Category Archives: Private Property

The Bush Affirmative Action Mortgage Program

Affirmative Action, Bush, Constitution, Economy, Founding Fathers, Private Property, Ron Paul, Socialism

I began this thread, “NO Small ‘r’ republicans In The House,” with a visceral response to Republican Fred Thompson’s sudden discovery of the principles of fiscal responsibility—principles he said very little about during his bid for the nomination of his party.

More accurately, if Fred had spoken about spending and the Republican Party losing its way—the cliché those charlatans adopted—it was in the vaguest of terms, never confessing to the specific policy catastrophes he regretted and would reverse. War, the thing that propelled the country into debt, was just dandy, and “let’s have more of it.”

Myron has forwarded me Rep. Paul’s splendid response to the legislation known as the “American Dream Downpayment Act. “HR 1276” has exacerbated what Steve Sailer has termed the current “Diversity Recession.” Before I excerpt the entire thing, I’d like to make the following point:

This is not about Ron Paul getting it right on this one issue. Paul has been responding in the House in exactly this fashion for decades. He has never wavered; has always been morally and politically true and correct, always gone straight to the marrow of the argument; articulating what the Constitution and the Founders provided.

Unlike Fred, Paul responded in the heat of the debate, not after the fact; and for the benefit of the People, not for political expediency.

Now over to Ron Paul, and his rapid-fire response to the Bush affirmative action mortgage program:

“The American dream, as conceived by the nation’s founders, has little in common with H.R. 1276, the so-called American Dream Downpayment Act. In the original version of the American dream, individuals earned the money to purchase a house through their own efforts, oftentimes sacrificing other goods to save for their first downpayment. According to the sponsors of H.R. 1276, that old American dream has been replaced by a new dream of having the federal government force your fellow citizens to hand you the money for a downpayment.

H.R. 1276 not only warps the true meaning of the American dream, but also exceeds Congress’ constitutional boundaries and interferes with and distorts the operation of the free market. Instead of expanding unconstitutional federal power, Congress should focus its energies on dismantling the federal housing bureaucracy so the America people can control housing resources and use the free market to meet their demands for affordable housing.

As the great economist Ludwig Von Mises pointed out, questions of the proper allocation of resources for housing and other goods should be determined by consumer preference in the free market. Resources removed from the market and distributed according to the preferences of government politicians and bureaucrats are not devoted to their highest-valued use. Thus, government interference in the economy results in a loss of economic efficiency and, more importantly, a lower standard of living for all citizens.

H.R. 1276 takes resources away from private citizens, through confiscatory taxation, and uses them for the politically favored cause of expanding home ownership. Government subsidization of housing leads to an excessive allocation of resources to the housing market. Thus, thanks to government policy, resources that would have been devoted to education, transportation, or some other good desired by consumers, will instead be devoted to housing. Proponents of this bill ignore the socially beneficial uses the monies devoted to housing might have been put to had those resources been left in the hands of
private citizens.

Finally, while I know this argument is unlikely to have much effect on my colleagues, I must point out that Congress has no constitutional authority to take money from one American and redistribute it to another. Legislation such as H.R. 1276, which takes tax money from some Americans to give to others whom Congress has determined are worthy, is thus blatantly unconstitutional.

I hope no one confuses my opposition to this bill as opposition to any congressional actions to ensure more Americans have access to affordable housing. After all, one reason many Americans lack affordable housing is because taxes and regulations have made it impossible for builders to provide housing at a price that could be afforded by many lower-income Americans. Therefore, Congress should cut taxes and regulations. A good start would be generous housing tax credits. Congress should also consider tax credits and regulatory relief for developers who provide housing for those with low incomes. For example, I am cosponsoring H.R. 839, the Renewing the Dream Tax Credit Act, which provides a tax credit to developers who construct or rehabilitate low-income housing.

H.R. 1276 distorts the economy and violates constitutional prohibitions on income redistribution. A better way of guaranteeing an efficient housing market where everyone could meet their own needs for housing would be for Congress to repeal taxes and programs that burden the housing industry and allow housing needs to be met by the free market. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and instead develop housing policies consistent with constitutional principles, the laws of economics, and respect for individual rights.”

Updated: Uncivil Agenda

Affirmative Action, Barack Obama, Business, Gender, Individual Rights, Private Property, Race

One can only hope that the Obama Administration’s commitment to further curtail freedom of contract, speech, and religion; and the already severely delimited right to associate and dissociate at will–that these go the way of his tax hikes on those who’ve accrued more riches than others. (The update consists of links to the better perspective.)

Since my wish is not His command, please apprise yourselves of what’s ahead. Read through Obama’s “Civil Rights” program (I’ve posted half of it). I do, however, support his efforts to reduce drug-use prosecutions, but not through coerced “treatment”:

* Combat Employment Discrimination: President Obama and Vice President Biden will work to overturn the Supreme Court’s recent ruling that curtails racial minorities’ and women’s ability to challenge pay discrimination. They will also pass the Fair Pay Act, to ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work, and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.
* Expand Hate Crimes Statutes: President Obama and Vice President Biden will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation, expand hate crimes protection by passing the Matthew Shepard Act, and reinvigorate enforcement at the Department of Justice’s Criminal Section.
* End Deceptive Voting Practices: President Obama will sign into law his legislation that establishes harsh penalties for those who have engaged in voter fraud and provides voters who have been misinformed with accurate and full information so they can vote.
* End Racial Profiling: President Obama and Vice President Biden will ban racial profiling by federal law enforcement agencies and provide federal incentives to state and local police departments to prohibit the practice.
* Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support: President Obama and Vice President Biden will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society. Obama and Biden will also create a prison-to-work incentive program to improve ex-offender employment and job retention rates.
* Eliminate Sentencing Disparities: President Obama and Vice President Biden believe the disparity between sentencing crack and powder-based cocaine is wrong and should be completely eliminated.
* Expand Use of Drug Courts: President Obama and Vice President Biden will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior.

Read on.

Home Invaders-Cum-Home Liberators

Communism, Crime, Individual Rights, Private Property, Socialism

All the characters involved in this operation are de facto and de jure squatters, trespassers, and home invaders.

But to the Associated Press, they are “activists,” “homeless,” and “realtors” with a difference. In an article titled “Activist moves homeless into foreclosures,” the AP prattles:

Rameau is an activist who has been executing a bailout plan of his own around Miami’s empty streets: He is helping homeless people illegally move into foreclosed homes.
“We’re matching homeless people with people-less homes,” he said with a grin.
Rameau and a group of like-minded advocates formed Take Back the Land, which also helps the new “tenants” with secondhand furniture, cleaning supplies and yard upkeep. So far, he has moved six families into foreclosed homes and has nine on a waiting list.

It takes all kinds to make a village of idiots.

Updated: Predicted Meltdown

Business, Communism, Economy, Government, Ilana Mercer, Inflation, Private Property, Socialism, The State

The brilliant Bob Higgs on the crumbling capital markets (read my comments following the “Snip”):

“The failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, setting in motion the biggest government bailout/takeover in U.S. history, brings a grim sense of fulfillment to competent economists. After all, what did people expect, that water would flow uphill forever?

This financial mega-mess is the same sort of event as the collapse of the USSR’s centrally planned economy, another economically unworkable Rube Goldberg apparatus that was kept going, more or less badly, for decades before it fell apart completely. Along the way, of course, famous (yet actually unsound) economists assured the world that everything was working out splendidly. As late as 1989, when the pillars were crumbling on all sides of the temple, Nobel Prize winner Paul A. Samuelson informed readers of his widely used textbook, “The Soviet economy is proof that . . . a socialist command economy can function and even thrive.”

In the future, we will see a similar breakdown of the U.S. government’s Social Security system, with its ill-fated pension system and its even more inauspicious Medicare system of financing health care for the elderly. These government schemes are fighting a losing battle against demographic realities, the laws of economics, and the rules of arithmetic. The question is not whether they will fail, but when—and then how the government that can no longer sustain them in their previous Ponzi-scheme form will alter them to salvage what little can be salvaged with minimal damage to the government itself.

Our political economy is rife with such catastrophes in waiting, yet the public always seems startled, and outraged, when the day of reckoning can no longer be deferred, and another apartment collapses in the state’s Hotel of Impossible Promises, loading onto the taxpayers more visibly the burden of sheltering the previous occupants.

Call it democracy in action or utterly corrupt governance; they are the same thing.

Each of these time bombs has at least one element in common: it promises current benefits, often seemingly without cost; but if it must acknowledge a substantial cost, it places that burden somewhere in the distant future, where it will be borne by somebody else. From the standpoint of society in general, every such scheme is a species of eating the seed corn. It satisfies the public’s appetite to consume something for nothing right now, with no thought for the morrow. It represents the height of irresponsibility by permitting people to live higher today than they can truly afford, financing this profligacy by borrowing recklessly and by taxing politically weak and ill-organized people in order to shower benefits on politically strong and well-organized special interests. …

The architecture of the Hotel of Impossible Promises is not arcane. All competent economists understand these things. Ludwig von Mises explained as early as 1920 why a centrally planned economy could not work as a rational system of allocating resources. The reasons why Social Security, especially its Medicare component, and many other such government programs contain the seeds of their own destruction have been explained time and again. Are the politicians who construct these structures really such idiots that they cannot understand the logic of what they are doing? Not at all. …”

[Snip]

The complete article is “Ticking Time Bomb Explodes, Public Is Shocked.” Read it. I disagree with the sentiment expressed in the last paragraph. Bob Higgs would find it hard to comprehend how stupid the corporate, political and academic elites truly are. This is the age of the idiot. Obama is an ass with ears. Ditto McCain. Take them at face value, Bob. Believe their idiocy. As hard as it may be for a man of your intelligence to grasp, they truly do not understand Mises and Hayek and Rothbard or even Friedman. The idea that misallocation of capital is inevitable in socialized systems is anathema to the incontinent legislators and the other cognoscenti. Psychologizing about their motives gives these intellectual tabula rasa more credit than they deserve. (Michael Rebmann of “North Buffalo Journal and Review” liked this rant.)

Update: I just saw CNN’s Campbell Brown, who, as I already noted, is not working with much, and her panel, laud the massive bailouts. Why? Because, as all agreed, the returns on this “investment” will be many times the investment. This is beyond rank utilitarianism. The concept of private property eludes Campbell and her commies. The risks in a bailout are socialized and the profits privatized. Theft is what this is all about–unconstitutional, criminal taking.