Posted on May 7, 2024 by Steven Hayward in Latin America

Will Argentina Save the West?

That’s not a headline I ever expected to write, even in satire. But the current experiment in Argentina, under the presidency of Javier Milei, is perhaps grounds for hope that at some point when things get so bad, voters return to their senses. (I’m looking at you, California and Minnesota.) He may not succeed, but the attempt is certainly inspiring.

Milei gave a speech a few days ago at the Milken Institute’s annual conference. Here are some of the best parts:

“The West is in danger. It is in danger because its leaders long ago moved away from the ideas of freedom. Ideas that made the West the most important civilizational achievement in the history of mankind. And instead of defending the ideas that generated the prosperity that everyone here enjoys, they listen to siren songs that lead inexorably to socialism, and consequently to poverty.

“In some sense, we Argentines are prophets of an apocalyptic future, which we have already lived. All those discussions of today, based on supposedly well thought out desires of wanting to help our fellow man, based on an erroneous idea about the nature and function of the State, sustained by economic theories that have been long refuted by data and empirical evidence, we Argentines lived them 100 years ago, and unfortunately applying those ideas have led us to ruin.

“Since the 19th century, and as a result of the industrial revolution, the GDP per capita not only increased but did so exponentially. In the last 150 years it multiplied by 15, generating an explosion of wealth that lifted 90 percent of the world’s population out of poverty, reaching the point that by the year 2020 only 5 percent of the global population lived in extreme poverty.

“Far from being the cause of our problems, free enterprise capitalism as an economic system is the best tool we as a species have known to end hunger, poverty, and extreme poverty across the globe.

“While the success of capitalism is easy to demonstrate, what is not so accessible to many is the counterfactual, where the systematic choice of a collectivist model leads. As I said before, perhaps the best example is the Argentinean example. Our entire history is a testimony of what can happen when the model of freedom is abandoned and replaced by collectivist experiments.

“Since 1949 the monetary base in the United States has multiplied 16 times, while in Argentina the figure multiplied the astronomical number of 25,000 trillions times. Yeah, it is a real number. I’m not making it up. I repeat it, the monetary base expanded 25,000 trillion times. That is the level of disaster that politicians can produce if they are allowed to deviate from the basic principles of the market economy.

“Those who lead the West have forgotten an elementary truth, and it is the moral responsibility of those of us who still remember it to defend and declaim it. And that inescapable truth is that economic freedom, in pursuit of individual interest, produces collective benefits, and therefore the entrepreneur who risks capital in pursuit of profit is a social benefactor.

“Those who lead the major nations and organizations in the West do not give enough credit to this idea and look at the economy from a theoretical framework that believes the market is imperfect, that it produces failures, and that it requires state intervention to perfect it. The problem with this conception is that it justifies interventions that bring more problems than benefits and undermine economic growth.

“The market, presupposing free competition and a system of free prices with clear signals, constitutes a mechanism for the extraction and transmission of information in which the greater the freedom the better is the performance. In other words, the free market is a process of discovery in which the capitalist finds, on the fly, the right course of action in a constant search for profit, and that translates into offering goods of better quality at the best prices.

“Those who insist with interventionism not only impede the virtuous functioning of the market, but on top of that they congratulate themselves and exchange medals of social responsibility in pompous ceremonies, while they end up promoting an agenda of values that opens the door little by little to socialism and consequently to misery.

“I do believe that the private sector has a very clear mandate of social responsibility, but it has nothing to do with being moralistic or guilty. The true social responsibility of the entrepreneur is a natural effect of the free functioning of his own economic activity. The mandate is to produce goods and services of better quality at the best price, linked to the maximization of profits. The social responsibility of the entrepreneur is to make money, and he can only do that by serving his fellow man with better quality goods at a better price.

“Entrepreneurs are social benefactors, far from the criticisms usually made of them by spendthrift and profligate politicians.

“Since free markets have existed we have crossed frontier after frontier. We have lifted the whole world out of poverty in 250 years. We have put men on the moon and now we are looking at Mars. And we have done it because of the ambition, creativity and optimism of men like you who partner with each other in pursuit of your happiness.

“We must not lose faith in that primal ambition that we humans have as our guide. We are a species of explorers, of creators, of inventors, not bureaucrats. And it is the adventurous entrepreneur, not the desk bureaucrat, the kind of man who embodies in the present this timeless quality of the human spirit.

“I look at Argentina with all the changes we are undertaking and I see that we are going in the opposite direction that the rest of the world, because while in the rest of the world the ideas of freedom are under siege, in Argentina there is a renewed faith in them.

“While the West turns towards control and imposition, Argentina turns towards trusting its citizens in the exercise of their freedom. While the West turns towards deficit, bureaucracy and the intrusive State, Argentina turns towards austerity, towards savings, and to retire the State from the economic activity. While the West turns towards economic shamanism and unsustainable formats of heterodoxy that endanger the future of all, Argentina returns to the path of reason, to the ideas of common sense.

“Our goal is to give back to the Argentines every peso we save, first by eliminating inflation and then, in the future, by reducing taxes as a consequence of economic growth. And we have as our north, to dismantle the tangle of regulations that Argentina has become, in order to free economic activity and unleash its productive force.

“For us, the only task of the State is to protect the life, liberty and property of Argentines, so that each one can be the architect of his own destiny. This is our vision. It is a vision similar to the one held by all the prosperous countries of the West in the great moments of their history. The task of the State is not to put invented money in people’s pockets, but to ensure the macroeconomic and legal conditions so that the private sector can develop on its own.

“I want to conclude these words by inviting everyone here, who are the heroes of the history of the progress of humanity… If you believe as I do in the superiority of free enterprise capitalism. If you believe as I do that the West is walking to a slow but sure retreat. If you believe as I do that merit, ambition, freedom and innovation and optimism are essential values of the human species that should be rewarded. I would like to invite you to bet on Argentina, to help me, you who are human progress personified, to make Argentina the new Rome of the 21st century.

“It is you who can prove to the bureaucrats of the world that they are destroying the West, that the ideas of freedom are the only way to achieve prosperity.

“Let us once again embrace the ideas of freedom with pride, let us be proud to be entrepreneurs, proud to be businessmen, because they are the true social benefactors, they are the ones who create wealth, they are the ones who have taken the world out of misery. To finish, I also ask you to accompany us, the Argentines, in this rebirth of the West.

I’m starting to think political figures with strange haircuts might be the way to go. (Except Boris Johnson. He came a cropper, despite his crazy hair.)

Posted on by John Hinderaker in China, Energy Policy, Green New Deal

What Energy Transition?

The press, and many politicians, constantly assure us that the world is in the midst of a transition from fossil fuels to “green” energy, which means wind turbines, solar panels, and mostly fictitious batteries. But is any such transition actually in progress? No. Robert Bryce has the numbers.

No such transition is taking place in the U.S.; on the contrary, last year natural gas-fired electricity generation increased 9.5 times as much as wind and solar combined:

But that’s nothing! The U.S. is rich enough to waste absurd amounts of money on pitifully inadequate wind and solar developments. Less developed countries can’t afford to be that stupid. Thus it is coal that contributes the most CO2 to the atmosphere. But when it comes to coal, the U.S. is irrelevant:

Worldwide, governments are spending absurd amounts of money to subsidize wind and solar, and that doesn’t even count the mandates that are the most insidious form of subsidy. Nevertheless, fossil fuel use is increasing 3.4 times as fast as “green” energy. Why? Because fossil fuels are vastly better: cheaper, more reliable, and far more energy-intensive:

Trillions of dollars can’t save expensive, unreliable and downright stupid methods of producing energy.

So, with all the hype about carbon dioxide destroying the planet–actually, it is necessary for virtually all life on Earth, but put that aside for a moment–and after governments spending trillions of dollars, ostensibly to promote a transition to “clean” energy, are carbon dioxide emissions actually declining?

Well, they have declined in the U.S. But that is irrelevant, as China produces most of the world’s CO2 emissions. Our reductions are immaterial:

As China’s population shrinks, most likely in half, and its economy implodes, India will largely take up the slack. But India has no intention of remaining poor by forgoing the world’s best source of energy, and therefore of wealth and societal well-being–fossil fuels. And other less-developed countries, like Indonesia and Vietnam, are building coal-fired power plants as fast as they can. While, at the same time, Africans want to modernize and have no intention of settling for expensive, occasional electricity via wind and solar. In that context, nothing we do makes any difference.

So if all this is true–and it is–where does the idea of a “green” energy transition come from? The answer is, from the American and international press. The transition concept is wholly imaginary, except in America’s news rooms. Check this out:

So the alleged energy transition is a creation of liberal reporters and editors, who deliberately mislead the rest of us, or else, equally possible, are so ignorant that they have fallen for propaganda from the “green” interests who hope to rip off–have already ripped off!–trillions of dollars in government money to enrich themselves, while impoverishing the rest of us.

Posted on by John Hinderaker in Energy Policy, Italy

Italy Goes Nuclear

It has been a very long time since anyone held up Italy as a model of a well-governed country. Not since Roman times, perhaps. But Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has Italy moving in a good direction. That applies to energy along with many other issues. Thus:

In a decisive shift from its past policies, Italy, under the leadership of Premier Giorgia Meloni and Environment and Energy Security Minister Gilberto Pichetto, is paving the way for the reintroduction of nuclear energy, with a focus on the latest in reactor technology: small, modular, and IV generation reactors. This move is not merely a policy change but a strategic recalibration aimed at bolstering national energy security and aligning Italy with modern, low-carbon energy technologies.

This trend is so obviously a good idea that it is hard to understand why more countries have not adopted it.

The backdrop to Italy’s renewed interest in nuclear energy is the stark reality of today’s geopolitical landscape, notably heightened by the energy uncertainties following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This scenario has laid bare the vulnerabilities in Europe’s energy supply, making the case for an energy diversification strategy that includes nuclear power compelling. Nuclear energy offers a stable, reliable source of power that can reduce dependence on external entities, the weather, and unpredictable global market shifts. The introduction of nuclear power thus represents a prudent step towards securing a stable energy future for Italy.

All of that is true. I don’t think Italy has much in the way of hydrocarbons, so it has a choice between putting its economy in the hands of foreign energy sources, or going nuclear. There are exciting developments in nuclear technology:

Central to Italy’s nuclear strategy is the adoption of small modular reactors (SMRs). Unlike traditional nuclear reactors, SMRs offer a range of benefits that align well with Italy’s strategic and environmental goals. These reactors are designed to be built faster due to their modular nature, which allows for construction in controlled factory settings and assembly onsite, leading to reduced construction times and potentially lower costs. Additionally, SMRs are considered safer due to their smaller size and innovative safety features, reducing the risk of large-scale nuclear accidents.

Italy shuttered its nuclear power plants in 1990, largely as a result of the Chernobyl disaster. But now, nuclear is back. Watch for many countries to follow the lead of Italy and, of course, France, which gets two-thirds of its electricity from nuclear reactors.

Posted on by Steven Hayward in 2024 Election, Biden Foreign Policy

Biden’s Two-State Solution

For a while now the joke has been going around that Biden’s two-state solution for the Israel-Hamas conflict involves the two states of Michigan and Pennsylvania. The more time passes, the more this seems not a joke at all. Biden is apparently terrified not only of the campus left, but that he could lose Michigan’s substantial Arab voting block, and hence the election, if he doesn’t placate them.

Here’s a riddle for the media (which means no one in the media will take it up): Biden has blocked delivery of precision JDAM munitions for Israel in an attempt to forestall the necessary attack on Rafah. I think Israel should say, “Fine, we’ll use imprecise munitions, then.” But never mind. I believe this munitions shipment was authorized by the recent congressional funding act for Israel and Ukraine. Didn’t President Trump get impeached for holding up a congressionally approved arms shipment to Ukraine? Shouldn’t Biden be held to the same standard?

Maybe there is some language in the legislation granting discretion to the president about the timing or conditions of arms shipments, or perhaps Biden’s decision can be justified under general executive powers (under the doctrine of the famous Curtiss-Wright case, perhaps). But even so this is yet another example of the mendacious double-standard at work in our politics today.

Posted on by Steven Hayward in The Daily Chart

The Daily Chart: Time to Unskew Elite Colleges?

Further to the argument made last week that college admissions offices should be fired wholesale because they bear responsibility for admitted so many deranged students, note what appears to be evidence that elite college admissions actively favor composing their classes of leftists. And then act surprised when they sack buildings and grandstand at commencement ceremonies. From Nate Silver:

Chaser—You can include elite graduate fellowships, too:

 

Posted on by Lloyd Billingsley in Immigration, Joe Biden

Xenojoebic

You know, one of the reasons why our economy is growing is because of you and many others. Why? Because we welcome immigrants. We look to – the reason – look, think about it – why is China stalling so badly economically? Why is Japan having trouble? Why is Russia? Why is India? Because they’re xenophobic. They don’t want immigrants.

That was Joe Biden at a May 1 fundraiser. White House mouthpiece Karine Jean-Pierre claimed Biden was saying that “we are a nation of immigrants,” and only making a “broad comment” about Japan and India. As the American allies doubtless noted, Biden has not made a similar criticism of Iran, a major adversary and not exactly a magnet for immigrants.

Biden may have been imitating Hillary Clinton, but as Paul Johnson noted in Modern Times, the “phobia” charge goes back to Freud, the first to charge that those who disagreed with him were somehow mentally deficient. Just so Biden knows, there is nothing wrong with any nation that does not want to accept millions of foreign nationals with no criminal background checks, health safeguards, job prospects or language skills. On the other hand, there’s a lot that’s wrong with Joe Biden.

Even hagiographical hooey like Mark Bowden’s 2010 Atlantic profile outed the Delaware Democrat as an semi-literate ignoramus. As his latest episode confirms, Biden still has trouble distinguishing allies from adversaries. Conrad Black called him a waxworks effigy of a president but the Delaware Democrat acts more like a national undertaker.

Posted on by Scott Johnson in Biden Foreign Policy, Hamas, Israel

Reading the readout

President Biden is confused. Israel appears to have commenced its long-delayed operation to take Hamas’s refuge in Rafah. John noted it here yesterday. With its “ceasefire deal” card Hamas plays the press for willing tools — because they are. They can’t be that stupid.

Biden spoke yesterday with Prime Minister Netanyahu by telephone. The White House has posted its readout of the phone call here. After an exchange of pleasantries, Biden supposedly provided an “update on efforts to secure a hostage deal[.]” Barak Ravid reports on the Israelis’ frustration with Biden on this point here at Axios.

Hamas is apparently discussing the release of 33 hostages in exchange for which Israel is to empty its prisons of terrorist murderers. I’m quite sure Biden did not advise Netanyahu how many of the 33 hostages are alive because Hamas won’t say.

Biden is confused by the report that the IDF has commenced an operation to take out Hamas in Rafah. The readout concisely concludes: “The President reiterated his clear position on Rafah.” In other words, Biden said “Don’t.”

The Times of Israel has more on the call here. As I say, the readout leaves off there. It provides no hint of Netanyahu’s response. We can only infer it from the IDF operation. For his part, Biden will do his best to assure the survival of Hamas. He does not want to offend the friends of Hamas in Michigan and elsewhere in the United States.