Month: June 2004

DC Get-Together This Sunday!

by

Several members of the Chicagoboyz conspiracy are going to meet up — and eat up. (Our woman on the scene says that this place has great dim sum.)

Anyone who wants to join us is welcome. Here are the when/where details:

Sunday, June 20, 11:45 AM

China Garden restaurant
1100 Wilson Blvd
Arlington, VA
(703) 525-5317

(If you are coming from DC, this is just over the Key Bridge from Georgetown.)

UPDATE: That’s Sunday, June 20 (I initially typed the wrong date).

UPDATE 2: To facilitate identification:

Larry Kudlow

by

Good article by Larry Kudlow:

“It rarely occurs to economic thinkers that people work or invest in order to generate the highest possible after-tax return. When it pays more, after tax, to take investment risks, more individuals are willing to change their behavior and assume greater risk. Tax risk less, and get more of it. Tax production more, and get less of it.

This was the essence of Reaganomics. It recognized the power of the individual to make choices in daily economic life. It also recognized the crucial economic theory of marginality. At the margin, what truly matters is the extra work effort, the extra investment dollar and the extra unit of profit, all measured in after-tax terms.”

Iraq & Bin Laden

by

Instapundit summarizes a wealth of information in his main post and more, including an e-mail from one of the staffers, on the reports from the 9/11 commission. The staffer suggests readers refer to the documents themselves.

These documents appear to argue we did not (or at least should not have) invaded Iraq thinking Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11. I didn’t think we did, but I may have missed something. My impression was that Cheney (the most outspoken) always used words like “connection” in a broader sense, not specifically related to 9/11. People have argued he was misleading, but when they cite quotes, his words have been qualified and clear. The fact that NPR viewers believe there was no connection may be countered by Fox’s viewers belief that there was. Isn’t the question what kind of connection if we are going to assess the savy of listeners? Neither or both can be right.