I don't quite understand how this happens but the more you try and ignore something, the more it finds ways to show up. Case in point, what the what the WSJ ed-page spews. As a political portal that blatantly attempts to act as a mouthpiece for ridiculously stupid policy, I'm not surprised by this latest piece from Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore titled "Laffer and Moore: The Red-State Path to Prosperity".
I could take, as Ritholtz pointed out, a variable such as weather and spin a brilliant tale with it - namely that colder climates are losing jobs faster. To sound even more ridiculous, I could proceed to say that we need a bit more global warming to buck this trend.
I may be on to something but the point is that I have zero evidence to back it up! Not one bit conclusive, not one bit truthful and not one bit sensible. And while this doesn't make me wrong, it does make me evil in a way - for pushing through with my global warming agenda based on...wait for it...a correlation that I turned into causation for my own convenience.
Here are some highlights of the inconsistencies:
"Among the 10 fastest-growing metro areas last year were Raleigh, Austin, Las Vegas, Orlando, Charlotte, Phoenix, Houston, San Antonio and Dallas. All of these are in low-tax, business-friendly red states. Blue-state areas such as Cleveland, Detroit, Buffalo, Providence and Rochester were among the biggest population losers.
This migration isn't accidental. Workers and business owners are responding to clear economic incentives. Red states in the Southeast and Sunbelt are following the Reagan model by reducing tax rates and easing regulations. They also offer right-to-work laws as an enticement for businesses to come and set up shop. Meanwhile, the blue states of the Northeast, joined by California, Minnesota and Illinois, are implementing the Obama model of raising taxes on businesses and the wealthy to fund government "investments" and union power.
But it isn't just higher taxes that make these so-called progressive states less attractive to business. Red states Texas, Oklahoma, Wyoming, West Virginia, Montana and North Dakota (and a few blue states like Ohio and Pennsylvania) are getting rich from oil and gas drilling. Meanwhile, bluer-than-blue New York has extended its moratorium on the technological advance behind the boom, hydraulic fracturing, citing overblown environmental hazards, and Vermont has outlawed it altogether. California's regulations prohibit nearly all new drilling of any kind.
All the empirical evidence shows that raising a state's tax burden weakens its tax base. Still, too many blue-state lawmakers believe that a primary purpose of government is to redistribute income from rich to poor, even if those policies make everyone, including the poor, less well off. The obsession with "fairness" puts growth secondary.
In short, red states of the South and other areas of the country are moving forward with pro-growth tax reform, while California and the blue states of the Northeast are doubling down on Obamanomics and European progressivism. Who will come out on top? Our money is on the red states and those wisely following their lead."
Yes, it's true. Laffer and Moore have claimed the right of empirical evidence! Scratch your head some more, it's the only thing that'll help.
I could take, as Ritholtz pointed out, a variable such as weather and spin a brilliant tale with it - namely that colder climates are losing jobs faster. To sound even more ridiculous, I could proceed to say that we need a bit more global warming to buck this trend.
I may be on to something but the point is that I have zero evidence to back it up! Not one bit conclusive, not one bit truthful and not one bit sensible. And while this doesn't make me wrong, it does make me evil in a way - for pushing through with my global warming agenda based on...wait for it...a correlation that I turned into causation for my own convenience.
Here are some highlights of the inconsistencies:
"Among the 10 fastest-growing metro areas last year were Raleigh, Austin, Las Vegas, Orlando, Charlotte, Phoenix, Houston, San Antonio and Dallas. All of these are in low-tax, business-friendly red states. Blue-state areas such as Cleveland, Detroit, Buffalo, Providence and Rochester were among the biggest population losers.
This migration isn't accidental. Workers and business owners are responding to clear economic incentives. Red states in the Southeast and Sunbelt are following the Reagan model by reducing tax rates and easing regulations. They also offer right-to-work laws as an enticement for businesses to come and set up shop. Meanwhile, the blue states of the Northeast, joined by California, Minnesota and Illinois, are implementing the Obama model of raising taxes on businesses and the wealthy to fund government "investments" and union power.
But it isn't just higher taxes that make these so-called progressive states less attractive to business. Red states Texas, Oklahoma, Wyoming, West Virginia, Montana and North Dakota (and a few blue states like Ohio and Pennsylvania) are getting rich from oil and gas drilling. Meanwhile, bluer-than-blue New York has extended its moratorium on the technological advance behind the boom, hydraulic fracturing, citing overblown environmental hazards, and Vermont has outlawed it altogether. California's regulations prohibit nearly all new drilling of any kind.
All the empirical evidence shows that raising a state's tax burden weakens its tax base. Still, too many blue-state lawmakers believe that a primary purpose of government is to redistribute income from rich to poor, even if those policies make everyone, including the poor, less well off. The obsession with "fairness" puts growth secondary.
In short, red states of the South and other areas of the country are moving forward with pro-growth tax reform, while California and the blue states of the Northeast are doubling down on Obamanomics and European progressivism. Who will come out on top? Our money is on the red states and those wisely following their lead."
Yes, it's true. Laffer and Moore have claimed the right of empirical evidence! Scratch your head some more, it's the only thing that'll help.
No comments:
Post a Comment