If one phrase encapsulated the Vietnam War, it was this: “We had to destroy the village in order to save it.” Those in the political class in Washington have learned nothing, but perhaps more accurately, many don’t care if their policy proposals and actions cause more misery than benefit.
On Sept. 29, Congress held a hearing on the rules proposed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) that would likely destroy much of the small-dollar loan industry and drive many low-income and poor credit-risk people into the arms of loan sharks.
The CFPB rules are so costly that most lenders will likely go out of business — by government intent. The small-dollar loan industry has been criticized for charging high fees and engaging in aggressive collection practices. The problem is that it is expensive to lend money to poor credit-risk people, and if legitimate businesses are not allowed to make a reasonable profit because of government regulation, the black marketeers will be the only ones serving the poor. As Rep. Jeb Henslaring, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, noted to CFPB Director Richard Cordray: “These are the very loans many need to keep their utilities from being cut off suddenly or keep their car on the road so they can, in turn, keep their jobs.” Mr. Cordray had no answer as to how the poor will obtain necessary low-dollar loans once he has destroyed the legitimate lenders.
The Internal Revenue Service’s new Foreign Account Tax
Compliance Act regulations have made it both very expensive and, in many cases,
impossible for Americans living abroad to obtain bank accounts in the countries
where they live. The new IRS and Treasury “know your customer” regulations have
also made it extremely costly or impossible for low-income workers in foreign
countries, all over the globe to send remittances back to their families in
their home countries. The harm these regulations would do has been obvious to
many of us who have been writing about the issue for the past several years.
Officials in the Obama administration’s IRS and Treasury have been callous and
mean-spirited in destroying the ability of millions to obtain needed banking
services, without providing legal and low-cost alternatives.
President Obama has made clear his intent to kill the coal
and other fossil fuel industries. The results are that energy costs are being
driven much higher, that hundreds of thousands of workers in these industries
are now losing their jobs, and that low-income people will suffer the most from
unnecessarily high energy costs. Even by the administration’s own estimates, if
all of the president’s proposals were enacted into law, it would only reduce
the world’s temperature by two-hundredths of a degree Celsius by the end of the
century. Greatly reducing the well-being of millions — and destroying the
economic village — for virtually no benefit is the height of political
arrogance.
A new report published last week by the Global Warming
Policy Foundation, authored by former Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
delegate Indur Goklany, calls for a reassessment of carbon dioxide. Mr. Goklany
said: “Carbon dioxide fertilizes plants, and emissions from fossil fuels have
already had a hugely beneficial effect on crops, increasing yields by at least
10-15 percent.” The carbon-dioxide fertilization effect is estimated to have
increased the value of global crop production by about $140 billion per year.
Other researchers have shown that the earth has become greener in recent
decades, largely because of the increase in carbon dioxide. At the same time,
reputable solar researchers have provided evidence that the output of the sun
is likely to go through one of its cyclical declines over the next few decades.
There are still too many unknowns to make firm conclusions about the offsetting
global temperature effects of rises in carbon dioxide and diminished sunlight.
But it is clearly irresponsible to destroy much of the potential for economic
growth and to hurt people living today in order to benefit future generations
who may or may not be adversely affected by climate change. And because of
evolving technology and increases in income, those living in the future will be
in a much better position to cope with any negative changes.
Finally, I was struck by the fact that during the Democratic
Party debate last week, no one listed the rise in global government debt as a
percentage of gross domestic product as a major risk. The debt crisis is upon
us now and is only getting worse. The people of Greece have already suffered
about a one-third decline in their per capita income as a result of the debt
crisis and misguided financial regulation. This crisis will spread around the
globe in the next few years. Because of too much debt, the Puerto Rican economy
is now contracting rapidly. Without first solving the global debt crisis, there
will not be the resources to deal with any future climate or other catastrophic
events such as a global epidemic.
The political class, in its lust for power and control, is
in the process of destroying the global “economic village” while falsely
claiming to be saving it.
Richard W. Rahn is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and Chairman of the Institute for Global Economic Growth.
2 comments:
Very interesting. Two posts in a row outlining the benefits of increase CO2 in atmosphere.
I was also interested in a post made on the Kiwiblog site about CO2.
I quote here
PJM (109 comments) says: October 31st, 2015 at 1:05 pm
“...Physics and simple mathematics tells us that if the atmosphere were viewed at a magnification of 10,000,000 times, CO2 molecules would have a diameter of 20 mm and at a concentration in the atmosphere of 380 ppm they would be equispaced at 3.9 metres at sea level and 4.9 metres at an altitude of 5,500 metres. Therefore, anyone who believes that CO2 could possibly have much effect on global temperatures should also believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden. " unquote
We have a fairies at the end of the garden believer then as head of state here.
Post a Comment