The Market Fundamentalist

http://reason.com/blog/printer/130475.html

Link from Reason.com blog, HIT AND RUN

Sometimes, in order to understand how large social organizations work, it is illuminating to examine a relatively trivial example of the dynamic and gain insights into the more complicated large scale organization.

In Oregon, car dealerships, who are facing hard times, are asking the state government to PASS A LAW forbidding car sales on SUNDAY.

Of course, they will say that Sunday is a religious day, and large scale commerce should be banned for religious reasons.

This is a perfect example of the Baptist and Bootlegger paradigm in “rent seeking activity”. (RENT SEEKING is the PUBLIC CHOICE school of economics term for using the state to gain competitive advantages in the market)

The Baptists would be the evangelicals and others who would welcome the State of OREGON to ban car sales on Sunday as a religious gesture of the importance of the SABBATH.

The Bootleggers, in this case, are the CAR DEALERSHIPS who want to cut down their expenses in a sagging economy and try to squeeze more sales out of the Saturdays they are open.

The KICKER is that the dealerships do NOT just want to close on their own. Why? Because PRIVATE CARTELS do not last long, that is why. Even OPEC has its internal discipline problems. If all the current dealerships decide to close down on Sundays voluntarily, why some one might change their mind, or an UPSTART new guy from Nevada might see an OPPORTUNITY FOR PROFIT and open a dealership that is closed on MONDAYS, but open on SUNDAYS, when frustrated weekend shoppers might be willing to close the deal.

Ok, Ok this is small potatoes. What is the point you were trying to make about major issues?

Well, since we have numerous liberals on this list, let’s look at JIM CROW laws.

OMG, he’s talking about RACISM in economic terms! How dare he analyze the relationship between HUMAN BEINGS in anything but purely humanitarian calls for equality?

Well, because, like it or not, we live in a world of scarcity, and with limited knowledge, and those are the conditions that economics is geared to analyze.

Consider that in the DEEP SOUTH, the majority of the white people were racists and wanted to keep blacks down. What would their strategy be? Well, the majority of white people is STILL not the majority of all people. Some whites are not racist, and the blacks might even outnumber the whites.

So, what organ of power would you try to focus your attentions on? Controlling the free market? Not likely, because the free market is well, free. Too many variables.

So, how about controlling the STATE! Yes, that’s the ticket! Concentrate on controlling the STATE!

So, make it harder for blacks to vote. Sure, that is important. Then, the majority of racist whites can elect RACIST governments, willing to pass and uphold JIM CROW LAWS.

Then, be sure the District Attorney is racist, and the judges. Easy to do when justice is a MONOPOLY controlled by the state. Make sure juries are all white.

Then violence and intimidation against blacks will go unpunished, and any uppity blacks will be prosecuted to the “full extent of the law”.

Now, this is most important: Pass laws that state that EVERYONE MUST DISCRIMINATE. No exceptions. Every business must be all white, or all black. No one can move to the South , no big corporations can move in, without obeying the JIM CROW laws.

No white liberals can gain a competitive advantage (like being open on Sundays in Oregon) by being willing to serve both whites and blacks.

There you have it. Jim Crow was a function of the state controlling business, not vice versa.

Free markets in the South would never have supported JIM CROW, because segregation does not make MARKET SENSE. You would have to have two of everything: two locker rooms, two bathrooms for each gender, two lunch rooms, etc. The costs of doing business would be prohibitive. Not to mention the constant racial tensions in the workforce.

That is why when the black man Plessy dared to sit in a whites only railroad car in the 1890’s and was arrested , the RAILROADS paid for his defense all the way to the Supreme CT., which did not uphold his right, or the rights of the railroads either (government regulated, you know) to conduct their business in a PROFIT MAXIMIZING WAY.

So, large corporations usually avoided investing in the JIM CROW south. The south did NOT become prosperous until JIM CROW ended.

Now, what about the civil rights movement? Was it the best solution?

Not necessarily. Sure, the power of the state was crushed. But, the power of individuals to think and act in a private capacity was crushed as well.

Does passing laws saying NO ONE CAN DISCRIMINATE an ethically better option than laws saying EVERYONE MUST DISCRIMINATE?

Given that those who wish to discriminate will face market losses and pay for their discrimination, and that free markets will not sustain large scale discrimination, was it worth attacking private property rights and free speech and free thought to “stamp out” all discrimination?

Those who believe in political correctness, favor forced busing, believe that the government must constantly intrude into the lives and businesses of citizens to enforce “equality” certainly do.

Those of us who are skeptical of government intrusions, and are willing to tolerate private behavior we do not agree with so that the overall freedom of association (and non association as well) is protected, do not.

Barry Goldwater did not vote for the Civil Rights Act, because he thought it would indeed lead to the PC culture we indeed have today.

Was he right?

Brendan

http://reason.com/blog/show/130478.html

Finally, an HONEST POLITICIAN!

No, not honest in the sense of truthful and ethical, but honest in the sense that Gov Rod Blagovetch’s frank ramblings about how much a Senate seat was worth to him on the open market caught by the FBI wiretaps is relevant to several threads we have pursued on our lists.

Like my friend Dennis would say, now we know why they spend millions to get a 100,000 dollar a year job.

Like Chris would say, sure there are some really honest, hard working politicians (most of them Democrats, I would think he would say) but Blagovetch’s blatant admissions underscore what I have said:

1. The worst monkeys climb the greasy pole of politics to the top (FA Hayek)
2. Public choice economics reveals to us that politicians are NOT selfless individuals dedicated to the “common good”, but ambitious pikers driven by self interest, and WITHOUT the competitive checks and balances one finds in the market.
3. As the economist in this blog points out, with all this bailout mania, what we will see is influence peddling writ large, as hundreds of politicians cloak their inner Blagovetch with high sounding words about “saving jobs” or “helping little people keep their homes” or “building a greener world” or just “change” as the corporations line up for favors that will surely be repaid in full down the road.
4. The polticians (ie, the state) ARE the real center of power. They are NOT owned or controlled by corporations or some hidden elite. They ARE the elite, they HAVE THE GUNS, and they dispense the favors that only power can bestow according to THEIR whim.

Brendan

McCain tries to rally his base by claiming that judges are “coddling” criminals and citizens are hiding in their homes while criminals “roam free.”

Never mind that violent crime rates have declined steadily over the last decades. Never mind that most states now allow concealed carry laws so citizens look to themselves, not just the state, for protection. Never mind that the states, such as California, are groaning under the fiscal and moral weight of overcrowed prisons. Never mind that America has one percent of its total populaton behind bars, more than China or Russia. Never mind that prosecutors get overwhelming conviction rates of 95%, and defendants plea bargain even when innocent to avoid going to trial. Never mind that the late chief Justice of the US Supreme Ct frequently spoke out against the rising tide of federal crime legislation. Never mind that 400,000 Americans are in prison for victimless crimes. Never mind the DNA innocence project and other investigations are uncovering numerous examples of innocent people convicted of capitol and other serious crimes. Never mind ….

Oh, never mind. Obama is no better on criminal justice policy. Neither candidate has spent much time even discussing it until McCain’s desparate and out of touch Hail Mary speech.

Brendan

t is the lie that Herbert Hoover was a “laissez faire” do nothing and FDR was a “strong leader” who “created the middle class” through government interventions that has fed the media frenzy for the bailout this last week.

Neither myth is true. Herbert Hoover was no laisez faire ideologue. He was a dyed in the wool Progressive who believed in the Progressive myths of an enlightened elite that would manipulate the economy and society through scientific principles applied through civil service bureaucracies. He was an engineer who had done good work in bringing relief to famine stricken areas of the world but it was a big mistake to believe that his engineering background could successfully manipulate a free society or a complex economy.

Hoover created the FCC, and nationalized the new radio broadband spectrum, giving us the unconstitutional distinction between freedom of the press and government censorship of the airwaves. He was instrumental in creating other big government bureaucracies, including the FAA.

When the stock market tanked, he refused to allow the markets to weed out the bad investments by letting the bad malinvestments fail. There would be unemployment, although probably only for months, not years, if Hoover had let the markets work. Instead, he called on big business leaders to keep wages and therefore prices high, and resist cutbacks. He raised taxes,and pushed through the Smoot Hawley tariff. The tariff, designed to protect American workers from foreign competition in order to “save jobs”, instead spread the depression around the world as countries retaliated by raising their tariffs, and trade ground to a halt.

Roosevelt followed the same protectionist, big government strategy as Hoover, only he went further by imposing fines, creating the fascist NRA (declared unconstitutional after a suit by two brave Jewish chicken growers from Brooklyn), useless make work projects that did nothing to increase productivity, keeping prices high by ordering “surplus” meat and grain to be destroyed, confiscating the citizens gold, and ending convertability of the dollar to gold, thereby setting the grounds for the continuous inflation we have lived with since 1932.

None of Hoover’s or Roosevelt’s interventions worked, they all failed, and the Depression dragged on until finally Roosevelt essentially nationalized the economy by entering World War II. That allowed him to impose wage and price controls, which led to the current employer based health insurance system, which plagues us today.

It was only after the war, in the return to normalcy 1950’s, that the economy recovered to be close to what it was in the 1920’s.

But then, Lyndon Baines Johnson gave us the roaring 60’s, and brought big government and soaring inflation back again.

The Federal Reserve’s fiat money pumping is what keeps the boom and bust cycle going, fueled by the same Progressive social engineering that produced the quotas for poor and minority home ownership, the subprime mortgage mess, and the current meldown.

When the American people told Congress not to bail out the banks, that was Main Street common sense. When the bailout happened, spurred on by mainstream media know nothings and establishment economist know it alls, that was the ugly spectre of Hoover and Roosevelt raising its “do something quick” big government ugly head.

Are we in for another ten year depression? If we continue to allow these interventions, we may be.

But, thanks to Ron Paul, and the internet, we have much more knowledge of the harmfull effects of government intervention. We are already involved in two wars, so mobilizing the country for war is not going to help us forget our problems. We have a chance to bury the ghosts of Hoover, Roosevelt, and big government interventions, including the Federal Reserve, if we act decisively in the months ahead.

Brendan

On the debate:

Obama claims he never pimped for FANNIE Mae. Liar, liar, pants on fire. Truth fact—Obama wrote that letter in 2007, after the mortgage and housing markets were tanking. McCain was little better.

Only Ron Paul knew in 2003…right, Barney?

Both want to stabilize home prices and keep people in their homes. So, now the idea is to prop up mortgages with government (taxpayers) money. So, you and I will be paying for the homes purchased with welfare checks as collateral. Good idea, fella’s. I guess I won’t be getting that Flip this House DVD after all.

Both parties got us into the crisis–YEA! That lady knew her stuff, that’s a town hall question, Yeah!

McCain the reformer–McCain the first amendment champion! The Energy Independence hero! The climate change hero! All Hail McCain the masked marvel of the Senate !

earmarks smearmarks, What is 16 billion when we’ve been talking 700 billion all week?

Energy independece again. 700 billion dollars overseas! To countries that hate us! Like Canada, and Mexico, and Britian, and Saudi Arabia, and Indonesia. They hate us, hate us, hate us.

Moral support for the Ukraine and Belarussia and Georgia and /free membership in Nato?
Do them do them now!

Energy…it could go up! Let’s see, we have to have Alternative Energy—ka ching! And Cap and trade-Ka Ching! And don’t forget T-Bone! Ka Ching!

Middle class tax cuts? Why not, when energy policy will soak the poor and the middle class for every dime they save and then some.

Sacrifice for the state!

Examine every agency! Defense ? Ok one point for MCain, he said he would examine the defense department pork.

Spending freeze except for defense? Why should we freeze defense, we only spend more than the rest of the world put together, John boy!

Obama – a Call to service. Double the Peace Corps! Only a politician would call paid make work a call to service, and a paid program “volunteering”.

We need to think about how we use energy? Does that include Al Gore? Oh wait, if he uses too much electricity in his mansion, he pays his own carbon credit corporation.

We must Buy a safe and efficient car built in America? Why, Senator Obama? I want my BMW! Please! If I work in the Peace Corps will you buy me a BMW?

McCain admits Hoover raised taxes! He really is a maverick!

Walk in clinics? McCain, we have those now. They are in Wall Mart.

Government mandates and fines for health care? No way. Government doesn’t tell you what to do, it just gives you free stuff.

Go across state lines for insurance! All right, McCain, you finally got a good point out there.

Give people choice! Reduce mandates! He said affordable health care (not affordable health insurance). McCain is now on track, too bad we will need all that government health care for the boys who die overseas, John.

Health care is aright, for every American! Obama says you all deserve a nurse by your bed and an ambulance on call. Viagra for every male, botox for every female! He just won the election.

Children are cheap to insure! What planet is Obama from?

State by state find a state where there are no protections…so you can buy insurance from any state (McCain) so that means all the bad insurance companies will move to Arizona…and what, Senator? Somehow, that doesn’t frighten me.

McCain laughs at Obama because he will announce he is going to attack Pakistan, and that will cause resentment. So, John, unannounced sneak attacks do not cause resentment? Just asking.

Good for obama : turned that Teddy Roosevelt thing right around. So speaking softly is singing “”Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.”

McCain: I was just joking with an old veteran, you know how we old veterans love to joke about killing women and children, heh, heh.

Who was right or wrong about the surge? They mention it, but no real analysis.

No cold war but not the behavior of a wealthy nation to throw its weight around, John? Er, the US was wealthy at one time, and we kinda throw our weight around, don’t you think?

Russia’s naked aggression? Is that like naked short selling? Are you Sure Georgia had nothing to do with it, gentlemen?

Obama wants to send foreign aid to all the Slovak nations, except Russia! Break out the Kilbasa, honey, the check is coming!

Obama : we must anticipate dangers before they happen—like when do governments actually do that, Senator? Can you name one time the CIA has been right in the last century. Or is that just liberal neocon speak for premptive war?

We must cut our Energy use –starve ourselves- to hurt Russia? Can’t I just cut off my nose to spite my face?

Is anyone out there FOR a 2nd holocaust? Raise your hand, please! OK, the gentleman with the funny mustache in the back row..

Iran –that Old canard that Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map. So, lets impose sanctions, enrage the Iranian middle class, and give the Ayatollah more power . Yea, that’s the ticket! Sanctions always hurt the guys at the top, not the MIDDLE CLASS, right Senators?

Yes, Senator McCain, let’s invade some countries we don’t even know where they are at. Like, maybe Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Georgia,

We have Unprecedented problems? Yeah, like we were never involved in two land wars in Asia and a depression. Hey, but that’s government—always creative, always coming up with new problems for the politicians to make us miserable over.

Brendan

from and Email post to Renopeace.org

The Savings and Loan Institutions were unstable business entities created by Congress. The plan was for deposit savings (The Savings Part) to fund home mortgages (The Loan Part.) This is unstable because long term loans generally have lower returns in interest income than the liability that short term deposits have in owed interest.

Congress gave them special tax breaks and other privileges so they could pay more in interest than ordinary banks, thereby attracting the deposits that would fund the mortgages.

The free market would never have created Savings and Loans. If the arose, they would not last long in a free market without Government Subsidies.

So, the Savings and Loans were an example of Central Planning gone awry. ( Central Planning means a central government agency PLANS an outcome (in this case more home ownership) and provides directives ( in this case tax breaks and other subsidies) to achieve the centrally planned goal. It is the cornerstone of socialism, communism, and social engineering in a mixed economy.

In the 1970’s the entire nation suffered the whiplash effect of decades of big government, in particular the GREAT LEAP FORWARD of the 1960’s Guns (Vietnam) and Butter (The Great Society) era. Nixon followed this by unilaterally ending the POST WAR BRETTON WOODS international monetary agreements, and took the US off the international gold exchange standard. (1972) . This led to the rise of OPEC, rapid inflation, high unemployment, and high interest rates. This was called STAGFLATION. It marked the end of Keynesian economics, which had predicted that stagflation was impossible, as the dominant economic theory of political economy.

Gosh darnit (to paraphrase Sara Palin) if Jimmy Carter didn’t recognize that something major was afoot, and he appointed PAUL VOLKER to head the Federal Reserve. Volker then used the theories of Milton Friedman, called Monetarism, to end the stagflation by cutting the money supply and letting interest rates rise (float) even higher.

Read the rest of this entry »

Much ink being spilled over the bailout from all sides as they scramble to dissociate themselves from the unpopular vote.

Governments all over the world are attempting a similar bailout scheme, and not allowing normal bankruptcy proceedings to sort things out.

I fear a great depression is in the works. The state is continuing the same failed interventions it always does, trying to avoid the inevitable price deflation through more inflation.

Hold on to your assets, the shit is going to hit the fan!

When it comes to housing, however, the United States is really two countries, Flatland and the Zoned Zone.

And Zoned Zone housing prices, which have risen much faster than the national average, clearly point to a bubble.

Paul Krugman, 8/8/05

Even serial statist NY Times columnist Paul Krugman understood how zoning drives up the cost of housing.

Houston absorbed 100,000 Katrina refugees, and housing prices did not go up. Houston, the fifth largest American City, has no Zoning. Other areas with little or no zoning (such as Raleigh Durham, NC) experienced no housing bubble.

But, even though Krugman recognized the problem 3 years ago, is he calling for land use de-regulation? No, his voice is silent.

Only CATO and HERITAGE think tanks are calling for an end to zoning and the anti sprawl, anti automobile hysteria that helped fuel the housing bubble.

Brendan

DEAR AMERICAN:

I NEED TO ASK YOU TO SUPPORT AN URGENT SECRET BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH A TRANSFER OF FUNDS OF GREAT MAGNITUDE.

I AM MINISTRY OF THE TREASURY OF THE REPUBLIC OF AMERICA. MY COUNTRY HAS HAD CRISIS THAT HAS CAUSED THE NEED FOR LARGE TRANSFER OF FUNDS OF 800 BILLION DOLLARS US. IF YOU WOULD ASSIST ME IN THIS TRANSFER, IT WOULD BE MOST PROFITABLE TO YOU.

I AM WORKING WITH MR. PHIL GRAM, LOBBYIST FOR UBS, WHO WILL BE MY REPLACEMENT AS MINISTRY OF THE TREASURY IN JANUARY. AS A SENATOR, YOU MAY KNOW HIM AS THE LEADER OF THE AMERICAN BANKING DEREGULATION MOVEMENT IN THE 1990S. THIS TRANSACTIN IS 100% SAFE.

THIS IS A MATTER OF GREAT URGENCY. WE NEED A BLANK CHECK. WE NEED THE FUNDS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. WE CANNOT DIRECTLY TRANSFER THESE FUNDS IN THE NAMES OF OUR CLOSE FRIENDS BECAUSE WE ARE CONSTANTLY UNDER SURVEILLANCE. MY FAMILY LAWYER ADVISED ME THAT I SHOULD LOOK FOR A RELIABLE AND TRUSTWORTHY PERSON WHO WILL ACT AS A NEXT OF KIN SO THE FUNDS CAN BE TRANSFERRED.

PLEASE REPLY WITH ALL OF YOUR BANK ACCOUNT, IRA AND COLLEGE FUND ACCOUNT NUMBERS AND THOSE OF YOUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN TO WALLSTREETBAILOUT@TREASURY.GOV SO THAT WE MAY TRANSFER YOUR COMMISSION FOR THIS TRANSACTION. AFTER I RECEIVE THAT INFORMATION, I WILL RESPOND WITH DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT SAFEGUARDS THAT WILL BE USED TO PROTECT THE FUNDS.

YOURS FAITHFULLY MINISTER OF TREASURY PAULSON
(Thanks to Mike Holmes)

Rush Limbaugh says that no Republican is really standing up to the bailout.
Well, maybe he is right. Ron Paul is really, “NO REPUBLICAN” like any of the
rest.

CNN has realized that Ron Paul speaks for a large audience, and they have
given him an OP ED on the financial crackup.

It seems the rest of the Republicans have their fingers in the air, trying
to see which way the wind is blowing. Cheney is coming down to the house. Is
he bringing cash? Threats? Pictures and videos? No one knows for sure, but
when the godfather comes calling, you gots to show some respect.

Then vote against the Bailout!

Ron Pauls commentary on CNN.com:
By Ron Paul
Special to CNN

Editor’s note: Ron Paul is a Republican congressman from Texas who ran for his party’s nomination for president this year. He is a doctor who specializes in obstetrics/gynecology and says he has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He served in Congress in the late 1970s and early 1980s and was elected again to Congress in 1996. Rep. Paul serves on the House Financial Services Committee.

Rep. Ron Paul says the government’s solution to the crisis is the same as the cause of it — too much government.

(CNN) — Many Americans today are asking themselves how the economy got to be in such a bad spot.

For years they thought the economy was booming, growth was up, job numbers and productivity were increasing. Yet now we find ourselves in what is shaping up to be one of the most severe economic downturns since the Great Depression.

Unfortunately, the government’s preferred solution to the crisis is the very thing that got us into this mess in the first place: government intervention.

Ever since the 1930s, the federal government has involved itself deeply in housing policy and developed numerous programs to encourage homebuilding and homeownership.

Government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were able to obtain a monopoly position in the mortgage market, especially the mortgage-backed securities market, because of the advantages bestowed upon them by the federal government.

Laws passed by Congress such as the Community Reinvestment Act required banks to make loans to previously underserved segments of their communities, thus forcing banks to lend to people who normally would be rejected as bad credit risks.

These governmental measures, combined with the Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policy, led to an unsustainable housing boom. The key measure by which the Fed caused this boom was through the manipulation of interest rates, and the open market operations that accompany this lowering.

When interest rates are lowered to below what the market rate would normally be, as the Federal Reserve has done numerous times throughout this decade, it becomes much cheaper to borrow money. Longer-term and more capital-intensive projects, projects that would be unprofitable at a high interest rate, suddenly become profitable.

Because the boom comes about from an increase in the supply of money and not from demand from consumers, the result is malinvestment, a misallocation of resources into sectors in which there is insufficient demand.

In this case, this manifested itself in overbuilding in real estate. When builders realize they have overbuilt and have too many houses to sell, too many apartments to rent, or too much commercial real estate to lease, they seek to recoup as much of their money as possible, even if it means lowering prices drastically.

This lowering of prices brings the economy back into balance, equalizing supply and demand. This economic adjustment means, however that there are some winners — in this case, those who can again find affordable housing without the need for creative mortgage products, and some losers — builders and other sectors connected to real estate that suffer setbacks.

The government doesn’t like this, however, and undertakes measures to keep prices artificially inflated. This was why the Great Depression was as long and drawn out in this country as it was.

I am afraid that policymakers today have not learned the lesson that prices must adjust to economic reality. The bailout of Fannie and Freddie, the purchase of AIG, and the latest multi-hundred billion dollar Treasury scheme all have one thing in common: They seek to prevent the liquidation of bad debt and worthless assets at market prices, and instead try to prop up those markets and keep those assets trading at prices far in excess of what any buyer would be willing to pay.

Additionally, the government’s actions encourage moral hazard of the worst sort. Now that the precedent has been set, the likelihood of financial institutions to engage in riskier investment schemes is increased, because they now know that an investment position so overextended as to threaten the stability of the financial system will result in a government bailout and purchase of worthless, illiquid assets.

Using trillions of dollars of taxpayer money to purchase illusory short-term security, the government is actually ensuring even greater instability in the financial system in the long term.

The solution to the problem is to end government meddling in the market. Government intervention leads to distortions in the market, and government reacts to each distortion by enacting new laws and regulations, which create their own distortions, and so on ad infinitum.

It is time this process is put to an end. But the government cannot just sit back idly and let the bust occur. It must actively roll back stifling laws and regulations that allowed the boom to form in the first place.

The government must divorce itself of the albatross of Fannie and Freddie, balance and drastically decrease the size of the federal budget, and reduce onerous regulations on banks and credit unions that lead to structural rigidity in the financial sector.

Until the big-government apologists realize the error of their ways, and until vocal free-market advocates act in a manner which buttresses their rhetoric, I am afraid we are headed for a rough ride.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer.

And this blogger as well!