Update II: ‘Monetary Freedom and Its Opposite’

Economy, EU, Federal Reserve Bank, Inflation, Political Economy, The State

Writes Mark Thornton of the Ludwig von Mises Institute:

“As we enter the era of decline for the dollar all sorts of reforms will be used to address this decline and the economic instability it causes. However, reforms designed on Wall Street or in Washington will not work and will amount to nothing more than rear guard action by the moneyed interests that control the government.

The only true path to reform is monetary freedom. We have gone from a situation where money was entirely free from government intervention to one that is completely dominated by government. Instead of privately minted coins made from precious metals we now have a system of government-printed paper fiat currency. We have gone from a system of private banking that provided bank notes and checks for demand deposits to one where banks are completely regulated by the central bank and a host of other regulatory bodies. The idea that our current financial mess resulted from a lack of regulation is truly laughable. Of course this process has taken centuries to complete. By giving up our monetary freedom—particularly over the last one hundred years—we have given government the ability to grow in size and scope and to achieve unthinkable levels of power. Every step forward towards government control of money has resulted in social chaos and economic destruction. The real economy only grows in the interludes when monetary mischief is at a minimum.”

[Snip]

Pay attention to the section, “What do we need to do as individuals?”

Update I: As always, Pat Buchanan delves well into the history of events–in this case The Bretton Woods Agreements, and the ongoing, current attempt to recreate a second Bretton Woods by unseating the US and its fallen currency. What I don’t get is why is Pat so confident that a “global central bank, the Fed of the world economy,” will not come to pass. He claims “Americans are not going to fund such a bank, nor cede it authority, nor abide by its dictates. We are not yet a Third World nation dependent on the IMF.”

Why Not? Whence comes the confidence? Pat’s courage and convictions are not shared in Washington and on Wall Street. (Or on “Main Street,” for that matter.)

Update II (Nov. 15): The G-20 Summit, where G stands for Golem, has concluded. Some humor has been injected into this solemn affair, as the central planners’ affirmed “their commitment to free market principles.” Another thing to tickle the funny bone: the commitment these counterfeiters made to “promoting integrity in financial markets.” Nothing about integrity in government. I guess that’s a contradiction in terms.

Updated: GOP, RIP?

Elections 2008, Ilana On Radio & TV, IMMIGRATION, Media, Neoconservatism, Republicans

The excerpt is from my latest WorldNetDaily column, “GOP, RIP?“:

“At bottom, what does David Brooks, the ‘Reformer,’ mean when he instructs ‘Conservatives … to appeal more to Hispanics, independents and younger voters'”?

‘Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods,’ wrote H.L. Menken. ‘If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner.’

‘Appealing to,’ or ‘reaching out,’ is political prattle for promising stuff. Republicans – ‘Reformed’ and Unreformed – have taken away from their defeat that they should be flogging more stolen goods in communities where such stuff is especially coveted.

These ‘Reformers’ want to ensure that the unreformed voter knows what’s on the menu next time around.

Time magazine would agree: “Thou Shalt not Covet” is so passé. (Or “so yesterday,” as the hip would say.)”

The complete column is here.

Update (Nov. 16): I will be chatting to Jerry Hughes of the Accent Radio Network, on his show, Conceived in Liberty. The topic: my column “GOP, RIP?” The time: 11:30 until 12:00 PM, Pacific.

Updated: Pawlenty Or Ponnuru; It's All The Same

Conservatism, Elections 2008, Energy, Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Republicans

The Republican Governor of Minnesota, Tim Pawlenty, has declared:

“‘Drill baby, drill’ by itself is not an energy policy. It’s not enough. We’re going to need wind and solar and bio mass.”

What Pawlenty is saying is that arguing with global warming politics is not viable. Therefore, the logic of drilling must be substituted with the illogic of expensive, and hence dirtier, sources of energy. As I wrote in “The Goods on Gas“:

“The more efficient the source of energy, the less waste and pollution are involved in its conversion into energy. Think of the totality of the production process! The fewer resources expended in bringing a fuel to market, the cleaner and cheaper is the process.”

So, Mr. Pawlenty, drilling is so an energy policy—especially if one hasn’t drilled in decades, and if oil is one of most viable sources of energy. Most Republicans have simply lost the ability to make a case, any case.

Update (Nov. 20): It’s my theory that the quest for power, among the punditocracy and the pols alike, creates a convergence toward opinions most acceptable to power brokers and voters.

To wit, in “Rebooting the Right,” Ramesh Ponnuru, editor of National Review, ladles out the same lukewarm, happy, middle-grounds we’ve heard from most GOPers–and I surveyed in “GOP, RIP?“:

“At the GOP governors’ meeting this month, Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota argued that Republicans need to stay conservative but also modernize. A revitalized conservatism would push for tax reform with an eye on middle-class families, not hedge-fund operators. It would seek solutions to global warming rather than deny that it exists. It would place a higher priority on making health care affordable than on slashing pork programs. It would promote the assimilation of Hispanics rather than regard them as a menace or a source of cheap labor.”

Updated: Pawlenty Or Ponnuru; It’s All The Same

Conservatism, Economy, Elections 2008, Energy, Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Republicans

The Republican Governor of Minnesota, Tim Pawlenty, has declared:

“‘Drill baby, drill’ by itself is not an energy policy. It’s not enough. We’re going to need wind and solar and bio mass.”

What Pawlenty is saying is that arguing with global warming politics is not viable. Therefore, the logic of drilling must be substituted with the illogic of expensive, and hence dirtier, sources of energy. As I wrote in “The Goods on Gas“:

“The more efficient the source of energy, the less waste and pollution are involved in its conversion into energy. Think of the totality of the production process! The fewer resources expended in bringing a fuel to market, the cleaner and cheaper is the process.”

So, Mr. Pawlenty, drilling is so an energy policy—especially if one hasn’t drilled in decades, and if oil is one of most viable sources of energy. Most Republicans have simply lost the ability to make a case, any case.

Update (Nov. 20): It’s my theory that the quest for power, among the punditocracy and the pols alike, creates a convergence toward opinions most acceptable to power brokers and voters.

To wit, in “Rebooting the Right,” Ramesh Ponnuru, editor of National Review, ladles out the same lukewarm, happy, middle-grounds we’ve heard from most GOPers–and I surveyed in “GOP, RIP?“:

“At the GOP governors’ meeting this month, Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota argued that Republicans need to stay conservative but also modernize. A revitalized conservatism would push for tax reform with an eye on middle-class families, not hedge-fund operators. It would seek solutions to global warming rather than deny that it exists. It would place a higher priority on making health care affordable than on slashing pork programs. It would promote the assimilation of Hispanics rather than regard them as a menace or a source of cheap labor.”