« Today’s Employment and Entrepreneurship | Main | Sandbox - 3aug18 »

02 August 2018


Don Bessee

It sounds like the kool-aide was passed around too much in that group think tank. In the real world we have them chipping away at the rule of law from both sides. Just like good totalitarians.

ICE was born in xenophobia, in a time after 9/11 and has grown up to become a tool of fear and illegality. And as Attorney General, I will continue to speak out against ICE, I will prosecute ICE for their criminal acts.





The paper is linked as commentary, not policy, from the Cato website. It is clearly marked as being published in USA Today, of all places, a newspaper I have in my hands a few times a year at most, because it was the only newspaper laying around in a hotel lobby.

The author is a lecturer in Econ at Harvard and according to his web presence there, has taught just two classes in the past few years. Meaning one class in the fall of '16, another a couple years earlier.

It might be that he also lectures in the large cattle call classes taken by many.

It is an extreme libertarian position, pretty much anarchy favoring employers in the USA rather than people living here and selling their labor here. As I think I mentioned earlier... dollars are fungible but people are not. It strikes me as a reason Cato stopped getting my money over 20 years ago... it was publishing much that I just didn't bother reading.

The Reason Foundation has generally received more attention by me.

George Rebane

Gregory 653pm - I'm glad you're all clear on that. I still have to wait to hear from Cato.

Account Deleted

from the paper - "Expenditure on the welfare state will contract because even if immigrants vote for welfare spending, existing residents will vote for less generous benefits when they believe these accrue to recent immigrants. What about possible bad outcomes of open borders? Immigrants will not flood into America, although the rate of immigration might
increase. Instead, much of the immigration will be temporary. Return migration happens because most people want to be near their families, surrounded by their own language, culture or religion."

This is a joke, right?
Complete fantasy.
We probably don't need the Highway Patrol, either. Once folks see all the wrecks everywhere, they'll slow down on their own and follow the laws voluntarily.
I'm a reasonable fellow - I'm sure everyone else in the world is too.


"Out of deference to the critics, I want to comment on ... what the bill will not do. First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same ... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset ... Contrary to the charges in some quarters, S.500 will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and economically deprived nations of Africa and Asia. In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think. Thirdly, the bill will not permit the entry of subversive persons, criminals, illiterates, or those with contagious disease or serious mental illness. As I noted a moment ago, no immigrant visa will be issued to a person who is likely to become a public charge ... the charges I have mentioned are highly emotional, irrational, and with little foundation in fact. They are out of line with the obligations of responsible citizenship. They breed hate of our heritage."

T. Kennedy on the Immigration Act of 1965.

lol. Pull the other one.

Bill Tozer

As Gregory rightly points out, there is a big difference between an indivdual’s opinion and policy papers. I am sure that I have posted links that contain studies from the Cato Institute a time or three. Same goes for studies, research, or even long term polling from The Atlantic, American Enterprise Institute, American Pediatrics College, or any number outfits that are contained within links I have posted supporting the writers’s arguments and POV, whether I like the outfit or not. I would be the first to say that the WaPo has a couple of good reasoned thoughtful writers despite what I think of the WaPo as a whole.

As far as open borders go, it’s not just about immigration. How many times have we read about cartel mules carrying hard drugs across the border. One bust that sticks out was several men packing in a large quantity of an ingredient used in the making of Fentanyl. Guess all does not come in from China via cargo ships. Whether the base ingredient/compound was headed to a licensed US manufacturer or some black market lab set up in a warehouse somewhere, I haven’t a clue. And I would be amiss not mention knockoffs and pirated items to avoid customs.


re: Cato Institute articles.

You know, you are probably better off avoiding reading policy papers by anyone claiming the job title of 'economist', especially the Ivy League variety. It's like getting your health news from hippy dippy herbal medicine websites. The occasional (and probably accidental) bit of truth, beaucoup pseudoscience, and a whole lot of wild ass guesses.

A straight-ahead political columnist will at least have the wisdom of the guy on the next bar stool and lacks an appeal to self-authority.

It would be interesting to give the Paul Krugmans of the world a bit of seed capital and see how they do. Like Hugh Hendry said about Jeffrey Sachs:

"When you bring on a professor and when you bring on a politician, they are unaccountable. Jeffrey's wrong, you know what? He'll survive and tenure. I'm wrong, I go bankrupt."

George Rebane

Dear People - FYI, my commentary on this piece from Cato really does continue in the annotated pdf which you are encouraged to download, peruse, and comment on.

George Rebane

scenes 848am - I read the economists' policy papers because the journalists who report on them are often wrong because of poor reading skills or their attempt to promote an alternative agenda. My own opinions about economics and economists are well-recorded in these pages.



I didn't even notice that, those are reasonable points.

One of my favorite shibboleths is the notion that 'you can have a borderless world if there were no .gov benefits' (or it's inverse, benefits imply borders).

Simply tell all new immigrants that they don't get welfare, allow free movement to all who can hobble on board an airliner, and back up the 767s in Lagos, Mumbai, or Mexico City. My proof is no stronger than Dr. Mirons, but my guess is that it would make The Camp of the Saints look trivial. The wars would break out long before the whole world became equally miserable, so it's likely there are upper limits.

George Rebane

scenes 922am - Agreed.

Todd Juvinall

Uh oh, looks like the "blue wave" is going RED!


The comments to this entry are closed.