Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
    Loading
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Coolidge- Summing up

    Posted by Michael Kennedy on 15th May 2011 (All posts by )

    I promise this is the last post of this series.

    Coolidge believed that the wedding of government and business would lead to socialism, communism or fascism. Hoover considered Henry Wallace a fascist for supporting the McNary-Haugen bill. Hoover, ironically, was to bring on the Depression by progressive measures that might have been called a form of fascism. The farm bill would be re-introduced under Hoover and die. Only during the New Deal would it find enough support to become law. The summer of 1927 was peaceful and prosperous. It was the summer of Babe Ruth’s 60 home runs. The Yankees would win the World Series and end up with a winning percentage of 0.714, still unsurpassed. In September, Gene Tunney defeated Jack Dempsey in the fight marked by the “long count.” The “Jazz Singer” came out that fall, the first talking feature picture. Charles Lindbergh flew the Atlantic in May of 1927. He and Coolidge were much alike yet different. Both were shy and diffident but Lindbergh was happy to cash in on his fame while Coolidge refused all offers after he left office.

    Coolidge arranged for Lindbergh to return to the states aboard the US cruiser, Memphis, where he was met by a crowd and by cabinet members, then there was a huge parade through New York City. Lindbergh and his mother stayed with the Coolidges at the temporary White House where Dwight Morrow, close friend of Coolidge from Amherst, introduced the young aviator to his daughter Ann. Aviation stocks, along with many others, soared and the Dow Jones Average by year end was at 200, the record high.

    In his December 6, 1927 State of the Union message, he mentioned an economic slowdown and asked for the same things he had been requesting; sell Muscle Shoals, help farm cooperatives and keep spending down. In May of 1928, he complained to reporters about Congressional spending. “I am a good deal disturbed at the number of proposals that are being made for the expenditure of money. The number and the amount is becoming appalling.” He managed to get another tax cut passed including a cut in the corporate tax rate. The surplus that year was $398 million.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Posted in Big Government, Business, Conservatism, Coolidge, Economics & Finance, Elections, History, Political Philosophy, Politics, Taxes | 3 Comments »

    Keynes v. Hayek II

    Posted by Bruno Behrend on 28th April 2011 (All posts by )

    This is one of the funniest, most creative, accurate, and informative videos I’ve ever seen. It could educate the nation through rap.

    Keynes v. Hayek

    Enjoy, pass it on.

    Posted in Economics & Finance | Comments Off on Keynes v. Hayek II

    A Planned Society and the Rule of Law

    Posted by onparkstreet on 15th November 2009 (All posts by )

    To say that in a planned society the Rule of Law cannot hold is, therefore, not to say that the actions of the government will not be legal or that such a society will necessarily be lawless. It means only that the use of the government’s coercive powers will no longer be limited and determined by pre-established rules. The law can, and to make a central direction of economic activity possible must, legalize what to all intents and purposes remains arbitrary action. If the law says that such a board or authority may do what it pleases, anything that board or authority does is legal – but its actions are certainly not subject to the Rule of Law.F.A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom.

    Health Choices Commissioner, “pay czars”, the Kelo decision, bail outs! To this layperson all of it seem so, well, arbitrary. It’s as if we in the U.S. are moving toward a system where just about anything can be justified because some government official says that it should be so. It’s all for the greater good, right? What are pesky little things like individuals and predictable rules in the face of all that wonderful greater goodness?

    Posted in Political Philosophy | 4 Comments »

    The following may be related. Or not.

    Posted by onparkstreet on 7th September 2009 (All posts by )

    It’s your call.

    1. But the democratic legislature will long hesitate to relinquish the decisions on really vital issues, and so long as it does so it makes it impossible for anyone else to provide the comprehensive plan. Yet agreement that planning is necessary, together with the inability of democratic assemblies to produce a plan, will evoke stronger and stronger demands that the government or some single individual should be given powers to act on their own responsibility. The belief is becoming more and more widespread that, if things are to get done, the responsible authorities must be freed from the fetters of democratic procedure. F.A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom.

    2. List of President Obama’s “czars” from Politico (I count 32, but I might be wrong because my eyes started glazing over after the “Great Lakes Czar”…….).

    UPDATE: Okay, I know many of these ‘czars’ are simply governmental department heads, and the like, but I still think the above is instructive as a point of discussion.

    Posted in Political Philosophy, Politics | 5 Comments »