MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Talking About Stoicism 151 Aging and Progress

Posted by M. C. on December 3, 2021

Make progress

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Watch “‘Between A Rock & A Hard Place’: The Fed Is Being Crushed” on YouTube

Posted by M. C. on December 3, 2021

“Attempting to micromanage human economic life by counterfeiting money and manipulating interest rates is a fool’s errand. Ultimately, those who attempt it must corner themselves into an impossible situation. Nothing they do works. Everything they do fails. The costs of keeping the illusion going become overwhelming. Don’t miss today’s Liberty Report!”

https://youtu.be/t4asH6ZJ3o4

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Understanding Why Government Policies Fail | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on December 3, 2021

This criticism is the opposite of the truth, and Galles here quotes Murray Rothbard; “The ‘fit’ in the jungle are those most adept at the exercise of brute force. The ‘fit’ on the market are those most adept in the service of society” (quoted on p. 9).

https://mises.org/wire/understanding-why-government-policies-fail

David Gordon

Pathways to Policy Failure
by Gary Galles
American Institute for Economic Research, 2020, 490 pp.

Gary Galles, an economics professor at Pepperdine University, has in this outstanding book shown how to apply basic economic principles to evaluate concrete policy proposals. In doing so, he offers a comprehensive defense of the free market and criticism of government programs that interfere with it. Galles combines two qualities rarely found together, and it is this combination that makes his book notable. Like Leonard Read, of whom he is a biographer, he can convey free market principles in a simple and memorable way; and he also has a detailed knowledge of the costs and benefits of the policies he analyzes. Pathways to Policy Failure consists of 137 of his articles, divided into four sections, though there is considerable overlapping between them: “Underselling Self-Government: Overselling the State”; “Lax Language”; “Measurements You Can’t Count On”; and “Evaluating Policy Paths.” In what follows, I’ll be able to discuss only a few topics in the book.

You might think it obvious that the best way to evaluate an economic system is through its results, but many critics of the free market are not satisfied with the prosperity it has given us. They claim it rests on base motives and actions. It operates, they say, through a Darwinian struggle in which the strong exterminate the weak. This criticism is the opposite of the truth, and Galles here quotes Murray Rothbard; “The ‘fit’ in the jungle are those most adept at the exercise of brute force. The ‘fit’ on the market are those most adept in the service of society” (quoted on p. 9).

Success in the market depends on how well producers are able to satisfy the demands of consumers. For this reason, the free market is far more under popular control than is government policy in a democracy. People have different preferences, and there is no way for a political system to establish a consensus that everybody will accept. Even a democracy that works well, if there is such a thing, can satisfy only the preferences of the winners of elections. In the free market, by contrast, those whose preferences few share can obtain what they want, so long as businesses can respond to their demand.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Fleeing Fox, Hayes and Goldberg Demonstrate the Iron Law of Con Inc. | Chronicles

Posted by M. C. on December 3, 2021

Goldberg and Hayes are the beneficiaries of the iron law Conservative Inc.: left-wing deviationists from the conservative party line will never under any circumstances be expelled from the conservative establishment, unless they leave of their own accord.

https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/blog/fleeing-fox–hayes-and-goldberg-demonstrate-the-iron-law-of-con-inc-/

By Paul Gottfried

I was recently delighted with receiving a gift for my 80th birthday in the form of vindication, when my iron law of Conservative Inc. behavior was fully confirmed. This happened when Stephen Hayes and Jonah Goldberg decided to dissociate themselves from Fox News because of the network’s association with Tucker Carlson, who has maintained—with ample evidence—that FBI agents were involved in the events of Jan. 6, 2021.

Hayes and Goldberg are both fixtures of the anti-Donald Trump website The Dispatch and formerly of Fox’s “All-Stars” team of panelists. Although they have raged quite tediously against the former president and against anyone who has defended him, neither has been removed from “conservative” TV. Quite the contrary! Goldberg has been free to express his torturously constructed views on what is considered by some to be the indispensable conservative channel. Unfortunately, this opinionator typically sounds like a constipated version of what the listener hears more crisply stated on CNN. But Goldberg has enjoyed the beaming, sympathetic support of Bret Baier, who is another inveterate Trump-hater, each time he holds forth.

To their credit, Goldberg and Hayes have left Fox of their own accord. Though Fox executives have since said they didn’t plan to renew their contracts next year anyway, I doubt this is true. Goldberg and Hayes are the beneficiaries of the iron law Conservative Inc.: left-wing deviationists from the conservative party line will never under any circumstances be expelled from the conservative establishment, unless they leave of their own accord. Whether it’s David Brooks, Bill Kristol, or Max Boot, any conservative celebrity who situates himself to the left of where the movement has momentarily positioned itself will suffer no dire consequences. He will instead continue to be feted and put on public display by party apparatchiks until he spits in their faces and emphatically demands to be taken off their celebrity list.

In all probability Hayes and Goldberg will find multiple places on leftist channels, where, like Kristol and Boot, they will be generously rewarded for their left views. It’s doubtful that Fox will lose “balance” because of their departure. Fox’s directors are already paying a king’s fortune to keep other leftists on hand, like Juan Williams and Richard Fowler, with whom house conservatives can hold canned dialogues.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Tips on Fake News for Twitter’s New CEO – Taki’s Magazine – Taki’s Magazine

Posted by M. C. on December 3, 2021

Hey! That reminds me — the Jussie Smollett trial kicks off this week!

https://www.takimag.com/article/tips-on-fake-news-for-twitters-new-ceo/print

Ann Coulter

Twitter announced this week that Parag Agrawal will be the social media giant’s new CEO. (This is an incredible achievement for the Indian-born Agrawal, given that the selection process heavily favored people born in India.) He has a difficult job ahead of him, trying to maintain the site’s reputation for fast-paced, free-ranging commentary, while also keeping the platform free of dangerous misinformation.

Agrawal is probably aware of the mounds — and I mean mounds — of irrefutable SCIENTIFIC PROOF that conservatives are gullible paranoids, constantly falling for misinformation and hoaxes.

For example, consider these 100% objective academic studies: “All this blithering idiocy, about something that was an obvious hoax from day one, was posted on the very social media site that Agrawal is about to oversee.”

Conservatives More Likely To Believe False News, New Study Finds — Maggie Fox, CNN, June 2, 2021

Return of the Paranoid Style: Fake News Is Fooling More Conservatives Than Liberals. Why? — The Economist, June 3, 2020

Conservatives’ Susceptibility to Political Misperceptions — R. Kelly Garrett and Robert M. Bond, Science Advances, June 2, 2021

On the other hand, now that I think about it, even powerful Democrats, establishment news organizations and influential celebrities have been known to err when evaluating the news.

Hey! That reminds me — the Jussie Smollett trial kicks off this week! (It’s a good thing I remembered that while writing this column.)

Smollett, you will recall, is the half-black, half-Jewish gay actor formerly of the Fox TV show “Empire” who claimed, back in January 2019, that he left his Chicago apartment at 2 a.m. in the middle of a polar vortex to get a sandwich, whereupon he was viciously set upon by two white guys shouting racist and homophobic slurs. (Despite being racist, homophobic white guys, they were huge fans of “Empire,” recognizing Smollett immediately.)

They beat him about the face, put a noose around his neck and doused him with a “chemical substance.” (Yes, as luck would have it, the white guys happened to be carrying a noose and chemical agents. Duh. It was a polar vortex.)

For extra bonus authenticity, Smollett said his assailants yelled, “This is MAGA country!” Did I mention this was in Chicago? (Trump: 12.4% of the 2016 vote.)

Even a skeptic would have to admit, Smollett’s account had the ring of truth. When you add (to an already highly believable story) the fact that there have been dozens of “noose incidents” over the past few decades, and every single one of them, without exception, turned out to be a hoax, his narrative only becomes more convincing!

To leap ahead to the conclusion, the Chicago Police Department spent 3,000 man-hours carefully examining surveillance tapes of the neighborhood where the incident had occurred and determined that — please sit down for this — the “attackers” turned out to be two Nigerian extras on “Empire.” (That does explain how they were able to recognize him.) After their arrests, they admitted that Smollett had paid them $3,500 to stage the attack.

Liberals, those calm, dispassionate seekers after truth — not conservative dolts, with their “paranoid style” and “susceptibility” to “false news” — reacted to Smollett’s alleged attack with the cool detachment we have come to expect from them.

“What happened today to @JussieSmollett must never be tolerated in this country. We must stand up and demand that we no longer give this hate safe harbor; that homophobia and racism have no place on our streets or in our hearts. We are with you, Jussie.” — Joe Biden |

“@JussieSmollett is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know … This was an attempted modern-day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.” — then-Sen. Kamala Harris

“The racist, homophobic attack … is an affront to our humanity. No one should be attacked for who they are or whom they love. I pray that Jussie has a speedy recovery & that justice is served. May we all commit to ending this hate once & for all.” — Rep. Nancy Pelosi

“This is a sickening and outrageous attack, and horribly, it’s the latest of too many hate crimes against LGBTQ people and people of color. We are all responsible for condemning this behavior and every person who enables or normalizes it. Praying for Jussie and his family.” — Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand

“There is no such thing as ‘racially charged.’ This attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack. If you don’t like what is happening to our country, then work to change it. It is no one’s job to water down or sugar-coat the rise of hate crimes.” — Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

“Regarding the heinous attack on @JussieSmollett, yet another reminder that Trump’s ascendance and the resulting climate of hate has meant that lives have been increasingly at stake since 2015. Smollett could have been killed by those thugs screaming MAGA. Let that sink in.” — Karen Attiah, Washington Post editor

“The horrific attack on Jussie Smollett has no place in a decent human loving society. Homophobia existed before Trump, but there is no question that since he has injected his hatred into the American bloodstream, we are less decent, less human, & less loving. No intolerance! No DT!” — Director Rob Reiner

“Jussie Smollett was violently attacked by two white men who poured bleach on him and put a noose around his neck. He was targeted for being black and for being gay. THIS is why we have to have zero tolerance against homophobia and racism. Jussie’s life matters.” — Actress Olivia Munn

“Heartbroken and furious reading about the attack on @JussieSmollett. I want Trump and all MAGA lunatics to burn in Hell.” — Actor Billy Eichner

All this blithering idiocy, about something that was an obvious hoax from day one, was posted on the very social media site that Agrawal is about to oversee. Nearly identical tweets from nearly identical liberals could be produced for similarly deranged takes on Nick Sandmann, Kyle Rittenhouse, Althea Bernstein, the NASCAR “noose,” the “Klansman” at Oberlin College, the “racist” bus attack in Albany, Trump supporters ripping hijabs off Muslim girls, racist graffiti at the Air Force Academy, the noose at Columbia’s Teachers College, the Duke lacrosse rape hoax, the University of Virginia gang rape hoax, the synagogue bomb threats and on and on and on.

Good luck to you, Mr. Agrawal.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Federal Judge Rejects DOD Claim That Pfizer EUA and Comirnaty Vaccines Are ‘Interchangeable’ – LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Posted by M. C. on December 3, 2021

A federal district court judge rejected a claim by the U.S. Department of Defense that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine being administered under Emergency Use Authorization is interchangeable with Pfizer’s fully licensed Comirnaty vaccine.

That means no Comirnaty lawsuit protection.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/12/no_author/federal-judge-rejects-dod-claim-that-pfizer-eua-and-comirnaty-vaccines-are-interchangeable/

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.
Children’s Health Defense

A federal district court judge has rejected a claim by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine being administered under Emergency Use Authorization is interchangeable with Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine, which in August was fully licensed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

In an order issued Nov. 12 in Doe et al. v. Austin, U.S. Federal District Judge Allen Winsor of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida denied a preliminary injunction requested by 16 service members against the U.S. Military’s COVID vaccine mandate. A hearing is scheduled for Sept. 14, 2022.

However, the judge’s acknowledgment that “the DOD cannot mandate vaccines that only have an EUA” is significant for two reasons.

One reason pertains to the difference in ingredients and manufacturing process between Pfizer’s EUA vaccine and the approved Comirnaty vaccine, and the other pertains to the legal difference between a fully licensed vaccine and an EUA vaccine.

The latter reason would apply not just to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, but also to the vaccines produced by Moderna and Johnson & Johnson (Janssen), both of which are authorized only as EUA products.

Under law, everyone has ‘right to refuse’ EUA product

When the FDA approved Pfizer’s Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine in August, approval was accompanied by a series of confusing documents and equally confusing public statements.

One such confounding statement reads as follows:

“The licensed vaccine has the same formulation as the EUA-authorized vaccine and the products can be used interchangeably to provide the vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns. The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness.”

The FDA provided no explanation as to how the licensed Comirnaty vaccine and the Pfizer-BioNTech EUA vaccine could “be used interchangeably” despite having “certain differences” that make them “legally distinct.”

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

The Frogs Have Begun Fleeing the Government’s Boiling Pot – American Thinker

Posted by M. C. on December 3, 2021

Now, whom does the government fear most under these conditions?

Rather, it is the person who has no problem walking away from the government’s panopticon to go hunting in the woods, who decides to pay in cash, or who has woken up to the reality that the federal government is in the business of control.  It is the solitary American capable of questioning the government’s official State narrative and willing to think for himself who scares the bejesus out of the powers that be.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/12/the_frogs_have_begun_fleeing_the_governments_boiling_pot.html

By J.B. Shurk

The federal government spies on every email, text, and call you make.  It uses your phone’s location services to pinpoint where you are at all times.  It knows which I.P. addresses are associated with online comments that have been deemed “politically incorrect.”  Its partnerships with Amazon and Walmart let it know what you’re reading and buying.  Its partnerships with Google and Facebook let it know what you’re thinking.  Its partnerships with Twitter and Hollywood allow it to censor unapproved messages before too many brains have the opportunity to consider new thoughts.  Its alliance with credit card companies allows it to track all your financial transactions and thereby understand your habits, preferences, choices, and addictions.  Its alliance with cellular companies allows it to monitor all your movements, contacts, and associations.  And all of these consumer comforts that are used by the “national security” surveillance state to watch everyone in real time constantly measure every American’s potential for subversiveness, even when that American is engaged in the most mundane things during the course of an ordinary day.  

Now, whom does the government fear most under these conditions?  Hint: It is not the millions of illegal aliens who pour through our uncontrolled borders (during supposedly the greatest pandemic threat in a century), or foreign governments that bankroll American elected officials (How else could Biden and other lifelong politicians be millionaires?), or the threat of an electromagnetic pulse attack taking out America’s aging electrical grid (because Congress’s “infrastructure” spending won’t bother fixing actual infrastructure when there are so many campaign donors and special interest groups to pay off).  

Rather, it is the person who has no problem walking away from the government’s panopticon to go hunting in the woods, who decides to pay in cash, or who has woken up to the reality that the federal government is in the business of control.  It is the solitary American capable of questioning the government’s official State narrative and willing to think for himself who scares the bejesus out of the powers that be.  It is the patriotic grandmother who has the temerity to show up at the nation’s capitol after a heavily disputed election to wave a Trump flag while drinking hot chocolate.  It is the parent who has the gall to believe that the public should be in charge of public education.  It is the humble police officer publicly outed and fired for privately giving a word of encouragement to an innocent teenager politically persecuted for defending his life against a State-sanctioned Antifa mob.  It is the health care worker, firefighter, blue-collar worker, or soldier who refuses to let Big Brother pump him full of experimental gene therapies for the remainder of his life just because people who wear their prestige like crowns proclaim, “You must because we say.”  In other words, governments pretending to protect freedom are most afraid of individuals who insist on being free.  

Does this seem like a system that is destined to survive?  

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

TGIF: Safety in Freedom | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on December 3, 2021

Few people understand that there’s safety in liberty, specifically, the freedom to think, improvise, and innovate. This is true for individuals, but when the potential danger is social or global, the case for liberty is equally clear.

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/tgif-safety-in-freedom/

by Sheldon Richman

With the emergence of the Omicron COVID-19 variant, renewed restrictions on liberty or calls for their reinstatement have broken out around the world. The new wave is probably only beginning, and with it will surely come sermons on how we must face trade-offs between liberty and safety. This seems to be the new normal.

The usual justifications for this purported necessity always feel inadequate, with gaping holes in the case for expanding government power to extraordinary lengths. Since we all now have a good deal of experience with COVID under our belts, let’s hope that the public’s doubts about any new power grab will be strong and loudly expressed.

What brought this subject to mind was a recent Oxford Union debate, which I ran across on YouTube. While I’ve watched only a little, it quickly occurred to me that the case for a necessary trade-off between liberty and safety runs aground with the realization that liberty is a necessary condition for safety. After all, it’s not always clear how one can best stay safe in a situation: that requires thought, discourse, action, and therefore liberty.

Moreover, that matter is separate from the question of how safe any particular person may wish to be. Indeed, people have different preferences with respect to risk and safety in part because life is complicated and trade-offs are ubiquitous. Increasing one’s safety in some measure by abstaining from some desirable activity will likely require too big a sacrifice for some people, although for others the benefit will be well worth the cost. (A person cannot violate his own freedom.) So who’s to decide? Why should a faceless bureaucrat or a charismatic politician make the call?

Few people understand that there’s safety in liberty, specifically, the freedom to think, improvise, and innovate. This is true for individuals, but when the potential danger is social or global, the case for liberty is equally clear. That’s precisely when we all need many minds searching for solutions without central direction. Knowledge is dispersed, and no one can say who will have a key insight. Competition is the universal solvent. And to be effective, thinking requires freedom of action.

Matt Ridley and Julian Simon before him elaborated how we all benefit from the often unintentional combination of ideas generated in different and unlikely places. By now, the serendipity that freedom produces ought to be expected. The results often are imaginative approaches to vexing problems that few would have dreamed possible.

The case for giving up freedom to acquire a measure of safety is actually an appeal to trust in an anointed central authority. And that means a threat of force is at least implied.

But where is the actual safety in that arrangement? Why should anyone believe that the anointed know what they are doing? They operate in a centralized, bureaucratic environment. The rulers expect the ruled to behave like children who have been told that all will be fine if they obey. Unfortunately, the ruled often think of themselves as children when it comes to the latest risk proclaimed by their rulers.

So are people really safer than they would have been in a free, decentralized, and competitive environment? We find no evidence for this in places that imposed harsh restrictions on liberty in response to COVID-19. Lockdowns, vaccine and mask mandates, and travel bans show no signs of delivering on the politicians’ promises. There just is no good substitute for freedom at every level because no central authority is knowledgeable enough.

Finally, what about the risks that individuals might present to others and not just to themselves? There are big differences between 1) the potential risks to others that anyone may pose in simply going about the normal business of life and 2) the dangers produced by aggression, gross negligence, and inadvertent toxic pollution, where identifiable individuals entitled to due process can be shown to present demonstrable peril to others. For one thing, in the first case, people are not passive victims-in-waiting but generally informed agents capable of taking precautions against infection. Imagine the nightmare that would come from the principle that everyone in society may be viewed as a threat to everyone else merely by breathing. We don’t have to imagine it, do we? That’s how most governments throughout the world — blunt instruments that they are — responded to the pandemic. As a result, our livelihoods — our lives– are now subject to cancellation without notice.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

The Tommy Emmanuel Interview | World’s Greatest Acoustic Guitarist

Posted by M. C. on December 2, 2021

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Watch “Good News For Christmas: Biden’s Mandate Keeps Losing In Court” on YouTube

Posted by M. C. on December 2, 2021

From California eastward, US courts keep ruling against President Biden’s attempt to force Americans to take the experimental virus shots. And the President has been forced to quietly back off of his threat to fire Federal workers who refuse the jab. Is freedom winning? Also today, leading expert says new variant may spell the end of Covid-19 altogether! Get Ron Paul’s new Mini-Book as a “thank you” for your donation to the Ron Paul Institute! Send $50 or more for the book as a gift; for $100 or more Ron Paul will personally sign it! Donate here: http://ronpaulinstitute.org/support/

https://youtu.be/8kTayqop02Y

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »