The Austrian School Deception : Austerity , Economic Snake Oil and Genocide

[trailhound]

The reality, of course, is that most Americans were considerably worse off than before.

 Thats all a matter of opinion. The elders of my family were dirt poor and lived in what revolt would describe as some horrible collapse of society and squalor and on and on. Yet they remember those times of their lives in a good light. Hard to explain but they scratched it out and are proud of the things they learned from it. They have something no one can take as a result of there experience. They have some things the gimme generations just dont.  Of coarse they were country people living in farmland.  I wouldnt recommend going down in the city.

 I have a question for you Revolt and Geo. What would you think about the reforms you propose being done and then the infrastructure the govt decides to print into existence is the Venus project?

[Geolibertarian]

I have a question for you Revolt and Geo. What would you think about the reforms you propose being done and then the infrastructure the govt decides to print into existence is the Venus project.

One could easily posit all sorts of ridiculous fearmongering scenarios concerning government-controlled police and government-controlled armies as a way of scaring the gullible into embracing the stateless utopian fantasy world of the Austrian School, wherein--according to those who promote this delusional, quasi-religious fairy-tale--a mystical, God-like entity euphemistically called the "free market" magically keeps privately controlled police and privately controlled armies from terrorizing, oppressing and enslaving people.

Fortunately, most of the people in this forum aren't quite so gullible. They know that keeping the police and military in public rather than private hands is, if nothing else, the far lesser of two evils; and that the reason certain public institutions have become so corrupt and oppressive in recent years is that they've been, in effect, "privatized" to one extent or another (case in point: the "Federal" Reserve), and that the solution to this is not to mindlessly throw the baby out with the bathwater but to reclaim from these private interests our rightful control over our own government.

I don't know about anyone else, but I, for one, say "no" to the privatized tyranny that anarcho-capitalists would have us all living under if they had their way, and "yes" to the liberty and freedom that can only be experienced in a truly Democratic Constitutional Republic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DioQooFIcgE

[trailhound]

One could easily posit all sorts of ridiculous fearmongering scenarios concerning government-controlled police and government-controlled armies

  So you think its best for people to trust in the govt to protect them and to control everything in a benevolent fashion. Talk about utopian fantasy land.

 My answer is give people the power, yours is give govt the power if you wish to digress the argument to this.  The police state forming around us as we speak...you're really burying your head on this.

[trailhound]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DioQooFIcgE

Good link though Geo.  I am not anti govt i am for anchoring it in reality and keeping strict limits on its power.

[Geolibertarian]

So you think its best for people to trust in the govt to protect them and to control everything in a benevolent fashion. Talk about utopian fantasy land.

Way to side-step my counterargument to this in my last post. 

My answer is give people the power, yours is give govt the power

Wrong. My answer is to give people the power by conferring to them their rightful control over their own government. Yours (apparently) is to throw the baby out with the bathwater by abolishing government altogether (or reducing it to the point of irrelevancy), and thereby give rise to the tyranny of "might makes right," where only those with the most "might" are "free."
 

The police state forming around us as we speak...

Yes, but why is it forming around us? As Alex's listeners know, the answer is that the police and military have fallen under the control of private interests!

Thanks for making my case for me.

you're really burying your head on this.

I'm convinced that it's you who are "burying your head on this," not me.

Guess we'll just have to let readers decide for themselves, won't we?

[trailhound]

Yes, but why is it forming around us? As Alex's listeners know, the answer is that the police and military have fallen under the control of private interests!

Thanks for making my case for me.

 And how would your system prevent this? At least with hard currency the power to do harm would be drastically limited.  Also the police state would find strong resistance from free and armed individuals with property and power.  No its not might makes right, its get off your ass and make your own wealth.  Once you have done that, in the austrian system, you would know your efforts were not in vain and that govt couldnt steal your wealth by devaluing it.

 Regarding private armies who dont obey the rule of law how about the IRS? Yes im sure in your utopian worldview we wouldnt have to worry about them because they would just be a benevolent loving govt entity with guns and the power to put you in jail.

[trailhound]

Wrong. My answer is to give people the power by conferring to them their rightful control over their own government. Yours (apparently) is to throw the baby out with the bathwater by abolishing government altogether (or reducing it to the point of irrelevancy), and thereby give rise to the tyranny of "might makes right," where only those with the most "might" are "free."

 I think you know you are taking my arguments to unintended extremes and perhaps you feel i am doing the same to you. There is common ground here and i want that stated. I think your proposals are better than the current system, but still feel it would be too easily corrupted.

[Libertarian Perspective]

I kind of agree with lostdog on this one, let the people run their own government or if there is a government have limited economic policy. I understand that tyranny might develop with rich landowners and "capitalists" would be able to hord wealth but if the government is small then they won't have a powerful; backing from which to extend their tyranny.

What we have in today's world is Red State Fascism where you have greedy robber barons who use the fact that government is very centralised to extend their power and this power is extended economically, let's not be naive here, it's not because they have thousands of armed goons, it's because they have our financial system by the balls and you want for government to keep having the power of coining money irrespective of how much fiat currency there is in circulation.

[Geolibertarian]

I understand that tyranny might develop with rich landowners and "capitalists" would be able to hord wealth but if the government is small then they won't have a powerful backing from which to extend their tyranny.

What you're either deliberately ignoring or blissfully unaware of is how oppressive "governments" come to exist to begin with:

       http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=107307.msg653514#msg653514

[Revolt426]

@Lostdog

It is interesting you post history without any concept of what you are talking about, i cannot possibly explain all the nonsene you posted (waste of time) but a quick example;

The Gold Standard was the anchor of world finance in the 19th Century but began breaking down during the First World War as governments engaged in unprecedented spending. It collapsed in the 1930s when the British Empire, the US, and France all abandoned their parities.

It was revived as part of fixed dollar system until US inflation caused by the Vietnam War and "Great Society" social spending forced President Richard Nixon to close the gold window in 1971.

Uhm, actually - the Gold Standard was not "revived" - that was an International Gold Standard meaning the Dollar was NOT convertable to gold, nor backed by gold - but anchored by gold to fix exchange rates and prevent currency "Shorting" for profiteering. We have not been on a Domestic Gold Standard since 1933, and if we were, this Nation would have collapsed prior to World War II.

The typical skewing of facts, mis understanding of history and parroting will continue so long as people do not do their own research and use google with sourceless information.....

So, i am assuming you will keep searching the internet to copy and paste things with no concept of what you are pasting , that's fine.... just don't expect to be right about everything becuase you infact are not reading any books or documenting your sources.

[Libertarian Perspective]

OK so the alternative power is that you delegate this responsibility to the government of "managing slaves" and even more people die, plus if you're freer and there isn't so mnay laws governing what can you own and where to work, you could fight against these greedy people who own the land before they totally screw you and institute a centralised government.

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

i do not profess to agree with either side entirely, however, i do believe that free markets are not evil, and i do believe there is something that could be defined as "an invisible hand".

Geo and Revolt, i have had Revolt admit that it (invisible hand) exists, however, im getting the impression neither of you feel that it is of any worth, in fact, you appear to think it does great harm.

this is where i feel i would disagree with you, when you say "100% of the austrian school is lies etc", that is a wild and erroneous statement for obvious reasons. surely you can agree that the market is preferred to government in terms of prices and labour? im sure you do.

if so, why do you talk of free markets as though they were magic, its not magic, its supply and demand, its natural market forces.

i cant help but feel you are using examples of where the free market has been perverted as cause for belief that the free market doesnt work, which is unfair, i would never cite stalin as a reason why communism would fail. get it?

i appreciate you believe in liberty and the constitution, but you seem unwilling to trust in them in so far as allowing the natural progression of markets, instead citing it as cult worship? this confuses me, it reminds me of those people i have talked with who self proclaim themselves as "libertarian socialists".

[Libertarian Perspective]

OK so in your idea Geo and Revolt what is the prefered state of an economic system? Government subsidies, a mix of "free-market" and government loans or full blown planning of the economy?

[Revolt426]

i do not profess to agree with either side entirely, however, i do believe that free markets are not evil, and i do believe there is something that could be defined as "an invisible hand".

Geo and Revolt, i have had Revolt admit that it (invisible hand) exists, however, im getting the impression neither of you feel that it is of any worth, in fact, you appear to think it does great harm.

Actually, that was already admitted in my essay, what is neglected in most Austrian theory is that the POPULATION corrects along with the economy (If the correction is allowed to happen). For instance, if we allow this Derivative Bubble to "Correct" we will all die..... is that a logical thing to do?.

this is where i feel i would disagree with you, when you say "100% of the austrian school is lies etc", that is a wild and erroneous statement for obvious reasons. surely you can agree that the market is preferred to government in terms of prices and labour? im sure you do.

if so, why do you talk of free markets as though they were magic, its not magic, its supply and demand, its natural market forces.

Supply and Demand exists, however that does not dertermine the value of a currency , and that is what the essay is about

i appreciate you believe in liberty and the constitution, but you seem unwilling to trust in them in so far as allowing the natural progression of markets, instead citing it as cult worship? this confuses me, it reminds me of those people i have talked with who self proclaim themselves as "libertarian socialists".

I think the definition of Cult worship is correct when someone knows a policy will kill a large amount of people and still clings to it and pushes it on forums (For whatever reason).

While you have only seen a few Extremist Austrians here, i would go take a look at some other threads on this board and the mises forum, if you disagree with Von Mises or Murry Rothbard on any subject you are immediately accused of being Anti-American pushing "strawman arguments". So i could understand you not agreeing with the "Cult" assessment since you have appearently not witnessed the Austrian's who are not willing to compromise on anything (And i certainly have, a lot of them).

If there is an Austrian economist that agrees that Derivatives must be eliminated and a Domestic Gold Standard would destroy the planet via destructive deflation, then i would have to go ahead and agree with them.

[Revolt426]

OK so in your idea Geo and Revolt what is the prefered state of an economic system? Government subsidies, a mix of "free-market" and government loans or full blown planning of the economy?

No one advocated any planning. The point of the essay was to highlight major flaws in an appearently popular system on the internet and provide an alternative (issuence of currency for labor by spending it into infrastructure).

There is no private "Infrastructure" market, the private sector has never developed one major infrastructure project without Government lending or spending.
A) Startup costs are top much for Corporations to build it
B) They don't even want to build it , since they wish to de-populate the planet
C) It is not profitable enough for them to waste their time with it

That being said, no one has advocated anything other then spending Greenbacks into Infrastructure (No micro management, "centralized power" , "Large Government").

If you think the Government building a canal, bridge, road etc.. is Socialism or "Centralized Power" then i suppose our first President and founding fathers were Socialists!....... this is all explained in the essay i posted , however.

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

so there must be some aspects of free market economics that you agree with, Revolt?

i understand your point of population in terms of corrections, but although it is feasible to avoid the full magnitude of this current crisis, it is not possible to avoid it all, and similarly it is not possible to avoid all future corrections. you seem quite absolutist on this front, maybe you do not mean to?

you have proven there are holes in austrian economics, granted, but by your rhetoric it is hard to understand where you draw the line, i agree with many of your specific ideas, like debt free currency, problems of gold standards etc, but you seem to, in your overzealousness to attack austrian economics, also attack ideas like free market, im trying to establish whether this is intentional?

[Libertarian Perspective]

All I can agree on is that government needs to have some laws, checks and balances to ensure that the people who want to start these infrastructure projects don't use their power in a negative way. Apart from that I don't think that the government should be involved in planning of the economy and issuance of currency. BY goivernment I mean the guys in washington. However as it's stated in the Constitution the people are the govenrment, I do agree that local councils and so forth should be involved in planning infrastructure projects.

[Revolt426]

so there must be some aspects of free market economics that you agree with, Revolt?

i understand your point of population in terms of corrections, but although it is feasible to avoid the full magnitude of this current crisis, it is not possible to avoid it all, and similarly it is not possible to avoid all future corrections. you seem quite absolutist on this front, maybe you do not mean to?

you have proven there are holes in austrian economics, granted, but by your rhetoric it is hard to understand where you draw the line, i agree with many of your specific ideas, like debt free currency, problems of gold standards etc, but you seem to, in your overzealousness to attack austrian economics, also attack ideas like free market, im trying to establish whether this is intentional?

The reason why you cannot find "The Line" is because i do not belong to a particular school of economics, but i would consider myself a Dirigist to some extent (explained in essay).

So, where is the line, i'll answer that no problem;

Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution "General Welfare" Clause.

Before attempting to impliment any policy, ask yourself "If this for the General Welfare" of the population of the United States (Meaning , is this going to damage a portion of the population)


I believe in the "Freest Markets" possible without parasitical elites with the ability to destroy life....... so fixing exchange rates would be a great answer to one of these problems. Is that tyrranical? i do not see how it is in any way shape or form - yet the Austrian school proclaims it is tyrrany.

[Geolibertarian]

i do not profess to agree with either side entirely, however, i do believe that free markets are not evil, and i do believe there is something that could be defined as "an invisible hand".

Geo and Revolt, i have had Revolt admit that it (invisible hand) exists, however, im getting the impression neither of you feel that it is of any worth, in fact, you appear to think it does great harm.

I can't speak for Revolt, but as for me, I happen to believe in free enterprise. I just don't buy into the implied notion that calling something "free" makes it so. It doesn't. The "devil" (or lack thereof) is in the "details," as they say.

this is where i feel i would disagree with you, when you say "100% of the austrian school is lies etc", that is a wild and erroneous statement for obvious reasons.

Actually that's not my position. Have you read the following post of mine?

       http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=97109.msg571833#msg571833

if so, why do you talk of free markets as though they were magic,

I'm afraid you've got it backwards; it's the Austrian Schoolers who do that. I merely call them on it.

i appreciate you believe in liberty and the constitution, but you seem unwilling to trust in them in so far as allowing the natural progression of markets,

The problem is that "allowing the natural progression of markets" is very often (though not necessarily always) an Austrian School euphemism for allowing an artificial implosion of markets to occur, which means allowing the very criminal bankers who orchestrated the collapse in the first place to foreclose on everyone and buy everything up at pennies on the dollar. Austrian Schoolers, in true Orwellian fashion, routinely call this parasitic transfer of wealth a market-based "correction" or "adjustment" (and that letting it take its course is thus conducive to "liberty"). In reality, it is a fraud-based looting of the real economy, and is conducive only to feudalistic tyranny.

Hope that clarifies the nature of the dispute.

[Revolt426]

All I can agree on is that government needs to have some laws, checks and balances to ensure that the people who want to start these infrastructure projects don't use their power in a negative way. Apart from that I don't think that the government should be involved in planning of the economy and issuance of currency. BY goivernment I mean the guys in washington. However as it's stated in the Constitution the people are the govenrment, I do agree that local councils and so forth should be involved in planning infrastructure projects.

Sure, this goes down to the local level as well.... i mean, when the Government starts a large scale infrastructure project Local Commercial Banks issue credit in their own states in addition to the Government doing so - it just so happens that the Credit on a Greenback system is debt free and sovereign, and fully represents the populace and economy of the nation unlike the privatized issuence of credit which the Government really has no control over (FED).

I wrote this essay because i do not want the only alternative to the status quo to be a  full blown Austrian system, and it just so happens that there is a very large movement of Austrians reading from the Von Mises website that do not take certain things into consideration (these are the things i've highlighted)........ However there are indeed certain methods of the Austrian School that would work, just not the ones i've highlighted (and they happen to be major foundation issues of that paricular school).

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

I can't speak for Revolt, but as for me, I happen to believe in free enterprise. I just don't buy into the implied notion that calling something "free" makes it so. It doesn't. The "devil" (or lack thereof) is in the "details," as they say.

Actually that's not my position. Have you read the following post of mine?

       http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=97109.msg571833#msg571833


I'm afraid you've got it backwards; it's the Austrian Schoolers who do that. I merely call them on it.

The problem is that "allowing the natural progression of markets" is very often (though not necessarily always) an Austrian School euphemism for allowing an artificial implosion of markets to occur, which means allowing the very criminal bankers who orchestrated the collapse to foreclose on everyone and buy everything up at pennies on the dollar. Austrian Schoolers, in true Orwellian fashion, routinely call this parasitic transfer of wealth a "correction" or "adjustment" (and that letting it take its course is thus conducive to "liberty"). In reality, it is a fraud-based looting of the real economy, and is conducive only to feudalistic tyranny.

Hope that clarifies the nature of the dispute.

thanks geo, i must say, ive never really had a problem with any of your posts, and 99% agree entirely, maybe its just the way Revolt puts it, he is very much sterner than you when presenting this information, having said that, i rather think it is not so intentional, that like many of us, he is just passionate.

anyway, i think i understand better now, you dont necessarily have a problem with free enterprise etc, just with the rigid dogma presented by the austrian school, i can deal with that.

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

However there are indeed certain methods of the Austrian School that would work, just not the ones i've highlighted (and they happen to be major foundation issues of that paricular school).

there we go, thats all i needed to hear, i agree totally!!!

[Revolt426]

there we go, thats all i needed to hear, i agree totally!!!

You know, it varies depending on the perosn... It just so happens Geo has been around the monetary reform issue a lot longer than i have and has a lot more patience than i have in regards to people posting skewed  history in the name of what they refer to as "Free Markets".

For instance, there is a LOAD of propaganda that comes from the Austrian school proclaiming Lincoln was a tyrant (without looking into what he actually did, since he was at war with the British Empire who essentially created the Confederacy).....

Another example being, "We should have allowed the Great Depression to correct itself"........ well, as anyone could see 1929-1932 and allowing that mess to "correct" itself resulted in a complete collapse of the U.S. Banking System to the point where people were unable to withdraw currency and cash checks by FDR's inuaguration....... So, i don't think that is really accurate, i don't believe that an invisible hand would come down and make those insolvent banks function again........ a very similar crisis to today in regards to the web of derivatives (however today's crisis is FAR worse in this globalized mess of an economy).

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

i agree that the "invisible hand" would not turn insolvent banks solvent, how could it, and that it is wrong to blindly let people suffer when there are things that can be done like freezing of the derivatives, like you and geo have described, but surely, if we were in a time far removed from our current troubles, where things were more stable, then the "invisible hand" would be a good thing? do you agree? i mean, does the "invisible hand" or free enterprise as i would call it, does this have a place in your vision of how things should be?

[Revolt426]

i agree that the "invisible hand" would not turn insolvent banks solvent, how could it, and that it is wrong to blindly let people suffer when there are things that can be done like freezing of the derivatives, like you and geo have described, but surely, if we were in a time far removed from our current troubles, where things were more stable, then the "invisible hand" would be a good thing? do you agree? i mean, does the "invisible hand" or free enterprise as i would call it, does this have a place in your vision of how things should be?

I would think the "invisible hand" would work only with a sound economic system for typical corrections (that do not destroy countless lives). When you have a Depression or full blown collapse on your hands, you really have to produce your way out of it (Re-Industrialize the Nation). The way to do that is to provide the modernized economic infrastructure to spurr the private sector.....

I mean, a short example...... we have 1/3rd LESS hospitals in this nation than we did in the 1940's..... obviously the population has expanded....... And they are still closing down on a monthly basis...

Our Dams are falling apart, our energy is totally in-sufficient to expand the economy, our bridges actually fall down!  .

This should not be occuring, and it surely does not help the private sector with their daily economic activities...

So if a sound system were implimented there would be no need for a tremendous intervention (like the Government freezing all Derivatives and putting the FED system into bankruptcy reorganization)..... There would be natural corrections but the current situation cannot be corrected in such a way.

[Revolt426]

You may be interested in this:

http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2008/2008_1-9/2008_1-9/2008-9/pdf/28-29_3509.pdf

How the 14th-Century Lombard Banks Created the Dark Age

This is an article on how a systemic banking chain reaction collapse wiped out 1/3rd of Europe in the 14th Century.....

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

I would think the "invisible hand" would work only with a sound economic system for typical corrections (that do not destroy countless lives). When you have a Depression or full blown collapse on your hands, you really have to produce your way out of it (Re-Industrialize the Nation). The way to do that is to provide the modernized economic infrastructure to spurr the private sector.....

I mean, a short example...... we have 1/3rd LESS hospitals in this nation than we did in the 1940's..... obviously the population has expanded....... And they are still closing down on a monthly basis...

Our Dams are falling apart, our energy is totally in-sufficient to expand the economy, our bridges actually fall down!  .

This should not be occuring, and it surely does not help the private sector with their daily economic activities...

So if a sound system were implimented there would be no need for a tremendous intervention (like the Government freezing all Derivatives and putting the FED system into bankruptcy reorganization)..... There would be natural corrections but the current situation cannot be corrected in such a way.

i understand, and agree!

might i suggest clarifying this point in future essays, it would appear you do not think 100% of austrian economics is wrong, just that in some important aspects that it is not suited to our current circumstances.

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

You may be interested in this:

http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2008/2008_1-9/2008_1-9/2008-9/pdf/28-29_3509.pdf

How the 14th-Century Lombard Banks Created the Dark Age

This is an article on how a systemic banking chain reaction collapse wiped out 1/3rd of Europe in the 14th Century.....

thanks, reading it now.

[Revolt426]

i understand, and agree!

might i suggest clarifying this point in future essays, it would appear you do not think 100% of austrian economics is wrong, just that in some important aspects that it is not suited to our current circumstances.

It was my first essay on the subject, and i actually mentioned i was attacking the "Foundations" but, yes i'll keep that in mind next time if i were to write another or post it elsewhere, thank you.

[Geolibertarian]

i agree that the "invisible hand" would not turn insolvent banks solvent, how could it, and that it is wrong to blindly let people suffer when there are things that can be done like freezing of the derivatives, like you and geo have described, but surely, if we were in a time far removed from our current troubles, where things were more stable, then the "invisible hand" would be a good thing? do you agree?

For me it depends on the situation. As you may have figured out by now, my approach to reducing government involvement is to begin first with eliminating the privileges of those at the top of the power pyramid and then work my way downward.

If I were a legislator, for instance, I wouldn't even consider supporting a bill to reduce welfare subsidies to the poor until and unless corporate welfare was abolished. I wouldn't even consider reducing the minimum wage requirement until and unless the tax on wages was dramatically reduced. And I wouldn't even consider reducing funding for job training programs until and unless most occupational licensing barriers were eliminated.

With regard to the current depression and to the question of how we should go about addressing it, you might be interested to know -- and Revolt may be surprised to learn -- that even Milton Friedman was generally supportive of the emergency relief measures implemented by FDR during the last great depression:

"Now, given the conditions you were in in '33, given that the mistake had been made, I have no doubt that major social action was called for. And I really have no criticism to make of the emergency action which was undertaken at that time in the form of WPA, PWA, direct relief -- I think you had to do it at that time, given the state you were in."

-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfdRpyfEmBE

To hear certain Austrian Schoolers talk, Friedman was a flaming communist just for saying that! 

[Michal Ptacnik]

It does not matter whether you have a too strong state or a too strong private sector. Both extremes tend towards tyranny. The first is the Soviet Union, the second is the USA right now. Any debating on whether you want a full free market or a full socialism is akin to "do you want to get kicked to the left or the right side of the head by the Man?"

The problem is the inherent nature of society, ultimately, and unless that changes, we will always be under the risk of being ruled by criminals, but if you achieve a modicum between free market and socialism, your chances will be better for a well governed (as far as that is possible now) society to take place.

[trailhound]

Hi Revolt. Since you dodged me earlier thought i would ask again if your proposals were implemented what would stop the govt from printing the Venus project and universal healthcare, geo-engineering etc into existence?

[Michal Ptacnik]

What is so bad about Venus?

[trailhound]

The problem is that "allowing the natural progression of markets" is very often (though not necessarily always) an Austrian School euphemism for allowing an artificial implosion of markets to occur, which means allowing the very criminal bankers who orchestrated the collapse in the first place to foreclose on everyone and buy everything up at pennies on the dollar. Austrian Schoolers, in true Orwellian fashion, routinely call this parasitic transfer of wealth a market-based "correction" or "adjustment" (and that letting it take its course is thus conducive to "liberty"). In reality, it is a fraud-based looting of the real economy, and is conducive only to feudalistic tyranny.

Hope that clarifies the nature of the dispute.

 That is disingenuous of you to blame the austrian school for the bubbles their system would eliminate.  And calling them Orwellian...wow.  Never thought of Ron Paul as Orwellian.

and then revolt saying we would all die if we had hard currency and real free markets...  um fearmongering? Both of you say i am fearmongering for fearing a central state with absolute control over everything but in light of your ridiculous chicken little position i hope someone else notices your fearmongering.

[Geolibertarian]

Hi Revolt. Since you dodged me earlier thought i would ask again if your proposals were implemented what would stop the govt from printing the Venus project and universal healthcare, geo-engineering etc into existence?

The fact that, through election reform, the government has been made into an institution that is of, by, and for "the people" again rather than of, by, and for the NWO.

Are you really so naive as to think (or so ideologically desperate as to blindly assume) that a public that is organized and forceful enough to compel Congress to implement monetary reform would not be organized and forceful enough to compel Congress to implement election reform at the same time?

[trailhound]

What is so bad about Venus?

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=10002.0

[trailhound]

Are you really so naive as to think (or so ideologically desperate as to blindly assume) that a public that is organized and forceful enough to compel Congress to implement monetary reform would not be organized and forceful enough to compel Congress to implement election reform at the same time?

 I just dont think election reform could address the issue unless capitalism was completely ended. I dont want to go there.

 And even if you did you still have to stop the moron public from clamoring for their own demise through social programs.

 Also i am not an idealogue i am open to creative solutions i just think the school you are attacking has better answers than you do.  Regardless all we have is our opinions because we dont know the final result of either equation.

[grapecrusher1]

I think most of these economic schools of thought have inherent flaws.

Most notably:

(1)  Socialist (with Tarpley as it's rep-haha) espousing smaller government yet in the same breath talking about massive government projects ---- this is
      counter intuitive.

(2)  The Austrian School is far too austere in its orthodox form and has no social net which, I believe, is necessary for a civilized progressive functioning society.

A hybrid I think is most functional. 

[Freeski]

I think most of these economic schools of thought have inherent flaws.

Most notably:

(1)  Socialist (with Tarpley as it's rep-haha) espousing smaller government yet in the same breath talking about massive government projects ---- this is
      counter intuitive.

(2)  The Austrian School is far too austere in its orthodox form and has no social net which, I believe, is necessary for a civilized progressive functioning society.

A hybrid I think is most functional. 

My understanding/belief is that a society without state-run social programs would naturally meet the need with private charity. People would become more resourceful, and less dependent. Mine is a genuine trust in liberty, I believe it can work things out on its own.

What we do today, instead, is predict "how" it will play out, and then we provide resources to help it materialize. We create it.

Freedom works. But you have to trust it.
IMO

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

My understanding/belief is that a society without state-run social programs would naturally meet the need with private charity. People would become more resourceful, and less dependent. Mine is a genuine trust in liberty, I believe it can work things out on its own.

What we do today, instead, is predict "how" it will play out, and then we provide resources to help it materialize. We create it.

Freedom works. But you have to trust it.
IMO

as always freeski, couldnt have said it better myself.