Search

Means-tested social-welfare spending, such as Medicaid, food stamps, and refundable tax credits, is the main driver of the current fiscal crisis in the United States, not Social Security and Medicare as commonly believed. While Social Security and Medicare do contribute to the deficit, they are largely funded by dedicated payroll taxes. In contrast, means-tested welfare spending totaled $1.6 trillion in 2023 and absorbs 72.6% of unobligated general revenue. The growth in welfare benefits has outpaced defense spending, resulting in the U.S. redistributing a larger share of its GDP through transfers and taxes than most developed countries. The article argues for mandatory work requirements for welfare recipients and counting all transfer payments as income to accurately measure poverty rates. [Extracted from the article]

The article discusses the negative consequences of protectionism and industrial policy on the economy. It argues that while protectionist policies may benefit a few special interests, they ultimately harm society as a whole. The article highlights the high costs associated with recent tariffs on washing machines and steel, which have resulted in decreased manufacturing output, reduced employment in the manufacturing sector, and higher trade deficits. The authors emphasize the importance of consumer sovereignty and the free market in determining what is produced and how resources are allocated. They caution against allowing politicians and bureaucrats to dictate economic decisions, as they often prioritize their own interests over those of consumers and workers. The article concludes by advocating for a focus on consumer benefit and economic growth rather than job creation as an end in itself. [Extracted from the article]

Byline: Phil Gramm Because I was born at Fort Benning, grew up in Columbus and graduated from the University of Georgia, I always had an affinity for Georgia during my [...]

The article discusses the negative impact of protectionist trade policies, specifically focusing on the tariffs implemented by former President Trump and continued by President Biden. The authors argue that protectionism hinders production and competitiveness by raising costs for American producers and consumers. They provide evidence that the tariffs did not lead to increased manufacturing employment and actually resulted in job losses. Additionally, the article highlights the high cost of protectionism to consumers and the concentrated benefits it provides to a few politically connected industries. The authors conclude that protectionism primarily benefits the powerful at the expense of the rest of the population. [Extracted from the article]