Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Re: “The New Deal was a bad deal

Take the time someday to read the books/ links.

See what the progressives were saying about the fascists, particularly Mussolini in the 1920's

The crackpot Mises was able to correctly foresee the fall of the German Mark, and the 1929 crash.

So...

Actually when money flows freely strife diminishes greatly. You have it backwards. Voluntary exchange is the only way scarce resources find there highest valued use. Not by coercion, from private or government means.
The intervention of capital free flow with government and private business cronyism(corporatism), and the monetary system of constant inflation, which in America were both made dominant from the progressives (right and left) has made the separation between big losers and big winners far greater than the free market. (see links if reading isn't an option)

So applying that today would involve letting the market, which is you and me and everyone making individual economic decisions based on individual time preferences and experiences, determine interest rates. Then stop the FED and commercial banks from fractional reserve banking, or if they do and have a run they go bankrupt. Letting all citizens keep 100% of what they earn and direct as much or little funds as they see fit to any government or private agency as they want. Give power back to the people and stop promoting envy warfare. Yes, the global bubbles created from monetary inflation would collapse (which they will anyway), the faster the capital structure can go back to savings and production instead of debt and consumption the better. That transition would only be slowed by intervention in the name of "stability".

As far as basing the well being of humanity on economic terms. Obviously you have to give something of yourself, your brawn, your brain, to make the necessary things available to live. The energy you put out to make the necessary things is part of you; it is you. Therefore, when you cause these things to exist, your title to yourself, your labor, is extended to these things. You have a right to them simply because you have a right to life. That is the moral basis of the right of property(income). Freedom of disposition is the substance of property(income) rights.

If whatever you produce is taken by somebody else, and though a good part of it is returned to you, in the way of sustenance, medical care, housing, yet under the law you cannot dispose of your output, you become a SLAVE.

It is silly, then, to prate human rights being superior to property/income rights, because the right to ownership is traceable to the right to life, which is certainly inherent in the human being. Property rights are in fact human rights, something marxists/fascists/progressives don't want to accept.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFDe5kUUyT0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWk6AXQnh4s

Posted by FiscalSanity1 on 11/18/2017 at 1:01 PM

Re: “The New Deal was a bad deal

Basic FACT about FDRs New Deal: It gave immediate relief to millions of hungry, homeless, and jobless Americans. There were consequence of the New Deal, but many consider the trade offs all worth while, considering the number of lives saved. However, at the time and still today, there are many who were content to let massive numbers of people suffer and die in order that another portion of Americans could become wealthy beyond their imagination and consume, consume, consume, regardless of fairness or consequences to the environment.

Why are so many FDR critics today so willing to let people around the world suffer and die needlessly so that the more privileged and fortunate can get richer still? FDR's plan was one of compassion and common sense and any negative consequences are more that fault of individual greed and lack of compassion for others.

Posted by rightword 2 on 11/18/2017 at 12:11 PM

Re: “Speak out about the Dunes

I don't want to see OHVs eliminated from the dunes, but there is a point when we have to call out all the lies that some people spread that make the ridiculous insinuation that off road vehicles in the dunes have somehow made the natural habitat there more healthy and vibrant with new bushes miraculously springing forth under the nurturing wheels of dune buggies and motorcycles.

In fact, vast swatches of tall and dense dune stabilizing native chaparral in the dunes has been wiped out by Off Road Vehicles. There has been some planting of grasses in the region since then, but that in no way equals what was once there prior to the massive numbers of OHVs that swarmed the dunes in the 1970s and continues to this day. Where there was once forests of chaparral standing taller than the tallest man, there is now nothing but sand.

Very little respect was paid to the environment in the dunes by the OHV drivers. Shrubbery and chaparral were little more than obstacles to be run up and over and ground down with big rubber wheels. THAT is the truth. It's no wonder there have been problems environmental problems in the dunes ever since.

Posted by rightword 2 on 11/18/2017 at 11:57 AM

Re: “Speak out about the Dunes

I for one would like it if OHVs continued to have access to a portion of our local dunes. But lets be REAL about some of the FACTS about the loss of vast swatches of tall and dense dune stabilizing native chaparral in the dunes having been wiped out by Off Road Vehicles. There has been some planting of grasses in the region since then, but that in no way equals what was once there prior to the massive numbers of OHVs that swarmed the dunes in the 1970s and continues to this day.

Anytime someone makes the claim that "the dunes have more vegetation on them now than they did before people started to use them for recreation" they are misleading you. The area in the dunes now used exclusively for off road vehicle recreation was densely vegetated at one time, but after OHVs took over the area, the area was denuded of vegetation. All there is there now is sand, but photographs from the 1930s through the 1950s show vegetation so dense and tall that cabins built there by the Dunites couldn't be seen from a distance. Check out Norm Hammond's book The Dunites for facts and photos that disprove the claims by Ian Tanner and Kevin P. Rice.

Rice, in particular, continues to spread the lie about the OHV area in the dunes. I personally was in the OHV area in the 1970s and 1980s and even at that time there was considerably more vegetation there than there is now. But even at that time it was sport among some off road enthusiasts to drive straight into and onto the vegetation, grinding it away until it was little more than dust. Before the OHV explosion in the 70s and 80s there were forests of native vegetation in the current OHV area that were so dense that OHV riders created tunnels through them that they would ride through (crushing the roots and eventually killing the mighty and tall chaparral that helped retain sand in the dunes. That is now long gone

Posted by rightword 2 on 11/18/2017 at 11:45 AM

Re: “The New Deal was a bad deal

Sure, Greg. Some of the THEORY you quote sounds reasonable, but the problem is trying to apply that to the problems of TODAY and being willing to accept the devilish consequences of what you speak. If the answer was so easy, we would not be having this problem. There are some big losers when you apply your way of thinking to the real problems we face today. Spout all the economic theory you want, but that will never in a million years get the job done in making our world a better place.

You can't base the value and well-being of humanity and the world on strictly economic terms. THAT is the big problem. The solution is NOT economic in the ways you think.We don't want hoarding, we don't want all the money accumulating to just a few. But the change has to come at the spiritual level and greater adherence to the Golden Rule. Sorry, that doesn't sound quick or easy as the proscriptions by long dead and mostly irrelevant authors or the survival of the finest Ayn Rand types who will end up this life as miserable as Ayn Rand did. Apply compassion. When love flows freely, money flows freely. It might be hard for you to believe, but its primarily a matter of faith.

Posted by rightword 2 on 11/18/2017 at 11:35 AM

Re: “The New Deal was a bad deal

i would strongly recommend reading "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard and "The Forgotten Depression: 1921 the crash that cured itself" by James Grant

F.D.R.(and Hoover)/ progressive/ Keynesian policies (of promoting monetary inflation)then, and up to today especially, reveal the Cantillon effect - In short, the early receivers of the new money will increase spending according to their preferences, raising prices in these goods at the expense of a lower standard of living among the late receivers of the new money or among those on fixed incomes who don't receive the new money at all. Furthermore, relative prices will be changed in the course of the general price rise, because the increased spending is "directed more or less to certain kinds of products or merchandise according to the idea of those who acquire the money, [and] market prices will rise more for certain things than for others." Moreover, the overall price rise will not necessarily be proportionate to the increase in the supply of money. Specifically, because those who receive new money will scarcely do so in the same proportion as their previous cash balances, their demands, and hence prices, will not all rise to the same degree. Thus, "in England the price of Meat might be tripled while the price of Corn rises no more than a fourth." Cantillon summed up his insight splendidly, while hinting at the important truth that economic laws are qualitative but not quantitative.

This is also why the effects of inflation are not even and cannot be measured properly using the C.P.I. metric.

If the newly created money/credit is used for investment in concrete capital goods with low liquidity it can reach the real economy. If it is however, invested in highly liquid assets (stocks for example), the new funds are merely "parked" and do not enter the economy properly. The more inflationary the policy, the greater the premium for holding purely financial assets. If real interest rates trend toward zero, the prices of financial assets seemingly rise toward infinite heights. "Parking" of money now not only does not involve a cost, one even earns a premium. So, more and more areas become monetary "parking spaces". This is the paradox of why we have a global trend toward recession, yet certain assets are in bubbles.
The killing of the middle class.

http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html

- Greg

Posted by FiscalSanity1 on 11/18/2017 at 8:39 AM

Re: “We need to restore the foredunes in Oceano

Anytime someone makes the claim that "the dunes have more vegetation on them now than they did before people started to use them for recreation" they are misleading you. The area in the dunes now used exclusively for off road vehicle recreation was densely vegetated at one time, but after OHVs took over the area, the area was denuded of vegetation. All there is there now is sand, but photographs from the 1930s through the 1950s show vegetation so dense and tall that cabins built there by the Dunites couldn't be seen from a distance. Check out Norm Hammond's book The Dunites for facts and photos that disprove the claims by Ian Tanner and Kevin P. Rice. Rice, in particular, continues to spread the lie about the OHV area in the dunes. I personally was in the OHV area in the 1980s and even at that time there was considerably more vegetation there than there is now. But even at that time it was sport among some off road enthusiasts to drive straight into and onto the vegetation, grinding it away until it was little more than dust.
I don't want to see OHVs eliminated from the dunes, but there is a point when we have to call out all the lies that some people spread that make the ridiculous insinuation that off road vehicles in the dunes have somehow made the natural habitat there more healthy and vibrant with new bushes miraculously springing forth under the nurturing wheels of dune buggies and motorcycles.

Posted by rightword 2 on 11/17/2017 at 7:30 PM

Re: “Hatred from the left

Donald Trump's reprehensible and unrepentant lying, his xenophobic scapegoating and his outrageous attacks on women leave good, morally upright people no reason to trust Donald Trump or the direction he's leading this nation. Natural resistance seems very much to be a good thing under a Donald Trump presidency. To follow Trump's lead on anything feels like following someone who history will rank somewhere between Benedict Arnold and Adolph Hitler.

Posted by rightword 2 on 11/17/2017 at 7:18 PM

Re: “Hatred from the left

Never have more American's rallied in support of someone so vile, sick, untrustworthy and spiritually crippled as Donald Trump. Sad. But America will weather this freak and come out stronger as we use Trump to identify those who are so foolish or so crippled or so morally bankrupt to wish such a horrible man to be the leader of the free world.

Posted by rightword 2 on 11/17/2017 at 7:13 PM

Re: “Hatred from the left

Donald Trump promotes and lives for the Seven Deadly Sins. Thus he's not the type of person suited to lead a just nation or even a single household. His attitudes and actions are more suited for the depths of Hell, but even there his ineptness assures he would not long be tolerated.

Those who can't see the evil in Donald Trump must be blind to it in themselves as well. It is easy to imagine that Trump, if empowered and supported in his efforts, would be quite pleased with himself if he ordered more atrocities than Adolph Hitler, a man Trump admires alongside Vladimir Putin, Saddam Hussein and the leadership of North Korea.

Trump always puts his own interests above that of others. He is working with Putin to divide and weaken the United States. Trump is a tool and a fool and a worse threat to democracy and justice than Osama Bin Ladin and Charles Manson.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by rightword 2 on 11/17/2017 at 7:10 PM

Re: “The New Deal was a bad deal

The propaganda campaign that is aiming to smear FDR is really aimed at destroying the power of the labor movement in the U.S. and elsewhere. The aim is to perpetuate unfair treatment of labor and helping the very richest people get richer on the backs of the common man. You'll find guys like Greg Larson who quote all kinds of books without having the critical thinking to realize their fallacies. Basically, they don't know what they are talking about, but by quoting books they don't understand, they feel smart, educated and empowered despite objective evidence to the contrary.

Posted by rightword 2 on 11/17/2017 at 7:07 PM

Re: “The New Deal was a bad deal

Greg Larson is a prime example of modern propaganda victim, willing to accept foolishness that appeals to his own selfish interests. Anyone who is so foolish as to believe that the outdated and irrelevant and crackpot economic fallacies perpetuated by the lemmings who mindlessly follow (and typically misinterpret) the writings of Ludwig von Mises is not to be taken seriously. VonMIses' ideas promote selfishness and inequality and help the rich get richer at the expense of all others. Anytime anyone tries to push Von Mise "theory" on you, you know they are either propaganda victims or are trying to make victims of others. VonMise is the kind of crackpot that people who praise the other major crackpot Ayn Rand look to for meaning and direction in their empty, spiritually bankrupt lives.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by rightword 2 on 11/17/2017 at 6:58 PM

Re: “The New Deal was a bad deal

The ancestors of the National Socialists(Nazi) economic model, J.G. Fichte, J.K. Rodbertus, and F. Lassalle were fathers of socialism(progressive economic model). Socialist intellectuals J. Plenge, W. Sombart, and P. Lensch praised the collectivist WW1 economy and provided the leading ideas for the German Youth Movement between the wars, and for the masters of National Socialism, O. Spengler, A. Moeller van den Bruck, and F. Zimmermann, to fuse socialism with nationalism using militarism.

Posted by FiscalSanity1 on 11/17/2017 at 2:56 PM

Re: “Supervisor Hill says critic has 'bad crush' in online comments

Two privileged old white guys who really do seem like they would make a classic couple. Let's put them in a room together for 24 hours, video it and release the highlights on youtube. Could end up serving as a pilot episode for the next hit comedy TV series. Sort of a Seinfeld/Odd Couple/World Wrestling type thing.

Would it be too much to hope these two passionate and feisty gentlemen get together, sincerely apologize to each other, shake hands and each go back to doing something worthwhile?

3 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by rightword 2 on 11/17/2017 at 1:17 PM

Re: “The New Deal was a bad deal

I would also recommend "The Roosevelt Myth" and "As We Go Marching" by John T. Flynn, "Forty Centuries of Wage and Price Controls" by Scheuttinger & Butler, "Age of Inflation" by Hans Senholz, and "Human Action" by Ludwig von Mises.
The pdfs are free online.
-Greg

Posted by FiscalSanity1 on 11/17/2017 at 12:27 PM

Re: “The New Deal was a bad deal

i would strongly recommend reading "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard and "The Forgotten Depression: 1921 the crash that cured itself" by James Grant

Posted by FiscalSanity1 on 11/17/2017 at 11:01 AM

Re: “The New Deal was a bad deal

over 3000 executive orders and confiscating peoples property is not constitutional
-Greg

Posted by FiscalSanity1 on 11/17/2017 at 10:57 AM

Re: “Political hypocrisy

There are gun owners and there are gun nuts. Gun nuts go out in public encouraging everyone to carry guns, claiming this will make the world safer and less violent. That's insane. Please don't confuse gun owners with gun NUTS.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by rightword 2 on 11/17/2017 at 9:28 AM

Re: “Dear fellow citizens of SLO County

A single-payer healthcare system that eliminates middlemen and tons of redundant paperwork is the absolute best method of improving healthcare quality and making it as affordable as possible. It's just a matter of common sense

Posted by rightword 2 on 11/17/2017 at 9:23 AM

Re: “The New Deal was a bad deal

I'm sorry to have to say that the letter writer, Greg Larson, appears to be another victim of Heritage Foundation/ alt-right/Russian propaganda aimed at brain-washing and dividing and weakening our nation by misrepresenting history in ways that benefit the rich and powerful and the expense of the common man. The continual dishonest attacks on "New Deal" concepts and FDR are one example. Larson may mean well, perhaps, but he is acting as a pawn and a sucker as he tries to further spread propaganda on behalf of those who have no respect for the U.S. Constitution and common decency.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by rightword 2 on 11/17/2017 at 9:20 AM

© 2017 New Times San Luis Obispo
Powered by Foundation