Dear Pro-Government Liberals,
I know you call yourselves progressives and believe that you are operating at a higher level of consciousness than those “dumb Republicans”, right? I was raised by hippies, I know all the New Age ideas about how we are all empowered spirits that have the ability to create our own reality. I’m sure you love that stuff and go to all the seminars that talk about living in a higher state of consciousness. Well, I would like to challenge you to compare your “abundance and power is mine” spiritual philosophy and relate it to your political and economic views.
If spiritually you believe that the universe is entirely composed of all the love and abundance that we need (if only we made ourselves aware of it), then why do you continue to fall for political lies such as the “Two Americas” described by John Edwards. All plans for the re-distributions of wealth are ineffective and morally corrupt. People should give to the poor when they feel inspired to do so with their own resources, it should not be done through forced taxation. That is not charity. It is forced redistribution of wealth, and it is not morally the same as a spontaneous act of charity.
Another important point I wish make is: If everyone should be free to be who they are, because the gift of life “is a chance for us to live out the full expression of ourselves", why do Liberals want the government to have control over so much of our lives?
Furthermore, if you love to celebrate diversity so much, why do you want to have centralized control over education or health care? I thought diversity was good.
And why do Liberals continue to treat the government as the sole power that should control and care for us with more and more stupid programs that we may or may not want? Stop waiting for the government to bail you out or take care of you in your old age. Don’t you realize how pitiful and dehumanizing it is for the elderly to be reliant on massive government programs? It kills their sense of self worth!
Finally, there is a creepy Liberal tendency to act as if the government were a God,"our great protector". If we are ever going to move away from the big brother, big government that we have now, we have to— Liberals especially— have to stop believing that the government is a benevolent caretaker. It’s not! Regulations, taxation, and all sorts of other government controls in our lives don’t add to the health and well-being of our society. They interfere with it. Why? Because people are relinquishing power and control of their own lives to the government. When they hand the government more and more control over their lives, they are making a dangerous and frankly immature decision to pass off the responsibilities that they should be tending to on their own, and demanding that the government take care of them.
Why don’t you take your power back, take responsibility for your life and quit calling for help from the government.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
US Banks Are Not Monuments Of Capitalism
Everyone, please stop saying that the current financial mess is a result of the excesses of capitalism. We do not have a capitalist economy and the current banking industry is not a monument of capitalist activity. Our current banking system conducts its business as a banking cartel; supported and enforced by the central bank and its regulatory agencies. No one knows or admits to this fact so it makes it almost unbearable for me to read or watch all the so-called experts as they share their opinions about the flaws with capitalism that have lead us to the current mess in the markets. I am most irritated by an article that I read in the Economist which is supposed to be written by some of the leading economic writers in the world. In its most recent issue (Sept. 20th, 2008), the magazine was covering the latest bailouts of AIG, Fannie and Freddie, and the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers. One article entitled “What next?” characterized the crisis as a clear message that capitalism is a flawed economic structure. It said, “The government of the world’s leading capitalist nation has been sucked deep into the maelstrom of its most capitalist industry. And it looks overwhelmed (The Economist, “What next?” Sept. 20,2008, pg. 19).” The author mistakenly believes that our banking industry is the titan of capitalist industry. This is absolutely absurd!
The real monuments to capitalism are the small businesses and entrepreneurs that make products which meet people’s needs without any government assistance or protection. The central bank and its member banks, the horrendous government monstrosities of Fannie and Freddie and the greedy morons that helped circulate the bad debts were not partaking in free market activity, they were encouraged to act badly because of market interventions by the government and its state backed banking cartel. They were not following normal free market rules that everyone else it required to abide by. Because of the special backing they receive from the government (low interest loans and subsidies), lending institutions convince themselves that they are incapable of failing. So they feel safe to take more and more risk, earning higher and higher returns. They always continue to increase their leveraged, risky bets until their Ponzi schemes are exposed. Then a market crisis takes root as everyone’s confidence in the market evaporates. Eventually a painful but necessary liquidation phase begins as bad debts and assets are cleared out of the market. Unfortunately, the banks’ risks and stupidity hurt the rest of the economy and instead of people realizing that the banking industry is inherently flawed because of the overleveraging that it is encouraged to do when it has the backing of the central bank, people blame the market crisis on capitalism. Now they are saying, “Hey, you capitalist pigs. See what you did to the markets? Now we have to get the government involved even more so it can use its infinite wisdom to fix the problem.” In other words, the author of the article in the Economist made this point by stating: “Capitalism requires people to pay for their mistakes…with the markets reeling, pragmatism trumped principle” (pg. 19). So apparently pragmatism—at least according to writers at the Economist— means turning towards Socialism. But is government control of the financial markets pragmatic? Are we supposed to forget about the fact that government bailouts waste our tax dollars? And, that a rise in the government debt will continue to dilute the value of our money? I suppose it is also considered blasphemy to mention the fact that the government caused the problem in the first place, right? So, what are we to do? Who is responsible for fixing a problem that the government and the banking cartel caused? Are the writers at the Economist right? Do we need to be “pragmatic” and let the government take over the markets so that we can all pretend that the entire financial system is sound? I think not.
Right now, we should be having a really serious discussion about fiscal and monetary policy. We should educate the public about how the central bank contributes to rising levels of inflation and market instability. It will take some time and a great deal of effort but the American economy is going to become even more Socialist than ever before unless we stand up and rail against the government’s increasingly unconstitutional uses of power. Americans are not going to realize how important it is for them to stop supporting big government plans until we boost our resolve to educate people about Libertarian ideals, Austrian business cycle theory, micro economics, and the dangers of central banking and government intervention. I promise that I will use every opportunity that comes my way to inform the public about what is really going on in the economy and what they can do to recover their financial and personal freedoms. I hope you will too.
Times of crisis always provide a ripe opportunity for us to learn from our mistakes. Please don’t make the mistake of blaming capitalism for the current market fallout. Instead, take the time to learn something new. I suggest you start by exploring Austrian economics. This school of Economic thought explains how overleveraged fractional reserve banks cause periodic booms and busts. A great website that contains all the information you need to understand Austrian Economic theory is: www.mises.org. This website is the homepage for the world’s leading free-market think tank, the Ludwig von Mises Institute, located in Auburn, Alabama.
I hope you enjoy learning about how the markets really work as much as I do!
Sincerely,
Betsy Hansen
The real monuments to capitalism are the small businesses and entrepreneurs that make products which meet people’s needs without any government assistance or protection. The central bank and its member banks, the horrendous government monstrosities of Fannie and Freddie and the greedy morons that helped circulate the bad debts were not partaking in free market activity, they were encouraged to act badly because of market interventions by the government and its state backed banking cartel. They were not following normal free market rules that everyone else it required to abide by. Because of the special backing they receive from the government (low interest loans and subsidies), lending institutions convince themselves that they are incapable of failing. So they feel safe to take more and more risk, earning higher and higher returns. They always continue to increase their leveraged, risky bets until their Ponzi schemes are exposed. Then a market crisis takes root as everyone’s confidence in the market evaporates. Eventually a painful but necessary liquidation phase begins as bad debts and assets are cleared out of the market. Unfortunately, the banks’ risks and stupidity hurt the rest of the economy and instead of people realizing that the banking industry is inherently flawed because of the overleveraging that it is encouraged to do when it has the backing of the central bank, people blame the market crisis on capitalism. Now they are saying, “Hey, you capitalist pigs. See what you did to the markets? Now we have to get the government involved even more so it can use its infinite wisdom to fix the problem.” In other words, the author of the article in the Economist made this point by stating: “Capitalism requires people to pay for their mistakes…with the markets reeling, pragmatism trumped principle” (pg. 19). So apparently pragmatism—at least according to writers at the Economist— means turning towards Socialism. But is government control of the financial markets pragmatic? Are we supposed to forget about the fact that government bailouts waste our tax dollars? And, that a rise in the government debt will continue to dilute the value of our money? I suppose it is also considered blasphemy to mention the fact that the government caused the problem in the first place, right? So, what are we to do? Who is responsible for fixing a problem that the government and the banking cartel caused? Are the writers at the Economist right? Do we need to be “pragmatic” and let the government take over the markets so that we can all pretend that the entire financial system is sound? I think not.
Right now, we should be having a really serious discussion about fiscal and monetary policy. We should educate the public about how the central bank contributes to rising levels of inflation and market instability. It will take some time and a great deal of effort but the American economy is going to become even more Socialist than ever before unless we stand up and rail against the government’s increasingly unconstitutional uses of power. Americans are not going to realize how important it is for them to stop supporting big government plans until we boost our resolve to educate people about Libertarian ideals, Austrian business cycle theory, micro economics, and the dangers of central banking and government intervention. I promise that I will use every opportunity that comes my way to inform the public about what is really going on in the economy and what they can do to recover their financial and personal freedoms. I hope you will too.
Times of crisis always provide a ripe opportunity for us to learn from our mistakes. Please don’t make the mistake of blaming capitalism for the current market fallout. Instead, take the time to learn something new. I suggest you start by exploring Austrian economics. This school of Economic thought explains how overleveraged fractional reserve banks cause periodic booms and busts. A great website that contains all the information you need to understand Austrian Economic theory is: www.mises.org. This website is the homepage for the world’s leading free-market think tank, the Ludwig von Mises Institute, located in Auburn, Alabama.
I hope you enjoy learning about how the markets really work as much as I do!
Sincerely,
Betsy Hansen
Friday, September 19, 2008
Unsolvable Disagreements
I believe that some debates will never end. There will never be a winner or a loser because each party is incapable of agreeing with one another. Here are two examples of unsolvable disagreements which plague our political dialogue.
- Abortion rights
- Foreign policy
Why is it impossible for people to come to a reasonable agreement on these issues? Because their disagreements rest with opposing world views and existential perspectives. These views shape people's understanding of how the world works or should be. Existential views have a serious impact on people's sense of security and power and opposing world views cannot be resolved by empty political debates.
How do existential views determine our beliefs about the role of government? Well, I can only speak on behalf of my own experience of how individuals are motivated to believe or choose different realities for themselves based upon their world views. For example, if I believe that the world is a dream or an illusion which is created by me, by virtue of the thoughts, beliefs and choices I make, then I would choose to live by a "live and let live" philosophy. I would be in favor of a free-market, Libertarian, anti-war society. But, if I believe that the world is made of good and evil forces, and that it is my job to destroy the evil forces in the world, then my opinion about the appropriate role of governments and armies would also be shaped by my spiritual perspective, because if the world is filled with dangerous people who must be faced head-on, I would be in favor of an aggressive, offensive foreign policy. With respect to abortion rights, if I believed that the government had a right to tell people what to do in their private lives, then I would be in favor of limiting abortion rights. You see where I'm going here? If not, let me simplify the argument.
The key problem is that some people actually believe that they can trust the government to use its power to protect them. They are OK with handing over their power to the government in order to feel more secure. But if you accept the spiritual perspective that says "you as an individual hold all the power that you need to make it in the world", then you will not fall for the lie that the government can look after you.
Consider this post a brief preview of the ideas which I will cover in the future.
Sincerely, Betsy
Monday, September 15, 2008
My Agenda
Welcome to what I hope will be a trully unique and inspiring website.
My goal here is to write about economics, finance, politics and the spiritual elements which play a significant role in the nature of our world.
Why would spirituality have anything to do with economics, finance and politics? It has a lot more to do with them than you might think.
All institutions are supported by an existential viewpoint. What I mean by this is that every institution is created to serve a purpose and function that is directly related to someones opinion about what it means to be human. For example, if I believe that the world is inherently dangerous I will choose to establish as many armies and regulatory agencies as possible so that I can make sure that all the "bad guys" are under control. You see what I mean? Your deepest beliefs about life become visible by virtue of your actions. If a man believes that his life is entirely in the hands of God, then he will trust God, family and friends to care for him, not the government.
How does this relate to economics? It's simple. If you are fearful at heart, you will support the idea of Socialism. If you are naturally more self confident, you will be more favorable toward free markets and limited government.
How can I make these claims? We choose to give other people power over us when we are afraid that we are incapable of caring for ourselves. This is how it is so easy for the government to take away people's freedom when they feel threatened by something. People fall prey to the tempting bargain "Give me your freedoms and I'll keep you save." It works every time.
My goal here is to write about economics, finance, politics and the spiritual elements which play a significant role in the nature of our world.
Why would spirituality have anything to do with economics, finance and politics? It has a lot more to do with them than you might think.
All institutions are supported by an existential viewpoint. What I mean by this is that every institution is created to serve a purpose and function that is directly related to someones opinion about what it means to be human. For example, if I believe that the world is inherently dangerous I will choose to establish as many armies and regulatory agencies as possible so that I can make sure that all the "bad guys" are under control. You see what I mean? Your deepest beliefs about life become visible by virtue of your actions. If a man believes that his life is entirely in the hands of God, then he will trust God, family and friends to care for him, not the government.
How does this relate to economics? It's simple. If you are fearful at heart, you will support the idea of Socialism. If you are naturally more self confident, you will be more favorable toward free markets and limited government.
How can I make these claims? We choose to give other people power over us when we are afraid that we are incapable of caring for ourselves. This is how it is so easy for the government to take away people's freedom when they feel threatened by something. People fall prey to the tempting bargain "Give me your freedoms and I'll keep you save." It works every time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
