Posted tagged ‘Central Planning’

Must Reads For The Week 3/11/17

March 12, 2017

ECONOMIC STUFF

Donald Trump and Peter Navarro Suffer From ‘Trade Deficit Disorder‘, by Mark J. Perry, at carpediemblog. Here is an excerpt form the article: “In his speech and op-ed, Navarro laid out Team Trump’s trade agenda that involves expanding US exports, reducing imports, and thereby reducing America’s merchandise trade deficit and supposedly therefore increasing our nation’s economic growth. Unfortunately, that’s a pure mercantilist trade agenda, which is an approach to trade that has been discredited now for several hundred years.

How Did Peter Navarro Ever Get A Ph.D In Economics From Harvard? economicpolicyjournal.com. Regular people being ignorant about economics is one thing. But having a Ph.D in economics and being economically ignorant is dangerous.

What Is Laissez-Faire? by Jeffery Tucker, at mises.ca. It simply means ‘Let it be’. A majority of people believe that complex order comes from top down planning by leaders possessing authority. It is inconceivable to them that unplanned order arises when people are allowed to manage their own lives and interact with others. Language is an example of complex spontaneous order. The rules of English were not written by someone and everyone started to follow them. People communicated with people and over time the ‘rules’ were established after discernible patterns (unwritten rules) were recognized. Attempts by Government central planners to control every aspect of society leads to chaos and conflict. Laissez-Faire. Please!

Repeal And Replace Needn’t Be Complicated, by Hunter Lewis, at mises.org. Do you use the term “healthcare system” or “healthcare market” when talking about ‘healthcare’. Most people talk about our “healthcare system”.  This shows we think of healthcare as a centrally planned system. The cost will never go down unless we see healthcare as an economic good rationed by prices in a market. Obamacare was 2500 pages of rules and regulations designed to ‘fix’ what was left of a healthcare market already encumbered by mountains of government regulations. The only ‘fix’ to our current “healthcare system” is to allow it to become a healthcare market. LAISSEZ-FAIRE! Get rid of all government regulations and a complex healthcare order will almost magically form itself. It won’t be a perfect order (nothing man does is perfect). But it will be the best that can possibly exist in a world of scarce resources and subjective value.

High Prices Don’t Cause Economic Bubbles, by Frank Shostak, at mises.org. When central banks increase the money supply (counterfeit money), scarce resources are misallocated to activities that would have never come into existence under normal market conditions. The 08 bubble was caused by the Fed electronically printing counterfeit money. It was not allowed to liquidate. More electronically printed counterfeit money was created to stop the correction. This counterfeit money has and is creating our present financial bubble. Excerpt from the article: “The emergence of a bubble or a monetary balloon need not be always associated with rising prices – for instance, if the rate of growth of goods corresponds to the rate of growth of the money supply then no change in prices will take place……what matters is not whether the emergence of a bubble is associated with price rises but rather with the fact that the emergence of a bubble gives rise to the emergence of non-productive activities that divert real wealth from wealth generators. The expansion of the money supply, or a monetary balloon, in similarity to a counterfeiter, enables the diversion of real wealth from wealth generating activities to non-productive activities.”

The Fed’s Dependence On The Consumer Will Backfire, by C. Jay Engel, at mises.org. Production is the creation of wealth and consumption is the destruction of wealth. Spending is consumption. Consumption is the destruction of what has been produced. Spending doesn’t grow an economy. We can only spend out of our own production. What we produce allows us to spend. Consumption has to lag behind production for an economy to grow. When consumption is increased by debt and money printing, we start a process where consumption is out pacing production. We start to eat our seed corn so to speak. Artificially increasing spending is a quick shot of adrenaline.  But it has no staying power.

 

CARTOONS

Advertisements

Drifting Towards Fascism

September 20, 2016

man drifting in a boat

First let’s define Fascism so we can begin at the same starting point. Fascism is an economic system where the state doesn’t own the means of production, but the state makes the rules that producers and consumers have to follow. There is a bureaucratic layer between businesses and politicians which plans the economy. It is crony capitalism on steroids.

Fascism places politicians and bureaucrats as the ultimate rulers aka decision makers. The individual has no rights or liberty except what the rulers say they have. Order comes from the state, (top down) not from the individual, (spontaneous order).

I saw a great chart (below) showing America’s drift toward Fascism, in an article titled, The Road To Fascism In Just Two Charts, at bawerk.net. I have always thought economic systems fit on a line where at one end no government exists, and at the opposite end there is total government control. Where an economic system is placed on this line depends on how much government intervention exists, or put another way, how little governmental intervention exists.

WHAT IS AN ECONOMY? WHAT IS SOCIAL FREEDOM?

An economy is what results when each individual is free to decide what to produce, consume, exchange and save in a world of scarce resources which have alternative uses. Simply put, you own what you’ve produced or what you’ve received in exchange for your production. It is your property and you have a right to do with it what you wish.

Production is the creation of wealth. Consumption is the destruction of wealth. Exchange is the increase of wealth as both parties place a higher value on what they received than what they’ve given up. Saving is the preference of consumption at some point in the future to consumption in the present. Savings is the basis for capital formation. Capital formation is what increases productivity. Increased productivity is the creation of larger amounts of wealth.

Each individuals decision on what and how much he will produce, consume, exchange and save according to what he  subjectively values in a world of scarcity is the essence of freedom.

In order to have economic freedom you have to have social freedom and in order to have social freedom you have to have economic freedom. In other words, economic freedom and social freedom are different sides of the same coin. Individuals are free to act. Each individual is responsible for the consequences of his actions if they bring harm to others or himself.

I have a quote by F. A. Hayek at the top of my web site. It is my favorite quote because it sums up the choice individuals have faced since the beginning of time:

F. A. HAYEK: “THE COORDINATION OF MENS ACTIVITIES THROUGH CENTRAL PLANNING OR THROUGH VOLUNTARY COOPERATION ARE ROADS GOING IN VERY DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS, THE FIRST TO SERFDOM AND POVERTY THE SECOND TO FREEDOM AND PLENTY.

Let’s take a look at the chart and see what it reveals.

true-political-axis

Zero Government intervention into the economy starts at the bottom left of the chart and moves upward and to the right as Government intervention starts to increase. Zero Social Freedom starts at the top right of the chart and moves downward and to the left as the level of Social Freedom starts to increase.

Communism, socialism, fascism and democratic socialism are on the top right of this chart. They are economic and political systems that strangle individual liberty. Their very nature means intervention into, or control of, what is produced, consumed, exchanged and saved.

Anarcho capitalism, free market capitalism, classical liberalism and our America constitutional founding are on  the lower left of the chart. They are economic and political systems that strangle Government and allow individuals the freedom to produce, consume, exchange, and save as they see fit.

What exists today is the middle ground of crony capitalism, crony socialism and other forms of government interventionism. This is the utopian middle ground that elites think mixes the best parts of both ends of the chart. They know that free market capitalism produces great amounts of wealth as seen by our standard of living. But the elites don’t like the way the wealth is “distributed” and want to use the force of government to make this distribution  “fairer” according to their idea of “fair”.

The elites attempt to redistribute wealth differently than it would exist in the free market, creates incentives that ultimately decreases the wealth that is being produced. It divides us into groups that can be pitted against each other by political opportunists.

These statements by Ludwig von Mises tell us all we need to know about the above chart:

The issue is always the same: the government or the market. There is no third solution.”

The middle-of-the-road policy is not an economic system that can last. It is a method for the realization of socialism by installments.”

Anti capitalistic policies sabotage the operation of the capitalist system of the market economy. The failure of interventionism does not demonstrate the necessity of adopting socialism. It merely exposes the futility of interventionism. All those evils which the self-styled “progressives” interpret as evidence of the failure off capitalism are the outcome of their allegedly beneficial interference with the market.”

CONCLUSION

We are in the chaotic middle. Our choice is to move towards freedom and free markets. It is going to take a lot of time and effort to educate enough people in order to tip the scales toward freedom. Is the cost too high? It’s your decision.

 

Related ArticleCapitalism vs. Crony Capitalism, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleSocialism Sounds Great, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWhat Creates Wealth? Freedom, at austrtianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWe Can’t Recreate The Garden Of Eden, at austrianaddict.com.

 

Could Brexit Be The Modern Day “Shot Heard Round The World”?

July 1, 2016

 

Ralph Waldo Emerson’s immortalized The Minutemen who made a stand against British Tyranny at Lexington and Concord in his “Concord Hymn”. Here is the first verse:

By the rude bridge that arched the flood,

Their flag to April’s breeze unfurled,

Here once the embattled farmers stood

and fired the shot heard round the world.

Could Brexit be a seminal moment moving forward in the history of liberty? We won’t know until the future unfolds. All we know right now is the UK decided they didn’t want to be ruled by a bunch of unelected bureaucrats who usurped British sovereignty when they went beyond the EU’s original mandate.

The UK was fortunate that they were able to throw off the tyranny of the EU through the political process. They didn’t have to fire a shot. Colonial America had to physically fight to free themselves from British tyranny. The cost of “dissolving the political bands which have connected one with another” is exponentially higher if, in order for you to part ways, you have to fight as opposed to just agreeing to separate. Thank goodness the EU didn’t hadn’t become a military power or maybe this would have turned out differently.

Eight Key Takeaways from Brexit

It’s always beneficial for individuals when layers of bureaucratic regulations can be gotten rid of. This allows decisions to be made at the level closest to the individual, which means they have a better chance of working and a better chance of getting changed when they don’t.

I hope the British realize that just because they got rid of the EU central planners doesn’t mean they got rid of the central planning socialists in their Parliament. If the people want more individual liberty they will have to vote in members of Parliament who will stand for individual freedom and vote out members who have supported government solutions to economic problems. This will be difficult because voting to cut the size and scope of Government means many people will have to vote against their own self-interest. For inspiration, the British people need look no farther than Nigil Farage (click here) and Daniel Hannan (click here). These two men were British representatives in the European Parliament. There support for leaving the EU guaranteed they would lose their job. They voted against their own self-interest which is rare among “public servants”.

If the British Parliament and the Bank of England try to centrally plan the British economy through regulation, taxes and money printing, than all the people have done is exchange one set of central planners, who are far away, for a set of central planners who are local. I hope the people who voted to leave understand that if they don’t remain vigilant, their local central planners will see this as an opportunity to grab more power. All but a few politicians and bureaucrats are sucked into the gravitational black hole of Government power. It is hard to resist. No one with this kind of power should be trusted.

How will this end? No one knows. Let’s hope other countries fire political shots, against central planners, that will be heard round the world.

NIGIL FARAGE RUBS SOME SALT IN BREXIT WOUND

Some good articles about Great Britain leaving the EU.

BROVO BREXIT! by David Stockman, at davidstockmanscontracorner.com. Excerpts from the article:

The central bankers and their compatriots at the EU, IMF, White House/Treasury, OECD, G-7 and the rest of the Bubble Finance apparatus have well and truly over-played their hand. They have created a tissue of financial lies; an affront to the very laws of markets, sound money and capitalist prosperity.”

“…Brexit is a contagious political disease. In response to today’s history-shaking event, determined campaigns for Frexit, Spexit, NExit, Grexit, Italxit, Hingexit and more centrifugal political emissions will next follow.”

“Smaller government – at least in geography – is being given another chance. and that’s a very good thing  because more localized democracy everywhere and always is inimical to the rule of centralized financial elites.

WHAT NOW, BRITAIN?, by Matthew McCaffrey, at mises.org. Excerpt from the article:

Britain’s historic decision to leave the European Union represents a blow to political centralization. However, it’s also a sobering reminder that the work of advancing peace and economic freedom is never done. Britain may be extricating itself from EU political control, but if its goal is genuine progress and prosperity, it will need to do much more than simply sever its ties with Brussels.

“Without winning the battle of ideas, the gains from leaving the EU will amount to very little. In this battle, Brexit is not so much a victory as an opportunity…….Brexit offers a chance to once again spread those long-neglected ideals of peace and free trade from which all human progress derives.

EIGHT KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM BREXIT, by Dan Mitchell, at freedomandprosperity.org. Excerpts from the article;

“What an amazing vote. The people of the United Kingdom defied the supposed experts, rejected a fear-based campaign by advocates of the status quo, and declared their independence from the European Union.” Here are some takeaways, thoughts and interesting developments (click on article).”

Here Is Some Econ. Homework

March 22, 2016

When knowledge is allowed to flow unhampered through the market, mainly through the price system, it works to coordinate all activities as optimally as possible. But when Government interventions don’t allow this knowledge to flow freely, malinvestments and dislocations are the result. The only way to cure these problems is for the interventions to stop. This allows the market to purge itself of these wasteful activities via a recession. Unfortunately no politician, bureaucrat, or Fed policy maker wants to have this correction happen on his watch.

Even tough hampered markets have an appearance of sustainability, they ultimately succumb to economic forces.

Here are two articles that talk about hampered markets. The first article is titled, Mises Was Right: The Hampered Market Is Unsustainable, by Sandy Ikeda, at mises,ca. Here are some excerpts from the article:

“Regulatory Dynamics Are Worse Than Transfer Dynamics. This is all because of the central role that prices play in coordinating market processes. That means that the government’s attempt to execute macroeconomic policy by manipulating the quantity of money and credit is perhaps the worst aspect of regulatory capitalism. Monetary manipulation eventually impacts all market prices directly and severely. Other things equal, it is the most distortionary form of intervention.”

“We can rank the major categories of intervention in order of their distortionary effects and thus in order of their unsustainability: 1) Large-scale monetary manipulation, 2) Large-scale price control, 3) Large-scale income redistribution.”

“So, other things equal, a country that pursues a pure form of welfare state capitalism might last longer than a country that pursues a pure form of regulatory state capitalism……”

“……Every country that has attempted interventionism in the past 100 years or so has experienced repeated economic crises. In Russia, crisis led to the Bolshevik Revolution and later the collapse of the Soviet Union. In Germany, the failure of the Weimar Republic conditioned the rise of National Socialism and then later the “economic miracle” under Ludwig Erhard. And in the United States, regulation and monetary manipulation produced the Great Depression and, decades later, the so-called Great Recession of 2007–09, with the “Reagan Revolution” in between.”

Ludwig Erhard And The German Economic Miracle.

 

Here is the second article titled, We Live In A Time Of Piecemeal-Planning & Incremental Interventionism, by Richard Ebeling, at mises.ca. Here are some excerpts from the article:

“Wherever we turn we are confronted with politicians, political pundits, television talking heads, and editorial page commentators, all of whom offer an array of plans, programs, and projects that will solve the problems of the world – if only government is given the power and authority to remake society in the design proposed.”

“Even many of those who claim to be suspicious of “big government” and the Washington beltway powers-that-be, invariably offer their own versions of plans, programs, and projects they assert are compatible with or complementary to a free society.”

“The differences too often boil down simply to matters of how the proposer wants to use government to remake or modify people and society. The idea that people should or could be left alnoe to design, undertake and manage their own plans and interactions with others is sometimes given lip service, but never entirely advocated or proposed in practice.”

“In this sense, all those participating in contemporary politics are advocates of social engineering, that is, the modifying or remaking of part or all of society according to an imposed plan or set of plans.”

“The idea that such an approach to social matters is inconsistent with both individual liberty and any proper functioning of a free society is beyond the pale of political and policy discourse. We live in a time of piecemeal planning and incremental interventionism.

“Society is a spontaneous order not a planned one.”

“Hayek argued that the true individualism starts from the premise that “society” is not some ethereal entity having an existence of its own, nor the designed creation of one or a handful of minds imposing a “plan” on people that produces the social order.”

“Instead, society is the cumulative and interactive outcome and result of multitudes of individual human beings making their separate individual plans that interact and generate connections and associations with other individual plans to produce the overall social order and its coordinated patterns.

 

If you really want to do some home work, read The Use Of Knowledge In Society, by F. A. Hayek at mises.org.

Related ArticleSpontaneous Order = Free Market Economy, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleCentral Planners Hate Economics, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleCharles Hugh Smith; Why Suppressing Feedback Leads To Financial Crisis, at austrianaddict.com.

Must Reads For The Week 1/23/16

January 23, 2016

ECONOMIC FORCES EVENTUALLY WIN

China Promises To Keep Intervening To “Look After” Stock Market “Investors”, Hurt “Speculators“, at zerohedge.com. So the cure for the Chinese stock market bust is Government intervention? Didn’t Government intervention cause the boom in the first place?  Government planners can’t stop reality. Economic forces are always in the process of correcting Government interventions.

The Rest Belt Goes Red – Glory Days Of China’s Steel Boom Leave Behind Abandoned Mills And Broken Lives, at davidstockmanscontracorner.com. Another example of a Government created bubble ending in a bust. Government centrally planning an economy doesn’t work. Ask the former Soviet Union.

The Three Musketeers Of Global Deflation – China, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, at davidstockmanscontracorner.com. We know about China’s problems, but over 65% of Russia’s and 45% of Saudi Arabia’s GDP comes from oil. Oil below $30 a barrel hurts these two countries. Economic forces can’t be stopped by Government central planners.

The Fragile Forty & How The Word Lost $17 Trillion In 6 Months, at zerohedge.com. Forty global stock indices are in bear markets, as over $17 trillion of equity has evaporated in the last six months. Central banks think the wealth effect created by their money printing will reignite the global economic engine. It hasn’t worked because economic forces eventually prevail.

This Is What The Death Of A Nation Looks Like; Venezuela Prepares for 720% Hyperinflation, at zerohedge.com. Bernie Sanders take note. This is what a socialist utopia looks like. Excerpt from the article: “..in reality the Venezuela economy no longer exists, with all transactions now taking place in grey or black markets, and the government apparatus effectively operating in a vacuum.” Economic forces creating a black markets was inevitable.

Schlumberger Fires 10,000 As It Announces $10 Billion Stock Buy Back, at zerohedge.com. To keep your slumping stock price up, all you have to do is buy back your stock. Simple supply and demand. How do you finance this buyback. Either borrow low interest printed money like many companies have and are doing, or get rid of your biggest expense, your workers. Economic reality forces businesses to make decisions.

A Post Boom World, Auto Prices Will Fall,, by Patrick Barron, at mises.org. Easy credit and sup-prime loans for cars will eventually end in a bust, like the housing bubble. Economic forces of supply and demand will bring the car market back in line.

And You Thought QE Was Over: The Fed Will Monetize Half Of This Years U.S. Treasury Issuance, at zerohedge.com. Over the next four years, the Federal Reserve is going to have to repurchase, with printed money, $1.1 trillion in maturing Government debt that it owns. The Federal Government can only grow to it’s present size if it is financed by it’s central bank, the Federal Reserve.

A RECESSION IS THE CORRECTION

Why We Need A Recession, by Ronald-Peter Stoferle, at mises.org. A recession is nothing more than economic forces correcting the misallocation of resources, labor, land and capital that was brought about by previous central bank money creation and easy credit.

As Ludwig von Mises said: “The return to monetary stability does not generate a crisis. It only brings to light the malinvestments and other mistakes that were made under the hallucination of the illusory prosperity created by the easy money.

And as F. A. Hayek said: “To combat a depression by a forced credit expansion, is akin to the attempt to fight an evil by its own causes; because we suffer from a misdirection of production, we want even more misdirection – an approach that necessarily leads to an even more serious crisis once the credit expansion comes to an end.

GOVERNMENT KNOWS BEST

How Government Poisoned The People Of Flint, by John Counts, at mlive.com. Government doesn’t know what’s best.

Texas Adopts New York Values On Fantasy Football, Tho Bishop, at mises.org. Government wants to protect you from illegal gambling. It’s better for you to buy legal state lottery tickets.

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.

Milton Friedman – Socialism Is Force!

August 13, 2015

Organizing a society via the force of central planning whether it take the form of monarchy, dictatorship, socialism, communism, fascism, or a democratically elected big government is very appealing to the people who are in charge of doing the planning. Or, in the case of democratically elected big government, it also appeals to the people who have been convinced that they are on the side of the planners they elected. As our country moves ever closer toward central planning, more force will have to be used to achieve the planners goals. This will produce more contention between people, which leads to less cooperation and more chaos.

Milton Friedman explains this in the video below.

Here is an excerpt.

“Trying to do good with methods that involve force lead to bad results. Because the people who set out with good intentions are themselves corrupted. And if they’re not corrupted they are replaced with people with bad intentions who are more efficient at getting control of the use of force……The most harm of all is done when power is in the hands of people who are absolutely persuaded of the purity of their intentions.”

Here is a quote from Murrray Rothbard:

“The market promotes and rewards the skills of production and voluntary cooperation. The Government enterprise promotes the skills of mass coercion and bureaucratic submission…and those who get to the top will be those with the most skill in that particular task.”

 

Related ArticleWhy The Worst Get On Top, at mises.org.

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