While I applaud the court's decision (especially Justice Thomas) I am somewhat disheartened that the court refused to overturn the slaughterhouse cases.  I have not yet had time to read the entirety of the opinion yet but it was a substantive due process decision which I am not a fan of.  However, it is a victory on 2nd amendment rights at least for the time being.  I hope to have a fuller analysis by the end of the week.  

I encourage you to read the opinion for yourself and let me know what you think.  I know its a few hundred pages but sometimes its worth the read.  :)

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf
 
 
Those who wish to regulate are no different than the ancient religious.  It is a desire to substitute the morality of one for all without respect for individual liberty or freedom.  The modern battle is a battle over a modern religion the religion of science.  Like the religions of the past the modern religion of science is severed into two camps.  There the economists and the environmentalists.  There are obviously more than two camps but these two groups are the clearest forms from which the distinction can be made and many fall in between the two.  Like at most points in history there are those who defend individual autonomy, liberty and responsibility and those who favor centralized power and dominance.  In the modern world we have the environmentalist and other who support massive regulation of our everyday lives except instead of relying on the dictates of a deity they claim science.  Likewise the economists seek to forward individual autonomy and liberty with an effort away from centralized control.  Like the environmentalists the economists too claim science as the source of their power.  The difference between the religious wars of old the one today is that each side claims to be supported by science as oppose to deity but what is the practical difference?  Environmentalists want to burden mankind with the dictates of an organized code of written morality… sound familiar?  The economists want mankind to be freed from the bounds of artificial rules which make them less happy and less productive.  It sounds as though it is the same old story in a new setting. Like a Hollywood movie the plots seem to repeat themselves over and over with different names and faces on the same old characters… 
 
Virginians 11/03/2009
 
Those of you in New Jersey and Virginia please be sure to get out and vote today!!  We need to send a message to slow the march of the left in D.C. 
 
 
This generation will likely be the first generation, according to experts, in recent American History to pass on a lower standard of living to their children and what is they rally cry?  They want to put more perks on the credit card.  If this was a private corporation the words we would use are words like: Ponzi scheme, fraud, bankrupt... there would be national outrage, stockholder class action law suits and federal indictments... 


why is it because its government they call it deficit, debt, stimulus, or mistakes... when you make up numbers like the "New or saved" jobs numbers that have been roundly proven fictitious by groups like the AP... when you promise openness and then serve up a 1900 page bill from behind closed doors... these are things that would bring criminal charges and civil lawsuits in the private sector but todays its just politics.


There was a time when people in this country had morals and consciences.  There was a time when they cared about their children's future.  there was a time when Americans would have stood up and called this what it was: Corruption, theft, selfishness, ignorance, and bad choices.


The problem is bad regulation and too much government.  The solution is no no regulation... its not more regulation!  Its time that we streamline.  Its time that we get folks in congress who will swear to not pass another new bill for 4 years or longer if necessary.  We need people in government who will go back through the old laws and regulations and get rid of what didn't work.  We need to repeal lots of 60 year old healthcare laws that are screwing up the system... we need to rethink a lot of our tax code and other incentive programs.  We need to reevaluate the governments role in education and maybe subsidize private education instead of running education.  We need to go back to the drawing board and find out why we are stagnating and then fix it... not with new rules and new limits but with smarter solutions that give people more liberty and more protection.  It can be done if we can get some smart honest politicians... I know thats an oxymoron but if we as voters change the way we look at this maybe we can change the people in office!


Its time to take responsibility.  Pay down the debt and live within our means.   It's time to stop manipulating our economy and streamline into something that will thrive in the global marketplace.  It's time to cut the fat in social safety nets and lower taxes so that people can afford to take care of themselves and their families.  
 
 
I keep saying that the tax structure unfairly harms those who invest in school because it targets people who condense their income into short careers.  Doctors, lawyers and other professionals are in this camp. After further consideration I feel that I owe a clarification.  It is not those professionals that are the first to suffer it’s a little different pattern then that.  The people who suffer first are the consumers of those services.  The high taxes force a pass through to doctor’s patients and lawyers clients and students at colleges and other consumers of these professional goods.   The reason is due to supply and demand and due to investment these people with this level of investment must require a certain standard of living which will be judged in take home pay not pre-tax income which means that they will raise their prices as taxes go up and pass that along (not intentionally they don’t often realize that they are doing this it feels much like inflation it just happens you don’t think about it).  Now this then harms people like poor patients, clients, and students as these taxes pass through.  Eventually this leads to decreased demand and IF supply holds going forward… that is assuming that these tax structures don’t chase off future doctors and lawyers and professors before they make such a large investment in the uncertain realm of class warfare through taxes then the eventual damage to them comes in the form of lower demand.  The final result is less access to doctors, lawyers and professors and other professionals to poor Americans and more access to the wealthy.  So my previous statements while accurate in a sense where not complete and now I have elaborated on them.
 
 
The reason the US has been the top economic power house is because of inovation, education and capital.  The biggest threat to the future of the american economy is the problem of a negative national savings!  Capital investment and savings was a major key to our growth.  Capital is a major component of income.  A seperate major issue is the level of regulation on saftey, output, polution, labor laws... these are all great things but at some point we need to realize that these laws add costs to the base of our cost structures and make us less competative in a global market.  The final problem is an unjust and inefficient tax system that punishes good decisions and forces poor choices.  If we don't change these fundamental short comings can we keep our spot at the top of the global economy?  What will happen if we lose that place while sitting trillions in debt to foreign nation
 
 
 
 
If a market moves towards recession because our capitol stock has grown too small to support our consumption then the necessary response of the economy is to recess and limit consumption until the capitol stock is rebuilt and then resume consumption at the previous rate.  This keeps the market sustainable and prevents a small discrepancy or miscalculation in the economy from causing a full scale collapse. 

If  every time a move away from spending towards capitol stock creates a response from government which offsets the net savings and loss of consumption by consuming and taking on debt then the capitol stock and consumption not only will not ever equilibrate but they will perpetually drift further and further apart until one part of the system can no longer sustain itself, in this case most likely the government’s ability to borrow and consume on a large enough scale to prevent adjustment, this necessarily prevents small recessions at the expense of a currency collapse.

Anytime the government moves from a policy of propping up aggregate demand through debt to allowing a drop in aggregate demand we will have a depression and any time government isn’t willing or able to spend enough quickly enough to slow the fall we will have a depression.  If however, government did not interfere then we would have periodic recession but because the miscalculation would be caught prior to the creation of a major bubble there simply will not be enough error to create a depression and the worst case scenario is then a short recession followed by a stabilized economy.

I say all that to reiterate what Austrian economists have been saying since Keynes really became popular and that is this:  From this point forward all recessions and depressions will be mathematically created by the Federal Reserve.  I say that because they act like a damn on a surging river.  They can control the flow and prevent a flood for a certain amount of time but because there is no outlet it is always only a matter of time before the strain gets to great and bursts the bulwarks flooding those below.   Like a damn with no outlet the actions of a federal reserve to prevent periodic corrections to correct the aggregate supply and demand functions across time will lead to disaster.  
 
 
I have no right to influence your social decisions in any forceful or coercive way unless I bear some risk or danger from those choices which you make.  I only bear consequences from individual social choices you make when I am economically liable for them under a social justice theory or when I am a party in some way to the transaction.  Therefore as a matter of property law I am covered and protected from the latter and therefore the former is the only issue of significance.  This means that a social justice theory when it comes to economic responsibility to or fellow citizens for “necessities” or needed luxuries as I call them such as premium health care must necessarily to be just have a corresponding theory  f social justice relating to the social decisions those beneficiaries of the original social justice theory. Those who are aided under social justice theory impose on me a direct cost through my pocketbook which gives me the right to regulate their activity.   Therefore you can either have an economic social justice system mixed with no choice on issues such as who you sleep with or what type of sex you have to the type and quantity of food you place in your mouth or we can abandon that theory and allow both social and economic liberty. 

This will occur through rent seeking regardless of acceptance because the wealthy who happen to be those who make good choices will be rent seeking to limit their liability under the theory thereby attempting to reduce expenditures while reducing social liberty.  On the other hand the poor and those who make bad choices will wish to expand their individual liberty while maximizing the shift assets from the wealthy to them.  This spirals through cycles of encouraging heavy government regulation in social and financial life while also leading to increased rent seeking and irresponsible and inefficient behavior by all!

 

Is this why we have the Left wanting less economic liberty and more social liberty and the Right wanting more economic liberty and less social liberty?  Each is representing one side in the Social Justice theory?

Wouldn’t both side be better off if the right gave in on social issues and the left gave in on economic issues?
 
 
 

    Archives

    June 2010
    November 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    February 2009

    RSS Feed

    Ludwig von Mises: 'Used to the conditions of a capitalistic environment, the average American takes it for granted that every year business makes something new and better accessible to him. Looking backward upon the years of his own life, he realizes that many implements that were totally unknown in the days of his youth and many others which at that time could be enjoyed only by a small minority are now standard equipment of almost every household. He is fully confident that this trend will prevail also in the future. He simply calls it the American way of life and does not give serious thought to the question of what made this continuous improvement in the supply of material goods possible.' - Economic Freedom and Interventionism
    Conservative T-Shirts

Liberty, power, philosophy, Freedom, Taxes, Government , Immigration, Corruption