Quote of the Day: The Entire Case for Keynesianism is Based on this Slogan

The Keynesians have no equivalent of this slogan: "There is no such thing as a free lunch." This is a powerful slogan. So is this one: "You can't get something for nothing." So is this one: "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is." So is this one: "Honesty is the best policy." But, above all others, we have this one: "Thou shalt not steal."

The Keynesians have this slogan: "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you." The entire case for Keynesianism is based on this slogan.

This is why it pays to defend freedom. Even when the overwhelming majority of voters do not want to hear the arguments, we should keep making them. We should keep pointing out that there will be horrendous negative repercussions for violations of the principle of voluntary exchange. We don't get a hearing, except during crises. I have good news. There will be plenty of crises in which we will get a hearing.

This excerpt is from Austrian economist Gary North from his (recommended  read) article "Have Hope: Our Opponents Are Economic Imbeciles"

Quote of the Day: The Difference between Marketists and Statists

At the Cafe Hayek, Professor Don Boudreaux differentiates free marketers "marketists" and collectivists "statists"

Here’s one difference between marketists and statists: We marketists understand (or think we understand) that the margins are many on which private people can adjust their actions in response to changes in constraints and in opportunities – be these changes caused by the market or by the state. And not only is the number of possible margins of adjustment large, many of these margins are so small in size or fleeting in their existence that they are undetectable by outside observers.

Statists, in contrast, seem me to suppose both that the number of margins on which private people can adjust their actions is relatively small, and that these margins are mostly detectable by outside observers.

This difference between marketists and statists results in marketists – compared to statists – being less pessimistic about markets and more pessimistic about state action.

Why more optimistic about markets? Because with many margins on which to adjust, private market actors have great scope to find or to craft market outcomes that are closely tailored to each actor’s individual preferences.

Why the pessimism about state action? Well, the large number of such margins and the invisibility of their details to everyone who is not ‘on the spot’ combine with the subjectivity of each person’s preferences to make it practically impossible for government officials to assess how well or how poorly markets are working. Too much is unseen – indeed, too much is unseeable – to render imposed collective decisions likely to improve the general welfare.

So my thesis is this: marketists understand, appreciate, and respect the enormous complexity of reality; statists do not. Statists believe reality to be far simpler than it is.

Perhaps statists are misled into such a misconception of reality by their theorizing. For example, the variables conventionally used in economic models to express economic relationships and connections are easy to mistake for being realistic and exhaustive representatives of real-world entities.

Or perhaps such people just do not think deeply. Perhaps they are misled by words used to describe collections of people – for example, “low-skilled workers”; “the steel industry”; “retailers”; “college students”; “smokers” – to miss the multitudinous differences that often separate the individual entities within any one of these categories from others within the same category.

Whatever the reason, the simpler one supposes reality to be, the greater are the prospects – one supposes – for outsiders to grasp reality fully enough to engineer it into a better state.

Here’s a related hypothesis: the simpler one supposes reality to be, the more readily one forgets Thomas Sowell’s observation that there are no ‘solutions,’ only trade-offs. Put differently, the simpler one supposes reality to be, the more prone one is to fall for a good-guy / bad-guy account of reality.

All problems are easily identifiable and are caused by evil-doers: deceitful business executives; hate-filled racist homophobes; stingy middle-class voters. The solution is to send in the good guys to defeat the bad guys; to exorcise the devil and undo his deeds, replacing Satan, if not with angels, with noble public servants bent on saving the day and doing what’s right.

When the economy is seen as a relatively simple mechanism – when society is viewed as one views a passion play or a Hollywood movie in which good and evil are unambiguous, and in which evil persists only because too few good people have yet to spring into action – then there seems to be a natural urge to call in a superhero to obliterate evil and misfortune.

Statists fail to appreciate the complexities of reality and, therefore, exhibit hubris when proposing public policies. Marketists, in contrast, do appreciate the complexities of reality and, therefore, are humble about prescribing government interventions.

Video: Why Social Justice is a sweeping indictment of a free society

In the following video, Jonah Goldberg of the American Enterprise Institute exposes the hidden agenda behind the demagogical term 'social justice'.

Mr. Goldberg on the great F.A. Hayek's vehement objection to 'social justice':

Hayek understood that the need for political opportunism and intellectual laziness of the term social justice was a pernicious philosophical claim—meaning freedom must be sacrificed in order redistribute income. Ultimately social justice is about the state amassing ever increasing power in order to do “good things” What are good things? Whatever the champions of ‘social justice’ decide this week.

For me, social justice can be simplified as the politics of envy. 

Hat tip Cafe Hayek, video from Prager University

 

Amidst Hyperinflation, Venezuelan Government Decrees a ‘Happiness’ Ministry

In Venezuela, “happiness” will now be imposed by fiat.

The Venezuelan government has announced a new bureaucracy called the Vice Ministry of Supreme Social Happiness

From Telegraph/AP

A new Vice Ministry of Supreme Social Happiness has been created by Nicolas Maduro, the Venezuelan president, in an attempt to coordinate all the "mission" programmes created by Hugo Chavez to alleviate poverty.

"I have decided to create this Vice ministry and I have given it this name to honour Chávez and Bolívar," Mr Maduro announced on Thursday in a televised speech made from the presidential palace. He said that the Vice ministry aimed to take care of the most "sublime, vulnerable and delicate, to those who are most loved by anyone who calls themselves a revolutionary, a Christian and Chavista."

Oil-rich Venezuela is chronically short of basic goods and medical supplies. Annual inflation is running officially at near 50 per cent and the US dollar now fetches more than seven times the official rate on the black market.

The creation of the ministry sparked widespread mirth and mocking in the streets and on social media.

In a state of hunger, shortages and hyperinflation, the Venezuelan government will force their citizenry to be “happy”. Maybe frowning, sulking or crying in public or in households will be prohibited.

In reality, the only entities who will be "happy" are the political leadership and the bureaucracy who will be spending more of other people money, and who will virtually dictate on lives of their constituencies to conform with the conceit of their leaders. “Be happy! Or else….”

Well in my view this fits Australia's Walk Free Foundation definition of “modern day slavery” which according to the Los Angeles Times, takes many forms, and is known by many names. Whether it is called human trafficking, forced labor, slavery or slavery-like practices … victims of modern slavery have their freedom denied, and are used and controlled and exploited by another person for profit, sex or the thrill of domination." (bold mine)

Happiness can never be imposed. Happiness is subjective and comes from the individual's inner self. 

As the great Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises explained, (Liberalism p.46)  [bold mine]

Whoever wants to see the world governed according to his own ideas must strive for dominion over men's minds. It is impossible, in the long run, to subject men against their will to a regime that they reject. Whoever tries to do so by force will ultimately come to grief, and the struggles provoked by his attempt will do more harm than the worst government based on the consent of the governed could ever do. Men cannot be made happy against their will

Happiness as a social policy is an example of the height of statist lunacy.

But as Mises warned Venezuela’s Happiness Ministry will eventually "grieve" or have its pretentiousness exposed.

Quote of the Day: Liberalism’s trifecta

The industry was liberalism’s trifecta: newspapers, television networks, and the school system. Two are bleeding red ink. The third soon will be, as online education enables students to live at home, take courses online, graduate with accredited degrees, and pay $15,000 in tuition, total. A widely accepted estimate is that half of all American universities will go under over the next five decades. It won’t take anywhere near that long. The no-name private colleges will go under first, Cutbacks in tax funding will complete the procedure. Legislators will figure out that they can fire two-thirds of the faculty and replace them with online lectures and low-paid, untenured professors and graduate students to grade written exams.

All that liberalism will have left is the public school system, K-12. This dinosaur has been caught trapped in the tar pit ever since 1963, when SAT scores peaked. Online education is invading today. The American Federation of Teachers is on the defensive. In 50 years, the suburban schools will be online. Competition will demonstrate that the public school bureaucracies cannot compete.

Liberalism made entrepreneurial decisions on where the future was headed. The World Wide Web is taking the world in a different direction. It is leaving liberalism behind.

Liberals call this process of ideological decentralization “Balkanization.” I call it the break-up of a cartel that can no longer compete on the free market.

This is from Austrian economist Gary North at the lewrockwell.com. Decentralization will likewise erode the 20th century top-down political institutions.

Chart of the Day: Careers of Political Leaders

The Economist writes, 

A POLITICIAN, a businessman, a comedian and an economist walk into a room. Unfortunately, this is not a joke—they all vie for the position of Italy's next prime minister. At an election this week the politician received the most votes, but not enough to govern. A deadlock now ensues. The career background of Italy's previous prime ministers is similarly eclectic. Between 1973 and 2010, the two main jobs held by prime ministers before they came to power were split roughly equally between lawyer, professor, and politician or civil servant. Economists featured only three times out of 23. And elsewhere, prime ministers with an economics background are also rare.

According to a paper by Mark Hallerberg of the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin, and Joachim Wehner of the London School of Economics and Political Science, policymakers with "technical competence" are more likely to hold office during a crisis. The authors found that a banking crisis increases the probability of having an economist as prime minister; a professor is more likely to hold the position during stockmarket crashes or inflation crises. Italy's Mario Monti and Greece's Lucas Papademos are recent examples. Unfortunately, voters seem inclined to get rid of them at the earliest opportunity.

Let us see how such a theory applies to the Philippine setting.

The record shows that the civil servant and lawyer background played a significant role in the Philippines political system for a vast majority of Presidents.

However recent trends reveals of a change. Since 1986, the trend of Philippine presidents appears to have gone against the lawyer experience.

11th Philippine president Corazon Aquino had been a housewife to a popular politician Ninoy Aquino. Mrs Aquino rose to political prominence after the assassination of her husband, which resulted to the ouster of the Marcos dictatorship and her presidency. So this seems to go in contrast with the notion of "technical competence" holding political office due to a political economic crisis.  

Another EDSA revolution figure, Fidel V Ramos, served as the 12th Philippine president had a career as military officer before ascending to the presidency. Mr. Ramos  graduated as a civil engineer and has a Masters in Business Administration in Business Administration for his educational background.

Popular film actor and 13th Philippine president Joseph Estrada has been a product of the Asian Crisis. 

Mr. Estrada’s career has mostly been as an actor and as local government official who rose through the national political scene. Mr. Estrada was ousted in January of 2001 in a popular revolution due to charges of corruption. Ironically, despite the EDSA II revolution, Mr. Estrada placed 2nd in the 2010 presidential elections. 

The Estrada election seems as another example that defies the study of the "technical competence" as post-crisis political leader.  Instead such reveals of the populist character of Philippine democratic politics.

I would think that this idiosyncrasies in elections is a country specific rather than generalized view.

The 14th and the 15th Presidents had “economics” as educational background. 

14th Philippine president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, beneficiary of the EDSA II revolution, had been an academic economist prior to becoming a politician. She was vice president to the ousted Estrada. Ms Arroyo won the 2004 presidential elections that has been clouded by scandals.

While Arroyo’s former student, and the incumbent 15th Philippine president Benigno Aquino III graduated as Economics major, but whose career had mostly been as local official.

The economists backgrounds of two recent presidents are hardly due to political responses from post-banking crisis. I may say that the logic runs backwards. Two presidents with economic backgrounds may have increased the risks of an economic crisis by embracing bubble policies.

 

Rather, since the Philippine presidency has mostly been about the spur of the moment politics, I think that the recent non lawyer trend may have been a happenstance. 

Sidestepping the professor-economist experience, the lawyer, civil servant and celebrity career records remain a dominant force in Philippine politics.

Nonetheless the increasing role played by economists and university profession (this applies according to the study cited by the Economist) in the field of politics tell us why we should distrust mainstream experts, as their mostly statist views could have been motivated by the desire to enter politics or to obtain careers in political institutions or agencies.

Quote of the Day: To Achieve Liberty, Envy and Intolerance have to be Overcome

To achieve liberty and peace, two powerful human emotions have to be overcome. Number one is "envy" which leads to hate and class warfare. Number two is "intolerance" which leads to bigoted and judgmental policies. These emotions must be replaced with a much better understanding of love, compassion, tolerance, and free market economics. Freedom, when understood, brings people together. When tried, freedom is popular.

The problem we have faced over the years has been that economic interventionists are swayed by envy, whereas social interventionists are swayed by intolerance of habits and lifestyles. The misunderstanding that tolerance is an endorsement of certain activities, motivates many to legislate moral standards which should only be set by individuals making their own choices. Both sides use force to deal with these misplaced emotions. Both are authoritarians. Neither endorses voluntarism. Both views ought to be rejected.

I have come to one firm conviction after these many years of trying to figure out "the plain truth of things." The best chance for achieving peace and prosperity, for the maximum number of people world-wide, is to pursue the cause of LIBERTY.

If you find this to be a worthwhile message, spread it throughout the land.

This excerpt is from the stirring farewell speech by Ron Paul at the US Congress

Video: Murray Rothbard on Why People are Attracted to Statism

From Bob Wenzel

MVP-Ateneo Rift: The Politicization of Education

In reaction to Mogul and PNoy favorite Manny Pangilinan’s severance of ties with his alma mater due to political differences somewhere I read a paraphrased comment that out of MVP's actions

Children should be spared of politics

Putting the blame on MVP alone is an example of misreading effects as the cause. The reason for the sensational split in the relationship is because the heated political divergences hasn’t just been between MVP and Ateneo, but instead this involves Ateneo official’s moral and political stand to inculcate into their professors and students.

I am NOT here to defend any political position by both camps, but to underscore the point of the vicious politicization of education, which in this case, has been through the imposition of political preferences by school authorities and church leaders on members of the academe and students. 

Essentially this controversial schism validates my views on why elite schools have been inclined towards statism.

To highlight the point of the dictatorial tendencies of the church-school cabal is the recent threat to purge by excommunication 159 Ateneo professors who sided with Philippine government’s RH Bill.

[As a side note, I am against any coercive imposition of “values” on the family: This means I am against the RH Bill and am equally against church strictures aimed at the interdiction of their moral stand on their constituents.]

Church influence on politics has had nasty social outcomes, as the great Professor Murray Rothbard wrote, (bold emphasis mine)

Historically, the union of church and state has been in many instances a mutually reinforcing coalition for tyranny. The state used the church to sanctify and preach obedience to its supposedly divinely sanctioned rule; the church used the state to gain income and privilege.

The Anabaptists collectivized and tyrannized Münster in the name of the Christian religion.

And, closer to our century, Christian socialism and the social gospel have played a major role in the drive toward statism, and the apologetic role of the Orthodox Church in Soviet Russia has been all too clear. Some Catholic bishops in Latin America have even proclaimed that the only route to the kingdom of heaven is through Marxism, and if I wished to be nasty, I could point out that the Reverend Jim Jones, in addition to being a Leninist, also proclaimed himself the reincarnation of Jesus.

Moreover, now that socialism has manifestly failed, politically and economically, socialists have fallen back on the "moral" and the "spiritual" as the final argument for their cause.

For the mainstream, coercion, as along as it is committed by the state, is seen as moral. Thus, the desperate attempts by competing interests (represented by diverse power blocs, church, schools, environmentalists, and others) to influence policymaking which thereby results to the attendant social frictions.

Yet education must be free of politics and of government interventions, as Professor Tibor Machan argues (bold emphasis mine)

When a country tries to combine freedom of thought and speech with government-administered education, there will be irresolvable conflict. In a system of private education competition among schools would take care of philosophical correctness. In some schools certain books will be featured in the library, in others they will not, and students and their parents will be able to select which they want to be exposed to. Biology will be taught as creationists wish or as Darwinians do.  No official doctrine will be imposed, period.

But when government delivers a coercive system of "education"--actually mostly indoctrination, since no alternative is available to the bulk of us who have to pay for and use such a system--any selection of books, magazines, films shown in classes and so forth will amount to censorship of the materials not chosen. They will be deemed as having been banned--whereas in a private system selection by the administrators of some schools, library officials, or teachers will not preclude exclusion by others. It is government's nearly one-size-fits-all approach to education that stands in the way of free inquiry.

Unfortunately, in many societies people want to mix elements of liberty with elements of coercion, as if that were something trouble free—health food with some poison! It isn't--the courts will struggle forever with trying to square that circle and politicians will engage in varieties of demagoguery to gain the power over the “educational” turf.

Only by getting government out of education can that matter be made consistent with the principles of a free society and fit for human beings whose minds must forever be free to think.

The MVP-Ateneo rift only confirms the symptoms of irresolvable social conflict brought upon by the politicization of education and of government interventions.

Updated to add: Because I was in a hurry and had something things to do, I was unable to edit this post at the time of the publication. Thus I made belated grammatical changes on the first three sentences about 4 hours after.
  

Massive Earth Hour (Blackouts) in India

Massive power outages in India has affected more than half of the population.

From the Bloomberg, (bold highlights mine)

India’s electricity grid collapsed for the second time in as many days, cutting off more than half the country’s 1.2 billion population in the nation’s worst power crisis on record.

Commuter trains in the capital stopped running, forcing the operator, Delhi Metro Rail Corp., to evacuate passengers, spokesman Anuj Dayal said. NTPC Ltd. (NTPC), the biggest generator, shut down 36 percent of its capacity as a precaution, Chairman Arup Roy Choudhury said by telephone. More than 100 inter-city trains were stranded, Northern Railway spokesman Neeraj Sharma said, as the blackout engulfed states in the north and east.

So what went wrong?

From the same article…

State-owned Power Grid Corp. of India Ltd., which operates the world’s largest transmission networks, manages power lines including in the northern and eastern regions. NTPC and billionaire Anil Ambani-controlled Reliance Power Ltd. (RPWR) operate power stations in north India that feed electricity into the national grid. The northern and eastern grids together account for about 40 percent of India’s total electricity generating capacity, according to the Central Electricity Authority.

The grids in the east, north, west and the northeast are interconnected, making them vulnerable, said Jayant Deo, managing director of the Indian Energy Exchange Ltd. The outage has also spread to seven additional states in the northeast, NDTV television channel reported.

“Without a definitive plan by the government to gradually bring the grids back online, this problem could absolutely get worse,” Deo said.

Singh is seeking to secure $400 billion of investment in the power industry in the next five years as he targets an additional 76,000 megawatts in generation by 2017. India has missed every annual target to add electricity production capacity since 1951.

Well in reality, the root of the problem hasn’t been about ‘definite plans’ by the Indian government, but rather largely due to India’s statist political economy.

Again from the same article…

Improving infrastructure, which the World Economic Forum says is a major obstacle to doing business in India, is among the toughest challenges facing Singh as he bids to revive expansion in Asia’s third-largest economy that slid to a nine- year low of 5.3 percent in the first quarter.

Tussles over policy making with allies in the ruling coalition, corruption allegations and defeats in regional elections have weakened Singh’s government since late 2010.

Must I forget, artificial electricity demand has partly been boosted by India’s central bank, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), who passes the blame on others.

Again from the same article

The Reserve Bank of India, which has blamed infrastructure bottlenecks among others for contributing to the nation’s price pressures, today refrained from cutting interest rates even as growth in the $1.8 trillion economy cooled to a nine-year low in the first quarter.

Indian consumer-price inflation was 10.02 percent in June, the fastest among the Group of 20 major economies, while the benchmark wholesale-price measure is more than 7 percent.

The last time the northern grid collapsed was in 2001, leaving homes and businesses without electricity for 12 hours. The Confederation of Indian Industry, the country’s largest association of companies, estimated that blackout cost companies $107.5 million.

Chart above from global-rates.com and tradingeconomics.com

India’s bubble ‘easy money’ (upper window) policies in 2009-2010 fueled a stock market recovery (below window) in 2010.

On the other hand, the then negative interest rate regime also stoked local inflation (pane below policy interest rates).

This has prompted the Reserve Bank of India to repeatedly raise policy rates or tightened monetary policy. The result has been to put a brake on India’s economy and the stock market rebound.

Part of the Indian government’s attack on her twin deficits, which has been blamed for inflation through the decline of the currency, the rupee, has been to turn the heat on gold imports and bank gold sales.

Aside from demand from the monetary policies, electricity subsidies has also been a culprit. Farmers have been provided with subsidized electricity. Such subsidy has not only increased demand for power but also put pressure on water supplies.

Environmentalists would likely cheer this development as ‘Earth Hour’ environment conservation.

Yet India’s widespread blackouts are evidences and symptoms of government failure.

Rampant rolling blackouts extrapolate to severe economic dislocations which not only to means inconveniences but importantly prolonged economic hardship.

What the Political Rhetoric “You Didn't Get There on Your Own” Means

When a politician preaches that “you didn't get there on your own” they may only be half right. That’s because our world operates on the principle of division of labor where no one really produces things on their own.

No one, on his own, even knows how to make a simple product like the pencil, as Milton Friedman explained

But what the politicians really mean is that every entrepreneurial success (wealth) has been owed to the government.

The distinguished Thomas Sowell exposes such myth or deception {bold emphasis mine]

Let's stop and think, even though the whole purpose of much political rhetoric is to keep us from thinking, and stir our emotions instead.

Even if we were to assume, just for the sake of argument, that 90 percent of what a successful person has achieved was due to the government, what follows from that? That politicians will make better decisions than individual citizens, that politicians will spend the wealth of the country better than those who created it? That doesn't follow logically -- and certainly not empirically.

Does anyone doubt that most people owe a lot to the parents who raised them? But what follows from that? That they should never become adults who make their own decisions?

The whole point of the collectivist mindset is to concentrate power in the hands of the collectivists -- which is to say, to take away our freedom. They do this in stages, starting with some group that others envy or resent -- Jews in Nazi Germany, capitalists in the Soviet Union, foreign investors in Third World countries that confiscate their investments and call this theft "nationalization."

Freedom is seldom destroyed all at once. More often it is eroded, bit by bit, until it is gone. This can happen so gradually that there is no sudden change that would alert people to the danger. By the time everybody realizes what has happened, it can be too late, because their freedom is gone.

All the high-flown talk about how people who are successful in business should "give back" to the community that created the things that facilitated their success is, again, something that sounds plausible to people who do not stop and think through what is being said. After years of dumbed-down education, that apparently includes a lot of people.

Take Obama's example of the business that benefits from being able to ship their products on roads that the government built. How does that create a need to "give back"?

Did the taxpayers, including business taxpayers, not pay for that road when it was built? Why should they have to pay for it twice?

What about the workers that businesses hire, whose education is usually created in government-financed schools? The government doesn't have any wealth of its own, except what it takes from taxpayers, whether individuals or businesses. They have already paid for that education. It is not a gift that they have to "give back" by letting politicians take more of their money and freedom.

When businesses hire highly educated people, such as chemists or engineers, competition in the labor market forces them to pay higher salaries for people with longer years of valuable education. That education is not a government gift to the employers. It is paid for while it is being created in schools and universities, and it is paid for in higher salaries when highly educated people are hired.

One of the tricks of professional magicians is to distract the audience's attention from what they are doing while they are creating an illusion of magic. Pious talk about "giving back" distracts our attention from the cold fact that politicians are taking away more and more of our money and our freedom.

Bottom line: Reading between the lines helps to protect one from getting hoodwinked by political glib talkers.

War on Education: ADB Disdains Tutoring, Seeks Regulation

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) detests private tutoring which they pejoratively calls the “shadow education”

From Yahoo,

Asian parents are spending billions of dollars on private tutors for their children, and the practice is growing despite doubts over its effectiveness, according to a study published Wednesday.

"Shadow education" is an expanding business not only in wealthy countries but also in some of the region's poorer nations as parents try to give their children the best start in life, the Asian Development Bank said.

Nearly nine out of 10 South Korean elementary pupils have private tutoring, while the figure for primary school children in India's West Bengal state is six out of 10.

"Proportions are lower in other countries, but throughout the region the shadow is spreading and intensifying," the study said, calling for a review of education systems to make such extra teaching less attractive.

Extra academic work is aimed at helping slow learners and supporting high achievers, and is seen by many Asian parents as a constructive way for adolescents to spend their spare time.

However, it can also reduce time for sports and other activities important for well-rounded development, as well as cause social tensions since richer families are able to pay for better-quality tutoring, the study said.

Funny, but are we not suppose to know more of our own interests or what is best for us and our family? Yet these haughty ADB people are saying otherwise...they know more about our children's welfare than us, the parents.

If a family finds that the “one-size-fits-all” educational standards implemented by incumbent institutions has not been sufficient in providing learning services for their children, would it be morally deviant to procure educational services outside of these institutions?

To consider, in the Philippines, nearly 4 out of 10 college graduates are unemployed and one in 10 of graduates go abroad. So how effective has traditional education been? Yet these are the standards which the ADB desires that our children be confined with.

I have to admit I have been a product of tutoring too, as my parents felt the need for me to learn more, when I was in grade school.

Education comes best from the self, as educator John Holt once said,

I believe that we learn best when we, not others are deciding what we are going to learn, and when we are choosing the people, materials, and experiences from which we will be learning

This has been true for me, where everyday is a learning day.

I would extend this idea to say that most of my learning came from self education or “deciding what to learn” and from indirect mentorship (Dr. Faber and the Austrian school for instance).

And I think that most of what I learned from contemporary education has been useless and merely went down the drain.

Yet here is what ADB wants to do…

The study called for state supervision and regulation of the industry, as well as a review of Asia's educational systems.

So the ADB wants to control and regulate the education of your children.

The truth of the matter is that they want our children to become worshipers of state.

Again John Holt,

Education... now seems to me perhaps the most authoritarian and dangerous of all the social inventions of mankind. It is the deepest foundation of the modern slave state, in which most people feel themselves to be nothing but producers, consumers, spectators, and 'fans,' driven more and more, in all parts of their lives, by greed, envy, and fear. My concern is not to improve 'education' but to do away with it, to end the ugly and antihuman business of people-shaping and to allow and help people to shape themselves

It may NOT just be the state, which the ADB promotes.

They may have secondary objectives. They may serve as mouthpieces or shills for established educational (politically connected) institutions whom have feeling the heat from online competition and from homeschooling.

The following video are the kind of stuffs which statists (like the ADB) hates:


Indian education scientist Sugata Mitra, in a TED talk, tackles one of the greatest problems of education—the best teachers and schools don't exist where they're needed most.

Some great quotes from Sugata Mitra:

1:41 children will learn to do what they want to learn to do

16:33 Education is a self organising system where learning is an emergent phenomenon

Like John Holt, the message from Mr. Mitra is simple: education is self determined.

Quote of the Day: Factual Free Market Fairness

The free market is an ethical system better than all the rest

Professor Deirdre McCloskey makes a compellingly superb argument at the Bleeding Hearts Libertarians (hat Professor Peter Boettke) [bold emphasis mine]

Externalities do not imply that a government can do better. Publicity does better than inspectors in restraining the alleged desire of businesspeople to poison their customers. Efficiency is not the chief merit of a market economy: innovation is. Rules arose in merchant courts and Quaker fixed prices long before governments started enforcing them….

How do I know that my narrative is better than yours? The experiments of the 20^th century told me so. It would have been hard to know the wisdom of Friedrich Hayek or Milton Friedman or Matt Ridley or Deirdre McCloskey in August of 1914, before the experiments in large government were well begun. But anyone who after the 20^th century still thinks that thoroughgoing socialism, nationalism, imperialism, mobilization, central planning, regulation, zoning, price controls, tax policy, labor unions, business cartels, government spending, intrusive policing, adventurism in foreign policy, faith in entangling religion and politics, or most of the other thoroughgoing 19^th-century proposals for governmental action are still neat, harmless ideas for improving our lives is not paying attention.

In the 19^th and 20^th centuries ordinary Europeans were hurt, not helped, by their colonial empires. Economic growth in Russia was slowed, not accelerated, by Soviet central planning. American Progressive regulation and its European anticipations protected monopolies of transportation like railways and protected monopolies of retailing like High-Street shops and protected monopolies of professional services like medicine, not the consumers. “Protective” legislation in the United States and “family-wage” legislation in Europe subordinated women. State-armed psychiatrists in America jailed homosexuals, and in Russia jailed democrats. Some of the New Deal prevented rather than aided America’s recovery from the Great Depression.

Unions raised wages for plumbers and auto workers but reduced wages for the non-unionized. Minimum wages protected union jobs but made the poor unemployable. Building codes sometimes kept buildings from falling or burning down but always gave steady work to well-connected carpenters and electricians and made housing more expensive for the poor. Zoning and planning permission has protected rich landlords rather than helping the poor. Rent control makes the poor and the mentally ill unhousable, because no one will build inexpensive housing when it is forced by law to be expensive. The sane and the already-rich get the rent-controlled apartments and the fancy townhouses in once-poor neighborhoods.

Regulation of electricity hurt householders by raising electricity costs, as did the ban on nuclear power. The Securities Exchange Commission did not help small investors. Federal deposit insurance made banks careless with depositors’ money. The conservation movement in the Western U. S. enriched ranchers who used federal lands for grazing and enriched lumber companies who used federal lands for clear cutting. American and other attempts at prohibiting trade in recreational drugs resulted in higher drug consumption and the destruction of inner cities and the incarcerations of millions of young men. Governments have outlawed needle exchanges and condom advertising, and denied the existence of AIDS.

Germany’s economic Lebensraum was obtained in the end by the private arts of peace, not by the public arts of war. The lasting East Asian Co-prosperity Sphere was built by Japanese men in business suits, not in dive bombers. Europe recovered after its two 20^th-century civil wars mainly through its own efforts of labor and investment, not mainly through government-to-government charity such as Herbert Hoover’s Commission or George Marshall’s Plan. Government-to-government foreign aid to the Third World has enriched tyrants, not helped the poor.

The importation of socialism into the Third World, even in the relatively non-violent form of Congress-Party Fabian-Gandhism, unintentionally stifled growth, enriched large industrialists, and kept the people poor. Malthusian theories hatched in the West were put into practice by India and especially China, resulting in millions of missing girls. The capitalist-sponsored Green Revolution of dwarf hybrids was opposed by green politicians the world around, but has made places like India self-sufficient in grains. State power in many parts of sub-Saharan Africa has been used to tax the majority of farmers in aid of the president’s cousins and a minority of urban bureaucrats. State power in many parts of Latin America has prevented land reform and sponsored disappearances. State ownership of oil in Nigeria and Mexico and Iraq was used to support the party in power, benefiting the people not at all. Arab men have been kept poor, not bettered, by using state power to deny education and driver’s licenses to Arab women. The seizure of governments by the clergy has corrupted religions and ruined economies. The seizure of governments by the military has corrupted armies and ruined economies.

Industrial policy, from Japan to France, has propped up failing industries such as agriculture and small-scale retailing, instead of choosing winners. Regulation of dismissal has led to high unemployment in Germany and Denmark, and especially in Spain and South Africa. In the 1960s the public-housing high-rises in the West inspired by Le Courbusier condemned the poor in Rome and Paris and Chicago to holding pens. In the 1970s, the full-scale socialism of the East ruined the environment. In the 2000s, the “millennial collectivists,” Red, Green, or Communitarian, oppose a globalization that helps the poor but threatens trade union officials, crony capitalists, and the careers of people in Western non-governmental organizations.

Yes, I know, you want to reject all these factual findings because they are “right-wing” or “libertarian.” All I ask you to do is, once in a while, consider. Don’t believe everything you read in the papers.

Amen.

What to Expect from a Greece Moment

The economist must deal with doctrines, and not with men. It is for him to critique errant doctrine; it is not his charge to uncover the personal motives behind heterodoxy. The economist must face his opponents under the fictitious assumption that they are guided by objective considerations alone. It is irrelevant whether the advocate of a false notion acts in good or bad faith; what matters is if the stated notion is true or false. It is the charge of others to reveal corruption and enlighten the public concerning the same Ludwig von Mises, Memoirs p.40

For some, today’s Greece elections serve as the defining ‘Greece moment’ of the Euro crisis. This would seem like a paradise for the advocates of drachmaisation or the return to the local currency, drachma which enables domestic governments to inflate the system.

Yet whether Greece decides to stay within, or departs from the EU, there won’t likely be significant changes in the dominant policies espoused by policymakers in addressing this crisis.

Inflationistas have been drooling for the aggressive use of monetary inflation as the easy way out of the crisis.

The difference would be that of the policy responses by global authorities as consequence of the political choice made by Greeks.

Uncertainty from the resultant political actions will establish the feedback loop between policy responses to the market’s reaction and market’s reaction to policy responses. That’s why policymakers have incessantly talking about erecting firewalls. Spain’s recent bailout has reportedly been predicated against contagion risks[1] from today’s election.

Utopian False Choice

Inflationistas give us a proposition based on a false choice/ false dilemma[2], analyst John Mauldin[3], a populist, gives a good example

Europe is down to two choices. Either allow the eurozone to break up or go for a full fiscal union with central budget controls. The latter option ultimately means eurobonds and a central taxing authority.

If only the world have been that simple where people think alike, move and act alike and economies are mechanized that can be switched on and off or modulated like temperature gauge of an air conditioning unit. Or that people’s actions can be captured in aggregate numbers.

Yet if this is true, then we won’t be having today’s crisis at all.

As the great F.A. Hayek once warned against utopian thinking[4]

it is probably no exaggeration to say that economics developed mainly as the outcome of the investigation and refutation of successive Utopian proposals—if by ‘Utopian’ we mean proposals for the improvement of undesirable effects of the existing system, based upon a complete disregard of those forces which actually enabled it to work.

The false dilemma presented to us fails to take to account the micro conditions of what plagues the EU crisis affected nations.

This vignette of the Greece government, which has been drawn by a Greek public servant and labeled as macaroni, which I earlier posted on my blog[5], has illustrative been of the anatomy of the Europe’s crisis.

The public servant Mr. Panagiotis Karkatsoulis, who works in the Greek Ministry of Administrative Reform and e-Governance and teaches at the National School of Public Administration, has partly been accurate in the dissection of the origins of crisis, particularly, “More than 30 years of scant coordination has resulted in a morass of contradictory rules and a lack of legal clarity” and “the first government of George Papandreou in 2009 had 15 ministers, 9 vice-ministers and 21 adjunct ministers, along with 78 general or special secretaries, 1,200 counselors, 149 directorate generals and 886 directorates — this for a population of just over 11 million, or the same number of people as those living in Cuba. The resulting mesh of interdependencies for decision making has made governing Greece increasingly difficult”.

So Europe’s fundamental problems can be summarized into the following: mishmash of ambiguous, unenforceable and conflicting arbitrary rules and regulations, bloated bureaucracy, unsustainable welfare state, obscure property rights, politically restrained markets through various interventionist policies and high tax rates[6], and a public sector far larger than the private sector, which has been draining away resources from the private sector, as evidenced by Greece’s consumption economy despite relative lower nominal wages or earnings[7] compared to other developed EU nations. As a side note, the perceived or expected cost of labor has been higher in most crisis affected nations in Europe due to stringent labor regulations and bubble policies[8].

In short, Greece’s economy has survived on a parasitical relationship where unproductive sectors have essentially been draining out resources from the depleted hosts.

Devaluation, thus, will not solve the problem of SOLVENCY, PRODUCTIVITY and COMPETITIVENESS as inflation only destroys real savings and extinguishes purchasing power.

Greece’s problem has not been prompted for by rigidity in wages emanating from market forces, but from the rigidity of her incumbent POLITICAL system. Politics simply won’t allow markets to do what the market does best. And obsession to politics is the price paid through a crisis.

As previously discussed, accelerating capital flight has been spawned by the sustained barrage for the siren song of the devaluation elixir as advocated by the political order and their Keynesian protégés, most of whom ironically are residents outside these crisis affected nations.

It’s easy to make recommendations that don’t affect one’s interests or where errant endorsements don’t have a direct personal impact.

The capital flight in the crisis affected EU nations has accounted for as symptoms of savers and creditors who seek refuge out of their nations (again to preserve savings) as well as risks of a banking collapse, while debtors have practically deferred on making payments, possibly in anticipation that their debts would be best paid on a devalued currency.

Also capital controls[9] from the elevated risk of a potential exit has likely been seen as a consequential threat.

All these, including tax increases, negative interest rates, price controls, inflationism and various regulatory proscriptions, are financial repression measures undertaken by desperate governments and endorsed by their institutional apologists who seek to persecute and expropriate assets of their private sector constituents in order to sustain the privileges of the political elite.

Add to these the rising incidence of protectionism[10] which mostly emanated from developed nations, particularly the EU.

So Keynesian (and Fisherian) snake oil prescriptions has essentially backfired or produced a series of unintended consequences. Aside from capital flight, falling tax receipts (including Italy[11]) and a breakdown of trade has been intensifying the crisis[12].

Also fiscal and political union naively extends the problem of the tenuous parasitical relationship. Eventually new hosts or EU’s creditor nations as Germany, Finland, Netherland and the others will also get drained by such unproductive and unsustainable redistributive relationships.

Fund manager John Hussman makes a great analogy of mainstream’s foolish ideas which he analogizes as the “WarrenBonds”[13],

This is like 9 broke guys walking up to Warren Buffett and proposing that they all get together so each of them can issue "Warrenbonds." About 90% of the group would agree on the wisdom of that idea, and Warren would be criticized as a "holdout" to the success of the plan. You'd have 9 guys issuing press releases on their "general agreement" about the concept, and in his weaker moments, Buffett might even offer to "study" the proposal. But Buffett would never agree unless he could impose spending austerity and nearly complete authority over the budgets of those 9 guys. None of them would be willing to give up that much sovereignty, so the idea would never get off the ground. Without major steps toward fiscal union involving a substantial loss of national sovereignty, the same is true for Eurobonds.

Even if 9 broke guys accedes to give up on their sovereignty, for as long as the structural system of parasitical relationship remains, even Warren Buffett will see his resources dwindle and will go bankrupt.

In short, all sorts of proposed and implemented bailout mechanisms—banking union, Eurobonds, EU regional deposit guarantee schemes, European Stability Mechanism and or the European Financial Stability Fund (“EFSF”), Securities Markets Programme (SMP), Long Term Refinancing Operations (LTRO) and Target2—are essentially transfers of resources from productive to unproductive nations, which ensures capital consumption and the eventual demise of the Union.

Of course what exponents of inflationism via devaluation don’t see or refuses to see are that there are other practical market based options such as outright default or restructuring and ‘shock liberalization’[14] as coined by University of Chicago Professor John Cochrane, viz., liberalize economy, allow banks to fail, reduce government spending (by cutting down the bureaucracy and repealing unnecessary regulations), reduce tax rates and sell state assets or privatization.

Whatever the outcome of today’s election, the crisis will continue to linger and will most likely fester for as long as solvency, productivity and competitiveness issues will not addressed by giving the private sector a bigger hand.

Exploring the Greece Moment

A Greece vote to stay within the EU will likely have concerted efforts by the European Central Bank (ECB) to reflate the system backed by some superficial ‘austerity’ policies. This will be another attempt to delay the day of reckoning.

This will likely another incite short term upswing for the markets but eventually will wear off, as with all the rest.

In short, boom bust cycles until the grand finale: defaults either by massive inflation (which likely brings the end of the euro experiment) or by outright default (disunion may or may not happen).

A Greece vote out of the EU to may spell interim trouble for the global markets, but this would likely prompt central banks to collaborate by massively inflating the system. So volatility can swing fiercely from downside to upside and vice versa, depending on how large these actions will be.

I would make another guess. Under the conditions where global central banks steps on the proverbial pedal to the metal, the RISK ON RISK OFF environment will probably transition to a stagflationary environment[15] (slow economic growth, high unemployment but also high consumer price inflation).

Again this will be conditional or mainly dependent on the scale or degree of actions which is something cannot be foreseen. I have to admit I don’t have telephatic powers that would allow me to read the minds of central bankers.

Yet under a stagflationary setting, market’s attention may likely be focused on commodities as inflation hedges.

And that’s where I’d be.

---

[1] Bloomberg.com Euro Bloc Faces Greek Vote Giving First Spanish Test, June 11, 2012

[2] Wikipedia.org False dilemma

[3] Mauldin John MAULDIN: The 'Bang!' Moment Is Here Businessinsider.com, June 16, 2012

[4] Hayek Friedrich von Four History And Politics The Trend Of Economic Thinking p.15 libertarianismo.org

[5] See Chart of the Day: Greece’s ‘Macaroni’ Bureaucracy, June 15, 2012

[6] Wikipedia.org Tax rates of Europe

[7] Eurostat Wages and labour costs European Commission

[8] See Germany’s Competitive Advantage over Spain: Freer Labor Markets May 25, 2012

[9] See The Coming Age of Capital Controls? June 13, 2012

[10] See More Wall of Worry: Rising Accounts of Protectionism June 15, 2012

[11] See Italy’s Pro-Growth Tax Increases Backfires, June 13, 2012

[12] See Is Greece Falling into a Failed State?, May 28, 2012

[13] Hussman John P. The Reality of the Situation, May 28, 2012 Hussmanfunds.com

[14] Cochrane John H. Euro explosion, June 15, 2012

[15] Investopedia.com Stagflation