Posner, champion of the law and economics approach to law is usually lauded by conservatives. But in his critique of Justice Scalia’s dissent in Arizona v. United States, he displays rare inanity. His arguments are irrelevant and spurious.
Through subtle, legerdemain, Posner slaps Scalia for chastising Obama’s failure to defend the nation’s borders, as well as his base pandering in issuing his cynical (and legally meaningless) executive order regarding young illegal immigrants. In Posner’s world, doing so - where the comments might be used against the President for the benefit of Obama’s opposition - is inappropriate.
But tell me, Judge, which is more appropriate - this, or a President who abuses his power? Scalia was obviously frustrated as he wrote his dissent, because he was confronting the sad reality of current America - unless and until Obama is defeated, America will be led by an incompetent and petty President.
Posner also marginalizes the burden placed on Arizonans by illegal immigration and the failure to secure the border. Apparently, Judge Posner was unaware the the border is an extremely violent place - especially along the Arizona-Mexico border. Posner chastises Scalia for not citing empirical data in some of his arguments, but then Posner himself completely fails to cite any data suggesting that Arizona is NOT burdened by the social costs of providing for illegals. And Posner completely overlooks the fact that the Arizona decision also sets precedent for the rest of the nation. Californians, for example, are extremely angry at their forced subsidization of illegal immigrants education, healthcare, housing, etc.
Finally, Posner also completely ignores the cultural influence of illegal immigration - an issue for another post.
Overall, Posner’s “rebuttal” to Scalia is a weak and impoverished attempt; unworthy of Posner, as well as the reader.
This guy’s blog keeps getting better and better.
I can just see him chuckling to himself sanctimoniously as he pecks away at his keyboard.
No kidding? Tax cheats got a piece of the Stimulus? What about the public sector unions who got their bailouts? Or, the nation of Cuba, who has been perpetrating a massive Medicare fraud to siphon billions away from the US? Or the countless other examples of grift and graft that are the legacy of this disastrous program?
Don’t look now, but the government just lost a billion bucks because it can’t manage its money properly.
Please contact us when you have something relevant to say.
Citing an absurd study that completely manipulates data, the “tax prof blog” argues that to grow a state economy, a state must impose an income tax.
Funny, I could have swore that individuals prefer having more money to having less money.
But, in the age of Obama, which is to say the age of 1984, up is down, black is white, and taxation is economic growth by another name.
This man needs to get audio lectures from Art Laffer and listen to them in his sleep to reprogram himself into reality.
Taxation DOES NOT generate economic growth. This idiot probably learned econ by reading the misguided fantasies of former Enron adviser Paul Krugman.
Of course, we should have known something was wrong just by the fact that the man teaches tax law. Anyone who can tolerate teaching the manifestly ridiculous tax code for a period of years without transcending and transforming into a rabid flat-tax-er, has loose screws.
Hmmm. Perhaps that’s why tens of thousands of boomers dropped-out of AARP when they heard it was aggressively conspiring with the Obama administration to ram-rod the ACA through Congress.
Good call, CNN. You lose.
Reminds me of a “Copland” quote:
"…they cross tha t bridge every day- to a place where everything is upside down-where the cop is the perp and the perp is the victim…"
Apparently the blue line isn’t extended to neighborhood watch.
But it’s fabulous to discover that the cops are going out of their way to hammer Zimmerman. Makes me extremely confident that politics plays no role in the justice system.
Great article from Reason Mag highlighting the inconsistencies in the arguments of eco nuts on nukes.
Nuclear energy carries lots of problems. But fears about uranium extraction are overblown. Uranium itself isn’t super risky. In fact, you can hold it in your bare hand with minimal problems (depending on the amount, it’s like a chest x-ray).
Thorium, on the other hand, is a different story.
Bottom line: the eco-philes need to get educated.
This blog is usually better.
Article argues that China’s business climate is better than the US.
The article casually overlooks the incredible disparities between Chinese in the economic zones and out of the zones. And then there’s the massive, across-the-board problem with corruption.
Sure, some people are making pots of money. They just happen to be extremely well connected. The rest are crushed into the ground. In other words, it’s doesn’t the least bit resemble a free-market extravaganza.
Lesson? Don’t mistake today’s China for yesterday’s US.