hand and Hispanic immigrants on the other; Republicans because in spite of the Tea Party wave sweeping the nation they face nearly insurmountable challenges (bordering on impotence and irrelevancy in California), and Hispanic immigrants because they can’t get their legal status normalized despite the power of their supposed friends in Washington DC. Caught in the crossfire are Hispanic American citizen voters and libertarian-minded Republicans who want the Tea Party movement to succeed in rolling back bloated government, ObamaCare, public employee union privileges and the rest, but favor a (classical-) liberal free-market approach to immigration policy.
There can be little room for compromise on restoring limited, constitutional government, low taxes, sane regulation, fiscal responsibility and with them renewed job growth and economic strength. But the immigration issue is one where the extremes must be reined in towards the center, for their own good and for the good of the country.
To the Republicans it must be repeated: There are 20 million Hispanic voters (US citizens, not talking about illegal aliens) in the US, and Hispanics are the single fastest-growing sector of the population, up 43 percent in the last decade. Republicans can’t win elections without gaining the hearts and minds of a substantial percentage of this diverse population. They will continue to fail if they appear hostile to Hispanic voters’ cousins.
Even so, to the undocumented immigrant population it must be told: You won’t succeed without Republican support at the national level. Notice that you got nowhere – and late – with Democrats when they had all the power in 2009 and 2010. Fortunately the most compelling arguments in favor of legal normalization are those that spring from the principles of free markets, limited government, individual responsibility, work ethic, familiy values, free trade and capitalism. These are (or should be) guiding principles of the Republican party. If you can embrace these and discard the false promises of socialistic welfare policies offered by the Democrats (the effects of which after all are what you fled from in Latin America) then you will find allies and solutions.
Unfortunately, much of the self-appointed political activist immigration reform movement elite are out for power for themselves first and tend to lean hard Left. For that reason, Republicans must make their appeals and outreach directly to the people at large rather than wasting too much effort trying to make nice with adversarial power brokers.
The Obama-Reid-Pelosi administration may have blundered fatally by ramming the government takeover of healthcare down the throats of the American people before they (the Democrats) had shored up support of the Hispanic voting bloc. Imagine if they had poured half as much energy into pushing the Dream Act or some other sweeping immigration reform in 2009. After the smoke from that battle had cleared, unlike healthcare the political body count likely would have emerged as a net gain for Democrats, who would then still have ammunition to spare to pass ObamaCare in 2010 with greater support left over for its defense in the aftermath. Instead they gave the flesh-and-blood people they had shed so many crocodile tears for the short stick while pouring all of their energy into a largely abstract goal of comprehensive health care ‘reform’ first. They ticked off not only their enemies but also their supposed friends.
This is a blunder upon which Republicans can and must capitalize. The Republican share of the Hispanic vote rose again in 2010 to 38% (in congressional races) from its low of ~20% in 2008. The question is whether Republicans can maintain the momentum or if they will do what they have been too good at in the past, which is to alienate people with emotional rants foaming at the mouth against illegal aliens, providing ample fuel for the Democat-Academia-Media machine to exploit.
Republicans opposed to compromise on immigration restrictions, border enforcement, amnesty etc. need to consider priorities. This country has serious problems, which were NOT caused by immigrants. Cap and Tax, Card Check, profligate ‘stimulus’ waste, too-big-to-fail bailouts, public employee union Ponzi-scheme pension liabilities and out-of-control administrative agencies like the EPA are greater threats than gardeners and house cleaners. The violence associated with narcotraffic is not an immigration issue; it is the radioactive fallout of the prohibition of substances that Americans demand and support with their dollars at a rate three times greater per capita than the nearest rival country. ObamaCare threatens to fundamentally alter the relationship between the federal government and the citizen in ways not seen since the Constitution was ratified.
These are the priority battles that must be fought without taking prisoners. Immigration calls for moderation and a sober, dispassionate look at the economic and social impact.
Saturday, May 08, 2010
Republicans and the Immigration Trap
The next 2 elections are too important to sacrifice over illegal gardeners.
Americans are understandably upset by the failure of the federal government to implement and enforce an unambiguous legal standard with respect to the border and unlawful immigration, especially where this has permitted violent crimes to occur and go unpunished. Republicans in particular are incensed by Democrat’s pandering to hispanics for votes by handing out taxpayer-financed goodies to their favored groups, including illegal aliens. ObamaCare has poured gasoline on the fire by acting as a giant magnet for fraud in addition to the merely destructive but still ‘legal’ aspects of socialized health care.
Fairly or unfairly, it falls to Republicans to deal with this challenge intelligently and objectively, and not fall over themselves in their eagerness to step into the political traps so obviously set for them by Democrats.
There are at least two major threats to Republican’s hopes of success this November and in 2012, failing which ObamaCare and other nationalizations will take permanent root in our society, and America’s decline into a European-style socialist has-been nation, governed from Belgium and the UN, may be irreversible. The first is that in spite of an abysmal economic record, ObamaReidPelosi will succeed in getting so many more people dependent upon government for whatever they have, that not enough free Americans will remain with the courage to rock the boat back to liberty. This strategy was brilliantly successful for FDR, delivering to him 3 re-elections during this nation’s Great Depression. The second is that Democrats will successfully (note I didn’t say fairly) paint Republicans as reactionary, bigoted racists, and take from them what little share they have left of the Hispanic vote. At the very least, we must not make this easy for them.
It is fitting and proper for Republicans to stand on principle and oppose bad policy. But we cannot win if we are perceived as being against people; in opposition to a huge cross-section of our society, simply for being who they are. Illegal immigrants didn’t cause the Great Recession. Immigration as a proportion of population is about a third of what it was in the peak years of the early 20th century. Contrary to public perception and anecdotal outrages, increased immigration is associated with lower, not higher crime rates overall. The greatest threats to our liberty and prosperity come from Washington itself (and Sacramento … and City Hall in the case of my beloved Los Angeles), followed by Academia, the mainstream media and Hollywood. Republicans need to contain their anger, refrain from foaming at the mouth whenever the subject of illegal immigration comes up, and go on positive offense.
That positive offense can take the form of a series of small legislative proposals – not everything has to be done by sensational, sweeping, grandiose, corrupt, pork-laden omnibus comprehensive bills that make headlines for years on end – to fix the most acute problems in the system. Each bill can stand alone, that is, be proposed, debated and voted on on its own merits; it doesn’t have to be bundled with a hundred others. The good news is that even as we alternate restrictions with concessions, the latter should permit more effective use of law enforcement resources while making it harder for the criminal element to hide among the innocent population.
For example:
• Focus law enforcement on felony criminal activity like murder, rape, assault, grand theft auto, arms and drug trafficking. Stop pursuing illegals whose only crime is being here without permission.
• Build and patrol the border fence.
• Deny (or delay for 10 years) citizenship to anyone who cannot prove that they entered the country through legal channels.
• Stop printing official government election materials in foreign languages at taxpayer expense. We are an English-speaking nation.
• Offer a relatively painless path to legal residency status (not citizenship) to people already here.
• Strengthen standards for knowledge of the English language and American civic institutions, including the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, as a requirement for citizenship.
• Offer accelerated citizenship to persons who serve honorably in the US armed services.
• Amend the US Constitution such that babies born in the US to foreign parents do not automatically become American citizens. No more ‘anchor babies’ (news flash: slavery was abolished 150 years ago).
• Increase or abolish H1-B visa quotas. It makes no sense to educate foreigners in our universities and then chase them away when they are ready to produce wealth and jobs in the USA.
• Relax restrictions on immigrants who come through proper border crossings who openly state their intention to seek work, whether permanently or seasonally. Photograph them, fingerprint them, register them in a nationwide database and test them for infectious disease as necessary, but let them through with legal residency (not citizen) status. Collect from each a payment for catastrophic health insurance coverage that is substantially less than illegal ‘coyote’ smuggling fees. By making it easier for honest workers to come through the front door, law enforcement can focus limited resources on criminal activity coming through the back door.
• Allow/require state and local law enforcement to investigate the legal or immigration status of all criminal suspects, persons of interest or defendants. No ‘sanctuary city’ or any other policies should be permitted to serve as cover for criminals and their activities.
• Stop conducting raids on commercial businesses which are intended to root out illegal workers, unless there is specific, probable cause of felony criminal activity. The drug traffickers are not cutting up chickens for $4/hour. Offering and accepting employment at mutually agreeable terms is not fundamentally a crime (if it were, it would still be the least of any immigration problems).
I’m sure you can think of more of you own. Even if not a single one of these gets a hearing in Nancy Pelosi’s Congress, if Republicans introduce one per week from here to November, Americans will recognize who the grown-ups are who are serious, responsible and really trying to help. We can take the political advantage away from the Democrats and make them play defense.
Even if you think some of these proposals are too lenient, liberal, or slouching toward ‘amnesty’, that judgment has to be balanced against the larger picture of what’s at stake. Do you want to win the argument or the war?
Don’t take the bait; take the initiative.
Americans are understandably upset by the failure of the federal government to implement and enforce an unambiguous legal standard with respect to the border and unlawful immigration, especially where this has permitted violent crimes to occur and go unpunished. Republicans in particular are incensed by Democrat’s pandering to hispanics for votes by handing out taxpayer-financed goodies to their favored groups, including illegal aliens. ObamaCare has poured gasoline on the fire by acting as a giant magnet for fraud in addition to the merely destructive but still ‘legal’ aspects of socialized health care.
Fairly or unfairly, it falls to Republicans to deal with this challenge intelligently and objectively, and not fall over themselves in their eagerness to step into the political traps so obviously set for them by Democrats.
There are at least two major threats to Republican’s hopes of success this November and in 2012, failing which ObamaCare and other nationalizations will take permanent root in our society, and America’s decline into a European-style socialist has-been nation, governed from Belgium and the UN, may be irreversible. The first is that in spite of an abysmal economic record, ObamaReidPelosi will succeed in getting so many more people dependent upon government for whatever they have, that not enough free Americans will remain with the courage to rock the boat back to liberty. This strategy was brilliantly successful for FDR, delivering to him 3 re-elections during this nation’s Great Depression. The second is that Democrats will successfully (note I didn’t say fairly) paint Republicans as reactionary, bigoted racists, and take from them what little share they have left of the Hispanic vote. At the very least, we must not make this easy for them.
It is fitting and proper for Republicans to stand on principle and oppose bad policy. But we cannot win if we are perceived as being against people; in opposition to a huge cross-section of our society, simply for being who they are. Illegal immigrants didn’t cause the Great Recession. Immigration as a proportion of population is about a third of what it was in the peak years of the early 20th century. Contrary to public perception and anecdotal outrages, increased immigration is associated with lower, not higher crime rates overall. The greatest threats to our liberty and prosperity come from Washington itself (and Sacramento … and City Hall in the case of my beloved Los Angeles), followed by Academia, the mainstream media and Hollywood. Republicans need to contain their anger, refrain from foaming at the mouth whenever the subject of illegal immigration comes up, and go on positive offense.
That positive offense can take the form of a series of small legislative proposals – not everything has to be done by sensational, sweeping, grandiose, corrupt, pork-laden omnibus comprehensive bills that make headlines for years on end – to fix the most acute problems in the system. Each bill can stand alone, that is, be proposed, debated and voted on on its own merits; it doesn’t have to be bundled with a hundred others. The good news is that even as we alternate restrictions with concessions, the latter should permit more effective use of law enforcement resources while making it harder for the criminal element to hide among the innocent population.
For example:
• Focus law enforcement on felony criminal activity like murder, rape, assault, grand theft auto, arms and drug trafficking. Stop pursuing illegals whose only crime is being here without permission.
• Build and patrol the border fence.
• Deny (or delay for 10 years) citizenship to anyone who cannot prove that they entered the country through legal channels.
• Stop printing official government election materials in foreign languages at taxpayer expense. We are an English-speaking nation.
• Offer a relatively painless path to legal residency status (not citizenship) to people already here.
• Strengthen standards for knowledge of the English language and American civic institutions, including the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, as a requirement for citizenship.
• Offer accelerated citizenship to persons who serve honorably in the US armed services.
• Amend the US Constitution such that babies born in the US to foreign parents do not automatically become American citizens. No more ‘anchor babies’ (news flash: slavery was abolished 150 years ago).
• Increase or abolish H1-B visa quotas. It makes no sense to educate foreigners in our universities and then chase them away when they are ready to produce wealth and jobs in the USA.
• Relax restrictions on immigrants who come through proper border crossings who openly state their intention to seek work, whether permanently or seasonally. Photograph them, fingerprint them, register them in a nationwide database and test them for infectious disease as necessary, but let them through with legal residency (not citizen) status. Collect from each a payment for catastrophic health insurance coverage that is substantially less than illegal ‘coyote’ smuggling fees. By making it easier for honest workers to come through the front door, law enforcement can focus limited resources on criminal activity coming through the back door.
• Allow/require state and local law enforcement to investigate the legal or immigration status of all criminal suspects, persons of interest or defendants. No ‘sanctuary city’ or any other policies should be permitted to serve as cover for criminals and their activities.
• Stop conducting raids on commercial businesses which are intended to root out illegal workers, unless there is specific, probable cause of felony criminal activity. The drug traffickers are not cutting up chickens for $4/hour. Offering and accepting employment at mutually agreeable terms is not fundamentally a crime (if it were, it would still be the least of any immigration problems).
I’m sure you can think of more of you own. Even if not a single one of these gets a hearing in Nancy Pelosi’s Congress, if Republicans introduce one per week from here to November, Americans will recognize who the grown-ups are who are serious, responsible and really trying to help. We can take the political advantage away from the Democrats and make them play defense.
Even if you think some of these proposals are too lenient, liberal, or slouching toward ‘amnesty’, that judgment has to be balanced against the larger picture of what’s at stake. Do you want to win the argument or the war?
Don’t take the bait; take the initiative.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Julian Simon on Environmental Hoaxes and Immigration
[Leer en Español]
Conservatives and Republicans who oppose liberalization of immigration laws would be well-advised not to throw overboard one of their greatest allies in another vital policy area, that of climate change and other environmental issues. I am referring to the late Julian Simon. His book ‘The Ultimate Resource 2’ and works based on or inspired by it represent the nuclear warhead arsenal of the conservative and capitalist movements against radical environmentalist fraud. He catalogs and debunks over a hundred cases of environmental scare campaigns in the past 200 years that turned out to be so much global hot air emitted by carbon-spewing political activists out to grab power and earn big bucks (and frequent-flier miles) through notoriety. What’s more, he systematically explained WHY objectively it must be so that all such scares end up as hoaxes (not that that ever deters the activists from inventing new ones with every generation, if not season). Julian Simon is an indispensible ultimate resource all by himself in this regard. Simon’s work has been praised by Milton Friedman, George Gilder, Rush Limbaugh and many writers on the Wall Street Journal editorial page.
Having a strong agreement on one or any number of points does not mean that we will always agree on others. We can all easily name people with whom we agree wholeheartedly on some issues while being fiercely at odds on others. But at the very least, the views of someone whom we respect so highly ought to deserve a fair, honest, and open-minded hearing. To do less would be rather shallow and petty.
Simon named his book The Ultimate Resource to make the point that in the final analysis, physical assets like coal, oil, water and food are only as good, useful and available as the PEOPLE who gather, collect, mine, extract, refine, grow and harvest them. It is human beings living under liberty and the rule of law that are the most precious, scarce, productive and needed resource. In the short run, physical resources are of course finite; but in the long term, they are virtually unlimited, only constrained by human imagination, ingenuity, freedom and hard work. In simple arithmetic, since the average human being on earth, when given a chance, is perfectly capable of producing more wealth than he must consume, the more people we have on earth, the more wealth there will be all around. And this principle extends into the realm of all other problem solving as well, not just production of food and wealth but managing pollution, waste, health hazards etc; the more free people available, the cleaner the environment.
In The Economic Consequences of Immigration and Immigration: The Demographic and Economic Facts, Simon focused his pro- (human) life thesis on the specific case of people who decide to move from one place or country on Earth to another in search of opportunity and/or in flight away from persecution and/or poverty. He concludes that the supposed economic arguments against immigrants break down under examination of facts. Consider a sampling of Simon’s findings, which have changed little since he asserted them about 20 years ago:
• The total number of immigrants per year (including illegal immigrants and refugees) nowadays is somewhat less than it was in the peak years at the beginning of the 20th century when U.S. population was less than half as large as it now is.
• Immigration as a proportion of population is about a third of what it was in the peak years.
• The foreign-born population of the United States is 8.5 percent of the total population (as of 1990). It had always been above 13 percent during the period from 1860 to 1930.
• More than half of illegal aliens enter legally and overstay their visas and permits. Less than half cross the nation's borders clandestinely.
• New immigrants are more concentrated than are natives in the youthful labor-force ages when people contribute more to the public coffer than they draw from it;
• The average education of new immigrants has been increasing…[nevertheless] [t]he proportion of adult new immigrants with eight or fewer years of education is much higher than the proportion of adult natives.
• The proportion of immigrants with bachelor's or postgraduate degrees is higher than the proportion of the native labor force.
• Immigrants do not cause native unemployment, even among low-paid or minority groups.
• Immigrants who enter legally through regular quotas are not permitted to receive public assistance for three years, and they may be deported if they obtain such assistance.
• If refugees are excluded from the assessment…the rate of welfare use for new immigrants who entered between 1980 and 1990 is considerably below the rate for natives ages 15 and above.
• Social Security and Medicare are by far the most expensive transfer payments made by the government. These payments go almost completely to natives. This is because immigrants typically arrive when they are young and healthy, and also because older recent immigrants do not qualify for Social Security for many years after their arrival.
• As of the 1970s, immigrants contributed more to the public coffers in taxes than they drew out in welfare services.
The Summary of Important Facts about Immigration may be read here: http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/pr-imsum.html
The complete pamphlet is available here: http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/pr-immig.html
Simon died a premature death at age 65 in 1998, but his influence and rigorous methodology may be readily recognized in the work of his disciples, among them Stephen Moore and Daniel Griswold. The Cato Institute’s August 2009 Handbook for Policy Makers contains a succinct chapter on immigration which is the culmination of this decades’ long research effort. This document deserves to be carefully studied by any serious person interested in how the system should be reformed. Its recommendations in brief are:
• Expand current legal immigration quotas, especially for employment-based visas;
• Repeal the arbitrary and restrictive cap on H1-B visas for highly skilled workers;
• Create a temporary worker program for lower-skilled workers to meet long-term labor demand and reduce incentives for illegal immigration; and
• Refocus border-patrol resources to keep criminals and terrorists out of the country.
Conservatives and Republicans who oppose liberalization of immigration laws would be well-advised not to throw overboard one of their greatest allies in another vital policy area, that of climate change and other environmental issues. I am referring to the late Julian Simon. His book ‘The Ultimate Resource 2’ and works based on or inspired by it represent the nuclear warhead arsenal of the conservative and capitalist movements against radical environmentalist fraud. He catalogs and debunks over a hundred cases of environmental scare campaigns in the past 200 years that turned out to be so much global hot air emitted by carbon-spewing political activists out to grab power and earn big bucks (and frequent-flier miles) through notoriety. What’s more, he systematically explained WHY objectively it must be so that all such scares end up as hoaxes (not that that ever deters the activists from inventing new ones with every generation, if not season). Julian Simon is an indispensible ultimate resource all by himself in this regard. Simon’s work has been praised by Milton Friedman, George Gilder, Rush Limbaugh and many writers on the Wall Street Journal editorial page.
Having a strong agreement on one or any number of points does not mean that we will always agree on others. We can all easily name people with whom we agree wholeheartedly on some issues while being fiercely at odds on others. But at the very least, the views of someone whom we respect so highly ought to deserve a fair, honest, and open-minded hearing. To do less would be rather shallow and petty.
Simon named his book The Ultimate Resource to make the point that in the final analysis, physical assets like coal, oil, water and food are only as good, useful and available as the PEOPLE who gather, collect, mine, extract, refine, grow and harvest them. It is human beings living under liberty and the rule of law that are the most precious, scarce, productive and needed resource. In the short run, physical resources are of course finite; but in the long term, they are virtually unlimited, only constrained by human imagination, ingenuity, freedom and hard work. In simple arithmetic, since the average human being on earth, when given a chance, is perfectly capable of producing more wealth than he must consume, the more people we have on earth, the more wealth there will be all around. And this principle extends into the realm of all other problem solving as well, not just production of food and wealth but managing pollution, waste, health hazards etc; the more free people available, the cleaner the environment.
In The Economic Consequences of Immigration and Immigration: The Demographic and Economic Facts, Simon focused his pro- (human) life thesis on the specific case of people who decide to move from one place or country on Earth to another in search of opportunity and/or in flight away from persecution and/or poverty. He concludes that the supposed economic arguments against immigrants break down under examination of facts. Consider a sampling of Simon’s findings, which have changed little since he asserted them about 20 years ago:
• The total number of immigrants per year (including illegal immigrants and refugees) nowadays is somewhat less than it was in the peak years at the beginning of the 20th century when U.S. population was less than half as large as it now is.
• Immigration as a proportion of population is about a third of what it was in the peak years.
• The foreign-born population of the United States is 8.5 percent of the total population (as of 1990). It had always been above 13 percent during the period from 1860 to 1930.
• More than half of illegal aliens enter legally and overstay their visas and permits. Less than half cross the nation's borders clandestinely.
• New immigrants are more concentrated than are natives in the youthful labor-force ages when people contribute more to the public coffer than they draw from it;
• The average education of new immigrants has been increasing…[nevertheless] [t]he proportion of adult new immigrants with eight or fewer years of education is much higher than the proportion of adult natives.
• The proportion of immigrants with bachelor's or postgraduate degrees is higher than the proportion of the native labor force.
• Immigrants do not cause native unemployment, even among low-paid or minority groups.
• Immigrants who enter legally through regular quotas are not permitted to receive public assistance for three years, and they may be deported if they obtain such assistance.
• If refugees are excluded from the assessment…the rate of welfare use for new immigrants who entered between 1980 and 1990 is considerably below the rate for natives ages 15 and above.
• Social Security and Medicare are by far the most expensive transfer payments made by the government. These payments go almost completely to natives. This is because immigrants typically arrive when they are young and healthy, and also because older recent immigrants do not qualify for Social Security for many years after their arrival.
• As of the 1970s, immigrants contributed more to the public coffers in taxes than they drew out in welfare services.
The Summary of Important Facts about Immigration may be read here: http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/pr-imsum.html
The complete pamphlet is available here: http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/pr-immig.html
Simon died a premature death at age 65 in 1998, but his influence and rigorous methodology may be readily recognized in the work of his disciples, among them Stephen Moore and Daniel Griswold. The Cato Institute’s August 2009 Handbook for Policy Makers contains a succinct chapter on immigration which is the culmination of this decades’ long research effort. This document deserves to be carefully studied by any serious person interested in how the system should be reformed. Its recommendations in brief are:
• Expand current legal immigration quotas, especially for employment-based visas;
• Repeal the arbitrary and restrictive cap on H1-B visas for highly skilled workers;
• Create a temporary worker program for lower-skilled workers to meet long-term labor demand and reduce incentives for illegal immigration; and
• Refocus border-patrol resources to keep criminals and terrorists out of the country.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
The Conservative and Republican Trump Card: Hispanic Voters
The Republican share of the hispanic vote has dwindled from a high of 40% in 2004 to 20% in 2008. But it doesn’t have to be this way; it could be 60 or even 80%. Republicans needn’t write off this segment of the population, and we certainly shouldn’t stupidly alienate it if we want to have a say in how our government is run and our country evolves in the next generation.
In general, hispanic citizens are hard-working, self-reliant, pro-family, pro-Judeo-Christian values; pro-Life, pro-school choice. These qualities should endear it to the conservative movement and the Republican party. There are plenty of hispanics in America, even those who participate in the Spanish-language talk radio forums (that I listen to and occasionally participate in), who are appalled at Barack Obama’s economic policies, his brownnosing of foreign leaders and entities, and the reclassification of foreign terrorists as common criminals subject to constitutional protections.
All the conservative movement and the Republican party would need to do to win this segment back to its side is make a sincere outreach appeal and stop appearing to foam at the mouth every time the topic of immigration, legal or illegal, comes up.
Conservative principles of limited government, free markets, free people, duty, honor and country, are not limited by ethnic origin, color or religion, and they do not stop at the border. There is no reason that conservatives can not support liberal (small ‘L’) free-trade policies with other countries and immigration policies that recognize the need for and benefit from immigrants both at the very low and the very high end of the education and skill levels, where they compliment our native-born medium-level average. There is certainly no good capitalist economic argument for undue restriction of trade or immigration.
This doesn’t mean roll over and play dead when Democrats nominate leftist socialist hispanics to high office, as in the case of Sonia Sotomayor. We have to take principled opposing stands and promote our people, of whom we have plenty ‘of color’. But it does mean refraining from painting 12 million people with a broad brush as some kind of criminal underground. To the contrary, reach out, educate this population in American civic values, and win them and their voting citizen cousins to our cause.
To do the right thing by their own principles and to win elections once more, conservatives need to TAKE THE LEAD in liberalizing trade and immigration laws under the rule of law, to make it easier for honest people to come here legally in order all the better to isolate the miscreants who violate our borders for criminal and/or terrorist purposes. By taking the lead in immigration reform, Republicans can take the election issue advantage away from the Democrats and prevent their worst and most irresponsible notions from becoming law over our impotent opposition.
Hispanics for Republicans? ¡Si, se puede!
Resources:
- American Thinker: Conservative Republican Values and the American Hispanic Mind
- The United States Needs More Conservative Opinion in Spanish
- National Review Online: Bush’s “Real” Hispanic Numbers
- Cato Institute: Will Democrats Err in Immigration Reforms?
- Daniel Griswold: As Immigrants Move In, Americans Move Up
- Wall Street Journal: sunshine for McCain
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Five Steps to Immigration Reform
By Howard Hyde
(ver en Español a: http://howardhyde-espanol.blogspot.com/2006/12/cinco-pasos-al-reforma-inmigratoria.html)
A realistic, politically feasible solution to the problems of illegal immigration which will actually work must be comprehensive, involving several interdependent aspects of security, politics, economics, citizens, immigrants, businesses and government agencies. It must be consistent with basic principles of how society actually functions, not on the ideology of narrowly-focused political factions or special-interest groups. And it will involve compromises with entrenched political interests; it will have something in it to offend everyone to some degree.
I see five pillars required of a comprehensive reform plan:
1. Legalize Capitalism. (Yes, you read that correctly.)
Abolish socialism. Stop paying able-bodied adults to breathe at the expense of fellow (taxpaying) citizens, many of whom are worse off than the beneficiaries but don’t meet the political requirements. Slash regulation of anything that doesn’t relate to murder, theft, rape, persecution or conspiracy (see the Ten Commandments). Allow businesses and individuals (including hospitals) to do as they see fit with what is theirs, including picking and choosing their customers, suppliers, employees, employers, investors and investments according to their own criteria and requirements. Allow medical savings accounts, deductibility of healthcare costs to individuals, marketing health insurance across state lines, and the right to refuse service to anyone. Abolish the abolition of unskilled labor (minimum wage laws). Cut red tape that keeps legitimate extra-legal and black market businesses out of the mainstream system. Understand that inclusion has been the number one challenge of capitalism for centuries; it is nothing new (see Hernando
2. Elevate Citizenship.
Require 8th-grade English proficiency for
3. Liberalize the quotas.
WE NEED the workers, unskilled and skilled, blue collar and professional. We need the professionals because their productivity and services maintain our leadership in the world and generate more opportunities at home. We need the laborers to perform jobs we’d rather not do, lower the prices of all goods and services, and free us to do higher-order work.
The current legal quotas are out of touch with reality by orders of magnitude. It is a lose-lose proposition to discourage educated professionals and force desperate poor people into illegality and danger with no benefit to ourselves. We need to make it easier, not harder, for economic immigrants to come into the
4. Document the Undocumented --- without penalty.
Every immigrant should be photographed, fingerprinted, tested for infectious disease and documented in a national database. Non-citizens should periodically (once, twice or four times per year) provide a verifiable residence address, subject to random audit; guest workers may apply for a non-citizen’s driver’s license, NOT valid for obtaining public services reserved for citizens, and must pass the appropriate exam to receive it.
Do not require immigrants to have already been in the country for a specified period, or to return home after another. MAKE IT EASY to comply with the law, and people will comply. People want to live legitimately, out of the shadows.
5. Isolate the criminals.
If we accomplish the above four points, then this one will be much easier. We have made legal immigration easy, so there is a drastically reduced need for anyone to ‘sneak’ across the frontier zone. Citizenship is not automatic, welfare fraud has been shut down, and hospitals aren’t obliged (penalized for opening) to serve patients that don’t pay, so the draw of inappropriate benefits has been reduced. The only real magnet left is honest, hard work for willing employers and customers, leading to a better life for all.
Some criminal element will remain, of course. Drug traffickers, car thieves, pimping rings, and terrorists will always be attempting to penetrate our borders and society. Nevertheless, under the circumstances in which legitimate but ‘illegal’ economic immigrants no longer form a massive cover under which the criminal element may operate, the latter will be easier to target and interdict. With legitimate immigration easy, the waves of desperate and innocent families with children flooding across the desert will recede, revealing only the highly suspect. The immigrant database mentioned earlier makes us able to know who’s who and where.
As for terrorists, let us not forget that the 9/11 terrorists all entered the country legally and repeatedly. With limited resources, we would do better to scrutinize those few mosques and madrassas in the
A nation has the legitimate right to secure its borders, and a security fence can be a justified part of a plan to prevent illegal entry. That being said, a wall in and of itself is not a solution; if the above reforms are carried out, it may not be necessary. We have lived as neighbors with
The idea of criminalizing and/or deporting 12 million illegal immigrants en masse is logically ludicrous, socially destructive and politically suicidal (is the Republican Party listening?).
Spanish-speaking Puerto Ricans have few restrictions on their movement into and work in the continental
The solution is to allow the natural process to work.
Friday, May 19, 2006
Illegal Immigration, 1806 -2006
The issue of illegal immigration into the
A look at our history would be beneficial if we truly want to find policies which will minimize our problems and conflicts down the road; we’ve been through all this before.
Pioneers and Outlaws
200 years ago,
For generations, the landowners and governors fought the squatters, in the courts and in the country. Armies were dispatched to evict illegal claimants, burn their barns and houses, destroy their fences and tear up their fields. Recalcitrant squatters were imprisoned. The landowners had the law and the high ground on their side; the squatters were clearly in flagrant violation of private (and public) property law, having stolen, without compensation or consent, the most durable and fundamental of all economic goods: land.
Yet over time and to an increasing degree, courts began to side with the squatters. In part this may have been the result of sheer, overwhelming numbers; there were thousands of immigrants pushing west, thousands of court cases. But there also emerged a genuine, defensible legal principle. The squatters were not just stealing land and depriving its rightful owners of its use; they were improving the land, making it livable and productive. The houses, fences, barns and cleared and plowed fields made the land more valuable than it had been, producing agricultural goods for the local, eastern, or even global markets. Courts began to recognize that evicting squatters from land they had thus improved was as much if not a greater violation of private property rights as the offense of squatting in the first place. Evicted squatters began to demand compensation for what had been taken from them, and courts with increasing frequency ruled in their favor. The legal principle and precedent of ‘preemption’, giving preferential rights to settler who had made improvements to land came to be recognized as a guiding principle.
For their part, the squatters and pioneers developed local legal systems of their own for establishing, recognizing and defending the legitimacy of claims to land. ‘Tomahawk rights’, ‘Cabin rights’ and/or ‘Corn rights’ (staking a claim by marking or deadening trees with a hatchet, building a cabin and/or raising a crop), and their elaborations and variations, were examples of this informal social contract. After gold was discovered in
The Homestead Act of 1862 was the culmination of generations of struggle over this issue, conferring legitimacy to the extralegal claims and local agreements of communities distant from the sophisticated eastern cities. Under the Homestead Act, anyone could acquire a recognized and protected claim to 160 acres (a quarter of a square mile) for the trouble of living on it and making improvements for 5 years. In 1866 the US Congress belatedly (by 18 years) declared the mining of mineral resources on government owned land to be a legal, legitimate activity for cititizens of the
* * *
How much more difficult it must have been in those days to reconcile the legal issues surrounding squatting! The violation of the written and officially sanctioned law was so blatant and obvious that honest and educated people could hardly be persuaded any other way. The squatters were not merely an eyesore or a nuisance; they were actually taking physical property from its rightful owners, a dozen acres times a thousand immigrants at a time. Yet over time we as a nation came to realize that however logical and clear-cut the official law seemed, it was out of step with reality, to wit:
- The immigrants are coming and they’re not going back. The promise of a better life in
- The immigrants are performing work and adding economic value beneficial to health of the nation. The work on the land improves the value of the land; the product of the land feeds, clothes and provisions more people more cheaply throughout the country and beyond.
- The lives, property, and liberty of poor immigrants are as sacred and defensible as those of lettered statemen and wealthy merchants. The american brand of the Judeo-Christian tradition, combined with the independent spirit and willingness of the common people to fight for their dignity and rights, ensured that the concerns of all citizens regardless of rank be respected.
Applying the lessons to today’s problems
The same principles are applicable today. In fact, it should be easier to accept and assimilate immigrants at a rate in harmony with reality for the simple fact that they are not stealing anything that isn’t given to them. With the exception of a minute minority of political activists, they are not claiming land for themselves or
Is this conclusion unrealistic or naive in a post-9/11 world? What about terrorism? What about the crimes committed by illegal aliens? What about the drug traffic? The youth gangs? What about repatriation; all the money they send back to their families in
Security
In light of global radical islamic terrorism, organized crime and individual cases of murder, theft, assault and so on, the
Rather, we need to make it easy for people willing to use their own resources to voluntarily and legally cooperate with others, to do so; make it advantageous to them to be part of the system.
We can never have a 100% guarantee against terrorism or crime. But with more people coming to America through legal channels and fewer ‘sneaking’ across the border, the terrorists and criminals will be easier, not more difficult, to expose and pursue.
South American immigrants know the difference between themselves and arabic-speaking middle-eastern men. Any terrorists attempting to blend in with the crowd crossing the border illegally would be highly suspect and have a high probablility of being ‘outed’. Mexicans don’t want the
Economic Competition
Throughout history and in all civilizations, people at all strata of society have sought to insulate themselves from ‘unfair’ competition. Politicians have reponded to the calls with tarrifs, trade barriers, taxes, privileges and regulations. The elite brittish colonists in east
In every case, however well-intentioned, protectionism breaks down as a viable principle, because there is no principle to defend. If I can buy a shirt made in
The fact is, every single one of us is in competition and cooperation with each other all the time. For my personal part, with my bachelor’s degree in Music and professional work in computer software development, I compete almost directly with Phd computer scientists from
There is no law, no wise lawgiver, no perfect program that can sort out all the justice so that everyone has a perfectly ‘level playing field’ on which to compete for customers and employers. The insistence on pursuing that Utopia leads to chaos, as pressure group after pressure group jockeys for advantage through the political process, vying for legislation favorable to their interests and unfavorable to other sectors of the same society; the steel manufacturers against the manufacturers of products that use steel; the milk or sugar farmers against the consumers, the consumers against the producers, the employees against the employers. The result is a tangled web of contradictory and self-defeating laws and a million-page tax code that not a single professional employee of the Internal Revenue Service can comprehend in its entirety.
We have to realize that in our quest for justice here on an imperfect Earth, the only laws that are viable and defensible in the long run are those that derive from the original 5 secular commandments: It is forbidden to murder, to rob, to rape, to falsely prosecute or to conspire to do any of the above out of envy or jealousy. That’s it! Any law that does not credibly derive from those simple five is suspect. Offering or accepting goods, services, or employment on a voluntary basis, by mutal consent of contracting parties, cannot be made illegal. There is no right not to have to compete.
Moreover, in the end the advantage of being protected is illusory. For if the competition for 12 million jobs goes away, so necessarily does the productivity of those same 12 million workers. The price of every commodity, good or service produced by the additional hands must necessarily rise, increasing the cost of living for everyone, including those who we might seek to ‘protect’ by keeping the competition out.
Free and open competition benefits the whole of society more completely and equitably that any form of favoritism, credentialism or protectionism.
Economic Damage
It is often charged to illegal immigrants that they are bankrupting our society through welfare and the ad hoc use of hospital emergency rooms for routine and emergency services, such as delivering american-citizen babies. These are very real problems that cannot be dismissed or ignored.
They also cannot be blamed on illegal immigrants.
With the exception of outright fraud, the failure of social programs cannot be blamed on those who accept their services and take their promises at their word. The fact is, the welfare state and government interference in the practice of medicine are inherently unstable and unviable systems. Socialism doesn’t work, period, because it destroys not only the incentives, risks and rewards of the free market, but destroys the very information base upon which decisions are to be made. No manager of a social program, hospital or business can make a decision which maximizes social welfare or justice, if profit and loss are taken out of the equation. If prices do not reflect true costs, if success is not measured by people’s willingness to voluntarily exchange their goods, services and money for those of the enterprise, then the manager cannot know what are the most urgent needs of customers or citizens and cannot know which resources are more scarce or more abundantly available for use in executing the Plan; the whole system breaks down. This is the result of forcing some people to provide goods and services without compensation, or at below-market compensation, while forcibly giving away wealth, money, goods and services to others for nothing other than a social identity or profile that the government, run by the prevailing political factions of the day, have identified as ‘worthy’. Socialism resulted in the collapse of the
All of this is entirely independent of illegal immigration; the problems inherent in socialism, collectivism, the welfare state and interventionsism will fester with or without illegal immigration. However, they also create perverse incentives which attract more illegal immigration than would otherwise be the case, and lead to the worsening of those same inherent problems.
Reform (eliminate) welfare and remove the heavy hand of government from medicine, and the problems linking illegal immigration to welfare fraud and hospital bankruptcy will be solved; not magically, but voluntarily through private initiative and cooperation. Doctors and hospitals existed in the
One may reasonably ask, if we allow hospitals to turn away patients who lack the proven ability to pay, won’t that lead to patients dying in the streets? The response is equally reasonable: if hospitals are forced into bankruptcy because they have no right to contract on mutually agreed-upon terms with patients, as IS occurring in
It is commonly charged to the illegals, that they are robbing us by sending their earnings to family back home. This ‘charge’ is problematic for a number of reasons. To whom does the money belong, all else being equal, after it has been duly earned through the voluntary provision of services? If the people paying the money to the workers did so voluntarily, which presumably they did, that can only be because they valued the service more than they did that amount of money, to which they no longer can make any legal or moral claim. Shall we tell people how to spend their own money after they’ve earned it? Shall we invite the families of the workers to join them here, that they might spend all the money here? Not if our complaint is that there’s ‘too many’ of them. Rather, private businesses could see a market opportunity for increased exports to
It might be worth re-considering the constitutional right to citizenship based on birth within the geographical area. It was a reasonable policy at a time when the nation itself was being born. How many nations around the world practice this today? If immigrants could not procure instant citizenship for their children, would that not reduce the incentive to come to the
Illegal at Home
The immigrants whom we call illegal in America today are much like those squatters of the 18th and 19th century; viewed by many as a nuissance, living on the periphery of the official legal and property systems. What seems to be missing from our discussion today is that the ones we call ‘illegal’ here are de facto just as much illegal in their own countries, perhaps even more so. People come to our shores because where they live, the system has shut them out. Employment is micro-managed by corrupt governments for the benefit of political cronies. Private property is not respected, documented or leverageable, such that even if one owns a house and some land, one can’t get a mortgage or a bank acount, or even be guaranteed that it won’t be taken away by someone with a bigger stick. Either a local gang will disregard your title conferred by the national governement and rob you, or the national government will ignore the local agreements and rob you.
Just as we accomplished in the 19th century, third world countries must find the way to rationalize their legal and property systems, so that the majority of the population, not just the elite, are included. Only when that happens can the flood of economic refugees abate. Americans can help other countries through diplomatic, legal and private channels to achieve this.
Balance
There is no restriction on immigration from (Spanish-speaking)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Copyright © 2006 by Howard Hyde. All rights reserved.
Support for the historical analysis in this article comes in the main from The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else:, by the Peruvian economist Hernando
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)