We all want to care about others. The 'Free College for All' narrative is rooted in the idea that we take care of others. But are we taking care of others by stealing from the masses to pay for College? What happens to the price of college if our subsidies for it increase? The price of college has increased DUE TO the persistent governmental interference in the market.
Politicians like Bernie Sanders can't wait to get in front of microphones and discuss how 'moral' it is for us to provide these services. Imagine that. It's moral to steal from your neighbor to provide college for free to others. But the moral argument should be made for those that are getting stolen from and for the future generations that have to pay the price of our generation's policies. The image below is the cliffnotes version of Bernie Sanders' "College For All" Act, basically just marketing. The full version of Bernie's plan (51 pages) takes some time to figure out how his policy proposal works.
My friend loves the idea, I responded to him that if we understand economics, then we know what we can expect to follow:
Throw 'free' money at colleges and then be amazed at why college costs increase and then throw more money at college and then be amazed so we throw more money at colleges and then costs increase so we have to throw more money... Each time we find that it is the government that is increasing the costs of college making it MORE necessary for government to get MORE involved and making it HARDER for families to afford it... Dangerous cycle. Government begets more government and creates more problems when it tries to solve problems. I offered to read the entirety of Sanders' bill if he would read Economics in one lesson, a quick read.
FREE BITCOIN! When you buy $100 Bitcoin through this link, you'll earn $10 of FREE Bitcoin! (IMMEDIATE 10% ROI!)
His response? I am quite familiar with the Mises Institute and Hazlitt's One Lesson. However, I'm cautious of lessons from the 1940s! You and I just don't agree on what's important or of value.
"What's important or valuable" isn't free college and free health care. It's the kind of world and indebted nation you're leaving to your children. They own this debt that we're ignoring because we aren't mature enough to live within our means. But we can't do that because politicians use 'emotions' to keep themselves in power, at our expense.
Our politicians are like children who keep passing the buck off on others because they won't be in office when it fails and promising 'free' stuff gets votes. Economics is Timeless
If we were in the stone age, Economics in One Lesson would still apply. Hazlitt doesn't talk about the results of what happened in the 1940s, he talks about the things we are doing today.
Chapter 1: The Lesson: The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate hut at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups. Chapter 2: The Broken Window fallacy (economy runs on consumption), basically the reason The Fed is drowning us in free money and zero% interest rates. Chapter 3:The Blessings of Destruction fallacy explains why economies boom during wartime and why the US is at perpetual war because peace isn't profitable. (Let me know if this seems relevant today) Chapter 4 Public Works mean Taxes- talks about the ills of an economy when taxation is used for public works compared to the free markets ability to do the same without taxation. Not applicable? 40% of the US GDP today is money spent by the US Government. Chapter 5: Taxes Discourage Production - Read this chapter with the understanding that EVERYTHING today is taxed. And before it's taxed, the money you've gotten through labor (income) is taxed. The stuff you made is taxed from many ingredients that were taxed and the people who bought it from you were taxed when buying it. Rewritten today, this chapter is it's own book. Chapter 6: Credit Diverts Production- "Actually, you know what," I tell my friend, "feel free not to read it because it's written in the 40's. But that's a cop-out". He's got children, it's his and my job to make the world better for them. If we can't read one book and challenge me to read something that might challenge my worldview and then follow on with an adult conversation, then we both can't continue this virtue-signaling where we think we're being moral and 'looking out for folks'. Government growth and deficit-spending hurts those that can't voice an opinion against it - Our Children
His response will likely be that I don't value Free Education or Free Healthcare or Free unlimited safety nets for everyone. He'd think I was immoral for not supporting it. Quite the opposite. The moral argument is to remove government obstacles to the free market and charity to support these causes.
Prices are high where government interferes and over-regulates the most. Why do our health care costs rise while Breast Implants and Lasik eye procedure costs plummet (while the quality increases)? One is highly regulated by the government, the other is not. The Free Market is competing for people's dollars so costs go down and quality goes up. Additional Reading
How Government Regulations Made Healthcare So Expensive
Economic interventionism Third-Payer Problem, AKA "If I go to a restaurant and my tab is picked up by someone else (Insurance Company), then I'm ordering the steak". PRICE CEILINGS AND PRICE FLOORS, a CENGAGE lesson in microeconomics. Rent-seeking - Wikipedia Follow libertyLOL on your favorite social media sites:FacebookYoutube Tumblr Pintrest Countable: Government Made Simple Steemit blog on a blockchain Patreon Gab.ai libertyLOL's Liberty Blog RSS Feed We also run a couple twitterbots which provide great quotes and book suggestions: Murray Rothbard Suggests Tom Woods Suggests Jason Stapleton Suggests Progressive Contradictions MORE FROM LIBERTYLOL:
0 Comments
.
Great article from a list I subscribe to over at Norada. Biggest failure I see in my clients is that they have no desire to better themselves or build Human Capital and expand their skillset. READ! Bottom line is that in 5-10 years, you will be the same person you are today with the exception of the books you read and the new people you meet. Try to be better 5-10 years from now. Keep growing. Read. Research shows that 88% of wealthy people devote at least 30 minutes a day to reading. If it works for them, it could work for you. Below, we’ve rounded up 12 of our favorite books, from personal finance classics to new releases. Here’s to a prosperous year! 1. “Think and Grow Rich” by Napoleon Hill Journalist Napoleon Hill researched more than 500 self-made millionaires, including Andrew Carnegie, Henry Ford, and Charles M. Schwab, before releasing this 1937 best-seller. Hill’s timeless personal fiance classic will help you understand that getting rich is more about mentality above anything else. In fact, he barely mentions the words “money,” “wealth,” or “finances.” Rather, he explains the psychological barriers that hold many people back from building fortunes — and teaches you how to start thinking your way to success. 2. “Business Adventures” by John Brooks Rich people tend to believe starting a business is the fastest way to make money. This read, endorsed by self-made billionaires Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, will teach you just how to do that … but not the way a conventional business book does. “Unlike a lot of today’s business writers, Brooks didn’t boil his work down into pat how-to lessons or simplistic explanations for success (How many times have you read that some company is taking off because they give their employees free lunch?)” Gates explains. “You won’t find any listicles in his work. Brooks wrote long articles that frame an issue, explore it in depth, introduce a few compelling characters, and show how things went for them.” Don’t let the 1969 publication date throw you off. While a lot has changed in the business world since the 1960’s, the fundamentals of building a strong business have not, Gates writes, adding, “Brooks’s deeper insights about business are just as relevant today as they were back then.” 3. “The Little Book of Common Sense Investing” by John C. Bogle One of the most effective ways to build wealth is to invest. At least, if you do it correctly. Bogle, founder of the Vanguard Group and creator of the world’s first index fund, details the simplest and most efficient investment strategy: Investing in low-cost index funds. Legendary investor Warren Buffett also says that every investor, large and small, should pick up a copy. 4. “The Essays of Warren Buffett” by Warren Buffett If a blurb by Buffett doesn’t entice you, get directly inside the billionaire’s head with this collection of letters and notes written by the “Oracle of Omaha.” The 700+ page book offers a clearer picture of Buffett’s philosophies on business, investing, and life. 5. “Tools of Titans” by Tim Ferriss What does it take to be a billionaire? Best-selling author Tim Ferriss’ latest book explores the daily routines and habits of celebrities, professional athletes, hedge fund managers and others. Ferriss went straight to the sources and interviewed more than 200 world-class performers. For a sneak peak, check out one, peculiar habit that the wealthiest, most successful people share. 6. “The Richest Man in Babylon” by George S. Clason Nearly a century ago, Clason revealed the “secret” to getting rich in his 1926 personal finance classic. It turns out that the “secret” isn’t much of one. All it takes to get rich is mastering a few simple concepts, such as paying yourself first and living within your means, which Clason preaches via a collection of entertaining parables. 7. “Rich Dad Poor Dad” by Robert Kiyosaki Kiyosaki shatters the myth that you need to earn a lot of money to get rich in this best-seller. By telling the story of two dads — his own, and the father of his best friend — he explains how to build wealth even with a small salary. Additionally, Kiyosaki challenges the popular belief that your house is an asset, details the differences between how rich people and average people choose to get paid, and emphasizes the critical difference between an asset and a liability. 8. “The Automatic Millionaire” by David Bach Self-made millionaire and financial advisor David Bach exposes a handful of money misconceptions in his easy-to-read best-seller. You don’t need a budget, you don’t need to make a lot of money, and you don’t even need willpower to accumulate a fortune, he writes. Research shows that 88% of wealthy people devote at least 30 minutes a day to reading. If it works for them, it could work for you. Below, we’ve rounded up 12 of our favorite books, from personal finance classic to new releases, to work your way through over the next 12 months. Here’s to a prosperous 2017! 9. “How Rich People Think” by Steve Siebold When Steve Siebold started interviewing hundreds of millionaires and billionaires, he was “completely broke and searching for answers about success I wasn’t finding in the classroom,” he writes. “What I discovered was, to get rich, I had to learn to think like a rich person. … Once I changed my thinking, the money started to flow.” Anyone has the opportunity to build wealth, he stresses in “How Rich People Think,” and it all starts with changing your mindset. For a sneak peak, check out the number one way rich people view the world differently than the average person. 10. “Be Obsessed or Be Average” by Grant Cardone As Siebold says, to get rich, you have to learn from those who have already done it. Self-made millionaire Grant Cardone knows a thing or two about managing money: The entrepreneur has built five companies and a multi-million dollar fortune. In the best-selling author’s latest book, he emphasizes that if you want real success, you have to be hungry, hyper-focused, even obsessed. While Cardone offers some contrarian advice — he discourages investing in a 401(k) plan and buying a home — his wealth-building strategies helped him go from broke at 25 to earning his first million by age 30. 11. “The Power of Broke” by Daymond John “Shark Tank” investor and entrepreneur Daymond John turned $40 worth of fabric into a $6 billion brand, FUBU. Along the way, he’s been rejected a lot and has lost a lot. Being broke, however, offers at least one major advantage: It sparks creativity and out-of-the-box solutions, he explains in “The Power of Broke.” Don’t write off your chances of wealth and success if your bank account is low, he suggests. Use it to your advantage. 12. “You Can Negotiate Anything” by Herb Cohen If you want to earn more in 2017, a simple yet often overlooked strategy is to negotiate your salary. If you’re nervous about approaching your boss to ask for a raise, try Cohen’s best-seller. It will help you get what you want, and what you deserve. For more great suggestions follow me on Twitter at Jason Stapleton Suggests and Tom Woods Suggests. You can also get two FREE Audiobooks by signing up with Audible on the link below: Follow libertyLOL on your favorite social media sites:FacebookYoutube Tumblr Pintrest Countable: Government Made Simple Steemit blog on a blockchain Patreon Gab.ai libertyLOL's Liberty Blog RSS Feed We also run a couple twitterbots which provide great quotes and book suggestions: Murray Rothbard Suggests Tom Woods Suggests Jason Stapleton Suggests Progressive Contradictions MORE FROM LIBERTYLOL:
You're looking at a guy who just got an audience at Yale -- Yale! -- to vote in favor of the right of state secession, by a margin of 2 to 1. Yes, I had some supporters in the audience. But an organizer said that even correcting for that, the outcome was still very surprising. Events at the Yale Political Union begin with a 20-30 minute statement by the speaker, and conclude by giving the speaker an opportunity to respond to the various speeches, pro and con, that students have given over the course of the night regarding the resolution at issue. My responses were the most enjoyable part of the night. Let's be blunt about this: while keeping the audience laughing, I pummeled my opponents into dust. "Man, that Woods sure has a high opinion of himself," you say. I'm just telling you what happened. I've got video coming. My favorite part involved the poor soul who was outraged that we hadn't discussed slavery, which "everybody knows" was at the root of battles between the states and the federal government. I then reviewed the history of that struggle, and rhetorically removed his kneecaps. It's nice to be able to walk into one of the most prestigious universities in the world and feel completely confident arguing a highly controversial position. You can have that nice feeling, too. No more thinking to yourself: I know I'm right, yet my co-workers left me stammering for a response. I've distilled the knowledge it's taken me decades to acquire into on-the-go courses you can listen to in your car. Today is the five-year anniversary of my Liberty Classroom, where my (trustworthy and awesome) colleagues and I teach the history and economics they kept from you. In honor of that anniversary, I'm taking 200 smackers off the Master, lifetime membership to the site. That's all 18 courses (that you can watch or listen to whenever you want), Q&A forums, live events, and more, plus every single course we ever create. This ain't never happening again, period. As a bonus, you get all the courses I created for the Ron Paul Curriculum (that's 400+ videos, also available in audio format). My course on government distills 20 years of learning into a one-semester course. Savings: 19 1/2 years. Plus, again today only, I'm also throwing in signed, personalized copies of FOUR of my books: The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History (aNew York Times bestseller), Who Killed the Constitution?, Real Dissent, and 33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask. Could there be a better treat for yourself, or for that student in your life? The link: http://www.LibertyClassroom.com The clock is ticking.... "Get the equivalent of a Ph.D. in libertarian thought and free-market economics online for just 24 cents a day."
Tom Woods has been tremendous in advocating for the teaching and spreading of libertarian ideas and principles. He has even pushed others to start their own blogs to keep the press on these ideas.
The list below is a collection of blogs, podcasts, publications and websites that he is owed direct credit (or blame) for their launch. You'll find a lot of similar blogs that support the same principles we write about here at libertyLOL.com. You'll also find some that represent the author's other passions outside of the Liberty message. Feel free to peruse and support these sites however you can!
Follow libertyLOL on your favorite social media sites:FacebookYoutube Tumblr Pintrest Countable: Government Made Simple Steemit blog on a blockchain Patreon Gab.ai libertyLOL's Liberty Blog RSS Feed We also run a couple twitterbots which provide great quotes and book suggestions: Murray Rothbard Suggests Tom Woods Suggests Jason Stapleton Suggests Progressive Contradictions MORE FROM LIBERTYLOL:
On my Twitter feed the other day, someone posted a photo of a page in a textbook he was forced to use in college.
"If you are a libertarian or an anarchist who believes states are a threat to freedom, you should consider moving to Somalia." That's the first sentence on the page. Subtle. (The offending book, if you're curious, is The Good Society: An Introduction to Comparative Politics, by Alan Draper and Ansil Ramsay.) Here we have an academic textbook literally urging libertarians to move to Somalia if they hate states so much -- in other words, it's written at the level of "You like carrots? Why don't you marry one" from third grade. Seriously, this is exactly the same dumb-guy argument I might encounter on Twitter. "Without a state," we read, Somalia under statelessness descended into a Hobbesian "state of nature where life is nasty, brutish, and short." Then, after two whole paragraphs on the situation in Somalia, we get study questions. If you look really, really closely, you may detect a very slight bias in these questions. VERY SLIGHT, I tell you. "1. Which is preferable, bad government or no government?" "2. Why hasn't Somalia without a state become the paradise that libertarians anticipate?" Now for one thing, was there ever a libertarian who predicted that a stateless Somalia -- or a stateless anywhere else -- would be a "paradise"? More importantly, if we're going to get a picture that's worth anything of life in Somalia without the state, the correct comparison to make is not between Somalia and the United States (the comparison most writers like this are implicitly making), but between Somalia and comparable African countries. And on that front, Somalia during its stateless period comes out pretty darn well. In most metrics of living standards it held steady or improved. In the Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization in 2008, Professor Benjamin Powell and his colleagues wrote: "This paper’s main contribution to the literature has been to compare Somalia’s living standards to those of 41 other sub-Saharan African countries both before and after the collapse of the national government. We find that Somalia’s living standards have generally improved and that they compare relatively favorably with many existing African states. Importantly, we find that Somali living standards have often improved, not just in absolute terms, but also relative to other African countries since the collapse of the Somali central government." Economist Peter Leeson, in Anarchy Unbound (Cambridge University Press), reports similar findings -- yes, Somalia ranked low in some categories during the stateless period, but that's where it ranked before statelessness, too, and if anything it made progress in those categories (life expectancy is up, for instance, and infant mortality is down). Does our textbook cite any of this? The question answers itself. The only person quoted in the book is a New York Times reporter. I think I'll take Ben Powell and Pete Leeson. Of course, smashing p.c. textbook propaganda is what we specialize in at my Liberty Classroom. Prepare yourself for some truth bombs: http://www.LibertyClassroom.com Tom Woods "Get the equivalent of a Ph.D. in libertarian thought and free-market economics online for just 24 cents a day." Follow libertyLOL on your favorite social media sites:FacebookYoutube Tumblr Pintrest Countable: Government Made Simple Steemit blog on a blockchain Patreon Gab.ai libertyLOL's Liberty Blog RSS Feed We also run a couple twitterbots which provide great quotes and book suggestions: Murray Rothbard Suggests Tom Woods Suggests Jason Stapleton Suggests Progressive Contradictions MORE FROM LIBERTYLOL:
FREE BITCOIN! When you buy $100 Bitcoin through this link, you'll earn $10 of FREE Bitcoin! (IMMEDIATE 10% ROI!)
Henry Hazlitt’s 1946 book Economics in One Lesson is regarded as a classic introduction to free market economics. Nobel prize winning economist Milton Friedman said of the book: “[Hazlitt’s] explanation of how a price system works is a true classic: timeless, correct, painlessly instructive.” The book’s titular lesson argues: The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups. The entire premise of the book is found in this one sentence, and the chapters that follow are filled with examples of what happens when economic central planners focus on policy effects to one group while ignoring the secondary effects of their policies on all other groups. Hazlitt goes on to explain, in Chapter 17, the effects of governmental price fixing: Let us first see what happens when the government tries to keep the price of a single commodity, or a small group of commodities, below the price that would be set in a free competitive market. The argument for holding down the price of these goods will run something like this: If we leave beef (let us say) to the mercies of the free market, the price will be pushed up by competitive bidding so that only the rich will get it. People will get beef not in proportion to their need, but only in proportion to their purchasing power. If we keep the price down, everyone will get his fair share. The first thing to be noticed about this argument is that if it is valid the policy adopted is inconsistent and timorous. For if purchasing power rather than need determines the distribution of beef at a market price of $2.25 cents a pound, it would also determine it, though perhaps to a slightly smaller degree, at, say, a legal “ceiling” price of $1.50 cents a pound. The purchasing-power-rather-than-need argument, in fact, holds as long as we charge anything for beef whatever. It would cease to apply only if beef were given away. A similar situation exists in Bitcoin where the independent development team known as Bitcoin Core is artificially suppressing the cost of full-node operation — in effect, impeding free market forces. “This is for the benefit of the consumers,” they say, ignoring the effects of this policy on the >99.9% of Bitcoin users who do not run a full node. As Hazlitt notes, this line of thinking is inconsistent because, regardless of the price at which something is fixed, there will always be people who cannot afford it. The only sound logical conclusions to be drawn from this line of thinking are to either set the price at zero or to allow the price to be dictated by the free market. More tenuous still is the supposition that current full node users will be “priced out” by a block size increase.
Not your typical full node users.
But schemes for maximum price-fixing usually begin as efforts to “keep the cost of living from rising.” And so their sponsors unconsciously assume that there is something peculiarly “normal” or sacrosanct about the market price at the moment from which their control starts. That starting or previous price is regarded as “reasonable,” and any price above that as “unreasonable,” regardless of changes in the conditions of production or demand since that starting price was first established. Bitcoin Core’s central planning inherently declares the cost of node operation today to be reasonable, but this is done without providing any hard data about which users are running a node, much less what their needs are, which costs they can bear, and so on. In discussing this subject, there is no point in assuming a price control that would fix prices exactly where a free market would place them in any case. That would be the same as having no price control at all. We must assume that the purchasing power in the hands of the public is greater than the supply of goods available, and that prices are being held down by the government below the levels to which a free market would put them. Now we cannot hold the price of any commodity below its market level without in time bringing about two consequences. The first is to increase the demand for that commodity. Because the commodity is cheaper, people are both tempted to buy, and can afford to buy, more of it. The second consequence is to reduce the supply of that commodity. Because people buy more, the accumulated supply is more quickly taken from the shelves of merchants. But in addition to this, production of that commodity is discouraged. Profit margins are reduced or wiped out. The marginal producers are driven out of business. Even the most efficient producers may be called upon to turn out their product at a loss. This happened in World War II when slaughterhouses were required by the Office of Price Administration to slaughter and process meat for less than the cost to them of cattle on the hoof and the labor of slaughter and processing. Centralizing Bitcoin In Bitcoin, block space is the commodity supply being artificially restricted. The producers of this commodity are the miners (although they do not produce a physical good, the analogy holds). Restricting the availability of the block space commodity indeed discourages the further production of such. New entrants into the Bitcoin mining business are thereby disincentivized: if the cost of producing a bitcoin has already reached its marginal level, then the profits available to new market entrants are not great enough to incentivize the risk-taking required of new mining operations. By dictating such policies and not allowing goods to be subject to the free-market-at-work, Core discourages new competitors and directly contributes to the centralization of mining! If we did nothing else, therefore, the consequence of fixing a maximum price for a particular commodity would be to bring about a shortage of that commodity. But this is precisely the opposite of what the government regulators originally wanted to do. For it is the very commodities selected for maximum price-fixing that the regulators most want to keep in abundant supply. But when they limit the wages and the profits of those who make these commodities, without also limiting the wages and profits of those who make luxuries or semiluxuries, they discourage the production of the price-controlled necessities while they relatively stimulate the production of less essential goods. The regulators wish to keep the ability of consumers to perform Bitcoin transactions in abundant supply, while simultaneously restricting the available supply of on-chain Bitcoin transactions. Thus the production of “luxuries” or less essential goods is stimulated: Lightning networks, sidechains, centralized clearinghouses, and altcoins. More foolish than the governmental central planners in Hazlitt’s example, many of the goods that Core assumes will pick up the slack for scarcity of on-chain transactions do not even exist yet. Some of these consequences in time become apparent to the regulators, who then adopt various other devices and controls in an attempt to avert them. Among these devices are rationing, cost-control, subsidies, and universal price-fixing. The cost of making a normal Bitcoin transaction becomes too high, so the cost of a segwit transaction shall then be fixed at one-fourth the cost of a regular Bitcoin transaction, Core has decided. Problem solved? Hazlitt explains, When it becomes obvious that a shortage of some commodity is developing as a result of a price fixed below the market, rich consumers are accused of taking “more than their fair share;” or, if it is a raw material that enters into manufacture, individual firms are accused of “hoarding” it. The government then adopts a set of rules concerning who shall have priority in buying that commodity, or to whom and in what quantities it shall be allocated, or how it shall be rationed. If a rationing system is adopted, it means that each consumer can have only a certain maximum supply, no matter how much he is willing to pay for more. We can see this today in Bitcoin when certain transactions are accused of being “spam” or of taking unfair advantage of the limited block space commodity. Nevermind that these so-called spam transactions pay the fair market rate to be included, or that these transactions are slapped with the spam epithet on no grounds other than their frequency or their size. The government may try to meet this difficulty through subsidies. It recognizes, for example, that when it keeps the price of milk or butter below the level of the market, or below the relative level at which it fixes other prices, a shortage may result because of lower wages or profit margins for the production of milk or butter as compared with other commodities. Therefore the government attempts to compensate for this by paying a subsidy to the milk and butter producers. Passing over the administrative difficulties involved in this, and assuming that the subsidy is just enough to assure the desired relative production of milk and butter, it is clear that, though the subsidy is paid to producers, those who are really being subsidized are the consumers. For the producers are on net balance getting no more for their milk and butter than if they had been allowed to charge the free market price in the first place; but the consumers are getting their milk and butter at a great deal below the free market price. They are being subsidized to the extent of the difference — that is, by the amount of subsidy paid ostensibly to the producers. Again, the consumer is told that the price controls are for their own benefit: “Why are you concerned? You’ll be able to make transactions for less than you can now!” But the producers are on net balance getting no more for their block space than if they had been allowed to charge the free market price in the first place. Worse still, if all Bitcoin transaction activity switched to the segwit format overnight, the miners are now being paid the same as before while bearing four times the burden of resources required. That Core does not consider this outcome disastrous is only a testament to the trivial cost of node operation even as resource requirements are increased. Now unless the subsidized commodity is also rationed, it is those with the most purchasing power that can buy most of it. This means that they are being subsidized more than those with less purchasing power. Who subsidizes the consumers will depend upon the incidence of taxation. But men in their role of taxpayers will be subsidizing themselves in their role of consumers. It becomes a little difficult to trace in this maze precisely who is subsidizing whom. What is forgotten is that subsidies are paid for by someone, and that no method has been discovered by which the community gets something for nothing. Stunting Growth Treating segregated witness as a capacity increase, as the Bitcoin Core development team does, ignores that the subsidized commodity is still kept in restricted supply. By not allowing the supply to grow in line with what the free market is capable of providing, discounting segwit transactions allows only for a bit of breathing room until those transactions also end up in short supply and begin rising in cost, as is happening with regular transactions today. Price-fixing may often appear for a short period to be successful. It can seem to work well for a while, particularly in wartime, when it is supported by patriotism and a sense of crisis. But the longer it is in effect the more its difficulties increase. When prices are arbitrarily held down by government compulsion, demand is chronically in excess of supply. We have seen that if the government attempts to prevent a shortage of a commodity by reducing also the prices of the labor, raw materials and other factors that go into its cost of production, it creates a shortage of these in turn. But not only will the government, if it pursues this course, find it necessary to extend price control more and more downwards, or “vertically”; it will find it no less necessary to extend price control “horizontally.” If we ration one commodity, and the public cannot get enough of it, though it still has excess purchasing power, it will turn to some substitute. The rationing of each commodity as it grows scarce, in other words, must put more and more pressure on the unrationed commodities that remain. If we assume that the government is successful in its efforts to prevent black markets (or at least prevents them from developing on a sufficient scale to nullify its legal prices), continued price control must drive it to the rationing of more and more commodities. This rationing cannot stop with consumers. In World War II it did not stop with consumers. It was applied first of all, in fact, in the allocation of raw materials to producers. Assuming that the public has a fixed or growing demand for using money transfer systems, of which Bitcoin is merely one type, then the end result of restricting the available supply of Bitcoin transactions is that more and more pressure is put on unrationed commodities. Whether those unrationed commodities are traditional payment methods or altcoins, the end result spells disaster for Bitcoin. The natural consequence of a thoroughgoing over-all price control which seeks to perpetuate a given historic price level, in brief, must ultimately be a completely regimented economy. Wages would have to be held down as rigidly as prices. Labor would have to be rationed as ruthlessly as raw materials. The end result would be that the government would not only tell each consumer precisely how much of each commodity he could have; it would tell each manufacturer precisely what quantity of each raw material he could have and what quantity of labor. Competitive bidding for workers could no more be tolerated than competitive bidding for materials. The result would be a petrified totalitarian economy, with every business firm and every worker at the mercy of the government, and with a final abandonment of all the traditional liberties we have known. The Bitcoin economy, unlike state economies, is thankfully one of voluntary participation. While the end result of price controls, a petrified totalitarian economy, will be the same, the consumers in the Bitcoin economy have a choice and do not need to remain participants. Packing up and moving to another cryptocurrency is far simpler than packing up and moving to a country with more favorable economic policies, and this is exactly what will happen (we are already seeing it happen with the news of Circle abandoning Bitcoin this week). Attempting to centrally plan Bitcoin’s underlying economics, as the Bitcoin Core developers do today, is guaranteed to lead Bitcoin down the path of irrelevance. This first appeared at Medium.com John BlockeJohn Blocke writes at Medium.com. This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.
FREE BITCOIN! When you buy $100 Bitcoin through this link, you'll earn $10 of FREE Bitcoin! (IMMEDIATE 10% ROI!)
Follow libertyLOL on your favorite social media sites:FacebookYoutube Tumblr Pintrest Countable: Government Made Simple Steemit blog on a blockchain Patreon Gab.ai libertyLOL's Liberty Blog RSS Feed We also run a couple twitterbots which provide great quotes and book suggestions: Murray Rothbard Suggests Tom Woods Suggests Jason Stapleton Suggests Progressive Contradictions MORE FROM LIBERTYLOL:
It can be easy and tempting, especially during a presidential campaign, to listen only to opinions that mirror and fortify one's own. That’s not ideal, because it eliminates learning and makes it impossible for people to understand what they dismiss as “the other side.” If you think that Barack Obama has been a terrific president (as the author does) and that Hillary Clinton would be an excellent successor (as he also does), then you might want to consider the following books, to help you to understand why so many of your fellow citizens disagree with you:
Having read these books, you might continue to believe that progressives are more often right than wrong, and that in general, the U.S. would be better off in the hands of Democrats than Republicans. But you’ll have a much better understanding of the counterarguments -- and on an issue or two, and maybe more, you’ll probably end up joining those on what you once saw as “the other side.” To contact the author of this story: Cass R Sunstein at csunstein1@bloomberg.net To contact the editor responsible for this story: Christopher Flavelle at cflavelle@bloomberg.net Originally published at Bloomberg.com MORE FROM LIBERTYLOL:
1. Liberty Maniacs
Liberty Maniacs is a great resource for hilarious political T-shirts, coffee mugs, hoodies, etc. They've got drinkware, stuff for kids, a "dirty jokes" section. Pretty much anything you need. Buy something for that White Elephant party you've got coming up.
Order here. Black Friday deals: 25% off all orders $75+ with code Black16. 20% off all orders $35+ with code Black2016. 10% off all orders code 10Black16. Might I suggest the Donald Trump "We Shall Overcomb" T shirt? 2. Liberty Classroom
What every libertarian needs to know to articulate the free-market point of view to unsympathetic audiences
Each month, for less than the price of a movie ticket, Liberty Classroom gives you access to stimulating, though-provoking lectures and discussions on the key ideas of libertarianism, capitalism, and free-market economics. Our vast library of audio and video classes includes 30 lectures on conservatism and libertarianism … 59 lectures on the history of political thought … 31 lectures on what’s wrong with textbook economics 20 lectures on logic … and much more – hundreds in all. Black Friday Deals: Basic one-year membership for $62 (regular price $119!) Basic one-year membership plus for $85 (regular price $149!) Master LIFETIME membership for $327 (regular price $597!) *You can aso purchase as a gift subscription– great Christmas gift for the liberty lover in your life ? Check it out here. 3. Amazon
There are great deals on Amazon through Cyber Monday. If you are buying anything from Amazon, please use our affiliate link: http://amzn.to/29NBa27
Click here to see Jason Stapleton's recommended book list which includes numerous books on Liberty, Politics, Economy, Markets and even some fiction! I'm personally buying Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt for a couple family members of mine. They've even got it on AUDIOBOOK! Follow libertyLOL on your favorite social media sites:FacebookYoutube Tumblr Pintrest Countable: Government Made Simple Steemit blog on a blockchain Patreon Gab.ai libertyLOL's Liberty Blog RSS Feed We also run a couple twitterbots which provide great quotes and book suggestions: Murray Rothbard Suggests Tom Woods Suggests Jason Stapleton Suggests Progressive Contradictions MORE FROM LIBERTYLOL:
How's this for a novelty: Tom Woods graduated from Harvard University and managed to keep his sanity.
It wasn't easy. One of his professors required him to buy his books from a store called Revolution Books. The communist mass murderers of the 20th century adorned the walls. He refused to do it. Every night at dinner there were people selling the Workers Vanguard -- an openly communist newspaper -- outside the dining hall. Tom debated them, but as you can imagine, it was pretty hopeless. Tom would up graduating with a degree in history with high honors. He went on to get his Ph.D. from Columbia University. But you know what? He had to learn an awful lot on his own. There was plenty of non-p.c. history he was never going to learn in a Harvard classroom. And this is a major reason people educate their children at home: they want them to learn the truth. America's universities -- not to mention our high schools and junior high schools -- aren't exactly the best sources for that. Nearly five years ago now Tom decided to fight back. He created Liberty Classroom, where people can learn the real history and economics they won't get in traditional school. The election has brought out the crazies, and you no doubt want to win all those debates you're getting dragged into. But do you find that although you know you're right, you just don't have the information you need at your fingertips? Never lose another debate. Liberty Classroom has 17 courses (and they're always adding more), plus Q&A forums where you can get all your questions answered by some of the smartest, most accomplished scholars in the liberty movement. Become a better debater while driving your car. Plus our Q&A forums: imagine, when you're stumped in a debate, being able to get your questions answered by Dr. Robert Murphy, one of the world's most prolific free-market economists, or Dr. Kevin Gutzman, author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution, or by Dr. Woods himself? For Black Friday Liberty Classroom is having its biggest sale of year but it's only Today through Cyber Monday. The universities have become propaganda factories. Tom is fighting back. Be a part of it: Check out more HERE. LibertyLOL Follow libertyLOL on your favorite social media sites:FacebookYoutube Tumblr Pintrest Countable: Government Made Simple Steemit blog on a blockchain Patreon Gab.ai libertyLOL's Liberty Blog RSS Feed We also run a couple twitterbots which provide great quotes and book suggestions: Murray Rothbard Suggests Tom Woods Suggests Jason Stapleton Suggests Progressive Contradictions MORE FROM LIBERTYLOL:
"Get the equivalent of a Ph.D. in libertarian thought and free-market economics online for just 24 cents a day."
Most of us learned politically correct U.S. history in school. The economics was at least as bad. It's never too late to learn the truth. At Liberty Classroom, you can learn real U.S. history, Western civilization, and free-market economics from professors you can trust. Short on time? No problem. You can learn in your car. FIND OUT MORE HERE How are you going to feel when you wake up on November 9th and either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump is the next president-elect of the United States? Although many of us might predict that we will feel awful, our prediction is probably wrong. Most of us discount our ability to bounce back from hard times and cope with problems. Psychologists Tim Wilson and Daniel Gilbert, in their paper Affective Forecasting, found that people were much less impacted than they thought they would be by the 2000 election between Al Gore and George Bush. Bush supporters were far less happy than they thought they would be when Bush was elected; when Gore lost, his supporters were far less unhappy than they had predicted they would be. Impact bias is what psychologists call the human mind’s tendency “to overestimate the emotional impact an event will have on us, either positively or negatively.” In their book Happiness: Unlocking the Mysteries of Psychological Wealth, psychology professors Ed Diener and Robert Biswas-Diener observe, “A major reason we overestimate the impact of the things that will happen to us just around the bend is that we underestimate our own resilience. Most of us discount our ability to bounce back from hard times and cope with problems.” For those who value freedom the coming years are likely to be challenging. We can all meet that challenge better by increasing our resiliency. Resiliency is a renewable resource; if we are currently low on resiliency, we can get more of it. Here are three ways to increase resiliency in our current polarized political environment. In her book Rapt: Attention and the Focused Life, Winnifred Gallagher explains psychology’s “negative bias theory.” Simply, “we pay more attention to unpleasant feelings such as fear, or anger and sadness because they’re simply more powerful than the agreeable sort.” Gripping our negative thinking is like grinding cut glass in our closed fist and then wondering why we are bleeding. As bad news rolls in in the coming years, it will be natural to have thoughts such as: “Freedom is lost for good.” “The economy will never recover from these terrible policies.” “I fear for my children and grandchildren.” It will be common to have angry thoughts of blame towards politicians who have, over many decades, allowed the principles that support freedom and prosperity to erode. We can have those thoughts, but we don’t have to allow those thoughts to have us. Research shows that trying to suppress unwanted thoughts leads to more unwanted thoughts. But we don’t have to fuse with our thinking in this way. According to physician and therapist Russ Harris, in his book The Happiness Trap, when we fuse with our thinking, we give these thoughts our full attention and they become all-consuming. We may find ourselves spending hours a day reading articles about why Trump or Clinton is a terrible person doing terrible things to the country. We may frequently check our Facebook feed and feel satisfaction when someone posts a denunciation that confirms our thinking. We can defuse our thinking and simply allow our upsetting thoughts to pass harmlessly through our heads. We don’t need to block our thinking or change our thinking; we just need to release our grip on our thinking. Gripping our negative thinking is like grinding cut glass in our closed fist and then wondering why we are bleeding. Release the glass, and the hand will begin to heal. Release negative thoughts, and new and more positive thoughts will naturally arise. Some people believe it’s a good thing to focus on their negative thinking. They tell me, “After all, why else would I be motivated to work to change the situation?” Often, I hear this basic confusion. The truth is, the more you are consumed by negative thinking, the less responsive you are. Why? Your mind is already occupied by the negative thoughts; there simply is no bandwidth left with which to respond to life based upon your highest values. Negative thinking lowers your resiliency. In her book Positivity, psychology professor Barbara Fredrickson notes, “the most pivotal difference between those with and without resilient personality styles was their positivity.” Positivity doesn’t mean having your head in the sand, it consists of a “whole range of positive emotions — from appreciation to love, from amusement to joy, from hope to gratitude, and then some.” Live Your Highest Values Political realities may be unpleasant, but so what? What does that have to do with our moment by moment decision to live by our highest values? The values by which we live our lives in the coming years will help determine the future of liberty. Can a President Clinton or President Trump impact our decisions to value honesty, accountability, responsibility, trustworthiness, or curiosity? Can the president impact our decision to continue to learn? To be grateful? To be generous? In his book Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life, psychologist Steven Hayes provides a useful definition of values as “intentional qualities that join together a string of moments into a meaningful path.” Values are “unfolding actions.” “If they are something you do (or the quality of something you do), they never end. You are never finished.” For example, if one of your values is to be a loving person, “this doesn’t mean that as soon as you love someone for a few months you are done… There is more loving to do — always.” In the same way, valuing freedom is a direction for the path we take. Human progress has never steadily climbed without interruptions. However, the values by which we live our lives in the coming years will help determine the future of liberty. Increased levels of resiliency are generated by living from our highest values. If we get trapped by our thinking about the political reality in which we are living, we begin to live our life based on our feelings and not on our values and principles. If we don’t understand that feelings are transitory and unreliable, feelings can occupy our mind and depress our resiliency to life’s challenges. In Shakespeare’s As You Like It, Duke Senior, his throne usurped, has been exiled into the Forest of Arden. Even so, he allows, life is not all bad, for “sweet are the uses of adversity.” Duke Senior does not say he’s glad for adversity; but he prefers to use his adverse circumstances wisely, rather than to spend his life complaining. Respect that Others See the World Differently Getting upset that others “don’t get it” reduces your capacity to be resilient. After election day you will encounter colleagues, friends, and family members who are happy about the results. Most of these people are not stupid or on the government’s payroll. Some of the people we criticize for their political views may be more responsible, more productive, and happier than we are. You can silently or publicly berate them, or you can take another path. You can be curious about their beliefs that drive how they see the world. Your respectful curiosity will help you be a more effective communicator of your own ideas. Everyone interprets the events of life differently, or as educator Jane Nelsen puts it in her book Serenity, through “the filters of his or her unique [thought system]. Everyone has personal memories, or interpretations and beliefs that act like filters through which present events are seen.” If we understand that interpreting the world differently is normal, we could be more curious about how others see the world. As we truly listen to others with compassion and respect, others are more likely to listen to us. I recommend that you become a student of the beliefs of other people. Everyone thinks they are seeing the world logically, and only by addressing their beliefs with respect will they ever change their mind. Getting upset that others “don’t get it” dampens the spirit, corrodes relationships, and reduces your capacity to be resilient to life. Remember, in America’s DNA is the idea that everyone has the potential to lead a responsible and happy life. Today, some may not understand the principles that promote liberty and prosperity; but increase your resiliency today and perhaps you will play a part in helping them understand those principles tomorrow Barry BrownsteinBarry Brownstein is professor emeritus of economics and leadership at the University of Baltimore. He is the author of The Inner-Work of Leadership. He delivers leadership workshops to organizations and blogs at BarryBrownstein.com, and Giving up Control. This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article. More from libertyLOL: |
Search the
libertyLOL Archives: Archives
December 2020
Search and Shop on Amazon.com!
Tom Wood's Liberty Classroom"Get the equivalent of a Ph.D. in libertarian thought and free-market economics online for just 24 cents a day...."
At Liberty Classroom, you can learn real U.S. history, Western civilization, and free-market economics from professors you can trust. Short on time? No problem. You can learn in your car. Find out more! |