David Friedman on "Should the courts and military be privatized?"

David has an excellent presentation on Stossel's show this week (available here).  For people who haven't yet read David Friedman's book The Machinery of Freedom, it is definitely worth your time.

Is it time to get rid of mandatory government surveys?

Why should people be forced to answer a questionnaire that will be used to generate more government regulations?  From the WSJ:

The Census Bureau does more than count all Americans every 10 years. It also runs hundreds of other surveys in between. But Americans are only obligated by federal law to participate in the once-a-decade headcount and a massive, continuous data-collection effort known as the American Community Survey. The ACS will reach 3.5 million households this year, using dozens of detailed questions—including asking about a household's use of flush toilets, wood fuel and carpools—to determine the need for various government programs. The survey's mandatory status, along with telephone and in-person follow-ups to initial mailings, helps keep response rates near 100%. . . .  The Census Bureau says the very specific questions—which are approved by Congress—are part of what makes the survey useful in helping the government dole out more than $400 billion annually. Tests by the agency indicate a voluntary survey would get fewer responses, particularly by mail, which would make collecting the data more expensive—in-person interviews cost about six times as much as mail per completed survey. . . .

This reminds me of something that Milton Friedman once said.  When he visited Hong Kong in the earlier 1960s he wanted to know about lots of things such as per capita income and poverty rate.  But the Governor of Hong Kong told him that he didn't compile that information because it would be used to generate support for more government action.

Milton Friedman on The Free Lunch Myth

Krugman on the 1938 crash

Krugman writes as if economists really believe that it was the lack of government spending that caused the "depression in the depression" in 1938.

Now, we weren’t supposed to find ourselves replaying the late 1930s. President Obama’s economists promised not to repeat the mistakes of 1937, when F.D.R. pulled back fiscal stimulus too soon. But by making his program too small and too short-lived, Mr. Obama did just that: the stimulus raised growth while it lasted, but it made only a small dent in unemployment — and now it’s fading out. . . .

I realize that someone such as Krugman might be unaware of Milton Friedman's work, but it might be useful if Krugman tries to look at these this work before he continues giving readers of his column the wrong impression. A simple discussion of what Friedman found is available here.

Milton Friedman on Greed

With all the attacks on private companies these days, I thought that this might be a useful anecdote for people to listen to.

Utah House Passes Universal Voucher Bill

It is too bad that this passed only after Milton Friedman had died, but it is still quite a testiment to the influence that he had on the nation's public debate. This will have a bigger impact on schooling in big cities. The shame is that competition is still not occurring in the biggest cities in the US with horrible public school systems.

School voucher opponents, dejected after the House voted 38-37 Friday in favor of a school voucher bill, predicted supporters will one day regret their votes.
They fully expect HB148 to sail through the Senate and win Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr.'s signature, but rather than calling for a constitutional challenge or a repeal effort, they spoke only of "bad policy" and escalating costs.
"I'm terribly disappointed. I think people sold out from fear of special interest groups," said Rep. Carol Spackman Moss, D-Holladay, a retired teacher.
If the bill is signed and becomes law, the heavy lifting would fall to the Utah Office of Education, which would have to get the program up and running by summer so parents can use their vouchers by fall.
"It's a huge assignment and [the bill is] very prescriptive," said Carol Lear, attorney for the Utah Office of Education.
Voucher supporters embraced each other in the halls after the vote.
"We've been chewing on this issue for seven years," said Rep. Stephen Urquhart, R-St. George, who sponsored this year's bill. "We learned from the dialogue, and we have passed something that will be beneficial to some families and it will be beneficial to the system overall."
HB148 would let parents spend public money on private school tuition. Families whose children already attend private schools would be exempt unless they are low-income, but every family with children in public schools would be eligible for vouchers ranging from $500 to $3,000. Public schools would lose some but not all state money for every voucher student who leaves. . . . .