I’ll continue to enjoy Lennon’s music. But his political ‘philosophy’ is to human enlightenment what, say, a rock concert by Milton Friedman would have been to human entertainment.

Politicians and big banks have a symbiotic relationship. Sad, but true.

The difference between the Obama administration and the Democratic base is that the administration has to deal, in some fashion, with reality. To be sure, Obama’s first choice is always to address reality through a left-wing lens. But at some level, he has to face the fact that terrorists pose a serious threat, as well as the fact that the only real solution to our economic malaise lies in economic growth. His ability to take purist positions is limited by his desire to be re-elected.

When the historians write about the economy, they usually view it through quasi-Marxist lenses, perceiving that investors and employers have been (and remain) the natural enemies of the workers, who would never have escaped destitution except for the heroic struggles waged on their behalf by labor unions and progressive politicians.

Here’s the pertinent question: “Why is Political Class Economically Incompetent ?” The answer is actually very easy. Nearly every politician is beholden to someone throwing money into their campaign.

With the wailing and gnashing of teeth from many progressives, you would think that Obama had cut a tax deal to eliminate tax breaks on the wealthy in exchange for freeze-drying Guatamalan orphans in order to use them as decorations on the Family Research Council’s Christmas Tree.

If human history has established beyond debate a single proposition, it is that entrusting management of a nation’s economy to its government is a bad idea. Government-managed economies consistently fail; worse, they are inherently tyrannical, as every decision is a political decision. It is difficult to understand, frankly, how any person of normal intelligence could want such a thing. Yet, according to Scott Rasmussen’s latest survey, 27 percent of American adults say the government should manage the economy.

Regardless of your stance on student loan justice, the question that is never raised is who in their right mind would give a $200,000 loan to a twenty year old sociology major in absence of federal subsidies and government shelters for student loans? College is no longer an investment in your future, it’s 21st century indentured servitude!

I should note, by the way, that economists who strongly favor the extension of UI benefits, such as those who signed this letter, also tend to favor more income redistribution in general. I suspect, therefore, that the foundation of their support comes not from having weighed the specific pros and cons of UI per se, but rather from a more general desire to “spread the wealth around.” That issue is, as I tell my students, more a matter of political philosophy than it is of economics.