While there are many things that one could certainly disagree or agree with in this article, it is definitely refreshing as flies in the face of bailout mentality.
Here’s a modest proposal: most people agree that enforcing a monopoly over an economic service or commodity never ends up well. Just imagine if there were a monopoly on shoes, or maybe groceries, or plumbing services. The product quality of a monopolized good is marginal at best; the people who produce the product have virtually no incentive to improve it, make it efficiently or plan for future improvements, not to mention listen to consumer demands. Anyone who has experienced a free market can understand this. There’s a story that, when someone said in the former Soviet Union that shoes could be produced more efficiently and with greater variety in a free market, a Soviet citizen responded (in a frenzied manner), “but how would you be certain everyone would get shoes? Who would determine how many shoes needed to be produced?” Does that sound familiar? Is there anyone you can think of in America who might have a similar reaction to a suggestion that, for example, health insurance be left to a free market? Or housing? Or etc., etc.? Say, here’s a great idea for all those who think that the government can run things: turn over control of the computer industry to government! Think of the vast improvements & efficiencies in product quality that we’d see!
Back to the main point: there has been in America for at least the past 100 years a monopoly (or at best a cartel) on the most basic commodity in an economy: money. That’s right; only Uncle Sam, along with the Federal Reserve, can create, manage and distribute the medium of exchange. Please don’t faint when you read this but there have been periods in history when people and groups have been free to create their own money and the economy functioned smoothly.
So, how can anyone be surprised that we are in this shape today? When a small, insulated, politically connected group of people can dictate money supply and interest rates? When they can print as much as they want to give to the politically well connected?
Let us (without government interference) create a free market in money. Then watch prosperity, diversity, variety and wealth soar.
To save the time of anyone who might be so inclined, I’ll write their probable responses here: “You’re a nut!” “Why, there’d be utter chaos!” “You just want to see poor people die in the streets!” “You’re an anarchist!” and, to cover a whole class of responses, anything that begins with “But what about…?” “How would you….?” “What would you do about…?”
I agree that this article is refreshing however the goals of our government and the well being of our country’s people are at odds. The people and capitalism’s goal is for innovation, efficiency and profit. The government’s goals are power, control and self perpetuation through spending, taxation and confiscation. These two are at opposites ends. Thus, we have capitalism of the state versus individual capitalism. At the present time capitalism of the state seems to be winning at the expense of the people and our public educational systems, which is a failure, is the propaganda mouth piece of government. The parents of today are the end products of our public educational system.
While there are many things that one could certainly disagree or agree with in this article, it is definitely refreshing as flies in the face of bailout mentality.
Here’s a modest proposal: most people agree that enforcing a monopoly over an economic service or commodity never ends up well. Just imagine if there were a monopoly on shoes, or maybe groceries, or plumbing services. The product quality of a monopolized good is marginal at best; the people who produce the product have virtually no incentive to improve it, make it efficiently or plan for future improvements, not to mention listen to consumer demands. Anyone who has experienced a free market can understand this. There’s a story that, when someone said in the former Soviet Union that shoes could be produced more efficiently and with greater variety in a free market, a Soviet citizen responded (in a frenzied manner), “but how would you be certain everyone would get shoes? Who would determine how many shoes needed to be produced?” Does that sound familiar? Is there anyone you can think of in America who might have a similar reaction to a suggestion that, for example, health insurance be left to a free market? Or housing? Or etc., etc.? Say, here’s a great idea for all those who think that the government can run things: turn over control of the computer industry to government! Think of the vast improvements & efficiencies in product quality that we’d see!
Back to the main point: there has been in America for at least the past 100 years a monopoly (or at best a cartel) on the most basic commodity in an economy: money. That’s right; only Uncle Sam, along with the Federal Reserve, can create, manage and distribute the medium of exchange. Please don’t faint when you read this but there have been periods in history when people and groups have been free to create their own money and the economy functioned smoothly.
So, how can anyone be surprised that we are in this shape today? When a small, insulated, politically connected group of people can dictate money supply and interest rates? When they can print as much as they want to give to the politically well connected?
Let us (without government interference) create a free market in money. Then watch prosperity, diversity, variety and wealth soar.
To save the time of anyone who might be so inclined, I’ll write their probable responses here: “You’re a nut!” “Why, there’d be utter chaos!” “You just want to see poor people die in the streets!” “You’re an anarchist!” and, to cover a whole class of responses, anything that begins with “But what about…?” “How would you….?” “What would you do about…?”
I agree that this article is refreshing however the goals of our government and the well being of our country’s people are at odds. The people and capitalism’s goal is for innovation, efficiency and profit. The government’s goals are power, control and self perpetuation through spending, taxation and confiscation. These two are at opposites ends. Thus, we have capitalism of the state versus individual capitalism. At the present time capitalism of the state seems to be winning at the expense of the people and our public educational systems, which is a failure, is the propaganda mouth piece of government. The parents of today are the end products of our public educational system.
Since Obama has taken office we have increased our defense & intelligence budget to something like $825,000,000,000.
Maybe we could, you know, spend less on the Pentagon and killing people and more money on, you know, schools and whatnot.