MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Canada’s bullying of Christians is turning it into a tyranny — RT Op-ed

Posted by M. C. on April 27, 2021

When I see a health inspector show up with several armed police officers to a place of worship demanding that a service is stopped, I have a hard time arguing against comparisons to the Gestapo. The same with seizing a church and telling its congregation that they must comply with the government or they cannot worship God in their own church. 

Canada as a nation is going to need to decide something right now. Is it going to allow Christians to kneel to God, or is it going to act as if it is God and want them to kneel to it first? If the answer is the latter, I fear that the darkest days for Christians in Canada have only just begun.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/522149-canada-bullying-christians-tyranny/

Micah Curtis

is a game and tech journalist from the US. Aside from writing for RT, he hosts the podcast Micah and The Hatman, and is an independent comic book writer. Follow Micah at @MindofMicahC

Churches in Canada have been subjected to aggressive policing of Covid-19 restrictions, despite the fact that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects the rights of religion and assembly. Why are Christians being targeted?

It’s been over a year since the Covid-19 crisis began. In that time, vaccines have been developed and are being distributed all over the world, in the hope that everyone can return to normal life. 

However, one group of people that has encountered problem after problem with the restrictions put in place by governments during the pandemic has been Christians. And, in the frosty land of Canada, tensions are beginning to rise due to the apparent targeting of Christians who simply want to go back to church.

In Alberta, a church called Gracelife has been physically fenced off by the government until its leaders agree to abide by government rules regarding mass gatherings. In the same province, a pastor in Calgary named Artur Pawlowski kicked health officials and police out of his church, comparing their tactics to those of the Gestapo, after they’d arrived to investigate supposed public-health violations. 

Given that the pastor is Polish, he’s likely all too aware of how the Gestapo treated his people during World War II. Similarly, the Gracelife church being fenced off rings some familiar, and alarming, bells.

Meanwhile, in Aylmer, Ontario the police chief has said that a large church service at the town’s Church of God in defiance of Covid-19 regulations will be investigated. There were more than 100 people in attendance, which is 10 times what is allowed by the current provincial order. MPP Randy Hillier and MP Derek Sloan spoke at the church, and a nurse from nearby London, who was fired after speaking out against lockdown measures, was also in attendance. Aylmer’s police have already arrested two Christians.

The Canadian charter of Rights and Freedoms states that everyone has the fundamental freedoms of conscience, religion, peaceful assembly, and freedom of association. 

Judging by the language of the document, you would think that people should be able to assemble without the government restricting them from doing so in the manner they have. While it is possible that someone could catch Covid-19, they are supposed to have the right to take that risk if it means attending services of worship and being part of a Christian community. But local health officials have other ideas.

It’s fair to ask why. The Canadian population has faced restrictions and stop/start lockdowns for as long as the US has, but now the vaccine rollout is well under way, people are ready to go back to their normal lives. 

Whether these government officials like it or not, part of many people’s lives is their belief in God and their desire to worship their deity. On top of that, Canada is supposed to recognize the right of citizens to practise their religion. Now maybe some people just aren’t able to put two and two together, but community and fellowship have always been part not just of Christianity, but of all Abrahamic religions.

When I see a health inspector show up with several armed police officers to a place of worship demanding that a service is stopped, I have a hard time arguing against comparisons to the Gestapo. The same with seizing a church and telling its congregation that they must comply with the government or they cannot worship God in their own church. 

Anytime that a government sees itself above deity or as a substitution for deity it is becoming a tyranny. These Canadian citizens have the right to believe in God and worship as they choose. They have the freedom to assemble, and they have the freedom of association. 

We were given time to ‘flatten the curve,’ we were given regulations to follow with the promise that things would improve, and all Christians have been met with are more lockdowns and further refusals to allow us our rights.

Canada as a nation is going to need to decide something right now. Is it going to allow Christians to kneel to God, or is it going to act as if it is God and want them to kneel to it first? If the answer is the latter, I fear that the darkest days for Christians in Canada have only just begun.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

Of Two Minds – What’s Yours Is Now Mine: America’s Era of Accelerating Expropriation

Posted by M. C. on April 27, 2021

The takeaway here is obvious: earn as little money as possible and invest your surplus labor in assets that can’t be expropriated. Develop low-overhead gigs and enterprises that are 100% yours so you can legitimately write off expenses and control how much work you decide to take on. Keep accurate records and pay whatever taxes are due, but by minimizing net income then taxes will be modest. Invest your best self, time and energy in assets that can’t be assessed, taxed or expropriated: your skills, networks, value you create and invest in your own self-sufficiency, sharing and good living of the kind that can’t be bought or sold or expropriated.

https://www.oftwominds.com/blogapr21/expropriation4-21.html

Charles Hugh Smith

The takeaway here is obvious: earn as little money as possible and invest your surplus labor in assets that can’t be expropriated.

Expropriation: dispossessing the populace of property and property rights, via the legal and financial over-reach of monetary and political authorities.

All expropriations are pernicious, but the most destructive is the expropriation of labor’s value while the excessive gains of unproductive speculation accrue to the elite that owns most of the nation’s wealth.

In a nation in which the leadership has finely honed the art and artifice of legalized looting and financial legerdemain, it’s not surprising that the expropriation of labor’s value takes many forms. For the self-employed and small business proprietor, the list is practically endless:

1. Proliferating junk fees for permits, licence renewals, applications, late fees, penalties, fines for violating obscure regulations, etc. (Never mind if you’re losing money; by definition, as a business owner you’re “rich” and deserve petty expropriations. If you’re Amazon, however, we’ll shower you with subsidies and tax breaks.)

2. Sky-high liability insurance, disability insurance and workers compensation insurance, because all the fraud and friction in these systems adds expense and you’re the one who will pay for it all.

3. Sky-high rent. Now that the Federal Reserve jacked up the “market value” of a $1 million commercial building to $10 million via asset inflation, rents have soared even though no improvements have been made to the tenants’ spaces. Thanks to the Fed, rents are many multiples of what they would be if the Fed hadn’t jacked up real estate to absurd overvaluations.

4. Taxes on wages. Consider the Self-Employed in a High-Tax State: let’s start with the 15.3% federal self-employment tax on wages up to $142,000, then add federal tax rates that quickly reach 32% and up and state taxes that hit 10% and higher in high-tax states, and then don’t forget the extra 3.9% Medicare tax above $125,000, and when we add all this up, the total tax rate exceeds 61%. (You want to quibble? OK, make it 55%. How much difference does this make? None.)

Now this may be acceptable in Scandinavian nations where you receive virtually free healthcare and higher education, but here in the Accelerating Expropriation USA, the Self-Employed in a High-Tax State has to pay insanely costly healthcare insurance out of the 39% that’s been oh-so-generously left to live on, as well as the insanely high student loans that were taken out to attend university.

Factor those in and the Self-Employed in a High-Tax State gets a third or less of her labor’s value. This only rises slightly in so-called lower-tax states, which tend to compensate for lower income taxes with high sales taxes and property taxes (“they get you coming and going.”)

Inflation is stealth expropriation, and like all expropriation, we’re told it’s for our own good, just like any other beating delivered by authorities. So as the Fed pushes asset inflation to Mars and whines that real-inflation isn’t high enough yet, the Self-Employed in a High-Tax State are experiencing a monthly expropriation of the purchasing power of what little labor value has been left to them.

I received an insightful email on this topic from A.C.:

“Expropriation.

Once you’ve had it done to you personally (as I did through my business) you view the world in a whole new light.

Without assets in which you can store the excess value of your labor minus the worry of debasement or theft, the incentive to create that excess goes away. That’s why the BLS ‘take this job and shove it’ JOLT measure is staying so stubbornly high.

Unfortunately, it’s that excess labor that funds what we call civilization.

People without the margins which excess labor can create tend to revert, for their own security, to community groupings based on familial bonds. They’re a store of value that’s stable and can’t be inflated away.

Those without such bonds are SOL. Hunger goes a long way in mitigating the personality disorders which impair the creation of such bonds.”


Here’s the takeaway: Any “wealth” denominated in financial instruments will be expropriated by one means or another, so “wealth” has to be denominated in some other “currency”, social, cultural, skills / intellectual, that is beyond the grasp of monetary and political authorities. This is the primary reason why crazy risky speculation is being pursued with such intensity: there is no way to escape the grinding impoverishment of expropriation for most wage-earners except to make more “wealth” via crazy-risky gambles than is being expropriated.
The Only Way to Get Ahead Now Is Crazy-Risky Speculation.

There’s another dynamic few grasp: When the Empire runs out of colonies to exploit, it brings its expropriation machinery home to stripmine the domestic populace. I explained this dynamic back in 2012:

Neofeudalism and the Neocolonial-Financialization Model (4/24/12)

Welcome to Neocolonialism, Exploited Peasants! (10/21/16) October 21, 2016

Why are we not surprised that as expropriation accelerates on all fronts, the Middle Class Now Holds Less Wealth than Top 1 Percent? (brookings.edu) Thanks to the magic of pay-to-play “democracy,” the super-wealthy and corporate elites escape all the expropriation machinery stripmining wage earners. The corporate taxes collected are a tiny slice of the hundreds of billions corporations spend on stock buybacks, the only purpose of which is to enrich insiders and the super-wealthy who own most of the nation’s financial assets.

The takeaway here is obvious: earn as little money as possible and invest your surplus labor in assets that can’t be expropriated. Develop low-overhead gigs and enterprises that are 100% yours so you can legitimately write off expenses and control how much work you decide to take on. Keep accurate records and pay whatever taxes are due, but by minimizing net income then taxes will be modest. Invest your best self, time and energy in assets that can’t be assessed, taxed or expropriated: your skills, networks, value you create and invest in your own self-sufficiency, sharing and good living of the kind that can’t be bought or sold or expropriated.

I cover these topics in greater depth in my books:

Get a Job, Build a Real Career, Defy a Bewildering Economy

An Unconventional Guide to Investing in Troubled Times

Money and Work Unchained

Be seeing you

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

Secret May 2009 Meeting of “The Good Club”. “Billionaire Club in Bid to Curb Overpopulation”. – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization

Posted by M. C. on April 27, 2021

Why all the secrecy? “They wanted to speak rich to rich without worrying anything they said would end up in the newspapers, painting them as an alternative world government,” he said.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/secret-may-2009-meeting-of-the-good-club-billionaire-club-in-bid-to-curb-overpopulation/5742626

By John Harlow and Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Flash back to May 2009, the Billionaires held a meeting behind closed doors at the home of the president of The Rockefeller University in Manhattan.

This Secret Gathering was sponsored by Bill Gates. They called themselves “The Good Club”. 

Among the participants were the late David Rockefeller, Warren Buffett, George Soros, Ted Turner, Oprah Winfrey and many more. 

The Secret Gathering was reported by the Sunday Times. as well as the Guardian.

“The fact that they pulled this off, meeting in the middle of New York City, is just absolutely amazing,” said Niall O’Dowd, an Irish journalist who broke the story on the website irishcentral.com.”

According to media reports, “The Good Club” focus was on the philanthropic mandate of the billionaires, using their money in support of poverty alleviation and “overpopulation”.

It is important to note that the Good Club meeting in NYC was held at the height of the H1N1 swine flu pandemic which turned out to be a scam. No doubt, the H1N1 pandemic was an object of discussion by the “Good Club”.

Barely a few weeks prior to this secret gathering,  Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College, London who at the time was advising the WHO, stated with authority that  “40 per cent of people in the UK could be infected [with H1N1] within the next six months if the country was hit by a pandemic.”

This is the same Niel Ferguson (generously supported by the Gates Foundation) who designed the coronavirus Lockdown Model which resulted in mass unemployment, poverty and the closure of 190 national economies as a means to combating COVID-19.

The media reports on the May 5, 2009 secret gathering focussed on the commitment of “The Good Club” to “slowing down” the growth of the World’s population.

Was an absolute “reduction” in World population contemplated at this meeting, –i.e. as a means to reducing “Overpopulation”? In this regard, Bill Gates in his February 2010 TED presentation pertaining to vaccination, confirmed the following;

“And if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that [the world population] by 10 or 15 percent”.

According to Gates’ statement, this would represent  an absolute reduction of the World’s population of the order 680 million to 1.02 billion.

(See quotation on Video starting at 04.21. See also screenshot of Transcript of quotation)

TED Talk at 04:21: https://embed.ted.com/talks/bill_gates_innovating_to_zeroBillionaire club in bid to curb overpopulationBillionaire club in bid to curb overpopulation

“The Good Club” Then and Now

The same group of billionaires who met at the May 2009 secret venue, have been actively involved from the outset in designing the coronavirus lockdown policies applied Worldwide.

They are also the architects of the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset”.

Below is the complete text of the Sunday Times article (May 24, 2009) (emphasis added)

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, April 25, 2021

****

“Billionaire Club in Bid to Curb Overpopulation”

by John Harlow,

Sunday Times, May 24, 2009

***

SOME of America’s leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world’s population and speed up improvements in health and education.

The philanthropists who attended a summit convened on the initiative of Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change.

Described as the Good Club by one insider it included David Rockefeller Jr, the patriarch of America’s wealthiest dynasty, Warren Buffett and George Soros, the financiers, Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York, and the media moguls Ted Turner and Oprah Winfrey.

These members, along with Gates, have given away more than £45 billion since 1996 to causes ranging from health programmes in developing countries to ghetto schools nearer to home.

They gathered at the home of Sir Paul Nurse, a British Nobel prize biochemist and president of the private Rockefeller University, in Manhattan on May 5. The informal afternoon session was so discreet that some of the billionaires’ aides were told they were at “security briefings”.

Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, said the summit was unprecedented. “We only learnt about it afterwards, by accident. Normally these people are happy to talk good causes, but this is different – maybe because they don’t want to be seen as a global cabal,” he said.

Some details were emerging this weekend, however. The billionaires were each given 15 minutes to present their favourite cause. Over dinner they discussed how they might settle on an “umbrella cause” that could harness their interests.

The issues debated included reforming the supervision of overseas aid spending to setting up rural schools and water systems in developing countries. Taking their cue from Gates they agreed that overpopulation was a priority.

This could result in a challenge to some Third World politicians who believe contraception and female education weaken traditional values.

Gates, 53, who is giving away most of his fortune, argued that healthier families, freed from malaria and extreme poverty, would change their habits and have fewer children within half a generation.

At a conference in Long Beach, California, last February, he had made similar points.

“Official projections say the world’s population will peak at 9.3 billion [up from 6.6 billion today] but with charitable initiatives, such as better reproductive healthcare, we think we can cap that at 8.3 billion,” Gates said then.

Patricia Stonesifer, former chief executive of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which gives more than £2 billion a year to good causes, attended the Rockefeller summit. She said the billionaires met to “discuss how to increase giving” and they intended to “continue the dialogue” over the next few months.

Another guest said there was “nothing as crude as a vote” but a consensus emerged that they would back a strategy in which population growth would be tackled as a potentially disastrous environmental, social and industrial threat.

“This is something so nightmarish that everyone in this group agreed it needs big-brain answers,” said the guest. “They need to be independent of government agencies, which are unable to head off the disaster we all see looming.”

Why all the secrecy? “They wanted to speak rich to rich without worrying anything they said would end up in the newspapers, painting them as an alternative world government,” he said.

Be seeing you

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

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : Police Problems? Embrace Liberty!

Posted by M. C. on April 27, 2021

The drug war is a major reason police have increasingly looked and acted like an occupying army. Police militarization threatens everyone’s liberty. Black people have been subjected to drug war arrests and imprisonment at relatively high rates.

Those interested in protecting and enhancing black people’s (and all people’s) lives should embrace liberty. Libertarians reject the use of force to achieve political, economic, or social goals, Therefore, in a libertarian society, police would only enforce laws prohibiting the initiation of force against persons or property.

Free markets, individual liberty, limited government, sound money, and peace are key to achieving prosperity and social cohesion. Those sincerely concerned about improving all human lives should turn away from the teaching of Karl Marx and John Maynard Keynes, who advocated expansive government power, and, instead, embrace the ideas of pro-liberty writers such as Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard.

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2021/april/26/police-problems-embrace-liberty/?mc_cid=74f313367e

Written by Ron Paul

undefined

Many Americans saw former policeman Derek Chauvin’s conviction on all counts last week as affirming the principle that no one is above the law. Many others were concerned that the jury was scared that anything less than a full conviction would result in riots, and even violence against themselves and their families.

Was the jury’s verdict influenced by politicians and media figures who were calling for the jury to deliver the “right” verdict? Attempts to intimidate juries are just as offensive to the rule of law as suggestions that George Floyd’s criminal record somehow meant his rights were not important.

The video of then-policeman Chauvin restraining Floyd led people across the political and ideological spectrums to consider police reform. Sadly, there have also been riots across the country orchestrated by left-wing activists and organizations seeking to exploit concern about police misconduct to advance their agendas.

It is ironic to see self-described Marxists, progressives, and other leftists protesting violence by government agents. After all, their ideology rests on the use of force to compel people to obey politicians and bureaucrats.

It is also ironic to see those who claim to want to protect and improve “black lives” support big government.

Black people, along with other Americans, have had their family structure weakened by welfare policies encouraging single parenthood. This results in children being raised without fathers as a regular presence in their lives, increasing the likelihood the children will grow up to become adults with emotional and other problems.

Those at the bottom of the economic ladder are restrained in improving their situation because of minimum wage laws, occupational licensing regulations, and other government interference in the marketplace. They are also victims of the Federal Reserve’s inflation tax.

Many progressives who claim to believe that “black lives matter” do not care that there is a relatively high abortion rate of black babies. These so-called pro-choice progressives are the heirs of the racists who founded the movement to legalize and normalize abortion.

The drug war is a major reason police have increasingly looked and acted like an occupying army. Police militarization threatens everyone’s liberty. Black people have been subjected to drug war arrests and imprisonment at relatively high rates.

Those interested in protecting and enhancing black people’s (and all people’s) lives should embrace liberty. Libertarians reject the use of force to achieve political, economic, or social goals, Therefore, in a libertarian society, police would only enforce laws prohibiting the initiation of force against persons or property.

A libertarian society would leave the provision of aid to the needy to local communities, private charities, and religious organizations. Unlike the federal welfare state, private charities can provide effective and compassionate aid without damaging family structure or making dependency a way of life. In a libertarian society, individuals could pursue economic opportunity free of the burdens of government regulations and taxes, as well as free of the Federal Reserve’s fiat currency.

Free markets, individual liberty, limited government, sound money, and peace are key to achieving prosperity and social cohesion. Those sincerely concerned about improving all human lives should turn away from the teaching of Karl Marx and John Maynard Keynes, who advocated expansive government power, and, instead, embrace the ideas of pro-liberty writers such as Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard.

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

Watch “Fauci Flip-Flops Again! ‘Ditch The Outdoor Masks'” on YouTube

Posted by M. C. on April 26, 2021

After warning repeatedly of new waves and dark days, President Biden’s chief Covid advisor Dr. Fauci has again flip-flopped. No longer is it “science” to wear masks outside, he says, after urging outdoor mask-wearing just months ago. Why Fauci’s change of heart?

https://youtu.be/UaHCk064wGs

Be seeing you

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

Why Empowering Organized Labor Will Definitely Not Help the Economy | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on April 26, 2021

The Reagan-killed-the-unions myth came about because of Reagan’s response to the air traffic controllers’ strike in 1981. The union, which had the acronym PATCO (Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization), actually endorsed Reagan in 1980 (along with the Teamsters—because Reagan agreed to delay trucking deregulation for two years, something Krugman ignores).

https://mises.org/wire/why-empowering-organized-labor-will-definitely-not-help-economy‘

William L. Anderson

Paul Krugman has a very prominent perch from the editorial page at the New York Times and he has used his influence, among other things, to shill for two things that are anathema to a strong economy: inflation and organized labor. My analysis examines what Krugman says about labor unions and explains why once again his economic prognostications are off base.

In a recent column, Krugman declares that the present political climate may reverse the long trend in private sector unionism—and that is a good thing:

The political environment that gave anti-union employers a free hand may be changing—the decline of unionization was, above all, political, not a necessary consequence of a changing economy. And America needs a union revival if we’re to have any hope of reversing spiraling inequality.

As he often does, Krugman presents a scenario of a prosperous America in which organized labor helped create a productive and happy society, although one might question his knowledge of history. He writes:

America used to have a powerful labor movement. Union membership soared between 1934 and the end of World War II. During the 1950s roughly a third of nonagricultural workers were union members. As late as 1980 unions still represented around a quarter of the work force. And strong unions had a big impact even on nonunion workers, setting pay norms and putting nonunion employers on notice that they had to treat their workers relatively well lest they face an organizing drive.

While he is partly correct in his statement, Krugman then paints an alternate picture of history, claiming, in effect, that the source of economic growth is high factor prices.

And this decline in unionization has had dire consequences. In their heyday, unions were a powerful force for equality; their influence reduced the overall inequality of wages and also reduced wage disparities associated with different levels of education and even race. Surging union membership appears to have been a key factor in the “Great Compression,” the rapid reduction in inequality that took place between the mid-1930s and 1945, turning America into a middle-class nation.

First, and most important (and maybe most shocking), the 1930s constituted the Great Depression, when unemployment was in double digits and living standards for many Americans fell from their levels a decade before. The notion that the Roosevelt administration “created” a middle class by putting people out of work is preposterous on its face.

Second, Robert Higgs forcefully destroyed the lie that the US economy during World War II brought prosperity and helped turn the country into a “middle-class nation.” Such thinking only can reflect a mindset that sees the US economy as being “managed” by the state, and that middle-class incomes are solely a function of state power to confiscate income from some and turn it over to others. To take a time when the nation was in an economic crisis and later involved in the most destructive war in history and then present it as a permanent model for society is perverse beyond words.

To better understand why Krugman would write such things, we need to understand his view of the economy, a view shared, apparently, by most political, academic, and social elites in this country. In the Krugman view—and I will try to keep from veering into presenting a caricature of his beliefs—private enterprise rests on a tenuous foundation. Like J.M. Keynes, he believes that the economy is circular in nature.

More than a decade ago, I wrote that Krugman and others see the economy as being like a “perpetual motion machine” in which individual savings actually work against economic prosperity:

If I can put the whole Keynesian set of fallacies into one statement, it would be this: the modern Keynesians believe that the economy operates like a perpetual motion machine, with government spending being the “grease” that keeps it from slowing down. The “friction” in this economic machine, according to the pundits, is private saving. Eliminate it, and the economy goes on forever, adding energy and expanding indefinitely.

I continue:

[I]f consumers save or “hoard” some of their money, then there will be a “leakage” from the system, which means that households cannot “buy back” the products they have produced. The unpurchased goods then pile up in the inventories, so businesses must then cut back production and lay off workers. This further triggers consumer uncertainty, which means they save even more money, and we are off to the downward races.

Krugman has used this analysis to explain every economic downturn, including the Great Depression, and since he left the Princeton University faculty to dedicate his academic work to examining what he calls income inequality, he has doubled down on his rhetoric. In his view, business firms create goods which people purchase, and the income ultimately flows back to business owners, making them wealthy.

As long as these wealthy business owners continue to spend all of their income either on consumption goods or new capital, the economy can move along. The likelihood of that chain of events happening, however, is near zero and, instead, the wealthy often will save (read: hoard) much of their income. Instead of buying cars, yachts, jewelry, and whatever else the rich like to purchase, and instead of putting back the rest of their income to purchase new capital or replenish existing capital, they stuff the money into nonproductive accounts and don’t spend at all.

On top of that, Krugman holds to the Thomas Piketty theme that over time wealthy people receive increasing returns to the capital they own so that we see the proverbial scenario of “the rich getting richer and the poor becoming poorer.” Once that becomes a guiding narrative, of course, everything that happens seems to fulfill the Krugman-Piketty theme.

Over time, hoarding by the rich throws sand into the gears of the perpetual motion machine, grinding the economy to a halt and throwing it into recession. While pundits like Karl Marx, Keynes, and Krugman will deviate among themselves as to the causes of economic downturns, they generally agree that the system implodes from within and only can be turned around by massive governmental involvement.

The Keynes-Krugman “solution” to this obvious problem is for government to create a system of massive wealth transfers from the wealthy to everyone else. High wages generated through labor union activism, high marginal tax rates, and a huge welfare system serve to take income away from the wealthy, give it to others who will continue to spend and keep the perpetual motion machine well oiled and moving. Thus, high taxes and high wages obtained via coercive activities by organized labor actually help everyone from the poorest people to the wealthy business owners. Lower-income people receive money, goods, and services while the wealthy find that their enterprises flourish when people have more money to spend. It is win-win for everyone.

Given his tendency to mangle economic history, it is not surprising that Krugman falsely blames Ronald Reagan for the decline of labor unions just as he falsely claims that organized labor created prosperity. He writes:

See the rest here

Author:

Contact William L. Anderson

William L. Anderson is a professor of economics at Frostburg State University in Frostburg, Maryland.

Be seeing you

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

The Capture of Goodness – OffGuardian

Posted by M. C. on April 26, 2021

But there is a problem about doing nothing. Because it may just be that human beings are only good insofar as they do good things. Goodness requires practice and wastes away from lack of practice. It is more like playing the piano than riding a bike; you have to keep it up or you can no longer really do it. How long before our good natures grow rusty and flake away? How long before we no longer know how to be good?

Which is why, I presume, we now have these badges of goodness: masks, certificates.

https://off-guardian.org/2021/04/25/the-capture-of-goodness/

Sinead Murphy

‘Goodness’ is not the word I wanted to use in this article. But ‘ethics’ sounded too abstract, ‘morality’ too rule-bound, ‘virtue’ too archaic, and ‘kindness’ too corporate (at least since ‘random acts of kindness’).

The ubiquity of that dreaded term ‘safety,’ brayed at us from every angle, has made all the old names for concern for each other’s welfare seem ill-fitting and out of date. ‘Goodness,’ for all its faults, will have to do.

*

On Tuesday 30th March, leaders of 23 countries, including the UK, France and Germany, issued a statement on the matter of ‘pandemic preparedness.’

Its key phrase was reprinted across the media: Nobody is safe until everyone is safe.

As we embark on our second Covid year, the sentiment is chilling.

Nobody is safe until everyone is safe is the latest phase in the capture of human goodness that has been the most profound effect of Covid.

At first, we were asked to keep our distance. Other people, for whose sake we do most of the good things we do, were put beyond our reach.

We no longer held the door for the next person to pass through. We no longer offered to carry an old lady’s shopping. We stopped shaking one another’s hand and patting each other on the back. We no longer hugged.

Almost all of the ways in which we knew how to be good to each other were paused; the bonds of mutual support were severed.

Then, for the first time uncertain about how to do good – then, we were asked to mask up. Not for our own sake. For the sake of the other person – I mask for you, you mask for me. Being good to other people was returned to us. But it was not quite like it had been before.

Other people, still at a distance, were now also without faces, and faces are so important in arousing our pity, commanding our assistance, eliciting our smile. Goodness had been readmitted, but for the sake of newly anonymous beings.

Then, still at a distance, still masked up, we were encouraged to take the jab. Not for our own sake – at least, not directly. For the sake of the herd. For herd immunity.

This concept, so energetically rejected as cruel during the first months of Covid, was returned to us. But it was not quite like it had been before. It was cleansed of its natural components, redefined by the World Health Organisation as an achievement of vaccination, its taint of ‘let it rip’ buried under a great enthusiasm for pharmaceutical engineering. Herd immunity was back. And goodness was redirected towards an anonymous crowd.

And now we are told that nobody is safe until everyone is safe. Now we are to be good, not even to a masked and distanced other, not even to an anonymous herd, but to everyone.

Everyone? All seven billion inhabitants of the earth? It is worse than that. The statement issued by world leaders on 30th March champions a concept of ‘One Health,’ which is described as encompassing ‘humans, animals and our planet.’

How in the world is any of us to act for the good of this everyone? The idea is sublime. It may strike us with awe, even admiration, but there is nothing we can do for its sake. Our good deeds, already scrambled by distancing and masking and herding, are now, at last, out of play.

One year ago, we were tempted from the well-trodden paths of goodness onto a seemingly higher road, emblazoned with slogans of sacrifice, decorated with rainbows and resounding with the clapping of people pulling together. But the road leads nowhere. It is a dead end.

In January, in the northern snow, I was saying hello to my neighbour over the low garden wall. So that she could find her key, she placed her little girl, ten months old and all wrapped up in her snowsuit, onto the soft ground. While my neighbour was searching in her bag, her baby slowly keeled over. Without thinking, I stepped across and leaned down to lift her. But it was the wrong thing to do. Her mother snatched her up and I retreated in vague apology.

What is now the right thing to do when a small baby falls sideways onto the snow? The answer: nothing. Goodness is cancelled. Or, rather, it is redirected through an idea so sublime that nothing follows from it for mere humans with their merely human faculties. Everyone means nothing to us. For the sake of everyone, we can do nothing.

But there is a problem about doing nothing. Because it may just be that human beings are only good insofar as they do good things. Goodness requires practice and wastes away from lack of practice. It is more like playing the piano than riding a bike; you have to keep it up or you can no longer really do it. How long before our good natures grow rusty and flake away? How long before we no longer know how to be good?

Which is why, I presume, we now have these badges of goodness: masks, certificates.

Our enthusiasm for both may have little to do with their dubious efficacy in stopping the spread of a respiratory virus, and much to do with our need for reassurance that, even though we no longer do good things, we still really are good people.

Be seeing you

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

The Biden Climate Summit — speeding up to hit the wall harder | CFACT

Posted by M. C. on April 26, 2021

They are trying to fork us with two prongs — government funding and government force.

The utilities love the CES because as regulated monopolies the more they are forced to spend the more they make. Rumor has it that some utilities have pointed out that it cannot be done, but they will be ignored, as all rational voices have been to date.

“Government funding”, “the more they make” – translation: you and me.

https://www.cfact.org/2021/04/24/the-biden-climate-summit-speeding-up-to-hit-the-wall-harder/

By David Wojick

The Biden Climate Summit is not just the two day zoomfest. That show is the crescendo to a complex concert that has played out over the last few weeks. Each of the speeches by Federal Agency heads is the announcement of their part of a massive green plan — the Biden climate agenda. The speeches were predictably boring but the plan is unpredictably dangerous.

Here is my take on the whole concert, not just the snorey speeches. My focus is on how the Biden climate agenda will fail, as it surely will.

The climate action target date started out as 2050, basically a way to do nothing now. A free political promise, so widely adopted. But politicians compete to get elected, so that far distant horizon has come closer and closer. First to 2045, then 2040, 2035, until now we suddenly have 2030.

Cutting our emissions 50% by 2030 is Biden’s bid to retake the helm of the Paris Accord ship of fools. Technically it is America’s “nationally determined contribution” under the Accord. Mind you since the Paris Accord is not a Treaty this is just a Presidential Promise (to try).

2030 is just a little over 8 years away and when it comes to building big stuff, that is today. Literally, because major projects often take around 8 years from conception to completion.

In this case the projects are not just big, they are monstrously big. Completely rebuilding our electric power system for example. Or replacing our internal combustion engines with battery powered electric motors. Or getting rid of natural gas heat in all its myriad uses.

It has been firmly established that none of this can be done in the incredibly short times now being called for by national leaders. It could not be done in 28 years, much less 8.

The good news is these stupidly bold promises are going to hit the wall of impossibility. This raises the fascinating question: What will the crash look like?

Pointing out the impossibility, physical and/or economic, of these wild plans has been done carefully and repeatedly. What I have yet to see is any idea how and when this impossibility might manifest itself. We should be planning for it! So here is my shot.

It all depends on specifically how the various impossibilities are attempted. Happily thanks to the Biden Summit concert we now at least have a lot of conceptual plans. (Yes, “conceptual plan” is an oxymoron, but these plans are moronic, right?)

They are trying to fork us with two prongs — government funding and government force.

On the funding side Biden & Co are calling for truly huge sums of money, untold trillions to be exact. A lot of this just is not going to happen and hitting that wall hurts no one (except the people with their hands out for the money). This is important because a lot of people seem to think the failure of Biden’s plans will be painful. Some will, but much won’t be, and it is important to know which is which.

Mind you some of it is really good pork, making it likely to pass.

A good example of great pork is $20 billion for electric school buses. Not that we need electric buses, but every Congressional district includes one or more school districts and they get the big bucks. What Congressperson does not want to say they brought home the bacon for the schools. None. That these silly buses do nothing for education is irrelevant. Money for the schools is a vote getter. There is also billions for electric transit buses, which is iffier.

On the likely to fail side is the ask for $100 billion to subsidize electric car buyers. “I made your electric car cheaper” is not a big vote getter, more like a vote loser because it favors the wealthy, even on the side of an electric bus.

It is especially important to fight big ticket funding proposals that are actually harmful, like blanketing the country with windmills and solar slabs. Both are environmentally destructive, plus they stimulate blackouts. Again, no one is hurt if these destructive monstrosities are not built. Except the folks that make them, who are pushing them like crazy, which they are.

Things are different on the federal force side. Here the potential for hurting lots of people is very real. Especially when you force people to do things that do not work. History is full of government mandated catastrophes.

In this case a glaring example is the so-called Clean Electricity Standard or CES. This is the central feature of the proposed 50% cut. As proposed, the CES would be a law requiring the electric power industry to cut CO2 emissions a staggering 80% by the magical 2030 deadline. It has to be 80% because the other big emission sources, especially transportation, cannot do 50%. So that is 80% in just 8 years. Absolutely impossible.

I am not making this up. As part of the Summit concert, a dozen major electric power producers sent a letter to Biden saying this: “The U.S. should implement a broad suite of regulatory and legislative policies to enable deep decarbonization of the power sector, including a clean electricity standard that ensures the power sector, as a whole, reduces its carbon emissions by 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2030.”

The utilities love the CES because as regulated monopolies the more they are forced to spend the more they make. Rumor has it that some utilities have pointed out that it cannot be done, but they will be ignored, as all rational voices have been to date.

Under CES, failure will certainly be painful for the general public, consisting mostly of repeated blackouts. The “hitting the wall” question then becomes how bad it has to get before the political tide turns? I can see people running for Congress specifically to restore reliable power. It is that important.

Failure also looms at the international level, which makes the “we are all friends here” Biden Summit especially amusing. Under the Paris Accord, America and other relatively developed countries are supposed to provide a whopping $100 billion a year in climate funding to the developing countries. This was to begin in 2020 but it did not happen, nor will it in years to come.

This part of the Biden Summit concert is the just issued “U.S. International Climate Finance Plan”. It sets a funding target of double what Obama did, which is very far less than our fair share of $100 billion a year. Oh and the target date is 2024, or not soon. Biden’s FY2022 budget request for international climate programs is just $3 billion, or next to nothing. Even that may not get funded.

Among the Summit speeches a few developing countries touched briefly on this explosive funding issue, while no developed country mentioned it. Among the developing countries this lack of confrontation was likely a condition of their being invited to speak. The upcoming UN Climate Conference (COP 26) in November will be a different story. The Paris Accord may crash and burn when this huge money flow fails to show.

The press release on the Climate Finance Plan is funny in a way that reflects the state of the nonsense. It repeatedly says the “United States intends” to do such and such, as though the President (1) speaks for the country and (2) can carry out this intention. Neither is true. At the end it quietly says the Biden Administration “will work with Congress” on these intentions. Will beg Congress is more like it.

The President cannot do the massive things promised at the Summit. Only Congress can do them and in most cases that is looking very unlikely. In fact when it comes to Congress this showy Summit was irrelevant.

The real action is in the Senate where the Democrats have the world’s slimmest majority, namely one vote. (If a Democrat retires or dies that could quickly change.) The Democrat majority in the House is also slim, so the Congressional conditions for restructuring America by force are simply not there.

In the Senate the big game is how to get around the filibuster. There is a procedure called budget reconciliation that does not require the 60 votes that ending a filibuster does. It is for budget items and is designed to avoid government shutdowns. The Democrats are busily trying to figure out how to squeeze their massive restructuring America climate agenda through this tiny loophole. I doubt they will succeed.

As for the Summit speeches by countries, there were a few entertaining items but no surprises.

China was the funniest as they resolutely promised to try to stop growing their coal burn in the next five years or so. China already makes more electric power from coal than the US does from all sources and they are still growing fast. They also promised to try to actually cut back their coal use, by 2030. So Biden’s goal is to halve American emissions in 2030 while China’s is to maybe stop growing theirs. The stark difference speaks volumes to the stupidity of the American plan. That President Xi Jinping did not laugh is remarkable.

The U.K. had already beaten Biden to the punch by announcing a bigger 2030 cut. The Canadians increased their ambition but their government does not even have a majority. Japan also increased ambition, but last I knew they were replacing their extensive fleet of zero emission nukes with coal fired power, so going the other way on the ground.

Russia was second funniest. Putin did what he always does on climate and shrugged his shoulders. But then Russia is happy to see the most warming at high latitudes, at night in winter, since unlike Canada and the US they have built a lot of towns in Northern Siberia. They are also fielding a fleet of powerful nuclear powered icebreakers, trying to open the Northeast Passage to commercial shipping. Global warming? Bring it on!

About all Biden got out of this zoomfest internationally is that everybody showed up, which is not nothing. I am sure Kerry had a lot to so with getting all these big ducks in a row. He probably coached every speech, diplomatically to be sure.

As the press coverage makes clear, the real show was the waves of program announcements from the Biden Department and Agency heads. Many of these programs have foolishly been portrayed as real, when they actually await Congressional authorization and funding, which may never happen.

So here we have it, the glorious Biden climate plan, all dressed up with no place to go. They should have had a runway. Shows over, now let’s see what really happens.

Given that most of the Biden plan is either impossible or destructive, and all of it is wildly expensive, my bet is that very little of it will ever be implemented. The ridiculous target of 2030 almost guarantees it.

They are speeding up to hit the wall harder. The truly interesting question is just how the wreck will happen. Stay tuned!

Author

Be seeing you

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

The “Russian Threat” – PaulCraigRoberts.org

Posted by M. C. on April 26, 2021

Today even in Republican and conservative circles to question Putin’s demonization raises disapproving eyebrows (the same for China and Iran).  The US Establishment has succeeded in labeling objective analysis as “pro-Russian” (or pro-Chinese or pro-Iranian). This means that an objective view of US/Russian relations is off-limits to US policymakers.  

The “Russian threat” is another hoax, one that will destroy the world.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/04/25/the-russian-threat/

Paul Craig Roberts

During 2016  CIA director John Brennan and FBI director James Comey, together with the corrupt Democrat party, began orchestrating Russiagate in order to prevent Trump from reducing the risk of nuclear war by normalizing relations with Russia.  President Trump tried to nip a New Cold War in the bud, but that was not in the interest of the power and profit of the military/security complex which desperately needs the “Russian threat” as its raison d’etre. 

Stephen Cohen, myself and a few others expressed concern that the tensions between the two  nuclear powers were being driven to more dangerous highs than ever existed during the 20th century Cold War.  Many websites joined in debunking the orchestrated Russiagate fabrication.

To discredit these voices, a new website, PropOrNot, suddenly appeared with a list of 200 “Russian agents/dupes.”  Those of us who had raised red flags about Russiagate and the worsening of tensions were on the list. The Washington Post gave the accusation credibility by reporting the PropOrNot accusation that those who dissented from a hostile policy toward Russia were “Putin agents.”

A number of the falsely accused websites were intimidated and abandoned the truth.  CounterPunch went even further. It dropped its best and most incisive writers—people such as Mike Whitney and Diana Johnstone.  CounterPunch, which  had once collected, published, and marketed a collection of my essays as a book, suddenly discovered that it preferred fiction over fact.  Other websites that had religiously reproduced all of my columns now became selective about which parts of the official narrative they would permit to be examined on their sites.  This was, perhaps, the beginning of the movement to de-platform all who challenge the narrative.

The threat to truth-tellers has now been elevated by election thief Joe Biden’s latest Executive Order declaring a “national emergency” to “deal with the Russian threat.” Pepe Escobar reports that Biden’s order opens every American to being accused of being a Russian agent engaged in undermining US security. “A sub-paragraph (C), detailing ‘actions or policies that undermine democratic processes or institutions in the United States or abroad,’ is vague enough to be used to eliminate any journalism that supports Russia’s positions in international affairs.”

“Supports Russia’s position” includes an objective description and non-partisan analysis of Russian policy. The crucial point is that, in effect, Biden’s executive order places everyone reporting objectively on Russia’s political positions as a potential threat to the United States.  https://www.unz.com/pescobar/putin-rewrites-the-law-of-the-geopolitical-jungle/  

If we are honest, we will acknowledge that we have undergone the complete collapse of the United States.  Truth is prohibited in the media, school systems, and universities if it conflicts with the elite agendas served by the official narratives. The First Amendment is dead and buried. Free speech is reserved for the official narratives, such as “systemic racism”  and “Russian threat.” Those who exercise their Constitutional right find themselves de-platformed or fired.  

To understand how the victory of propaganda over truth elevates the likelihood of nuclear Armageddon, consider the difference between the 20th century and 21st century cold wars.

In the original Cold War both Soviet and American leaders worked to defuse tensions.  Agreements were made on arms control and the anti-ballistic missile treaty. There were regular meetings or summits between American and Soviet leaders.  Diplomatic decorum was maintained.  There were agreements that permitted each side to inspect the other’s compliance.  

This process began with President John F. Kennedy and  Soviet First Secretary Khrushchev.  It continued through President Reagan and, more or less, President George H. W. Bush.  It ended with the Clinton regime and has been downhill ever since.  President Trump intended to reduce the dangerous tensions, but was not permitted.  Indeed, his intent was sufficient cause for the Establishment to drive him from office.  2020 was a coup, not an election.

In the 20th century Cold War Russian experts differed in their assessments of the threat, and their differences were publicly aired. Differing assessments were debated. Dissenters were not demonized as Russian agents.  Today American Russian experts find that being Russophobic is a career boost. In the 20th century the New York Times and Washington Post were aligned with peace efforts. Today they are part of the neoconservative warmongers’ propaganda ministry.

The alarming conclusion is that since the Clinton regime, the US government has worked consistently to worsen relations with Russia even to the extent of publicly demonizing the Russian president and strangling objective debate in the US.  This is the perfect foundation for war.

All the while insouciant Americans elected governments that successively raised the likelihood of nuclear annihiliation while shutting down dissident concerns.  As I reported on March 17, “In the United States Russian Studies has degenerated into propaganda.  Recently, two members of the Atlantic Council think tank, Emma Ashford and Matthew Burrows, suggested that American foreign policy could benefit from a less hostile approach to Russia. Instantly, 22 members of the think tank denounced the article by Ashford and Burrows.”

Today even in Republican and conservative circles to question Putin’s demonization raises disapproving eyebrows (the same for China and Iran).  The US Establishment has succeeded in labeling objective analysis as “pro-Russian” (or pro-Chinese or pro-Iranian). This means that an objective view of US/Russian relations is off-limits to US policymakers.  

The “Russian threat” is another hoax, one that will destroy the world.

Be seeing you

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

12 Myths Fueling Government Overreach in Times of Crisis | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on April 26, 2021

Politics cannot be put aside. Politics is what politicians and political interest groups do. Partisanship is inevitable as political actors who seek conflicting ends struggle for maximum control of the government.

https://mises.org/wire/12-myths-fueling-government-overreach-times-crisis

Robert Higgs

Congress and the president have adopted many critically important policies in great haste during brief periods of perceived national emergency. During the first “hundred days” of the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration in the spring of 1933, for example, the government abandoned the gold standard, enacted a system of wide-ranging controls, taxes, and subsidies in agriculture, and set in motion a plan to cartelize the nation’s manufacturing industries. In 2001, the USA PATRIOT Act was enacted in a rush even though no member of Congress had read it in its entirety. Since September 2008, the government and the Federal Reserve System have implemented a rapid-fire series of bailouts, loans, “stimulus” spending programs and partial or complete takeover of big banks and other large firms, acting at each step in great haste.

Any government policymaking on an important matter entails serious risks, but crisis policymaking stands apart from the more deliberate process in which new legislation is usually enacted or new regulatory measures are usually put into effect. Because formal institutional changes—however hastily they might have been made—have a strong tendency to become entrenched, remaining in effect for many years and sometimes for many decades, crisis policymaking has played an important part in generating long-term growth of government through a ratchet effect in which “temporary” emergency measures have expanded the government’s size, scope, or power.

It therefore behooves us to recognize the typical presumptions that give crisis policymaking its potency.

The twelve propositions given here express some of the ideas that are advanced or assumed again and again in connection with episodes of quick, fear-driven policymaking—events whose long-term consequences are often counterproductive.

1. Nothing like the present situation has ever happened before. If the existing crisis were seen as simply the latest incident in a series of similar crises, policy makers and the public would be more inclined to relax, appreciating that such rough seas have been navigated successfully in the past and will be navigated successfully on this occasion, too. Fears would be relieved. Exaggerated doomsday scenarios would be dismissed as overwrought and implausible. Such relaxation, however, would ill serve the sponsors of extraordinary government measures, regardless of their motives for seeking adoption of these measures. Fear is a great motivator, so the proponents of expanded government action have an incentive to represent the current situation as unprecedented and therefore as uniquely menacing unless the government intervenes forcefully to save the day.

2. Unless the government intervenes, the situation will get worse and worse. Crisis always presents some sort of worsening of something: the economy’s output has fallen; prices have risen greatly; the country has been attacked by foreigners. If such untoward developments were seen as having occurred in a one-off manner, then people might be content to stick with the institutional status quo. If, however, people project the recent changes forward, imagining that adverse events will continue to occur and possibly to gather strength as they continue, then they will object to a “do nothing” response, reasoning that “something must be done” lest the course of events eventuate in an utterly ruinous situation. To speed a huge, complex, “anti-terrorism” bill through Congress in 2001, George W. Bush invoked the specter of another terrorist attack. Barack Obama, Invoking the specter of economic collapse, rushed through Congress early in 2009 the huge Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act before any legislator had digested it. In a February 5, 2009, op-ed in the Washington Post, he wrote, “If nothing is done … our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.”1 At a February 9 press conference, he said “[A] failure to act will only deepen this crisis,” and “could turn a crisis into a catastrophe.”2

3. Today is all-important; we must act immediately.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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