Isilion

15 billion here, 15 billion there, pretty soon you’re talking about real money…

Hyperinflation here we come…

It a shame there is no one running for president who actually understands economics and monetary policy.

We all know that Fannie and Freddie are bankrupt. Will Bush and Bernanke bring on global hyperinflation in a failing attempt to keep housing prices from falling as they must? This we know: the government with all its guns cannot repeal economic law. It can only hurt the productive even more, as in the Great Depression, which lasted 17 years in large part because of the attempts to keep prices and wages artificially high.
More…

The Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act is anything but fair, transparent, or even-handed. It does not simply require the permits, set the level, and establish the exchange mechanism, oh no; though that’s what they tell you about. Instead, the bill is loaded with exceptions, grants, set-asides, and other tweaks that make the system highly unfair and require a large bureaucracy to administer the permits. Industries and states who have lobbied most effectively are exempted, have their permits provided free, or get their permits a reduced price. Those who have not made the investment in wining and dining K Street are left out in the cold. They may be better businesses - in fact, they probably are, since they’re spending their resources on the actual business instead of on schmoozing in Washington - but they will fail in the marketplace because of the artificially higher costs laid on them by the government. Instead of emphasizing business acumen, this arrangement places a premium on political pull just like a banana republic. The laws even make it possible to make a fortune without doing anything useful at all, by cornering a permit set-aside and then selling permits off to someone who actually needs them. What’s capitalistic about that? Nothing.

What’s the bottom line? The Climate Security Act would create a fascist state by placing the government in complete control over who is allowed to do anything using their “private” property. Didn’t bid high enough for your carbon emissions permit? Then your factory must shut down. Didn’t lobby effectively? Then you’ll have to pay more than your competitor whose congressman, while enjoying his new yacht, took care to slide a little gift for his patron into a bill rider.

It’s easy to say that this is targeted only at big business. It’s even true - it was done that way on purpose. Do you think that Congress would dare take $6.7 Trillion by increasing taxes on, say, gasoline? They’d be howled out of office. Yet this will have exactly the same effect. Businesses don’t pay taxes; people do. Sure, the corporation writes the check, but they aren’t allowed to print money, they have to get the money from somewhere. They either pass the bill along to you the consumer or they go out of business.

The Definition of Fascism

The US faces a pretty stark choice right now: it can let the losers take their losses — both the big institutions who created and traded in fraudulent securities, and all the “little guys” who borrowed too much money trying to get rich quick, or trying to live like the millionaires they see on TV. We can let them go down, and suffer the consequences of their bad choices (and maybe prosecute some of the culpable bankers and corporate executives), OR, in an effort to let these losers off the hook we can wreck the whole machinery of capital by making our medium-of-exchange worthless.

The people in charge — both in and out of government — can’t face the losses, so for now they’ve apparently decided to wreck the currency.

More…

And they are still not listening.

Sigh.

Running a deficit of hundreds of billions of dollars per year in order to fund our misadventure is unsustainable. Eventually those debts must be repaid, but this country is in such poor financial shape that when our creditors come knocking, we will have little with which to pay them. Our imperial system of military bases set up in protectorate states around the world is completely dependent on the continuing willingness of foreigners to finance our deficits. When the credit dries up we will find ourselves in a dire situation. Americans will suffer under a combination of confiscatory taxation, double-digit inflation, and the sale of massive amounts of land and capital goods to our foreign creditors.

The continuation of the war in Iraq will end in disaster for this country. Parallels between the Roman empire and our own are numerous, although our decline and fall will happen far quicker than that of Rome. The current financial crisis has awakened some to the perils that await us, but solutions that address the root of the problem and seek to fix it are nowhere to be found. There must be a sea change in the attitudes and thinking of Americans and their leaders. The welfare-warfare state must be abolished, respect for private property and individual liberties restored, and we must return to the limited-government ideals of our Founding Fathers. Any other course will doom our nation to the dustbin of history.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul437.html

The day will come when Americans will say “Wow, I could’ve had a Ron Paul.”

Long shot, 9-11 Truther, Ron Paul. Crackpot, Libertarian, Ron Paul. Long shot, Neo-Nazi, Ron Paul!

*End Transmission*

It has long been the dream of powerful men to possess Earth. Throughout history rulers of many a great empire have tried to conquer what they figured was the whole thing. These mad dogs were not raised to be content with the power that they merely inherited. No, the father to son line is always, “There are always more sheep to shepherd.” And thanks to technology, this ant world of ours is becoming a much more manageable ant farm. The State, their corporate beneficiaries and financial masters have managed to sell mercantilism and paper money to the whole world with the goal of obtaining total control.

More…

America finds herself in a situation that is more precarious than at any time since the Great Depression. We are losing two wars, our banking system is insolvent (thanks to the Feds’ reckless monetary policy) and our government is spiraling toward bankruptcy.

Despite the seriousness of our predicament, the way out is simple (though not easy). We need a leader who clearly grasps the fundamentals of market economics and who appreciates the basics of our republican form of government. We need a leader who will reduce our overseas commitments, balance our budget, and restore our constitutional liberties.

In short, America needs a president with a solid, rational plan based on fundamental principles.

Looking at the polls, it’s becoming apparent that the American people want none of this. A significant portion of our population still thirsts for imperial glory. Another healthy slice wants the government to serve as a giant teat in the sky, regardless of the financial consequences.

Very few, on the other hand, seem willing to take the hard path that an authentic American restoration would require.

So instead, it looks like our next president will be a deranged militarist, a shrill neo-Marxist, or a sloganeering lightweight steeped in cultish adulation.

And all the while, the USS Titanic churns ever closer to its rendezvous with the icebergs.

More…

America can be likened to a cruise ship that is taking on water faster than it can be bailed out. If the issue in your mind is whether the ship’s captain is female, or black, or is willing to offer more free services while on your cruise, or wants to mount more machine guns on the deck to deter terrorists, you are completely distracted from the imminent crisis that confronts America.

More…

In a very fundamental way, there are really only two candidates running for president this year: Ron Paul, and all the others.

This is because there are really only two issues at stake.

The first issue is our out-of-control foreign policy. America is embroiled in shooting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We spend more on our military than nearly the rest of the world combined. We have troops stationed in over a hundred foreign countries. Manic interventionism has stretched our military to the breaking point, and has ruined our nation’s reputation.

The second issue is our impending economic implosion. Our government, which has shed the last vestiges of constitutional restraint, has made a myriad of promises that it cannot keep. Our outstanding obligations to fund social security, government health care programs, and everything else under the sun are rapidly bankrupting our nation. To maintain these Ponzi schemes, the Fed is debasing our currency and igniting an ugly bout of hyperinflation.

Our predicament is severe and profound. We must immediately begin to shed our overseas obligations and put our domestic house in order. Otherwise, we will find ourselves reenacting the collapse of the Soviet Union right here at home.

Ron Paul is the only candidate who is willing to address these issues. He is the only one who is willing to speak frankly with the American people about our predicament and the painful actions which must be taken to prevent a real catastrophe.

And rather than offering solutions, Obama, McCain, Clinton and Romney, (and the other political hacks running for president) are not even willing to talk honestly about the problems.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/latulippe/latulippe82.html

Don Luskin Named Economic Advisor to the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign

“Ron Paul’s economic plan is the real thing… not just a band-aid”

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – Newly appointed Ron Paul economic advisor, Donald L. Luskin, issued the following statement about Dr. Paul’s proposed comprehensive economic revitalization plan:

“Ron Paul’s economic plan is the real thing – a plan. It’s not just a band-aid designed to ‘stimulate’ the economy in an election year. It’s a fundamental agenda for real and lasting change, making the US economy more vibrant and competitive, and removing barriers to advancement for all Americans.”
Donald L. Luskin is Chief Investment Officer for Trend Macrolytics LLC and contributing editor to the National Review Online and SmartMoney.com. He is also a frequent guest on CNBC, and the author of two books: Index Options and Futures: The Complete Guide and Portfolio Insurance: A Guide to Dynamic Hedging.

Mr. Luskin is available for interviews regarding Congressman Paul’s economic policies.

Congressman Paul’s comprehensive economic revitalization plan can be found online at: www.RonPaul2008.com/Prosperity

It’s really amazing when you see the lights go on and somebody “gets” it. Maybe Glenn Beck really isn’t a tool, at least not intentionally…

GLENN BECK: When you were on my program on television, you said something that I didn’t correct because I didn’t — I mean, it sounded so outlandish but I let it go because I didn’t have the facts and you sounded so convinced of it that I thought, hmmm, I’ve got to check into that and I’ll correct it the next time he’s on or I’ll correct it the next day. What you said was, if we got rid of the income tax, the Government would still take about the same amount of money in as they had ten years ago.

PAUL PAUL: Approximately.

GLENN BECK: We looked into it and it’s accurate. Can you explain that and how do we get that message out to people?

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/196/4897/

He’s catchin’ on, I’m tellin’ ya…

Currencies come and go, but gold has been a store of value for more than 5,000 years. Gold is rare, but, thanks to Gutenberg, paper money is not. Presented with an opportunity to churn out extra cash at little expense, it takes a special kind of government to resist. Few seem able to do so.

According to former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan: “There is no inherent anchor in a fiat-money regime [a currency not underpinned by gold]. What constitutes its ‘normal’ inflation rate is a function solely of a country’s culture and history.” For many, that flexibility has proven ruinous.

Inflation wrecks currencies in the same way that termites destroy wooden houses. The world’s two most successful currencies, the US dollar and the British pound, both of which are still used by other nations to hoard wealth, have each lost more than 95 per cent of their value in the past 100 years.

Since 1971, when Richard Nixon broke the dollar’s formal link to gold, America has pumped out trillions of new dollars. Money from thin air. China alone is sitting on more than $1,000 billion of reserves, as American consumers pile up debts to buy “essentials” from factories in Shenzhen and Guangdong. No wonder the buck has lost its fizz.

By contrast, there is a finite supply of gold. This keeps it honest. As financial commentator Peter Burshre pointed out: “Regardless of the dollar price involved, one ounce of gold would purchase a good-quality man’s suit at the conclusion of the Revolutionary War [American War of Independence], the Civil War, the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt and today.”

read more | digg story

Even though I took some introductory courses in economics in college, it was always boring to me, also, other than the very basic stuff like supply & demand and the law of diminishing returns, I didn’t really understand it. I was originally drawn to Ron Paul’s campaign because of his opposition to the war and his unwavering defense of civil liberties. His economic stuff was just more blah, blah, blah, until he started getting through to me with the idea that economics and monetary policy are fundamental to understanding both domestic and foreign policy and the political structures and processes at play in this country and around the world. Talking about those things without talking about economics is like trying to talk about music while ignoring the concept of rhythm; like trying to understand Magick without knowledge of Qabalah.

I’ve actually been aware of him for several years, and it has been an amazing education for me. Regardless of the outcome of this election–and between you, me and the Internet, I am less confident about that than I was six months ago–there are now thousands, if not millions, of people like me who are waking up to the principle of spontaneous order and the emergent properties of a free society. He has let the genie out of the bottle and it is not going back in.

One of my guilty pleasures is my Live Journal. In a recent discussion of political things a fellow eljayer mused on her changing ideals and posited that “we need nationalized health care.”

I asked her to reconcile that with this (9 minutes, and worth it):

Her response was:

Every civilized nation on the planet has nationalized health care except us. How do they do it? (That’s rhetorical, though I suppose you can answer it if you like.)

And no, I have not sat through that entire youtube thing.

p.s. Bush ran this country into the fiscal ground.

I did my best, and I can only hope either she or her other readers will grasp the gravity of the situation.

Every civilized nation on the planet does not spend between six hundred billion to one trillion dollars a year, depending on who’s doing the counting, maintaining over 700 military bases in more than 130 countries with a nine trillion dollar debt and over fifty trillion dollars in unfunded future obligations.

You really should watch the youtube thingy. Whatever you might think of Glenn Beck, the other guy is the Comptroller General of the United States. He is doing a very courageous thing in trying to get people to pay attention. He also addresses the nationalized health care issue head on.

p.s. Woodrow Wilson started this train wreak in 1913, but it really kicked into gear when Richard Nixon abandoned the gold standard in 1971. In his own pitiful way George Bush is trying every trick he can think of to stave off the inevitable.

Source: U.S. Dept, of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPI	Source: U.S. Treasury, Bureau of the Public Debt
Note: These charts only go up to 2001. I couldn’t find any pretty graphics of the current numbers.

It is, I suppose, understandable that the one presidential candidate who talks about this situation is dismissed as kook. For the rest, the splendor of the imperial purple and the adulation of the mob is simply too irresistible.

As I was posting this here she replied:

Enh. We’ll all be dead soon.

But more seriously..every dog has its day. Maybe the US day is coming to a close…at least for our ‘glory days’.

I can’t spend my time worrying about things I have zero control of.

p.s. I’m not an economist. I have no way to really evaluate this. I’ve seen other arguments suggesting that wheeee…you can deficit spend all day long. It made no sense to me. But a very smart person I know finds it sound so there must be something compelling about it.

To which I could only reply with this:

Watch and learn.

The circus is about to begin. By choice or by inaction the people of the United States will soon be participating in a decision that will affect us all for years to come. People who take an interest in the process have many different issues they consider to be critical: abortion, education, climate change, foreign policy and on and on. Before you cast your vote, or not, as the case may be, ask yourself how important your favorite issues will be when you are confronted with L. Neil Smith’s nightmare scenario:

The mental picture that haunts my nightmares most consistently is finding myself squatting in bombed-out ruins with a half-brick in my hand, trying to decide if I can brain the four-year-old I’ve been stalking, for the can of beans she’s just discovered.
http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2006/tle359-20060319-02.html

Before you say that he is fear mongering, if every dollar in your pocket or in your bank account drops to ten cents in value you will be facing that sort of choice. If you watched the above video and still think it can’t happen you need to take another drink of kool-aid and let the conscious people do the thinking.

I’m inviting everyone who reads my posts (all three or four of you) to follow the link to the candidate you support and decide for yourself if they are even thinking about, let alone talking about, this fundamental issue. Then you might want to look at some of the others to see how they stack up.

Democrats
Joe Biden
Hillary Clinton
Chris Dodd
John Edwards
Mike Gravel
Dennis Kucinich
Barack Obama
Bill Richardson

Republicans
Rudy Giuliani
Mike Huckabee
Duncan Hunter
John McCain
Ron Paul
Mitt Romney
Fred Thompson

Those of you who know me know exactly who I’m supporting. If you want to cut to the chase you can watch these two videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abV9tgbG-bA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaxdUPNYj2s

Or ignore it all. Just make sure you have a good supply of bricks.

The right imagines that it supports free enterprise, but even in the area of trade and money? Even to the point at which the state is denied permission to undertake tasks such as imposing sanctions on unfriendly foreign regimes? The left might like [Ron Paul’s] antiwar positions, but what if giving up war mongering also requires rethinking the merit of the redistributionist welfare state?

A state strong enough to redistribute wealth at a whim will not hesitate to wage war, impose sanctions, take away privacy, and violate core human rights. A state strong enough to wage war will not think twice about redistributing wealth and running a cradle-to-grave welfare state. These are truths that the right and left need to deal with.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/econ-rp.htm

The ability to raise wages lies in the hands of both consumers and companies. Suppose consumers began tipping a dollar to every employee who works for a business. A checkout clerk at Wal-Mart would make $20 to $30 an hour from this form of exchange.

Yet I have never heard any defenders of the poor advocate such a system. This consumer behavior would raise wages for the poor ten times more than the few cents or dollars suggested by minimum wage laws. Consumers would have the ability to improve the welfare of low-skilled workers directly.

Read it all here

Though I’m not aware of any actual examples, I could easily imagine some non-western “primitive” society where they had the local equivalent of tip jars at the Wal-Mart and people actually used them. Not only would it create a vibrant economy, with a lot of little rivers of money flowing where they will, but it would also be indicative of a caring loving people. I hesitate to think how most people I know would respond to the same thing.