Ron Paul on Audit the Fed (on Kudlow)

November 30, 2009 · Posted in Monetary Economics · 1 Comment

The True Cost of War

November 29, 2009 · Posted in Foreign Policy · 2 Comments

… and of course the only change we see from the president is to send yet more troops into combat.

President Obama said Tuesday that he was determined to “finish the job” in Afghanistan, and his aides signaled to allies that he would send as many as 25,000 to 30,000 additional American troops there even as they cautioned that the final number remained in flux.

It has to be utterly confusing for those who for some reason thought Obama was going to be a peace candidate. Time to remember the 2008 presidential campaign, when some crazy Republican candidate dared to say “Just come home …”

Tags: afghanistan, cost of war, war

Government Equals Aggression – Nothing More, Nothing Less

November 28, 2009 · Posted in Philosophy · Comment

Any economic discussion is useless when we don’t look at human action. We can talk all day long about government intervention, business regulation, stimulus packages, bailouts, taxes, deficits, etc. But what do these terms really mean? What do they mean in terms of human actions taken?

After all society is nothing but a sequence of different actions taken by humans, every second of the day. Economics is nothing but an analysis of a very specific subset of those actions, namely those that are motivated by or lead to changes in the money prices of goods.

A government is nothing but a group of people that uses aggression to take money from other individuals on a periodical basis and promises protection in return.

Business regulation, in these people’s minds, really means that that same group of people hires individuals and purchases guns in order to force others to comply with orders decreed. If the subjects fail to comply, they will be fined, if the fine is not forthcoming, letters will be sent, if the letters are not answered, armed thugs will arrive and and force them to hand over the requested fine.

If the thugs are still met with non-compliance, they will kidnap their victims and order that they be prosecuted and thrown in jail, the laws being such that they will be prosecuted and thrown in jail. If those same people dare to raise a gun to defend themselves and their property against this intrusion, they will be shot.

The stimulus package is nothing but a debt that is taken on on behalf of the taxpayers, and then spent on things that benefit the contractors and individuals who receive the money first. This is happening in an environment where the majority of people is in too much debt already.

But taking on more debt is not going to get anybody out of this predicament. It is not some lofty, imaginary government that ultimately owes the money, it is the taxpayer whose tax payments will be used to repay the debt in the future. That same taxpayer who is already underwater and has spent too much of his money already. But how is that tax money taken from the taxpayer. Well, just read what I wrote one paragraph above and substitute “tax” for “fine”.

Every single government policy will always lead you back to these basic facts. When a government official says “we need to do xyz”, he really means “our armed gunmen need to extort money from individuals so we can do xyz”, there is simply no way around this.

The politicians in power of course don’t have much of an incentive to talk about their policies in those terms. If they did, they would immediately reveal the cruel, unethical, mafia-style character of every single one of their actions.

Some people will try and make the argument “but the majority agreed to it”. So what? What does that mean? Since when is the majority right? Heck, the majority elected Hitler into office! The fact that the majority agreed/consented with something does not in the slightest make that thing right.

If the majority of people in your house agreed that it was just to take your money via aggression, would you say that that makes this a just undertaking? Is in not rather oppression of a minority? What if all the people on your block agreed that it was appropriate to steal your property and you are the only one objecting? Does that give them the right to do so?? What if all inhabitants of your town or city were to come together and declare it just to take your money or your home from you, and threatened you with kidnapping and throwing you behind bars if you dared to resist. What if every single person in the country joined the mob and declared it just to take your possessions? Does that make it just? Is it not rather the exact opposite, a monstrous injustice, a mass crime on a colossal scale?

Then those who run out of arguments to support the validity of the state will tell you that after all, you are getting something in return from those who use aggression to obtain your property. But how ridiculous is this? Why would they ever give you more in return than what they took from you, without infringing on someone else’s rights in precisely the same way. All the odds are against the idea that money handed over to a bureaucratic institution will be utilized in your best interest, it is impossible to evade The Trouble With Bureaucracy.

Furthermore, even if they did give back precisely what you were forced to hand over, what in the world would the purpose of this exercise be, other than a gigantic waste of time and resources? On top of that, how do they even know what to give back? Did they ever ask you? Were you presented with a menu to choose from? What if you don’t want the things they claim to be giving you, what if you don’t think they are worth even a fraction of the money you handed over? But does anyone give you the choice?

But let’s play along with this fantasy and assume they do give you something you specifically asked for in return. What if it has flaws? What if it doesn’t work in a way that caters to your needs? Does anybody ask you for feedback on how specifically to improve the good that was provided to you … you know, all that stuff that private businesses do, so long as they are not subsidized or bailed out by … *sigh* … the government? But notice how I am having to make the most ridiculous of assumptions in order to try to find a slight justification for the existence of the state. And yet, it is still impossible to find one that even remotely makes sense.

Then they will bring up the argument that you chose by voting. OK, let’s assume that fantasy was true, and Barack Obama presented every single good he is going to provide in return for your tax money. (The argument fails there already but I am trying to be as open as possible to all the boring justifications people will come up with again and again.) Then that immediately begs the question: What if you are one out of the 80% of the population who did not vote for him? Surely the person advancing the argument that you made a choice by voting can’t deny that in that case you did NOT vote for the choices presented and should not be obliged to hand over your property at gunpoint.

When confronting people who have unlimited faith in the validity of government with those facts, one will likely always be confronted with rolling eyes, aggravated temper, ridicule, name calling, and other immature reactions. But there is one thing that you will never encounter: A reasoned refutation of the facts presented.

Ethics, Human Nature, and Government are crucial concepts that need to be understood. So long as they are not, people will continue to be surprised about all the governmentally induced failures that will have been, from my point of view, as predictable as ever.

And finally, a nice clip that supports the point I am making above:

Tags: aggression, anachism, Government

Peter Schiff on the Campaign Trail

November 28, 2009 · Posted in Politics · Comment

It is really fun and uplifting to see Schiff talk and relate to people on the campaign trail …

YouTube – SCHIFF SCORES….Peter Schiff speaks at the WRTC meeting, Nov. 19.wmv

YouTube – SCHIFF on Tea Parties Woodbury, CT Nov. 19, 2009.wmv

YouTube – MR. SCHIFF GOES TO WASHINGTON November 19, 2009.wmv

YouTube – SCHIFF ON HEALTH INSURANCE…Nov. 19, 2009.wmv

YouTube – SCHIFF on Palin and the Presidency Nov. 19, 2009.wmv

YouTube – SCHIFF ON DODD “He’s Clueless”, Nov. 19, 2009.wmv

YouTube – SCHIFF ON THE DOLLAR Woodbury, Connecticut November 19, 2009.wmv

YouTube – PETER SCHIFF Something Different Nov. 19, 2009.wmv

YouTube – SCHIFF on Competition Woodbury, CT Nov. 19, 2009.wmv

YouTube – PETER SCHIFF – A gift of Clarity Woodbury, CT. November 19, 200.wmv

YouTube – PETER SCHIFF Dr. Doom or a Prophet Woodbury, CT. Nov. 19, 2009.wmv

YouTube – SCHIFF on National Security and More Woodbury, CT November 19, 2.wmv

Tags: peter schiff, peter schiff for senate

Peter Schiff Smacks Bernanke; Fed Officials Choke on Response

November 27, 2009 · Posted in Politics · 1 Comment

Very nice…

Tags: ben bernanke, federal reserve bank, peter schiff

1 in 4 Homeowners Under Water

November 25, 2009 · Posted in General Economics · Comment

WSJ reports nearly 1 in 4 homeowners are under water:

The proportion of U.S. homeowners who owe more on their mortgages than the properties are worth has swelled to about 23%, threatening prospects for a sustained housing recovery.

Nearly 10.7 million households had negative equity in their homes in the third quarter, according to First American CoreLogic, a real-estate information company based in Santa Ana, Calif.

These so-called underwater mortgages pose a roadblock to a housing recovery because the properties are more likely to fall into bank foreclosure and get dumped into an already saturated market. Economists from J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. said Monday they didn’t expect U.S. home prices to hit bottom until early 2011, citing the prospect of oversupply.

The argument of oversupply is valid. But then, why would prices hit bottom in 2011, is it not rather likely that it will take many more years, if not decades to work through the overhang, coupled with continuously rising unemployment, government debt, and taxation, private deleveraging, increased savings, and declining consumption demand?

Keep in mind that things look even worse for borrowers in some of the bubble states:

Homeowners in Nevada, Arizona, Florida and California are more likely to be deeply under water, according to the analysis. In Nevada, for example, nearly 30% of borrowers owe 50% or more on their mortgage than their home is worth, said First American.

These, and more, are all reasons Why There Is More Pain to Come …

Tags: housing, housing market

The Global Warming Religion

November 24, 2009 · Posted in Environment · 28 Comments

The recently leaked CRU emails expose a web of inconsistencies, manipulations, lies, and disregard for ethical scientific approach. But let’s take all of that aside. Let’s say I am jumping to conclusions. At the very least any inquiring mind would conclude that some of these emails expose some content that may be shedding a slightly different light on a lot of the procedures and calculations that have led to our present day conclusions on climate change.

But what are global warming fanatics across the globe doing instead right now? They are trying to do everything possible to make us believe that these emails are of no significance whatsoever. They are brushing aside the most rampant indicators of manipulation and bias on the part of the research group in question. Heck, they are calling the posts that do nothing but make available the leaked emails “wishful propaganda”. Yes, propaganda. They are going so far as to calling the dissemination of information propaganda! Meanwhile they turn a blind eye to the information leaked.

Again, I am not saying in any way that they should change their minds immediately or jump on these emails. This would be unreasonable to expect. But to refer to someone who publishes uncomfortable information as a propagandist??

This is frantic behavior at its worst. It shows how one loses his objectiveness when a scientific hypothesis turns in to a political idea and then turns into an outright religion. It is very much comparable to the lunatics who would have us believe that the first two humans on earth conversed with a snake, that the earth is 6000 years old, and that a guy named Jesus was born by a virgin, defying all reasonable proof against it while not expecting ANY proof in support of it.

The common link is the belief that if a part of your religion is proven to be wrong, for some mystical reason all the good teachings and ideas that could be derived from it become invalid as well. But there is no problem at all in acknowledging that a part of ones ideology has been a fairytale. It is, in fact, the very precondition of scientific discourse to continue questioning your ideas, hold them up against the unswerving light of reason, discard of false ideas, and refine correct ones.

But we see what happens when a human mind no longer precipitates a cause, but instead the cause controls the human mind and morphs into a crusade.

That being said, here are some more interesting insights from Dr Tim Ball on Watts Up With That:

Tags: global warming, tim ball

Global Warming Hoax Exposed

November 23, 2009 · Posted in Environment · 2 Comments

The widespread paranoia about global warming and its obvious benefits to certain special interest groups have always been suspicious signs of a giant world wide hoax, very much of the likes of the Y2K scare and the current swine flu panic.

Now, some very incriminating emails circulating within the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Angila have been discovered. First off, what is the CRU? Wikipedia says:

The Climatic Research Unit is a component of the University of East Anglia U.K. and is one of the leading institutions concerned with the study of natural and anthropogenic climate change.

It has around thirty research scientists and students and has developed a number of the data sets widely used in climate research, including the global temperature record used to monitor the state of the climate system, as well as statistical software packages and climate models.

Here are some of the emails that have leaked (I downloaded them all here but found these on Mish’s blog):

Here Are A Few Choice Emails

From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@virginia.edu, mhughes@ltrr.arizona.edu
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@uea.ac.uk,t.osborn@uea.ac.uk

Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or first thing tomorrow. I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998. Thanks for the comments, Ray.

Cheers
Phil

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK

===================================

From: Gary Funkhouser
To: k.briffa@uea.ac.uk
Subject: kyrgyzstan and siberian data
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 15:37:09 -0700

Keith,

Thanks for your consideration. Once I get a draft of the central and southern siberian data and talk to Stepan and Eugene I’ll send it to you.

I really wish I could be more positive about the Kyrgyzstan material, but I swear I pulled every trick out of my sleeve trying to milk something out of that. It was pretty funny though – I told Malcolm what you said about my possibly being too Graybill-like in evaluating the response functions – he laughed and said that’s what he thought at first also. The data’s tempting but there’s too much variation even within stands. I don’t think it’d be productive to try and juggle the chronology statistics any more than I already have – they just are what they are (that does sound Graybillian). I think I’ll have to look for an option where I can let this little story go as it is.

Not having seen the sites I can only speculate, but I’d be optimistic if someone could get back there and spend more time collecting samples, particularly at the upper elevations.

Yeah, I doubt I’ll be over your way anytime soon. Too bad, I’d like to get together with you and Ed for a beer or two. Probably someday though.

Cheers, Gary
Gary Funkhouser
Lab. of Tree-Ring Research
The University of Arizona
Tucson, Arizona 85721 USA
phone: (520) 621-2946
fax: (520) 621-8229
e-mail: gary@ltrr.arizona.edu
================================================

My take on the global warming debate is this: Any of the theories advanced may or may not be accurate. Everybody is entitled to his opinions on this. Whether it is man-made or not has absolutely no bearing on the general steps that have to be taken toward reducing our waste of resources, reducing emissions, and improving the way we treat our resources.

After all, the biggest polluters in the country are the federal and state governments and their hired contractors! I am all for shutting down every single one of their polluting activities. I am all for unlimited responsibility by corporations, governments, and individuals alike, when their actions harm someone else’s life, health, or property. But unfortunately it has been deliberate government policy that has again and again granted sovereign immunity and corporate privileges, infringing upon the independence of civil and criminal courts who would have been the proper mediums to deal with the environmental issues in question.

What is so dangerous about the global warming debate is that a lot of the arguments advanced ultimately seem to be leading people to think that we need that same federal government to get involved and attempt to regulate activities that impact our environment even more.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. You simply can’t expect the fox to guard the hen house. Cap and Trade – Lobbyism Gone Wild With Your Tax Dollars will be just one of the inevitable result of all such policies. I hope that a healthy dose of scepticism can put all these nonsensical programs to rest and let us return to discussing real change and real solutions as opposed to more of the same.

Tags: cap and trade, global warming, global warming hoax

Money Supply – October 2009

November 22, 2009 · Posted in General Economics · 2 Comments

The true money supply in October was $2,151 billion, up 7 percent from 1 year ago:

Tags: money supply, october 2009, true money supply

Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed Amendment Passes; One More Hurdle Taken; More Battles Ahead

November 20, 2009 · Posted in Politics · Comment

From John Tate with C4L:

Dear Friend of Liberty,

Thanks to your quick action in contacting Congress, the House Financial Services Committee earlier today rejected Representative Mel Watt’s attempt to hijack Audit the Fed by voting 43-26 to pass Ron Paul’s amendment to the financial regulatory reform bill.

Dr. Paul called me right after the vote to personally express his thanks to C4L members for all of your efforts!

It is an incredible testament to the growing power of the liberty movement that we were able to get such an audit passed by a major House committee, but this is by no means the end of our fight.

Financial Services leadership has seemed determined for several months that if an audit of the Fed were to get out of Committee, it should be attached to an overall regulatory reform package that would actually increase the powers of the Fed to interfere in our economy.

Congressman Paul’s amendment gives the Government Accountability Office power to conduct a thorough audit of the Fed’s entire $2 trillion balance sheet and replaces the Watt language that would have further restricted GAO audits of the Federal Reserve.

While this is a victory over an attempted hijacking of our cause, the audit authority is still being rolled into the Financial Stability Improvement Act, a bill that Campaign for Liberty will oppose.

This Act will be voted on as soon as the Committee returns from its Thanksgiving break, and we will then know if it will move to the floor.

And it’s already becoming clear that Ron Paul’s amendment may face challenges on the House floor.

Now is the time to turn up the pressure!

Keep contacting Congress and tell your representative that before Congress debates over giving the Fed any new powers, we need to know what they’re doing with the ones they already have!

Urge your representative to support a standalone, up or down vote on Audit the Fed, H.R. 1207.

We’ve put too much work into this effort to see an audit bogged down in yet another Washington bureaucratic nightmare.

Make no mistake, though, the victory today proved we can get the votes to pass the thorough, historic audit we’ve been fighting for this past year. We have put the Federal Reserve on notice that the freedom movement is serious about reclaiming our country and that it is here to stay.

Thanks for all you do for the cause of freedom. Now, let’s finish this fight!

In Liberty,

John Tate

President

P.S. Turn up the pressure! Tell your representative you want a standalone vote on Audit the Fed, H.R. 1207.