Here's some potentially VERY good economic news that was lost amid the weekend news flurry.  Those…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Some Potentially VERY Good Economic News

Here's some potentially VERY good economic news that was lost amid the weekend news flurry.  Those with "skin in the game," and who likely possess the best perspective, are betting heavily on an upturn, as highlighted by Friday's Wall Street Journal:

Corporate insiders are buying stock in their own companies at a pact not seen in years, a sign they are betting on a rebound after a coronavirus-induced rout.  More than 2,800 executives and directors have purchased nearly $1.19 billion in company stock since the beginning of March.  That's the third-highest level on both an individual and dollar basis since 1988, according to the Washington Service, which provides data analytics about trading activity by insiders."

Here's why that's important:

Because insiders typically know the…[more]

March 30, 2020 • 11:02 am

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
The Democrats' Economic Message Is Preposterous Print
By David Harsanyi
Friday, January 17 2020
As far as I can tell, not a single moderator or reporter has ever asked Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren to explain exactly how instituting a punitive tax on the rich will create higher wages for low earners.

Actually, contends every 2020 Democratic presidential hopeful, the economy is in really bad shape. It is only working for the wealthiest among us while leaving behind the poor, the working class and the shrinking middle class.

Now, I suppose one could forgive the socialist contingent of the party for offering knee-jerk class-based bromides  their entire worldview, after all, is centered on class struggle  but even alleged moderates such as Joe Biden are falling back on economic arguments that are wholly disconnected from anything resembling reality.

Democrats could simply say: "Yes, it's true that the economy has been doing rather well for most Americans since Barack Obama saved it from the nefarious clutches of the Republican Party, but it's important that we never forget the men and women  and especially minorities  who've yet to benefit from this recent economic uptick. We can do better!"

That, of course, would mean implicitly admitting that easing regulatory oversight, cutting taxes and leaving the economy largely alone can be a successful formula for growth, which won't do. So, instead, the left continues to be consumed by the zero-sum fallacies of "inequality" to such an extent that it often sounds like it's more interested in punishing the wealthy than lifting the poor.

As far as I can tell, not a single moderator or reporter has ever asked Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren to explain exactly how instituting a punitive tax on the rich will create higher wages for low earners. Can either point to any time in history when tax hikes triggered organic wage growth or an increase in self-sufficiency among Americans?

Wages for the lowest-end earners, in fact, have grown faster than they have for higher-wage earners in recent years. Some of it is due to new minimum wage laws  which, though they benefit very few, are a luxury we might be able to afford with a humming economy  and a tight job market that's putting upward pressure on salaries. There are more open jobs than there are people trying to find a job.

In the last debate, Tom Steyer claimed, "90 percent of Americans have not had a raise for 40 years." Politicians have been peddling the "wage stagnation" myth for a decade now. The notion that Americans make no more than their grandparents conveniently ignores a big expansion of employment-based benefits, increased efficiency and technological advances that have, by any genuine real-world measure, vastly improved the economic life of the average American.

Yet, in last night's debate, Biden again asserted, to applause, that the middle class was "being clobbered" and "killed." (The middle class is actually quite alive. It isn't losing ground to poverty. It has been losing ground to the upper-middle-class for 40 years, however.)

Last year, the S&P 500 rose by 29%, the NASDAQ by 35%, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average by 22%. Middle-class Americans are increasingly reliant on their 401(k)s and pensions to live comfortably during retirement. Millions of other Americans depend on college-savings funds to help pay for their kids' educations. And even those without a stock portfolio benefit from a vibrant market, which generates profits that are invested in hiring, innovation and salaries while helping move money from unprofitable sectors to more profitable ones.

This chaotic churning of money turns off technocrats. Rather than taking the view that the growing economy is a messy but neutral marketplace where ingenuity and opportunity can create comfort and wealth, they see it as a giant pile of money that should be "invested" in massive, state-mandated social engineering projects. As far as I can tell, both Sanders and Warren are interested in effectively nationalizing large chunks of the health care and energy sectors.

And yet the media continue to cover the Democratic primary debates where such ideas are the currency of the realm as if they were completely normal.

They are not. Democrats today argue that we should institute wide-ranging regulatory regimes such as the Green New Deal, which, whatever form it ends up taking, would necessitate the biggest tax increase in American history. There was not a single Democrat on the debate stage this week who didn't support deliberately limiting and inflating the cost of our most efficient and affordable energy sources. This is not an ordinary debate.

Now, whether we're living in the greatest economy the nation has ever experienced, as Donald Trump often contends, is up for debate. It's safe to say we've been experiencing one of the strongest stretches in modern history since back when gridlock hit D.C. during the Obama administration.


David Harsanyi is a senior writer at National Review and the author of the book "First Freedom: A Ride Through America's Enduring History With the Gun." 
COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM

Question of the Week   
In which one of the following years did Congress first meet in Washington, D.C.?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"New York Governor Andrew Cuomo called on the federal government to take control of the medical supply market. Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker demanded that President Trump take charge and said 'precious months' were wasted waiting for federal action. Some critics are even more direct in demanding a federal takeover, including a national quarantine.It is the legal version of panic shopping. Many seem…[more]
 
 
—Jonathan Turley, George Washington University Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law
— Jonathan Turley, George Washington University Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law
 
Liberty Poll   

Who is most to blame for the delay in passage of the critical coronavirus economic recovery (or stimulus) bill?