In all the commentary on Patrick J. Buchanan's new book (The Death of the West, NY: Thomas Dunne Books, 2002), has anyone discussed his silly economic fallacies and highly interventionist policy agenda? This is the conservative book of the year, the core thesis of which (the West needs higher rates of population increase to keep up with the Third World) impacts very strongly on economic issues.
While many pundits are fond of declaring that capital drives up medical costs, they simply are not being truthful. As one with even a rudimentary understanding of economics knows, capital has the effect of reducing unit costs. It would make no sense to acquire capital, otherwise.
A heritage of honesty and hard work are marvelous tools for papering over the failures of welfarism and subtle servitude. With the right attitude, a prison population can settle into a comfortable and egalitarian existence, one that might even impress Queen Catherine passing by on a boat. Such is the case in Denmark today.
Using changes in the margin regulation as a stick to beat the stock bubble does not work, fails to solve the underlying problem, and further injures investors by restricting their choices. What Fed Chairman Greenspan didn't know is something that the young Greenspan and his mentor Ludwig von Mises did: that monetary freedom is the way to end market bubbles once and for all.
Is it any wonder that under the leadership of a supposed conservative administration, the alleged nemesis of the tax-and-spend liberal democrats in government, we are now seeing increases in all varieties of bureaucratic budgets and the creation of new federal projects and even of federal agencies? If there is money to be gotten for cheap, public officials will go for it, never mind their alleged commitment to public service or their oath of office or what have you!
It is the widespread view in academia that John Maynard Keynes was a model classical liberal in the tradition of Locke, Jefferson, and Tocqueville. But if Keynes was such a model champion of the free society, how can we account for his peculiar comments in 1933 endorsing the social "experiments" that were going on at the time in Italy, Germany, and Russia? And what about his strange introduction to the 1936 German translation of General Theory, where he writes that his approach to economic policy is much better suited to a totalitarian state such as that run by the Nazis?
Freedom needs no help from the state—which is its natural enemy, not its ally. Freedom promotes natural order, inequality, and the decentralization of enterprise, wealth, and culture.
The American nation state has effectively served as the church of this religion in the United States. The American "Vatican" is Washington, D.C., also a unique governing jurisdiction within the boundaries of a nation-state, like its Roman counterpart. Led by its economic priesthood, the American government administers the affairs of the nation to achieve a secular salvation for all its citizens--the attainment of a new heaven on earth.
No government can live up to its billing as a semi-divine problem solver. Government intervention is not an alternative to the market; it merely creates a different kind of market full of con men selling very sour lemons.
Contrary to popular thinking, economics is not about GDP or CPI or other economic indicators as such, but about human activities that seek to promote people's lives and well-being. So what are the tools that economists and financial experts utilize in their assessments of the economy? What is the basis of their framework of thought?
