"Republicans' No-Tax Stand Unsupported By History or Facts" is the headline on a Bloomberg News editorial. Says the editorial, "As always, the Republican leaders justified their intransigence by invoking the demons of job-killing taxes that would suppress the dynamism of overtaxed Americans, hampering growth. This is partisan nonsense." The editorial calls "dubious" the claim that raising taxes in a downturn hinders growth. It insists "revenue increases are required" and helpfully adds, "A large majority of voters would like to see the wealthiest 1 percent raise their hands first."

With the governor of Texas, Rick Perry, apparently preparing to enter the contest for the Republican presidential nomination, this short piece by Joseph Nixon, a lawyer and former Texas state representative, on the Teaxs policies that have grown jobs there is worth a look: "Right-to-work laws, low taxes and fair courts."

Mickey Kaus links to the federal government's hiring Web site and comments:

When the New York Times reported on financial troubles at the Mark Twain House museum in Hartford, Conn. back in June 2008, the newspaper attributed the problem in part to state politicians who were unwilling to spend enough. From the article:

the state contributes about $60,000 a year toward operating expenses, a fraction of the museum's current $2.9 million budget. In February, legislative leaders said they favored awarding an extra $230,000 to help the museum bridge a $370,000 shortfall that it foresees for the year ending next Jan. 31.

But the state's governor, M. Jodi Rell, a Republican, and the Democratically controlled legislature then adopted what was widely called a "do-nothing" budget that left the previous year's decisions frozen.

"That was a huge blow," said Duby McDowell, a board member at the museum.

As a result, the museum and other needy organizations are now fending for themselves, Ms. McDowell said

Harvard, which as a non-profit doesn't pay taxes at the corporate level and in fact is a huge beneficiary of government spending via research grants and contracts, subsidized student loans, and Pell Grants, is emerging as a hotbed of anti-Tea Party, pro-tax-increase sentiment. Here's Harvard economics professor Kenneth Rogoff, in an interview with Spiegel:

I just cannot understand how President Obama made so many concessions in the latest negotiations over the debt ceiling. He was holding all the cards and he was still stared down by the Tea Party. He should have said: "I do not negotiate with terrorists. If you want to bring down financial markets, it will be on your head. I am going to behave normally and responsibly." Instead, he got gamed into making giant concessions...

Here's Harvard Law professor Mark Roe, in a column posted by Project Syndicate:

Anyone who wants to blame the Tea Party or Republican opposition to tax increases and support for spending cuts for the stock market decline should have a look at Europe. There's no Tea Party there and the markets were down even more. Britain, with the riots, is in worse shape than we are. So is Greece.

Bloomberg News manages to write an entire editorial calling for more American concessions to Castro's regime in Communist Cuba without a single mention of Cuba's American hostage, Alan Gross.

The Bloomberg editorial spins a strange theory of the downfall of the Soviet Union:

The U.S. should have learned long ago that cutting trade links and stopping contact between Americans and Cubans haven't worked to undermine communist rule.

My latest weekly column is up at Reason.com, pointing out that war casualties under Obama are outpacing those in George W. Bush's first term. Check it out.

The death of Hugh Carey, the Democrat who served as governor of New York between 1975 and 1983, had me looking for this New York Sun editorial, "Catching Up With Carey," which is short but gives as good a flavor of Carey as any of the longer obituaries.

The New Yorker magazine out today has pieces by two different writers that display a similar attitude.

The first runs under the headline "Why Wall Street Should Fear the Tea Party." It includes the sentence, "the austerity advocates will also be emboldened in their attacks on the Federal Reserve, which they argue has been overly loose in its monetary policy (when in fact it's been too tight)."

'Don't Gut the S.E.C." is the headline over Arthur Levitt Jr.'s op-ed in the New York Times accusing Congressional Republicans of "efforts to eviscerate the Securities and Exchange Commission by underfunding and micromanaging it."

Just what is the evidence of this "underfunding" of the SEC? Mr. Levitt complains, "For 2012, the S.E.C asked for an increase of $222 million in its budget; it is slated to receive no increase at all."

What's not mentioned in Mr. Levitt's op-ed is what the New York Times news department reported earlier this year:

by several measures, the S.E.C. is far from starved for money. Its $1.1 billion budget in 2010 was 15 percent higher than the $960 million it received the year before — and nearly triple its $377 million budget in 2000.

The Bergen County New Jersey Record has an article about a town attorney in North Bergen, N.J., who "enjoys a 30-hour workweek, eight weeks of paid time off each year, and the promise of a six-figure pension — all courtesy of North Bergen taxpayers." The article goes on:

Herbert Klitzner's $214,106 municipal salary and benefits are unrivaled by attorneys who lead legal departments in the state's biggest cities. He even outearns the state's attorney general.

But Klitzner's salary covers only a portion of North Bergen's legal expenses. Klitzner outsources some $600,000 in additional legal work each year much of that to a firm that pays him for part-time private legal work and provides him with an office.

More:

Paul Caron's Tax Prof blog notices a new paper by libertarian law professor Richard Epstein and M. Todd Henderson headlined "Do Accounting Rules Matter? The Dangerous Allure of Mark to Market." The paper says not to cite it or circulate it without permission, but Tax Prof has posted the abstract, which I am going to go ahead and circulate here:

If Governor Christie of New Jersey or Governor Cuomo of New York hope to be elected president or vice president, or be re-elected governor, on the basis of balancing their state budgets without raising taxes, they will want to do whatever they can to squash the proposal from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey — which they control — to raise tolls to $17 from $8 for the Port Authority's bridges and tunnels.

From a reader reacting to yesterday's post on Medicare:

I'm afraid you have missed the boat re Medicare.

Problem is:

1. Politicians have made a promise to the elderly that cannot be fulfilled, mainly "You are entitled to obtain care anywhere in the US, provided by any MD (or licensed provider, including chiropractors, optometrists, podiatrists, etc) with no real limit to the volume or type (and 'necessity') of service provided." Politicians are finally starting to say that this is a promise that cannot be continued.

2. There is no "alignment" between hospitals, MDs and insurers about Medicare goals and operations. They play "win-lose" and fight over who gets paid for services and procedures performed. The more hospitals get paid, the less remains for MDs and vice versa. Without alignment, there is no force for cost containment. Patients are "oblivious to cost" since they are coming from the realm of "entitlement"---"I have my Medicare card & the government will pay for it all."