Not All News Is Bad
Already, you can see that the political constellation is lining up in a way that is more friendly to the cause of liberty. The Democrats are up to their old tricks, which are transparently dumb and dated. The Republicans are responding with smart and sound criticisms. The government looks poised for a fantastic gridlock that will let the liquidation take place so that we can move toward a good recovery.
There is plenty to regret about Obama's victory, but the first impressions of the political dynamic that is playing out looks like it could mean good things for the future.
Comments (19)
Don't be too surprised when Detroit falls over and the Republicans, with their "smart and sound criticisms" are blamed for what will be a brutal aftermath. The pain, which Austrians know will ensue, will not be perceived as part of the market's healing process but as a call to intervention. Again, those who argued against the bailout will be attacked and more resources plundered to save the victims of corporate greed.
Yes, I'm pessimistic, but I will be really happy if Lew is right.
Published: November 19, 2008 2:00 PM
I'm a great admirer of the sanity of Lew Rockwell but I have another interpretation of the Bush speech. The whole piece and the reasons why are on my blog but the bottom line is that Bush is widely perceived as an evil liar so if he starts speaking truth whatever he says will be taken as a lie. Those pulling his strings understand this and that is why he made the speech.
As the last commenter said I would be really happy if Lew is right.
Published: November 19, 2008 2:46 PM
Well, the problem with Michigan and Detroit in particular is that, while there HAS BEEN, IS NOW, and WILL BE pain, there can't really be a healing process without fundamental political reforms of the sort that a socialist governor and corrupt commie city government aren't likely to support.
Published: November 19, 2008 3:30 PM
Are those that conceal statist policies behind free-market rhetoric really better than open statists?
Published: November 19, 2008 4:35 PM
I think the next few years will actually be a painful period for the cause of liberty. Everything is blamed on the Republicans, who I think we can all agree blew it and pursued failed policies. Now it will take the Democrats screwing up (which in the long term their policies WILL fail) for the Republicans to refute their failed policies with sound ones. That might be an optimistic outlook, that the Republican Party will move away from their neo-con ways, but we will see. The message of liberty is popular!
-DC
http://www.davidcarlsonpolitics.com
Published: November 19, 2008 5:26 PM
I have had similar discussions with my wife pertaining to the 'fallout' from the elections; our predominant sentiment being that sometimes you have to endure a Carter to get a Reagan. Of course, it is the consequences of the Carter that you must deal with in the future. The blowback from the assured mess the far Left will leave (in 4 short years) is the future a resurgent true-conservative GOP will have to meet.
The stage will be set with what will no doubt be monumental challenges that make today’s economic troubles look tame-especially concerning inflation. What is exciting to consider is the advantage truly conservative ideals have over both so called 'progressive' and neo-cons-and the potential to capitalize on those ideals. We know the beliefs of both liberals and neo-cons tend to err towards spending to create wealth. We know that this is unsound. We have a base to build upon by which we can educate and persuade.
That base took the form of the ‘Ron Paul’ camp in the GOP primaries. The tremors of Dr. Paul's presidential campaign points to a deep current of discontent among conservatives and libertarians in this country. Regardless of who is at the helm in the future, this current that will be the basis for a principled and idealistic momentum; this should both serve as a refining force and lend credence to time tested classical liberalism.
The reason I believe Mr. Rockwell is correct is that time will prove the left and neo-conservatives wrong. People will see this and there is a precedent from which to proceed. The only thing that must be provided is the leadership to cogently express those ideas at the right time. That’s the wildcard.
Published: November 19, 2008 8:08 PM
The unfortunate truth is that tomorrow's intelligent leaders, the 20-30 year olds getting prepared for leadership roles in every aspect of our economy, are largely in favor of socialist-style economics. While the positive and moral sentiment is there, favoring help for the weak and the poor, this sentiment is channeled into a desire for the nationalization of every vital and/or dysfunctional industry. I'm a finance student in contact with many college-age intellectuals and have to battle daily over the long-term pitfalls of socialism. I tend to get nowhere; arguing economics with people who have zero background in economics is a futile effort.
Getting back on track will not happen in the next five or even ten years. My generation is a lost cause. The only recourse is to begin educating the new youth as to the workings of our economic and financial system. Non-governmental educational organizations that include economics, business, and monetary theory along with the other basics such as English, math, and history are the only way to enact true change. Until we put our force behind these entities, we'll be fighting an uphill battle against people who think they're doing the just and moral thing by supporting socialist policies.
Published: November 20, 2008 12:41 AM
Prosperous packing Cup Shanghai Machinery Co., Ltd. Set R & D, design, manufacturing, sales, in the same
Published: November 20, 2008 1:51 AM
Anyone abandoning the cause, looking for greener pastures elsewhere? I don't know for sure, but I suspect there might be a surge in passport applications in a few years. Who knows.....
It is libertarian to leave, rather than stay right? That is why so many people have come to the US.
Published: November 20, 2008 3:38 AM
Statism is dead!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGIgOIFdnMQ&fmt=18
Published: November 20, 2008 3:44 AM
banker,
Don't abandon hope! "Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito." Another relevant quote, “Lost causes are the only ones worth fighting for.”
Published: November 20, 2008 10:48 AM
Lew --
Points well taken. When the fervor fuels the flames of distrust of government, only good can come from that. Much like the chemically-addicted, the economy is in withdrawal. Detoxification (spending cuts, downsize or eliminate government programs) and counseling (lessons in liberty and laissez faire capitalism) are the prescriptions. The bad news is actually an excellent opportunity for renewal. Let's keep in mind that the engine of optimism and progress is from the productive and industrious -- not the parasites. As we move ahead, let us take pride in the fact that we succeed in spite of the changelings to the cause of liberty. The lessons in action are greater than those in word.
Published: November 20, 2008 2:24 PM
I agree that it is nice to see the Republicans finally starting to oppose this fiscally irresponsible legislation; however, Bush's eloquent speech on how the free market works can do nothing but harm for the cause of capitalism.
The Republican controlled Congress and President Bush, as you know, have not been the best representatives of capitalism. By making a speech in defense of sound economics, Americans can only assume that we have had a free market system.
For example, just last night on the Colbert Report, Colbert ranted and raved about how the free market has done such a great job--look at where we are now. I assume (based on the people surrounding me and the so called 'experts' that most Americans see on tv shows) that most Americans have no idea about sound economics. For the misinformed/ uninformed public it may seem that government intervention into the market is necessary.
The 'experts' on tv only spread the message of deceit to the American public. Check out "Peter Schiff was right" on youtube to see how having a true understanding of our financial crisis (Schiff) is received by these 'experts'.
These people that defend the free market while not practicing anything remotely close to it can only do more to misguide the opinions of the complacent American public.
Published: November 20, 2008 2:41 PM
One must assume that the author thinks that just opposing Barack, now that they are the minority party, shall make the Republican party useful and worthy in the cause of fighting wasteful government spending. He could not be more than wrong. For one thing many of our so-called representatives are of the same mode. They have labels that say they are different, liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, but they are all well to do and wealthy compared to the average American citizen who they supposedly "represent". Look Maxine Waters voted for Hank Paulson's criminal bailout just like John McCain did. Both are just alike really. If anyone approached either of these members of Congress in the street and wanted to shake their hand both would give strange glances at you as if you had a rat in your hand when you wanted to shake theirs.
As far all the good things like having "gridlock" and slowing down government and cutting government programs or enliminating them altogether, the best way to start all this is to cut down greatly that bloated military budget that stands at about 2 trillion dollars a year and what seems to be off limits when it comes to public discussion. The US military has failed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Time to finally pare down its' budget immensely and immediately.
Time to cut foreign aid and right now. No more money for any country anywhere from American taxpayers no matter how big or small the country is and no matter what region of the world it is in. Actually it is time to END foreign aid, especially all that money we give to the state of Isreal.
Finally it would be good if the playing field that average Americans must play on be leveled that their so called representatives either give the same health plans, the same pay, and the same insurance coverages in terms of life, auto, and home insurance that they have to the people they represent in their respective districts. You see these fat cats could care less about "less government", "less spending" and providing opposition against the incoming administraion. All of it is all for show for the media and parts of the general public that have fallen for it. They are beholden to their masters who own them. One would doubts there shall be any real change in the coming years , and that would have been true if McCain had won, because the American people enmass will not force their representatives to giving them what they really want and stay uninformed and idolent thinking that they need not be part of the political process.
Published: November 22, 2008 10:29 AM
Good news? Absurd. Even if the Republicans got back in, they would continue the nonsense. The Reagan revolution was going to usher in the Jeffersonian principles of limited government. It did nothing of the sort. Reagan cut some taxes and, a couple years later, added some others. And he spent more money than previous administrations, only to be overspent by succeeding administrations.
So it has gone, and always will go. Voters WANT government spending. Voters expect government to help them. And they're angry that "deregulation" failed them. Alan Greenspan, the Obi-Wan Kenobi of laissez-faire is mocked and disgraced, and couldn't even use these moments to propel freedom.
While we hope that critical mass will be achieved and the libertarian karma will be embraced by 50% plus 1 of the voting public, not one (not one!) talking head of courage took Greenspan to task for his disgraceful performance before Congress in October.
He sat there, in his characteristic monotone, blithering on about economic models, and how he was "shocked."
What an idiot. These scenes remind me of Paul Johnson's flawed treatise, _Intellectuals_. In fact, perhaps Greenspan can join the likes of Marx, Hellman, Chomsky and a host of others who would guide the world with their brilliance when, in reality, they hadn't the common sense, the ethics, or the practical understanding to tie their own shoelaces.
Greenspan may have been a reluctant intellectual; nevertheless, he acted the part, and did not recoil from the accolades donned upon his balding and aging head. And like every intellectual, every "leader," every person who is supposed to save our asses and part the Red Sea, they disappoint. Why? Because they never should have had the power in the first place. They are human. And nobody can foresee events and all variations. They have no business regulating anyone. Non-interference makes the market work.
But Greenspan did one worse. He had a chance to articulate the flaws in the game. He could have argued that regulation without oversight is foolhardy, but deregulation without assumption of personal risk (a.k.a. free money for unworthy borrowers, and government salvation for fat-cat CEOs who fearlessly drive their financial processes into the ground without fear of recrimination) is even more foolhardy! I guess "foolhardy" is too strong a word to use when you're an accomplice, along with the Congress, in the ponzi scheme. He was yet another Wizard of Oz who had outrageous control over the economy. Because without a leader and a guide, we'll all die, right?
Greenspan presented his "surprise" that the system did not adapt. He thought players would act in "self-interest" and prevent the meltdown. How astonishing! Was he too stupid to see that they DID act in self-interest? The borrower wanted a new house, and could get one for no money down. So she did act in self interest. The speculators could off-load risk because Uncle Sam would ultimately be around to bail them out, and wouldn't even demand to take their hundred-room mansions. They did act in self-interest. Alan, can you lift your puzzled head away from your keyboard, and try to apply some common sense to the riddle at hand, and defend your life's work?! They all acted in self-interest. That was not the flaw in the model, which you long to scribble in on the sigma formulae.
Greenspan had the chance to turn the argument upside down, and throw it right back into those ex-used-car salesmen, and defend my free market philosophy.
My gardener can explain this, predicted this, and understood this, and he makes about $60,000 per year. His name will never be in Wikipedia or any history book. But the famous ex-Randian buffoon who sat before Congress, addled, mocked and disgraced, and who lived a life of glory and cash, was unable to explain the failures in the economic collapse.
And because of his blundering, half-hearted attempt to articulate classroom principles, when the world anxiously watched, the "free market" will be a dirty phrase for several decades to come. Such a shame.
Published: November 22, 2008 12:29 PM
Franklin,
How does one become your gardner?
Published: November 22, 2008 4:21 PM
Ian, I should have qualified it, I guess. Guy is a small business man -- not my personal manservant! : ). Sole proprietorship and he helps me about three times a year.
You game me a good laugh, though!
Published: November 22, 2008 4:42 PM
Bush's diatribe is in no way encouraging. In the first place, it comes too late, with no change in policies on the table. It also ignores the financing of the Iraq war, the Fed's role in the housing bubble, and the fact that capitalism has not been alive and well in the past century.
The words make sense, but you just know the contexts are wrong. And the only reason Republicans would be swayed to more liberal (in the old sense) persuasions is due to defiance of a Democrat-led executive and legislature.
Published: November 22, 2008 10:17 PM
Ah, I think there's a reason why republicans tend to fall back on free market rhetoric when they're the minority power. It's simply because they lost their credibility and influence, and they're trying to pander to their large base of free market conservatives and upcoming businessmen.
If what I claim turns out to really be their main motivation, then It means that the free market "base" is larger than the mainstream thinks it is. Now that would be sweet! and I can't help but think that the Austrian school and Ron Paul were at least a part of that mental movement towards the free market.
Published: November 25, 2008 10:34 AM