Even China has domestic politics

Drezner over at Foreign Policy seems surprised that China would be so belligerent towards Japan over custody of the Chinese fishing trawler captain. Drezner points out that China's apparent rare-earth embargo against Japan makes little sense internationally. A belligerent China is pushing the Pacific Rim towards Washington; according to Drezner, China doesn't seem to realize this. I think they must.

What's going wrong in our right system

Now, I know how Charlie feels about Thomas Friedman, and 9 times out of 10, I'm inclined to agree.  However, when I spotted a post on RCW's blog that started in a similar cynical manner, but argued that Thomas Friedman was actually making a legitimate point, I had to read on.  In his September 21st column in the New York Times, Friedman points out what is wrong with our system when comparing it to what China is doing right:

Studying China’s ability to invest for the future doesn’t make me feel we have the wrong system. It makes me feel that we are abusing our right system. There is absolutely no reason our democracy should not be able to generate the kind of focus, legitimacy, unity and stick-to-it-iveness to do big things — democratically — that China does autocratically. We’ve done it before. But we’re not doing it now because too many of our poll-driven, toxically partisan, cable-TV-addicted, money-corrupted political class are more interested in what keeps them in power than what would again make America powerful, more interested in defeating each other than saving the country.

If you want to read the rest of Friedman's column (if you haven't already), it's here.

Tax Cuts for the Wealthy or for the Nation?

Recently debate has flared up over whether Bush’s so called “tax cuts for the wealthy” should be extended. Republicans urge congress to extend all the cuts, but the Democrats want to only extend the cuts for the bottom 98% of all income earners. Thus far, the Democrats have cast this as a choice between helping the rich or the nation. I, however, believe that extending all the tax cuts is not only good for the rich but good for the nation.

The reason most often given by Republicans for extending the cuts is that they help small businesses, for many small businesses file their taxes as individuals and thus would benefit from tax cuts to those earning above $250,000 a year. This is true, but it is often pointed out that small businesses can be helped without extending tax cuts of millions of wealthy Americans. Very few small businesses would actually benefit from this; the vast majority would remain unaffected.

However, there are far more important reasons to extend the tax cuts to the wealthy, reasons which are rarely mentioned by politicians. It is a commonplace that taxation decreases efficiency. Economic agents, even wealthy ones, will be less willing to work hard if they know the government will take a large portion of their income. An increase in government revenue will bring on a decrease in overall GDP. Thus, a decrease in taxes can cause an increase in tax revenue, and an increase in taxes can cause a decrease in revenue (the Lerner Curve). Admittedly, this is unlikely to happen, but it demonstrates that an increase in taxation is unlikely to increase tax revenue proportionally. Taxes have the unintended consequence of decreasing productivity over the entire economy.

Now under normal circumstances, correcting the deficit through more responsible tax policies would be imperative. However, we risk descending into a second recession if we tether down economic productivity with more taxes. In a recent poll, 60% of economists said that extending all the tax cuts would be the most economically sound choice. Surely, having experienced the devastating effects of the most recent recession, we should not allow our economic choices to be influenced by some infantile desire to take from the rich and give to the poor, especially since the consequences could be disastrous for the entire economy. The debate over tax cuts should not be about taking money from the greedy and lazy richest 2% of Americans. No, the debate should be about what is best for the nation. There are many strong reasons to extend the cuts, and our nation’s leaders would do well to focus on helping the nation and not punishing the wealthy.

Short and Sweet

I have been complaining for a while now that Western (in the EU/US sense of the term) media have been frustratingly ignorant of the cultural context of Turkish politics. After much ado (even though I would have preferred to write a post myself, I just couldn't find the time), I have finally found an article that isn't quite buying the message put out by the ruling AKP. All I can say is that it's about time. (Pun not at all intended.)

"Turkey Braces for Key Vote Over It's Future," Pelin Turgut, Time

Today's Elites

In recent times, commentators like offhandedly to compare America to Rome or to Athens, often with some vague implied notion that we must beware of our own "decline" and potential "fall." These statements are generally vague and historically uninformed, but they show an acute awareness that our own nation should look to the past to help steer our course for the future. It is peculiar, then, that pundits rarely critique the vices of modern America, as those in antiquity were so ready to do. Livy, for instance, observes of his own time that "we are able to endure neither our vices nor their remedies." Ammianus Marcellinus comments upon the depravity of the city of Rome as a major reason for its decline. In the past those wishing to critique their own societies tended to focus on moral as well as economic and political weaknesses.

I was somewhat refreshed then when I, while staying up late into the morning, read the following article by a conservative military historian. It is essentially a critique of what he sees as a "postmodern cultural elite" which he believes permeates academia, government, Hollywood, and corporate America. While we can easily dismiss Hanson's complaints as unsubstantiated generalizations, he brings up a number of interesting contradictions which may be important to consider:

- Those progressives obsessed with a green revolution tend to live very "ungreen" lives, favoring jets, boats, large homes, and countless electronic devices, yet they are the same public figures who denigrate those less fortunate for ecologically harmful activity.

- Although elites tend to romanticise nature, they are far removed from it and have little experience with the mechanics of agrarian society.

- Rich Americans like to go to the gym and exercise so as to appear muscular and healthy, but most intentionally avoid manual labor. In other words, today's elites exercise out of vanity and distance themselves from those who actually do work.

As many of our readers are attending universities and moving into careers in government and academia, I believe that it is important for us to consider some of Hanson's critiques of today's elites. It is possible, I think, that we can lose sight of the values and plights of common people. We should be quick to check our own excesses and shortcomings lest we suffer the same fate as Athens and Rome.

SEAMANSHIP! SEAMANSHIP!

A bit of a lighthearted post today. Last week JWar sent me a link showing the difference between American and Japanese Navy recruiting commercials. Well, the same video showed up today in an article on Foreign Policy that discusses recruiting commercials around the world. Its pretty hilarious, everyone should take a look at them. Personally, I'm torn between joining India's Summer Camp Army, using Transformers in the Singaporean Navy, or just joining the Ukrainian Army and picking up ones in a tank.