Posts
The Moral Issues of Money - Gabriel M. Mueller - Mises Daily: "This is what James is warning against. 'Your gold and silver are corroded,' he writes. James's logic is this: Corrosion of gold and silver is the result of impurities, impurities are the evidence of debasement, and debasement is the practice of fraud and stealing. Therefore, James says, do not debase your money in order to pay your workers or to purchase their goods, because to do so is to commit fraud and theft against them.
Today, we don't have to worry about rich people — that is, our employers — debasing our gold and silver, because we're not paid in gold and silver anymore. No, we face a much greater concern — the government controls our money. In fact, the government controls our money in the same way our dishonest king did: it creates money out of thin air and it debases our money every time it does so."
"Why are we not talking about the ethics — the right or the wrong — of money production in America? If James condemned the business owner that debased the wages of workers, why are we not condemning a government that exploits the money of its citizens? And which violation is greater? At least the cheated worker can move onto a new employer to preserve his/her wealth and dignity. How is the citizen ever able to escape the injustice of his or her government?"
Monday, May 02, 2011
Happy Mother Earth Day, Citizen! - Ben O'Neill - Mises Daily
Happy Mother Earth Day, Citizen! - Ben O'Neill - Mises Daily: "The proposed UN treaty will recognize the Earth as a living entity that humans have sought to 'dominate and exploit.'"
If humans have sought to dominate and exploit the earth, then all organisms have also done that. What about how organisms on earth have tried to dominate and exploit the light from the sun?
"Since rights are a moral concept, it follows that they can only pertain to things that have some interests and will of their own. In particular, it is clear that moral obligations can only accrue to beings in need of moral guidance and are capable of sufficiently high levels of abstraction to understand and apply moral principles. Such beings must be conscious and must also be capable of sufficiently high levels of abstraction to understand moral principles and obey them — in short, they must be rational, conscious beings. If they are not, then they lack the means to understand and apply moral principles, and it is senseless to ascribe such principles to them."
"There can be no rights without corresponding moral obligations"
"In fact, it is highly dubious even to classify the Earth as a living thing. It is an entity composed mostly of nonliving material, and covered, relatively sparsely, with living plant and animal life."
"The Earth-rights doctrine has no basis in reason. It is pure mysticism, resting, as it does, on the attempt to ascribe interests and moral prerogatives to a nonconscious entity. Nor is the actual purpose of this doctrine the protection of the environment. Its real purpose is the acquisition of power, not for nature, but for people — or rather, for certain people."
"Since all physical resources required for human survival come from the Earth, and are a part of this 'living system,' this implies that humans cannot do anything — they cannot even exist on Earth — without the permission of the Earth. And if governments are the representatives of the Earth in exercising its rights, then this logically implies that people cannot do anything without the permission of their government."
"The fact remains that the principle of Earth rights leads logically to the conclusion that these rights must expand, and expand, to the point that they eradicate human rights."
"Some would probably argue that the state-representation doctrine is just a practical means of allowing for the Earth to exercise its rights." "Once we are through the looking glass, I suppose it is just as 'practical' to say that Morales is the representative for talking walruses as to say that I am. Nevertheless, the point remains that any such representation is a fantasy"
"This theory (which is itself hopelessly flawed) holds that the state is the representative of 'the people' by virtue of their ability to vote in its elections, and from their choice not to leave its jurisdiction. Clearly both of these are impossible for the Earth, and for the plants that live upon it."
"The notion that governments should 'represent' the will and interests of a giant ball of minerals with no mind or desires is the outcome of environmentalist philosophy in action. It is as absurd as a ficus tree running for Congress, or a barrister attempting to take instructions from a blade of grass."
If humans have sought to dominate and exploit the earth, then all organisms have also done that. What about how organisms on earth have tried to dominate and exploit the light from the sun?
"Since rights are a moral concept, it follows that they can only pertain to things that have some interests and will of their own. In particular, it is clear that moral obligations can only accrue to beings in need of moral guidance and are capable of sufficiently high levels of abstraction to understand and apply moral principles. Such beings must be conscious and must also be capable of sufficiently high levels of abstraction to understand moral principles and obey them — in short, they must be rational, conscious beings. If they are not, then they lack the means to understand and apply moral principles, and it is senseless to ascribe such principles to them."
"There can be no rights without corresponding moral obligations"
"In fact, it is highly dubious even to classify the Earth as a living thing. It is an entity composed mostly of nonliving material, and covered, relatively sparsely, with living plant and animal life."
"The Earth-rights doctrine has no basis in reason. It is pure mysticism, resting, as it does, on the attempt to ascribe interests and moral prerogatives to a nonconscious entity. Nor is the actual purpose of this doctrine the protection of the environment. Its real purpose is the acquisition of power, not for nature, but for people — or rather, for certain people."
"Since all physical resources required for human survival come from the Earth, and are a part of this 'living system,' this implies that humans cannot do anything — they cannot even exist on Earth — without the permission of the Earth. And if governments are the representatives of the Earth in exercising its rights, then this logically implies that people cannot do anything without the permission of their government."
"The fact remains that the principle of Earth rights leads logically to the conclusion that these rights must expand, and expand, to the point that they eradicate human rights."
"Some would probably argue that the state-representation doctrine is just a practical means of allowing for the Earth to exercise its rights." "Once we are through the looking glass, I suppose it is just as 'practical' to say that Morales is the representative for talking walruses as to say that I am. Nevertheless, the point remains that any such representation is a fantasy"
"This theory (which is itself hopelessly flawed) holds that the state is the representative of 'the people' by virtue of their ability to vote in its elections, and from their choice not to leave its jurisdiction. Clearly both of these are impossible for the Earth, and for the plants that live upon it."
"The notion that governments should 'represent' the will and interests of a giant ball of minerals with no mind or desires is the outcome of environmentalist philosophy in action. It is as absurd as a ficus tree running for Congress, or a barrister attempting to take instructions from a blade of grass."
Are Speculators Gouging Us at the Pump? | Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren | Cato Institute: Commentary
Are Speculators Gouging Us at the Pump? | Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren | Cato Institute: Commentary: "If this is going on we would expect to see some sort of inventory buildup. While crude inventories in the U.S. are increasing, they always increase at this time of year, and this year's increase is well within the normal range. More important, gasoline inventories are decreasing and decreasing much more rapidly than normal. Hence, there's no evidence that speculators are reducing the supply of crude or gasoline through increased storage."
"The loss of Libyan crude — about 2% of global supply — has reduced the amount of oil available in the market and gasoline prices track global crude oil prices.
Prices must necessarily rise to reduce global oil consumption because we can't consume what isn't there. How much do prices need to rise to reduce oil consumption by 2%? It takes a big increase in gasoline prices to get us to drive even a little less. Economists estimate that prices must rise anywhere from 10 to 20 times the percentage reduction in quantity to reduce demand enough to equal the lower supply. Thus for a 2% supply reduction, prices must rise between 20% and 40%. Average gasoline prices have risen 20% since early February, on the low end of what economists predict."
"The loss of Libyan crude — about 2% of global supply — has reduced the amount of oil available in the market and gasoline prices track global crude oil prices.
Prices must necessarily rise to reduce global oil consumption because we can't consume what isn't there. How much do prices need to rise to reduce oil consumption by 2%? It takes a big increase in gasoline prices to get us to drive even a little less. Economists estimate that prices must rise anywhere from 10 to 20 times the percentage reduction in quantity to reduce demand enough to equal the lower supply. Thus for a 2% supply reduction, prices must rise between 20% and 40%. Average gasoline prices have risen 20% since early February, on the low end of what economists predict."
Madison Protest: Unions Are Angry - But Wisconsin Should Go Even Further | Chris Edwards | Cato Institute: Commentary
Madison Protest: Unions Are Angry - But Wisconsin Should Go Even Further | Chris Edwards | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Unions certainly have free speech rights to voice their opinions about public policy. But collective bargaining gives unions the exclusive right to speak for covered workers, many of whom may disagree with the views of the monopoly union. Thus, collective bargaining is inconsistent with the right to freedom of association."
Friday, April 29, 2011
The Unvarnished Truth about Un-American TSA | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary
The Unvarnished Truth about Un-American TSA | Gene Healy | Cato Institute: Commentary: "even if terrorists crashed a plane a week, 'a person who took one flight a month for a year would have only a 1-in-135,000 chance of being killed in a hijacking — a trivial risk compared with the annual 1-in-6,000 odds of being killed in a car.'"
West Exacerbates Libyans' Suffering | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary
West Exacerbates Libyans' Suffering | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary: "One still can argue that the policy is justified. But self-proclaimed humanitarian hawks hate to admit that it is war they are making. The mere threat of intervention is supposed to be enough: Muammar Qaddafi was just supposed to 'go.'
Still, there's nothing to worry about. Only bad guys die and only good consequences occur in humanitarian wars. When conservatives like George W. Bush bomb another country, it necessarily is a costly disaster. When liberals like Barack Obama do so, it necessarily is a grand success."
Still, there's nothing to worry about. Only bad guys die and only good consequences occur in humanitarian wars. When conservatives like George W. Bush bomb another country, it necessarily is a costly disaster. When liberals like Barack Obama do so, it necessarily is a grand success."
Governors' Letter Shows Why Medicaid Block Grants Are Necessary | Michael F. Cannon | Cato Institute: Commentary
Governors' Letter Shows Why Medicaid Block Grants Are Necessary | Michael F. Cannon | Cato Institute: Commentary: "The governors write that block grants 'would shift costs and risk to states.' In reality, the matching-grant system these governors seek to preserve is a massive cost-shifting scheme. Block grants would reduce this phenomenon.
For every additional dollar a high-income state spends on its Medicaid program, the federal government sends the state one matching dollar. Low-income states get as much as $4 from Washington for each additional dollar they spend.
Therefore, every time a governor expands his or her state's Medicaid program, the federal government's system of matching grants effectively shifts 50 to 80 percent of the expansion's price tag to taxpayers in other states.
The same is true in reverse. If governors tolerate waste, fraud and abuse, the matching-grant system shifts 50 to 80 percent of the cost to taxpayers in other states."
"Under block grants, states would keep 100 percent of the savings from rooting out fraud and abuse, which would encourage states to spend their Medicaid dollars wisely, reduce the cost of the program, and enable states to do more with fewer resources."
For every additional dollar a high-income state spends on its Medicaid program, the federal government sends the state one matching dollar. Low-income states get as much as $4 from Washington for each additional dollar they spend.
Therefore, every time a governor expands his or her state's Medicaid program, the federal government's system of matching grants effectively shifts 50 to 80 percent of the expansion's price tag to taxpayers in other states.
The same is true in reverse. If governors tolerate waste, fraud and abuse, the matching-grant system shifts 50 to 80 percent of the cost to taxpayers in other states."
"Under block grants, states would keep 100 percent of the savings from rooting out fraud and abuse, which would encourage states to spend their Medicaid dollars wisely, reduce the cost of the program, and enable states to do more with fewer resources."
Why We Must Freeze the Debt Limit | Jagadeesh Gokhale | Cato Institute: Commentary
Why We Must Freeze the Debt Limit | Jagadeesh Gokhale | Cato Institute: Commentary: "A temporarily frozen debt limit could instead signal U.S. lawmakers' resolve to get our fiscal house in order. It may even reassure investors about long-term U.S. economic prospects."
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Uncle Sam: Busted - Robert P. Murphy - Mises Daily
Uncle Sam: Busted - Robert P. Murphy - Mises Daily: "As Lew Rockwell has said of any would-be budget hawks, tell me how much you want to cut spending this year — not ten years from now when someone else will be in office."
"So under the Ryan plan's own rosy forecast, the federal budget won't actually be balanced for almost three decades. Does that strike most readers as 'savage' budget cutting that recognizes the fiscal emergency upon us?"
"but the pattern is the same: the difficult choices only affect future politicians. The Republicans are not daring to tell voting seniors that their benefits will be cut today."
"So under the Ryan plan's own rosy forecast, the federal budget won't actually be balanced for almost three decades. Does that strike most readers as 'savage' budget cutting that recognizes the fiscal emergency upon us?"
"but the pattern is the same: the difficult choices only affect future politicians. The Republicans are not daring to tell voting seniors that their benefits will be cut today."
Fear the Boom, Not the Bust - Patrick Barron - Mises Daily
Fear the Boom, Not the Bust - Patrick Barron - Mises Daily: "it is very difficult to invest safely in such [a monetary inflation] environment, because government will expropriate resources. Your challenge is to avoid investments that appear to be sound under normal financial analysis but are more likely to suffer losses due to the distorted economic environment in which you must operate. So, here are some guidelines."
"Avoid those industries that are most capital intensive"
"Be very careful investing in the expansion of industries that are most removed temporally, meaning further away in time, from generating revenue."
"Avoid industries that depend upon increased money creation or some form of government coercion for their existence."
"Avoid investments that catch the eye of government and environmentalists, such as natural-resource exploration companies. Also avoid investments that governments might tax, regulate, or confiscate."
"Do not base investment decisions on tax credits, subsidies, and the like"
"Do not rely upon government oversight agencies or private rating agencies"
"Instead of looking at the rising price of gold in money terms, we should be looking at the falling value of various types of money in terms of gold."
"Anchoring the monetary base in gold today would mean a dollar price of gold of almost $8,000 per ounce. Anchoring M1 would mean over $7,000 per ounce, and anchoring M2 would mean almost $34,000 per ounce."
"Avoid those industries that are most capital intensive"
"Be very careful investing in the expansion of industries that are most removed temporally, meaning further away in time, from generating revenue."
"Avoid industries that depend upon increased money creation or some form of government coercion for their existence."
"Avoid investments that catch the eye of government and environmentalists, such as natural-resource exploration companies. Also avoid investments that governments might tax, regulate, or confiscate."
"Do not base investment decisions on tax credits, subsidies, and the like"
"Do not rely upon government oversight agencies or private rating agencies"
"Instead of looking at the rising price of gold in money terms, we should be looking at the falling value of various types of money in terms of gold."
"Anchoring the monetary base in gold today would mean a dollar price of gold of almost $8,000 per ounce. Anchoring M1 would mean over $7,000 per ounce, and anchoring M2 would mean almost $34,000 per ounce."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)