Market Correction

7 July 2006

The Editor, New York Times
229 West 43rd St.
New York, NY 10036

To the Editor:

Prompted by a blackout at her home in rural Vermont to step away from her computer and notice the star-filled sky, Cynthia Emerlye hopes "we will all wake up someday, break these electronic bonds and walk into the waiting embrace of Mother Nature" (Letters, July 7).

News flash: without the electronic and commercial bonds that Ms. Emerlye wants us to "break," her belly and mind would likely have been too empty, and her dwelling and body too filthy, for her to appreciate starlight. Without modernity, Mother Nature's arms offer us not an "embrace," but a death grip.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University

5 July 2006

Editor, The New Orleans Times-Picayune

Dear Editor:

Bob Herbert quotes Hillary Clinton's remark that "a full time job that pays the minimum wage just doesn't provide enough money to support a family today" ("Working for a pittance," July 5).

Sad but true. But it's more sad that being unemployed at the minimum wage provides even less money to support a family.

While there is debate among researchers on the question of whether or not higher a minimum wage puts low-skilled workers out of jobs, for Bob Herbert blithely to assume that raising the minimum wage has no downside for low-skilled workers is careless. For Sen. Clinton to do so is predictably scandalous.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University

2 July 2006

Editor, The Washington Times

Dear Editor:

Alan Tonelson and Peter Kim illogically argue that, because manufacturing industries led U.S. economic growth in the past, the relative decline in U.S. manufacturing in recent years is an ill economic tiding for Americans ("Manufacturing squeeze," July 2).

Would Tonelson and Kim argue also that, because railroads led the growth of the transportation sector 125 years ago, the decline of railroads in recent decades means that our transportation prospects are endangered? Of course not. Americans are increasingly among the world's best service providers -- researchers, insurers, software designers; the list is long and growing. Our economy in general is no more threatened by increased specialization in services and consequent ability to import more manufactured goods than our transportation sector is threatened by our growing reliance upon air transportation.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University

29 June 2006

Editor, The Wall Street Journal
200 Liberty Street
New York, NY 10281

Dear Editor:

U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab correctly argues that governments that lower trade barriers and reduce subsidies make their citizens wealthier ("More Trade, Less Poverty," June 29). But then she (apparently proudly) announces that Uncle Sam will not make further moves along these lines until other countries do so.

What gives? Why does our government knowingly dampen the growth of American prosperity just because other governments are equally inconsiderate of their citizens?

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University

28 June 2006

Editor, The New York Post

Dear Editor:

You predict that Warren Buffett "will be remembered as an exemplary humanitarian" ("Buffett's Death-Tax Avoidance," June 28). Right.

But Mr. Buffett's greatest contribution to humanity will never be his philanthropy, however effective it is. His supreme contribution is his investment prowess - his skill and hard-work at directing capital to fruitful uses.

Although derided by many, such prowess is essential to keep ordinary workers productive and well-paid.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University