Tag Archives: unions

Something Wicked This Way Comes – Doug Casey

From Conversations with Casey:

(Interviewed by Louis James, Editor, International Speculator)

L: Doug, a couple weeks ago we talked about mass riots spreading beyond the Middle East, and you were right. Yemen, Bahrain, and Libya – hundreds reported dead in Tripoli. But I see on Google News that some very brave individuals have organized protests in Moscow and Beijing. And now we have tens of thousands protesting in Madison, Wisconsin, citing the successful uprising in Egypt. There are counter-protesters in Wisconsin, fears of violence… talk of the governor calling up the National Guard. Is the spirit of revolution in the air?

Doug: On a deep level, there is a common thread running through these events. But, in bankrupt Wisconsin, the pro-union forces trying to hold on to artificially high wages and benefits have nothing in common with the hungry, oppressed, miserable people who took to the streets of Egypt. It’s fashionable for all sorts of people with a grievance to call those Egyptians “freedom fighters” and identify themselves with them. I’m a freedom-fighter, you’re a rebel, he’s a terrorist. The semantics are used to muddy the distinctions, not to clarify.

To a fair degree the Egyptians really are freedom fighters – they actually did oust a tyrant – but they are just going to replace the old boss with a new boss. It’s not been a radical revolution – at least not so far. The odds are that the new boss will be every bit as bad as, or worse, than the old boss, regardless of whatever window dressings of reform he uses to gain international acceptance for his regime.

Back in Wisconsin, it’s completely disingenuous – actually ridiculous and shameful – for unionized state employees to label themselves freedom fighters. These are the people who most directly slop at the trough at the public’s expense. They’re minions of the ruling class. They’re not trying to overthrow an unjust situation, they’re rioting to maintain it.

L: So, what’s the deeper, connecting thread?

Doug: Economic hardship. It seems to me that the driving factor behind these protests spreading in the Arab world – and what pushed them from inevitable to imminent – was rising commodity prices, especially food prices. Food prices are also rising rapidly in the U.S. Many fruits and vegetables have doubled, and bread is up 50% over the last year. Cotton has tripled over the last two years. That’s going to make clothing more expensive. The difference is that most Americans don’t live hand to mouth, not the way most Arabs do. But nonetheless they don’t like to see their standard of living drop, and they’ll strike out as well. As we just discussed in January, it would be most prudent to prepare for chaotic times ahead.

L: Oppressed Middle Easterners take to the streets out of hunger. Wisconsin union members take to the streets because their entitlements are threatened. Both relate to the rising costs of real things resulting from the global currency crisis, which is part of the larger train-wreck of the old economic world order.

Doug: Yes, and with modern communications, widespread public sentiment can be mobilized with speed never seen before. But you know, it’s a bit similar to what happened back in the ’60s – although for different reasons. We had simultaneous riots in Europe – mostly in France, but also in Germany and Italy. In Paris, they were tearing up the cobblestone streets to throw rocks at the cops. You had the race riots in Detroit, LA, and Washington, DC, among other U.S. cities, and later, anti-war protests. At exactly the same time, you had the Red Guard and a huge conflagration in China. Three major centers of world civilization erupted in civil unrest at once. But those riots were strictly political. Today’s riots are economic, and that’s much more serious. Political riots are generally for sport. Economic riots are the real thing.

I’ve no doubt that with the economic, social, and political forces at work in the world today, we’ll see more unrest, lots more. But it’s going to be much more violent, and much more dangerous than it was in the ’60s, because the world is much less stable.

L: And more countries have nuclear weapons. If more U.S. puppets fall in the Middle East, that’s going to be really bad for Israel, which is surrounded and outnumbered by foes who have no interest whatsoever in reaching a peaceful accommodation. If pressed hard enough, Israel could go nuclear, the threat of which has not stopped individuals from shooting rockets into their midst. I know you don’t like making predictions, but does your guru-sense tell you that’s likely to actually happen soon?

Doug: Nobody knows, of course, but the odds favor new leaders in most of the Arab countries – and most of the Muslim world. Israel is opposed to any change, because they have an accommodation with the old governments. The same is true with the U.S. Israel and the U.S. are like a nasty dog and his bad-tempered master – although I’m not sure which is which. Sometimes the master kicks the dog, sometimes the dog bites the master, but they still work together.

Anyway, now both the U.S. and Israel are going to have to cut new deals with new governments. I suspect the new governments will be less inclined to be U.S. stooges, and more likely to be actively anti-Israel.

Meanwhile, bankrupt state governments in the U.S. could precipitate chaos there, before the balloon goes up elsewhere. We are in uncharted waters, in which anything can happen – and probably will. The key is that most people in the world live on less than $3 a day, most of it goes to food, and food prices are exploding upwards. As is fuel.

L: I remember the terrible events in New Orleans when civil order broke down just a couple years ago. Most Americans seem to be ignoring that embarrassing event, and have long forgotten the Watts riots and Kent State. How do you get such people to consider the facts without sounding like Chicken Little?

Doug: Good question. When the going gets rough, it often turns out that civilization is really just a pretty veneer that lies on top of a fetid cesspool. The fact of the matter is that many – actually most – people suffer from serious psychological aberrations that rise to the surface if you push the right hot buttons. Losing what they have, and going hungry – especially when they see thieves like most politicians and their pals making billions – won’t sit well with the masses. It’s going to push a lot of hot buttons.

I don’t like thinking about rioting and martial law and all of that unpleasantness either; people get hurt, property is destroyed, and so forth. But at this point, a good dose of that looks almost inevitable. What we’ve seen in Tunisia, Egypt, now Bahrain, and Libya – it’s not just a flash in the pan. It’s the start of something big.

L: It’s a pity to see so much human energy being unleashed, creating powerful forces for change, at a time when it’s unlikely that that power will be used for good. So few people have any grasp of basic economics – they have no idea where prosperity comes from. So few people understand that human rights are individual rights and that entitlements are not rights… These people are going to ask for Big Brother to take them in hand, and Big Brother is going to give them what they ask for, good and hard.

Doug: You’re quite correct. The logical next step, as we mentioned before, is a new Robespierre – or a whole slew of them. But you know I always try to look at the bright side, and the good news is that a lot of despotic states are going to be overthrown. Others that are not overthrown will be discredited – also very good. This comes at a time when many of these states are on the ragged edge of collapse anyway – their days are numbered, even without this force precipitating their collapse.

Perhaps technology has advanced to the level that people will begin to see they can conduct their lives without the dead hand of the state trying to tell them what to do, and taking most of what they produce for the privilege.

L: Perhaps. The time may not be far off when the very idea of the nation-state itself will be discredited, and human society will evolve to a – hopefully – better form of organization.

Doug: I’d love to think so. I think that as technology continues to advance and liberate the individual, the disappearance of the state is inevitable, even if it’s not imminent. But whether things get better after the crash or not, I’m increasingly convinced that what has long been inevitable for the whole world is now becoming imminent. We are in the early stages of a major upheaval. In other words, distortions in the way the world works have been built up to a level where the old order could easily collapse. I’m quite serious when I refer to the coming Greater Depression.

L: Just as we all knew the Soviet Union had to collapse from its internal problems – tyranny and economic stupidity – but weren’t sure when. Now, decades of economic mismanagement and bad decision-making in the global arena must eventually be liquidated. But how do you know the bill is coming due?

Doug: Well, timing is always the problem. If you wait long enough, absolutely everything that is possible will happen. I suppose that’s why we have time itself – to keep everything from happening at once [chuckles]. But we have to think about what’s likely in the course of a single lifetime, so we can benefit from foresight – or be punished for guessing wrongly.

Consider that several other U.S. states are looking at “union-busting” legislation such as Wisconsin’s. Unions can no longer pretend to be vehicles to protect the workers; they are really nothing but cartels that reward their members at the expense of everybody else. And, unlike the federal government, the states can’t just print money. They have to tax people directly to pay for things. Now they have two choices: raise taxes or default on past promises.

Raising taxes is very hard to do during a depression. People who feel their standard of living is slipping just won’t stand for it. Taxes were a major cause of the French Revolution and the American Revolution.

The riots in the ’60s weren’t about this type of thing – entitlements and taxes – but remember, in the ’60s, few states had sales taxes, and where there was one, it was usually only one percent, or two, max. Now, sales taxes regularly run six, seven, eight, even ten percent. In addition, real estate taxes have gone up tremendously, as have state income taxes, of which there were also fewer back then. So these governments are already straining their ability to tax, and they know that if they raise taxes again, it will destroy much of what’s left of their economies.

L: But they can’t really default either – that would get the politicians thrown out of office just as quickly.

Doug: Default would hurt bondholders – generally older people who are very active voters. Also, pension funds, insurance companies, and banks would see a large chunk of their assets wiped out, which would be another body blow to struggling state economies. Not being able to print money, they won’t be able to keep paying their debts, so they’ll be forced to lay off more and more government employees. State and local governments are truly between a rock and a hard place, just like the U.S. government. But the U.S. has the option of destroying the currency to put off the hour of reckoning, and that’s what they’ll do.

L: Well, if the governments have to fire a bunch of employees, that’s a good thing. But it will add to the unemployment burden, unless they scrap unemployment benefits too, which would also get the politicians tossed out of office.

Doug: Well, most government employees just push paper, and stop things from happening. It would be cheaper and better to pay them not to work, so they won’t do actual damage – or give them unemployment compensation. Unfortunately, though, they’ll just fire a few employees, or cut their wages and benefits a bit. What they need to do is totally abolish whole departments – each state has hundreds of them, making the lives of businessmen miserable and expensive. They won’t do that, so the bureaucracy will just grow back if there is any recovery. Rather, the reduced number of employees will slow down approvals even more, slowing business even more. And that will further open the door to corruption.

Actually, it would be therapeutic to see some of them end up like Mussolini. It’s certainly a good thing to see action toward recovering the money Mubarak stole. The same should be true in the U.S. Everybody in high office emerges very wealthy from a small salary – it’s all stolen money.

But at this point, there is just no way out. It’s like jumping off the top of a 100-story building – it’s an exhilarating ride until you get to the bottom. That’s exactly where, not just the U.S., but the whole global economy is.

L: I guess so… You could spread your arms and try to slow the fall, or if you were an experienced sky-diver, you could try to angle your descent toward one side or the other, but it’s not going to change what happens when you hit the street.

Doug: That’s exactly right. In the real world, actions have consequences. Economic causes have effects, and the piper can only be put off from payment for so long. I don’t think he can be put off any longer.

L: When, exactly, do you think the bill – and its ever-accumulating interest – will come due?

Doug: I’m not going to put a date on it, but it’s starting. The next ten years are going to be the most interesting decade in centuries. The events that are now under way – economic, financial, social, technological, political, and military – have the promise of being the biggest thing in a very, very long time.

L: Okay, but, with all due respect, you were full of doom and gloom back in 1980 – said we were going to tip over the edge, but we didn’t.

Doug: I was, and I did say that – and we could indeed have gone over the edge back then. It was a very close thing. Fortunately – or unfortunately, if you consider the much, much larger bill now coming due – they papered it over. And things actually got better, due to two things: one, many individuals produced more than they consumed, and saved the difference; and, two, we got many improvements in technology. But financial and economic affairs are much worse now than they were then.

L: You don’t believe it’s possible to paper it over this time? Doesn’t it make you uncomfortable to say, “It really is different this time!” – at least a bit?

Doug: Sure it does. Famous last words. But, in fact, it really is different this time, as anyone who searches the news for phrases such as “unprecedented,” “record deficit,” “record bank failures,” etc., can see. It’s a judgment call, obviously. But we have to make judgments if we’re going to succeed, or even survive. Sometimes you have to call for a change in a major trend – which is risky. But not nearly as risky as getting trampled by the mob after it actually changes. I’m not afraid to leave the mainstream. In fact, I far prefer it, whether I’m right or wrong.

L: How can you be so sure there’s no possible way to paper this over again? Mugabe trashed his currency and is still in power. Life goes on in Zimbabwe. Couldn’t multi-trillion-dollar deficits become the new normal in the U.S.?

Doug: No, that’s not possible. It would destroy the currency. It’s bad enough when you do that in a nothing/nowhere country like Zimbabwe, where subsistence farmers can keep on scratching a living out of the dirt with sticks and stones, if they have to. But it wipes out most of the economy above the subsistence level, as just about everyone has their savings in the destroyed currency. If you do that to the Canadian dollar, say, it would be a disaster – but mainly for people who live in Canada. And plenty of Canadians have assets in other countries. But if you do it to the U.S. dollar, it wouldn’t just be a disaster in the U.S. The U.S. dollar is the world reserve currency. Few Americans have assets outside of the U.S. Foreigners hold, maybe, eight trillion U.S. dollars. All the central banks of the world have mostly dollars. People all over the world have dollars in their pockets and bank accounts. When Bernanke destroys the dollar it will be a worldwide catastrophe. And that will happen all the faster if the feds bail out the states – which is a possibility with someone like Obama in charge.

Let me re-emphasize this. Almost everyone with net worth around the world tries to keep much of it in dollars. There are trillions of dollars outside the U.S. – far more than inside, and the people holding them are going to be impoverished. They won’t be able to invest or to spend. A collapse of the dollar would lower the standard of living of a lot of people around the world, basically overnight.

This is really, really serious, and there’s no way out. We are going to go through the meat grinder.

If we were to somehow stumble through this one – I would be fascinated to see how – and manage to move ahead in some semblance of the way things were pre-2008, I very much doubt it would last long. And I’m very sure it will just make the ultimate reckoning day that much more catastrophic.

I hate to say it, because I know the human cost will be enormous, but I think the odds greatly favor this being “it.” I only hope to not be very adversely affected by it – and to have the right to say “I told you so”… although it will be unwise to draw that to anyone’s attention after it happens. [Chuckles]

L: Hm. Well, even if there was some way to gain a reprieve for a few more years, it’s still going to be ugly. The 70,000 people protesting in Wisconsin show that the so-called jobless recovery is a lie. Improving the bottom line by laying people off is not the same as increasing the top line, and increased government spending is not real GDP growth. Even if we manage to struggle on this way, the minimum payments now due the piper are going to keep things dicey. That means that the risk of social/political collapse remains, even if we avoid economic collapse.

Snow Crash could be starting right now.

Investment implications?

Doug: Nothing we haven’t said before: we’re headed out of the eye of the storm, so you better rig for stormy weather – the worst you’ve ever seen.

L: Specifically…

Doug: Buy gold – lots of gold, even though it’s no longer cheap. To capitalize on the likely next bubble, buy gold stocks. Given the trouble in the Middle East, the right energy stocks are also good to invest in. Short anything that won’t do well in economic hard times, including the whole financial sector – and the retail, consumer, and construction sectors. Use those investments to build your cash position so you’re ready to take advantage of the spectacular investment opportunities all of this turmoil is going to cause.

And do not – do not – forget to diversify yourself out of your country of residence. If you have the means, and have not done so yet, buy a “vacation” home. Make it in some nice remote place where you’d enjoy spending time in any event, but where the people live close to the earth and don’t depend on the modern global economy. Also, make it in a place where hungry masses from unsustainable cities are unlikely to show up on your doorstep.

L: And if the sky is not falling?

Doug: Then you still make a bundle on the volatility ahead and end up with a nice vacation home you can sell if you decide you no longer need it for insurance.

But remember, nothing lasts forever. Few governments last as long as that of the U.S. has – and it’s showing clear signs of terminal decay. Don’t kid yourself, thinking, “It could never happen here.” Europeans have an advantage over Americans; they remember fighting each other much more recently, and know full well it certainly can happen there.

L: Okay, Tatich. I guess I’ll add the gun shop to my stops when I head down to my local coin shop to buy gold – time to load up on ammo again.

Doug: Sure, why not? You can always sell it later if you don’t use it. Cigarettes too, even though I know you don’t smoke. And alcohol, even though I know you don’t drink.

L: I’ll feel like a Y2K fanatic, but I guess there’s room in the attic.

Doug: Sounds trite, but it’s better safe than sorry, and it won’t hurt to prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

L: Sometimes old wisdom is the truest wisdom.

Doug: Indeed. We’ll talk more next week. This business with the labor unions in Wisconsin is interesting – we should talk about labor unions.

L: Good topic. I look forward to our conversation.

Doug: ‘Til next week then.

Robert Wenzel on the Global Riots

Robert Wenzel writes:

The world is exploding with protests, riots and in some cases revolutions. Behind this disruption of the status quo is the reaction against government attempts to force people against the natural order. In Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and the like, it is pure revolt against totalitarian control. In Greece, Ireland and Wisconsin it is protests against the fact that governments can’t do the impossible, i.e. pay out more plunder than they take in (in one form or another). In Greece, Ireland and Wisconsin, the protesters clearly want the impossible. They want the plunder that isn’t there.

But at the core, the fundamental problem with all these upheavals is there is no indication that the people in any of these situations understand what makes for a growing prosperous society. In Greece, Ireland and Wisconsin, the protesters are clearly self-centered, who have no clue that they would live in a much better society if the governments simply ended their positions and stopped taxing the people. This would result in the people hiring the government employees in the private sector, where the incentives would result in a growing society.

In the revolutions of Egypt, Tunisia and Libya it is not clear what will replace the totalitarians. There is no indication that the masses understand the destructive nature of government control.

From Wisconsin to Libya, the teachings of Hayek, Mises and Rothbard are still not generally understood. Until they are, protests, riots and revolutions may simply just set the stage for future protests, riots and revolutions, as one government plan is replaced by some other government plan that won’t work in the long run. Nothing will really change until the people truly understand the importance of the rule of law, private property and free markets. Until Hayek, Mises and Rothbard are on the lips of revolutionaries the way Marx and Guevera and are now, the revolutions shall continue.

Volt Fraud At Government Motors

More evidence of the error of “central planning”…

From IBD:

Volt Fraud At Government Motors

Posted 10/19/2010 06:55 PM ET

Standing behind the first lithium-ion battery off the Brownstown, Mich., assembly line of the Chevrolet Volt in January were, from left, Rep. Sander...Standing behind the first lithium-ion battery off the Brownstown, Mich., assembly line of the Chevrolet Volt in January were, from left, Rep. Sander… View Enlarged Image 

Green Technology: Government Motors’ all-electric car isn’t all-electric and doesn’t get near the touted hundreds of miles per gallon. Like “shovel-ready” jobs, maybe there’s no such thing as “plug-ready” cars either.

The Chevy Volt, hailed by the Obama administration as the electric savior of the auto industry and the planet, makes its debut in showrooms next month, but it’s already being rolled out for test drives by journalists. It appears we’re all being taken for a ride.

When President Obama visited a GM plant in Hamtramck near Detroit a few months ago to drive a Chevy Volt 10 feet off an assembly line, we called the car an “electric Edsel.” Now that it’s about to hit the road, nothing revealed has changed our mind.

Advertised as an all-electric car that could drive 50 miles on its lithium battery, GM addressed concerns about where you plug the thing in en route to grandma’s house by adding a small gasoline engine to help maintain the charge on the battery as it starts to run down. It was still an electric car, we were told, and not a hybrid on steroids.

That’s not quite true. The gasoline engine has been found to be more than a range-extender for the battery. Volt engineers are now admitting that when the vehicle’s lithium-ion battery pack runs down and at speeds near or above 70 mph, the Volt’s gasoline engine will directly drive the front wheels along with the electric motors. That’s not charging the battery — that’s driving the car.

So it’s not an all-electric car, but rather a pricey $41,000 hybrid that requires a taxpayer-funded $7,500 subsidy to get car shoppers to look at it. But gee, even despite the false advertising about the powertrain, isn’t a car that gets 230 miles per gallon of gas worth it?

We heard GM’s then-CEO Fritz Henderson claim the Volt would get 230 miles per gallon in city conditions. Popular Mechanics found the Volt to get about 37.5 mpg in city driving, and Motor Trend reports: “Without any plugging in, (a weeklong trip to Grandma’s house) should return fuel economy in the high 30s to low 40s.”

Car and Driver reported that “getting on the nearest highway and commuting with the 80-mph flow of traffic — basically the worst-case scenario — yielded 26 miles; a fairly spirited backroad loop netted 31; and a carefully modulated cruise below 60 mph pushed the figure into the upper 30s.”

This is what happens when government picks winners and losers in the marketplace and tries to run a business. We are not told that we will be dependent on foreign sources like Bolivia for the lithium to be used in these batteries. Nor are we told about the possible dangers to rescuers and occupants in an accident scenario.

There’s the issue of asking grandma to use her electricity for the three or four hours necessary to recharge your car so you can get home to charge it again. Where’s the electricity going to come from considering that solar and wind don’t work when the sun don’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow? We aren’t building any nukes.

And since electricity rates are necessarily going to skyrocket as a result of this administration’s energy policies and fondness for cap-and-trade, what’s the true cost of operating a not-so-all-electric car like the Volt?

In 2008, candidate Obama pledged to put 1 million plug-in vehicles on the road by 2015. Not likely. It was a tough sell when we thought it was all-electric and could get 230 mpg. It will be a tougher sell now that we find it’s a glorified Prius with the price tag of a BMW that seats only four because of a battery that runs down the center of the car.

President Obama likes to talk about not giving the GOP back the keys to the car. It’s his industrial policy and central planning that have driven us into the ditch.

The Black Market is the Free Market

The Black Market is really the Free Market doing what some people (calling themselves “government”) disapprove of.

Here is a post we stumbled across that says it well:

The Black Market
by Harris Kupperman

A few years back, on a trip to some Third World nation, I remember asking a successful businessman why more small businesses are not public. His response was sublime. “I keep two sets of books – one for the government and a real one for myself. I am not showing anyone the real books. If I have shareholders, what will I show them? I will never get fair value for my business if I show them the fake numbers.” Welcome to the black market.

Let’s face it, no one enjoys paying taxes. In many countries, you have a bifurcation. Large companies can use their clout with the government to get special exemptions from various taxes and regulations. As long as the campaign contribution is smaller than the tax, most companies pay it. Smaller companies are less fortunate. They cannot afford protection and so they chose to operate more in the shadows. They do not report certain income and they over-report expenses. In some countries, this is so prevalent that it has become an “accepted” practice.

In many countries, avoiding taxes and stupid regulations is just part of doing business. How can you blame them? The danger is that this limits the ability of these companies to access the capital markets for debt and particularly for equity funding. Without growth capital, there is no growth in your economy. Even worse, many of these companies take their unreported profits and deposit them in overseas banks out of the reach of the taxing authority – which further stymies growth. No country wants to create a black market – it forms naturally out of desperation because of bad governance. Businessmen rarely want to do business in the shadows as there are hidden costs to this sort of business – however, sometimes they have no choice.

read more…

Can Politicians Help Us?

Can Politicians Help Us?
Wednesday, September 29, 2010 by

The word “politician” usually comes with a negative connotation. It often brings to mind thieving, lying, corruption, and malfeasance. Nonetheless, most people seem to look to politicians to manage their world for them, to protect them, and to make their lives better. In every instance of local or national elections, citizens are deeply focused on choosing the politician they think will do the best for their community or nation. They seek politicians with experience, knowledge, insights, and ideas. They seek a leader.

But can our elected officials, even if honorable and well-intentioned, really improve our lives? Let’s take a look at the various possible avenues of assistance.

Currently, the main demand placed upon politicians is to create jobs for us. But, since it is companies — not the government — that create jobs, such a task is impossible. Government can expand and draw more workers into its ranks, or it can directly finance the creation of specific jobs in a specific marketplace with taxpayers’ money. In either case, a destruction of wealth is involved, and the jobs — unlike private-sector jobs — do not pay for themselves but in fact require ever more taxpayer funding each year, which further reduces capital in the economy.

If jobs are not profitable — if they are not part of a production process that results in creating at least the same amount of sales revenues as the costs that went into generating those revenues — then they use more resources than they create; they destroy wealth. That ultimately means fewer goods available for each person, and at higher prices.

But even if the government subsidizes unprofitable jobs (e.g., green jobs) and “funds” (i.e., subsidizes) that work to make up for its lack of profit, there is still a net destruction of wealth. This is because subsidies come directly from what would otherwise be our incomes.

When money is taken from us through taxes to pay the extra costs required to produce something that we would not voluntarily choose to purchase on our own at that higher total price (i.e., the selling price plus the subsidy we paid out of pocket to make the item “worth” producing), our money is wasted. Other goods we would prefer will not become available because the resources used to make those goods were instead used in making the product we didn’t want.

Except for building space stations, military bases, or other government-funded, wealth-destroying activities, government creates and builds nothing. It thus has no power to create real jobs in the marketplace; it can only “manage” and regulate.

To repeat, only individuals and individual companies produce and create; their ideas and capital are what profitably creates jobs.

Year by year, most of the currently existing companies would hire more workers if only they were allowed. For example, suppose a company has $100 to pay out in wages. Suppose further that it has hired 9 people for an average wage of $11.11 per hour each ($11.11 × 9 people =$100). If there had been a tenth person available to perform work at the company and help increase its production, why wouldn’t the company have hired that person and spread the $100 across 10 people, instead of 9, at a wage of $10 per hour each ($10 × 10 people = $100)?

continue reading…

7 Reasons Why a Dollar Crisis Is Imminent

This author below forgot to mention the most important reason:  Government Intervention in the markets from which most of these 6 reasons stem from.    The countless restrictions placed on business, manipulation of the money supply, mismanagement, government bailouts, and succombing to special interest groups have all restricted liberty and stifled the economy.

6 Reasons Why a Dollar Crisis Is Imminent
SeekingAlpha.com

The U.S. dollar is sliding dangerously close to a steep cliff — a possible point of no return at which the currency could collapse and America could join the ranks of the world’s banana republics.

click to enlarge

clip_image003

For more than thirty years, the U.S. has resisted the restructuring, austerity and market forces required to restore the health, competitiveness and potential of its economy.

Extending a long-running policy of neglect, denial, short-sightedness, political expediency and corruption, for the past two years, the Federal Reserve has tried to prop up the increasingly uncompetitive and defective U.S. economy with what amounts to unprecedented amounts of money printing — still in effect and slated to expand. The government as a whole has increasingly spent beyond its means, doubled down on debt and pushed the limits of inflation risks as it milks the outdated perception of the dollar as a “safe haven” for all it’s worth.

The bill is coming due and the table is being set for the biggest currency crisis ever. Almost all of the key ingredients are in place for a crisis of confidence that will threaten to overwhelm all efforts to contain it — something beyond the magnitude of currency crises that unraveled Mexico in 1994, Asia in 1997, Russia in 1998, and Argentina in 1999. The similarities are now beyond disturbing.

More…

Why you will pay more to subsidize special interest groups (your neighbors)

The following article shows the faulty reasoning that illustrates what Henry Hazlitt described as:

“The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.”

Essentially,  by placing tariffs on Chinese goods to protect favored US industries everyone else will have to pay the higher costs of goods to subsidize their neighbors who work in these protected industries.

When the trade war begins, these short term benefits to protected industries will be negated resulting in a lower standard of living for all.  Only Free Markets can raise the standard of living and virtually eliminate unemployment.

Story from The Telegraph:

Risk of trade war rises as key US committee backs tariffs on China
The risk of a trade war between the US and China has increased after a key Congressional committee backed a bill to allow US companies to seek tariffs on Chinese imports.

By Richard Blackden, US Business Editor
Published: 11:00PM BST 24 Sep 2010

The adoption of the measure by the Ways and Means Committee on Friday means it will now be voted on by the House of Representatives on Wednesday.

“China’s exchange-rate policy has a major impact on American businesses, and Americans jobs, which is what this is all about,” said Sander Levin, a Democrat from Michigan and chairman of the committee.

China’s determination to shackle the strength of its currency helped turn the country into the world’s manufacturing hub for everything from iPods to T-shirts and, until the recession bit, attracted few critics. But an unemployment rate of 9.6pc in the US, as well as upcoming Congressional elections, is spreading anger across Capitol Hill.

According to the bill’s supporters, a properly valued yuan would move jobs back to the US as exports from China become more expensive. The Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington argues up to 500,000 American jobs could be created.

The move by the committee is awkward for the White House which has steered clear of officially classifying China as a “currency manipulator” for fear of the repercussions of a trade war. President Barack Obama urged Chinese premier Wen Jiabao to take more aggressive steps when they met at the United Nations on Thursday, but the Chinese leader said that the value of the yuan was not the cause of the $145bn (£91bn) trade deficit the US is running with China.

Underlining the high stakes for China over its key economic relationship, Mr Jiabao said that if the yuan rose sharply he couldn’t “imagine how many Chinese factories will go bankrupt, how many Chinese workers will lose their jobs”.

Not every US company shares the committee’s view. Wal-Mart and Citigroup are among companies lobbying against the Bill, fearing it will provoke retaliation in China. If the bill passes next week, the Senate will still need to vote on it.

Free to Choose

Why did America prosper while most of the world remains poor?

| June 10, 2010

America’s current struggles notwithstanding, life here is pretty good. We have a standard of living that’s the envy of most of the world.

Why did that happen? Prosperity isn’t the norm. Throughout history and throughout the world, poverty has been the norm. Most of the world still lives in dire poverty. Of the 6 billion people on earth, perhaps 1 billion have something close to our standard of living. Why did America prosper when most of the people of the world are still poor?

Milton Friedman taught me the answer. More than any other American, Friedman, who won the Nobel Prize in economics in 1976, clearly warned the world about the unintended consequences of big government.

“We’ve become increasingly dependent on government,” said Friedman. “We’ve surrendered power to government; nobody has taken it from us. It’s our doing. The results—monumental government spending, much of it wasted, little of it going to the people whom we would like to see helped.”

That’s from Friedman’s PBS TV series Free to Choose, which aired 30 years ago and became the basis of his No. 1 bestseller by the same name.

The title says a lot. If we are free to make our own choices, we prosper. That was a new idea to many back then. At the time—when inflation and interest rates were in double digits and unemployment approached 10 percent—people thought a wise government could ensure economic growth, guarantee full employment, and eliminate poverty. Friedman explained that the opposite was true, that bigger government had brought us “burdensome taxes, high inflation, a welfare system under which neither those who receive help nor those who pay for it are satisfied. Trying to do good with other people’s money simply has not worked.”

No, it hasn’t. So why, 30 years later, is America doing so much more of it?

Because people still have not learned Friedman’s lesson.

Because of that, I give money to a charity that offers teachers free copies of some of my TV news videos that explain the benefits of free markets. The video most popular in high schools is one in which I ask students, “When so many nations remain poor, why did America become prosperous?” Many answer, “Because we have democracy.” Yet India has democracy, and India has been poor for years. “India is overpopulated,” they say. They don’t know that India has the same population density as New Jersey.

Other students suggest that America prospered because of our natural resources. But Hong Kong has no natural resources. It’s basically a rock. It is also more densely populated than India. Yet, in just 50 years, Hong Kong went from poverty to American levels of wealth.

How? In Free to Choose, Friedman explained that it was the free market. Overlooking the amazing Hong Kong skyline, he said: “This miracle hasn’t been achieved by government action—by someone sitting in one of those tall buildings and telling people what to do. It’s been achieved by allowing the market to work.”

Walking down a crowded street, he added, “They are free to buy from whom they want, to sell to whom they want, to work for whom they want. Sometimes it looks like chaos, and so it is, but underneath it’s highly organized by the impersonal forces of a free marketplace.”

At the time of his series, India was a symbol of enlightened central planning.

“India has tremendous economic and human potential,” Friedman commented. “The human tragedy is that in India that potential has been stifled by the straightjacket imposed by an all-wise and paternalistic government. Central planning has condemned India’s masses to poverty and misery.” What counted most for Friedman was that people should be free to try innovative ideas and succeed … or fail.

“The free market enables people … to trade with whomever they want; to buy in the cheapest market around the world; to sell in the dearest. … (B)ut most important of all: If they fail, they bear the cost.”

“Most important of all.” It’s clear what he would have thought of today’s government bailouts.

John Stossel is host of Stossel on the Fox Business Network. He’s the author of Give Me a Break and of Myth, Lies, and Downright Stupidity. To find out more about John Stossel, visit his site at johnstossel.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS, INC.
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

The Dr. Zhivago Option

The Dr. Zhivago Option

By Robert Ringer

The other day, one of my son’s friends, who had just come home from college for the summer, stopped over to say hello. We chatted briefly, and I asked him if he was still planning on becoming an entrepreneur/businessman after he graduated from school next spring.

To my surprise, he said that because of the economy, he had changed his mind about pursuing a business career. He told me that he now planned to apply for a job with the CIA. Surprised, I asked, “What in the world made you decide to go to work for the CIA?”

Without pause, he responded, “It’s so tough to get a job nowadays that I figured I’d just go to work for the government, because there’s much more security in a government job.” I immediately thought to myself that standing right in front of me was a new Barack Obama voter!

It’s simple: Get as many people as possible working for the government – which can always meet its payroll by taking money from entrepreneurs and small businesspeople who create private-sector jobs – and thereby assure winning a majority of votes in every election.

It reminded me of a conversation I had many years ago with a brilliant, ultra-pragmatic, narcissistic acquaintance who had a hugely successful economic consulting business. One day we were having a discussion about the United States’ relentless move toward collectivism, and I asked him, “Given how you’re addicted to the material things in life, what would you do if the United States ever became a full-fledged communist country?”

Without so much as a pause, he answered, in a matter-of-fact tone, “That wouldn’t be a problem. I’d just become a member of the Communist Party and work my way into the inner circle.” His response evoked a nervous chuckle from me, but the chuckle quickly faded as I realized he was deadly serious. His answer bothered me then, and it bothers me even more today.

The first thing that went through my mind after that conversation was the movie Dr. Zhivago and Rod Steiger’s character Viktor Komarovsky. Komarovsky was a member of Russia’s elite class that dined on caviar and expensive vodka while the masses lived on the edge of starvation in abject poverty.

But when it became clear that the Bolshevik Revolution would succeed, Viktor Komarovsky simply cozied up to the revolutionary hierarchy and proclaimed himself to be a communist. He was well aware that revolutionary rhetoric was a fantasy, and that in every revolution, it’s the toughest and wiliest thugs who emerge as the new royalty.

For the masses, of course, things stay pretty much the same, though under communism they usually end up even worse off than they were before the revolution (as was certainly the case in Russia following the Bolshevik Revolution).

Today, the Komarovsky mind-set is a serious problem in the United States. I keep saying that Obama and Co. know they are going down to massive defeats if there are elections in 2010, but maybe I’m wrong. Perhaps I’ve underestimated their determination to get enough people on the government dole and government payroll to mathematically assure victory.

I continue to say that most of the big stories in the news are nothing more than distractions – distractions that take people’s focus off the biggest problem Americans are facing: an irreversible loss of their liberty. That includes the BP oil spill, illegal immigration, and even Obama’s attempt to buy off Joe Sestak to get him out of the race so he could pay back Arlen Specter for his open conversion to the progressive cause.

It’s not that some of these issues aren’t important; they are. But they are not as important as Americans unthinkingly submitting to servitude. And that is what the Obamaviks don’t want the masses to think about.

When it comes to the mid-term elections in 2010, Republicans are running a race against the clock, because it’s only a matter of time until the government has a large enough percentage of voters on its payroll and on the dole to assure a permanent majority in the House and Senate, not to mention permanent control of the White House.

Worst of all, the Republican Party itself has a whole army of Viktor Komarovskys in its ranks, ready to support the Obamaviks at the drop of a vote. Names like Mitt Romney (the de facto architect of Obamacare), John McCain (“I was in favor of illegal immigration before I was against it.”), Lindsey Graham (an unabashed hard-core progressive), Mike Huckabee (the slickest – and possibly most dangerous – man in America), Orrin Hatch (a deeply entrenched member of the go-along-to-get-along club), and Mitch McConnell (another deeply entrenched member of the same club) come quickly to mind.

These men have conclusively demonstrated that they are more than willing to support the progressive’s notion of “social justice” if that’s what it takes to get elected and reelected. Their greatest threat comes from names like Bachmann, Ryan, DeMint, Rubio, and Paul & Paul.

Over the next five months, you can be sure that much Republican blood will be spilled in the war between the Viktor Komarovskys of the Republican Party and those who refuse to go along with the business-as-usual Dr. Zhivago Option. And you can guess which side the socialists in the Democratic People’s Party will be cheering for.

95 Theses of Agorism

From FR33AGENTS.COM:

.pdf version

95 Theses of Agorism

agora (1) – n. A place of congregation, an ancient Greek marketplace. agora (2) – n. A market free of forceable regulation, taxation, and government (The) Agora – The aggregate of all such markets of any size. 95 Theses
1. Free, unregulated, untaxed, and unmonitored trade is the natural right of all human beings
2. In a voluntary trade, both parties receive more than they give up, otherwise neither would trade.
3. Nobody gets taken advantage of through mutually voluntary trade.
4. Taxation forces people to pay for things that aren’t worth the cost
5. Government regulation forces people to abstain from trades they would otherwise voluntarily make.
6. Markets collect, organize, and distribute information more rapidly, accurately, fairly, and efficiently than any central authority could ever do, even with superior resources.
7. Prices are information.
8. Force distorts market information.
9. Governments’ only means of action is force.
10. Governments operate blindly because they only see information distorted by force. The more information they gather, the less clear their vision becomes.
11. Aggression is a reaction to unpleasant or unwanted information. Its motto is “kill the messenger”.
12. A market is smarter than any of its participants. A government is stupider than most of its participants.
13. Governments require markets for their survival; markets thrive in the absence of government.
14. The more efficient a government is, the more dangerous it is.
15. Markets improve the material well-being of all people. Governments improve the material well-being of some people at the expense of other people.
16. Markets are more powerful than governments.
17. Human survival and well-being require free markets.
18. Human survival and well-being require the absence of government.
19. The best humanitarian aid that can be brought to impoverished people is to allow them access to the Agora, usually by removing their governments.
20. Productivity is the application of intelligence to labor for creating something of value to someone.
21. Labor is equivalent to value in the same way crude oil is equivalent to a vacation.
22. The non-productive have always and will always try to live off the value created by the productive.
23. The productive will by right decide how much, if any, to allow it.
24. Charity is offered and received face-to-face, or it is no longer charity.
25. Wealth is the natural and honorable reward from trading value for value.
26. Wealth is a store of productivity, not a store of value.
27. In the Agora, the rich have already given back far more than they received. That’s the only way to get rich in the Agora.
28. Those who get rich outside the Agora could never give back all they have taken.
29. Money laundering is an invented crime; the concept cannot exist in the Agora.
30. Price gouging is an invented crime, the concept cannot exist in the Agora.
31. Unfair competition is either not one, or not the other, or not in the Agora.
32. Market price is an observation of history.
33. Market price is related to value in the same way news photographs are related to current events.
34. “Intrinsic value” is a lie told by parasites to try to steal from producers.
35. Companies advertising their product as “an $XX value” are lying to you.
36. Fiat currency is theft by fraud.
37. Gold and silver are usually the bases for real money because they have properties that best serve that purpose.
38. Paper is the basis for fiat currency because it has properties that best serve that purpose.
39. Communication strengthens markets and undermines governments.
40. Markets are the way communities stay organized when they are too large for face-to-face interaction.
41. All resources are human. The term “human resources” is demeaning to the nature of both humans and resources.
42. Competition is not the purpose of a market; it is one of its methods.
43. Natural selection in the Agora is more Lamarckian than Darwinian.
44. Natural selection in the Agora does not destroy resources, it reallocates them.
45. Natural selection in the Agora does not kill people; it frees them to be more productive.
46. “Dog eat dog” is a feature of governments, not of markets.
47. Monopolies can only be created and sustained by governments.
48. Freedom to fail is every bit as important as freedom to succeed.
49. The Agora guarantees neither, and resists the perpetuation of both.
50. Markets don’t have goals, values, or ambitions. Markets are a tool for human beings to pursue those things.
51. “Market Failure” is an oxymoron. People sometimes fail to use markets properly.
52. Innovation is an inherently Agorist activity, even when it happens outside the Agora.
53. A primary goal of government is to restrain innovation.
54. Raw materials in the ground are not resources until they are brought to market.
55. The owners of private property tend not to destroy it. Commons are routinely destroyed or exhaustively consumed.
56. Agorist exploitation of the environment increases resources, and protects the environment. Government “protection” of the environment reduces resources, and harms the environment.
57. No species is endangered when it is owned. The best way to keep a species from extinction is to allow it to be property in the Agora.
58. “Public property” is an oxymoron, and privatization of profits is not privatization.
59. Property is authority. It’s not a market without private property and private authority.
60. Where there is private property authority, there is an agora.
61. Private property let open to the public is not a commons.
62. Shortages do not exist in the free market; government obfuscation of price information is the only way to achieve a general shortage.
63. Being unable to buy something at the price you want to pay is not a shortage.
64. Markets are, in part, a process of voluntary rationing.
65. Corporations are evil only to the extent they rely on government power. Corporations with a monopoly are branches of government.
66. Markets rely on trust. Markets rely on suspicion.
67. Individuals in the Agora expect suspicion and earn trust. Governments demand trust, and earn suspicion.
68. A government truly of the people, by the people, and for the people would have no powers whatsoever.
69. If the measure of virtue for a society is how it treats the least among it, then the Agora is the most virtuous society ever known to man.
70. Governments thrive on opposition, antagonism, provocation, confrontation, and defiance. What they cannot tolerate is to be ignored.
71. The central idea behind the Agora, and one of the things it does best, is to ignore governments.
72. The effectiveness of the Agora’s self-regulation is proportional to the extent to which external regulation is absent.
73. The Agora cannot be managed, controlled, regulated, or destroyed. It can only be interfered with.
74. Voting is nothing more than an expression of the voter’s preferred way to interfere with the Agora.
75. The Agora is a network, and like all networks, it routes around damage.
76. Government is damage.
77. Public education is an oxymoron.
78. One of government education’s primary functions is to instill fear of the Agora.
79. The Agora is all around you. It’s nothing to be afraid of.
80. The Agora is peaceful. Violence and war are results of failure to embrace the Agora.
81. Guns are often required to deal with people who operate outside the Agora, because guns are the primary way people outside the Agora operate.
82. The Agora does not require permission.
83. Anyone with the power and inclination to grant the Agora permission is a threat to all honest men.
84. Anyone offering the Agora permission will be ignored.
85. Most true heroes end up in prison or murdered. This is even truer for Agorist heroes.
86. The Agora ignores creed and color.
87. When it comes to markets, black is beautiful.
88. Wherever there are human beings, there is an agora. It may be hiding, but it is there.
89. The Agora is a select community – the strict qualification for membership is to want it. Most people don’t.
90. The Agora does not recognize borders or artificial boundaries. It is everywhere, and it is nowhere.
91. The Agora welcomes you, but does not need you.
92. You need the Agora. Even if you oppose it, you benefit from it.
93. An Agorist movement is an oxymoron. Agorism is the natural state of humanity.
94. Practicing agorism is the only way to achieve agorism. Isolated networks will eventually find each other.
95. Governments are on notice the world over: your days are numbered.