For most people it seems to be, “anyone who makes more money than I do.” 

For a serious discussion in the context of whether to extend the Bush tax cuts, see here.

In the Los Angeles Times.

NEWCASTLE, South Africa — The sheriff arrived at the factory here to shut it down, part of a national enforcement drive against clothing manufacturers who violate the minimum wage. But women working on the factory floor — the supposed beneficiaries of the crackdown — clambered atop cutting tables and ironing boards to raise anguished cries against it.

“Why? Why?” shouted Nokuthula Masango, 25, after the authorities carted away bolts of gaily colored fabric.

She made just $36 a week, $21 less than the minimum wage, but needed the meager pay to help support a large extended family that includes her five unemployed siblings and their children.

Minimum wage laws raise the incomes of some by forcing others to earn zero. Why does that make sense? When governments want to help the poor, they should give them money. Interventions in specific markets are poorly targeted, at best.

Last year, Americans sent 1.6 trillion text messages and spent 2.3 trillion minutes talking on cellphones. They also drove nearly 3 trillion miles. More often than many will admit, those activities happened at the same time.

On Thursday, the Safe Driving Act takes effect here, placing Massachusetts among the majority of states where the law forbids texting while driving, and where 16- and 17-year-old motorists will not be allowed to use a cellphone in any manner while at the wheel, unless it is to dial 911.

I am not convinced such laws generate more benefit than cost, as I explained in an earlier post.

Rather than just speculate about this, however, I decided to get some evidence.  I have two students writing senior theses on whether these laws reduce traffic accidents.  I’ll report on their results in about six months.

Republicans are excited at the prospect of re-taking the House and possibly the Senate on November 2.

So it’s interesting to think about what happened the last time Republicans swept into Congressional power after two years of an unpopular, left-leaning Democratic president: Bill Clinton was re-elected two years later.

One can easily imagine the same scenario playing out this time.

Say the Repulicans take at least the House and successfully “obstruct” the Obama agenda; that is, we get gridlock. And say that, in part because of this gridlock, the economy gains some measure of predictability and recovers at a decent rate in 2011-2012.

Then Obama’s campaign themes in 2012 will be 1) my policies from 2009-2010  finally paid off, and 2) things would have been even better if those nasty Republicans had not blocked my recent initiatives.  

Obama wins in a landslide.

And that might be OK.  The economic policies enacted during Clinton’s last six years were not horrible, precisely because of the gridlock effect.

Mark Zuckerberg, the 26-year-old founder and chief executive of Facebook, is expected to announce a donation of $100 million to the Newark public school system this week, in a bold and aggressive bid to turn around one of the country’s worst performing school systems.

Zuckerberg’s gift is well-intentioned, but it has little chance of improving the Newark public schools.  Newark’s problem is not lack of money but lack of choice.  With a reasonable voucher system, Newark could spend less and get better results. If Zuckerberg really wants to make a difference, he should spend that money funding a ballot initiative to replace public schools with vouchers.

Many government interventions are, despite their official justifications, really an attempt to use government to suppress competition.  This story provides a perfect illustration:

Beer distributors in California have united to fight against the Proposition 19, which would legalize pot.

“Unless the beer distributors in California have suddenly developed a philosophical opposition to the use of intoxicating substances, the motivation behind this contribution is clear,” Steve Fox, director of government relations for the Marijuana Policy Project, said in statement. “Plain and simple, the alcohol industry is trying to kill the competition. Their mission is to drive people to drink.”

FRANKFURT—The European Central Bank has increased its purchases of government bonds amid rising concerns in financial markets about the ability of Greece, Ireland and Portugal to repay their debts.

In other words, the bailout last spring just papered over a much deeper problem that has yet to be addressed.

ST. LOUIS — When judges here sentence convicted criminals, a new and unusual variable is available for them to consider: what a given punishment will cost the State of Missouri.

For someone convicted of endangering the welfare of a child, for instance, a judge might now learn that a three-year prison sentence would run more than $37,000 while probation would cost $6,770. A second-degree robber, a judge could be told, would carry a price tag of less than $9,000 for five years of intensive probation, but more than $50,000 for a comparable prison sentence and parole afterward. The bill for a murderer’s 30-year prison term: $504,690.

I certainly think doctors and patients should know the costs of alternative approaches when they make health-care decisions.  So I guess this makes sense too. When a judge is on the fence about alternative punishments, why not choose the less expensive one?

For those of you who did not notice this in the comments section:

Which is not to say that pro-MC litigation, and even the MCPA, are without their intellectual and academic opponents.  Jeffrey Miron, a Senior Fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute think tank in Washington, says “Look, I think we can all agree that prejudice against MCs, sucker or not, is abhorrent.  But consider the legacy of Roe v. Wade.  Prior to 1974, the states were on their way to passing laws which would have allowed abortion, with constraints one may deem reasonable or not, but chosen by the people, through the democratic process.  Since 1974, Roe, a mandate imposed by 5 isolated old lawyers, has only led Americans to harden their positions.  It’s the same for MCs and even biters.  If we allow the American people to move forward, on their own, I suspect that 20 years from now punk MCs won’t be getting smoked on the streets.”

I didn’t say it, but I could have!  Read the whole “story” here.