Call to Action | Docs | NYC General Assembly # Occupy Wall Street: 'Occupy Wall Street is a people’s movement. It is party-less, leaderless, by the people and for the people.'
'Any statement or declaration not released through the General Assembly and made public online at www.nycga.net should be considered independent of Occupy Wall Street.'
Friday, November 11, 2011
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Visible Projects, Hidden Destruction - Ralph Reiland - Mises Daily
Visible Projects, Hidden Destruction - Ralph Reiland - Mises Daily: 'In fact, once creating jobs is viewed as the chief purpose of government spending, said Hazlitt, a project with more waste and more inefficiency in its implementation, and less labor productivity, will be viewed as superior to a less wasteful project. The "more wasteful the work, the more costly in manpower," he explained, "the better it becomes for the purpose of providing more employment."
A key fallacy in this thinking, Hazlitt explained, is that it ignores the incomes, the wealth, and the jobs that are "destroyed by the taxes imposed to pay for that spending." What's visible is the new school or new road, but what is unseen are those things that were lost through higher taxation, the unbuilt homes and unbuilt cars that don't exist because of the money that was redistributed away from those who earned it in order to pay for inefficient make-work projects. What is unseen are the unbuilt stores and unbuilt factories, the uninvested funds and the new enterprises that would have been created.'
'Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), for instance, likes the idea of the rest of us paying $315 million to build a useless and costly bridge in rural Alaska to an island with only 50 residents, an island that's already sufficiently accessible via a seven-minute ferry ride.
Giving a free $2 million yacht to every man, woman, and child on the island would have been $215 million cheaper than the bridge, but Rep. Young was chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, not the owner of a yacht company.'
A key fallacy in this thinking, Hazlitt explained, is that it ignores the incomes, the wealth, and the jobs that are "destroyed by the taxes imposed to pay for that spending." What's visible is the new school or new road, but what is unseen are those things that were lost through higher taxation, the unbuilt homes and unbuilt cars that don't exist because of the money that was redistributed away from those who earned it in order to pay for inefficient make-work projects. What is unseen are the unbuilt stores and unbuilt factories, the uninvested funds and the new enterprises that would have been created.'
'Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), for instance, likes the idea of the rest of us paying $315 million to build a useless and costly bridge in rural Alaska to an island with only 50 residents, an island that's already sufficiently accessible via a seven-minute ferry ride.
Giving a free $2 million yacht to every man, woman, and child on the island would have been $215 million cheaper than the bridge, but Rep. Young was chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, not the owner of a yacht company.'
When Does a Baby Become a Person? | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary
When Does a Baby Become a Person? | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'Abortion is not a choice to be made. Rather, it is flight from responsibility for a choice previously made.'
Obama's New War in Uganda | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary
Obama's New War in Uganda | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'President George H.W. Bush had Panama and Iraq. President Bill Clinton intervened in Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo. President George W. Bush invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. President Obama adopted Afghanistan as his own, before adding Libya and now Uganda.
These conflicts had surprisingly little to do with American security. Only Afghanistan — the initial phase, targeting al-Qaeda for 9/11 and punishing the Taliban regime for hosting Osama bin Laden — was a defensive action. The first Gulf War responded to aggression, but not against the U.S.
Most of the other interventions were militarized social work, intervening where the U.S. had little or no plausible security interest. Unfortunately, rarely did the humanitarian consequences match the initial expectations.'
These conflicts had surprisingly little to do with American security. Only Afghanistan — the initial phase, targeting al-Qaeda for 9/11 and punishing the Taliban regime for hosting Osama bin Laden — was a defensive action. The first Gulf War responded to aggression, but not against the U.S.
Most of the other interventions were militarized social work, intervening where the U.S. had little or no plausible security interest. Unfortunately, rarely did the humanitarian consequences match the initial expectations.'
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
Let's Prize Climate Skepticism | Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar | Cato Institute: Commentary
Let's Prize Climate Skepticism | Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'We keep hearing that 95 percent or 98 percent of scientists believe catastrophic, man-made global warming is proven. Climate skeptics are widely denounced as science deniers. However, as Schechtman showed, 99 percent of scientists can be and have been wrong.
Science proves nothing beyond all doubt. Rather, it progresses by knocking down existing theories in favor of better ones, which in turn are subject to fresh attacks. Skepticism is at the very heart of the scientific method. The scientific approach is at odds not with climate-change skeptics, but with those who claim global warming is completely proven, contestable only by madmen and blackguards paid by oil companies.'
Science proves nothing beyond all doubt. Rather, it progresses by knocking down existing theories in favor of better ones, which in turn are subject to fresh attacks. Skepticism is at the very heart of the scientific method. The scientific approach is at odds not with climate-change skeptics, but with those who claim global warming is completely proven, contestable only by madmen and blackguards paid by oil companies.'
Why Politicians Lose So Much Money Trying to Pick Winners | Jim Powell | Cato Institute: Commentary
Why Politicians Lose So Much Money Trying to Pick Winners | Jim Powell | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'If business is challenging when entrepreneurs make decisions for sound business reasons, it's doomed when politicians become involved, because they make decisions for political reasons. Politicians like to pay off big campaign contributors by steering government contracts their way, regardless of how dubious the campaign contributors might be as business executives.
Politicians want projects they can brag about during an election campaign, whether or not the projects make business sense. Politicians demand that projects be located in their districts or states, even when such locations create problems like higher costs.
And of course, politicians expect that those who receive government funding will help their re-election campaigns. No surprise that many businesses have chief executives best known for their ability to find a place at the public trough, rather than boosting sales in free markets.
Government attempts to pick winners are most likely to increase the amount of money lost betting on losers. This is because with the power to tax, subsidize and mandate, politicians are able to pour money into unprofitable projects that private investors would never touch voluntarily.'
'Precisely because one never knows where innovators might come from, free markets are open to all comers, foreign and domestic. Market economies are more flexible and dynamic than government-run economies.
Unlike taxpayers who are dragooned into paying for political schemes, private investors are volunteers risking their own money or money they worked hard to raise. If they make mistakes, it will be harder for them to raise more. Investors constantly revise their estimates of business performance in light of the latest information. Investors pull capital away from laggards, which can help discipline them if anything will. Investors reward solid performers with more capital, helping them do more good work.'
Politicians want projects they can brag about during an election campaign, whether or not the projects make business sense. Politicians demand that projects be located in their districts or states, even when such locations create problems like higher costs.
And of course, politicians expect that those who receive government funding will help their re-election campaigns. No surprise that many businesses have chief executives best known for their ability to find a place at the public trough, rather than boosting sales in free markets.
Government attempts to pick winners are most likely to increase the amount of money lost betting on losers. This is because with the power to tax, subsidize and mandate, politicians are able to pour money into unprofitable projects that private investors would never touch voluntarily.'
'Precisely because one never knows where innovators might come from, free markets are open to all comers, foreign and domestic. Market economies are more flexible and dynamic than government-run economies.
Unlike taxpayers who are dragooned into paying for political schemes, private investors are volunteers risking their own money or money they worked hard to raise. If they make mistakes, it will be harder for them to raise more. Investors constantly revise their estimates of business performance in light of the latest information. Investors pull capital away from laggards, which can help discipline them if anything will. Investors reward solid performers with more capital, helping them do more good work.'
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
Turn the Problem of North Korea Over to Its Neighbors | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary
Turn the Problem of North Korea Over to Its Neighbors | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'Even if the Republic of Korea's defense then was worth three years of war, the peninsula matters much less to America today. A North Korean attack would no longer be the assumed harbinger to regional or global aggression. Neither Russia nor China would aid an aggressive Pyongyang. And the ROK is well able to defend itself, in contrast to 1950, when Washington had refused to arm its ally after Seoul threatened to invade the north.
There's no reason for the U.S. to remain entangled on the peninsula through its promise to defend the South backed by the deployment of 27,000 military personnel.'
'However, the U.S. government should provide no aid, food or financial, to Pyongyang. Tragically, millions of North Koreans are hungry, and UN Undersecretary-General Valerie Amos has been lobbying for more international food assistance. But it is impossible to keep politics out of even "humanitarian" aid. Government-to-government assistance boosts the Kim regime, which has turned the entire nation into a deadly prison camp.'
There's no reason for the U.S. to remain entangled on the peninsula through its promise to defend the South backed by the deployment of 27,000 military personnel.'
'However, the U.S. government should provide no aid, food or financial, to Pyongyang. Tragically, millions of North Koreans are hungry, and UN Undersecretary-General Valerie Amos has been lobbying for more international food assistance. But it is impossible to keep politics out of even "humanitarian" aid. Government-to-government assistance boosts the Kim regime, which has turned the entire nation into a deadly prison camp.'
The CLASS Act: This Is Confidence-Inspiring? | Michael F. Cannon | Cato Institute: Commentary
The CLASS Act: This Is Confidence-Inspiring? | Michael F. Cannon | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'Congress required CLASS to set each applicant's premiums according to the average applicant's risk of needing such long-term care, rather than her individual risk. But averaged premiums are only attractive to people with above-average risks. Since few people with below-average risks would enroll, the average premium would rise. That would encourage more people with below-average risks not to enroll, and the vicious cycle would continue until the program collapsed.'
'It is a virtue, say supporters, that Obamacare raises taxes (amid high unemployment, no less) to encourage people to buy something they would not voluntarily purchase with their own money.'
'It is a virtue, say supporters, that Obamacare raises taxes (amid high unemployment, no less) to encourage people to buy something they would not voluntarily purchase with their own money.'
Fed Created a Recipe for Disaster in Housing Market | Mark A. Calabria | Cato Institute: Commentary
Fed Created a Recipe for Disaster in Housing Market | Mark A. Calabria | Cato Institute: Commentary: 'Using the Fed balance sheet to absorb the losses that should have been borne by creditors and shareholders is not conducting monetary policy. It is fiscal policy, on a massive scale.'
Monday, November 07, 2011
Smash Capitalism and You Destroy Civilization - Art Carden - Mises Daily
Smash Capitalism and You Destroy Civilization - Art Carden - Mises Daily: 'Even in its present corrupted and cronyized form, "modern capitalism" — which Deirdre McCloskey defines loosely as "private property and unfettered exchange" — is a goose that lays golden eggs, and not merely for the super rich. If you disagree, ask yourself how many of those claiming to speak for "the 99 percent" have smart phones, which Louis XIV couldn't have bought for all the gold in France. The problems the occupiers blame on "capitalism" were not caused by "private property and unfettered exchange." They were caused by institutionalized interference with "private property and unfettered exchange."'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)