https://mises.org/wire/word-thanks-lew
Thursday, December 14, 2017
Friday, December 8, 2017
Save the Environment Buy Getting Rich
https://fee.org/articles/there-is-nothing-green-about-socialism/
This perfectly describes my view on environmental issues. Shame on Al Gore.
"The best way to protect the environment is to get rich. That way, there is enough money not only to meet the needs of ordinary people, but also to pay for cleaner power plants and better water-treatment facilities. Since capitalism is the best way to create wealth, humanity should stick with it."
This perfectly describes my view on environmental issues. Shame on Al Gore.
"The best way to protect the environment is to get rich. That way, there is enough money not only to meet the needs of ordinary people, but also to pay for cleaner power plants and better water-treatment facilities. Since capitalism is the best way to create wealth, humanity should stick with it."
Wednesday, November 15, 2017
Secession of the Heart
Isn’t it wild that a non-partisan observer is the only one
who can objectively analyze what is going on with the current Mueller
investigation? The whole thing is a farce – a complete and utter farce.
“But Manafort is different. By arresting
Manafort, who served for a time as Trump’s presidential campaign manager,
Mueller can pile on false charges until Manafort buys his way out by providing
Mueller with false charges against Trump.
In US federal courts today, charges no longer
have to be proven, just asserted. If Trump’s surrender to the military/security
complex and abandonment of his intention to normalize relations with Russia do
not suffice to make Trump acceptable to the military/security complex, Mueller
can squeeze Manafort until Manafort agrees to whatever story Mueller hands him.
The last thing Manafort or Trump can count on is justice. There has been no
justice in the US “Justice” system for decades.”
Pat Buchanan and Clarence Thomas get it right here - we have
no unum for our e pluribus. With no unum,
we ought to separate. Why violently
remain together when we could peacefully separate?
“The spirit that produced the war in the 1860s, and lasting
division in the 1960s, is abroad again. A great secession of the heart is
underway.”
I do love using the logic of idiots to spin them
in a bundle of idiocy. If reason is
whiteness, using reason even to critique reason is perpetuating whiteness. Then again, pointing this out doesn’t matter
because nobody believes in truth anymore. Read the article but a good summary
follows:
“In order to critique ‘whiteness’ they must affirm ‘whiteness.’
To put it even more clearly, only those who affirm ‘whiteness’ could have a
problem with ‘whiteness,’ and the solution to ‘whiteness’ must itself be ‘a
function of whiteness.’ But I suppose that in identifying the
self-contradiction at the heart of their worldview and insisting upon rational
consistency, the Yancys and Caputos would accuse me of advancing ‘whiteness.’’
Interestingly, I never thought about this but the speed limit is
actually more like a speed minimum….
I agree with David Stockman re Jerome Powell as written by David
Stockman:
“It can't get any worse than this. Jerome
Powell is a Wall Street-coddling Keynesian and Washington lifer
who passes for a Janet Yellen replica---that is, save
for his tie and trousers and his as yet underdeveloped
capacity to whine pedantically. During his years on the Fed since May
2012, Powell has voted approximately 44 times to drastically falsify
interest rates and to recklessly and fraudulently monetize trillions
of the public debt. That is, Powell has been all-in for a destructive
central banking regime that is literally asphyxiating capitalist prosperity in
America. We will get to the latter in more detail momentarily, but just
consider the plight of bank account savers during the 65”
Lies and Consequences
“Wars and Lies go hand in hand. It's always
challenging calling out the government on its lies as war fever picks up. They
have the mass media in their pockets and they're all blaring fear inducing
propaganda at the same time.”
The US government admits to lying us into another regime
time operation and giving support and weapons to al-Qaeda and ISIS. Yet, most people who claimed this from the
beginning were considered conspiracy theorists.
The test of time shows once again that the people who know the military
industrial complex were correct.
The US has no reason to go to war anywhere in the world. Instead, we continue to intervene based on
lies and evil people.
Ask more questions.
Demand truthful answers.
An absolutely brilliant piece on libertarianism and its
consistency with conservative cultural practices.
“I will do so: if one desires moving toward libertarianism,
culture matters, and a certain kind of culture. One built on tradition, one that has a healthy sense about
improving what works (as defined above) and eliminating what doesn’t
work. One that
does not subsidize behavior of any sort. One that
allows the free market for culture and tradition to work.
Do you want a libertarian order? Start with that.”
Wednesday, November 1, 2017
An Insightful Russian Aphorism
“The only lesson of history is that it teaches us nothing.”
I saw this here: http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=9194
I saw this here: http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=9194
Monday, October 30, 2017
The Greater Good is an Evil Idea
“Here’s the problem: everybody thinks their cause
is righteous. Everybody thinks they are acting for the greater good. Those who
want universal health care may think they have the moral high ground, but those
who favor a market system are just as convinced that theirs is the correct
moral path. When you allow an exception to the rules of justice because “it’s
for the greater good” you open the door for literally everyone to use that same
excuse to do terrible things. What starts as an exception becomes the rule, and
violence escalates on all sides, bolstered by an ever-growing cloud of smug
self-righteousness.”
Logan Albright writes wisely about the often stated “we are
doing it for the greater good”. He is
correct in saying the worst atrocities are often committed under this
premise. This is, in fact, the excuse
the US military uses in its complete and utter destruction of the rest of the
world. We are fighting ISIS so it’s for
the greater good, we are fighting communists so it’s for the great good, we are
fighting NAZIs so it’s for the great good.
This is not acceptable to me and I beg you take a deep look inside and
see that the US military does a lot of bad in the name of the greater good.
“In the real world, the idea of ‘the greater good’
can be, and has been, used to justify anything, however perverse. I don’t care
how noble your motives are. Once you’re willing to sacrifice the lives of
innocents for your cause, you’ve lost the moral high ground. The truth is that
there is no greater good than respect for the rights and dignity of others.”
I love this post and this website. It is like The Onion except with a
libertarian worldview. A passage:
“In a new interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, the Gold
Star widow of La David Johnston provided a damning account of her conversation
with the president. Among other issues, she said that President Trump seemed to
forget her late husband’s name in the middle of the discussion.
While such a charge would be
difficult for most presidents to live down, Trump quickly responded to the
accusation on Twitter with an excuse that many may find plausible.
‘If I had to remember the name
of every American soldier who died in a pointless and obscure conflict on my
orders, I wouldn’t have time for anything else. No good!’ Trump wrote.
PolitiFact subsequently judged
the tweet to be false, concluding that Trump would in fact have time left over
even after memorizing America’s pointless casualties. However, their assessment
was controversial because it relied on a narrow definition of ‘pointless’,
which excluded current operations in Afghanistan, Yemen, and Somalia, among
others.”
Wednesday, October 25, 2017
The Real Cost of War
CIVILIAN deaths are UP 60% in 2017. And I argue that civilian casualties are
likely underreported. So-called
“collateral damage” (read the loss of
human life) is evil. You cannot argue another position. Would Americans tolerate drones dropping
bombs in America for the purpose of eliminating evil threats if it necessarily
resulted in death of innocent human beings?
“Of course, these civilian deaths are disregarded
as “collateral damage”: unfortunate, but necessary to protecting America’s
foreign interests. But good luck defining what these interests are, because it
seems that the term itself has been used more as an excuse for interventionism
rather than carry any substantial meaning.”
If a “crime” was committed but nobody else was harmed, is it
a crime? Answer: NO! This is why the act of taking drugs itself
cannot be a crime. Perhaps the things people
do on drugs are crimes, but this is not justification for limiting the intake
of them in the first place. Legalization
of drugs would reduce the prison population by 50%, and the DEA budget. The drug
cartels would go out of business immediately, and the blood and carnage
associated with this system of allocation would essentially be eradicated. Our world gets better the instant we legalize
all drugs.
Jury nullification is vital.
Juries must stand up to the egregious overstepping of power by the
government. And they must do it in every
single case other than those that aggressed on another human being.
“I saw the heart of the state’s logic laid bare before my eyes. If the state authority says something is illegal, who are we to
say no? It is shocking, in the eyes of ordinary citizens, for a person to
say, ‘No, if a law outlaws blue pens, I will not lock someone inside a human
cage to punish their disobedience.’”
More proof the US government is culpable in killing of
innocents. US urged the killing of
500,000 Indonesian thought-to-be communists in the 1960’s.
“The Donald's Treasury Department has borrowed an average of million
dollars per hour on a 24/7 basis ever since inauguration day!”
A nice piece considering the inverse of mutually assured destruction. Trump claims the US ICBM intercepting capable
is 97% effective. This claim is not
true. And dangerous. US strikes on N.
Korea become much more plausible once its citizens believe an ICBM intercept is
almost assured.
“The dangerous overconfidence being
demonstrated by the White House over the ability to intercept a North Korean
missile attack might indeed be in some part a bluff, designed to convince
Pyongyang that it if initiates a shooting war it will be destroyed while the
U.S. remains untouched. But somehow, with a president who doesn’t do subtle
very well, I would doubt that to be the case. And the North Koreans, able to
build a nuclear weapon and an ICBM, would surely understand the flaws in
missile defense as well as anyone.”
Nixon was Correctly Impeached for the Wrong Reason
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/10/egon-von-greyerz/a-world-of-lies-but-gold-will-reveal-the-truth/
Sure, Nixon is hated, and rightly so. Not for Watergate – he did nothing different,
in principle, than every other president in the last 75 years. What did he do
that was so abominable? Taking the US off the gold standard.
“All this [Watergate] broke out 11 months
after Nixon’s disastrous decision to take away the gold backing of the dollar
on Aug 15, 1971. Nixon should not have been impeached for the Watergate scandal
but for his decision to end the gold backing of the dollar. That disastrous
decision is what will lead to a total collapse of the world economy and the
financial system, starting sooner than anyone can imagine.”
A
scary comparison follows:
“Just like the world never questioned the
massive Madoff Ponzi scheme, no one ever questions the $2 quadrillion
(including derivatives and unfounded liabilities) Ponzi scheme that the whole
world is now involved in. Madoff was a saint compared to what the world is now
being subjected to. So why is no one protesting and why does everyone believe
that this will continue. Well, for exactly the same reasons that they believed
in Madoff – Greed and Vested Interest. Governments, central bankers, bankers,
fund and asset managers and investors don’t want anyone to cry wolf. The whole
world wants this wonderful Ponzi fraud to go on for ever. But it won’t. Instead
it will come to a very abrupt end in the next few years and no one will be
prepared.”
I support this. Tell
your Congressman to stop the war in Yemen.
This is really funny from Scott Adams.
Wednesday, October 18, 2017
Why and When? Two Important Questions
“A deepening anxiety about the
future of democracy around the world has spread over the past few years.
Emboldened autocrats and rising populists have shaken assumptions about the
future trajectory of liberal democracy, both in nations where it has yet to
flourish and countries where it seemed strongly entrenched. Scholars have
documented a global ‘democratic recession,’ and some now warn that even long-established ‘consolidated’
democracies could lose their commitment to freedom and slip toward more
authoritarian politics.”
I am guessing you might think this is concerning, I submit
that the question asked, is, itself the biggest concern. The choices for the question for what type of
government do you support are: representative democracy (quasi rule by
majority), direct democracy (rule by the majority), rule by experts, rule by a
strong leader or rule by the military. But I ask:
why do we have to be ruled at all? What benefit does being ruled give us? Why
can’t we live in complete voluntarism?
This is the most peaceful way of living.
No person should be forced to do anything he or she does not want to
do. Simple as that. If we follow that logic, we cannot have a
government. Government is by definition
ruling over people with force, and is NOT consistent with voluntarism.
The crash is coming! When?
That is the only question. Global
market cap for all companies is nearing all-time highs relative to global gross
domestic product. The chart shows we are
approaching levels before the crash of ’08-’09.
Beware!
Asking the Proper Questions
Sheldon Richman makes this excellent point:
“Tax debates might have better outcomes if we
began by acknowledging that the politicians take the money from the people who
earn it. It’s not the politicians’ money. It’s ours.”
Of course, the money
is the property of the person that earned it.
Yet, that is not how the government, the politicians, nor the news media
positions it. Here are a few examples:
“The term tax
break suggests the beneficiaries don’t really deserve it: giving people a
break rarely means giving them what is already theirs. On the other hand,
justifying a tax cut as a stimulant to economic growth implies that if a
tax increase would accomplish that (as some argue), then an increase
would be justified.”
“The implicit premise that the money
belongs to the politicians can be detected in various ways. For example, whenever
a tax cut is proposed, critics ask, ‘How are you going to pay for that?’ That’s
a peculiar question indeed.”
“The right question is “If taxes are
cut, how will the government pay for its programs?” Now the question has
shifted from taxes to spending. That’s progress because it directs our
attention to whether any given program should be paid for.”
Start demanding the answers to the right questions. That’s the way to real progress.
Tuesday, October 17, 2017
Have a Little Faith
Jacob Hornberger says:
“The response of hospitals to the
Las Vegas massacre confirms what I have been saying for the past 28 years of
FFF’s existence: that Americans can trust themselves and freedom and get rid of
Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, and all other governmental involvement in
healthcare.”
Who among us hasn’t heard the dramatic claim that any reform
to Medicare will push Grandma in her wheelchair off the cliff, and that paring
back Medicaid leaves the impoverished without care at all?
Hornberger’s response:
“One big problem with that argument
is that it is Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare that have sent healthcare costs
soaring through the roof. Prior to the enactment of Medicare and Medicaid,
healthcare costs were reasonably priced. In fact, most people didn’t even have major
medical insurance. That’s because medical costs were so reasonable, sort of
like going to the grocery store. The only medical insurance that people bought
was to cover catastrophic illnesses.
The reason we have Obamacare is
because Medicare and Medicaid sent healthcare cost soaring through the roof.
The reason that statists are called for a complete government takeover of
healthcare is because Obamacare has only made the situation worse.”
The article gives real world pre-Medicaid-era examples of
how free markets and charity worked to provide quality care to those able to
pay and those not, while at the same time providing doctors a salary
commensurate for the services they provide and the joy of the profession they
pursued.
So what then is the answer to our “healthcare crisis?” I agree with Hornseberger.
“The solution is: Repeal Medicare,
Medicaid, and Obamacare. End all governmental involvement in healthcare.
Separate healthcare and the state. Establish a total free-market healthcare
system, one based on economic liberty and voluntary charity.”
How do I know this would work?
“It’s called faith in the free
market and in voluntary charity. I can’t prove that everyone would do it. I
simply have no doubts that enough doctors and hospitals would do it.”
The example in Las Vegas is a strong argument in favor of
getting the government completely out of healthcare. We need more faith that
people will work to help others.
Stock Market Crash?
“Jim Rogers observed that the 2008 financial crisis was caused
due to a rise in debt, and since then the debt has gone through the roof. In
fact, Alberto Gallo of Algebris Investments, in a blog written in July this
year noted that global debt levels have almost quadrupled, rising 276% in the
last decade to $217 trillion.”
The stock market will crash. The crash will be YUGE. We just don’t know when or how painful it
will be.
Thursday, October 12, 2017
Where is Your Moral Compass?
Walter Williams with some more wise words on rights versus
smart decisions.
“Then there’s the issue of campus
rape and sexual assault. Before addressing that, let me ask you a question. Do
I have a right to place my wallet on the roof of my car, go into my house, have
lunch, take a nap and return to my car and find my wallet just where I placed
it? I think I have every right to do so, but the real question is whether it
would be a wise decision. Some college women get stoned, use foul language and
dance suggestively. I think they have a right to behave that way and not be
raped or sexually assaulted. But just as in the example of my placing my wallet
on the roof of my car, I’d ask whether it is wise behavior.
Many of our
problems, both at our institutions of higher learning and in the nation at
large, stem from the fact that we’ve lost our moral compasses and there’s not a
lot of interest in reclaiming them. As a matter of fact, most people don’t see
our major problems as having anything to do with morality.”
NCAA Cartel
Bryan Caplan provides some wise thoughts related to the “controversy” a few months back when Vice
President Pence declined to attend dinner with another female without his wife. He reminds us that even in something as
simple as men and women socializing with one another, we can never forget to
consider the seen and the unseen, the cost and the benefit. Read his brief blog to understand.
Capitalism means nice guys (and girls) finish first. Crony capitalism
(read capitalism with government regulation) means nice guys finish last.
“But to me, the evidence is all
around: we ride Uber and Lyft, we subscribe to Netflix, we expect free two-day
deliveries with Amazon Prime, we take pride in being foodies, and we spend
copious amounts of time on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. All of these
everyday delights we take for granted are the fruits of the labor of free minds, free
peoples, and free markets.”
Monetarism and Keynesianism are two sides of the same coin
says Stockman. I concur.
“The answer to every economic problem is one
version of statism or another. If monetarism doesn’t succeed in “pump priming”
with credit and inflation “stimulus” then surely the fiscal side will with
“automatic stabilizers” and indiscriminate government expansion. These two
grand economic strategies are often separated as if they are distinct sets of
disparate theory; they are not. They represent two sides of the same coin, both
being different means to accomplish redistribution as economic catalyst and
forward agent.”
“Mises was not primarily anti-socialist. He was pro-capitalist. His opposition to socialism, and
to all forms of government intervention, stemmed from his support for capitalism
and from his underlying love of individual freedom and conviction that the
self-interests of free men are harmonious — indeed, that one man’s gain under
capitalism is not only not another’s loss, but is actually others’ gain. Mises was a consistent champion of the
self-made man, of the intellectual and business pioneer, whose activities are
the source of progress for all mankind and who, he showed, can flourish only
under capitalism.”
I agree, a Nobel Prize for Mises. Required reading of Mises works in all
colleges and universities would greatly benefit the world.
“He deserves to receive every token of
recognition and memorial that our society can bestow. For as much as anyone in
history, he labored to preserve it. If he is widely enough read, his labors may
actually succeed in saving it.”
AV à Indeed, Mark Perry is
correct. The NCAA is nothing but a
cartel provider of athletic talent. It
is not a surprise that when a scarce resource (in this case basketball talent)
is not distributed via the price system, black markets will sprout up. Black markets have always existed and will
always exist in places where complete and total laissez-faire capitalism
absent. Any and all regulation is bad
regulation for this purpose.
Public Enemy #1 - - The State
Walter Block responds to criticism of the free market model
of criminal punishment. This oft-stated
criticism cites the many inequities such as discrimination against the poor, racism,
sexism and other prejudices. Block
highlights the real culprit in these consequential inequities – the State, and
not free enterprise. He aptly illustrates his point through
segregated busing in the civil rights era.
Why didn’t free enterprise rise up to offer blacks an alternative to
being forced to ride in the back of the bus?
Nope. The State itself precluded
in through Jim Crow Laws denying such permits.
The enemy is the State, and not free markets. Quite the polar opposite, the answer to our
problems lies NOT in the State, but in the free market.
How many people in America know the US army is now targeting
Russian military personnel? The enemy is
the State.
Wednesday, September 27, 2017
My NFL/National Anthem Protest Thoughts
because everyone wants my two cents....
1.
I would not use this avenue for a protest.
2.
But other people can do so if they so choose.
3.
Many on the right who are so offended really
should understand what the US military actually does. Hint – it isn’t the huge peace bearing
organization you think it is. (See
earlier posts!)
4.
Why would I care what the players in the NFL
think about politics? I don’t ask a
priest about economics or politics.
5.
I don’t really understand the absolute outrage
of people on the right. It just doesn’t
piss me off the way it seems to piss off so many others. I can’t be bothered to be annoyed by people
with such limited ideas.
6.
What specifically are the NFL players
protesting? Institutional racism? Bogus.
Capitalism? Bogus. Wrongful
deaths of black victims by cops?
Perhaps, but don’t limit wrongful killings to color of skin. It happens to whites as well.
7.
There are plenty of reasons to protest - wars, the welfare state,
militarized police, civil asset forfeiture, or the role of government in
general. Read this blog and you will
find many valid reasons to protest.
8.
People on the left need to stop saying, “Trump
is wrong.” He didn’t threaten using force, and he even implied it is the
decision of the owners to do as they please with their organization. He may be STUPID but he simply gave an
opinion and is entitled to do so.
9.
I suspect the majority of NFL owners would
rather the players didn’t kneel but they know that in today’s day and age you
cannot be anything other than a social justice warrior or ESPN and the rest of
the lunatic left will accuse you of being a NAZI.
1.
Roger Goodell is a bad person, a bad leader and a
bad face of the NFL. Several issues have
come up during his tenure and I haven’t seen him handle any correctly. Admittedly I don’t follow this closely but:
1) he seems to promote domestic violence (and then do a 180 and presume guilt
until proven innocent and 2) he appears to discriminate against the Patriots
unfairly. Note I am a 3rd
party observer here. I don’t have much a
care for anything NFL so my opinion may be wrong but it isn’t necessarily
biased one way or another.
Irony
This is what interventionist foreign policy looks like.
“Once the most prosperous country in the Maghreb under the eccentric
Colonel Gadaffi (yes, he was a tinpot dictator and his hands were by no means
clean), it has been turned into rubble amid a civil war between a tiny
Western-supported government, various military factions and fundamentalist
Islamists in the wake of the intervention Ms. Clinton wholeheartedly supported.”
This is why nuclear brinksmanship is SOOO dangerous. One false positive and the world ends.
After a false positive while monitoring of nuclear
monitoring in 1983, the Russian waited for confirmation:
If Petrov had simply sounded the alarm for his
superiors, as he was trained and ordered to do, there is a good chance
counterstrikes would have been launched on behalf of the USSR and the world may
not be as it is today.
Fast forward to today:
The escalation between the United States and
North Korea builds by the day. As each president continues to taunt the other,
either by showing off military might or dishing out childish insults, the world
gets closer to the possibility of nuclear war: one that could also involve the
nuclear arsenals of China, even Russia. Unlike Petrov, neither world leader has
taken a moment to fully think this through. A nuclear war is in absolutely
no one’s interest.
Read this one for an accurate, yet sad interpretation of
certain quotes in the most recent Trump speech to the UN.
Oppressive regimes cannot endure
forever…
We can only hope.
Imagine that, the JFK files go missing mere months before
they are set to be released …
Thursday, September 21, 2017
Alexander Hamilton - My Least Favorite Founding Father
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/09/thomas-dilorenzo/americas-hamiltonian-empire-of-lies/
An absolutely scathing piece on Alexander Hamilton. The Founding Father of the monopolist rule of the federal government, national level court decisions, the Civil War and the Federal Reserve. Hard to imagine one man creating more destruction with his horrid interpretation of the Constitution.
An absolutely scathing piece on Alexander Hamilton. The Founding Father of the monopolist rule of the federal government, national level court decisions, the Civil War and the Federal Reserve. Hard to imagine one man creating more destruction with his horrid interpretation of the Constitution.
Wednesday, September 20, 2017
Who Works for Whom
AV à I hate the term “the thin blue line.” It implies that without these public servants
(that we are FORCED to pay via the THEFT of our earnings called
taxes) America would turn into something akin to the Purge movie. How ludicrous. Private defense corporations and police
forces would immediately pop up and expand.
Realize that they already exist and already provide more security than
the public police.
For what it is worth I don’t have an
opinion on this recent police shooting trial in St. Louis. The plaintiff seems to be a bad guy. But it is certainly plausible that the cop
planted the gun, and I unfortunately wouldn’t be surprised at all if that were
the case.
Some will claim the police work for
me, the taxpayer. Yes, I agree that you
(and I) pay taxes (at least most of us do!)
But I vehemently oppose the logic that because we pay taxes, the public
service providers work for us. No. We are all forced to pay taxes. Bureaucrats decide where and how
those tax dollars are spent, NOT US.
Think of it the way Dave Smith suggests in his comedy special Libertas.
Paying taxes is like getting mugged on the street and then claiming that the
guy who mugged you now works for you. In
reality, you work for them!
We the people make things, we provide
services, we grow the economy, and we provide economic value for other
people. With the value we have created,
government comes and steals a portion of it.
Sometimes up to 40% or so. Hence,
paying taxes IS like getting mugged. Biggest difference is the taxpayers
they have been so mind-f****d by the MAN that they think the police work for
them.
“… Americans are basically good people who
generally want what’s best for the world. If they weren’t, the unelected power
establishment which rules over them wouldn’t have to keep making up lies about
babies in incubators and protecting their family from Weapons of Mass
Destruction in order to secure US hegemony. If they ever told the public the
truth, they’d be dealing with hundreds of millions of heavily-armed Americans
telling them to get their sociopathic asses out of here.”
I am not a 9/11 denier, but I’m not entirely a believer
either. I am simply reminded that the US
government has repeatedly falsified evidence in order to justify the use of
military might. Read the few examples
described in the article. Remember when the
Syrians supposedly used chemical weapons to gas civilians earlier in 2017. The incident was later identified as being
perpetrated by ISIS to prod a US response to the Assad regime.
Markets are at work in everything. A consultant charges fee to help college
girls get the best sorority bid they can.
Constitution Day
“Rather than bow down and
venerate the Constitution on September 17, Americans should dust off the
Articles of Confederation and study the handiwork of the Continental Congress.
In it they will find a plan of government that makes liberty the primary object
of government and power serving as a mere satellite.”
Why would we blindly celebrate
the Constitution? Maybe we should try
following it first. If you don’t see
that 95% of what the government does is unconstitutional (including Medicare
and Medicaid and Social Security and Wars and spying) then you should spend a
few moments reading the document as well as the Federalist papers that were
written by the same people.
Wake Up America, We Are Drowning In Debt
I’m finding it difficult to choose a quote to reprint here
so I highly advise you read the whole post. This is 100% true, scary
and a major issue.
“Those
in power pretend near zero interest rates eight years after the recession was
supposedly over is normal. They pretend $500 billion to $1.4 trillion annual
deficits are normal. They pretend 20% unemployment is really 4.4%. They pretend
the stock market is at all-time highs due to an improving economy rather than
central bank easy money and corporate stock buybacks. They pretend $20 trillion
of debt and $200 trillion of unfunded welfare promises is no problem. We are
living in the grand delusion.”
Get over your transgender and statue-removing complaints.
Unsustainable debt and annual deficits are THE true issues of our time.
Friday, September 15, 2017
The Reason I Advocate For the Right to Price Gouge
Read this excellent piece from a conservative site about the
deep state and neoconservative foreign policy that is in no way conservative.
“The founders didn’t envision a CIA,
let alone a national police force. Just for example, the FBI was only made
necessary when the federal government dramatically expanded in size and
scope due to Prohibition,
which only was made necessary when Americans decided to turn to government, not
to the church and civil society, to remedy the country’s ills.
The point is that the intelligence
bureaucracy will always be politicized, as long as it is endowed with such
immense power. The deep state shouldn’t just be brought to heel under President
Trump’s authority, its size and scope should be reduced so that no president
can wield its current accumulation of power.”
I copy this post as a quick reminder from Dr. Block on Say’s
Law
“From: R
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 1:44 PM
To: Walter Block
Subject: Re: Austrian Economics
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 1:44 PM
To: Walter Block
Subject: Re: Austrian Economics
Hi, I have a doubt in
economics which I got after reading the Atlas shrugged by Ayn Rand. I would be
highly obliged if you could help me with this query:-Causality is an
irreversible absolute. One cannot eat a cake before he bakes it. Therefore
production is the cause and consumption is the effect. In any Credit
transaction we consume before we produce which is a reversal of causality.
Therefore any form of credit should not exist. Where am I going wrong in my
thinking? R
Dear R: You say this: ‘In
any Credit transaction we consume before we produce which is a reversal of
causality.’ This is false. A correct statement would be, ‘When we borrow, we
consume before we produce which is a reversal of causality.’ But in a credit
transaction, there are TWO sides. The borrower and the lender. Before the
borrower can consumer, the lender had to produce. So, production always comes
before consumption. No exceptions.”
Three important takeaways from this article:
·
“The economics of price gouging is simple. Price gouging is
simply charging market prices for goods that are in high demand and short
supply. Natural disasters don’t negate economic laws.”
·
“For the government to try and calculate how much prices should
be allowed to rise on certain goods before, during, and after a natural
disaster is pure Soviet-style central planning. Price-gouging laws are contrary
the free market, free enterprise, and freedom itself.”
·
“Price-gouging laws grossly violate property
rights.”
I am with Laurence Vance. Price
gouging is good. Absolutely everything about it is good. It allocates resources better, conveys
scarcity better, and creates incentives for increased supply better than any
other system of allocation. While these
are all good reasons supporting price gouging, none is stronger than the moral
reason for it. It is the only decision
that respects property rights. Telling
me what I can and cannot do with my property (keep in mind that this ultimately
ends with the threat of being thrown in a cage if I don’t comply) is completely
and utterly immoral and we should never force someone to do something. Hence, I support allowing price gouging and
find anyone that doesn’t contemptible.
I also like the conclusion of this
post:
“None of this means that raising prices on
essential goods in the midst of a natural disaster is always moral, just, and
right. But that is a matter of conscience, religion, and ethics, not law.”
I concur with Phil Giraldi. I am offended by libraries dedicated to
presidents in general, and specifically to the last two idiots that oversaw the
executive branch.
“If we really think we can eradicate evil in our country by
destroying anything symbolic or plausibly linked to the bad old days, then
let’s get those bulldozers rolling. Bill, Barack and W can kiss their libraries
goodbye, though I am still wondering what to do with the associated think
tanks. Just imagine what a George W. Bush think tank must look like. Good
grief!”
Hayek and the Security of a Social Safety Net
The ABA’s main function is no doubt as an interest
group. This has been obvious for
decades. Yet the ABA remains as a
government created monopoly on lawyers.
Give me a break
“In recent decades the ABA has repeatedly departed from its
proper, politically neutral task of promoting the rule of law and the sound
administration of justice and taken partisan stances on controversial political
issues. Of course, a private organization may do this, but then it should not
be treated as an apolitical representative of the entire legal profession
entitled to quasi-governmental status. It is time to treat the ABA as an
interest group like any other.”
Hornberger makes the important point:
“While it’s easy for many Americans
to recognize tyranny when it is committed by foreign regimes, it is much more
difficult for them to recognize tyranny when it is committed by their own
government. But tyranny is tyranny, whether it involves punishing people for
booze or drugs and regardless of the particular regime that is doing the
punishing.”
Iran bans the production, sale and use of alcohol
prohibition. Seems ludicrous to us, but
we did it during Prohibition, AND we currently prohibit other drugs. We have even waged our War on Drugs for
decades. Both Iran and the U.S impose
government tyranny in restricting individual freedom to consume alcohol/drugs. We
can go further and debate the other costs and benefits of legalizing these
vices. But regardless, legalizing drugs
is the only moral path in keeping with our individual rights. Anything less is tyranny.
Scary stuff here:
“Sure, we may have no
sympathy for this particular issue. However, the precedent is set and they can
do this to you for taxes. The government can claim you have an account in
Bangladesh and you say you do not. The judge then throws you in prison for life
until you tell them the location of something that may not even exist. They
need not prove anything anymore, they rely on the judge claiming he has
inherent power to effectively kill you. What next – off with your head?”
AV à An excellent quote
from Hayek in The Road to Serfdom:
“Thus, the more we try to provide full
security by interfering with the market system, the greater the insecurity
becomes; and, what is worse, the greater becomes the contrast between the
security of those to whom it is granted as a privilege and the ever-increasing
insecurity of the under-privileged And the more security becomes a privilege,
and the greater the danger to those excluded from it, the higher will security
be prized. As the number of the privileged increases and the difference between
their security and the insecurity of the others increases, a completely new set
of social values gradually arises. It is no longer independence but security
which gives rank and status, the certain right to a pension more than
confidence in his making good which makes a young man eligible for marriage,
while insecurity becomes the dreaded state of the pariah in which those who in
their youth have been refused admission to the haven of a salaried position
remain for life.”
Allow
me to explain a bit. One major assumption
Hayek makes in this quote is that security (in wages, occupation etc) cannot
exist for everyone at all times. This is
tantamount to socialism, which cannot work for a plethora of reasons of which I
will not explain here – other than what follows. The crucial lapse ensuring the failure of
socialism is that, absent free markets, no one can know what the price of
goods/services should be in order to use resources to help the most people.
It
is helpful to think of this quote from Hayek in terms of an economic pie with two
pieces – 1) those with security and 2) those without security (in job, wages,
income, and lifestyle.) When we
guarantee the income of some, the pie, by definition, becomes proportionately
fixed in size. We limit creative
destruction in this segment/area of the economy and we reduce the number of
entrepreneurs. (By contrast, in an
economy in which nobody has absolute security, everybody must become an
entrepreneur in the sense of always positioning him or herself to provide the
most value to the most people.) Furthermore, the current portion of the pie
taken by people with security leaves behind a relatively smaller piece of the
pie with which others without security can possibly find jobs, income and added
value opportunities.
The
point of Hayek’s quote is that this division between the secure and the
un-secure will continue to create divisions in society. The divisions will yield power to politicians
who give security to more groups. The
irony is by giving these groups more security we limit opportunities for others
within the existing economy. And we
limit the future growth of the economy.
This
phenomenon most certainly becomes a death spiral, and is impetus almost always
comes from government. This spiral
ultimately must end in a revolution. We
are yet to see the revolution but I venture to say it won’t be pretty. Perhaps this is one meaning of Hayek’s
brilliant phrase, “The Road to Serfdom.”
Don Boudreaux’s excellent quote of the
day from James Mill’s Elements of Political Economy:
“The benefit which is derived from
exchanging one commodity for another, arises, in all cases, from the
commodity received, not from the
commodity given. When one country exchanges, in other words, when one
country traffics with another, the whole of its advantage consists in the
commodities imported. It benefits
by the importation, and by nothing else.”
And yet the moron in
the White House wants to stop China from giving us free stuff on grounds of
dumping. I feel like I am living in a
time in which we cannot see the most obvious of points. Imports are good. We have a trade deficit, precisely a good
thing. People send us a lot of stuff to
use and enjoy.
Civil
asset forfeiture is absolutely, positively 100% not acceptable. This is inhumane. This is unconstitutional. This is evil.
This cannot be allowed to continue.
Props to the guy who filmed this video and raised tens of thousands of
dollars for the hot dog vendor. I hope
this officer is fired immediately.
Tuesday, September 12, 2017
Capitalism - The Greatest System in the World
“But what price gouging does, as Don
Boudreaux points
out, is cause people far from the
crisis spot to pitch in by temporarily foregoing buying the water, plywood,
etc. that, due to price gouging, are priced higher even outside the directly
affected area.”
I hear and read many Americans expressing distaste for
capitalism. Democrats hate it. Republicans
claim to like it, but secretly don’t (also known as Republican In Name Only).
And libertarians claim capitalism to be imperfect, yet they acknowledge it’s
the best we have.
I fancy the Libertarian view more than the other two. But I’ll say this until the day I die:
“Capitalism is precisely a perfect system.”
Those who deny this truth simply do not understand the beauty of
entrepreneurship, the knowledge that prices convey, spontaneous order and
incentives. If you understand these four
things you will agree that capitalism is not ‘”cold” or “heartless’ or any
other verbal cheap shot. Instead, capitalism is an amazing and beautiful system,
which allocates resources where they provide the most benefit to society. It allows for the maximum number of people to
be “well off.” It requires that you must
provide value to someone else in order to be compensated. It does NOT include taking by force (which,
not coincidentally, is all that government is).
We must flip the script.
Capitalism is not only the best we have. Capitalism provides an amazing
system that will endure forever as the best system in a world of people with
unlimited desires and potentials. Social
suffering in our world stems always and everywhere from government
interference, be it fascism, socialism, crony monarchs or crony US presidents.
Given even a moderate acceptance of the principles and
benefits of capitalism, Federal government spending could be reduced by 99.9%,
allowing free markets to function to solve most, if not all, concerns. The remaining $4.5 million Federal budget
would be laser focused on efforts to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide
for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity.” (US Constitution)
Even so, I still claim the $4.5 million is too much.
Read this excellent blog post on hating the State. Do you hate it in an abstract manner or in
its specific oppressive functions? I
think I agree with the majority of this post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)