Just for the Record

What are the real Costs of Privatization of Public Works?–Felix Salmon tries to present a cogent Overview of the Process. I live in a City where they have argued for so many decades as to the exact location of a second Viaduct over the Rail system, that We are soon to be left with not one; the current Viaduct must be closed for structural Maintenance. It is doubtful that Privatization will help. Most mainline Routes in this Country need to be widened, yet Business and Housing were originally constructed too close to the Routes for any Widening process. Privatization will only allow greater obstruction to any expansion program, sending all Participants to the Court system, whereas today it rests in chaotic Town Hall meetings; never support any Proposals backed by Lawyers!

James Joyner provides an interesting Post about the current level of economic expansions–most notably, a comparison between the Carter Era and the George W. Bush Period. The Carter administration was only half the length of the Bush administrations, and the economic conditions operating on the Carter economy were all generated prior to the actual administration. There is much debate whether George W. inherited the benefits and injuries prior to his reign, or it was relatively churned by the bad Air of his own Terms. My own evaluation would suggest that Bush was as responsible as any President can be held for the debacles, allowing Spendthrift practices throughout the Government from his first Inauguration (Government Contracts immediately allowed Profits-taking by Suppliers, about a 7% Shift from Social Welfare spending to Spending to provide high Corporate Profits, etc.). The Result may have been a Resource-drained Government without the ability to administer sound economic policy (notice I have not even commented on the potential idiocy of the Bush Tax Cuts).

It amuses Me that Economics excuse multiple Sins with the innocent appearance of an Angel. Robert Carroll presents an excellent Case in Point. The 2001 and 2003 Tax Cuts led to increased reportage of Income, to the level that maybe 25-40% of expected revenue loss was replaced. What is not said states that the Marginal Profit of Tax Evasion reduced in magnitude, while the Marginal Cost of Tax Evasion remained static. Great Groups of Tax Evaders considered the potential Risk of Imprisonment was unacceptable, due to the low Return coming from such Evasive practice. It is interesting to note that the Bush administration has been dismantling the IRS system to capture Tax Evaders through Budget reductions and Layoffs of trained Personnel; the Intent being obvious to allow much lower Marginal Costs to Tax Evasion in the future. I expect the current Leadership is shaken to their Souls that Successors could actually introduce adequate Tax rates. Don’t you just love the Democratic process? lgl