Mises Daily by Ron Paul | Posted on 9/3/2009

Most Americans haven’t thought much about the strange entity that controls the nation’s money. They simply accept it as though it has always been there, which is far from the case. Visitors to Washington can see the Fed’s palatial headquarters in Washington, D.C., which opened its doors in 1937. Tourists observe its intimidating appearance and forbidding structure, the monetary parallel to the Supreme Court or the Capitol of the United States.

People know that this institution has an important job to do in managing the nation’s money supply, and they hear the head of the Fed testify to Congress, citing complex data, making predictions, and attempting to intimidate anyone who would take issue with them. One would never suspect from their words that there is any mismanagement taking place. The head of the Fed always postures as master of the universe, someone completely knowledgeable and completely in control.

But how much do we really know about what goes on inside the Fed? With the newest round of bailouts, even journalists have a difficult time running down precisely where the money is coming from and where it is headed. From its founding in 1913, secrecy and inside deals have been part of the way the Fed works.

Part of the public-relations game played by the chairman of the Fed is designed to suggest that the Fed is an essential part of our system, one we cannot do without. In fact, the Fed came about during a period of the nation’s history called the Progressive Era, when the income tax and many new government institutions were created. It was a time in which business in general became infatuated with the idea of forming cartels as a way of protecting their profits and socializing their losses.

whole story here …

One of our local aspiring politicians here in Central Florida has recently written a book explaining his politics intertwined with history and a stab at economics. I have briefly meet Todd on several political rallies and must admit when I first meet him last December 2008 I was totally thrown back by the fact that he was a trial lawyer. Honestly after losing Orange County Republican Representative Ric Keller and his crap and losing my beloved Seminole County Congressional Representative Tom Feeney in the 2008 congressional elections to liberal Democrats I was in no mood for another RINO. It took a couple of beers and self control not to get just a little perturbed. Well I was wrong about Todd.

In his book he explains the frustrations he and millions of other conservative voters have had with former President Bush and the Republican in the congress and senate from 2001 to 2006. Basically we the people voted in one group of people and got a totally different result. Expanded federal government, new entitlement programs, corruption, poorly executed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (until General Petraeus took over in 2006 in my opinion), lack of border enforcement and the constant political charades that pass as politics in Washington. The frustration and disgust is mutually and universally felt by millions including Todd.

The book is extremely well written for what I assume is a first book. It is at a basic senior high school level and is very easy to grasp the concepts that are put forward. The order of discussion is also very coherent and well thought out. The book starts out with the founding fathers and eliminates a lot of propaganda currently passing for fact in the main stream of the media and education institutions. How we got away from being a Christian nation and how the founding fathers viewed religion as part of our being are examined with just enough depth to make the case without boring the reader with tedious example after example. Pretty damn good job for a new author. An examination of socialism, dependency verses capitalism is examined in economic wealth terms as well as spiritual terms. Not something you see in every political book.

The current issues like our $11.5 trillion dept are examined currently and looking at the road of how we got here. Solutions are provided that are sp ecific ranging from a balanced budget amendment to supporting the Fair Tax national sales tax plan. Obama’s disastrous economic policies are examined without vilifying the man. Education and the importance of Christianity in children’s lives are examined. Supporting school vouchers is not going to win Todd any teacher votes and saying so in black and white took some courage for the likely Republican nominee for the Orange County congressional seat in 2010. Supporting 12 year limits on the senate and house members will not endear him to the established members of the Republican or Democratic Party. The stands that Todd made in this book took real courage and I mostly agree and certainly respect that. How many times have we had a politician tell us one thing and do the opposite? Seems like every day at the White House.

The book goes on to cover energy independence, health care reform, entitlement reform, illegal immigration, the environment (surprisingly green for a Republican), and finally the most, for me anyway, interesting part of the book, his assessment of running for congress as a complete unknown. Bein g a local I remember his radio adds and really liked what he said. But after Bush what was the difference between him and his primary opponent Keller? Really all I wanted was the seat to stay in Republican hands. Todd gives all us interested in politics some real insight to the process as an average Joe trying to make a difference and the obstacles he faced. Sadly only eight pages were devoted to this subject. The book is worth the price just to read his thoughts on that bitter campaign last summer.
Finally Todd is a lawyer not a business person or economist. And as such has blind spots in some of his policy solutions. It’s not his fault per se. He doesn’t circle much in these fields and just doesn’t know what he doesn’t know. Here are a few of his solution that I had a beef with.

Education scores are given for science scores for whites, Hispanics, American Indians and African Americans (these hyphenated classifications make me want to vomit). Well here is the politically incorrect truth. Whites have an average IQ of 100, Asian 101, Jews 110+, Hispanics 93, and blacks 85. Ouch that hurts. Vouchers are the right solution. Let the parents and students self segregate based on academics, athletic, knighting, race or any other way they want to. Forcing students with totally different values, intellects and abilities is beyond stupid. That doesn’t mean if Steve Erkel, the black brainy kid on Family Matters, wants to attend the dork school he should be denied . Go for it. The kid would fit right in there. Let the parents and children decide what is best for them. I said it not Todd.

On illegal immigration Mr. Long is right about non enforcement costing blue collar workers jobs and wages. Want a dirty little secret? Blue collar wages are driven down about 37%, depending on worker demand, by illegal immigration.

On page 159 a proposal to have women seeking an abortion view the unborn fetus on an ultrasound to make them sympathetic and possibly change their minds about the abortion is proposed. Bad idea. Some women who have abortions are haunted for years afterward. No need to make it worse. Or maybe that is the intention?

You want to make women responsible for their behavior? A better idea would be to do away with all payments related to children. No welfare, child support, food stamps. Eliminate it all. Give custody to the parent with the most stable employment background. If that fails start looking at dividing the kids up. If that doesn’t work look at the grandparents. If that doesn’t work adoption and finally bring back the orphanages. A dirty little economic secret is that since the 1950’s the biggest change in the family has not been the lack of faith in Jesus Christ but the change in a money supply to unwed mothers and divorced mothers. Charles Murray of the America Enterprise Institute has written several papers and books on the subject. Any economist worth his salt can do a regression analysis of t he divorce and unwed mother rate from the 1950’s and find the relationship between increased economic incentives to reward bad behavior and a increase in that behavior. Why my friend in graduate school did just such a regression analysis. People are more inclined to follow Jesus Christ if there are consequences to not following his example. Make the consequences real.

As far as religion in schools as a Libertarian if the parents want it then so be it. I don’t feel if parents object they should be ignored. Let them put their kids in a secular school.

On page 179 there is a condemnation of the news media. We all know the liberal idiots who pollute the air waves on a daily basis. But I don’t think much has changed over the years. Some people want to be informed and some could care less. The media in the 70’s was never fair they just hid their bias better. Hey I am all for honesty. At least know you know you’re getting propaganda from the jerks. I disagree that people are less informed today. If you want to know something you can find it much quicker than back in the day. The same 30% that supported the American Revolution are the same 30% that are well informed today. I have a family of liberals and facts mean nothing to them. Trust me on this. They will seek out the propaganda no matter what.

Abolishing the FCC would be a good first step. The government has no constitutional right to the air waves. Through the whole thing to the industry and have them come up with standards of decency and reporting news events. When they come up with their standards they either sign on or they don’t. If they don’t follow their standards have them sue each other in an arbitration hearing. Fines go to the winner. The FCC is about to silence critics and like any government program is poorly managed and susceptible to politics and dictators. Get rid of it if you ever get the chance.

On health care get rid of Medicaid, Medicare and all federal government related expenditures. Give the people a voucher to the elderly buy health insurance. Eliminate pre-existing clauses. Set up medical savings accounts for the young and so forth. CATO has written several papers on the subject and they have several excellent free market solutions. Mr. Long supports decentralizing government programs to the state and local level. Privatize it all and get the government out of the business.

Pretty much the same thing with social security. Mr. Long does support privatization of social security but also support raising age eligibility requirements if social security is not privatized. Pretty unfair but then again the whole system is unfair. I support giving a rebate to anyone who wants to opt out of the system with interest. That would be fair. And require all private accounts mandated, say 5% of gross income, to be put in federal, state or local bonds. The money will not grow fast but that’s not what it’s for. People can use their income above 5% to invest as they please.

On the ethanol mess I couldn’t quite pick up if Mr. Long was for or against the tariff on Brazilian ethanol. As any respectable economist will tell you tariffs punish consumers at about a 9 to 1 up to a 19 to one ration. For every domestic dollar gain to industry consumers lose $9 to $19. Bill Clinton knew this dirty little economic secret and when he signed NAFTA it helped our economy. Never support tariffs. The government’s policy on energy should be one of encouragement then getting out of the way. Period. Do that and gas will be $1.50 a gallon.
The green people will be disappointed that Mr. Long isn’t for cutting down every tree and eliminating every environmental regulation. Oh well. But as stated before industries should self regulate themselves with the government acting only as the referee throwing the flag when someone cheats. Industries know who cheats, how they do it and if they can get away with it. Setting up a financial system to rat out and fine the bad players would clean up any industry pretty darn quick. I have worked with thousands of contractors over the years and they know all the tricks of the trade. Having them hire industry insiders to check out the other guy would be much more effective than government for life employees looking to make friends.

Overall this was an excellent first book that is very suitable for younger readers and those without a lot of political knowledge. For hard core politicians, economist, business people getting Mr. Long’s positions on issues is refreshing. Mr. Long makes no apologies for his religious faith and takes some very politically dangerous positions. Honesty in a political book is a rare thing these days and he is to be complemented on his frankness. Well worth the read. Best of luck in 2010.

origianl post at …

As her opponents seethe, writhe and wail over governor Pailin’s every move it is business as usual in Alaska. Sarah Palin quietly goes about her business as usual much to the chagrin of those who have rabid hate for her. Personally I find this whole “OPPOSE SARAH PALIN” (from both sides of the isle) drop dead funny. Apparently the opposition is so out of touch they have no clue how “mindlessly stupid” they appear to anyone who has no vested interest one way or another in what she does.

In fact daily it is becoming more clear just how “mindlessly stupid” the majority of officials running our government have become (or always were and we just paid it no mind).

While Governor Palin was busy signing a joint resolution declaring Alaska’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution – and now 36 other states have introduced similar resolutions as part of a growing resistance to the federal government.

Kathleen Sebelius Obama’s Secretary of Health and Human Services is doing the footwork trying to foist the latest SCAM onto the citizenry of the USA. Free health care to all.

When asked by a reporter “does president Obama expect EVERYONE to pay the bill for this program?” her answer was YES. Now either the woman is totally out of touch or plainly an open faced liar.

What a surprise of late!

It certainly does not take rocket science to see why the Sarah Palin bandwagon grows daily by leaps and bounds.

Fair Play, economist Steven Landsburg states this eloquently in a passage on the importance of rights, tolerance, and pluralism (p. 92):

You and I disapprove of bigotry. But the private virtue of tolerance and the public virtue of pluralism require us to countenance things we do not approve. Tolerance means accepting the fact that other people’s values might be very different than your own. Pluralism means eschewing the use of political power as a means for ‘correcting’ those values.

The idea of tolerating intolerance sounds suspiciously paradoxical, but so do a lot of other good ideas—like freedom of speech for advocates of censorship. In fact, freedom of speech has a lot in common with tolerance: Neither of them means a thing unless it applies equally to those we applaud and those who offend us most viscerally.

Tolerance is ennobling, which is why we should teach it to our children. Pluralism is insurance against tyranny, which is why we should demand it of our government. To speak up for even the most despised minorities is both morally right and politically prudent.

Read more …

A Review of the book:

United In Hate — The Left’s Romance With Tyranny and Terror is a book that examines the seamy underbelly of the radical Left which considers Western society and its values an anathema. Dr. Jamie Glazov, the Managing Editor of FrontPage Magazine, methodically details the causational factors that have lead modern Leftists to adhere to the death and destruction mantra of tyrannical Islamic Jihadists.

The Twin Towers are destroyed, 2973 people die in the attack and the radical Left cheers; the war in Iraq is won and the Left expels a disgusted sigh; totalitarian thugs kill innocent millions that the Left justifies as a “cleansing” required to forge a utopian society; suicidal Jihadists shred shoppers in malls with nail bombs and are excused by the Left as door-matted victims striking back at their oppressors; women are vilified, stoned, mutilated and killed by radical Muslims as Leftist feminists remain silent, save here in America where they rail mightily against a country club that’s denied membership to a female executive.

What draws Leftists moth-like toward the annihilating fires of unbridled totalitarianism, or drives them to slavishly worship at the feet of dictators that kick them to the curb when they are considered no longer useful? Why does the Left cleave to a radical Islamic terrorism that vows to destroy all non-believers, including them? Dr. Glazov answers these and other “head scratching” questions in a court-ready presentation of the Left’s mindset that will make forensic psychologists proud.

The Left’s hatred and rejection of Western civilization, its freedoms and values, begins with an acute sense of alienation from it, and unable to “fit in” the Left believes radical societal change, regardless of the consequences, is necessary. After all it’s the West’s fault that the Left has no sense of purpose or direction. Although the Left vehemently argues against this premise, its words and actions prove Dr. Glazov’s case.

The ideological descendents of the communist/progressive Left that spent its capital hoping the West would lose the Cold War to the Soviet Union are today’s leftist core. Based on their hatred for the United States, the Left has forged a symbiotic relationship with radical Islam, whose hatred for America equals theirs. Both make it clear that they consider Western civilization evil and unworthy of preservation. Violent revolution is the Left’s path to change; the Jihadists’ follow the path of war and annilation.

Some might think Dr. Glazov has taken a wrong turn in his analysis of the radical Left’s agenda and beliefs. If so, they should read the scurrilous quotes of Michael Moore extolling the virtues of the “Iraqi freedom fighters,” or Ward Churchill’s and Jeremiah Wright’s crowing after 9/11 that “America’s chickens have come home to roost.” Or, they should examine the genuflexing before the world’s tyrants by the likes of Jimmy Carter, Sean Penn and Tom Hayden. Dr. Glazov’s take on the radical Left is correct and as sharp as a tightly focused laser.

Should the book cause even one radical Leftist to re-examine his or her contorted beliefs and return from the “dark side,” Dr. Glazov’s efforts will be a resounding success. A great thought provoking read!

Ben R. Furman
Former FBI Counterterrorism Chief
www.blackhawkpress.com
www.blackhawkpress.com/blog
You can get the book at:
United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror

While I was bouncing around the internet I happened onto an interesting article posted by an author who had written a book on the matter. (Book linked below.)

Since Barack Obama likes to pattern himself after FDR and the New Deal … it caught my attention. I could never understand why people would be happy with a 19% unemployment rate … at least happy enough to re-elect a president over and over.
Were they fed skewed facts?
I have often wondered if women (who were not usually bread winners back then) were counted into these statistics. If we took the % of woman out of that statistic does the percent then rise to 38%? Is that really what we can look forward to under the HOPE PRESIDENT?

Oh wait I know now HOPE means I HOPE none of this drops on my front door.

Hope then was suppose to be just past the horizon or around the next corner?
Sound anything like what passes the lips of Barack Obama almost daily?
Why am I getting the feeling Obama WILL SAY ANYTHING to keep the lid on this powder keg?

Notice this tactic at hand today?

Let’s use an analogy to make the point: Imagine that in the last days of his presidency, George W. Bush declared a new policy. His spokespeople explained, “It is rather misleading to say that the unemployment rate in October 2008 was 6.6 percent, because that implies millions of Americans are destitute. But in fact they are all receiving generous assistance from the government in various forms. If we say that their ‘job’ is filling out the paperwork for unemployment claims, then the true unemployment rate is more like 0.4 percent. Those are the people who truly have no source of income, and need to be helped.”

Would any left-liberal sign on to that rationale? Of course not. Now, there is no objectively hard and fast line between a “real” government-provided job versus a “phony” job such as “filling out unemployment forms.” In fact, a purist could note that all government jobs are artificial and not indicative of true productive value for consumers, since their compensation is derived through involuntary taxation.

This book by Robert P. Murphy can be purchased for around $13 at Amazon.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression and the New Deal (The Politically Incorrect Guides) ISBN: 9781596980969

I love Ann Coulter.

Her latest rant is directed at those who consider waterboarding a war crime.

It is my firm belief that every one of these waterboard protesters would in a hot new york minute waterboard anyone who had information that would save THEIR loved one. If they say they would not?
You can count on one thing THEY LIE!

Its pretty easy to be an idéologue when someone elses ass is on the line and yours or those you care about is not.

Is Henican a hypocrite?

HERE is the Coulter article.

Myths about the Great Depression were once a mere annoyance. Now they have become a source for tyranny. The Bush-Obama response to the meltdown proves that one thing is certain: until we get the history of the 1930s right, liberty will be under threat of those trying to repeat the drama.

Thank goodness Robert Murphy has come along to straighten out the mess in a way that everyone can understand. In this hard-hitting book, we find the most accessible and most truth-telling book about the Great Depression and the New Deal that has ever been written.

Free-market economists have been working for decades to make the record of the calamity clear. This book may just be the magic bullet we’ve been looking for to kill off the myths before they kill us.

He puts together in one easy package the research of hundreds of scholars, showing that it was not capitalism that failed in 1929 but the boom times created by Fed credit expansion. Murphy takes aim at the Chicago School economists and the Keynesians who continued to be in denial on this central point.

A particularly great feature here for Austrians dealing with monetarist myths: Murphy explains that the deflation in the 1930s didn’t have to be somehow devastating. It was not egregious by historical standards, and was fully compatible with economic growth. In fact, the Fed tried but failed to flood the economy with money in the 1930s. Here Murphy provides a very compelling explanation of fractional-reserve banking and its effect on the supply of money.

He further shows that Hoover was not a free-market president. His policies were so statist that he might as well have been a Soviet agent. His biggest critic, who blasted him for his spending and centralization, was none other than FDR. But once FDR came to power, he enacted the longest string of cockamamie, prosperity-killing measures of any president in American history.

The economy still hadn’t recovered going into World War II, a war that didn’t help the economy or get us out of the Great Depression. It prolonged the government-made pain.

Murphy dissects the real history here with facts, analysis, clear prose, suggestions for further reading, fantastic quotations from all the main players, and even when he is discussing complicated data, he never leaves the reader behind.

Murphy concludes his book by recounting what led to the current crash. And wraps it all up with an excellent criticism of Bush-Obama and predicts that their policies will prolong problems.

This book appears as part of Regnery’s “Political Incorrect Guide” series but, in fact, this account is not biased in any particular direction. It is just good history, accurate history, truth-telling history that we have to know to navigate the treacherous waters of today’s economic and political environment.

Capitalists everywhere should have this on their bookshelf and in their briefcase.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression and the New Deal (The Politically Incorrect Guides)

(272 pages, paperback, 2009 ISBN: 9781596980969)

A book review and worthy read.

A Possible Post Mortum of the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights,
By James E. Egolf, MA

Messers Woods and Gutzman wrote a provocative book that should be read by Americans who actually care about law-and-order plus individual liberties. This reviewer has noticed that the number of Americans who do care is quite small. The book deals “The Dirty Dozen” cases and instances of abuse of government power, and the authors readily admit that this book could have been exponentially larger. This review will not cover all “The Dirty Dozen” examples which would make the review too tedious. However, the general scheme of the book will be examined.

The first example cited in this book dealt with the arbitrary laws that violated First Amendment rights of Free Speech and Free Press (1917-1918). U.S. authorities could make arrests and prosecutions for the most innocent remarks that could have been construed as critical of U.S. intervention into W.W. I. What was worse,the authors cited examples of official tattle tales who reported on neighbors’comments. As an aside, Messers Woods and Gutzman demolish the statement alleged by Pres. Woodrow Wilson who supposedly expressed regret for agreeing to the Declaraion of War. The authors clearly that the statement was fabricated by Wilson’s sycophants who tried to cover Wilson’s blunder. The basic constitutional point made my Messers Woods and Gutzman is that the First Amendment clearly states that Congress shall make no law abridging the rights of Free Speech and Free Press. Yet, power hungry political hacks and unthinking Americans accepted all of this with little protest. One should note that the American people are so poorly read and so ready to believe media accounts that such oppressive laws are no longer necessary. The American media folks have so censored themselves that censorship laws are unnecessary. Too many Americans are too immune to truth and reason to notice.

Messers Woods and Gutzman had a good examination of Pres. Truman’s attempt to seize American steel mills because labor union leaders wanted more than steel executives were willing to give. Truman’s threat was made to curry favor with steel workers and increase wages. The U.S. Supreme Court Justices ruled against the Truman Administration. However, as Messers Woods and Gutzman noted, the ruling was not strong enough. Also they alerted readers that if a President could seize steel mills, he could also seize steel mills or any industry to REDUCE wages.

The chapters dealing with the civil rights cases were carefully researched and clear. The authors show that in an attempt to end discrimination, they only made it worse. School authorities were scolded because of the changing demographics. Civil rights laws which forbade assigning students to schools by race were ignored by federal judges who ordered busing to schools based on race. The consistently flawed federal rulings that changed almost overnight resulted in such confusion that court orders for busing had to end.

The chapter titled The Great Gold Robbery showed an arbitrary U.S. Government whose authorities went after law abiding citizens whose only crime was that they owned gold. This “legal” basis for this decision was that the federal authorities could do this under W.W. I laws about trading with the enemy (Today U.S. defined enemies change as often as one changes shirts). In other words, U.S. citizens who happened to own gold were suddenly enemies. Such arbitrary power needs no further comment.

This reviewer thought the chapter on “The Wall of Separation” was the weakest, but this chapter was still well written. As an aside, this reviewer is not offended if someone has a menorah or a creche on their premises. If Christians wish me a Merry Christmas or Jews wish me Happy Hanukkah, this reviewer is not offended and accepts the statements in the spirit in which such comments are made. If Hindus or Moslems offter greetings, again, such statements are accepted as gestures of good will.
Messers Woods and Gutzman stated that the people in the states should determine public school or any public display of religious symbols. What should have been considered is that some state authorities can use their power to coerce of intimidate those of a different religion. In other words, state authorities can be as oppressive as federal authorities. Too often legal cases reach the courts because, for example, some school official or coach will demean or intimidate anyone who has different religious convictions. However, the chapter has merit because of “overkill” by those opposed to any religious symbols in public places.

The chapter on military conscription was very good. Messers Woods and Gutzman provided substantial research that the Founding Fathers and early National political leaders were opposed to a national military conscription which started in Europe. The quatation of Danial Webster on the floor of Congress rejecting a draft is worth noting. Readers should note that many who want military conscription want it for everyone else except themselves. Walter Lippman promoted military conscription until he realized he too could be conscripted. He managed to get cushy government while exhorting other Americans to risk their lives (a real hero here). The former U.S. House member Andy Jacobs called such cowards, who want wars but want others to do the killing and the dying, war wimps and chicken hawks. Mr. Jacobs was a decorated Marine during the Korean War.

The chapter titled “Do Americans have a Constitutional Duty to Suffer?” is a good example of judicial stupiidty and bureaucratic nonsense. This chapter cites federal attempts to stop people who are suffering from using medical marijuana. The unreasonable judicial rulings stated that home-grown marijuana could be eliminated by the power of the Interstate Commerece Clause of the Constitution. Since the plants were used for immediate medical use per physicians’ prescriptions, the illogic of using the plants could affect interstate commerice is obvious.

The chapters dealing with excutive orders, war powers, and signing statements are ominous. Messers Woods and Gutzman carefully demonstrated that such powers are unconstitutional and lawful. Executive orders began with the administration of the Pres. Theodore Roosevelt when he granted diplomatic recognition to a country when the U.S. Senate refused to do so. Pres. Theodore Roosevelt simply used a different phrase via executive order. The chapter titled “The phony Case for Presidental War Power” offers a stinging rebuke of a law clerk and later government “Justice” Dept. offical name Yoo. Yoo wrote a poorly reasoned law review article which stated that the U.S. President can use his war powers to send combat forces anywhere any time he damned well pleases. The Constitution history and warnings of the Founding Fathers are well cited in this section. The chapter on signing statements would be amusing if not so dangerous. Messers Woods and Gutzman give precise ecamples of how signing statements, which only express a president’s disapproval of a section of a bill, have been recently used to violate the law especially duirng the Clinton and Bush administrations. To use signing statements as pretext to violate the law is unconstitutional and illegal. An opinion is not a constitutional power to break the law.

The last chapter titled “Can Anything Be Done?” is not hopeful at all. When most Americans are concerned about what dress some celebrity is wearing, the abuses of the Constitution will never get corrected. As this reviewer has stated elsewhere, the American people have raised thoughtlessness to a virtue.

Find this book HERE at Amazon