Home » Posts tagged 'free market'

Tag Archives: free market

Whoever controls the narrative controls the world. That’s all you’re seeing in efforts to manage information via censorship, algorithm changes, “fact” checking, Russian propaganda panic, etc. Humans are story-driven animals, so if you control the stories you control the humans.

❖

Lessons from this whole Wall Street/Reddit ordeal:

The stock market is a scam.
There is no “free market” and there never will be.
Wall Street predators are the most despised people on earth.
The public can do more to fight back than it had previously assumed.
There’s surely a lot more we can do to fight back that we haven’t thought of yet.

❖

You can’t expose how rigged the system really is without pushing against its power structures according to its own rules. When the entire system pushes back and boots you out in front of everyone, more people are made more aware that it is rigged. This can only be a good thing.

❖

Every single hedge fund plutocrat has at some point in their lives thought the words “I can’t believe I’m getting away with this!”

❖

This is another one of those awkward “we need to shut down the rabble without looking like a totalitarian oligarchy” standoffs.

❖

Myth: The rich compete with each other and ordinary people benefit from it.

Reality: The rich collaborate with each other against ordinary people.

Example:

It will always tend to be more profitable to do bad things than good things: ecocide over preservation, exploitation over equality, war over peace. Humanity remains on a doomed trajectory for as long as its systems maintain profit-seeking as the driving force behind its behavior.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Goodbye, Free Market

June 18, 2020

Goodbye, Free Market

Fremdschämen.

Fremdschämen is a noun of the German language. It translates this way:

Embarrassment for those incapable of feeling embarrassment.

Today we suffer embarrassment for Mr. Jerome Powell and his fellows of the Federal Reserve…

For no action they take lowers their heads in shame… or blushes their cheeks with embarrassment.

Mr. Powell is simply in the hands of Wall Street… and on his knees to Wall Street.

Well does he know the taste of shoeblack.

Yesterday Mr. Powell got a fresh coat on his tongue. Details to follow.

But first, let us look in on his masters…

A Banner Day on Wall Street

Wall Street was in full roar today.

The Dow Jones jumped an additional 582 points. The S&P gained 58 points; the Nasdaq, 169 points of its own.

CNBC, by way of explanation:

Stocks rose on Tuesday as a record jump in retail sales — coupled with positive trial results from a potential coronavirus treatment and hopes of more stimulus — sent market sentiment soaring.

Government number-torturers reported this morning that May retail sales jumped a record 17.7%.

The chronically erring Dow Jones survey of economists had projected a 7.7% increase.

Yet we are not surprised by the surge. April’s numbers were true abominations. But certain economic restrictions were waived in May.

A trampolining back was therefore expected.

Meantime, a medicine named dexamethasone — a widely available medicine — is evidently effective in the treatment of deathly ill coronavirus patients.

It reportedly axed hospital deaths by perhaps one-third.

Thus the market had its spree today. But it merely added to yesterday afternoon’s joys…

Powell Licks Wall Street’s Shoes

The Dow Jones had been off 762 points in early trading yesterday, quaking with coronavirus-related fear.

But then Mr. Powell sank to his knees… and tongued Wall Street’s wingtips…

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Internet Censorship, Ego Death, And Other Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix

May 9, 2020

Internet Censorship, Ego Death, And Other Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix

There is no legitimate basis upon which to support monopolistic plutocratic megacorporations with extensive government ties silencing dissident voices in order to control the thoughts that people think about Covid-19. This is true regardless of your stance on the virus itself.

It is a known fact that Silicon Valley tech giants have extensive ties to the US government. Like, it’s not a secret. At all. Yet whenever you object to internet censorship you always get people babbling about how it’s a “private company” so it’s okay. If a company is intertwined with government power in myriad ways, how is its deplatforming behavior meaningfully distinct from state censorship? Especially when its willingness to collaborate with the government protects it from antitrust cases, thereby killing any potential competition?

“Free market” types say “If you don’t like it you can go on another platform!” No you can’t. There’s no competition. If you don’t like Twitter you can leave a platform of hundreds of millions for a platform like Gab, which is like ten people and nine of them are Nazis.

They’ll say “No biggie, go be on that tiny platform over there, there’s plenty of free speech there!” I am sure there is. There’s free speech in the desert, too. Free speech doesn’t matter if you’ve isolated yourself on a platform where your voice is only heard by a few fringey people.

They’ve herded everyone onto a few monopolistic government-tied platforms, and now they’re censoring those platforms with an increasingly authoritarian fist. There’s no “free market” solution to this problem, because it’s not happening in a free market.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Cover-19 and the Death of Market Fundamentalism

April 17, 2020

COVID-19 AND THE DEATH OF MARKET FUNDAMENTALISM

On top of the countless human tragedies, there will be many long-lasting social and economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Perhaps none will be more profound though, than the death of free market fundamentalism and the return of the State.

Why now? After all, there have long been moral, social and environmental risks posed by an unfettered market. Risks that present a strong case for action by the State – with inequality and climate change being the two most glaring examples. It didn’t help.

This is different. COVID-19 presents a blindingly powerful economic case for change. It shows that an ideological, quasi-religious approach to regulating markets, sometimes called neo-liberalism and, until the virus, the dominant political approach in the west, is fatally flawed. It creates a weak and unstable economy, which magnifies risks and is unable to manage shocks¹. It threatens itself.

Of course, a pandemic would always have had a very large and disruptive economic impact. However, we can already see that those countries with a coherent, competent, respected and well-resourced State – everything market fundamentalists have sought to undermine – are likely to have both lower economic and human cost.

Thus, market fundamentalism is no longer even in the interests of the corporate sector or the financial elites. It creates unmanageable economic risks and ultimately poses an existential risk to capitalism, as argued by Nobel Prize winning economist, Joseph Stiglitz². Therefore, any corporate or finance leader who continues their knee jerk support for actions to ‘free up markets, ‘reduce taxes’, to ‘get government out of the way’, will now know the consequences.

This is not about being for or against ‘the market’ or the ‘corporate sector’. It is not about ‘curbing corporate power’ or developing ‘an alternative economic system’. Capitalism, correctly defined and well managed, can be a powerful and effective component of an intelligently designed, democratic and fair society.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Rush To A Cashless Society Only Serves Globalist Interests

November 30, 2019

The Rush To A Cashless Society Only Serves Globalist Interests

A fundamental pillar of true free markets is the existence of choice; the availability of options from production to providers to purchase mechanisms without interference from governments or corporate monopolies. Choice means competition, and competition drives progress. Choice can also drive changes within society, for if people know a better or more secure way of doing things exists, why would anyone want to stay trapped within the confines of a limited system? At the very least, people should be allowed to choose economic mechanisms that work best for their particular situation.

This is NOT how our society functions today, and free market do not exist anywhere in modern nations including the US. Whenever I hear someone (usually a socialist) blame free market “capitalism” for the oppressive ailments of the world, I have to laugh. The alliance between governments and corporate monopolies (what Mussolini called national socialism or fascism) makes free markets utterly impossible. What we have today is an amalgamation of socialist economic interference and corporatocracy. Our system is highly restrictive and micro-managed for everyone except the money elites, who do not have to follow the same rules the rest of us do.

Of course, I might be preaching to the choir when it comes to these issues. But, there are some underlying developments being pushed forward by globalists hell-bent on a one world monetary system and a one world government that even many liberty activists are not fully aware of.

In alternative economic circles, the US dollar is seen as the end-all-be-all of fiat currency dominance. Many activists see it as the key to the power of the global elites and they think the Federal Reserve is the top of the globalist pyramid. This is not exactly true.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Apex Predator That Will Take Down Wall Street (And K Street)

January 14, 2019

The Apex Predator That Will Take Down Wall Street (And K Street)

Grant Williams grabbed our vote for the top Alt-Finance presentation of 2017 for A World of Pure Imagination , which highlighted global stock, bond and real estate bubbles that are now showing signs of imploding.

The co-founder of RealVision TV excelled again during 2018 for Cry Wolf, an encomium for a gold-backed currency, which Williams argues would act as an “apex predator” to check government policies that have enticed Americans to borrow themselves into near-bankruptcy.

“In gold’s absence, bankers have multiplied precipitously, creating new variations on the same theme: credit,” says Williams, who likens the process to the proliferation of deer in Yellowstone National Park following extermination of wolves in the 1930s. “They have grazed the financial landscape to virtually nothing.”

Williams’ arguments are well-understood in the precious metals community, where he has taken on a growing role as a Yoda of sorts—a lonely voice arguing cogently for financial sanity.

However, Williams’ ideas are essentially unknown to ordinary investors and the general public, in part because (ironically, for what many describe as a capitalist economy) free market thinkers are essentially banned from governments, universities, and the mainstream media.

Hence the importance of Cry Wolf, which dramatically illustrates the role of what Joseph Schumpeter called “creative destruction,” whose effects Williams likens to the reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone in 1995.

Destructive preservation: rewarding the inefficient

Right now, the U.S. economy is (in many ways) the opposite of a free market.

Much of this is directly tied to the gradual banning of gold-backed currencies, which has enabled governments to print money and distribute it to favored interest groups, often in secret, without taxpayer approval.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Liberal Capitalism as the Ideology of Freedom and Moderation

November 7, 2018

LIBERAL CAPITALISM AS THE IDEOLOGY OF FREEDOM AND MODERATION

Nowadays, many along the political spectrum seem to agree that America increasingly has become a polarized society. Ideological and public policy discourse has been gravitating more toward the extremes: progressives and the Democratic Party with a more explicitly socialist rhetoric and proposed government agenda, and conservatives and Republicans who increasingly appear to be moving in the direction of populist, and especially economic, nationalism under the presidency of Donald Trump.

If such ideological extremism is politically tearing the country apart in the eyes of many, then what could and should be a “non-ideology” of compromise and moderation? This is a question that Jerry Taylor, president of the William Niskanen Center, asks and answers in a recent article, “The Alternative to Ideology,” in which he directly challenges the premises and policy perspective of many libertarians.

Mr. Taylor insists that those who espouse a political philosophy of individualism, free markets, and strictly limited constitutional government are out of touch with reality and make themselves irrelevant in contemporary political discourse. Having long been a proponent of libertarianism himself, Mr. Taylor believes that he understands its asserted weaknesses from the inside.

Doubting Market Solutions to Global Problems

His first doubts, he explains, emerged with his conclusion that libertarians have little or nothing to contribute to the leading problem of our time: global warming. In Mr. Taylor’s view, this demonstrated to him that there needed to be answers outside the mantra of individual liberty and free markets. How else could this threat to humanity be tackled other than through extensive and combined governmental intervention, regulation, taxation, and possibly organized planning?

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Hitler’s Economics

October 30, 2018

Hitler’s Economics

For today’s generation, Hitler is the most hated man in history, and his regime the archetype of political evil. This view does not extend to his economic policies, however. Far from it. They are embraced by governments all around the world. The Glenview State Bank of Chicago, for example, recently praised Hitler’s economics in its monthly newsletter. In doing so, the bank discovered the hazards of praising Keynesian policies in the wrong context.

The issue of the newsletter (July 2003) is not online, but the content can be discerned via the letter of protest from the Anti-Defamation League. “Regardless of the economic arguments” the letter said, “Hitler’s economic policies cannot be divorced from his great policies of virulent anti-Semitism, racism and genocide.… Analyzing his actions through any other lens severely misses the point.”

The same could be said about all forms of central planning. It is wrong to attempt to examine the economic policies of any leviathan state apart from the political violence that characterizes all central planning, whether in Germany, the Soviet Union, or the United States. The controversy highlights the ways in which the connection between violence and central planning is still not understood, not even by the ADL. The tendency of economists to admire Hitler’s economic program is a case in point.

In the 1930s, Hitler was widely viewed as just another protectionist central planner who recognized the supposed failure of the free market and the need for nationally guided economic development. Proto-Keynesian socialist economist Joan Robinson wrote that “Hitler found a cure against unemployment before Keynes was finished explaining it.”

What were those economic policies?

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

How a Free Market Inevitably Produces Dictatorship

August 23, 2018

How a Free Market Inevitably Produces Dictatorship

Who rules the land? A deeper and truer version of this question is: What rules the land? Is it the money (the aristocracy), or is it the people (the public, the residents on that land)? (For the interest of paleoconservatives, the issue of residents’ citizenship will come later here, as “immigrants” instead of as “citizenship”; but our basic focus is not ethnicity/nationality; it’s class: the money, versus the voters; not the natives, versus the foreigners.)

In a democracy, the public rule — the people do — and it’s on authentically a one-person-one-vote basis, and anyone who is a resident in that land can easily vote, just like anyone else who lives there, because only the residents there, during the specific time-period of the voting, are the ultimate decision-makers, over that land, and over its laws. This is what a democracy is: it’s one-person-one-vote, and, in the political sense, it’s total equality-of-rights and total equality-of-obligations — real and total equality-by-law: equal rights, and equal obligations, for all residents. A democracy applies the same requirements to everyone.

This does not mean that individuals are equal in their abilities and in their needs, and so it’s not a statement about the economy; it is purely a statement about the government — a political question. The economy is a separate matter, though it’s highly dependent upon the government — the laws that are in place and enforced. Many people confuse these two fields, and mistakenly think that the economy is basic to the government.

So: the economy is dependent upon the government; the government determines the economy, which, in any land, is highly dependent upon the laws that are in place and that are enforced — the government.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The West Continues to Rot at the Core as it Obsesses Over the Short-term

August 18, 2018

The West Continues to Rot at the Core as it Obsesses Over the Short-term

The stock market, by and large, is a farce.

This is not to say that it does not have a purpose, because undoubtedly it does. This cannot and will not be denied, except by those who identify themselves as having anarchist traits.

Yet, it is still a farce. It is corrupt, it is short-sighted and it is riddled with problems. But in our “semi” capitalistic system, it is what we have. And we have to make the best of it.

This, however, does not stop us from striving to improve it. In fact, I believe this should be a major goal of Western society as a whole. The stock market, in tandem with the free market, has led to the most powerful economic engine this world has ever seen. Even if it is now riddled with disease, it is and will be for the foreseeable future a juggernaut in the economic landscape.

We should constantly strive to weed out corruption within the system and work towards improving the function of the markets as a whole. However, one issue that has once again been pushed to the forefront is the fact that Western markets are incredibly short sighted.

Many legal and financial experts have argued this point for years. The stock market’s obsession over quartering reporting has pushed it to its breaking point, driving companies to overemphasize the short-term, rather than the long-term, health of the company as a whole.

This irrational way of thinking has driven many companies to the point of bankruptcy, as many CEOs and executives know they have a short term life span within any given company. This drives them to push short-term profits, hoping to beat the next quarterly consensus—driving the price of shares up, and thus their golden parachute packages along with it.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

If You Don’t Trust People, Then You Shouldn’t Trust Politics

December 28, 2017

If You Don’t Trust People, Then You Shouldn’t Trust Politics

If people can’t be trusted to make their own decisions, why would those same people be trusted to make decisions for the rest of us?

“Ordinary people can’t be trusted to make the right decisions about what’s best for themselves and others. That’s why we need government to decide for them.”

“And who will we trust to decide who these government officials are?”

“Ordinary people, of course. It’s only fair.”

I hope you see the irony here.

I also hope you see the irony in expressing mistrust in human nature while also expressing faith in the idea that human nature will somehow become trustworthy when those humans work for the government. If people can’t be trusted to make their own decisions, why would those same people be trusted to make decisions for the rest of us? This line of thinking has never made sense to me, and I hope it starts to make a little less sense to you.

Here’s one of my favorite clips where the economist Milton Friedman addresses this fallacy in response to Phil Donahue’s concerns about capitalistic greed:

The way we’re going to move forward in this world is not by finding a person who’s good enough to make bad systems work, but by investing in systems that incentivize even the bad person to make himself or herself accountable to creating value for others. And I know of no other system like that other than the free market.

If you’re interested in hearing me elaborate on this theme, check out this talk I gave at The Nassau Institute & The University of The Bahamas on the power of free markets and why we need to look beyond politics if we truly want to create a freer society:

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Regulation–The Hidden Curse

May 29, 2016

REGULATION – THE HIDDEN CURSE

Regulations are nearly always introduced with the best intentions.

In financial services, they aim to stop unscrupulous brokers and banks from ripping off the public through bad practices. Manufacturers are banned from making products which are dangerous to children, the environment, or which might fail through shoddy workmanship. However, state intervention in commercial matters is based on shaky grounds, consistent with denial of the role and workings of markets, and an overriding desire to interfere.

This contrasts with a true understanding of why free markets work, and the control the consumer exercises over prices and choice, subordinating them to his subjective decisions. Consequently, regulation is based on an unreasoned belief that the individual needs state intervention to ensure standards are maintained, and that bad practices will be eliminated. The incorrect assumption is that free markets encourage unscrupulous manufacturers and service providers to defraud the consumer, when in fact, reputation becomes the paramount relationship in trade.

Because private sector regulation tends towards monopoly practices, the state naturally sees itself as the independent arbiter to ensure fair play. But the state, having initially imposed regulations, finds it very difficult to stop there, with political pressures always to modify and intensify bureaucratic control. Furthermore, unintended consequences of earlier regulations are never corrected by abolishing them. Instead, more layers of regulatory control are introduced in an attempt to address ensuing problems. We therefore drift into greater and greater regulation, without being aware of the true economic cost.

Anyone who favours regulation needs to explain away Germany’s post-war success. Her economy had been destroyed, firstly by the Nazi war machine, and then by Allied bombing. We easily forget the state of ruin the country was in, with people in the towns and cities actually starving in the post-war aftermath.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Governments Create Monopolies and Cause Worker Exploitation, Not Free Markets

May 19, 2016

GOVERNMENTS CREATE MONOPOLIES AND CAUSE WORKER EXPLOITATION, NOT FREE MARKETS

The world is threatened with a renewed wave of anti-capitalism and anti-business sentiments and policies. Many who cheered the demise of Soviet communism in the early 1990s, presumed that this meant that, by default, the case for free markets and competitive enterprise had won in the battle of ideas. Over the last twenty-five years it has become clear that the same misguided arguments against free market capitalism constantly reemerge, like an ideological vampire waiting to rise from the intellectual grave and drain market freedom of its lifeblood by more government regulations and controls.

One of the most persistent of these misguided ideas is the belief that left on its own, competitive markets tend to bring about concentration of wealth, inequality of income, and “market power” to exploit workers and consumers of what justly should be theirs.

The most recent example of this is an article on, “Monopoly’s New Era,” by Joseph E. Stiglitz, the 2001 Nobel Prize winner in economics, which appeared on Project Syndicate website on May 13, 2016. Professor Stiglitz is one of those thinkers who seem to see a “market failure” at every turn and apparently has rarely found a government intervention he did not like.

Two Ways of Looking at the Market Process

He contrasts two differing views of the market economy. One view, an outgrowth of Adam Smith and those who followed in his intellectual footsteps over the last 250 years, argue that freedom, prosperity, and income equity are generally assured wherever the market is kept open and competitive, with minimal government impediments.

The other “school of thought” that he interestingly identifies with no one particular thinker of the past “takes as its starting point ‘power,’ including the ability to exercise monopoly control or, in labor markets, to assert authority over workers,” Stiglitz explains.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

When the Game Changes

May 5, 2016

WHEN THE GAME CHANGES

“In a free market, the price and quantity of an item are determined by the supply and demand for that item.”

‘The function and nature of markets’ on boundless.com.

In their efforts to jam the square peg of financial theory into the round hole of human nature, economists have perpetrated some pretty stupid things. But few of them are dumber than the efficient market hypothesis. EMH states that it is impossible to beat the market because the efficiency of the market means that prices always incorporate and reflect all relevant information. Why was the Dow Jones Industrial Average worth 22.6% less on Tuesday October 20th 1987 than it had been the previous day ? Why is Warren Buffett worth $67 billion ? Must be all that efficiency.

George Soros (estimated net worth: $25 billion) is also a pretty good refutation of the efficient market hypothesis. As a student at the LSE, Soros chose the Viennese-born philosopher Karl Popper as his tutor. Popper argued that empirical truth can never be known with absolute certainty; scientific laws can never be conclusively proved, they can only be given provisional authority, until some better theory intercedes. No amount of confirmation is sufficient. One failed test is enough to falsify.

“While I was reading Popper I was also studying economic theory and I was struck by the contradiction between Popper’s emphasis on imperfect understanding and the theory of perfect competition in economics which postulated perfect knowledge. This led me to start questioning the assumptions of economic theory.”

Buffett’s refutation is less elegant, but equally effective:

“I’d be a bum on the street with a tin cup if the markets were always efficient.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Follies and Fallacies of Keynesian Economics

February 22, 2016

THE FOLLIES AND FALLACIES OF KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS

Eighty years go, on February 4, 1936, one of the most influential books of the last one hundred years was published, British economist, John Maynard Keynes’s The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. With it was born what has become known as Keynesian Economics.

Within less than a decade after its appearance, the ideas in The General Theory had practically conquered the economics profession and become a guidebook for government economic policy. Few books, in so short a time, have gained such wide influence and generated so destructive an impact on public policy. What Keynes succeeded in doing was to provide a rationale for what governments always like to do: spend other people’s money and pander to special interests.

In the process Keynes helped undermine what had been three of the essential institutional ingredients of a free-market economy: the gold standard, balanced government budgets, and open competitive markets. In their place Keynes’s legacy has given us paper-money inflation, government deficit spending, and more political intervention throughout the market.

It would, of course, be an exaggeration to claim that without Keynes and the Keynesian Revolution inflation, deficit spending, and interventionism would not have occurred. For decades before the appearance of Keynes’s book, the political and ideological climate had been shifting toward ever-greater government involvement in social and economic affairs, due to the growing influence of collectivist ideas among intellectuals and policy-makers in Europe and America.

Keynes on Time Magazine Cover

Before Keynes: Wise Free Market Policies

But before the appearance of The General Theory, many of the advocates of such collectivist policies had to get around the main body of economic thinking which still argued that, in general, the best course was for government to keep its hands off the market, maintain a stable currency backed by gold, and restrain its own taxing and spending policies.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Tag Archives: free market

Content

Post categories

Economic Links

Energy/Resource Links

Environmental Links

Geopolitical Links

Liberty Links

News Links

Other Links

Survival Skills

Post Archives by Category

Post navigation

Latest Posts