How Not To Add Two Headlines

A striking example of how our political and economic leaders cannot connect two -- let alone three and four -- economic phenomena. From today's NYT:

Headline One: "Jobs Down for the 5th Month"

Headline Two: "In Turnabout, Antitrust Unit Looks at Intel."

Obviously, the first article is about the dismal economy.

The second is about the fact that "the Federal Trade Commission opened a formal antitrust investigation of the Intel Corporation." Intel's mediocre and envious competitor, AMD, can't compete on the free market, and so -- in an all-too-typical Tanya Harding move -- is seeking to knee-cap Intel. The hobbling campaign "has cost both companies tens of millions of dollars in legal and public relations expenses." (For an explanation of the injustice and impracticality of the antitrust laws, see my book The Abolition of Antitrust.)

If our country's leaders were able to integrate, they would realize that the second headline is a cause of the first. They might see that such trust-busting drains the wealth of an economic prime mover, which means in turn that Intel cannot create as many jobs.

And if their minds were on the premise of linking facts and knowledge, they might integrate two more headlines from today's NYT:

Headline Three: "As Ills Persist, Afghan Leader Is Losing Luster"

Headline Four: "Water-Starved California Slows Development"

Three is about Afghan's request for $50 billion, a significant portion of which, no doubt, will come out of the pockets of individual Americans and American corporations. The connection between three and one should be so obvious as to not require explanation.

Four is about how California's water shortage is causing many municipalities to stop residential and commercial development. As an example, of what is in fact a country-wide problem (see for instance the southeast), a "1,500-home development project" was halted by government authorities. Environmental controls on water are partly responsible for this wealth- and job-destroying shortage. (See the NYT article.) The primary cause is that governments (state and local) control the water supply. If the creative intelligence and wealth of entrepreneurs were unleashed, we would have water flowing through the streets, and more economic development and jobs -- and might even be able to water our lawns.

If we had leaders who understood Ayn Rand's point that "integration is the essential part of understanding," then just maybe those leaders would grasp that there's a link among those four headlines: A country loses jobs because the productive businessmen who create them are being bled dry by confiscatory taxes and fees, and are being strangled by government controls.