Quick thoughts

1. Tyler Cowen writes in the NYT about America's high number of young entrepreneurs. The reason? "[T]hese successes," Cowen writes, "are rooted in the commercial, competitive, philanthropic, nonegalitarian and open nature of American society."

Nonegalitarian? Depends on what you think "egalitarian" means, Tyler. If you think it means that society believes it's OK to start your own business and get ahead, then sure. But if egalitarianism means "equal opportunity for all," then egalitarianism is exactly what has allowed America to be so entrepreneurial. In many societies, only the rich are able to start businesses; not here. That's been to our advantage.

2. The Economist and Matt Yglesias both think the civil war in Gaza is an unmitigated disaster. But I'm not so willing to throw up my hands in defeat. I think that the idea of a single, geographically divided Palestinian state in the West Bank AND Gaza was unworkable from the beginning, and that this civil war - dividing Palestine into a Fatah-controlled West Bank and a Hamas-ruled Gaza - is exactly what Palestine needs.

What needs to happen now is for Abbas to boot Hamas from the West Bank over to Gaza (which he may already be doing), and issue a Declaration of Independence for Palestine that only includes the West Bank, and which recognizes Israel. Israel will be forced to pull out of the West Bank and make peace there, and Gaza will remain the only holdout of Hamas and the rejectionists. If this worked, it would do wonders for the whole Mideast.

Update: Martin Indyk and Foreign Policy's Blake Hounshell both agree..

3. Hillary Clinton has come out against the US-Korea Free Trade Agreement, ostensibly to support U.S. automakers, even though the agreement lowers Korean barriers against U.S.-made cars but not vice-versa. The WaPo thinks Hillary is making a big mistake. But Jonathan Tasini of the Huffington Post applauds the decision, saying "the underlying dynamic for so-called "free trade" is simple: drive wages down as low as possible and allow maximum protection for capital and investment."

Tasini is full of it. Korea has strong unions and great labor standards (in fact, probably better than ours). Koreans are much richer than Mexicans or Chinese people. How would an FTA with Korea drive down U.S. wages, exactly? Has free trade with Europe driven down U.S. wages? Tasini's non-argument is moronic knee-jerk vapid empty [insert more expletives here] crap. And Hillary is being a blatant corporatist, which does not befit a liberal at all. Cancelling the FTA with Korea would be an unmitigated disaster for the U.S. - we'd continue on the path toward losing a key democratic ally in East Asia, push Korea right into the arms of China, lose the economic leverage the FTA would give us over Japan, and lose big opportunities for American workers, consumers, and companies. Here's hoping the nomination goes to Obama.