Friday's interesting reads

"Abolish All ‘Taxes’ " NYTimes op-ed by Richard Coniff (HT: Club for Growth):

"I propose we stop saying “taxes” and start calling them “dues.”

Yes, this is a little sneaky. Some conservatives may even call it Orwellian, and they ought to know. But the word “dues” also plays into the psychology of group identity, and that can work to the benefit of conservatives and liberals alike. Consider that “tax” comes from the Latin for “appraise” with punitive overtones of “censure” or “fault,” as if wage-earners have done something wrong by their labors. “Dues,” in contrast, is rooted in social obligation and duty...

Instead of denouncing taxes, politicians would do better to appeal to the patriotic corners of our hearts that warm to phrases like “we the people.” “Taxation” is a throwback to the time when kings picked our pockets. “Paying my dues,” a phrase popularized in the jazz music world, is language by which we can stand together as Americans."

I especially liked the line about people feeling they've "done something wrong by their labors." I was reading this thread on the CFA Forum where people were discussing the absurdity of a hedge fund manager who made $3.5 billion last year because of a "well-placed" (lucky/skillful) bet on subprime debt. You sure would think these guys felt he'd done something wrong because he made so much. Also, you can't help but think back to Obama's comments about the "fairness" of a higher capital gains tax and not wonder if he thinks people who pay that tax have done something wrong by their labors.

"Repeal Housing's Mortgage-Interest Deduction" by John Tamny at Real Clear Markets (HT: Club for Growth):

"The mortgage-interest deduction and all manner of housing subsidies distort investment in ways that reduce our pay, keep our rates of taxation higher than they might be, and make housing marginally less affordable for those who don’t yet own, but would like to. So while any attempt at repeal would generate all sorts of sky-is-falling protest, an end to the subsidy would pay great economic dividends that would accrue to everyone, not just the special interest that is today’s homeowner."

"Bush, Democrats Sell Fear Itself on U.S. Economy" by Amity Shlaes at Bllomberg (HT: Club for Growth)

"The suggestion behind such talk is that the current situation isn't merely depressing. It is that the slowdown is like the Great Depression of the 1930s. You almost expect Senators Obama and Hillary Clinton to repeat the lines from President Franklin Roosevelt's inaugural address of 75 years ago: ``The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.''

The analogy is absurd. This economy is to the Great Depression what an April drizzle is to Hurricane Katrina. So far, the Dow has declined about 12 percent from its record high of last fall. In the Depression, it dropped more than 80 percent. Unemployment is about 5 percent. In the Depression it was 25 percent.

Maybe 2 percent of mortgages are in trouble, and abandoned homes line some parts of Cleveland Heights. During the Depression, more than half of Cleveland was underwater. Today, one big bank has collapsed. In 1931, 1,400 banks collapsed. "

Just a little perspective.

"Talk enough about people losing their homes, and Washington will pass a law that "encourages'' -- or forces -- banks to forgive principal on some mortgages. Banks will take the lesson and restrict credit later."

There will be costs of action to help homeowners. No matter how well-intentioned they are, you can count on some degree of unintended consequences.

From my weekly letter from Senator Isakson:

"As the merger [of Delta and Northwest] is understood now, all of the conditions I laid out to support a Delta merger appear to be met. These conditions include that Delta must remain Delta, must remain in Atlanta and must be a good deal for Georgia and the employees of Delta. Last year I was opposed to USAirways trying to take over Delta at a time when Delta was vulnerable. Today, Delta is a strong airline and I believe Delta is making a deal for the right reason, rather than defensive reasons. While there may be opposition to the merger, I hope that as the details come out, people will see the deal is in the best interests of the country, travelers and the states involved."

At first he talks about the merger being good for Georgia and the employees of Delta but later he talks about it being in the best interests of the country. If you oppose a merger for the soul reason that it isn't called Delta and is located in Atlanta, you most assuredly aren't doing so because its in the best of the country.