Peter Schiff @ Occupy Wall Street
Some people there are actually curious and open to debate and new ideas. Others are just a completely hysterical and embarrassing disgrace for any movement that claims to espouse change, peace, and freedom for all.
I thank them for making complete fools of themselves on video for the world to see. You’ll know what I mean when you watch it …
“Occupy Wall Street” and its Futility
The Inevitable Waste and Corruption of “Stimulus” Spending
A good theory has predictive power. A prediction doesn’t automatically make a theory true, but it’s a good first test in my opinion.
Quite a while ago, I made the case, based on praxeological reasoning, why bureaucracy can’t ever accomplish its stated objectives in the long run.
Based on that theory I suggested many times over that government stimulus programs will not be a panacea to economic sluggishness, quite the contrary.
In particular I wrote almost 3 years ago:
The $800 billion spending bill that is currently being discussed will not fix the US economy.
(…)
This bill was never [Obama's] bill. It was the Congressional Democrats’ bill, led by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Now Obama has made it his bill. All the scandals, wasteful projects and corruption that will be uncovered under the projects funded by it will be associated with him.
(…)
To ignore [those who oppose it] would be the biggest mistake Obama could make now.
(…)
If he continues doing it, the political retaliation will ensue sooner or later in the next Congressional elections and maybe in the next presidential elections. This is an unnecessary, harmful, and avoidable political gamble.
Here we are, almost 3 years later, with an unemployment rate higher than it was at the time (~9% now vs. ~8% then), which I would submit as one piece of evidence that the stimulus did not work. (My readers will know that there are many more, but that’s not the main point of this post!)
(And yes, I know the good old argument that “it would have been much worse, had it not been for the stimulus” etc. I would only kindly ask that anyone wanting to submit such an argument please logically refute the counter arguments that I have already laid out very clearly in The Trouble With Bureaucracy, and empirically supply specific examples that corroborate this thesis and that outweigh any evidence that may exist to the contrary.)
But in addition to that, I would say that the corruption, scandals, waste, and the ensuing political backlash that I predicted above, have only just begun to unravel: The case of Solyndra is suddenly a big thorn in the administration’s side, and it doesn’t seem to be going away any time soon:
Pressure on the Obama administration over the loan guarantee given to Solyndra ratcheted up after the discovery of e-mails from a White House official warning of possible political ramifications of the loan. As Carol Leonnig and Joe Stephens reported:
A White House official fretted privately that the Obama administration could suffer serious political damage if it gave additional taxpayer support to the beleaguered solar-panel company Solyndra, according to newly released e-mails.
(…)
Solyndra, the first renewable-energy company to receive a loan from the stimulus law creating the guarantee program, had its headquarters raided by the FBI last week. As AP reported:
The FBI raided Solyndra’s headquarters last week and interviewed company executives at their homes. A U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the case is under seal, said the search was related to a fraud investigation into whether Solyndra filed inaccurate documents with the government.
The Silicon Valley company was the first renewable-energy company to receive a loan guarantee under the stimulus law, and the Obama administration frequently touted Solyndra as a model for its clean energy program. President Barack Obama visited the company’s headquarters last year.
Even as Obama declared that “the future is here” during a May 2010 visit to Solyndra, warning signs were being sent from within the government and from outside analysts who questioned the company’s viability.
At least three reports by federal watchdogs over the past two years warned that the Energy Department had not fully developed the controls needed to manage the multibillion-dollar loan program.
… and as was predictable, Republicans are happy to pounce:
“What did the stimulus give us last time? It gave us Solyndra,” Bachmann said to cheers at a packed Tea Party fundraiser this week in liberal Marin County. “Wasn’t that great?”
Bachmann is among the growing ranks of Republicans, including the lineup of 2012 GOP presidential candidates, who are increasingly salting their stump speeches, press releases and talking points with references to the Fremont firm that once was a poster child for the Obama administration on alternative energy jobs before it shut down last month.
The Minnesota Congresswoman and Tea Party darling delights audiences when she dryly quotes Vice President Joe Biden’s past observation that the federal government’s $528 million loan to Solyndra “was exactly what the stimulus act was all about.”
“It’s exactly true,” she said to cheers and applause from conservative activists in Marin on Thursday. “I tell you … we have so much material, it’s going to be a joy.”
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/16/MNED1L5MRI.DTL#ixzz1YAbztAT7
I would actually be shocked if this will remain the only example of blatant stimulus waste that will come back to haunt the president.
Actions have consequences; stupid decisions, whose long term impact you are unable to assess, will come back to bite you in the ass, particularly during election year. From the Republicans’ viewpoint, Obama could not have picked a better time for pushing the stimulus bill, since it usually takes at least a few years for all the filth and corruption of giant government programs to build up and trickle through the shiny, pompous, and mindless facade of politics.
But as I have come to realize about politics a while ago, the best thing to do in my opinion is to abstain from participating in these spectacles, sit back, relax, and don’t hurt your head too much about petty, boring, and small minded sociopaths who aspire to exercise power over millions of people year after year.
The Strategy to Defeat Ron Paul … Ignore Him
I think from the mainstream media’s point of view, it’s their last resort to simply ignore Ron Paul. And that is actually a great sign. It shows that their ideas are morally bankrupt and the second they attempt to engage they know they will lose the argument.
Ron Paul is not going to be elected to any position of power, that is a given. His ideas on the economy, liberty, freedom, and ethics are great.
The only problem is that he chose politics as a venue for those ideas. Politics will not set us free, it will only keep us enslaved. The day we let go of it, is the day we’re free :)
Obama vs Obama on Raising the Debt Ceiling
Senator Obama in 2006 when the debt ceiling was at $8,965 billion or 64.2% of GDP:
The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.
And of course as a standup and incorruptible agent of change, President Obama in 2011 (via spokesperson), with a debt ceiling at $14,294 billion or 92.1% of GDP:
Obama “thinks it was a mistake,” presidential spokesman Jay Carney told reporters. “He realizes now that raising the debt ceiling is so important to the health of this economy and the global economy that it is not a vote that, even when you are protesting an administration’s policies, you can play around with.”
Ah, the idiocy of politics in all its beauty …
I wonder if this is the kind of “CHANGE” he was talking about all along. ;)
Unions, Bargaining, Morality, Egypt, and Liberal vs Republican Bullshit
Politics
The economist Franz Oppenheimer once wrote that there are only two means of acquiring material wealth. One is voluntary exchange and the other is theft. He aptly called the former the “economic means” and the latter the “political means”.
This is exactly the distinction that I make in the primer on the right hand side of this blog. I call it economics of voluntary action versus economics of compulsory action.
Oppenheimer furthermore defined the state as an “organization of the political means”:
The State is an organization of the political means. No State, therefore, can come into being until the economic means has created a definite number of objects for the satisfaction of needs, which objects may be taken away or appropriated by warlike robbery.
The process of politics, due to its complete violation of morality, contradicts everything humans are by default wired for.
It seems to be generally understood that there is nothing to be gained out of the political process for mankind in general.
One can observe this in common day to day speak:
“Oh, this is getting too political for me.”
“He’s just playing politics.”
“Don’t politicize this issue!”
“You should hear yourself talk. You sound like a politician!”
And so on …
Thus I think it is fair to say that evidence exists to support the notion that people in general very much understand the futility of the political process. They like to let it slip from time to time. Except when it really matters … on election day.
You can see this in emotional knee jerk responses that you get from most people when advocating abstention from the voting process.
It is not unreasonable to believe that such cognitive dissonance is one of the ultimate results of childhood scar tissue.
Rally to Restore Sanity – Making the Case for Anarchy & Voluntaryism
Jon Stewart held a great and, in my opinion, a hugely important speech at the rally to restore sanity, if only you read between the lines.
It is probably the best case someone has ever made for anarchy/voluntaryism in the mainstream media:
Everyone knows that the concept of government doesn’t work and is doomed to fail miserably. Few people admit it willingly and openly. Few people can fathom the “insane” idea that it should be abolished. Jon Stuart doesn’t admit it openly but you can, in my opinion, clearly see from certain passages in this speech that the idea is at least floating around in his subconscious.
For example:
(…)We hear every damn day about how fragile our country is, on the brink of catastrophe, torn by polarizing hate; and how it’s a shame that we can’t work together to get things done; the truth is: We do! We work together to get things done every damn day!!
The only place we don’t, is here [Washington DC] or on cable TV. But Americans don’t live here or on cable TV. Where we live our values and principles form the foundation that sustains us while we get things done, not the barriers that prevent us from getting things done.(…)
I have explained this myself before:
If one took one simple look around oneself, he would find the answer to this question at once. The best example of voluntaryism working … is yourself.
You cooperate in society on a voluntary basis. You don’t use aggression to buy groceries. You don’t use aggression to get your clothes. You don’t use aggression when debating with friends and family. You don’t use aggression to find a job. You don’t use aggression to settle disputes with neighbors, clients, vendors, employees, etc. You are perfectly capable of living peaceful, free, and beautiful lives.
It is in very few cases where we ever interact with anybody from the state. Every April 15th we file our taxes to confirm how much the state has taken from us throughout the year. Sometimes we don’t, and then a tax collector shows up to make us do it or kidnap us at gunpoint if we don’t. Sometimes we go to the DMV to get a driver’s licence. At times we get fined by the police because we do a U Turn where they decree, for whatever reason, that it is illegal. We send our kids to public schools where they spend 14 years of their life being indoctrinated about how great the state is, where diverse talents and opinions are put through the meat grinder of collective thinking and conformity, where opposing ideas such as presented in this article are not even for a second tolerated.
All these interactions we have with the state are, in general, rather unpleasant, boring, frustrating, and un-gratifying. Yet, due to a lack of proper education about the alternative of voluntaryism, we believe that it is utterly necessary to have this group of people with the right to use aggression against us to fund their destructive activities, be it domestic or foreign depredations, to borrow our children’s future into oblivion, and then, out of all things, to EDUCATE those same children for 14 (!!) years of their lives.
It will take years of enlightenment, dedication, and education, to open people’s eyes about one of the most simple facts about themselves: that they are inherently good.
And this one is one where he points out how on the market people work together every day, regardless of their political affiliations, their race, or their religious beliefs. (In my opinion this is of course because on the market you have to work with different people, lest you starve in utter poverty. The market, in that sense by and large forces people to be good, so long as it’s not tinkered with in the form of aggression.)
… and sure, at some point there will be a selfish jerk who sits up the shoulder and cuts in the last minute; but that individual is rare, and he is scorned, and not hired as an analyst.
What a great example of a voluntaryist society that exists even on government built roads! :)
Here is a comparable thing I myself outlined when talking about the provision of court/insurance services in a free society:
But let’s assume the case where one insurer goes all out and begins abusing its power by using massive force of arms against others.
First of all, nobody would ever work with that insurer again. In performing such an act it has just signed its own death sentence as far as its existence in the business community is concerned.
Competing and reputable insurers would join together and smash the rogue agency at once, carried by the support of all their members, and virtually all of society.
Why would any profit seeking entrepreneur take such a tremendous risk? Can anybody give me an example where a business on the free market, unbridled by government subsidies and bailouts, has ever done anything even remotely as risky?? It is simply not going to happen, but even if it were to happen, the problem would solve itself at once.
The point about “not hired as an analyst” is very relevant, too. In my view, the analogy would be as follows: Most people are concerned that there will be bad people who desire power over others and use aggression in a free society. And that may very well be the case. But those individuals will be rare, scorned, and not put in charge of governing an entire country!
To sum it up:
It is simply impossible for a government to operate cooperatively, to “work together with the people”.
The truth of the matter is, that behind all the political hysteria and clamoring, government bureaucrats amongst themselves are cooperating perfectly fine in the business of exploiting the majority and dishing out favors and money to themselves and their friends and lobbyists. But this is not what pundits think of when they say the government should be more cooperative. They are thinking of some sort of collaboration between the people and the state within some imaginary Borg brain where all the problems in matters of public policy will somehow get resolved magically.
But the proposition “Government should be more cooperative” in that sense creates a contradiction in terms. For the government can only exist by using or threatening aggression in the first place. But aggression is the exact opposite of cooperation! It would be like saying “0 should be 1″ or “black should be white”.
Overall this was a great speech in my opinion, even though the speaker probably hasn’t admitted to himself that it is for the reasons I outlined above, and not for the restoration of a system that simply cannot be restored.
The Truth About Voting
This is what people who vote or engage in other political action really look like to me, no matter what party they associate with:
Let’s Get Out And Vote …
“Let’s get out and vote … let’s make our voices heard … we’ve been given the right to choose between a douche and a turd … it’s DEMOCRACY in action, put your freedom to the test, big fat douche or a stupid turd … which do you like best?”
-
Recommended Books
Important Posts
-
US Taxes, Spending & Debts – Historical Charts
-
The Ethics of Voluntaryism – An 8 Step “Cross Examination”
-
How to Debate Without Looking Things Up
-
Quantitative Easing – “Easing” the Theft of Large “Quantities” Over Time
-
Human Action, Ethics, Praxeology, Economics, and History
-
Praxeology and History
-
The Global Warming Information Extravaganza
-
US Poverty Rate – How the Great Society Programs Reversed its Decline
-
Existence, Logic, Evidence, Truth, Knowledge & Bigotry
-
The Root Causes of the Financial Crisis & The Great Recession
-
Why Are You Unemployed?
-
Human Rights in Relation to Ethics, Morality & Aesthetics
-
What’s the Problem With Government Budget Deficits?
-
Universally Preferable Behaviour – A Rational Proof of Secular Ethics
-
Is Government Needed to Fight Poverty??
-
Market Prices – Purpose vs. Arbitrariness
-
War Is A Racket – Made By Government
-
Anarchism / Voluntaryism FAQ
-
Human Rights & Anarchism
-
Government Equals Aggression – Nothing More, Nothing Less
-
Fixing US Health Care Once And For All – 5 Crucial Steps
-
How Minimum Wage Laws Create Unemployment
-
100% Reserve vs. Fractional Reserve Banking
-
Anti-Libertarian Nonsense Debunked
-
Anarchism – The Ultimate Fruition of Liberty, Peace & Happiness
-
The Roots of Left vs. Right Ideologies
-
Inflation & Deflation Revisited
-
The Business Cycle Revisited
-
Saving the X Industry
-
We Need More Regulation
-
The End of Consumerism
-
Savings and Investment
-
Freedom, Liberty, Peace, Happiness and Prosperity
-
The Business Cycle
-
The Trouble with Bureaucracy
-
Stock Evaluation
-
The Great Depression – Now and Then
-
The Economics of Corporate Bailouts
-
Antitrust and Monopolies
-
History of Money
-
The Objectives of Economic Policy
-
Credit Expansion Policy
-
