We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Samizdata quote of the day All you have to do, is to see whether the law takes from some what belongs to them in order to give it to others to whom it does not belong. We must see whether the law performs, for the profit of one citizen and to the detriment of others, an act which that citizen could not perform himself without being guilty of a crime. Repeal such a law without delay… If you do not take care, what begins by being an exception tends to become general, to multiply itself, and to develop into a veritable system.
– Frederic Bastiat
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Indeed. Very well said, M. Bastiat. A nice self-evident rule to follow.
Quantative easing and all inflationary (currency devaluation) procedures would likewise fall into the realm of counterfeiting.
I have actually wondered whether counterfeiting could not be promoted as a means to introduce liquidity into the economy.
Do you think any main stream economists might object?
Bastiat is always worth re-reading.
“I have actually wondered whether counterfeiting could not be promoted as a means to introduce liquidity into the economy.”
This is called social credit economics.
The vast majority of the fiscal (tax and spend), monetary (credit-money bubble making) and regulation policy in most Western countries, violates Bastiat’s rule.
We have already passed the point of lack of “sustainablity” (and passed it a long time ago).
The question is now NOT “whether collapse can be avoided”, but rather “when will the collapse take place”.
I believe that in 2013 (yes that soon) the falling apart of the present set-up will become obvious.
Could it have prevented?
I think it could – at least on the fiscal side (I will leave aside the monetary side – and also the regulation-state).
Had Barry Goldwater won the election of 1964 the “Great Society” welfare-state programs would not have pushed into effect.
It is often forgotten how difficult it was to get the Great Society programs passed – President Johnson was in many ways a legislative genius (although an evil genius).
And how these programs not been passed, the fiscal position of the United States (I repeat I am leaving aside the monetary side and the regulation-state) would have been sustainable.
“Ronald Reagan in 1981”.
Already too late – no way that a Democrat controlled House would have repealed Medicare and so on.
Even if Reagan had really wanted to do that – which I doubt.
It is very difficult to repeal such Welfare State “entitlement programs” once they have been passed and TENS OF MILLIONS of people have become dependent on them.
Even the much boasted of “welfare reform” of the 1990s was restricted to income support for healthy people of working age (and only hit some of the programs they got).
And even this could not get past Clinton without a deal to introduce “SCHIP” – i.e. government funded health care for children (including rather old “children”).
No.
There must be (de facto) bankruptcy – there is no alternative now.
And not just in the United States.
If anything it will be worse in Britain – I suspect much worse.
By the way – if Jack Kennedy not been murdered the situation might well not be so bad.
Partly because he did not have the legislative skills to get Great Society progams passed – even if he wanted them passed (which I doubt).
And partly because he would have lost to Goldwater in 1964 anyway – his Addison’s illness would have been too hard to hide by then.
And no dead-Kennedy for Johnson to exploit.
Time machine anyone?
Go back and prevent the murder.
Although going back and preventing a murder in 1914 would be my first choice.