Video: A Great Divide or An Awakening?

At 1:18 it is remarked how Americans disapprove of both political parties. Other polling shows that a majority of Americans think the government is too big and intrusive.

There are ideological divides in the country, as there are in societies free enough to allow divergent public discourse on what is good and just.  The divide that is widening in America is between Americans outside the Beltway grounded in the reality of unsustainable debt, and politicians inside the Beltway who create for themselves their own universe of make-believe economics and math.

Madison famously quipped that "If men were angels, no government would be necessary..." (Federalist 51).  If politicians exercised common sense, no Tea Party would be necessary.

"As Much Unemployment As We Pay For"

From BBC News: A trio of economists were awarded the 2010 Nobel prize for economics. 

Their specialty that garnered the world's most prestigious award?  "[H]ow unemployment, job vacancies and wages are affected by regulation and policy."

From the Academy itself: "One conclusion is that more generous unemployment benefits give rise to higher unemployment and longer search times."


It's official, or officially recognized by The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, at least: Extending unemployment benefits extends unemployment. 

In his essay, Keynesian Myths, an essay in Making Economic Sense, Murray Rothbard gives us this to consider:

"Government interference, in the form of minimum wage laws and compulsory unionism, creates compulsory unemployment, while welfare payments and unemployment 'insurance' subsidize unemployment and make sure that it will be permanently high.  We can have as much unemployment as we pay for." [Emphasis added.]

What are the chances our Nobel laureate president will take note of The Academy's conclusion.



 

Video: Flannel Shirts, Fake Steel Workers, and Voters

The most telling portion of this video is the statement that, in the end just before an election, campaigns look to tap into emotion and get voters to vote against something rather than for something.

Advertisers will only try to sell you what they think you will buy.  In the next couple weeks it will be telling to see how much slide-of-hand and actual substantive campaign ads pop up.  This election cycle has a higher percentage of voters paying attention. 

It would be good to make politicians and their campaign managers realize we're looking for substance.

Videos: Notice a Difference?

What's the difference between government protests in Europe and in America?

In Europe, people take to the streets to protest cuts in government spending and reductions, real or perceived, in the entitlement cradle-to-crave nanny state. And all this in spite of the fiscal reality that such a government overreach has produced deficits their societies cannot sustain. The folks in the streets want more spending, more government, more of the cradle-to-grave nanny state.

Here's France:


And here are the Greeks:


Americans, on the contrary, have taken to the streets to protest government spending, the deficit, and to demand a reduction in the size and scope of government in their lives. They protest against big government, not for it. Americans, by and large, have a preference for individual freedom and an inherent suspicion of intertwining their individual fates with the caprice of government largess. It is the cultural effect of our unique history: it is how we are hard-wired as a people.

Here is the Tea Party:


That is quite a difference, one worth keeping in mind when discussing what is "mainstream" and what is "extreme" in American thinking.

Video: Big Business, Monopolies, and "Big Green" Environmentalism

"The myth is widespread and deeply rooted that big business and big government are rivals---that big business wants small government." Timothy Carney, The Big Ripoff: How Big Business and Big Government Steal Your Money

PJTV presents an excellent exposition on the relationship between the environmentalist movement, big business, and the regulatory agencies of the federal government. (I cannot embed the 11 minute video directly onto this post, so click here to link to it.)

The standard public perception about big business and big government is that the two are always opposed, locked into an adversarial relationship.  Not so.  As Timothy Carney (in his excellent book quoted above) points out, the history of big government is the history of big business and vice versa.  One complements the other as potential competitors are crowded out of or prevented entry into the market due to overly burdensome regulations and taxes.   Thus, lower prices, higher quality, and more choices for the consumer leave the market, too.

Classical economists have long pointed out that in a strictly free, competitive environment, it is nearly impossible to build and maintain a monopoly over competitors.  When the government is big enough and interventionist enough to squash out potential competitors, they will do so ostensibly for the public good.

Not all corporations are slimy monopolists colluding with the federal government.  The ones that do not deserve respect and our business. The ones that do are certainly not worthy of the name "capitalists" for capitalism implies competitive and open pursuit of wealth in an open and free market, not cornering markets through covert manipulation of government regulatory agencies.  

The broader point is that monopolies simply do not occur due to lack of regulation in a "free market capitalism"; they arise from and are solidified by excessive government intervention in the economy.  And companies that play the game properly deserve the title of monopolists. 

In context of this video, consider that former energy company Enron heavily lobbied government to sign onto the Kyoto Protocol--an international treaty rife with burdensome regulations on energy companies.

More recently and related to PJTV's Big Green topic, General Electric and numerous other corporations have spent millions lobbying Congress to pass the ominous Cap and Trade legislation.