Showing posts with label free markets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label free markets. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

The value of money


Pity the poor statists. They got their global crisis, but by the time it arrived they had squandered all the public trust. Yeah, we know it’s broken, but we sure as hell don’t entrust the solution to the people who broke it.

Big Government a Bigger Threat to Us than Big Business
Recent Gallup polls show a fall to barely 41 percent in the number of Americans who see their county as divided into “haves” and “have-nots.” Some 64 percent of Americans -- and 48 percent of Democrats -- see “big government” as a greater threat to the country than “big business,” a number near record levels. (Clive Crook – A Crisis of Leadership)
It's a pretty good article Clive Crook has written, but he stumbles in a few places, such as when he questions  free markets (why do people like him never question government interventions?)
Orthodox economics, according to recent reports, says markets are always right. Really? (Clive Crook – A Crisis of Leadership)
Yes, really. The market was right when house prices crashed. Free money stoked rampant speculation and irrational exuberance, and the walls came tumbling down. The markets are "right" in the same cruel way that the grocery store cash register says the groceries you bought add up top $210 when you only have $200 in your pocket.

It's no different with money and its market price.  The only thing keeping the dollar from crashing is that the Euro is even worse.  We are the least dirty shirt.

Theft by Government is Still Theft
Since the abandonment of Bretton Woods, the dollar has lost 77% of its value against the GDP deflator and 97% of its value relative to gold. In October 2011, real wages for ordinary workers were 6.7% lower than they had been 39 years before. This is all the cumulative effect of 1% lower growth rates for decades.
How can we reverse course? A modern version of a link to gold for the dollar is known as the “price rule.” That means the Fed is to be guided in its monetary policies by the market prices of a basket of price sensitive commodities, such as gold, oil, silver, copper, and other precious metals and minerals. When those prices start to rise, that signals inflation, and time for the Fed to slow down the money expansion. When those prices start to fall, that signals deflation and recession, and time for the Fed to step up money expansion.
The Fed would then be guided by markets, rather than by progressive bureaucrats who think they know it all and should rule over the rest of us in their wisdom (see, e.g., disastrous inflation/recession cycles of the 1970s). That would have the added advantage of enabling the Fed to dismiss most of its troublemaking staff, which could mostly be replaced by a few interns monitoring market prices. (The Monetary Foundations of Economic Prosperity)
The US Government is devaluing our savings and purchasing power while food and energy costs have risen around 10% over the past 18 months.  That's why you're feeling poorer despite the lollipops and sunshine being peddled by the Obama hallelujah choir in the press.  Government theft is eating us alive.  

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Living Wills and the Will to Live

When the public funds your lifestyle, it has a right to question your lifestyle choices.  That includes health care.
"It is a good day to die"
-- Old Lodge Skins in Little Big Man
"We've got a duty to die and get out of the way with all of our machines and artificial hearts and everything else like that and let the other society, our kids, build a reasonable life."
-- Colorado Governor Richard Lamm
A good discussion broke out in the comment thread of a recent blog post, Rule of Law. We got off on a healthcare tangent, but it was an interesting exploration of life and death.

Finntann kicked it off with a raw, ripped-off scab look at reality that had a sad ending ...
The failure of modern medicine is not in treatement or cost but directly attributable to our innate desire for immortality.
It's harsh, but we treat those that we should not treat. We refuse to accept the diagnosis of mortality. We trade vast fortunes for six months, a year, two years to the detriment of all involved, except those making money off of it.
What is reasonable action and what is reasonable cost? How much is six months of additional life worth?
My sister died of breast cancer a little over a year ago with medical bills well into the six figures. In the end, she wished she had gone to Europe instead of to the doctor.
AOW then chimed in with a report from real life about insurance and existing conditions. As her blogger buddies know, she's been navigating the health care system as she nurses her husband back to good health. She knows what she is talking about.

Ducky had good advice on medical directives...
My family knows exactly what to do. If quality of life has been lost, end it.
This spurred KP (after telling a great story about a Vietnam war combat pilot) to remind us that it's not always so simple:
A perfect example would be stroke in the midbrain. Patient is unconcious, surgeon tells you the stroke is "in a good place" making decent recovery possible. You have five minutes to decide what to do at 4:30am. The directive isn't worth the paper it is written on. You will decide while trying to gather some degree of medical certainty.
Quite simply, all of this is properly the purview of the individual and the family, upon consultation with the family's doctor and pastor.

Collectivizing health care by pushing our money into a big government pot makes our private affairs public

In a government-run, publicly funded healthcare system, every medical and lifestyle decision becomes the purview of every taxpayer and of the armies of bureaucrats who are charged with the custody of government funds.

Justice Kagan will shake her gavel at you and tell you to each your congressionally-mandated vegetables, and put out that cigarette!  If government-enforced diets and exercise save me from paying for the diabetes, obesity and other expensive health problems of the fatties among us, why not?

Life and Death

Who's life is worth more, the 87 year old physics PhD who is still doing productive research, or the poor child living in a ghetto?

Government-created scarcity will inevitably bring about such utilitarian decisions.  Wouldn't it be better to get government out of it, completely?  Free up the insurance industry to craft policies tailored to specific groups and let a well-policed free market set prices and determine what care looks like.  More importantly, let the consumer see what the real price of health care is.

Cut out the red tape and overregulation, and set the consumer free in the marketplace with his or her own dollars, and prices will come down.  They always do.  The truly indigent could be helped by government paying their health care premiums instead of setting up a whole bureaucracy.

The alternative is a scolding nanny state making all your decisions for you, creating a nation of infants.  Some would say we're already a long way down that road.

Monday, October 31, 2011

Free market triumph

Happy All Saints Eve
How do you like your bank fees?  Hidden or clearly stated?

Congress passed a law to “protect consumers” by banning credit card companies and banks from charging merchants a fee for each transaction.

Banks complied, and merchants pocketed the difference, saving the consumer nothing.

Next, Bank of America did the honest thing and announced a flat $5 per month fee for cardholders to make up for the revenue congress took from them.

Result: Consumer is $5 per month poorer and store owners are marginally richer. Thank you Dick Durban and Congress!

Now comes Chase, Citigroup and others saying they will not charge cardholders a fee, giving consumers a clear choice. Unlike government action, the free marketplace gives consumers more choices, as merchants compete for our dollars.

Thanks to the free market, a customer can now choose to do business with a bank that explicitly charges her the fee, or she can go with the bank that hides if from her.

Daily News Corner

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

American Liberalism is an Incoherent Hodgepodge

Yoinked from Boil the Beast

American Liberalism is a loose confederation odd-ball interest groups.  It has no moral foundation and no philosophical underpinnings.  It is an illogical, immoral, agenda-driven, emotion-laden farrago of fear-mongering and grievance-nursing.






Behold the myriad inconsistencies of American Liberalism:

* Derisively insist their is no God, yet use the teachings of Jesus to defend their redistributionist schemes

* Trumpet free speech for America-haters and pornographers, but not for Christians in the public square or conservative talk show hosts in the free market of ideas

* Denigrate the right to keep and bear arms, which is clearly stated in the constitution, but use obscure clauses to launch multi-trillion dollar statist schemes

* "Pro-Choice" unless it's the food you eat, light bulbs you use in your home, health care options, school you send your kids to, secret ballots for union votes...

* Scream and whine about rightwingchristiantheocrats taking over the country, but defend religious extremists who actually blow things up and kill people, including their own family members

* Deride those of us who cling to our bibles and our Christian faith as dimwitted toothless hicks who want to foist our morality on everyone, yet naively and unthinkingly lap up everything Al Gore and the other liberal high priests tell them.  And insist the rest of us bow down at their altars as well.
  
* Teachers cannot mention God, but liberals insist their dogmatic religious tenets of statism uber alles, multiculturalism, and homosexual fetishism be preached in every classroom. 

Let Them Eat Food Stamps 

Most insidious, liberals would deny a poor mother the money-making opportunity to make burritos and other food items in her own home and then sell them on the street. It's all in the name of food safety and "keeping the flow of the city," dontcha know...

Handmaidens of the state like Jersey actually say stuff like this, never once pausing to consider how "health and safety" red tape serves as a corporate-sponsored barrier to entry into the free market.

Just give that young mother some food stamps, right?  It's so much easier (and enslaving) than giving her economic opportunity.