July 2008 – Page 3 – artdiamondblog.com

Economists’ Statement on McCain Economic Plan (that I Signed)

I agreed to have my name added to the “Economist’s Statement” below, which was released to the press on Mon., July 7th. My general view is that free markets encourage morality, free choice, efficiency, and innovation; and that John McCain is much more likely to adopt free market policies than is Barack Obama.

Economists’ Statement:
We enthusiastically support John McCain’s economic plan. It is a comprehensive, pro-growth, reform agenda. The reform focuses on the real economic problems Americans face today and will face in the future. And it builds on the core economic principles that have made America great.
His plan would control government spending by vetoing every bill with earmarks, implementing a constitutionally valid line-item veto, pausing non-military discretionary government spending programs for one year to stop their explosive growth and place accountability on federal government agencies.
His plan would keep taxes from rising, because higher tax rates are exactly the wrong policy to restore economic growth, especially at this time.
His plan would reduce tax rates by cutting the tax that corporations pay to 25 percent in line with other countries, by completely phasing out the alternative minimum tax, by increasing the exemption for dependents, by permitting the first-year expensing of new equipment and technology, and by making permanent a reformed tax credit for R&D.
His plan would also create a new and much simpler tax system and give Americans a free choice of whether to pay taxes under that simple system or the current complex and burdensome income tax.
His plan would open new markets for American goods and services and thereby create additional jobs for Americans by supporting good free trade agreements, such as the one with Colombia, and working with leaders around the world to avoid isolationism and protectionism. His plan would also reform education, retraining, and other assistance programs so they better help those displaced by trade and other changes in the economy. His plan addresses problems in the financial markets and housing markets by calling for increased transparency and accountability, by targeted assistance to deserving homeowners to refinance their mortgages, and by opposing so-called reform plans which would raise the costs of home-ownership in the future.
The above actions, as well as plans to address entitlement programs — especially Social Security, Medicare and other government health care programs — and his regulatory reforms — especially in the area of health care — constitute a broad and powerful economic agenda. Because of John McCain’s experience working with the American people in all walks of life, with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, and with leaders around the world, we are optimistic that these plans will become a reality and will create jobs and restore confidence and strong economic growth.

Economists Who Have Signed The Statement:
Burton Abrams, University of Delaware
James D. Adams, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Douglas K. Adie, Ohio University
Richard Agnello, University of Delaware
William Albrecht, University of Iowa
Constantine Alexandrakis, University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth
William Alpert, University of Connecticut
Wayne Angell, Former Fed Governor
Fernando E. Alvarez, University of Chicago
Geoffrey T. Andron, Austin Community College
George R. Averitt, Purdue University North Central
Charles Baird, California State University, East Bay
Howard Beales, George W ashington University
Stacie E. Beck, University of Delaware
Gary Becker, University of Chicago
Donald Bellante, University of South Florida
Daniel K. Benjamin, Clemson University
John J. Bethune, Barton CollegeSanjai Bhagat, University of Colorado
Andrew G. Biggs, American Enterprise Institute
Robert G. Bise, Orange Coast College
Michael K. Block, University of Arizona
Donald Booth, Chapman University
Karl J. Borden, University of Nebraska
Michael Bordo, Rutgers University
George H. Borts, Brown University
Mich ael Boskin, Stanford University
Daniel P. Brandt III, Washington, D.C.
Ike Brannon, Department of the Treasury
David P. Brown, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Jeff Brown, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Joseph Brusuelas, Merk Investments
Phillip J. Bryson, Brigham Young University
Andrzej Brzeski, University of California, Davis
James Buchanan, George Mason University
Todd Buchholz, Two Oceans Management
Richard Burdekin, Claremont McKenna College
Richard V. Burkhauser, Cornell University
James B. Burnham, Duquesne University
Andr ew B. Busch, BMO Capital Markets
James L. Butkiewicz, University of Delaware
Mark Calabria, United States Senate
James Carter, Vienna, VA
Don Chance, Louisiana State University
Barry R. Chiswick, University of Illinois at Chicago
Bhagwan Chowdhry, UCLA
Richard Clarida, Columbia University
Candice Clark, Economic consultant
Kenneth W. Clarkson, University of Miami
Warren Coats, IMF, retired
John Cogan, Hoover Institution
Boyd D. Collier, Tarleton State University
Michael Connolly, University of Miami
Kathleen B. Cooper, Southern Methodist University
Joshua Coval, Harvard University
Ted Covey, McLean, Virginia
Nicole Crain, Lafayette College
W. Mark Crain, Lafayette College
Dan Crippen, Former CBO Director
Thomas D. Crocker, University of Wyoming
Robert L. Crouch, University of California, Santa Barbara
Mario J. Crucini, Vanderbilt University
Ward S. Curran, Trinity College
Coldwell Daniel III, The University of Memphis
Antony Davies, Duquesne University
Steven Davis, University of Chicago
Clarence R. Deitsch, Ball State University
Richard DeKaser, National City Corporation
Stephen J. Dempsey, University of Vermont
Christopher DeMuth, American Enterprise Institute
David B.H. Denoon, New York University
William G. Dewald, Ohio State University
Arthur M. Diamond Jr., University of Nebraska at Omaha
John Diamond, Rice University
David L. Dickinson, Appalachian State University
Francis X. Diebold, University of Pennsylvania
Jeffrey H. Dorfman, University of Georgia
Thomas J. Duesterberg, Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI
Parnell Duverger, Broward Community College
Isaac Ehrlich, SUNY at Buffalo
Martin Eichenbaum, Northwestern University
Jeffrey A. Eisenach, Criterion Economics
Michael A. Ellis, Kent State University
Joachim G. Elterich, University of Delaware
Kenneth Elzinga, University of Virginia
Stephen J. Entin, Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation
T.W. Epps, University of Virginia
Michael G. Erickson, The College of Idaho
Paul Evans, Ohio State University
Dino Falaschetti, Hoover Institution
Frank Falero Jr., California State University
Susan K. Feigenbaum, University of Missouri, St. Louis
Martin Feldstei n, Harvard University
Eric Fisher, California Polytechnic State University
Arthur A “Trey” Fleisher III, Metro State College of Denver
James Forcier, University of San Francisco
William F. Ford, Middle Tenn. State U.
Michele Fratianni, Indiana University
Luke Froeb, Vanderbilt University
Kenneth C. Froewiss, NYU Stern School of Business
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Hudson Institute
Timothy S. Fuerst, Bowling Green State University
Lowell Gallaway, Ohio University
B Delworth Gardner, Brigham Young University
Dave Garthoff, The University of Akron
Ilhan K. Geckil, Anderson Economic Group
Rick Geddes, Cornell University
Joseph A. Giacalone, St. John’s University
Adam Gifford, California State University, Northridge
David Gillette, Truman State University
Micha Gisser, University of New Mexico
Amy Jocelyn Glass, Texas A&M University
Charles J. Goetz, The University of Virginia
Claudio Gonzalez-Vega, The Ohio State University
Lawrence Goodman, Bergen City, NJ
Barry K. Goodwin, North Carolina State University
Eric S. Graber, Independent Economist
Douglas H. Graham, The Ohio State University
J. Edward Graham, University of North Carolina Wilmington
Phil Gramm, Former U.S. Senator
Teresa Beckham Gramm, Rhodes College
Wendy Lee Gramm
William B. Green, Sam Houston State University
Kenneth Greene, Binghamton University
Paul Gregory, University of Houston
Earl Grinols, Baylor University
Gary Hansen, UCLA
Eric Hanushek, Hoover Institution
Stephen Happel, Arizona State University
James E. Hartley, Mount Holyoke College
Kevin Hassett, American Enterprise Institute
Joel W. Hay, University of Southern California
Jared E. Hazleton, Texecon: A Texas Economic Consulting Firm
Charles E. Hegji, Auburn University Montgomery
Robert H. Heidt, Indiana University School of Law
Harold M. Hochman, CUNY Graduate Center and Lafayette College
Robert J. Hodrick, Columbia Business School
Stuart G. Hoffman, The PNC Financial Services Group
Arlene Holen, Washington, D.C.
Mac R. Holmes, Troy University
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, John McCain 2008
C. Thomas Howard, University of Denver
E. Philip Howrey, University of Michigan
Glenn Hubbard, Columbia University
James L. Huffman, Lewis & Clark Law School
J. Christopher Hughen, University of Denver
E. Kingdon Hurlock, Calvert Investment Counsel
Stephen L. Jackstadt, University of Alaska, Anchorage
Joseph M. Jadlow, Oklahoma State University
Sherry L Jarrell, Wake Forest University
Michael C. Jensen, Harvard Business School
Dennis A. Johnson, University of South Dakota
Shane A. Johnson, Texas A&M University
Richard Just, University of Maryland
Tim Kane, Washington, D.C.
Steven Kaplan, University of Chicago Graduate School of Business
Alexander Katkov, Johnson and Wales University
Melissa Kearney, University of Maryland
Joe Kennedy, Arlington, Virginia
Lawrence W. Kenny, University of Florida
Calvin A. Kent, Marshall University
E. Han Kim, University of Michigan
Robert G. King, Boston University
Paul R. Koch, Olivet Nazarene University
Meir Kohn, Dartmouth College
James W. Kolari, Texas A&M University
Roger C. Kormendi, Kormendi/Gardner Partners
Marvin Kosters, American Enterprise Institute
Robert Krol, California State University, Northridge
Anne Krueger, Johns Hopkins University
Deepak Lal, University of Cal ifornia, Los Angeles
Douglas Lamdin, The University of Maryland, Baltimore County
Daniel L Landau, University of Connecticut
Richard La Near, Missouri Southern State University
Nicholas A. Lash, Loyola University
Don R. Leet, California State University, Fresno
Norman B. Lefton, Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville
Tom Lehman, Indiana Wesleyan University
Thomas M. Lenard, Technology Policy Institute
Noreen E. Lephardt, Marquette University
Adam Lerrick, Carnegie Mellon University and the American Enterprise Institute
Philip I. Levy, American Enterprise Institute
W. Cris Lewis, Utah State University
Andrew Light, Liberty University
Jane Lillydahl, University of Colorado at Boulder
Zheng Liu, Emory University
Luis Locay, University of Miami
John R. Lott Jr., University of Maryland
Lawrence W. Lovik, Alabama Policy Institute
Robert Lucas, University of Chicago
John Lunn, Hope College
R. Ashley Lyman, University of Idaho
Paul W. MacAvoy, Yale School of Management
Glenn MacDonald, Washington University in St. Louis
John Makin, American Enterprise Institute
Burton Malkiel, Princeton University
David Malpass, Encima Global LLC
Michael Marlow, California Polytechnic State University
Donald J. Marshall, Consulting Engineer and Economist
Aparna Mathur, American Enterprise Institute
Timothy Matthews, Kennesaw State University
John Matsusaka, University of Southern California
Bennett McCallum, Carnegie Mellon University
Paul W. McCracken, University of Michigan
Martin C. McGuire, University of California-Irvine
W. Douglas McMillin, Louisiana State University
Roger Meiners, University of Texas – Arlington
Will Melick, Kenyon College
Allan Meltzer, Ca rnegie Mellon University
John Merrifield, University of Texas at San Antonio
Paul Merski, Independent Community Bankers of America
Jim Mietus, Great Falls, VA
Todd Milbourn, Washington University in St. Louis
Geoffrey P. Miller, New York University Law School
James Miller, George Mason University and The Hoover Institution
William C. Miller, Pioneer Analytics LLC
David E. Mills, University of Virginia
Velma Montoya, National Council of Hispanic Women
Michael Moore, George Washington University
Charles Britt Moss, University of Florida
Robert Mundell, Columbia University
Tim Muris, George Mason University
David B. Mustard, University of Georgia
Richard F. Muth, Emory University
Anthony N. Negbenebor, Gardner-Webb University
Charles Nelson, University of Washington
Robert J. Newman, Louisiana State University
Michael P. Niemira, International Council of Shopping Centers
Tom O’Brien, University of Connecticut
Lee E. Ohanian, UCLA
June O’Neill, Baruch College, CUNY
Steve Parente, University of Minnesota
Randall Parker, East Carolina University
Douglas Patterson, Virginia Tech
Tim Perri, Appalachian State University
Mark J. Perry, University of Michigan-Flint
Tomas Philipson, University of Chicago
William Poole, University of Delaware
Michael E. Porter, Harvard Business School
Barry Poulson, University of Colorado Boulder
James Prieger, Pepperdine University
R. David Ranson, H. C. Wainwrigth & Co. Economics Inc.
Richard Rawlins, Missouri Southern State University
Martin A. Regalia, Gaithersburg, Maryland
Barrie Richardson, Centenary College
Christine P. Ries, Georgia Institute of Technology
Aldona Robbins, Fiscal Associates
Gary Robbins, Fiscal Associates
Kenneth Rogoff, Harvard University
Richard Roll, UCLA
Harvey Rosen, Princeton University
Larry L. Ross, University of Alaska, Anchorage
Robert Rossana, Wayne State University
Timothy P. Roth, The University of Texas at El Paso
Charles Rowley, George Mason University
Paul H. Rubin, Emory University
Roy Ruffin, University of Houston
Gary J. Santoni, Ball State University
T.R. Saving, Texas A&M University
Mike Schuyler, Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation
Anna Schwartz, National B ureau of Economic Research
Loren C. Scott, Louisiana State University
Robert Haney Scott, California State University, Chico
Carlos Seiglie, Rutgers University
Richard Selden, University of Virginia
John Semmens, Laissez Faire Institute
Sol S. Shalit, University of Wisconsin
Alan Shapiro, University of Southern California
Judy Shelton
William F. Shughart II, The University of Mississippi
George Shultz, Hoover Institution
Jerome Siebert, University of California, Berkeley
John Silvia, Wachovia
Chuck Skipton, University of Tampa
Scott B. Smart, Indiana University
Amy Smith, Former OMB Chief Economist
James F. Smith, The University of North Carolina
Vernon Smith, Chapman University
Sean M. Snaith, University of Central Florida
Douglas Southgate, Ohio State University
Frank Spreng, McKendree University
Beryl W. Sprinkel, Retired
Stan Spurlock, Mississippi State University
George J. Staller, Cornell University
Craig A. Stephenson, Babson College
Houston Stokes, University of Illinois at Chicago
Courtenay C. Stone, Ball State University
Scott Sumner , Bentley College
James Sweeney, Stanford University
Richard Sweeney, Georgetown University
Robert Tamura, Clemson University
Clifford Tan, Stanford Center for International Development
John A. Tatom, Indiana State University
John Taylor, Stanford University
Paul Taylor, Vienna, VA
Teresa Tharp, Valencia Community College
Clifford F. Thies, Shenandoah University
Henry Thompson, Auburn University
Walter N. Thurman, North Carolina State University
Jerry G. Thursby, Georgia Institute of Technology
Robert D Tollison, Clemson University
William N. Trumbull, West Virginia University
Kamal Upadhyaya, University of New Haven
Charles W. Upton, Kent State University
Peter J Van Blokland, University of Florida
T. Norman Van Cott, Ball State University
Richard Vedder, American Enterprise Institute
George J. Viksnins, Georgetown University
J. Antonio Villamil, The Washington Economics Group
Richard E. Wagner, George Mason University
William B. Walstad, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Murray Weidenbaum, Washington University in St. Louis
Marc D. Weidenmier, Claremont McKenna College
Finis We lch, Texas A&M University
James B. Whitaker, Centreville, VA
John Wicks, University of Montana
Wayne H. Winegarden, Arduin, Laffer & Moore Econometrics
Gary Wolfram, Hillsdale College
DeVo L. Yoho, Ball State University
Nancy A. Yonge, Smith Center for Private Enterprise
Paul J. Zak, Claremont Graduate University
Mokhlis Y. Zaki, Northern Michigan University
Mark Zandi, Malvern, PA
Arnold Zellner, University of Chicago
Kate Zhou, University of Hawaii
Joseph Zoric, Franciscan University of Steubenville
Benjamin Zycher, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
* Affiliations are listed for identification purposes only.

The statement may be found online at:

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/PressReleases/Read.aspx?guid=c90681b9-5dfe-4de4-8057-ceedb30c228d

“Creaky Regulations . . . Act as a Brake on Innovation”

“Paul Metzger, holding the Handler, an anti-microbial device that helps users avoid touching surfaces that might carry germs.” Source of caption and photo: online version of the NYT article quoted and cited below.

(p. C5) With so many people worried about getting sick — whether from the common cold and flu or exotic new strains of antibiotic-resistant bacteria — Paul and Jeffrey Metzger had every reason to hope that the germ-fighting key fob they invented would be a runaway hit.
Their device, known as the Handler, began selling last year online and in stores like Duane Reade pharmacies for about $11. It features a pop-out hook so germophobes can avoid touching A.T.M. keypads, door handles and other public surfaces where undesirable microbes may lurk. As added protection, the Handler’s rubber and plastic surfaces are impregnated with tiny particles of silver to kill germs that land on the device itself.
But those little silver particles have run Maker Enterprises, the Metzger brothers’ partnership in Los Angeles, into a big regulatory thicket. The Metzgers belatedly realized that the Environmental Protection Agency might decide that a 1947-era law that regulates pesticides would apply to antimicrobial products like theirs.
The agency ruled last fall that the law covered Samsung’s Silvercare washing machine. Samsung was told it would have to register the machine as a pesticide, a potentially costly and time-consuming process, because the company claims the silver ions generated by the washer kill bacteria in the laundry.
The Metzgers halted production of their key fob while they sought legal guidance on how to avoid a similar fate.
Their quandary highlights a challenge facing the growing number of entrepreneurs who have ventured into nanotechnology, a field that gets its name from its reliance on materials so small their dimensions are measured in nanometers, or billionths of a meter.
. . .
“They don’t really know how they want to register these particles,” said Tracy Heinzman, a lawyer in Washington who deals frequently with the E.P.A. “There’s no clear path forward.”
More broadly, the limbo into which the Handler has tumbled shows how the limited resources of agencies like the E.P.A. can combine with creaky regulations to act as a brake on innovation. “The marketplace is always ahead of the E.P.A.,” Ms. Heinzman said.

For the full story, see:
BARNABY J. FEDER. “Small Business; Fighting Germs and Regulators; Pesticide Rules May Apply to Tiny Particles That Kill Microbes.” The New York Times (Thurs., March 6, 2008): C5.
(Note: the title of the online version was “Small Business; New Device for Germophobes Runs Into Old Law.”)
(Note: ellipsis added.)

“Production of the Handler has ceased for the time being.” Source of caption and photo: online version of the NYT article quoted and cited above.

“Become Pioneers of Leapfrog Technology”

Here is the latest entry in my continuing effort to document uses of the “leapfrog” concept in business and innovation. The entry below appears in a table entitled “Strategy Milestones” and is under the third of three column headings, which is entitled “Long Term (5+ Years).”

(p. 149) Become pioneers of leapfrog technology

Source:
Bossidy, Larry, Ram Charan, and Charles Burck. Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done. New York: Crown Business, 2002.
(Note: the quotation is presented as being Bossidy’s.)

Bestsellers Rejected Many Times Before Acceptance

Source of graphic: online version of the WSJ article quoted and cited below.

(p. W2) Leonard Mlodinow’s book “The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives” explores how chance controls the world. In one chapter, the author, who has a doctorate in theoretical physics from the University of California, Berkeley, and is a former writer for “Star Trek: The Next Generation,” looks at the number of big-time writers whose early works were, at first, rejected by publishers. He mentions how authors such as Vladimir Nabokov and Sylvia Plath suffered rejection. “Many books destined for great success had to survive not just rejection, but repeated rejection,” Mr. Mlodinow writes. “There exists a vast gulf of randomness and uncertainty between the creation of a great novel…and the presence of huge stacks of that novel…at the front of thousands of retail outlets.” Below, some examples he cites of rejections for authors who went on to become famous.

For the full story, see:

Robert J. Hughes. “ADVISER; What’s ‘Happening’; CULTURAL FIGURES | Books; Randomness and Rejection.” The Wall Street Journal (Fri., June 13, 2008): W2.
(Note: ellipses in original.)

Source of book image: http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41uQY8DkQ5L._SS500_.jpg

Sir Laurence Olivier Got Mad at Those Who Ridiculed Charlton Heston’s Acting

(p. 5go!) “In 1985, I took a train to London from Royal Air Force Mildenhall (Base) with a couple of med techs and decided to check out some of the plays,” Brodston recalled in his e-mail.
His theater date was a native Briton who had joined the U.S. Air Force.
“We came upon a play that had Charlton Heston in it, ‘The Caine Mutiny Court Martial,'” Brodston remembered. “We couldn’t afford the tickets, so they put us on the ‘king’s cuff’ (standby tickets for students and servicemen).”
Just as the house lights were dimming, an older woman led Brodston and his companion up the steps to a private box because no one had claimed the seats.
“Be quiet and don’t tell anyone,” she furtively whispered because she wasn’t supposed to give away box seats that normally fetch up to $300 each.
Two minutes into the play, the door at the rear of the box opened, and two people sat behind them. Engrossed in the play, Brodston and friend paid little attention.
“At intermission, we looked up and saw Lord Laurence Olivier and his wife, Joan Plowright, sitting behind us!”
. . .
In 1999, Brodston crossed paths with Plowright in New York, and she remembered the night they shared a box at the London theater.
“Larry used to get mad when people made fun of Chuck’s acting,” Plowright told Brodston. “He loved Chuck in ‘Ben Hur’ and that silly ape movie (‘Planet of the Apes’). He and the children would watch those movies again and again.”

For the full commentary, see:
BOB FISCHBACH. “Bob’s Take on Cinema: A night of fine theater with Chuck, Larry.” Omaha World-Herald (Thursday, June 12, 2008): 5go!.
(Note: ellipsis added.)

The Role of Private Enterprise in Sequencing the Human Genome

Source of book image: http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/2004/02/20/genome_war.php

The race to decode the genome always seemed like an appealing test case of the relative efficiency of government versus private enterprise. But the results seem muddy because sometimes in the media the outcome has been described as a win for Craig Venter’s private Celera corporation, and other times, as a tie.
For years I have wanted to learn more, and now I have finally done so by reading James Shreeve’s fascinating The Genome War.
It is clear from the book that the entrance of Celera, greatly accelerated the government’s own efforts to sequence the human genome. So one important lesson is that, no matter who “won the race, the consumer benefited from the entrance of a private competitor.
Also clear, is that Venter’s group took advantage of public resources and results. Their primary zeal was for sequencing the genome, rather than for promoting private enterprise.
Regrettably, this is a common case: many entrepreneurs take the institutions of their economy as given, and make use of government when it suits their short-run objectives.
Officially the results were announced as a tie. But the main bone of contention had been over Celera’s advocacy and use of the “whole genome shotgun” technique for sequencing the gene. The government group had attacked the method as impractical and unreliable.
The proof of who “won” in a deeper sense, was that after the contest was over, everyone, including the government, was using the “whole genome shotgun” technique.
Another lesson is that the usual scientific goal of immediately releasing findings, may actually reduce the information available to the public. If, as with the genome, the information is costly to obtain, allowing a period of proprietary ownership of the information, provides private entrepreneurs with the incentive to discover the information in the first place. Another case of unintended consequences: if we fully follow the alleged idealism of academic scientists, we will end up with less scientific knowledge, not more.

Reference to book:
Shreeve, James. The Genome War: How Craig Venter Tried to Capture the Code of Life and Save the World. 1st ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2004.
(Note: My comments are based on the whole book. A paragraph on pp. 366-367 is especially important.)

“Most Interview Processes Are Deeply Flawed”

(p. 129) Developing leaders begins with interviewing and assessing candidates. I’m not talking about overseeing the HR department and interviewing finalists; I’m talking about hands-on hiring. Most interview processes are deeply flawed. Some people interview well, and some people don’t. A person who doesn’t interview well may nonetheless be the best choice for the job. That’s why it’s so important to probe deeply, know what to listen for, and get supplemental data. It takes time and effort to drill down further, but it’s always worth the trouble.

Source:
Bossidy, Larry, Ram Charan, and Charles Burck. Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done. New York: Crown Business, 2002.
(Note: the quotation is presented as being Bossidy’s.)

The Radical Islamic Threat to Free Speech

“Marked for death: Ayaan Hirsi Ali.” Source of caption and photo: online version of the WSJ commentary quoted and cited below.

(p. A15) Criticism of Islam, however, has led to violence and murder world-wide. Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa calling for Muslims to kill Salman Rushdie over his 1988 book, “The Satanic Verses.” Although Mr. Rushdie has survived, two people associated with the book were stabbed, one fatally. The 2005 Danish editorial cartoons lampooning the prophet Muhammad led to numerous deaths. Dutch director Theodoor van Gogh was killed in 2004, several months after he made the film “Submission,” which described violence against women in Islamic societies. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Dutch member of parliament who wrote the script for “Submission,” received death threats over the film and fled the country for the United States.
The violence Dutch officials are anticipating now is part of a broad and determined effort by the radical jihadist movement to reject the basic values of modern civilization and replace them with an extreme form of Shariah. Shariah, the legal code of Islam, governed the Muslim world in medieval times and is used to varying degrees in many nations today, especially in Saudi Arabia.
Radical jihadists are prepared to use violence against individuals to stop them from exercising their free speech rights. In some countries, converting a Muslim to another faith is a crime punishable by death. While Muslim clerics are free to preach and proselytize in the West, some Muslim nations severely restrict or forbid other faiths to do so. In addition, moderate Muslims around the world have been deemed apostates and enemies by radical jihadists.

For the full commentary, see:
PETER HOEKSTRA. “Islam and Free Speech.” The Wall Street Journal (Weds., March 26, 2008): A15.

The Method of Milton Friedman’s Practice Was Better Than the Method of His Essay

The method of the Chicago School is often thought to be the method outlined in Friedman’s famous essay “The Methodology of Positive Economics.” It can be (and has been) persuasively argued that the actual methodology practiced by Friedman is broader, and more eclectic than that advocated in his early essay.
His practice continued to exemplify a kind of empiricism, but it was a kind of empiricism that included, not only ‘rigorous’ econometrics, but also economic history, case studies, and ‘stylized facts.’
I believe that the method of Friedman’s practice is sounder than the method of his essay. So it is unfortunate that the Institute founded in Friedman’s name will probably only support those who practice the formal method of the essay.

(p. B5) The University of Chicago will announce Thursday that it plans to establish a center for economics honoring the late economist Milton Friedman.
The school plans to raise an endowment of $200 million to support the Milton Friedman Institute.
. . .
. . . his approach to economics embodies what has come to be known as the Chicago School. He defined that as “an approach that insists on the empirical testing of theoretical generalizations and that rejects alike facts without theory and theory without facts.”
It is that approach, and the intellectual rigor that Mr. Friedman brought to it, that the Friedman Institute is meant to advocate, rather than any ideology, says Chicago economist Gary Becker, a Nobel Prize-winning former student of Mr. Friedman’s who was on the faculty committee that recommended the institute.

For the full story, see:
JUSTIN LAHART. “University Plans Institute to Honor Milton Friedman.” The Wall Street Journal (Thurs., May 15, 2008): B5.
(Note: ellipses added.)
The famous Friedman method essay is:
Friedman, Milton. “The Methodology of Positive Economics.” In Essays in Positive Economics, 3-43. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953.