Posted by Jason | Posted in Government | Posted on 31-10-2009
How can something that is immoral for us to do individually be moral when performed collectively as the government?
How can something that is immoral for us to do individually be moral when performed collectively as the government?
Here is more proof of the idiocy of the Federal government. Because the congress has to show how much they care, they are going to drive these small toy makers out of business.
By LESLIE WAYNE | New York Times
October 30, 2009
For 35 years, William John Woods has made wooden toys for children. Each one of the 2,000 or so he makes each year passes through his hands at his shop in Ogunquit, Maine, and no child, he said, has ever been hurt by one of his small boats, cars, helicopters or rattles.
But now he and others like him — makers of small toys and owners of toy resale shops and boutique stores — say their livelihood is being threatened by federal legislation enacted in the last year to protect children from toxic toys through more extensive testing. Big toymakers, including those whose tainted imports from China led to the recall of 45 million toys and spurred Congress to take action, have more resources and are able to comply with the new law’s requirements.
“This is absurd,” said Mr. Woods, whose toys are made of maple, walnut and cherry and finished with walnut oil and beeswax from a local apiary. He estimates it would cost him $30,000 — a figure he calculated from having to pay $400 in required tests for each of the 80 or so different items he produces — to show that they are not toxic.
“I use beeswax,” Mr. Woods said. “The law was targeted at large toymakers using lead. There was no exclusion for benign products.”
This is just more proof that so called government protection is not only not necessary, but they are harmful to the little guy and all Americans. Without government intervention, 45 million toys were recalled for having traces of lead. Private businesses, in order to protect their reputation and customers, acted without coercion to remove these toys from the market. This is proof that you do not need all these government regulators and protection agencies in order to protect the public.
If there was no government agency to interfere in the free market, you would still have private watch dogs such as Consumer Reports. When they discovered lead in a toy, the media would be alerted, and the problem would be blasted out to the public, as it was when these toys were discovered to have led. Once the news breaks, in order to protect their future business, businesses will react to rectify the problem. All of this takes place without the need for government coercion. This all works efficiently with the least amount of cost to all parties involved.
But of course, the government decides they need to show they are looking out for “the people” (read my post about what the Federalist Papers say about this). In doing so, they drive up the cost on each toy produced. They drive the little guy out of business, despite the fact he uses nothing that could even contain lead. They drive up the price of toys for everyday Americans. In general they make it harder for the “little guy”.
In the International Business Times’ article on the coming inflation, they talk about government debt being at record levels. This is true, and I’ve already talked about how we are enslaving our children with with ever increasing debt. The paragraphs below also mentions how much we are already robbing ourselves. In 2008, the government paid $451 billion in interest on the debt. How much production was eaten up by that $451 billion? How much would that have stimulated our economy? This was before the massive almost $2 trillion deficit Obama is running in 2009. Instead of benefiting from our production, we will be paying for yesterday’s waste. We’ll be robbing ourselves to pay for the bailouts of yesteryear. The bailouts that benefited none of us. They only benefited Geithner and Paulson’s buddies at Goldman Sachs. Couldn’t this classify as modern day enslavement by the rich and politically connected?
2: GOVERNMENT DEBT IS AT RECORD LEVELS
Canada’s budget surplus has turned into a multi-billion dollar deficit as a result of the credit crisis. But Canada’s problems pale in comparison to those of its neighbour to the south. The richest country in the world is drowning in debt.
Let’s examine for a moment the sorry state of US indebtedness. Due to ongoing bailouts and stimulus packages, the US will experience a record $1.75 trillion deficit in 2009. US debt (accumulated deficits), as tracked by the famous US National Debt Clock in Manhattan, stands at a staggering $11.8 trillion and counting. In 2008 alone, the government paid a staggering $451 billion in interest, according to the government’s own website, TreasuryDirect.gov. And that number is expected to rise substantially in 2009.
That figure – $11.8 trillion – is a mindboggling amount of money. But it represents only a part of America’s total liabilities. If Social Security and Medicare obligations are included (which they should be), obligations rise to over $106 trillion dollars, according to the US Treasury.
None of this money has been set aside, but has instead been borrowed by the government for its own use. When combined with the debt of nearly $11.8 trillion, total debt soars to an astonishing $118.6 trillion, or nearly ten times total GDP, or $300,000 per person.
Just to be clear to populist liberals, government will not solve this. The government is the means of the enslavement, so they cannot be expected to set us free.
The International Business Times has a great article on the coming inflation. They highlight below how the government has distorted the true inflation we have experienced since 1983. If the government doesn’t like something, they just redefine it to get the results they want. All Americans know though how much food, energy and housing have increased despite governments claim of low inflation.
3: THE CPI INFLATION INDEX DOES NOT REFLECT TRUE INFLATION
In both Canada and the US, inflation is hurting our pocketbooks, but you wouldn’t know it from the Consumer Price Index (CPI). That’s because the CPI is understated by as much as 7 percent per year according to economist John Williams, who has been tracking US CPI for many years (see Figure 2). In addition, North American investors and consumers seldom hear the “headline” inflation number. Instead, the financial media usually report only the “core” inflation number, which excludes food and energy. This was done, ostensibly, to remove volatility from the CPI. But food and energy account for about 23 percent of consumer spending, so how can they be ignored? Governments have a major incentive to understate CPI because trillions of dollars’ worth of pension funds, health benefits and wage increases for public sector employees are indexed to it.
Today’s CPI is substantially understated because it is calculated using a complex re-weighting formula that is riddled with substitutions, exclusions, hedonic adjustments and geometric weighting. If we were to recreate the CPI using the original 1983 formula, we would discover that even though we have experienced asset depreciation following the credit crisis, price inflation for goods and services has not gone away. And if the monetary authorities had decided to factor home prices into the CPI, the bubble would have been far more obvious from the beginning.
I picked this up from Hotair, and in my opinion this is why Romney has no chance in 2012, and why I’m glad he didn’t get the nomination in 2008. Don’t claim to be a free market conservative when you implemented one of the country’s only state run health insurance programs that is now blowing up in their face. Now he’s claiming it wasn’t meant to bring down cost. Well, if you were a free market guy, you would have realized providing insurance to all only drives up costs, and the costs are what make complain about health care.
This election I will have a litmus test. Do you believe in the free market, as in no government intervention at all, or do you believe government should intervene and so called protect “the people”. If you answer the latter, you don’t know what the free market is, and you lost my vote. Hopefully other free market folks will do the same.
Last night, Ron Paul was on Larry King after Michael Moore. Ron Paul, who seems to be the only congressman who understands economics, rightfully explains that Michael Moore doesn’t seem to know what the free market is. He’s mixing corporatism with capitalism. As I’ve always said, if you listen to liberals talk about capitalism, they are never talking about capitalism. They are talking about whatever they put before capitalism. How many times have you heard crony capitalism, corporate capitalism, greedy capitalism, etc? Their complaint is not about capitalism. Their complaint is with cronyism, corporatism, and greed. None of them are synonymous with capitalism. They are more closely synonymous with government, the very solution that they then propose. Anyway, here’s Ron Paul.
In a her column today, Ann Coutler explains why the parts of health care that aren’t covered by many insurance plans are the ones providing faster service, declining prices and more innovation.
She also explains how health insurance and the mess that has ensued from it was created by guess who? The Government. Great read. Check it out.
Many anti-fed economists have been predicting massive inflation with the way the Fed has grown the money supply in order to deal with this current crisis. With all their warnings, I decided to look at GDP, growth of the monetary base, and inflation to see how historically they related to each other. To make it simple, I took it by decade, but there is always a delay. The averages may not show for the decade, but there is definitely a correlation over the long term.
As you can see, inflation is always very close to growth in the monetary base minus the growth in GDP. If you take the averages of all years from 1960 to 2006, you can see the historical correllation. Keep in mind this includes the inflation of the 70s and early 80s, and it still works out. You will notice over the long haul, inflation equals growth in the monetary base minus growth in GDP (7% – 3% = 4%).
Now, let’s look at what has happened from 2007 to today.
So, as you can see the monetary base has grown an average of 38%. Most of that growth has taken place in the past year with the monetary base growing at 100%
If the history of how these three indicators correlate with each other is correct, you better invest in an inflation hedge. It’s going to get ugly.
Rather than letting the free market deliver credit to consumers, Chris Dodd needs to grandstand for his constituents. He wants the government to limit interest rates on credit cards.
Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd has been hearing from constituents upset because banks have been raising the interest rates on their credit cards. This week Mr. Dodd decided to do something about it. He proposed a bill imposing an immediate freeze on those rates.
“At a time when families are struggling to make ends meet, jacked up rates can quickly create crushing debt,” Mr. Dodd said in a statement. “People need to be responsible with their money, but they shouldn’t be taken to the cleaners by outrageous rates.”
If customers are being taken to the cleaners, it is because lawmakers like Mr. Dodd sent them there. In May, Congress passed the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act, which bars rate increases without a 45-day notification. To reduce their risk under this law, banks are rushing to raise rates before it takes effect in February. Thus the Senator’s latest political grandstand.
This is no different than price caps. What do price caps do? In order for price to be driven down, you need demand to decline while supply remains steady, supply to increase while demand remains steady, or demand to decrease while supply increases. If you artificially limit price, while not lowering demand, you automatically lower supply. It will happen no other way, so while Dodd does some showing off, he is decreasing credit in the market, which we are told is one of our biggest problems right now. I have an idea. How about Dodd tells his constituents to quit borrowing money. The credit card companies can’t charge you if you don’t ask for their services.