MInimum Wage Nightmare

I just heard on the news this morning (accidentally while looking for today's weather), that California's politicians approved a $15 per hour minimum wage. They call it "economic justice". I call it "economic illiteracy". California politicians say they want to "be an example to the rest of the nation". OMG help us!

This is a sad example of "What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen", which the great economist Frédéric Bastiat wrote about over a hundred years ago. The benefit to those who get those $15 per hour jobs is highly visible and highly touted in the Political Theater. What remains invisible and are all the jobs that are lost when companies have to cut the bottom-end and entry-level jobs in order to pay the raised wages. What is not seen are the entry level jobs and new small business that simply never get started because labor costs are too high. 


What is hidden from view is the fact that higher labor costs force companies to automate much of their entry-level jobs that formerly were a step up for many of the most needy in our society. The automation we encounter at gas pumps and grocery store check-outs is a direct result of minimum wage laws. When government uses force to impose higher wage prices on business, owners and managers look for ways to cut costs. Automation is one way to cut labor costs. Minimum wage means jobs will be cut. The other invisible cost is the necessary increase in end prices to consumers - that mostly hurts those who can least afford it - the elderly, the disabled, and the poor.


And we sill haven't learned. Liberals haven't learned. Conservatives haven't learned. 
The Left claims to care about the poor and downtrodden and "economic justice". Yet they mostly care about what LOOKS like a good idea. Never mind that minimum wage laws hurt the most poor and the most helpless in society. Leftists wring their hands over the growing gap between the 1% and the 99%, yet minimum wage laws create and feed that unnatural divide between the haves and have-nots, a divide which the free market could NEVER create on its own.


The Right claims to be in favor of limited government and free markets. But, they contradict that principle by their belief in the need for a "mixed" or "controlled" economy. The minimum wage laws expand the power of Big Brother, and enable more and more regulations to be piled on top of the small businesses that the Right Wing claims to support.


Sorry folks, you can't make the world better with force.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/01/walter-e-williams/bunch-liars-minimum-wage/

What Did We Learn From The Revolutionary War?

The upcoming 4th of July holiday makes me relate our current problems to those "days of yore". What about today's conflict over immigration? What about the insistence by R's and D's alike that we need a "mixed" marketplace? Does top-down regulation and control deliver on its promises? Or, like libertarians like to say, does every government program exacerbate the problem it claims to be curing?

The Revolutionary War was fought in part because of all the trade restrictions that England was heaping on the colonies. There were lots of restrictions, fees, taxes, and regulations that were in place to stop newcomers from starting up new businesses. This mercantilist mentality made sense to many people, because they thought that newcomers were going to hurt the businesses that they had grown accustomed to. The restrictions not only hurt new businesses, the restrictions also hurt consumers the way any monopoly hurts consumers; prices and shortages increased while quality declined. Also, the burden on creativity kept new inventions and innovations out of the marketplace. . . All in the name of benefitting the existing businesses.

There are so many parallels we can draw between these restrictions on newcomers in businesses and restrictions on newcomers we call "immigrants". Restrictions on immigration are just another form of welfare. These restrictions benefit the existing populace. In effect, this creates a monopoly that raises prices and dampens creativity in the marketplace. Never mind that the marketplace we're talking about is what we call "the US population"; we are shooting ourselves in the foot by creating a monopoly on "citizenship" for the current residents of the US.

For every one privileged person who is "protected" and "supported" by immigration or business restrictions and regulations, there are hundreds and thousands of people who are being hurt by such an enforced monopoly. Taxes are raised to support these laws, politicians get expanded powers, freedoms are jeopardized, busybody neighbors spy on neighbors, new businesses are stifled, prices are pushed up, the variety of goods and services is limited, creative market solutions and innovations are smothered, and on and on. It's what government does to everything it touches; the benefits are visible, while most of the costs are invisible. When future prosperity and happiness are thwarted, you don't see a crater in the ground where that future was going to sprout.

"Since no one but you can know what's best for you, government control can't make your life better." Harry Browne

Want Democracy? Vote for the Market, not Politicians.

I'm stirred up by all the people looking forward to independent candidates in the 2012 election, and their illusion that things will change "if we just get the right person into office". Politics is like spinning your wheels in the mud. Only freedom can save humankind. Politicians, leave us alone.

There are two types of people in the world; those who just want to be left alone, and those who just won't leave others alone.

The Free Market turns greed-mongers and parasites into Servants of their Customer. They are forced into doing noble and heroic deeds.

Politics does just the opposite; It gives greed-mongers and parasites the levers of power to run everyone's life and reach into everyone's wallet to pay for it all. We end up with an ever-growing Warfare / Welfare State.

There is no responsibility in politics like there must be in the marketplace. Politicians spend other people's money and wreck other people lives. Why should they keep any pledges or oaths? The nature of the system doesn't change when Independents are elected. The political system has no responsibility like the marketplace has.

Tea-Partiers say things like "Go directly to the public" or "Get an Independent Candidate who will make a Pledge". WTF! How does that get enforced in politics? It doesn't. You wait years until the next election to change anything. In the Market, you are DIRECTLY pledged to the public, because the day you break your pledge as a producer or service provider is the day you close the doors of your business. The best pledge-keepers are found in the marketplace.

Politicians, on the other hand, don't have to kiss anyone's butt if they don't want to, ... not even their biggest contributors. They don't have to follow the "words on paper" that is the Constitution. There's no enforcement as there is in the marketplace. No direct payment or loss for actions, as there is in the marketplace. Politicians can break every pledge, and they are still "entitled" to keep their position of power until their term runs out (with cushy benefits and retirement packages). Yes, there is the option of recall or impeachment, but how often does that happen. And why should we have to go through the trouble of "recalling". The marketplace has a better way; consumers simply turn their backs on an unscrupulous or stupid businessman, and their business goes "bye bye" within days.

Politics makes a crude attempt at predicting market needs, but they are too slow, too narrow-minded, too destructive of innovation, too stuck in "One-Size-Fits-All" mentality, too indebted to their campaign contributers, too worried about the latest opinion polls, and on and on. Politics cannot do anything to "help" Business and Trade.

I would even argue that courts, police, national defense, and private home defense would all be cheaper and better in a free market. My argument is common sense; Government Monopoly causes a never-ending rise in prices and a never-ending fall in quality and innovation. Government is the ultimate monopoly.

True "Independence" and "Democracy" is enabled in The Free Market. Some Anti-State Voluntaryists are starting to call it "The Peaceful Market" because it is the marketplace where no one is forced to buy or sell something they don't want to buy or sell. People have been taught to fear the words "Free Market", but all it means is people peacefully and freely associating with whomever they please.

I'm for anything that's peaceful. That rules out all politics.

Be patriotic: Shop Smart!

On Jan 7, 2010, I got an e-mail message that encouraged everyone to "Buy American"

My challenge to you is to start reading the labels when you shop for everyday things and see what you can find that is made in the USA - the job you save may be your own or your neighbors!

If we care about the American economy, should we "Buy American"?

This is a popular myth believed by people who never read anything about economics.

To limit your purchases by lines on a map is to lose everything that the division of labor gives us.

The "division of labor" means we don't all have to be self-sufficient. I don't have to know how to build a guitar in order to play a guitar. I don't have to build my own car, or my own tools, or my own house. I don't have to learn how to build or maintain all of these things, Other people in the marketplace have learned from trial and error how best to make a quality product at a reasonable price. Through an investment of their time and money, entrepreneurs learn what techniques work best for production and distribution of a product. The bigger the marketplace, the better this works

When you limit your purchases to a certain area on a map, you are paying someone to invest their time and money in duplicating the process of "trial and error". It's terribly inefficient and uneconomical, and it ends up being a bad deal for the buyer and the seller. It's bad for the buyer because he's throwing good money after bad, and it's bad for the seller because his business is inefficient and therefore not viable.

It's okay to "buy American" if it makes you feel good. It's your choice. I guess people make purchases for stupider reasons. But don't delude yourself into thinking that this is good for American jobs or the American economy. The more competition we have in the marketplace, the better it is for everyone's prosperity. The bigger the marketplace, the better. When you limit your purchases to "buy American", you are cutting out a major chunk of competition, you are shrinking your marketplace, and you're asking for lower levels of prosperity for you, your family, and your country.

The best thing a shopper can do for himself, his family, and his country is to "buy smart": buy the best product at the best price from the company with the best service reputation. That's the best economic choice, and it's "win-win" for everyone involved. Anything other than "buying smart" weakens the American economy.

(Quote from a Gary North article): "To buy" is "to sell." It is the same transaction. It is an exchange. The person who suggests that Americans should buy only from Americans is suggesting the absolute abolition of international exchange. He is advocating the destruction of the international division of labor. He is advocating the abolition of international economic specialization. He is advocating international economic disintegration, given the key position internationally of American trade, American capital markets, and American technology. He is advocating economic collapse. He is advocating a return to barbarism.

Be patriotic: Shop Smart!

Alex Jones and 9/11 Truthers

There is nothing new in what Aaron Russo or Alex Jones says to get excited about. I get that same feeling every time I watch any Alex Jones. He just doesn't go far enough for me. Everyone thinks Alex and 9/11 Truthers are so radical, but they still think in terms of collectivism - God bless America and all that constitution stuff.

Alex and Aaron are a good first step. But, I think that long-time followers of Alex Jones and the 9/11 Truth movement are way overdue in taking the next logical step; learning more about the history and philosophy of Voluntaryism (anarchism) and the Free Market. Because when the system collapses (which we can't stop but who knows when?) only one thing will matter: What Next?

And "what's next" will be determined by what is in people's heads. So, the only thing important to me is learning the philosophy of freedom and applying it to my life and helping others to learn the importance of liberty. That doesn't mean getting "mad as hell" and blaming others; it means doing the hard work of learning about history and economics. That's what matters, not the plans of the boogie men in the Trilateral Commission, Rosicrucians, Bilderbergers, or whatever. They can do nothing without soldiers and cops to carry out their bidding.

We need to teach the next generation of kids not to be sheeple, and not to look to the iron fist of government to solve problems and give hand-outs.

I'm trying to say that I know Aaron Russo from way back, and I know the conspiracy crowd from way back. And, in my view, it's not enough to look for corruption, crimes, and conspiracies in government. I know the intrigue of it all is fascinating. But nothing is going to come from any exposure of plots and crimes if we don't look at ideas for changing the entire system - the system which is a breeding ground for power-monger schemes. That means changing people's heads and the way they raise their children to love power and worship authority.

Aaron keeps talking about "the America I thought I knew" and there is lots of talk about what is "legal" under the constitution, the Bill of Rights and Amendments, and court rulings. Aaron says "The 16th Amendment does not give the IRS the authority to tax your labor and your wages".

Do you guys understand the history of what Aaron is referring to there? The 16th amendment had procedural problems, and so it "isn't legal".

But the root problem is not where does the Fed or IRS get so-called "authority" as found somewhere in the constitution. The root problem is "where does the Constitution get authority"? Read some Lysander Spooner. That's not as easy as watching hours of Alex Jones videos, but it's a lot more educational. An old saying goes: "great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people".

I'm interested in ideas, not events and people so much... Not because I think I have a great mind, but because ideas are what molds people and events. Change ideas and you change people and events in the long run. Change people and events, and you don't change a thing in the big picture. Changing people and events is merely defensive and reactive - wheel-spinning activities.

Aaron says "The Supreme Court is the law of the land". That is bull. We are playing the game of those in political power if we think that we can "take back the republic" by forcing politicians to play by their rule-book, The US Constitution. It doesn't matter what is or isn't "an inside job". It doesn't matter what is a "false flag operation" or not. It doesn't matter that, as Aaraon says "the war on terror is a phony". Aaron says "9/11 is the root cause of everything". I don't give a crap what someone predicted or what some UN asshole wrote on a piece of paper. I've been reading about the UN agenda for a one-world government since the early 70's. I've been reading about the UN's desire for world-wide population reduction since the 70's. I've heard about FEMA camps since they invented FEMA back in 1979. None of this is new, none of this is the root problem.

I saw "Mad As Hell" at a libertarian meeting in Grand Rapids back in the mid 90's. At the very beginning of "Mad As Hell", Aaron says "the most fundamental problem that we have in America, is that it is no longer a free country". That's all well and good, but America NEVER WAS a free country. Even at the very beginning the government was too big, too centralized, too easily used by evil men for corrupt purposes

The constitution was a perfect example of creating bigger government to solve problems created by government in the first place.

Aaron and Alex, and that whole crowd of fear-mongers don't ever point out that we can't go back to some dreamy world where there was freedom and all the politicians played by the rule-book. There never was such a world. We have to look for ways to get completely rid of politicians running our lives. My big problem with Alex and Aaron is that they stir up all these fears of a "totalitarian state", but they never show the one way to avoid a totalitarian state - that is to get rid of all government and all states. And - "The only way to unseat tyranny is to unseat tyranny in people's minds".

They make this big deal of America being a "Constitutional Republic". Does anyone read enough to understand what that means, and the history of Constitutional Republics? The idea of a Constitutional Republic goes back to Aristotle, not the US founding fathers. All Constitutional Republics in history have evolved into totalitarian and/or socialist states.

A Constitution is nothing but paper. Here is a list of countries that have constitutions. I think there are almost 200 countries that call themselves a "republic". It means nothing. There is virtually no difference between the word "democracy" and the word "republic". Those two words are just words. I used to think that the difference between "a republic" and "a democracy" mattered, but I was wrong to think that way. Governments give themselves these labels for the sake of political theater.

Labels and words on paper don't matter. What matters is ACTIONS. For example; If you give money to someone else under fear of being kidnapped or worse, that is called "theft". It doesn't matter that government calls it "taxation". A "republic" is a mafia. A "democracy" is a mafia. Like Aaron rightly pointed out - government is no different than the mafia. The most important point that Aaron misses is that people know the mafia is evil, but people are taught that government is good. Government is an "Evil" that everyone is taught to see as "good". There's the Root. Education of young minds.

All of this is an endless recurring cycle, which will not end until people decide that they don't need a congress, a president, a constitution, a supreme court, or even a county commission to run their lives efficiently and fairly. It's not hard to make predictions, and I'm not impressed by Aaron's or Alex's predictions.

It's a distraction to think that "exposing" evil plots will help. What will help is changing people's minds by helping them to learn that their faith in government is what is empowering the people in the UN and elsewhere who have all the evil plots. Take away their power, and their plots won't matter.