Posted on 01/31/2008 12:11:12 AM PST by beaversmom
DP: One of the clearest thinkers, and for me, folks, that’s a big compliment, in America, Tom Sowell is my guest. Economic Facts And Fallacies, about race, about male/female, about what’s happening in urban centers, and we’re going to go through each of them. Today is the primary in Florida, and I suspect you’re not going to give me an answer to this, and that’s all right, but I’m going to ask it to you anyway. Is there anybody, at least from an economics perspective, that you like?
TS: Oh, I guess Romney knows more about the economy, apparently, than any of the others do.
DP: So…and in light of the possibility that if Iraq continues to improve, economics might be the number one issue, that would be somebody you could live with?
TS: Yes, yes. I was hoping for (laughing) I was hoping that Fred Thompson would show some small interest in winning, but apparently…
DP: Oh, he did show small interest.
TS: That’s true, that’s true.
DP: (laughing) I’m a literalist, and I understand. And between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, from an economic future of America standpoint?
TS: Oh, my God. That is…talk about something that’s too close to call, it’s too horrible to contemplate.
DP: Because?
TS: Neither of them…well, Barack Obama shows absolutely no understanding of anything that has happened since the 1960’s. I mean, he’s the newest candidate with the oldest message. Hillary probably knows a little bit more, but her…that’s not going to operate to the benefit of the country, I don’t believe, because the Clintons will do whatever is to their benefit, regardless of what that does to the country.
DP: But what are even…Barack Obama’s economic policies? What would he like to see done?
TS: Oh, I think he would like to demonize the corporations, have the government control more of what they do, tax them more, and so on.
DP: What do you answer to the typical…let me give you the typical Democratic charge, and have you respond to it. We ship jobs abroad, number one, okay? Because of all of the agreements and fair trade, and so on, all we’re doing is sending American workers’ jobs abroad.
TS: No, what is also happening is that foreign countries are shipping their jobs to the United States. Now I haven’t seen the latest figures, but I mean, think about all the people who are employed by Toyota in the United States, Siemens, Honda, et cetera. In fact, if Toyota wasn’t hiring automobile workers, the rate of unemployment among automobile workers would be far higher than it is, because General Motors, Ford and Chrysler are struggling.
DP: So here is a thing that I have never quite understood. The unemployment rate has been particularly low for years now. If we are shipping so many jobs abroad, why is the unemployment rate so low?
TS: Because there are more jobs being created here.
DP: Well, that’s what I’m saying. People don’t square those two…in my thinking, I have never understood that. There are very few Americans who don’t have a job, but we’re shipping millions of jobs abroad. And I’m not even attacking the people who say this. I just want to understand how in their minds do they square those two facts.
TS: They don’t bring the two facts together. When I hear people talk about jobs being shipped overseas, I never hear them say X number of jobs were shipped overseas, Y number of jobs were brought into the United States, and one is greater than the other. They don’t even reach the point of making that comparison. They act as if every job that goes overseas is a net loss of jobs in the United States.
DP: I just bought a wonderful flat screen monitor, and it made by a well-known Japanese company. And to my delight and amazement, I looked on the box, and it said assembled in the United States.
TS: Oh, yes. A lot of the Toyotas are assembled in the United States.
DP: But this was a flat screen TV. We never think of those being made here, and it was a very good…I’ll say it. It doesn’t matter. It was a Pioneer.
TS: Uh-huh.
DP: And it was made here in the U.S. So all right, so let’s talk about some more of the arguments. We have welfare for corporations.
TS: Well, in some cases, we do. And I think that it shouldn’t be. I mean, if you’re going to start…in fact, I would say that if you’re going to start a crusade to get rid of wasteful government spending, you ought to start not only with the corporations, if you passed a law saying that no government transfers of money gratis can go to people who are millionaires, you would wipe out billions of dollars of government spending. I mean, a lot of the agriculture subsidies goes to people who are not merely millionaires, but in many case, billionaires. But the rhetoric is always that we’re saving the poor, small family farm. I think of the poor as being used as human shields in political battles, that the money may not go to the poor, but they’re always thrown in that if you stop this program, the poor will suffer tremendously, et cetera.
DP: Next charge that is made, we have greater income inequality, gap between rich and poor, than every before in America.
TS: Oh, that is the number one big lie of our time. And it’s based on looking at abstract statistical categories, rather than flesh and blood human beings. Right after my book went to press, there was some data that came out which reinforces what I said even more so. If you follow specific individuals over time, you discover, for example, that the bottom 20% of taxpayers in 1996 has their incomes increase by 91% by 2005. Meanwhile, the top 1% of taxpayers had their incomes decline by 26% over that same time period. Now it’s true that the top bracket has a higher percentage of the income than the bottom bracket by a greater percentage at the end than the beginning, but they’re wholly different people in these brackets.
DP: There are wholly different people in these brackets meaning?
TS: Yeah, and each one of the…for example, over half the people who are in the bottom 20% in 1995 were not there in…
DP: Oh, I see, I see. That’s right.
TS: And the same…it’s even…if you get it to the top 1/100th of 1% of income earners, which presumably are the rich, that they’re always talking about, the turnover is 75%. Three quarters of the people who were in that bracket in 1996 were no longer in that bracket in 2005.
DP: So you and I have a chance to enter that bracket, Tom?
TS: Oh, I wouldn’t be surprised if we haven’t at one point or other, because it’s usually people who have a spike in income one year. That puts them in that bracket. You know, you sell your house in California. Well, good Heavens, you’re way up there that one year. Now unless you have a second house to sell the second year, you know, that’s a one year wonder.
DP: All right, but this…so your answer to the Democrats’ refrain, that the inequality is greater than ever, is that those groups fluctuate, and that in fact, since ’96, in any event, the income of the bottom fifth has risen far more, and the top 1% has declined?
TS: Oh, absolutely.
DP: All right.
Audio here:
http://dennisprager.townhall.com/talkradio/Show.aspx?RadioShowID=3
Tuesday January 29, 2008
H1: Economic Facts and Fallacies With Dennis Prager
Prager H1: Dennis talks to Thomas Sowell, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. They discuss the candidates, the economy and destructive economic myths. Sowell’s new book is Economic Facts and Fallacies.
If you have the time and it will fit, will you add:
Economic Facts and Fallacies at the beginning of the title
Thank you
marking for later
Thanks for posting. Sowell’s economics books are treasures.
I’ve read his columns, and heard him on radio, but haven’t read his books. I’d like to get this one. Why can’t we have clear thinkers like this running for office?
BUMP!
I wish Thomas Sowell or his clone was the President. The world is way past ready for him or someone with his level of intelligence and common sense in the highest office in America.
BTTT
You are welcome.
I would vote for him even if he were nominated by the Democrats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.