It appears that the issue of global warming is a bit more complicated than those in the major media outlets and the environmentalist organizations would want us to believe. It also appears that our "fragile ecosystem" is a bit more robust than they would have us believe.
In the writings of modern evangelical environmentalists runs a disturbing theme: the idea that it is possible for a small group of individuals to improve upon our use of the environment through coercion. In the name of stewardship, they lay claim to control of every aspect of our lives.
The answers we receive from the academics in response to the collapse of the Enron Corporation and the implosion of other firms are not answers at all. At best, they deal only with effects, or, at worst, reverse the pattern of cause and effect. To put it another way, writes William Anderson, the people who are supposed to know the answers don’t even know what questions they should pursue.
Creating traditions of free trade, property rights, and entrepreneurship in an impoverished continent, often amid lethal tribal and religious conflict, will take decades to achieve. But it is the only way to throw off the yoke of foreign aid.
It was only a matter of time before the Feds realized that political capital could be created from the Enron mess. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is now investigating all electricity sellers for evidence of pricing schemes employed during California’s energy crisis. In true Soviet-like fashion, the FERC has issued a deadline by which suspected firms must “admit or deny” their complicity in engaging in spurious pricing schemes during the time period.
Proponents of socially responsible investing, or SRI, promote it as a way to invest in stocks while having "positive social impact" at the same time. Beneath the surface, everyone knows that what SRI really promotes is old-fashioned socialist ideology employed in the name of investment.
According to Ludwig von Mises, socialism was doomed to failure because the lack of private property, plus the absence of a profit and loss system, meant that accurate economic calculation would be impossible in those regimes. Instead of order, there would be chaos--something that was borne out time and again as we witnessed the poor performances of socialist economies.
What may be the more important factor in manufacturing future Enrons is the role of government in fostering the boom-bust cycle. Enron, then, is just one casualty of many--albeit the largest so far--of massive credit expansion and of manipulation of interest rates by the central bank.
Hey, accountants are people, too, and they're not very happy ones these days. Arthur Andersen’s accountants--not unjustifiably--think that they are unfairly being made the scapegoats for much of Enron’s unreported sins, and the consequences could be devastating for the accounting concern’s survival.
A quarter century ago, there was a gasoline crisis--caused more by gasoline price controls than OPEC--which convinced Congress that Americans were not competent to make their own automotive choices. Thus, CAFE standards were born. They were intended to force us to get better mileage by imposing harsh penalties on any automaker whose fleet did not meet rising fuel economy standards. The Senate rejected an increase but what about existing rules?
