Posts
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
The Economics of Illusion - L. Albert Hahn - Mises Institute
The Economics of Illusion - L. Albert Hahn - Mises Institute: "For it presupposes an economy whose members do not see through the changes brought about by monetary or fiscal manipulation — or, as some might say, the swindle. Above all, it presupposes that people are blinded by the idea that the value of money is stable"
Studies Say $196 Billion Wasted on United Nations Health Programs - United Nations - FOXNews.com
Studies Say $196 Billion Wasted on United Nations Health Programs - United Nations - FOXNews.com: "In one paper, WHO researchers examined the impact of various global health initiatives during the last 20 years.
They found some benefits, like increased diagnosis of tuberculosis cases and higher vaccination rates. But they also concluded some U.N. programs hurt health care in Africa by disrupting basic services and leading some countries to slash their health spending."
It shouldn't be surprising that a large bureaucracy is very ineffective.
They found some benefits, like increased diagnosis of tuberculosis cases and higher vaccination rates. But they also concluded some U.N. programs hurt health care in Africa by disrupting basic services and leading some countries to slash their health spending."
It shouldn't be surprising that a large bureaucracy is very ineffective.
Obama: Status Quo Will Be Much More Costly Than Price of Overhaul Bill - Political News - FOXNews.com
Obama: Status Quo Will Be Much More Costly Than Price of Overhaul Bill - Political News - FOXNews.com: "President Obama says he recognizes the heavy price tag of revamping the health care system but that it would be much more costly to do nothing."
Then he should be able to prove that.
Then he should be able to prove that.
Planned Economy or Planned Destruction?
Campaign For Liberty — Planned Economy or Planned Destruction?: "How anyone could believe all the lies about capitalism and business and then believe that an omnipotent government knows all the answers, has no corruption, and will 'protect' us is beyond me. I am much more afraid of a tyrannical government than any private business. Virtually ALL evil throughout the history of the world was purported by governments, not the free market. Nazi Germany, Stalin, Mao, Castro et cetera were all oligarchies - not bastions of laissez-faire capitalism.
The ONLY way a business can harm the people is with government privilege that FORCES the people to use their product or service through some government act, legislation, or coercion. Otherwise, market forces come into effect and bad, evil, inefficient business would go away because people, voting with THEIR money, will in effect vote them out of existence by not patronizing that particular business."
The ONLY way a business can harm the people is with government privilege that FORCES the people to use their product or service through some government act, legislation, or coercion. Otherwise, market forces come into effect and bad, evil, inefficient business would go away because people, voting with THEIR money, will in effect vote them out of existence by not patronizing that particular business."
How Much Money Inflation? - Howard S. Katz - Mises Institute
How Much Money Inflation? - Howard S. Katz - Mises Institute: "In pursuit of the answer to how the monetary base got to be bigger than the money supply itself, I called the St. Louis Federal Reserve, and they were good enough to send me the following reply:
Half of all transaction deposits do not appear in M1 [the money supply] due to retail deposit sweeping. Adding these back into M1 causes M1 to be larger than the monetary base. (In retail deposit sweeping, banks reclassify checkable deposits as savings deposits so as to reduce statutory reserve requirements. Within certain legal bounds, such behavior is acceptable to the Fed. Bank customers are unaware that such reclassification is occurring.)
Plus the FOMC has increased the Fed balance sheet to levels never before seen. Banks are holding deposits at the Fed and not making a great deal of new loans (they are making some, but it is a recession after all). If the banks made new loans, that would generate more deposits to be included in M1.
Transactions deposits are simply demand deposits plus other checkable deposits. That is, they are total bank deposits and, as such, are an important part of the money supply."
Half of all transaction deposits do not appear in M1 [the money supply] due to retail deposit sweeping. Adding these back into M1 causes M1 to be larger than the monetary base. (In retail deposit sweeping, banks reclassify checkable deposits as savings deposits so as to reduce statutory reserve requirements. Within certain legal bounds, such behavior is acceptable to the Fed. Bank customers are unaware that such reclassification is occurring.)
Plus the FOMC has increased the Fed balance sheet to levels never before seen. Banks are holding deposits at the Fed and not making a great deal of new loans (they are making some, but it is a recession after all). If the banks made new loans, that would generate more deposits to be included in M1.
Transactions deposits are simply demand deposits plus other checkable deposits. That is, they are total bank deposits and, as such, are an important part of the money supply."
The China Card | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary
The China Card | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary: "First, the United States should indicate that it is willing to share the cost of caring for any refugees who end up over the border in China (or Chinese humanitarian activities in the North in the aftermath of a collapse). The price would be small compared to the cost of North Korea's current regime. And over the long-term a stable, reform-oriented government in the North or a reunified peninsula would offer Beijing obvious economic benefits. The PRC already trades more with South Korea than does the United States. It likely would enjoy a similar advantage in a more prosperous North Korea.
Second, the Republic of Korea, with a nearly $900 billion GDP, should join Washington in making such an offer. The cost of German reunification caused Seoul to hope for at least a modest North Korean economic revival before reunification on the peninsula. However, Pyongyang's increasingly provocative behavior suggests that the price of immediate reunification would be smaller than that of a war or arms race.
Third, the United States should enlist Japan, with the world's second largest GDP of $4.8 trillion, in this effort. Nearly one million ethnic Koreans live in Japan, with the majority hailing from the North. Tokyo could pledge its financial support, as well as indicate its willingness to accept the return of the one hundred thousand ethnic Koreans who emigrated to the DPRK during the 1960s along with their estimated two hundred thousand family members. In return, a new regime in Pyongyang might be more willing to satisfy Japan's demands for an accounting of its citizens kidnapped over the years.
Fourth, the Korean Diaspora could offer its private support. There are more than two million Korean-Americans, more than two hundred thousand ethnic Koreans in both Canada and Russia, about one hundred twenty-five thousand in Australia, and tens of thousands each in countries throughout Asia and Europe. All could assist in the event of a messy end to the Kim regime.
Fifth, the Obama administration should promise the PRC that the United States would not take geopolitical advantage of Chinese intervention. Thus, Korean reunification would not result in American troops on China's border. Instead, U.S. forces would come home. They aren't needed even today to defend the South. And they certainly wouldn't be required if the DPRK disappeared.
Sixth, Washington should point to the risk of further proliferation throughout East Asia. A nuclear North Korea is more a problem for its neighbors than for America. China should not assume that the United States would or could forever restrain the ROK and Japan from responding in kind if they found themselves facing a hostile, nuclear-armed North. Nor is it in the interest of America to remain in the middle of such an unstable geopolitical mix. In short, Beijing would share the nightmare of a nuclear DPRK.
Finally, the United States, backed by leading Asian and European states, should point out that Chinese leadership in resolving the problem of North Korea would enhance the PRC's international reputation. China has emphasized its determination to "rise" peacefully; there would be no better evidence of its good intentions or leadership potential than helping to rid the world of the brutal, threatening regime in Pyongyang."
Second, the Republic of Korea, with a nearly $900 billion GDP, should join Washington in making such an offer. The cost of German reunification caused Seoul to hope for at least a modest North Korean economic revival before reunification on the peninsula. However, Pyongyang's increasingly provocative behavior suggests that the price of immediate reunification would be smaller than that of a war or arms race.
Third, the United States should enlist Japan, with the world's second largest GDP of $4.8 trillion, in this effort. Nearly one million ethnic Koreans live in Japan, with the majority hailing from the North. Tokyo could pledge its financial support, as well as indicate its willingness to accept the return of the one hundred thousand ethnic Koreans who emigrated to the DPRK during the 1960s along with their estimated two hundred thousand family members. In return, a new regime in Pyongyang might be more willing to satisfy Japan's demands for an accounting of its citizens kidnapped over the years.
Fourth, the Korean Diaspora could offer its private support. There are more than two million Korean-Americans, more than two hundred thousand ethnic Koreans in both Canada and Russia, about one hundred twenty-five thousand in Australia, and tens of thousands each in countries throughout Asia and Europe. All could assist in the event of a messy end to the Kim regime.
Fifth, the Obama administration should promise the PRC that the United States would not take geopolitical advantage of Chinese intervention. Thus, Korean reunification would not result in American troops on China's border. Instead, U.S. forces would come home. They aren't needed even today to defend the South. And they certainly wouldn't be required if the DPRK disappeared.
Sixth, Washington should point to the risk of further proliferation throughout East Asia. A nuclear North Korea is more a problem for its neighbors than for America. China should not assume that the United States would or could forever restrain the ROK and Japan from responding in kind if they found themselves facing a hostile, nuclear-armed North. Nor is it in the interest of America to remain in the middle of such an unstable geopolitical mix. In short, Beijing would share the nightmare of a nuclear DPRK.
Finally, the United States, backed by leading Asian and European states, should point out that Chinese leadership in resolving the problem of North Korea would enhance the PRC's international reputation. China has emphasized its determination to "rise" peacefully; there would be no better evidence of its good intentions or leadership potential than helping to rid the world of the brutal, threatening regime in Pyongyang."
Biden: 'We Misread How Bad the Economy Was' - Political News - FOXNews.com
Biden: 'We Misread How Bad the Economy Was' - Political News - FOXNews.com: "The vice president says the Obama administration 'misread how bad the economy was' but stands by its stimulus package and believes the plan will create more jobs as the pace of its spending gains momentum."
You were wrong again but you assure us that you are right now? Sounds hard to believe.
You were wrong again but you assure us that you are right now? Sounds hard to believe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)