Dan Mitchell on Sweden and the welfare state. Take home message – get rich first.
Sweden became rich when government was small. Indeed, until about 1960, the burden of the public sector in Sweden was smaller than it was in the United States.
Sweden compensates for bad fiscal policy by having a very pro-market approach to other areas, such as trade policy, regulatory policy, monetary policy, and rule of law and property rights. Sweden has suffered from slower growth ever since the welfare state led to large increases in the burden of government spending.
Sweden is trying to undo the damage of big government with pro-market reforms.
Another climate science scandal. This time Lord Stern and his funding.
Check out The Spectator. And the Mannkal Economic Education Foundation, The Institute for Public Affairs IPA. The Centre for Independent Studies. The Sydney Institute. And Mark Steyn. And Jo Nova.
For climate science nerds. Everything you wanted to know about the interglacial warm periods but were afraid to ask.
When the village boy cried wolf, he was proposing an alternative hypothesis to the villagers. The null hypothesis was that there was no wolf. When the villagers accepted the boy’s hypothesis with a sample size of one and not enough evidence, they committed a type I error, a false positive. Given the risk of committing such an error with climate change, it is important to study the climate of the past.
Since there is only one reality and unlimited hypotheses to explain it, whenever confronted with a new claim, it is reasonable to think that the null hypothesis is it is not true. Adopting that reasonable position means being skeptical by default. That doesn’t make one very popular in the village, but makes one right most of the time.
The changing norms of science.