Catallaxy Files

A report in today’s Australian states that the Government received advice that four illegal immigrants on board the Oceanic Viking were a threat to Australia’s national security before their removal to Christmas Island.

Recall that the Prime Minister slammed Wilson Tuckey for saying that there could be terrorists on board on 22 October

Interview 22 October 2009:

PM: I’ve seen some comments from Mr Tuckey this morning. The first point I’d make is that in Australia, for a long, long time, we have applied health checks and security checks to asylum seekers wherever they come from around the world. And these are prudent approaches, it’s the right approach, to ensure that folk who come to our country have met basic physical standards, but also met basic security standards as well. And this has been the case for a long, long time and it is the case today as well.

But when I look at these remarks today, they are of an entirely different character. You know, since World War II we’ve had nearly three quarters of a million refugees make their home in Australia. We’ve had about 150,000 come to make their home in Australia in the period of the Howard Government, 15,000 or so arrived by boat in the period of the Howard Government.

So what is Mr Tuckey actually saying about all those people? I think these are deeply divisive, disgusting remarks and they do not belong in any mainstream Australian political party. I think Mr Turnbull should show some leadership, and withdraw his support for Mr Tuckey’s preselection as a Liberal candidate for the next election.

JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, are you confident that there are no terrorists onboard these boats that are coming to Australia?

PM: Can I say that, throughout the period that I’ve been Prime Minister, and I’m sure the case before as well, when it comes to asylum seekers, whether by boat or by other means, necessary security checks are made to ensure that people pass security muster. That’s what they’re there for. Always have been, and will be into the future. Therefore, that’s the way in which you handle these things.
But to go out there and to smear asylum seekers in the way in which Mr Tuckey has done, I say again, is divisive, I think is disgusting, and I don’t believe belongs in a mainstream political party today.

http://www.wilsontuckey.com.au/news/pdf/Asylum%20Seekers%20-%20Hon%20Wilson%20Tuckey.pdf

Did the Government risk/compromise our national security for political convenience? Should Chris Evans resign as Immigration Minister for allowing these four to enter Australia in full knowledge that they were a national security risk?

(HT. Carpe Diem)

Paul Krugman is touting social democracy.

The real lesson from Europe is actually the opposite of what conservatives claim: Europe is an economic success, and that success shows that social democracy works.

Actually, Europe’s economic success should be obvious even without statistics. For those Americans who have visited Paris: did it look poor and backward? What about Frankfurt or London? You should always bear in mind that when the question is which to believe — official economic statistics or your own lying eyes — the eyes have it.

In any case, the statistics confirm what the eyes see.

Okay. That is fair enough – the Europeans (those ones anyway) are not living in abject poverty, but nobody intelligent has ever suggested that they do. So Krugman puts up a bit of a strawman; although he does slip up a bit.

Sacramento is now the Athens of America — in a bad way.

His bottom line is this.

After all, while reports of Europe’s economic demise are greatly exaggerated, reports of its high taxes and generous benefits aren’t. Taxes in major European nations range from 36 to 44 percent of G.D.P., compared with 28 in the United States. Universal health care is, well, universal. Social expenditure is vastly higher than it is here.

So if there were anything to the economic assumptions that dominate U.S. public discussion — above all, the belief that even modestly higher taxes on the rich and benefits for the less well off would drastically undermine incentives to work, invest and innovate — Europe would be the stagnant, decaying economy of legend. But it isn’t.

Europe is often held up as a cautionary tale, a demonstration that if you try to make the economy less brutal, to take better care of your fellow citizens when they’re down on their luck, you end up killing economic progress. But what European experience actually demonstrates is the opposite: social justice and progress can go hand in hand.

He is trying to pull the ‘there is no difference between 28 and 36 to 44 percent’ stunt on taxes. Krugman is very good at math, so make of that what you will.

Tylet Cowen has a whole long story about what the look for and think about. Greg Mankiw just cuts to the chase.

Here is GDP per capita, adjusted for differences in price levels (PPP), from the IMF, for the United States and the five most populous countries in Western Europe:

United States 47,440
United Kingdom 36,358
Germany 35,539
France 34,205
Italy 30,631
Spain 30,589

Readers of today’s column by Paul Krugman might find these figures useful to keep in mind.

Mankiw 1, Krugman 0.

The Rathouse is a website which replaced an older Fortune City site because this became loaded with pop-ups (the downside of a free site), also the Webmistress was unhappy with the limited range of fonts and other things that artists like to play with.

The Rathouse launched in September 2002, not long after the Popper Centenial Conference in Vienna. The site is named after the Rathaus, the Great Hall of Vienna.

After practicing with the Rathouse The Webmistress set  up a  site of her own to display her artworks and illustrations.

The core of the site consisted of articles about Karl Popper, Bill Bartley and F A Hayek which were printed in the long-defunct  Melbourne Age Monthly Review. This was a bold adventure into high journalism, possibly inspired by the late Robert Haupt. The Review took long articles on more or less intellectual topics. The dominant tone was leftwing and  postmodern. Cynics called it The Mogadon and some suggested it was more for the writers than for the readers. In the event there were not enough readers and it was dumped.

But the damage was done. The first piece which I submitted appeared under the heading The Purpose of Popper and the editor advised that this aroused more positive feedback from readers than any other piece to date. This suggested that it is not a compete waste of time to keep the ideas of critical rationalism alive for the benefit of a lay audience.

Read the rest of this entry »