Politics does not have to be logical. On the contrary, politics avoids the logical.

Socialists.

In general, politicians of all stripes hate free markets. They hate freedom. If they placed a premium on freedom, they'd not be politicians in the first place.

Scientific American recently published an article about government-pushed fears over sodium consumption, which have been determined by much research to be much ado over nothing. No matter that Scientific American itself helped push those fears. 20 years from now, they'll be discounting fears over global warming, despite their current advocacy for the same.

Rock and Roll, jazz and hip-hop are negro music. That's the only reason the leaders of more advanced, technologically adept countries despise these forms of entertainment. Negroes tend to gravitate towards sexualized vulgarity, which can be very appealing to youths of all races and cultures. It robs them of the concentration and intellectual fortitude necessary to sustain progress from one generation to the next. The Chinese recognize this, as they have instituted measures to insulate their own advancing society from this scourge. We, on the other hand, have failed to pay heed - as our current state of demise attests.

Sowell did not imply that tax cuts of any size and indescriminately applied would always yield positive returns. Of course, you do probably understand that much, and simply aimed to ridicule the argument in general. The US has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. We also have a decidedly progressive federal tax code. The phenomenon Sowell describes occurs when the rate being cut is of significant size, and the cut itself is of moderate size. The current top bracket is around 36 percent, give or take. I don't know about you, but most people realising 64 cents for every dollar they earned would feel a bit ripped-off, especially when they know that almost half of everyone gets the whole dollar. People occupying the...

Sowell has limited space for his column, so it is necessary to present certain arguments in an abridged form. The phenomenon Sowell describes, involving the counter-intuitive, though historically documented rise in tax revenues experienced by the federal government after it enacted a tax cut is so well known that your mockery of Sowell's column can only be interpreted in two ways. Either you're just being silly, though perhaps harboring a political affinity for the class-warfare aims of the left that Sowell describes, or you're profoundly ignorant of economics and history.

What a grim world you describe. Hell, it's a wonder anything gets done.

"Seems" and "is" are not synonymous. Perhaps the article ''seems" to you to be an argument about environmental restrictions specifically targeting Blacks. It "seems" to me that this may be the case because you did not comprehend Sowell's article - assuming you actually read it in its entirety. I'll briefly lay it out for you. Environmental restrictions tend to increase the cost of owning property. Blacks, on average, have less money than whites. Hence, Blacks (on average) tend to own less real estate (proportional to their population) than whites. Blacks tend to own even less real estate in areas affected by environmental restrictions, as those restrictions increase the cost of owning real estate. Clear, irrefutable logic is...

"Seems" and "is" are not synonymous. Perhaps the article ''seems" to you to be an argument about environmental restrictions specifically targeting Blacks. It "seems" to me that this may be the case because you did not comprehend Sowell's article - assuming you actually read it in its entirety. I'll briefly lay it out for you. Environmental restrictions tend to increase the cost of owning property. Blacks, on average, have less money than whites. Hence, Blacks (on average) tend to own less real estate (proportional to their population) than whites. Blacks tend to own even less real estate in areas affected by environmental restrictions, as those restrictions increase the cost of owning real estate. Clear, irrefutable logic is...