North Korea puts rocket units on alert to 'attack US' - Telegraph

North Korea puts rocket units on alert to 'attack US' - Telegraph

North Korea has elevated its artillery and strategic missile forces to "combat-ready posture" and said it is prepared to strike targets in South Korea, Japan, Guam, Hawaii and the continental US.

More than a Vacation a Month for Obamas in 2013 | The Weekly Standard

More than a Vacation a Month for Obamas in 2013 | The Weekly Standard

In the first three months of the year, members of the first family have been on three vacations, averaging a vacation a month. And now it's being reported that the first daughters are on a spring break vacation in the Bahamas.

AP / STEVEN SENNE

The Obamas began the new year in Hawaii. "President Obama departed Hawaii this morning for Washington, after spending NINE days vacationing with family and friends in his native state. Here’s a quick look at how he spent his vacation," ABC reported on January 6, 2013.

"Obama played FIVE rounds of golf with SEVEN different partners, spending roughly THIRTY hours on TWO different courses on Oahu. The president made FIVE early morning trips to the gym at the nearby Marine Base at Kaneohe Bay. The First Family spent TWO afternoons enjoying the beach on the base and went for ONE hike to a local waterfall. The president spent ONE father-daughter afternoon with Malia and Sasha, bowling and going out for shave ice, an annual tradition." 

Then the first lady and their daughters vacationed in Aspen over President's Day weekend. "First Lady Michelle Obama arrived in Aspen on Friday afternoon and is here with her daughters for a ski vacation," Aspendailynews.com reported in February. "Few details about her trip were available. Sources said she is staying at the home of Jim and Paula Crown, owners of the Aspen Skiing Co. She is reportedly skiing at Buttermilk today, where the Crowns, of Chicago, own a home on the Tiehack side."

RealClearMarkets - Friends of the Poor Are Often Their Greatest Enemies

RealClearMarkets - Friends of the Poor Are Often Their Greatest Enemies
By Diana Furchtgott-Roth

Pope Francis has repeatedly called on those in positions of responsibility to protect and care for the poor. What is the best way to do this?

For an answer, look to a new book by Columbia University professors Jagdish Bhagwati and Arvind Panagariya, out next week from PublicAffairs. Based on data from India, it shows how countries can achieve higher growth and reduce poverty. Entitled Why Growth Matters: How Economic Growth in India Reduced Poverty and the Lessons for Other Developing Countries, it analyzes what India did right and what it did wrong in its struggle to lift its millions from poverty.

A concern for the poor is not the same as doing something effective about reducing poverty. The Indian experience shows that policies matter as much as objectives, and that the worst enemies of the poor can ironically be those who profess to be their friends. Pope Francis can use this important book as a guide to provide the pro-poor leadership that he promises from the Vatican.

An examination of global economic systems shows that capitalist systems have been the most successful in delivering high incomes and better quality of life.  Look at economic growth in North Korea vs. South Korea, and, in the 20th century, East Germany vs. West Germany, the Soviet Union vs. Europe, Taiwan and Hong Kong vs. China.

The latest Economic Freedom of the World report, co-published by the Cato Institute, the Fraser Institute, and 70 other think tanks, finds that:

* Countries ranked in the top fourth of the world in economic freedom had average GDP per person of $37,691 in 2010, whereas countries ranked in the bottom fourth had average GDP of $5,188.

* For countries in the top fourth, average per person GDP of the poorest 10 percent was $11,382. In the bottom fourth, the same group earned $1,209.

* The average income of the poorest 10 percent of citizens of the most economically free countries was more than twice the average income for all citizens in the countries with the least economic freedom.

Or, as Catholic theologian Michael Novak wrote in The Universal Hunger for Liberty, "Developed countries are better able to order the economic elements of life to the good of human prosperity. In this way they reduce scarcities, raise the average age of mortality, eradicate diseases, diminish illiteracy, and so forth. To be well ordered for the achievement of such goals is what it means to be developed."

India's economic reforms started in earnest in 1991 after a balance of payments crisis, according to Bhagwati and Panagariya.

Prior to 1991, India's economy was characterized by extensive intervention, with strict industrial licensing for capacity creation and utilization, with Kafkaesque results. Bhagwati told me that the problem with India was that Adam Smith's Invisible Hand was nowhere to be seen.

India's public sector proliferated into every kind of activity, not just natural monopolies. When India produced inputs such as steel, the inefficiency undermined several user sectors in turn. These public sector enterprises were often given monopolistic positions, with no private entry allowed and with import controls preventing foreign competition.

Hence, India's share in world trade and trade to GNP ratio declined, while those in successful developing countries rose. Direct foreign investment shrank, and by 1991 equity investment into India had fallen to almost $100 million, smaller than the budgets of major American universities.

Bhagwati and Panagariya show that the 1991 reforms virtually swept away industrial licensing, reduced tariffs, and opened the way to entry by private firms into the industries reserved for the private sector, thus forcing them to compete. New firms such as Jet Airways entered private aviation in India, forcing Indian Airlines to raise its level of performance. The effect was a sharp rise in the growth rate and in the reduction of poverty.

Bhagwati and Panagariya explode a series of common myths about India's economic progress, such as that India pursued growth as an end in itself, without considering poverty reductions or the provision of health and education. They show that poverty fell more rapidly after the 1991 reforms than before.

Rather than more open trade leading to increased poverty, as is often alleged, the authors show that trade decreased poverty in India. They write, "trade openness in a labor-abundant economy stimulates growth in general and the expansion of labor-intensive industries in particular so that it can be expected to lower rather than raise poverty." In particular, two of India's poorer regions, Bihar and Orissa, now are among the fastest-growing states today.

India still has problems, of course, and the authors do not shy away from recommendations for changes in the provision of electricity, infrastructure, and transportation. Labor laws, many over 40 years old, need wholesale reform because they discourage hiring. Mandates on employers rise steadily with the number of employees.

For instance, manufacturers which use electricity and employ 10 workers, or those which do not use electricity and employ 20 employees, need to whitewash their premises every 14 months and repaint every 5 years. A firm with 150 employees must provide a lunch room, and a firm with 30 female employees must provide a day-care center. No one can be fired without extensive discussions with labor tribunals and courts.

Many anti-poverty programs focus on redistribution, but growth is a precondition to generate revenues to help the poor. This applies to countries with many poor and few rich, not only India, but also China, Indonesia, Brazil, and many countries in Africa. Redistribution cannot help countries where there is little to redistribute in the first place.

And welfare programs need careful consideration to be effective. One suggestion from Bhagwati and Panagariya: Replace the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, which guarantees one member of a rural household 100 days' worth of employment at a given wage, with simple cash transfers through an ATM. These will give the poor more purchasing power and it will enable them to sell their labor at a higher wage.

All economic correlations are complex, and many factors are at play, but Why Growth Matters shows how the poor benefit from economic development, and which regulations can still stand in the way. As Pope Francis opens a discussion on reducing poverty, the book could not have come at a better time.

Diana Furchtgott-Roth is a contributing editor at RealClearMarkets, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, and a columnist for the Examiner.  She is the author of Regulating to Disaster: How Green Jobs Policies Are Damaging America's Economy (Encounter Books, 2012).

Editorial: Harvest of uncertainty over Obamacare | workers, health, care - Opinion - The Orange County Register

Editorial: Harvest of uncertainty over Obamacare | workers, health, care - Opinion - The Orange County Register

ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER

The impending policies of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will affect individual farmers and their employees. There are an estimated 600,000 crop workers and roughly 20,000 livestock workers in California at a given time. For every job in farming, the industry creates two to three nonfarming jobs. It's an industry that should thrive in California, where the climate is kind.

Yet, Obamacare adds more burdens on farmers, who already contend with onerous state and federal requirements that hamper production and harvesting. Specifically, H-2A visa rules and E-Verify hiring requirements, coupled with a shortage of agricultural workers, makes farming in the United States a difficult endeavor for small operators.

MCT ILLUSTRATION

"There's nothing affordable about the Affordable Care Act," Tom Nassif said to us; he's president and CEO of Western Growers, an advocacy group representing area and regional family farmers in Arizona and California.

Despite union leaders' aggressive push for a federal takeover of health care, it turns out that the Affordable Care Act could harm the very people it supposedly aimed to help: workers. Major unions, including the AFL-CIO and the Teamsters, wanted to keep current health plans and receive government subsidies to cover costs imposed by the Affordable Care Act.

Some unions – along with Big Labor – were exempted from the law through temporary waivers from the Obama administration. But, for the most part, the farming community is not off the hook. "A lot of our members will opt out," Mr. Nassif predicted. "They will choose to pay the penalty [for not providing health insurance] because it's so much lower."

Obamacare requires businesses with 50 or more employees, averaging at least 30 hours per week, to provide health coverage. Well before Jan. 1, 2014, farmers will need to decide whether it makes sense to drop health coverage, pay the penalty and look at providing supplemental pay for workers to get their own insurance. Or, they could look at cutting employee hours to avoid the mandate but will need to attract employees without offering health insurance – in an environment when there already is a shortage of workers.

In the event farmers drop health insurance, workers who lack proper documents could elect to go to hospital emergency rooms and walk-in clinics. This predictably would create higher costs for taxpayers and poorer outcomes for ill or injured workers.

Western Growers, which has been advising its members on the expected impact of Obamacare, also worries about future regulations on top of the new health care legislation. "You don't add to it," Dave Puglia, senior vice president of Western Growers, recommended, noting current burdens on the farming community. "Sacramento needs to place a moratorium on bills."

Zuckerman: The Great Recession Has Been Followed by the Grand Illusion - WSJ.com

Zuckerman: The Great Recession Has Been Followed by the Grand Illusion - WSJ.com

The Great Recession is an apt name for America's current stagnation, but the present phase might also be called the Grand Illusion—because the happy talk and statistics that go with it, especially regarding jobs, give a rosier picture than the facts justify.

The country isn't really advancing. By comparison with earlier recessions, it is going backward. Despite the most stimulative fiscal policy in American history and a trillion-dollar expansion to the money supply, the economy over the last three years has been declining. After 2.4% annual growth rates in gross domestic product in 2010 and 2011, the economy slowed to 1.5% growth in 2012. Cumulative growth for the past 12 quarters was just 6.3%, the slowest of all 11 recessions since World War II.

And last year's anemic growth looks likely to continue. Sequestration will take $600 billion of government expenditures out of the economy over the next 10 years, including $85 billion this year alone. The 2% increase in payroll taxes will hit about 160 million workers and drain $110 billion from their disposable incomes. The Obama health-care tax will be a drag of more than $30 billion. The recent 50-cent surge in gasoline prices represents another $65 billion drag on consumer cash flow.

February's headline unemployment rate was portrayed as 7.7%, down from 7.9% in January. The dip was accompanied by huzzahs in the news media claiming the improvement to be "outstanding" and "amazing." But if you account for the people who are excluded from that number—such as "discouraged workers" no longer looking for a job, involuntary part-time workers and others who are "marginally attached" to the labor force—then the real unemployment rate is somewhere between 14% and 15%

PAUL, CRUZ, LEE TO BLOCK GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION -Breitbart

PAUL, CRUZ, LEE TO BLOCK GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION

by MIKE FLYNN

Sens. Paul, Cruz and Lee have signaled that they will block the Senate from moving to any consideration of gun control legislation. On Monday, the three Senators sent a letter to Majority Leader Reid which read in part, “We will oppose the motion to proceed to any legislation that will serve as a vehicle for any additional gun restrictions.” It is further confirmation that the three are providing the only opposition to Obama's big-government agenda.
Majority Leader Reid has orchestrated the gun legislation to provide maximum benefit to vulnerable Dem Senators in red states. He has stripped most meaningful measures out of the underlying bill, providing Democrats on opportunity to vote against amendments that contain the most sweeping gun control legislation.
The action by Sens. Paul, Cruz and Lee call out the lie on this legislative sleight-of-hand. They have chosen to block any consideration of any gun control legislation. If the GOP caucus follows them, the Senate will never proceed to consideration of gun control legislation.
If the action of Paul, Cruz and Lee prevails, the Senate will never proceed to consideration of the bill or the underlying amendments. The action of these three provides a real opposition. Senators like McCain and Graham should move to the sidelines. New leaders are ready to fight for liberty.

Govt. Spends More on Disability than Food Stamps, Welfare Combined on Mon, 25 Mar 2013

In an eye-opening six-month investigation into America’s disability program, Planet Money reporter Chana Joffe-Walt uncovered a “disability industrial complex” fraught with fraud that churns out 14 million checks every month to citizens the government has deemed disabled.

“Since the economy began its slow, slow recovery in late 2009, we’ve been averaging about 150,000 jobs created per month,” said Joffe-Walt in an Public Radio International (PRI) “This American Life” interview. “In that same period every month, almost 250,000 people have been applying for disability.”

Among Joffe-Walt’s findings are the following facts:

The federal government spends more money each year on cash payments for disabled former workers than it does on food stamps and welfare combined; America’s two largest disability programs, including health care for disabled workers, costs taxpayers $260 billion a year
In some parts of the country, such as Hale County, Alabama, one out of every four working-age adults collects a disability check
As of 2011, 33.8% of newly diagnosed disabled workers cited “back pain and other musculoskeletal problems” as their reason for being unable to work. In 1961, the top reason for being disabled was “heart disease, stroke”
Disabled workers do not get counted in the unemployment figures. If they did, the numbers would be far higher
Less than 1% of people who went on disability at the beginning of 2011 have returned to the workforce
The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program—which covers kids and adults—has exploded. SSI is now seven times larger than it was 30 years ago.
The report suggests that the much-touted Welfare to Work policies of the 1990s that appeared to successfully move welfare recipients off the public dole may have been a mirage. States have figured out that shifting people from welfare to disability frees up substantial funds, as states have to pay the costs of welfare, but the federal government picks up the tab for disability.

“That’s a kind of ugly secret of the American labor market,” said MIT economist David Autor. “Part of the reason our unemployment rates have been low, until recently, is that a lot of people who would have trouble finding jobs are on a different program.”

Joffe-Walt says disability has “become a de facto welfare program for people without a lot of education or job skills.” The reporter notes that the disability program “wasn’t supposed to serve this purpose; it’s not a retraining program designed to get people back onto their feet.”

According to Social Security chief actuary Steve Goss, disability insurance program reserves will run out of money in 2016.