Central banks and their favorite economists are everywhere worried that central banks may be too weak to keep the current “expansion” going. If central banks are too weak now, what will happen when they get the strength they want?
Free markets have provided an abundance of goods and comforts for even low-income households. But constant government intervention in the work, lives, and incomes of the poor continues to create many barriers to economic success.
When a central bank devalues a currency, it is often said that the devaluation will help exporters, and thus the whole country, as a result. But this simplistic analysis ignores the many downsides of inflating the currency.
Government loans often feature lower interest rates than what can be found in the private sector. But this is only because these cheap loans are taxpayer subsidized. Meanwhile, the government bans many private loans that risky borrowers need most.
In recent years, some economists, contrary to long-established and widely-accepted economic theory, have been claiming that increases in the minimum wage do not increase unemployment. But both logic and the data say otherwise.
Government likes to put out lots of data showing things like income and employment for huge numbers of people. The problem is, this tells us almost nothing about how real-life people are hurt or helped by government intervention.
Backed into a corner and facing grim economic prospects, the Russian government may conclude that its best bet is to adopt some type of gold standard. The resulting panic in the West would be interesting to watch.
The opposite of secession is annexation wherein governments extend their monopolies over a greater territory. Just as secession naturally limits the power of states, annexation extends it, and should be opposed.