The ongoing debate over tax cuts has been framed, as it always is, in stark terms: Either we stimulate the economy by cutting taxes — leading to a rise in deficits and debts — or we raise taxes to pay the ever-higher cost of government.
There is now a growing movement in favor of convening a new constitutional convention to correct a host of alleged deficiencies in the document. A constitutional convention is clearly both legal and constitutional. But is it wise?
The recent rush to kneel or otherwise refuse to show deference for the National Anthem among professional football players is deeply offensive to many patriotic Americans. But should such conduct be illegal?
In the wake of the awful mass shooting in Las Vegas, anti-gun interests across the nation claim the federal government should do everything it can to outlaw the private ownership of weapons deemed a threat to public safety. Are they correct?
Americans everywhere expect their government to do something about the tragedy of Hurricane Harvey and its aftermath. But what exactly should its role be?
In a world of paper money, ATM machines, debit cards, and cryptocurrencies, it is difficult to imagine a time when all money was based on a precious metal, either gold or silver. But only a few generations ago, all paper money was fully backed by gold or silver — meaning that paper notes could be redeemed on demand for gold or silver — and both gold and silver coins were in daily circulation.
Enemies of the free market claim that “too much” capitalism lead inevitably to the monopolistic concentration of wealth in the hands of a few oligarch. Are they correct? Throughout the 19th century, many wealthy “robber barons” did indeed establish monopolies in their respective markets — but always by procuring favors from politicians.
We now have presidents waging war at their pleasure, exactly like the monarchs of the British Empire. But this was not the intent of the founders.
A proper and principled military policy would reserve the might of our armed forces for defense of our own territory, including embassies abroad — but not nebulously defined “American interests.” It would seek neither to police the world nor to impose our civic values by force.