Archive for the ‘Econ. 101’ category

Socialism Sounds Great

June 1, 2016

The definition of socialism is, government ownership of the means of production. Many countries we call socialist today, don’t actually own the means of production, they just encumber the private owners of the means of production with rules, regulations, and taxes to the point that the businesses have limited freedom to make decisions concerning their business. Government is the silent partner with businesses today. Silent from the stand point of what the public sees, but boisterous from the businesses point of view. “Socialism” today is nothing more than a modern day version of fascism, corporatism, mercantilism, or simply interventionism.

Thomas Sowell

SOCIALISM FOR THE UNINFORMED

In this article, Socialism For The Uninformed (read here), Thomas Sowell gives his insight into, not only what modern-day socialism is, but where it leads. Here are some excerpts from the article.

Socialism sounds great. It has always sounded great. And it will probably always continue to sound great. It is only when you go beyond rhetoric, and start looking at hard facts, that socialism turns out to be a big disappointment, if not a disaster.”“While throngs of young people are cheering loudly for avowed socialist Bernie Sanders, socialism has turned oil-rich Venezuela into a place where there are shortages of everything from toilet paper to beer, where electricity keeps shutting down, and where there are long lines of people hoping to get food, people complaining that they cannot feed their families.”

“With national income going down, and prices going up under triple-digit inflation in Venezuela, these complaints are by no means frivolous. But it is doubtful if the young people cheering for Bernie Sanders have even heard of such things, whether in Venezuela or in other countries around the world that have turned their economies over to politicians and bureaucrats to run.”

“The anti-capitalist policies in Venezuela have worked so well that the number of companies in Venezuela is now a fraction of what it once was. That should certainly reduce capitalist “exploitation,” shouldn’t it?”

But people who attribute income inequality to capitalists exploiting workers, as Karl Marx claimed, never seem to get around to testing that belief against facts — such as the fact that none of the Marxist regimes around the world has ever had as high a standard of living for working people as there is in many capitalist countries.”

“Facts are seldom allowed to contaminate the beautiful vision of the left. What matters to the true believers are the ringing slogans, endlessly repeated.”

“…..But the very idea of subjecting their pet notions to the test of hard facts will probably not even occur to those who are cheering for socialism and for other bright ideas of the political left.”
The great promise of socialism is something for nothing. It is one of the signs of today’s dumbed-down education that so many college students seem to think that the cost of their education should — and will — be paid by raising taxes on “the rich.”

“Here again, just a little check of the facts would reveal that higher tax rates on upper-income earners do not automatically translate into more tax revenue coming in to the government. Often high tax rates have led to less revenue than lower tax rates.”

“In a globalized economy, high tax rates may just lead investors to invest in other countries with lower tax rates. That means that jobs created by those investments will be overseas.”

None of this is rocket science. But you do have to stop and think — and that is what too many of our schools and colleges are failing to teach their students to do.”

 

 THE LEFT’S SUPPORT OF STATE OVER PROSPERITY
-In this article, Chili, Venezuela, And The Left’s Support Of State Over Prosperity (read here), Dan Mitchell shows the difference between Chili and Venezuela over the last 40 years. Look at the data in the charts from this article. It shows that when a government allows more economic freedom than currently exists, production increases. Since production is the creation of wealth, the country becomes wealthier. When a government takes economic freedom away where it has existed in the past, production decreases. Lower production leads to less wealth creation and ultimately a poorer country. Chili and Venezuela are countries going in very different directions.
 -Here are some excerpts from the article.
 -“Chile’s success starts in the nid-1970’s when Chile’s military government abandoned socialism and started to implement economic reforms. In 2013 Chile was the world’s 10th freest economy. Venezuela, in the meantime, declined from being the world’s 10th freest economy in 1975 to being the world’s least free economy in 2013.”
 -“Chile is not a perfect role model, to be sure, because of an unsavory period of military rule. But the good news, is that economic liberty has led to political liberty. whereas the opposite has happened in Venezuela.”
 -“…..as the people of Chile grew richer, they started demanding more say in the running of their country. Starting in the late 1980’s the military gradually and peacefully handed power over to democratically elected representatives. In Venezuela the opposite has happened. As the failure of socialism  became more apparent, the government had to resort to ever more repressive measures in order to keep itself in power.”
 -“Yes, it’s very desirable for all citizens to benefit from economic growth. But if you look at the charts in the article, it’s abundantly clear which nation is producing better outcomes from average citizens.
this is fundamental flaw of Statists. By fixating on redistribution and equality, this leads them to policies that re-slice a shrinking economic pie.
 Related ArticleWhy Socialism Won’t Work? Human Nature, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleMilton Friedman – Socialism Is Force, at austrianaddict.com.

 Related ArticleAmerica’s Socialist Origins, by Prager University, at austrianaddict.com.
 Related ArticleCapitalism vs. Crony Capitalism, at austrianaddict.com.

America’s Socialist Origins, by Prager University

March 31, 2016

Some of the first settlements in America were set up as socialist or collective societies. No one owned property. Everyone’s production was ‘given’ to the public store. These early settlements were examples of socialist ideas that Karl Marx popularized in this saying form the mid 1800’s ,”form each according to his abilities to each according to his needs“. These lab experiments didn’t work because, although everyone was willing to consume, not everyone was willing to produce. If these socialist ideals couldn’t work in small groups, where everyone knew each other and had the similar end of just surviving the next day, how can these ideas be expected to work in countries with tens of millions of people who don’t know each other and who desire a variety of ends?

Here is a video from Prager University titled,

AMERICA’S SOCIALIST ORIGINS

 

Here are some excerpts from my post, The Real Thanksgiving Story: I quote Richard J. Maybury.

“In the harvest feasts of 1621 and 1622, “all had their hungry bellies filled,” but only briefly. The prevailing condition during those years was not the abundance the official story claims, it was famine and death. The first “Thanksgiving” was not so much a celebration as it was the last meal of condemned men.”

“But in subsequent years something changes. The harvest of 1623 was different…….. In fact, in 1624, so much food was produced that the colonists were able to begin exporting corn.”

“What happened? After the poor harvest of 1622…..They began to question their form of economic organization.”…..in 1623 Bradford abolished socialism. He gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit. In other words, he replaced socialism with a free market, and that was the end of the famines.”

 

Related ArticlePrivate Property vs. Collective Ownership: Which Deals With Scarcity Better Than The Other, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWhy Socialism Won’t Work? Human Nature, at austrianaddict.com.

 

Menos Marx – Mias Mises (Less Marx – More Mises)

March 28, 2016

The global economic slowdown provides an opportunity to spread the ideas of Austrian economics and individual liberty. People know something is wrong but they don’t know the cause. Government intervention by politicians and bureaucrats, along with our central bankers policy of money printing and zero interest rates is what caused these economic distortions.

It is easy for political leaders to sell the belief that the solutions come from bureaucratic central planners. People can see concrete things built from the plans of engineers and architects, so it makes sense in our minds that plans can bring about the ends sought by the planners.

Getting people to understand that order can be created spontaneously when individuals pursue their own plans and cooperate voluntarily with each other in what we call a free market, is much more difficult because of its abstract nature. The concepts of money and interest rates aren’t easy to wrap your head around. When they are manipulated by central banks, it’s even harder to grasp.

Education about economic principles has to come from the bottom up (0ne on one), because we know the truth can’t come form politicians and bureaucrats.

In this article, Hope In Brazil As Millions March Against Rouseff, by Tho Bishop, at mises.org, we see growth of bottom up change. Here are some excerpts from the article: “Due to the work of Helio Beltrao and Mises Brasil, Ludwig von Mises and Austrian economics have made unprecedented gains within the country. As I noted last year, Mises is the most searched economist in all of Brazil. Meanwhile the media was forced to take notice as signs reading Menos Marx, Mais Mises (Less Marx, More Mises) were seen being waved during an earlier round of anti-Rousseff (President Dilma Rousseff) protests.”

“Ludwig von Mises: “In the long run even the most despotic governments with all their brutality and cruelty are no match for ideas. Eventually the ideology that has won the support of the majority will prevail and cut the ground from under the tyrant’s feet.

MORE HOPE FOR LATIN AMERICA?

Here is a video from libertypenblog.blogspot.com. John Stossel talks to Gloria Alvarez who is a free market activist in Latin America. Here are quotes from the video:

Gloria Alvarez: “..In Latin America we still don’t know how economics works. We have seen Cuba fail and it should be enough to see Cuba failing…….and since we don’t know history because Latin Americans are oblivious to what happened in the Soviet Union, in China…..”

Stossel asks, “How did you learn this”

Gloria Alvarez: “….I studied in a libertarian university…UFM….It has von Mises library…

 

Miss Alvarez, Latin Americans aren’t alone in their ignorance of history or how economics works. We Americans have become blissfully ignorant. And we have no excuses because we have a culture of liberty and free markets. How much farther down the Road to Serfdom do we have to travel before we wake up?

Click here to see video Gloria Alvarez speak at CPAC.

Related ArticlePeople Want A President Who Will “Get Something Done“, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticlePrivate Property vs. Collective Ownership: One Deals With Scarcity Better Than The Other, at austrianaddict.com.

 

 

Free Trade or Trade Restrictions: Which Leads To Prosperity?

March 16, 2016

Free Trade Is The Path To Prosperity, by Georgi Vuldzhev, at mises.org. – When people make voluntary exchanges,  both parties actions reveal that they value what they have received more than what they have given up. It is an increase of value for both parties. Without trade each of us would have to produce all the goods we wanted to consume. Would you have enough time or knowledge to pull this off? No chance! If you had to pull this off, would you be poorer? Absolutely! When government interferes with trade (voluntary exchange), society becomes less prosperous. Are you listening Mr. Trump, Mr. Sanders, and Mrs. Clinton? Politicians purchase votes, at a low cost, with protectionist rhetoric. Unfortunately the high cost of government trade restrictions, subsidies, and tariffs, is paid by consumers and workers who lose their jobs.

Donald Trump vs. Milton Friedman on Trade Policy. by Mark J. Perry, at carpediemblog. – In time of war countries blockade their enemies ports to prevent imports from coming in. Why? Because it harms them economically. Tariffs are the same as blockades. Blockades prevent trade, which causes economic harm. Henry George said: “What protection teaches us, is to do to ourselves in time of peace what enemies seek to do to us in time of war.” Donald Trump has proposed a 45% tariff on Chinese goods. Just because you are successful in the business world doesn’t mean you know anything about economics.

Here is the video from LibertyPen

 

Related ArticleSpecialization And Trade Create Wealth, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWalter E. Williams: Voluntary vs. Involuntary Exchange, or Seduction vs. Rape, at austrianaddict.com.

Economic Forces Eventually Win: Let’s Look At Oil

March 2, 2016

Mark J. Perry’s recent post at Carpe Diem Blog titled; Some Charts And Updates On America’s Amazing Shale Revolution, It’s Not Over Yet, shows how economic forces are always in play even when we think they’re not. When the price of oil was over $100 dollars a barrel and gas was close to $4 a gallon in 2014, who thought oil would get down to $30 dollars a barrel and gas would sell for under $2 a gallon?

The law of supply and demand states that more will be produced at a higher price than a lower price. Higher oil prices made fracking economically viable. The American shale industry took off, in spite of the Obama administration making oil rich government land off limits to fracking. The shale industry started drilling on private land. Even though a portion of the investment in the shale industry may be an artificial bubble, thanks to the fed printing money, the reality is that fracking is now viable at lower and lower prices per barrel. Some marginal companies are going bankrupt because of the lower prices, but you can rest assured these evil oil companies won’t be bailed out by our green energy loving government, which is good. These marginal producers will be purchased by more viable companies and whatever malinvestment the Fed created will be purged from the shale industry. The housing bubble should have been allowed to find the bottom, instead of the Fed pumping money to keep the correction from happening. This is what should have happened to GM instead of being bailed out by Bush and Obama.

Economic forces are always in play even though government tries to keep them at bay through regulation, taxes, or money printing. Even though it may take some time, economic forces always win. Just ask the leaders of the former Soviet Union.

Here are some charts and quotes from Mark J. Perry’s article (click above).

US oil production is almost up to early 1970s levels.

oil

US natural gas production is at all time highs.

natgas

Low oil prices have had a positive economic impact, even though the Wall Street experts say the low prices are bad. In fact the Obama administration couldn’t claim any US job growth if it wasn’t for the jobs created in the fracking industry. And the Obama did everything it could to halt fracking. Excerpt from the article.

“The plunge in energy prices is driving a U.S. building boom for plants that turn crude oil and natural gas into motor fuels, chemicals and fertilizer. Energy companies proposed or received approval to build 140 petrochemical projects in the last five years as falling oil and natural gas prices made it cheaper to refine and process the raw materials…

We are becoming more energy self sufficient. The OPEC Cartel has been brought to its knees by the American shale revolution.

netoil

Excerpt from the article:

“America’s Amazing Shale Revolution is arguably one of the most remarkable energy, economic, entrepreneurial, and technological success stories in history. The charts, data and reports above help to tell part of that remarkable story.”

“And make no mistake, the shale revolution is not going away, it’s here to stay and will be part of the global energy landscape for a long time. Despite a temporary slowdown and setback in domestic oil production in response to low oil prices, America’s bonanza of shale resources won’t vanish, but will remain available and accessible when needed…. America’s petropreneurs….stand ready to start drilling shale oil again as soon as oil prices rebound back above $40 per barrel. And the shale producers will come back leaner and meaner than ever in the upcoming Shale 2.0 period, thanks to ongoing technological improvements in drilling and extraction technologies, less costly and shorter drilling times for new wells, and increases in the initial shale output flowing from new wells…

America’s shale revolution isn’t going anywhere. In fact we are probably at the end of the beginning of the revolution.

Related ArticleFree Market Fracking Trumps Government Solutions When It Comes To Producing Energy, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWind And Solar Energy Is Diluted and Intermittent, Which Means More Costly, at austrianaddict.com.

Thomas Sowell: Wealth, Poverty, and Politics

January 26, 2016

As most of you know Thomas Sowell is one of my favorite authors. The first book by Dr. Sowell that I read was Vision Of The Anointed. I was hooked. The amount of insight per words written is staggering. His ability to make the complex understandable to regular people like me sets him apart from others. I try to read everything he’s written.

Dr. Sowell talks about his new book titled Wealth, Poverty, and Politics with Peter Robinson on Uncommon Knowledge sponsored by The Hoover Institution. This video covers interesting topics from economics, to culture and ethnicity. It is worth the investment of time to watch this.

Quote from the video,“Milton Friedman said if government took over the Sahara Desert, there would be a shortage of sand.

 

Related ArticleThomas Sowell’s Vision Of The Anointed, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleThomas Sowell: The Economics And Politics Of Race, at austrianaddict.com.

Related Article – Thomas Sowell, “Economic Problems Don’t Have Political Solutions, at austrianaddict.com.

“Save Our Jobs” From “Creative Destruction”

December 17, 2015

Does free market capitalism destroy jobs? Yes! The free market replaces jobs that it previously created with more productive ways of doing the same thing.  Joseph Schumpeter coined the phrase “creative destruction” to describe the dynamism and innovation that is unleashed under free market capitalism. Put another way the free market creatively replaces unproductive jobs with more productive jobs.

Think milkmen, blacksmiths, paperboys, along with cassette tape, vinyl record, and typewriter manufacturers. News papers and book stores. Think taxi cartel vs. Uber.

This 1 minute and 38 second parody, gives us an understanding of “creative destruction” that an economist could only dream of achieving in thousands of written words.

COALITION OF OBSOLETE INDUSTRIES

Excerpt from the video, “If we don’t stop progress how will anyone ever have jobs?

 

Related Article“CAR WARS” Return Of The Jitneys, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleGovernment Intervention Stifles Real Job Creation, at austrianaddict.com.

Cuba’s Black Markets Show Mans Desire For Liberty

November 24, 2015

Cuba has had a centrally planned communist economy ever since Castro took over in 1959. The videos below show a few things. 1) Look at how poor these people are. 2) Black markets will spring up even under a communist dictatorship. 3) People will always try to find ways around intrusive laws. 4) Black markets are more productive than centrally planned systems. 5) The totalitarian State Needs to control information if it is to survive.

These videos are by Vox.

Why Cuban Cab Drivers Earn More Than Doctors

Castor Hates The Internet, So Cubans Created Their Own

 

Private Property vs. Collective Ownership: One Deals With Scarcity Better Than The Other

November 5, 2015

The first rule of economics is scarcity. There are not enough resources to satisfy peoples desires. Economic systems don’t create this scarcity, it is the natural state of our world. The two questions that economic systems have to answer are, 1) How can limited means satisfy unlimited wants? 2) Which economic system does a better job of dealing with scarcity?

Private ownership of the means of production is the definition of free market capitalism. State ownership of the means of production is the definition of socialism. The economic system that exists in the U.S. today is not free market capitalism. It is a system hampered by Government rules, regulations and taxes. These Government interventions take decisions about the means of production out of the hands of private owners and places them in the hands of bureaucrats.

No economic system that exists today is purely free market or centrally planned. Since change is constant, the direction an economic system is moving is what is important. So economic systems are either moving toward collective ownership or toward private ownership of the means of production. Or as F. A. Hayek said, “moving toward serfdom and poverty or freedom and plenty.”

 

PRIVATE PROPERTY DEALS WITH SCARCE RESOURCES

In this article titled, Why We Need Private Property To Deal With Scarce Resources, Patrick Barron does a great job explaining how private property deals with scarcity better than collective ownership. Here are some excerpts from the article.

The existence of scarcity is true of all resources (such as time, human energy, and natural resources). However, it is not necessarily intuitive that allowing scarce resources to be owned privately is the solution to this problem.

Consequently, socialism appears attractive to many and they turn to having all resources owned collectively for the “common good.” Unfortunately, a society which spurns private property…. often learns the terrible lessons of central planning and the tragedy of the commons (i.e., commonly held resources will be plundered to extinction)

Throughout history, most of mankind has been divided into a hierarchical system of masters and slaves with some gradations between the two extremes. The masters…. devised complex rules-based systems for resource distribution….. And ultimately, these plans depended upon pure terror for enforcement. But this so-called solution to the problem of scarcity — restricting the people’s liberty through the use of force — does not work.”

Problem 1: We Can’t Economize Without Effectively Ordering Our Preferences First

“.… Modern economics explained that without private ownership of resources, there was no mechanism for observing or acting on ordinal preferences in which persons prioritize desires from highest to lowest. Without a way to allocate goods according to ordinal preferences, there is no rational means to economize for the betterment of society.”

In other words, without markets and prices, there is no way to know what people really want or need, so the masters never really knew what to order the slaves to produce, what technical means to use, what alternative materials to use, the quality desired, or how much to produce. Thus, the commissars of the Soviet Union ordered the production of inefficiently produced, shoddy goods. The Soviet empire collapsed, despite the fact that Russia is blessed with vast natural resources and an industrious population.”

Problem 2: Few Raw Materials Are Ready To Consume

A second fatal problem with common/government ownership of resources is that few readily available, consumable resources actually exist. There are no resources on the planet that do not require at least a minimum of effort to transform into a consumable product……Of course, most natural resources require much more effort to convert to consumable products, passing through many stages of production.”

…. Consider a hiker lost in the wild. It matters not at all to him that great stands of timber lie within easy reach or that valuable minerals lie under foot. These natural resources require great effort over very long time periods to be converted into something consumable….. A lost hiker does not have the knowledge, time, or previously produced means to convert these basic resources into consumable products to ensure his survival. All this is far beyond anyone’s autarkic abilities.

Now let us assume that someone did harvest trees by felling them, transporting them to a lumber mill, milling them, storing them in a ventilated and dry place for many months before kiln-drying them….. advertising their availability to contractors, keeping sales records, sending out bills, and collecting the bills, only to have a socialist call him a plunderer and confiscate his lumber for free distribution to whomever the masters deemed to be politically advantageous to their continued privileged position. No one other than the favored cronies of government would ever harvest another tree….. production of usable lumber would be monopolized…. prices would increase and quality would decline. Moreover, with no voluntary market at work…. there would be no means of knowing if these resources were being used in a way valued by those who valued them most.”

Problem 3: We Need Private Property To Build Capital

Without the ability to profit from privately owned property, there would be no incentive to provide or withhold capital for any endeavor. Also, a system of private ownership is necessary to determine if that capital is being used in a way the consumers value. The consequences of ignoring this fact of economic science is most evident today in China’s ghost cities, where resources, both natural and human, have been expended for no observable benefit except to advance the careers of politicians….”

The opposite case of resource waste comes from special interest groups…use the state and prohibit exploitation of resources by private individuals…. modern environmentalists have convinced the political class that most progress is unsustainable, dangerous to our health, etc… Society is prevented from benefiting from their conversion to consumable products. The poor suffer the most from these policies as the prices of raw materials — and thus finished consumer goods — are driven up.”

“Private ownership insures that valuable resources will never be plundered to extinction, because their value will have been capitalized. Instead, private owners will seek to make resources as widely available as possible without endangering the long-term prospects for future harvesting of resources. The process of determining a resource’s capitalized value is impossible absent free-market capitalism with strict defenses of property rights.”

Despite both the theoretical and empirical evidence to the contrary, socialists tell us the opposite; i.e., that state ownership of all resources will prevent their plunder and ensure prosperity for all. As Ludwig von Mises explained, though, socialism is not an alternative economic system of production. It is a system of consumption only, and a system of economic ignorance and economic plunder.”

Related ArticleMilton Friedman -Socialism Is Force!, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWhy Socialism Won’t Work? Human Nature, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWealth Can’t Be Redistributed If It Doesn’t Exist, at austrianaddict.com.

Wind And Solar Energy Is Diluted And Intermittent. Which Means Higher Cost

October 26, 2015

Politicians and bureaucrats mask the real cost of producing energy from wind and solar when they;  1) “invest” your tax dollars in wind and solar companies. 2) give tax payer guaranteed loans to these companies. 3) use your tax dollars to subsidize the purchase of this energy.

On the flip side of the coin, they artificially drive up the costs of producing energy from coal, oil, and nuclear through regulations and taxes.

CAN WE RELY ON WIND AND SOLAR ENERGY? by Prager University.

Excerpt from video, “In the entire world there is not one real or proposed independent free standing solar of wind power plant. All of them require backup. And guess what that backup is? Fossil Fuels.”

LOW COST RELIABLE ENERGY FUELS ECONOMIC PROSPERITY.

An economy becomes wealthier when it can produce more while using fewer scarce resources, time, labor and capital. Economies are fueled by energy. If Government continues to force us to use higher cost energy (read here) to power our economy, we are going to be less wealthy and prosperous. The green jobs that are being brought into existence by Government force, aren’t as productive as the jobs that will be lost when the fossil fuel energy sector is forced to shrink. Put another way, these green jobs wouldn’t exist in a free market because the free market always chooses the most productive activities. Less productive activities go away. The cost of these non productive activities will fall on the entrepreneur who made the miscalculation. He will be incentivized to cut his losses sooner rather then later. The incentives in our crony capitalist green energy industry are different. Since the tax payer pays the cost of the failure (read here), the losses will be allowed to go on longer. Resources, time, labor and capital will be wasted as well as tax payer dollars.

When will we quit putting our faith in politicians and bureaucrats when their policies constantly fail to produce their hoped for results. Our current crony capitalist system that weds Government and business isn’t free market capitalism. Our politicians want you to think it’s free market capitalism because they need a straw man to demonize. Once demonized, the only “solution” is more Government intervention. And the outcome of government intervention is the destruction of wealth; because scarce resources are not being allocated to their most productive uses according to consumer demand.

We have to rediscover the truth that moving toward free market capitalism and away from government intervention is the only cure for our economic problems. Free market capitalism has lifted billions of people out of poverty and is the only process that can keep us from stagnating and/or sliding backwards.

Related ArticleUnelected EPA Driving Up The Cost Of Food And Energy, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleFree Market Fracking Trumps Government Solutions When It Comes To Producing Energy, at austrianaddict.com.

Related VideoThe Story of Electricity, 2 minute video by, instituteforenergyresearch.org.