Cato vs. Mises (was Re: Party goals)

[brianholtz1965]

"ricochetboy" <philzberg@e...> wrote:

As the dollar resumes it's slide,
and the ravages of inflation and un employment morph into serious
social unrest, the intellectual vacuum is left to be filled by the
tiny Mises Institute

If the intellectual credibility of the Mises Institute rests on deriving a
forecast of "serious social unrest" from the graph of inflation and
unemployment over the last several decades, then it's pretty clear that the
intellectual pressure gradient has the opposite sign of what you claim.

Brian Holtz
Yahoo! Inc.
2004 Libertarian candidate for Congress, CA14 (Silicon Valley)
http://marketliberal.org/>
blog: http://knowinghumans.net/>
book: http://humanknowledge.net/>

[dej72]

[ Attachment content not displayed ]

[ricochetboy]

If you believe the government statistics on cpi and unemployment, then
some research on your part might be advised. I don't know if the Mises
Institute sees unrest in our future, but it seems to this obsrever
that there is a great deal of suffering going on in the cities the
suburbs and the hinterlands, and that when viewed through an Austrian
lens, our economy and our people are in for a very rough ride.I think
that the failure to educate the public , or even the elite about the
fundamentals of Austrian economics is a gret tradgedy. for as
conditions worsen Americans will be looking for someone to blame, and
it won't be the true culprits, the Fed. Usually the socialists and the
faschists fight it out. Already the battle lines are being drawn.
Cato has absolutely failed on this score. I vividly remeber one Cato
scholar on C Span smugly telling folks, if they just put thier 401 k
into stocks they will be OK. Well anyone who retired in 1929 or 1966
would have waited 20 years for the purchasing power of thier portfolio
to break even. By not explianing to the American people that we do not
have capitalism, but centrally planned corporate socialism at the
finacial core of our economy, and that the problems of inflation and
deflation are not inherant in capitalism, but the result of systemic
banking errors, leaves the public open to Socialism or Faschist
leanings when times get tough, as they inevitably do. We have
undergone an historic credit expansion under greenspan. It has been a
great ride. But all credit expansions end in trdgedy. They always
have. This one being global due to Bretton Woods, and unlimited due to
the worldwide adoption of a faith based paper money system, will end
very badly. Even the ultimate insider Paul Volker in a recent
Washington Post Op ed, understated his concern and questioned wether
anything can be done at this late date to fix the world economy.
Talking to San Fransiscans who are riding high on the real estate
credit bubble about trouble ahead is like talking to a flapper in
August 1929 about what her life will be reduced to in 1933.Nobody
drinking from the punch bowl cares to listen. Even is this group,
economic campaceny is the prevailing sentiment. We;; I can't tell you
how or when the party ends, but my bets are on worldwide
hyperinflation.The pity is the socialist will blame the greedy
corporations and the faschists will blame the revenge of God for the
loose morals of the liberals and nobody will blame the Fed. Freedom
will be the victim. It already is.

[Starchild]

Phil,

  For the sake of everyone, I certainly hope you are wrong.

  I do appreciate this gem from your comments below: "faith based paper money system." I am going to use that! Do you recall where the phrase came from, or did you come up with it yourself? You also use the word "campaceny" below. I can't find anything like that in the online dictionary; did you mean "complacency?"

  As far as "socialists and fascists fighting it out," I would point out that fascism is a *form* of state socialism. If we want people to recognize this, it is best to avoid speaking or writing as if they were two separate creatures.

  Interestingly, the distinction I like to make between state or top-down socialism, and voluntary or bottom-up socialism, has a longer pedigree than I was previously aware of. The June issue of Liberty magazine has an article titled "Anarchist Socialism" in which Wendy McElroy presents an essay by John William Lloyd.

  "The term 'socialism,'" she writes, "as used by the 19th century individualist radicals differed in meaning as dramatically as the word 'liberal' today differs from its 18th century usage. As used by Lloyd and his contemporaries, socialism per se -- as opposed to State Socialism -- did not negate private property or the primacy of the individual but referred more to voluntary, cooperative ventures through which a just society could be achieved. Thus, many of the voluntary communities of early libertarianism could be viewed through either a socialist or individualist lens. To the extent that Individualist Anarchists who sometimes used the label 'socialist' had a point of overlap with collectivist-socialists, it is: they agreed with the labor theory of value. Since Individualist Anarchists also insisted on the primacy of contract, however, their position devolved to the statement: interest and rent are invalid practices, nevertheless everyone has the right to make a foolish contract, and no third party has the right to interfere."

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

[tradergroupe]

Dear Starchild;

Beg to differ on socialism and fascism being of the same genre. As examples: take Mussolini's Italy or Franco's Spain or Hitlers's Germany. Compare them to Swedens Socialist State. Au contraire!

They are very contrary forms Fascism being generically considered right-wing and socialism being considered left-wing but to the right of Communism.

From Wikipedia:

Socialism is an ideology with the core belief that a society should exist in which popular collectives control the means of power, and therefore the means of production. In application, however, the de facto meaning of socialism has evolved and branched to a great degree, and though highly politicized, is strongly related to the establishment of an organized working class, created through either revolution or social evolution, with the purpose of building a classless society. It has also, increasingly, become concentrated on social reforms within modern democracies. This concept and the term Socialist also refer to a group of ideologies, an economic system, or a state that exists or has existed.

Fascism was typified by attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life. Many scholars consider fascism to be part of, or in coalition with, extreme right politics. The definitional debates and arguments by academics over the nature of fascism, however, fill entire bookshelves. There are clearly elements of both left and right ideology in the development of Fascism.

Modern colloquial usage of the word has extended the definition of the terms fascism and neofascism to refer to any totalitarian worldview regardless of its political ideology, although scholars frown on this. Sometimes the word "fascist" is used as a hyperbolic political epithet.

Similar political movements spread across Europe between World War One and World War Two and took several forms such as Nazism

Ron Getty
SF Libertarian

Starchild <sfdreamer@...> wrote:
Phil,

      For the sake of everyone, I certainly hope you are wrong.

      I do appreciate this gem from your comments below: "faith based paper
money system." I am going to use that! Do you recall where the phrase
came from, or did you come up with it yourself? You also use the word
"campaceny" below. I can't find anything like that in the online
dictionary; did you mean "complacency?"

      As far as "socialists and fascists fighting it out," I would point out
that fascism is a *form* of state socialism. If we want people to
recognize this, it is best to avoid speaking or writing as if they were
two separate creatures.

      Interestingly, the distinction I like to make between state or
top-down socialism, and voluntary or bottom-up socialism, has a longer
pedigree than I was previously aware of. The June issue of Liberty
magazine has an article titled "Anarchist Socialism" in which Wendy
McElroy presents an essay by John William Lloyd.

      "The term 'socialism,'" she writes, "as used by the 19th century
individualist radicals differed in meaning as dramatically as the word
'liberal' today differs from its 18th century usage. As used by Lloyd
and his contemporaries, socialism per se -- as opposed to State
Socialism -- did not negate private property or the primacy of the
individual but referred more to voluntary, cooperative ventures through
which a just society could be achieved. Thus, many of the voluntary
communities of early libertarianism could be viewed through either a
socialist or individualist lens. To the extent that Individualist
Anarchists who sometimes used the label 'socialist' had a point of
overlap with collectivist-socialists, it is: they agreed with the labor
theory of value. Since Individualist Anarchists also insisted on the
primacy of contract, however, their position devolved to the statement:
interest and rent are invalid practices, nevertheless everyone has the
right to make a foolish contract, and no third party has the right to
interfere."

Yours in liberty,
                        <<< Starchild >>>

[Starchild]

Ron,

  Dictionary definitions tend not to be particularly helpful when it comes to ideology, in my opinion, because they are generally still thinking in terms of the old left-right paradigm. If you're familiar with the Nolan or Advocates for Self-Government chart, you are no doubt aware of the shortcomings of that political model. Both supposedly far-left communism and supposedly far-right fascism involve subordinating the individual to the interests of the state or society as a whole. This is their most important characteristic, one which places them both in diametrical opposition to libertarianism, which promotes individual choice.

  If you set aside rhetoric and self-perception, and compare the actual public policies advocated and practiced by fascists versus those advocated and practiced by other state socialists, I think you will find it difficult to draw arbitrary lines between them. The main difference seems to be the attitude toward corporations and making money -- fascists embrace these things more than most state socialists, though of course they must not interfere with the interests of the state. There is also more of an emphasis on militarism and nationalism than under other brands of state socialism. Yet the Nazis favored many welfare state programs such as compulsory health insurance and government pension funds, and famously scapegoated Jews as profiteers, while the Soviet Union was highly militaristic and enamored of the "strong leader" model -- remember all the statues of Stalin and Lenin, and the parades of tanks and missiles through Red Square every May Day? The country I would consider the leading example of fascism today is the "People's Republic" of China -- not coincidentally, a country that is nominally "communist."

  Libertarians probably talk about "socialism" more often than "fascism" in regard to U.S. government policies, yet don't present circumstances in the United States -- the sanctioning of private property being seized for the benefit of corporations, a nationalist and militaristic reaction to terrorism, continued antipathy toward explicitly left-wing regimes such as Cuba's, the world's largest percentage of people behind bars mostly for "personal choice" rather than "economic choice" offenses -- seem more indicative of a trend toward fascism than toward communism? If fascism and communism are "very contrary" ideologies as you assert, shouldn't it be more obvious which of the two has been gaining in the U.S.?

  An interesting thing about the Scandinavian countries, including Sweden, is that they apparently have less state socialism in practice than their reputations would lead one to believe, and this in fact probably explains why they remain relatively prosperous. I refer you to the Heritage Institute's Index of Economic Freedom in which countries are ranked by the amount of government interference in the economy (see http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/countries.cfm ). The 2005 index ranks Sweden at #14 in the world, just one spot below the United States! Sweden may have some prominent welfare state features, but clearly it is not a paragon of state socialism now, if indeed it ever was. (Incidentally, Denmark is #8, Finland #15, and Norway #29, while among the Baltic newcomers, Estonia places 4th in the world after only Hong Kong, Singapore and Luxembourg, while Lithuania is #23 and Latvia #28. All fairly respectable economic liberty standings given a pool of 155 countries surveyed.)

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

Dear Starchild;

Beg to differ on socialism and fascism being of the same genre. As examples: take Mussolini's Italy or Franco's Spain or Hitlers's Germany. Compare them to Swedens Socialist State. Au contraire!

They are very contrary forms Fascism being generically considered right-wing and socialism being considered left-wing but to the right of Communism.

From Wikipedia:

Socialism is an ideology with the core belief that a society should exist in which popular collectives control the means of power, and therefore the means of production. In application, however, the de facto meaning of socialism has evolved and branched to a great degree, and though highly politicized, is strongly related to the establishment of an organized working class, created through either revolution or social evolution, with the purpose of building a classless society. It has also, increasingly, become concentrated on social reforms within modern democracies. This concept and the term Socialist also refer to a group of ideologies, an economic system, or a state that exists or has existed.

Fascism was typified by attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life. Many scholars consider fascism to be part of, or in coalition with, extreme right politics. The definitional debates and arguments by academics over the nature of fascism, however, fill entire bookshelves. There are clearly elements of both left and right ideology in the development of Fascism.

Modern colloquial usage of the word has extended the definition of the terms fascism and neofascism to refer to any totalitarian worldview regardless of its political ideology, although scholars frown on this. Sometimes the word "fascist" is used as a hyperbolic political > epithet.

Similar political movements spread across Europe between World War One and World War Two and took several forms such as Nazism

Ron Getty
SF Libertarian

Phil,

  For the sake of everyone, I certainly hope you are wrong\.

  I do appreciate this gem from your comments below: "faith based paper

money system." I am going to use that! Do you recall where the phrase
came from, or did you come up with it yourself? You also use the word
"campaceny" below. I can't find anything like that in the online
dictionary; did you mean "complacency?"

  As far as "socialists and fascists fighting it out," I would point out

that fascism is a *form* of state socialism. If we want people to
recognize this, it is best to avoid speaking or writing as if they were
two separate creatures.

  Interestingly, the distinction I like to make between state or

top-down socialism, and voluntary or bottom-up socialism, has a longer
pedigree than I was previously aware of. The June issue of Liberty
magazine has an article titled "Anarchist Socialism" in which Wendy
McElroy presents an essay by John William Lloyd.

  "The term 'socialism,'" she writes, "as used by the 19th century

individualist radicals differed in meaning as dramatically as the word
'liberal' today differs from its 18th century usage. As used by Lloyd
and his contemporaries, socialism per se -- as opposed to State
Socialism -- did not negate private property or the primacy of the
individual but referred more to voluntary, cooperative ventures through
which a just society could be achieved. Thus, many of the voluntary
communities of early libertarianism could be viewed through either a
socialist or individualist lens. To the extent that Individualist
Anarchists who sometimes used the label 'socialist' had a point of
overlap with collectivist-socialists, it is: they agreed with the labor
theory of value. Since Individualist Anarchists also insisted on the
primacy of contract, however, their position devolved to the statement:
interest and rent are invalid practices, nevertheless everyone has the
right to make a foolish contract, and no third party has the right to
interfere."

Yours in liberty,
<<< Starchild >>>

> If you believe the government statistics on cpi and unemployment, then
> some research on your part might be advised. I don't know if the Mises
> Institute sees unrest in our future, but it seems to this obsrever
> that there is a great deal of suffering going on in the cities the
> suburbs and the hinterlands, and that when viewed through an Austrian
> lens, our economy and our people are in for a very rough ride.I think
> that the failure to educate the public , or even the elite about the
> fundamentals of Austrian economics is a gret tradgedy. for as
> conditions worsen Americans will be looking for someone to blame, and
> it won't be the true culprits, the Fed. Usually the socialists and the
> faschists fight it out. Already the battle lines are being drawn.
> Cato has absolutely failed on this score. I vividly remeber one Cato
> scholar on C Span smugly telling folks, if they just put thier 401 k
> into stocks they will be OK. Well anyone who retired in 1929 or 1966
> would have waited 20 years for the purchasing power of thier portfolio
> to break even. By not explianing to the American people that we do not
> have capitalism, but centrally planned corporate socialism at the
> finacial core of our economy, and that the problems of inflation and
> deflation are not inherant in capitalism, but the result of systemic
> banking errors, leaves the public open to Socialism or Faschist
> leanings when times get tough, as they inevitably do. We have
> undergone an historic credit expansion under greenspan. It has been a
> great ride. But all credit expansions end in trdgedy. They always
> have. This one being global due to Bretton Woods, and unlimited due to
> the worldwide adoption of a faith based paper money system, will end
> very badly. Even the ultimate insider Paul Volker in a recent
> Washington Post Op ed, understated his concern and questioned wether
> anything can be done at this late date to fix the world economy.
> Talking to San Fransiscans who are riding high on the real estate
> credit bubble about trouble ahead is like talking to a flapper in
> August 1929 about what her life will be reduced to in 1933.Nobody
> drinking from the punch bowl cares to listen. Even is this group,
> economic campaceny is the prevailing sentiment. We;; I can't tell you
> how or when the party ends, but my bets are on worldwide
> hyperinflation.The pity is the socialist will blame the greedy
> corporations and the faschists will blame the revenge of God for the
> loose morals of the liberals and nobody will blame the Fed. Freedom
> will be the victim. It already is.

<image.tiff>

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

+ Visit your group "lpsf-discuss" on the web.

+ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpsf-discuss-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

+ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

<image.tiff>

[lpsfactivists]

I am not presuming to speak at the level of understanding exhibited
by Phil and others who have contributed to the subject of our current
illusion-based economy. I am simply hoping that someone out there
will run with Phil's suggestion that perhaps CATO (currently the most
visible libertarian group) has not spoken out sufficiently forcefully
on such subjects as our huge external debt, our even huger internal
debt, our hyper-active printing press (producing faith-based money),
our ever-increasing dependence on oil and thus our need to continue
our imperialist course, our ever shrinking U.S. job market (think
outsourcing without *equivalent* benefit to U.S. wage earners), our
clearly unsustainable real estate market, our aging population
(coupled with low savings rates) etc. etc. I do not think it wise to
wait until the fascists and the liberals oblitarate each other (yes,
they are definitely two distinct and opposing groups) -- maybe the
versed among the LP could contribute some hard facts (not the usual
smoke and mirrors) to the political discourse, as Phil suggests?

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "ricochetboy" <philzberg@e...>
wrote:

If you believe the government statistics on cpi and unemployment,

then

some research on your part might be advised. I don't know if the

Mises

Institute sees unrest in our future, but it seems to this obsrever
that there is a great deal of suffering going on in the cities the
suburbs and the hinterlands, and that when viewed through an

Austrian

lens, our economy and our people are in for a very rough ride.I

think

that the failure to educate the public , or even the elite about the
fundamentals of Austrian economics is a gret tradgedy. for as
conditions worsen Americans will be looking for someone to blame,

and

it won't be the true culprits, the Fed. Usually the socialists and

the

faschists fight it out. Already the battle lines are being drawn.
Cato has absolutely failed on this score. I vividly remeber one Cato
scholar on C Span smugly telling folks, if they just put thier 401 k
into stocks they will be OK. Well anyone who retired in 1929 or

1966

would have waited 20 years for the purchasing power of thier

portfolio

to break even. By not explianing to the American people that we do

not

have capitalism, but centrally planned corporate socialism at the
finacial core of our economy, and that the problems of inflation and
deflation are not inherant in capitalism, but the result of systemic
banking errors, leaves the public open to Socialism or Faschist
leanings when times get tough, as they inevitably do. We have
undergone an historic credit expansion under greenspan. It has been

a

great ride. But all credit expansions end in trdgedy. They always
have. This one being global due to Bretton Woods, and unlimited due

to

the worldwide adoption of a faith based paper money system, will end
very badly. Even the ultimate insider Paul Volker in a recent
Washington Post Op ed, understated his concern and questioned wether
anything can be done at this late date to fix the world economy.
Talking to San Fransiscans who are riding high on the real estate
credit bubble about trouble ahead is like talking to a flapper in
August 1929 about what her life will be reduced to in 1933.Nobody
drinking from the punch bowl cares to listen. Even is this group,
economic campaceny is the prevailing sentiment. We;; I can't tell

you

[ricochetboy]

gets Alan Greenspan to say the most amazing things in Humphry Hawkins
Testimony.The moey supply has incresed over ten fold since we went off
the gold standard gasped it's last breath in 1971. Enjoy...
http://tinyurl.com/7s6a9

[tradergroupe]

Dear Starchild;

The USA is heading towards a fascist state and these four articles from recent Lew Rockwell
columns support the theses. Just consider New York City where the police will now randomly inspect bags for bombs being carried by terrorists on the NYC transit subway system. No probable cause need apply just you got selected. Papieren Bitte! and Seig Heil!

  http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/red-state-fascism.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/which-way.html

  http://www.lewrockwell.com/reese/reese128.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/reese/reese195.html

Ron Getty
SF Libertarian

Starchild <sfdreamer@...> wrote:
Ron,

Dictionary definitions tend not to be particularly helpful when it
comes to ideology, in my opinion, because they are generally still
thinking in terms of the old left-right paradigm. If you're familiar
with the Nolan or Advocates for Self-Government chart, you are no doubt
aware of the shortcomings of that political model. Both supposedly
far-left communism and supposedly far-right fascism involve
subordinating the individual to the interests of the state or society
as a whole. This is their most important characteristic, one which
places them both in diametrical opposition to libertarianism, which
promotes individual choice.

If you set aside rhetoric and self-perception, and compare the actual
public policies advocated and practiced by fascists versus those
advocated and practiced by other state socialists, I think you will
find it difficult to draw arbitrary lines between them. The main
difference seems to be the attitude toward corporations and making
money -- fascists embrace these things more than most state socialists,
though of course they must not interfere with the interests of the
state. There is also more of an emphasis on militarism and nationalism
than under other brands of state socialism. Yet the Nazis favored many
welfare state programs such as compulsory health insurance and
government pension funds, and famously scapegoated Jews as profiteers,
while the Soviet Union was highly militaristic and enamored of the
"strong leader" model -- remember all the statues of Stalin and Lenin,
and the parades of tanks and missiles through Red Square every May Day?
The country I would consider the leading example of fascism today is
the "People's Republic" of China -- not coincidentally, a country that
is nominally "communist."

Libertarians probably talk about "socialism" more often than "fascism"
in regard to U.S. government policies, yet don't present circumstances
in the United States -- the sanctioning of private property being
seized for the benefit of corporations, a nationalist and militaristic
reaction to terrorism, continued antipathy toward explicitly left-wing
regimes such as Cuba's, the world's largest percentage of people behind
bars mostly for "personal choice" rather than "economic choice"
offenses -- seem more indicative of a trend toward fascism than toward
communism? If fascism and communism are "very contrary" ideologies as
you assert, shouldn't it be more obvious which of the two has been
gaining in the U.S.?

An interesting thing about the Scandinavian countries, including
Sweden, is that they apparently have less state socialism in practice
than their reputations would lead one to believe, and this in fact
probably explains why they remain relatively prosperous. I refer you to
the Heritage Institute's Index of Economic Freedom in which countries
are ranked by the amount of government interference in the economy (see
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/countries.cfm ). The
2005 index ranks Sweden at #14 in the world, just one spot below the
United States! Sweden may have some prominent welfare state features,
but clearly it is not a paragon of state socialism now, if indeed it
ever was. (Incidentally, Denmark is #8, Finland #15, and Norway #29,
while among the Baltic newcomers, Estonia places 4th in the world after
only Hong Kong, Singapore and Luxembourg, while Lithuania is #23 and
Latvia #28. All fairly respectable economic liberty standings given a
pool of 155 countries surveyed.)

Yours in liberty,
<<< Starchild >>>

[ricochetboy]

Starchild, the phrase "faith based currency" comes from the brilliant
and entertaining Bill Bonner of the Daily Reckoning from Agora Press
which he founded in Baltimore in the early eighties. The daily
reckoning is free is often worth the read, especially on Monday's when
it hosts the famous Mogambo Guru, the worldsagriest economist.

You are absolutely correct, I should make a habit of avoiding the
woord Faschist , and instead use the word National Socialist. I did
mean to say complacency.

I wish I was wrong about the economy, but the fate of my beloved
hometown, Baltimore, is testimony to the future of the whole country.
You should take a trip to Baltimore, hire a HUMV and a bif body guard
and take a tour of the vast wastelandsthat were once a gret urban
center. Then try Philadelphia, Detroit, Cleveland and Rochester,
outside of the Yuppie enclaves. Rural Kentucky, northern Minnesota,
and Arkansas might be next. The rot is well established and spreading.

The place the National Socialists and the Socialists meet in complete
harmony is thier Hobsian view of our energy future. Noth sides deride
a vision of market solutions as being pie in the sky delusions. Both
demand radical government action on energy policy. The right wants a
free for all on public lands and a militry takeover of the middle
east, and the left wants to outlaw SUVs big energy taces and
subsidies.Neither sees any use for free markets.

[dej72]

[ Attachment content not displayed ]

[dej72]

[ Attachment content not displayed ]

[lpsfactivists]

Derek,

The U.S. job market shrinks as producers wisely invest their capital
abroad, mainly in search of lower labor costs; the choices in
domestic jobs shrink as the spectrum of services offered abroad
widens. The domestic unemployment rate does not rise, since
discouraged workers who stop searching for jobs are no longer counted
as unemployed.

Anticipating a sentiment such as you have expressed I emphasized the
word *equivalent* benefit to wage earners, since a decrease in cost
to producers does not necessarily tanslate into an equivalent
decrease in price to the consumer/wage earner; witness the salaries
of CEO's, for instance. BTW the CPI, as I recall, does not include
real estate or energy in its "basket of goods;" rendeirng it rather
useless, IMHO.

However, please do not surmize that I am "against" outsourcing, or
foreign capital investment, or import/export deficits, or any of the
other U.S. market carachteristics. Whatever happens in the markets,
happens in the markets.

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Derek E. Jensen Sr."
<derekj72@g...> wrote:

1. By what measure is the US job market ever-decreasing?
2. What's wrong with outsourcing if it leads to higher returns to

capital?

(and I may add net increases in overall USA standard of living

through lower

prices of consumer goods and lower prices of factor inputs)

>
> I am not presuming to speak at the level of understanding

exhibited

> by Phil and others who have contributed to the subject of our

current

> illusion-based economy. I am simply hoping that someone out there
> will run with Phil's suggestion that perhaps CATO (currently the

most

> visible libertarian group) has not spoken out sufficiently

forcefully

> on such subjects as our huge external debt, our even huger

internal

> debt, our hyper-active printing press (producing faith-based

money),

> our ever-increasing dependence on oil and thus our need to

continue

> our imperialist course, our ever shrinking U.S. job market (think
> outsourcing without *equivalent* benefit to U.S. wage earners),

our

> clearly unsustainable real estate market, our aging population
> (coupled with low savings rates) etc. etc. I do not think it wise

to

> wait until the fascists and the liberals oblitarate each other

(yes,

> they are definitely two distinct and opposing groups) -- maybe the
> versed among the LP could contribute some hard facts (not the

usual

> smoke and mirrors) to the political discourse, as Phil suggests?
>
> Marcy
>
>
> --- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "ricochetboy"

<philzberg@e...>

> wrote:
> > If you believe the government statistics on cpi and

unemployment,

> then
> > some research on your part might be advised. I don't know if the
> Mises
> > Institute sees unrest in our future, but it seems to this

obsrever

> > that there is a great deal of suffering going on in the cities

the

> > suburbs and the hinterlands, and that when viewed through an
> Austrian
> > lens, our economy and our people are in for a very rough ride.I
> think
> > that the failure to educate the public , or even the elite

about the

> > fundamentals of Austrian economics is a gret tradgedy. for as
> > conditions worsen Americans will be looking for someone to

blame,

> and
> > it won't be the true culprits, the Fed. Usually the socialists

and

> the
> > faschists fight it out. Already the battle lines are being

drawn.

> > Cato has absolutely failed on this score. I vividly remeber one

Cato

> > scholar on C Span smugly telling folks, if they just put thier

401 k

> > into stocks they will be OK. Well anyone who retired in 1929 or
> 1966
> > would have waited 20 years for the purchasing power of thier
> portfolio
> > to break even. By not explianing to the American people that we

do

> not
> > have capitalism, but centrally planned corporate socialism at

the

> > finacial core of our economy, and that the problems of

inflation and

> > deflation are not inherant in capitalism, but the result of

systemic

> > banking errors, leaves the public open to Socialism or Faschist
> > leanings when times get tough, as they inevitably do. We have
> > undergone an historic credit expansion under greenspan. It has

been

> a
> > great ride. But all credit expansions end in trdgedy. They

always

> > have. This one being global due to Bretton Woods, and unlimited

due

> to
> > the worldwide adoption of a faith based paper money system,

will end

> > very badly. Even the ultimate insider Paul Volker in a recent
> > Washington Post Op ed, understated his concern and questioned

wether

> > anything can be done at this late date to fix the world economy.
> > Talking to San Fransiscans who are riding high on the real

estate

> > credit bubble about trouble ahead is like talking to a flapper

in

> > August 1929 about what her life will be reduced to in

1933.Nobody

> > drinking from the punch bowl cares to listen. Even is this

group,

> > economic campaceny is the prevailing sentiment. We;; I can't

tell

> you
> > how or when the party ends, but my bets are on worldwide
> > hyperinflation.The pity is the socialist will blame the greedy
> > corporations and the faschists will blame the revenge of God

for the

> > loose morals of the liberals and nobody will blame the Fed.

Freedom

[dej72]

[ Attachment content not displayed ]

[lpsfactivists]

Derek,

Thanks for the CPI, which will be good for me to keep for future
reference.

No, I do not agree that lower cost to producers automatically
translate into net decrease in price to the consumers in our
discussion i.e. wage earners; producers have a choice as to where to
invest any net gain: capital (foreign or domestic), owners
(stockholders may sometimes also be wage earners, but not in the
majority of cases), management (again not the wage earners we are
discussing), or wage earners.

Yes, I agree with you that there is no reason at all why wage earners
should be the beneficiaries of lower costs to producers; I never said
they should.

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Derek E. Jensen Sr."
<derekj72@g...> wrote:

Marcy:
I think you are thinking of the "core" CPI. The CPI which is most

widely

quoted includes:

   - FOOD AND BEVERAGES (breakfast cereal, milk, coffee, chicken,

wine,

   service meals and snacks)
   - HOUSING (*rent of primary residence, owners' equivalent rent,

fuel

   oil*, bedroom furniture)
   - APPAREL (men's shirts and sweaters, women's dresses, jewelry)
   - TRANSPORTATION (new vehicles, airline fares, *gasoline*, motor
   vehicle insurance)
   - MEDICAL CARE (prescription drugs and medical supplies,

physicians'

   services, eyeglasses and eye care, hospital services)
   - RECREATION (televisions, pets and pet products, sports

equipment,

   admissions);
   - EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION (college tuition, postage,

telephone

   services, computer software and accessories);
   - OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES (tobacco and smoking products,

haircuts and

   other personal services, funeral expenses).

In the presence of competition, a decrease in cost to producers

will surely

translate into a net decrease in price to the consumer/wage earner.

I don't

think you would dispute this. I agree with you that "a decrease in

cost to

producers does not necessarily translate into an *equivalent
*decrease in price to the consumer/wage earner" but, why should
consumer/wage earners expect to capture all of this surplus? One

should

expect capital to reap the benefits as well.
   
>
> Derek,
>
> The U.S. job market shrinks as producers wisely invest their

capital

> abroad, mainly in search of lower labor costs; the choices in
> domestic jobs shrink as the spectrum of services offered abroad
> widens. The domestic unemployment rate does not rise, since
> discouraged workers who stop searching for jobs are no longer

counted

> as unemployed.
>
> Anticipating a sentiment such as you have expressed I emphasized

the

> word *equivalent* benefit to wage earners, since a decrease in

cost

> to producers does not necessarily tanslate into an equivalent
> decrease in price to the consumer/wage earner; witness the

salaries

> of CEO's, for instance. BTW the CPI, as I recall, does not include
> real estate or energy in its "basket of goods;" rendeirng it

rather

> useless, IMHO.
>
> However, please do not surmize that I am "against" outsourcing, or
> foreign capital investment, or import/export deficits, or any of

the

> other U.S. market carachteristics. Whatever happens in the

markets,

> happens in the markets.
>
> Marcy
>
> --- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Derek E. Jensen Sr."
> <derekj72@g...> wrote:
> > 1. By what measure is the US job market ever-decreasing?
> > 2. What's wrong with outsourcing if it leads to higher returns

to

> capital?
> > (and I may add net increases in overall USA standard of living
> through lower
> > prices of consumer goods and lower prices of factor inputs)
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I am not presuming to speak at the level of understanding
> exhibited
> > > by Phil and others who have contributed to the subject of our
> current
> > > illusion-based economy. I am simply hoping that someone out

there

> > > will run with Phil's suggestion that perhaps CATO (currently

the

> most
> > > visible libertarian group) has not spoken out sufficiently
> forcefully
> > > on such subjects as our huge external debt, our even huger
> internal
> > > debt, our hyper-active printing press (producing faith-based
> money),
> > > our ever-increasing dependence on oil and thus our need to
> continue
> > > our imperialist course, our ever shrinking U.S. job market

(think

> > > outsourcing without *equivalent* benefit to U.S. wage

earners),

> our
> > > clearly unsustainable real estate market, our aging population
> > > (coupled with low savings rates) etc. etc. I do not think it

wise

> to
> > > wait until the fascists and the liberals oblitarate each other
> (yes,
> > > they are definitely two distinct and opposing groups) --

maybe the

> > > versed among the LP could contribute some hard facts (not the
> usual
> > > smoke and mirrors) to the political discourse, as Phil

suggests?

> > >
> > > Marcy
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "ricochetboy"
> <philzberg@e...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > If you believe the government statistics on cpi and
> unemployment,
> > > then
> > > > some research on your part might be advised. I don't know

if the

> > > Mises
> > > > Institute sees unrest in our future, but it seems to this
> obsrever
> > > > that there is a great deal of suffering going on in the

cities

> the
> > > > suburbs and the hinterlands, and that when viewed through an
> > > Austrian
> > > > lens, our economy and our people are in for a very rough

ride.I

> > > think
> > > > that the failure to educate the public , or even the elite
> about the
> > > > fundamentals of Austrian economics is a gret tradgedy. for

as

> > > > conditions worsen Americans will be looking for someone to
> blame,
> > > and
> > > > it won't be the true culprits, the Fed. Usually the

socialists

> and
> > > the
> > > > faschists fight it out. Already the battle lines are being
> drawn.
> > > > Cato has absolutely failed on this score. I vividly remeber

one

> Cato
> > > > scholar on C Span smugly telling folks, if they just put

thier

> 401 k
> > > > into stocks they will be OK. Well anyone who retired in

1929 or

> > > 1966
> > > > would have waited 20 years for the purchasing power of thier
> > > portfolio
> > > > to break even. By not explianing to the American people

that we

> do
> > > not
> > > > have capitalism, but centrally planned corporate socialism

at

> the
> > > > finacial core of our economy, and that the problems of
> inflation and
> > > > deflation are not inherant in capitalism, but the result of
> systemic
> > > > banking errors, leaves the public open to Socialism or

Faschist

> > > > leanings when times get tough, as they inevitably do. We

have

> > > > undergone an historic credit expansion under greenspan. It

has

> been
> > > a
> > > > great ride. But all credit expansions end in trdgedy. They
> always
> > > > have. This one being global due to Bretton Woods, and

unlimited

> due
> > > to
> > > > the worldwide adoption of a faith based paper money system,
> will end
> > > > very badly. Even the ultimate insider Paul Volker in a

recent

> > > > Washington Post Op ed, understated his concern and

questioned

> wether
> > > > anything can be done at this late date to fix the world

economy.

> > > > Talking to San Fransiscans who are riding high on the real
> estate
> > > > credit bubble about trouble ahead is like talking to a

flapper

> in
> > > > August 1929 about what her life will be reduced to in
> 1933.Nobody
> > > > drinking from the punch bowl cares to listen. Even is this
> group,
> > > > economic campaceny is the prevailing sentiment. We;; I can't
> tell
> > > you
> > > > how or when the party ends, but my bets are on worldwide
> > > > hyperinflation.The pity is the socialist will blame the

greedy

[dej72]

[ Attachment content not displayed ]

[dej72]

[ Attachment content not displayed ]

[dej72]

[ Attachment content not displayed ]

[ricochetboy]

You ask about the demand for money. The demand for money is reprented
by the amount of all goods and services that would be exchanged for
money. Has the quantity of all goods and services incresed ten fold or
so in the last twenty years. Maybe. Probably not. Typically throughout
human history, productivity increases by about 3 percent a year.
Interestingly population and gold supply both increase by about 1.7
percent a year. Under the gold standard of the 10th century, according
to Alan Greenspan in recent Humphry Hawkins testimony, prices remained
unchanged from 1789 to 1924. Since the establishment of the Feed the
dollar has lost approximately 97 percent of it's purchasing power.
Much of th inflation in recent years years has been exported
overseas, but if the chinese significantly revalue the yuan and the
Japanese and Indians follow suit, Inflation will be exported back to
the US.along with higher interst rates as the asian central banks stop
buying treasuries like zombies. The price of money over time is
expressed in interest rates. and I am too tired to continue the
discussion.

[ricochetboy]

Hwew is a great little article on employment statitics. An oldie but a
goodie.http://tinyurl.com/c4mtv

I would have no problemo with outsourcing were our currencies value so
politically manipulated by central banks. Prior to Bretton Woods and
gradually destroyed until all vestiges were obliterated by nicon,
world trade was self balncing through the flow of gold. If a country
such as the us was conssuming more than it was producing, then gold
would flow out of the consuming country. The money supply in the
consuming country would fall. With less money chasing the same amount
of goods, prices in the over consuming country would fall. The cost of
production would decline as prices declined, and domestic ly produced
goods would become cheaper, and foreign goods appear more expensive.
The trade imbalance would self correct. In the glorious peacful period
betweeen Waterloo and World War One, this self balancig worked well
throughout the western world, with the ecxeption when governments
such as Lincoln's administration messed with the banking and credit
systems. Contradst that to the present system. A guy in suburban
chicago gets a home equity loan. He takes 200 bucks and goes to
Walmart. Walmart sells him some stuff and pays a chinese businessman
200 bucks to reorder the same stuff. The chinese business man takes
the hundred bucks from Walmart to the bank and changes it into yuan
rembibi. The chinese bank prints the yuan to give to the businessman.
It takes the hundred dollars and ideally it would buy back some yuan
in the world market with the hundred bucks. But that would increse the
supply of dollars in the currency markets and decrese the supply of
Yuan. The dollar would decline and the yuan would rise in value if
they did that. So instead the chinese bank takes the hundred bucks and
buys some us treasuries, or some fannie maes. this drives down us
interst rates. That drives up us housing prices. And another guy takes
out a home equity loan. Meanwhile in China, inflation rages from all
the printed yeans.Now with the yuan being allowed to ever so slowly
revalue upward, this craziness should maybe slow down. But the US
dollar had been so string vs othercurrencies for so long that our
manufacturing capacity is greatly reduced. The adjustment willl be
difficult.The us consumer will have to get used to much higher oil and
commodity prices as the currecy shifts to a more balanced value. The
structural anti competitve forces in this society will have to come
down for us labor to be able to bid low enough to compete in the world
market. That requires a commitment to economic libery. In the
meantime, the finacial powers that be in Mew York will not go softly
into that good night. It is going to be quite a show. I just wish Lou
Dobbs would talk about how Brettton Woods, making the dollar the
worlds reserve currency, made our currency way overvalued for waay
too long. The result has been the demise of the blue collar
manufaccturing class in the us. You can paper it over all you want
with BS about the service economy, and higher value inputs etc etc.
but the bottom line is, there are lots of blue collar kids mulein ice
instead of makin steel. I sometimes wish the US still had some old
English habits. Traitors to the crown were drawn and quarterd and
thier heads left on the london bridge to rot for twenty years. Woodrow
Wilson, FDR and Richard Milhouse Nixon all deserve to have this
treatment for creating the present world finacial system. A little
place for Robert Rubin might also be appreciated for so effectively
suppressing the price of gold as his strong dollar policy. Bush gets
credit for working to bring some balance into the dollars value.
Wether it will hwlp is still unclear. It took a very long time to make
this mess. It will take a long time to fix it.