WaPo Hawking $300 Online 'Master Class' Course on Economic Literacy

Newsbusters:

The Washington Post hopes you may want to "Widen Your World," with online "Master Class" courses that cost $200-$300 a pop.

For example, there's Steven Pearlstein's "Introduction to Economic Literacy."

[Lesson number one: don't spend $300 to have a liberal journalist lecture you.]

I wrote about Mr. Pearlstein three times in 2008, (here, here and here) but stopped because I realized that chronicling the astonishing economic illiteracy of WaPo's (anti) business reporter was like shooting ducks in a barrel and had become boring. Now WaPo is laughably offering up Pearlstein as some sort of economic literacy expert, which is akin to touting Michael Moore as a diet and fitness guru.

The Fantasies of Steven Pearlstein

The Washington Post's Steven Pearlstein has proved once again why he is the personification of the Peter Principle. As that paper's business reporter, he consistently shows his hostility toward the very subject he covers with calls for the failure of capitalism and increased government interference in private enterprise.
Now he does himself one better with the moronic claim that increasing taxes during a recession is a good thing:

“That there’s something wrong with raising taxes in the middle of a
recession – that it’s always a bad idea – not true,” Pearlstein said. “It
depends on what the government does with that money and what people would have done with the money if they already – if they had it and it wasn’t taxed.”

In other words, individuals are poor judges of the proper way to invest and spend their own money. Therefore the high priests of government, who are of course endowed with supernatural powers, should confiscate those funds by force in order to ensure it is used in the most beneficial (politically motivated) way. After taking a cut of 30% or so for the Church of Secular Government of course.

This glittering jewel of economic ignorance goes on:

“And it’s quite possible that if you raised taxes on people who
otherwise would have saved the money and you, and you invest it wisely – the economy can be better off,” Pearlstein said. “So it’s not always the case raising taxes in a recession is a bad idea. It matters on whom and how you use the money.”

I find it quite amazing that Pearlstein doesn't understand that savings is investment. Where does he think interest comes from? I guess he really means that the anointed in government are the only ones who know how to invest "wisely". They've done such a good job with Social Security and Medicare contributions, so why wouldn't this dope think that?

Of course Pearlstein has history on his side, right? After all, Jimmy Carter raised taxes during recession in the 70's and that worked out well didn't it?
Herbert Hoover did the same thing 1929 and that...never mind.

Pearlstein says it's "quite possible" is dumb idea would work, which is like saying it's quite possible that the umpteenth email I got from Nigeria today really will be a way for me to make millions.

Pearlstein isn't going to find a lot of takers for his incoherent ramblings:

Even Democratic President-elect Barack Obama said tax increases could be detrimental to the overall economy. And as Murray Rothbard pointed out for the Ludwig von Mises Institute – raising taxes in this environment is a bad idea – under any school of economics.

“Every school: Austrian, Keynesian, monetarist, or classical, would react in horror to such a plan, which obviously worsens a recession by lowering saving and investment, and productive (as opposed to parasitic and wasteful government) consumption. Raising taxes does nothing to help the inflation, and does a lot to make the recession more severe; and it aggravates the deadweight burden of government on the economy.”

Related Posts:
WAPO's Anti-Business Reporter Wants Less Business
WAPO's Anti-Business Reporter, Steven Pearlstein

WAPO's "business reporter" wants less business

Having StevenPearlstein as your business reporter is like hiring a Red Sox fan to cover the Yankees. And an ill informed one at that. Pearlstein has already called for the collapse of Wall Street and now he calls for the death of capitalism with his usual economic illiteracy. He blames too little regulation for the ills of health care, energy, housing etc.; ignorant of the fact that most of those problems can be traced directly to market distorting tax and regulatory policy, along with constant meddling in markets for purely political considerations regardless of the harmful results. Pearlstein supports more of the same "solutions" that caused the problems in the first place and apparently wants our economy and culture to slow down to the speed of lumbering Europe.

WAPO's anti-business reporter Steven Pearlstein

Who is Steven Perlstein? I asked myself this question after reading this column calling for the collapse of Wall Street because well...it would be amusing. That about sums up this childish rant from a guy who as far as I can tell has no business credentials, and it shows. I'm sure one of the requirements of a food writer is the ability to boil water and maybe scramble an egg, but experience in the smarmy world of business apparently is a detriment to the anointed at the Washington Post.

Perlstein throws around terms like "credit swaps", "CDO" etc. as if he knows what they are and then complains about their very existence. Indeed, too little regulation is the problem says Perlstein. Regulations that no doubt would be administered by government hacks blessed with scary business talents similar to his own. The fact that Perlstein wouldn't know a balance sheet from a bed sheet doesn't stop him from criticising the compensation of Wall Street managers, as he would replace the voluntary judgement of the private sector risking its own money with that of a state that suffers no consequences for the politically motivated decisions it forces on others. Their pay is "excessive" folks! Why? Because Richard Pearlstein says so!

Perlstein is also concerned that smart students are going to Wall Street rather than enter more socially acceptable professions like teaching, science and "public service". The fact that those activities are funded by the very people he would like to fail is obviously lost on him. He does allow however that his infantile wish will have some "collateral damage". The first place this ignoramus will notice that is in the stock of his employer and his 401K .