Posts Tagged ‘Economy’

When Tigers Fight…

June 12, 2014

Here is my take on the latest mid east goings on…

Let the muslims kill each other, in great quantities. That will be fewer that we will have to face eventually.

Oh, but what about the world market? Well, get the obamanites the hell out of the way, and we start exploiting the energy that we have here. Problems solved…

Many problems as a matter of fact. Unemployment here at home, energy that will be cheap and plentiful, and the economy of the entire world gets out of this never ending big government Tory inspired slump..

The United States and our allies have spent way too much gold and blood to waste any more on the middle east. Freedom and liberty will solve this ongoing crisis.

Surrender monkey’s: Flag this message Boehner and Cantor Surrender… Again

January 22, 2013

Just hours ago, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced he will postpone his assault on the filibuster until Thursday.

This battle is far from over, but thanks to your consistent action and quick work to turn up the pressure, it’s clear Harry Reid is scrambling to find the votes he needs.

But right now, there’s another all-out EMERGENCY C4L needs your help to combat.

Tomorrow, in a push led by Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor, the U.S. House is scheduled to vote on a plan to increase the debt limit by… infinity.

You see, passage of this scheme would hand President Obama a blank check to spend whatever he can get through Congress before this summer!

That’s why it’s vital you give Speaker Boehner, Majority Leader Cantor, and your U.S. Representative a piece of your mind IMMEDIATELY!

Only weeks ago, as they caved in to President Obama’s demands for higher spending and increased taxes, Republican leadership told you and me not to worry.

Sure, our nation is mired in over $16 TRILLION of debt.

Sure, it’s common sense that Congress needs to rein in its reckless, drunken spending.

But first, they had to cave in to President Obama on economy-crushing higher taxes (and just you never mind that their plan hiked spending, too)…

The good news, we were told, was the new debt ceiling fight would surely give fiscal conservatives the “leverage” they’d been seeking to cut spending!

Now, those outright LIES have been totally exposed.

It seems Speaker Boehner and Eric Cantor are afraid to EVER stand up to President Obama and Harry Reid’s demands for more spending.

In fact, under this new scheme, whatever new spending hikes, massive new boondoggles, and outrageous new assaults on our liberties President Obama can ram through an increasingly compliant Congress by May 19 will be automatically funded with borrowing increases.

And with the Federal Reserve eager to buy up as much debt as they can with dollars created out of thin air, I fear what this could mean to our already fragile economy.

That’s why it’s vital you take action right away!

Please call House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor at once.

Speaker Boehner –  (202) 225-0600

Majority Leader Cantor –  (202) 225-4000

Tell them exactly what you think of this new scheme to grow government, chicken out from taking a stand again, and stick you with the bill – and do not mince words.

While you’re at it, call your U.S. Representative:

(202) 224-3121

Tell your Representative to vote “NO!” on this radical scheme before it’s too late.

Our window to make our voices heard is rapidly closing, so please act at once!

In Liberty,

These people are “leaders?” I caught a lot of hell for calling Romney “obamalite” but take a look please, at most of the rest of the Republicans! We need a whole new batch of Libertarians in places of power. No, not the whack jobs that caused me to leave the party, but the types that Ronald Reagan referred to as the heart and soul of Conservatism. My quote may not be exact, but you get the picture. Liberty and Freedom of the common man and woman most often provide solutions for virtually all of our problems. While government just screws things up beyond belief. Usually via unintended consequences. Is the majority of America, even including the illegal aliens residing here really all that stuck on stupid..? Free cheese isn’t free people, and Freedom isn’t, and never has been “free.”

The Bill of Rights, according to Common Law. Come and take them from me. God willing!

Enraging organized labor and Democrats; Sorry about that…

August 9, 2011

Seems that Labor Unions and Communists, I mean Democrats, sorry. Got a little peeved when a few brave souls decided to do what was right, and said to hell with political correctness.

What happens when the votes are counted after the massive recall election will be a signal to the rest of the nation, and the world, about what really matters to mainstream America anymore.

We can only hope that the voters in Wisconsin will use their brains and not follow the populist rhetoric.

Read more about this HERE.

This election can be viewed as a referendum on contemporary America. On our collective morals, our dignity, and our pride.

Our forefathers were not at all about handouts, or people living at the government trough. They fought, bled, and in many cases died so that we, as a people, have the freedom to succeed or fail as individuals and as a corporate whole.

We are a representative democracy for a reason. We have a Bill of Rights for a reason. We have a Constitution for a reason as well.

Think about it.

This nation has many problems besetting it. Will we allow others to dictate to us what freedoms we shall have, and exercise? Let’s draw up a list of those problems, and in the coming months go a little deeper into what is going on, the implications involved, and history around them.

  • The Economy; Khrushchev’s shoe at the U. N?
  • Race Wars; Charles Manson, Timothy McVeigh, and the KKK?
  • The Bill of Rights; Private Property, Search and Seizure, The Patriot Act, GCA 1968, Brady Bill, and the Lautenberg abomination?
  • Taxation; “User Fees” and other taxes that are not taxes?
  • Political Correctness; Populism unleashed, full blown social democracy, mob rule anyone?

This is a short list to be sure. However, any of those things could, and very well might trigger a full blown civil war.

Bureaucratic belligerence and official oppression..?

And now we are; Terrorists Again…

August 7, 2011

Terrorists, again, that is what myself and others are being called. Why? Did any of us blow up other people with bombs? Did we hold people hostage unless we got our way..? Nope, none of that. Nothing of the sort actually. We advocated the basic value of paying your bills, and not abusing credit. Hmm…

Definition of TERRORISM

: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
ter·ror·ist adjective or noun
ter·ror·is·tic adjective

Examples of TERRORISM

  1. They have been arrested for acts of terrorism.

First Known Use of TERRORISM

1795

Other Government and Politics Terms

agent provocateur, agitprop, autarky, cabal, egalitarianism, federalism, hegemony, plenipotentiary, popular sovereignty, socialism

SOURCE

So, advocating a social norm. That being paying your debts, is now an act of terrorism. At least according to the authoritarians that are running this nation into the ground.

But, it’s creeps like that who also advocate ex post facto law, and suppression of your civil rights. Just last year they were calling myself and others terrorists because we insisted upon exercising our rights, as defined within the Constitution and Bill of Rights…

Some time back I noted here that we are in fact heading toward a full blown depression, and I believe that this asinine response to the fiscal crisis that we are in by our so call leaders will only make it that much worse when it does hit. The politicos in swampy bottom remind me of children and Corporate types that are more focused on finger pointing and blame assignment than on solutions.

It must just be so much easier to blame TEA Party activists than to accept responsibility and personal accountability…

Let’s see now… Economics revisited; The epic failure known as obama.

July 26, 2011

Quick! Blame it on Bush! Blame it on Congress! Blame it on racism! But remember to do it For the Children!

Let’s get back to the basics, and stop the blaiming and finger pointing. Supposedly we have adults working on the economic woes that have beset our nation. What is needed are solutions. Not more he did this or she did that type of whining…

If a house is on fire put the damned fire out. NOW! The investigation into the cause can come later. If a patient is in V-Fib shock him, and do it now! What caused it can be determined at a later date…

Here, are a few guidelines to help the uninformed. So as to not try putting out that fire by spraying it with gasoline.

There are four basic laws of . When these laws are applied correctly in a society the society achieves explosive prosperity. Conversely when these four laws are violated that society will spiral down into recessions, depressions and wars.

The following are The Four Basic Laws of Economics.

  1. All money value is created through and backed by the production of goods and services.
  2. The individuals who create this production own the money exchanged for it.
  3. All production must be marketed on an Open Market (open to all on equal terms, absolutely no exceptions.)
  4. The money supply must be held constant forever with no exceptions. This Law standardizes the economic system like the metric system is standardized with a titanium bar in the length of 39 centimeters. So a constant money supply standardizes economics

These are the four basic laws of economics.   When I studied the History of Economics, I found  Societies using these laws knowingly or unknowingly achieved roaring prosperity.    When these laws fell out of use that Society found itself  in a recession, depression and/or war.

Societies using these laws are rewarding Production.   Societies not using these laws are rewarding non-production.    When you reward production you will get more production.   When you reward non-production you will get more non-production.

If we look back at the last 48 years we can see Laws 2, 3 and 4 were very out. The first law cannot be violated because production always creates money value if production is taking place. It is always in, man cannot change this law.    Without production money will have no value.

SOURCE

Economic principles are crucial not only to arguments for economic freedom, but also for personal and political liberty and for peaceful coexistence. Yet many people are ignorant of economics, or have heard some misleading or incorrect information. Still more people don’t see how economic principles can be applied to everyday life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is the job of the libertarian to show the world how closely tied economics is to freedom.

Economics and Abstraction

The trouble that many people seem to have applying economics, or accepting the libertarian view that economics is much more widely applicable than traditionally believed, is that they view economics as an abstraction, a set of patterns or guidelines, or some philosophy or social science that attempts to model reality. Since economics is viewed only as a model, when economics and reality do not coincide it is simply assumed that the model is flawed, and thus economics is seen as just one way of looking at things, that is sometimes useful and often inaccurate.

Some economics is abstraction. The supply and demand curves, for example, are abstract, not real. There are no actual curves, physically manifest in the real world, that are supply and demand curves. They are a mathematical model, and as such, they are useful only in helping us to visualize the data they represent – not to predict outcomes with great accuracy.

On the other hand, the core principles of Austrian economics are real, universally applicable laws. In the real world, physically, things are produced and consumed; they are supplied and demanded; the laws governing these actions are just as real as the laws of the physical world.

Every action one takes involving any resource that is scarce, anything that can be spent, is an economic action. Whether you are spending money or material goods, or time, attention, or effort, or whether you are spending any social capital, good will, influence, or credibility – any time you shrink your pool of anything that’s available to you, for any reason, you are engaging in an economic action. Taking these actions while ignoring the rules governing them is just as potentially hazardous as driving a car without knowing how to steer, or walking around on top of a steep mountain while ignoring the laws of gravity.

The problem the libertarian faces in convincing people of the veracity of these claims is that there is, within the field of economics, a lot of junk science. Every time a war, hurricane or tsunami hits, someone proclaims that the economy is stimulated, promptly convincing practically everyone within earshot that what’s good for “the economy” – an abstraction – is not necessarily good. Actual economists cringe at this, pointing out the fallacy that Bastiat is credited with exposing, which is that this view does not consider the opportunity cost of the resource being spent repairing the damage. In fact, disasters – natural or man made – are disasters, and throwing the economy in front of the train of public opinion is generally an attempt by those in power to placate the population and maintain the status quo. After all, a public that can see the positive side of hurricanes and tsunamis is that much more likely to buy into a war or some other State-sponsored disaster.

The Market – Real or Abstract?

People speak of the market very often in economics, so it’s of paramount importance to determine the reality behind this term. Is the market a real, actual thing, or is it an abstraction? The answer is both, and neither.

In some cases, the market is a real, physical place. When you buy groceries, you buy them at a supermarket, or a mini-mart, or a convenience store (the name convenience store is all too accurate, since their main commodity for sale is not groceries, but convenience, and you certainly pay for it), which is just as much a market as the supermarket is. Generally, any place where you buy something can be called a market. So in this sense, the market is real.

In other cases, the market is not physical but inferred. You can buy things on the Internet – web sites are “places” in one sense, but not another. The market becomes a facilitator. When we refer to the market value of a thing, we aren’t referring to the price we saw the thing for sale for at the actual market. We are in this case speaking of a metaphorical market. The black market isn’t an actual place one goes that is actually colored black. It’s an abstract term. (One could argue that the place where an exchange takes place becomes a de facto market, so if I sell things at my house, my house is an actual market for those things for that time. Either way, the term market is sometimes used as an abstraction, sometimes not.)

In this sense the market is both real and abstract, depending on the circumstance. However, the sense in which the term is often used is neither a physical location nor an abstraction of such. It is a situation, or a description of the state of things. When things are traded “on the market” it means that ownership of the things has been exchanged publicly, voluntarily, and legitimately. When we refer to a market as free, we mean that there are no barriers to these exchanges placed by others – in other words, no taxes, tariffs, price controls, or other interferences. When we say that something is “placed on the market” we mean that it is being offered for sale or trade.

It is important to distinguish between the abstract and situational uses of this term. For instance, if something is “on the market,” it’s available to be purchased – there is an actual good or service that is really available. If something has a “market value,” however, you can’t infer anything about that thing itself. “Value” is subjective, and relative; “market value” simply refers to the price one could fetch for the item if it were sold publicly. It might be based on the MSRP (manufacturer’s suggested retail price), or on the appraisal of a third party, or on the price that previous, similar items have sold for. There’s no way to predict or know market value – you can only guess, estimate, extrapolate, or average.

The Reality of the Free Market

Detractors of libertarianism complain that the free market is idolized and worshiped by libertarians, and that it is just another abstraction, that can never come true; they say it is idealistic or Utopian to expect a free market to ever arise.

The term “free market” often does not refer to a market at all. For instance, some would claim that the free market reduces prices and increases quality as time passes. However, there isn’t an actual marketplace that accomplishes this feat. Rather, “free market” is an abbreviation; what we are really referring to is the collected efforts of individuals acting on the free market. Markets don’t act – people do. The “free market” is simply the state of people acting without barriers to exchange.

Economic law proves that when individuals act without barriers to exchange they bring about states of affairs more desirable to themselves than if they act with barriers to exchange. When the “free market” reduces the price of a commodity, what’s really happening is that individual suppliers are reducing the prices of their goods in order to maximize their profits in the face of competition. When the “free market” increases the quality of a good, what’s happening is that suppliers are making better products, in order to maximize profit in the face of competition. When the “free market” bankrupts one supplier and makes another a millionaire, what is really happening is that individual consumers chose to spend their money on the latter supplier’s product, in order to maximize the utility of their money.

Libertarians do not worship the free market; however, we hold as an ideal that state of affairs brought about by the free market – a situation where everyone is free to act to benefit him or herself, as long as they do not harm others. Theory holds that this leads to maximal prosperity. Empirical evidence shows that the fewer restrictions on non-harmful, non-coercive behavior, the greater the prosperity that is achieved. This is not because of an abstraction or a model, but because of human nature and physical reality.

As for the final accusation, the situation described by the free market is not Utopian. Free exchanges are made every day. What prevents many people from seeing this fact is the limitation of economics to financial matters.

The Scope of Economics

Economics govern not merely financial exchanges but the allocation of all scarce resources, and the actions people take to satisfy their desires. People desire material goods, but they also desire other things. Let us consider the example of interpersonal relationships, and the applications of the free market scenario vs. the hampered market.

Daily, we trade our affections for the affections of others. Friends, family members, lovers, even pets, are capable and willing partners in exchanges of time, energy, favors, and good will – and these things are scarce resources. Governments do not currently place a tax on any of these things; however, I am certain that if a politician could figure out a way to do it it would happen. However, there are plenty of limitations or restrictions. A person cannot legally give a large monetary gift to their spouse, parent, child, or best friend without the government taxing it, even if the giver initially paid income tax on the money. A man cannot legally engage in sexual relations with another man. Consenting adults are limited in their behavior to varying degrees in different states.

Consider the question of voluntary exchange in a romantic relationship. You exchange affection, love, intimate relations, and promises of exclusivity, among other things. In a free market, these exchanges are voluntary and unrestricted. However, imagine if you had to pay a fee to love someone. This is relationship tax. Imagine if you had to give affection or romantic relations to a person who claimed to be unable to attain these things from free exchange! This is relationship welfare. Imagine if you had to marry someone of a specific race because statistics showed it to be harder for people of that race to find spouses! This is relationship affirmative action. Imagine if the State paid some people to have relations with each other, but not others. This is relationship subsidy. Imagine if the government provided everyone with a pet and demanded extraordinary amounts of money from them to take care of this pet. Yet this is what State roads, schools, and every other State bureaucracy is.

We live in a society with a relatively free market in interpersonal relationships. Very few filial, friendly, and romantic relations are taxed, limited, restricted, or forbidden. Many agree that the few restrictions there are should be lifted. Most people would be outraged by any further limitations or by any of the policies outlined above. It is clear to everyone that when it comes to matters of the heart, the freer the better.

But when it comes to matters of the wallet, it’s not clear to them at all. People are willing to force others to spend their money to contribute to the good of society. Money is seen as the root of all evil. Desire for material goods is looked down upon. The only reason for this is that it’s easier to benefit from someone else’s material goods than from their affections. Armed with enough firepower you could steal a million dollars but couldn’t make one person love you. Politicians have spent ages, for this reason, convincing us that it’s their right to steal money from us practically at gunpoint, and they have largely ignored our love lives – except to appease their religious constituency.

Due to centuries of influence by the political apparatus, many people believe that we rely on government interference for our safety and security and that it is necessary to sacrifice some freedom toward this end. However, when we consider that our finances are not the only economic situation we’re in, it becomes easier to see the stark differences between liberty and oppression.

Conclusion

Whenever an individual acts to meet his or her desires, he or she is subject to the rules of physical reality – of cause and effect, of scarcity, and of gravity and other physical laws. He or she is also subject to the rules of economics. Free trade allows the most efficient specialization, which means the greatest productivity. Disasters are bad. People trade things they have for things they want more. Scarcer goods are more expensive. These and other laws are immutable and both empirically and aprioristically proven.

Abstraction is a tool some economists overuse, but this should not be construed to deny the validity of economic laws. The free market is not an abstraction but an actual state of affairs, one that is to be striven for. The scope of economics is wide, and the rules thereof apply to things you might not expect them to – they apply to any action taken to meet a desire.

The denial of economic reality can be as disastrous as the denial of physical reality. The belief that you can defy economics is similar to the belief that you can fly by sprinkling fairy dust on yourself and thinking happy thoughts – it’s a fantasy that could prove harmful or fatal if taken too far. Libertarians should stress the applicability of economic principles and attempt to educate the public about them if we are ever to have victory for the cause of freedom and liberty.

 

SOURCE

 

And then there is…

 

 

The story of the Austrian School begins in the fifteenth century, when the followers of St. Thomas Aquinas, writing and teaching at the University of Salamanca in Spain, sought to explain the full range of human action and social organization.

These Late Scholastics observed the existence of economic law, inexorable forces of cause and effect that operate very much as other natural laws. Over the course of several generations, they discovered and explained the laws of supply and demand, the cause of inflation, the operation of foreign exchange rates, and the subjective nature of economic value–all reasons Joseph Schumpeter celebrated them as the first real economists.

The Late Scholastics were advocates of property rights and the freedom to contract and trade. They celebrated the contribution of business to society, while doggedly opposing taxes, price controls, and regulations that inhibited enterprise. As moral theologians, they urged governments to obey ethical strictures against theft and murder. And they lived up to Ludwig von Mises’s rule: the first job of an economist is to tell governments what they cannot do.

The first general treatise on economics, Essay on the Nature of Commerce, was written in 1730 by Richard Cantillon, a man schooled in the scholastic tradition. Born in Ireland, he emigrated to France. He saw economics as an independent area of investigation, and explained the formation of prices using the “thought experiment.” He understood the market as an entrepreneurial process, and held to an Austrian theory of money creation: that it enters the economy in a step-by-step fashion, disrupting prices along the way.

Cantillon was followed by Anne Robert Jacques Turgot, the pro-market French aristocrat and finance minister under the ancien regime. His economic writings were few but profound. His paper “Value and Money” spelled out the origins of money, and the nature of economic choice: that it reflects the subjective rankings of an individual’s preferences. Turgot solved the famous diamond-water paradox that baffled later classical economists, articulated the law of diminishing returns, and criticized usury laws (a sticking point with the Late Scholastics). He favored a classical liberal approach to economic policy, recommending a repeal of all special privileges granted to government-connected industries.

Turgot was the intellectual father of a long line of great French economists of the eighteenth and nineteenth century, most prominently Jean Baptiste Say and Claude-Frederic Bastiat. Say was the first economist to think deeply about economic method. He realized that economics is not about the amassing of data, but rather about the verbal elucidation of universal facts (for example, wants are unlimited, means are scarce) and their logical implications.

Say discovered the productivity theory of resource pricing, the role of capital in the division of labor, and “Say’s Law”: there can never be sustained “overproduction” or “underconsumption” on the free market if prices are allowed to adjust. He was a defender of laissez-faire and the industrial revolution, as was Bastiat. As a free-market journalist, Bastiat also argued that nonmaterial services are subject to the same economic laws as material goods. In one of his many economic allegories, Bastiat spelled out the “broken-window fallacy” later popularized by Henry Hazlitt.

Despite the theoretical sophistication of this developing pre-Austrian tradition, the British school of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries won the day, mostly for political reasons. This British tradition (based on the objective-cost and labor-productivity theory of value) ultimately led to the rise of the Marxist doctrine of capitalist exploitation.

The dominant British tradition received its first serious challenge in many years when Carl Menger’s Principles of Economics was published in 1871. Menger, the founder of the Austrian School proper, resurrected the Scholastic-French approach to economics, and put it on firmer ground.

Together with the contemporaneous writings of Leon Walras and Stanley Jevons, Menger spelled out the subjective basis of economic value, and fully explained, for the first time, the theory of marginal utility (the greater the number of units of a good that an individual possesses, the less he will value any given unit). In addition, Menger showed how money originates in a free market when the most marketable commodity is desired, not for consumption, but for use in trading for other goods.

Menger’s book was a pillar of the “marginalist revolution” in the history of economic science. When Mises said it “made an economist” out of him, he was not only referring to Menger’s theory of money and prices, but also his approach to the discipline itself. Like his predecessors in the tradition, Menger was a classical liberal and methodological individualist, viewing economics as the science of individual choice. His Investigations, which came out twelve years later, battled the German Historical School, which rejected theory and saw economics as the accumulation of data in service of the state.

As professor of economics at the University of Vienna, and then tutor to the young but ill-fated Crown Prince Rudolf of the House of Habsburg, Menger restored economics as the science of human action based on deductive logic, and prepared the way for later theorists to counter the influence of socialist thought. Indeed, his student Friederich von Wieser strongly influenced Friedrich von Hayek’s later writings. Menger’s work remains an excellent introduction to the economic way of thinking. At some level, every Austrian since has seen himself as a student of Menger.

Menger’s admirer and follower at the University of Innsbruck, Eugen von Boehm-Bawerk, took Menger’s exposition, reformulated it, and applied it to a host of new problems involving value, price, capital, and interest. His History and Critique of Interest Theories, appearing in 1884, is a sweeping account of fallacies in the history of thought and a firm defense of the idea that the interest rate is not an artificial construct but an inherent part of the market. It reflects the universal fact of “time preference,” the tendency of people to prefer satisfaction of wants sooner rather than later (a theory later expanded and defended by Frank Fetter).

Boehm-Bawerk’s Positive Theory of Capital demonstrated that the normal rate of business profit is the interest rate. Capitalists save money, pay laborers, and wait until the final product is sold to receive profit. In addition, he demonstrated that capital is not homogeneous but an intricate and diverse structure that has a time dimension. A growing economy is not just a consequence of increased capital investment, but also of longer and longer processes of production.

Boehm-Bawerk engaged in a prolonged battle with the Marxists over the exploitation theory of capital, and refuted the socialist doctrine of capital and wages long before the communists came to power in Russia. Boehm-Bawerk also conducted a seminar that would later become the model for Mises’s own Vienna seminar.

Boehm-Bawerk favored policies that deferred to the ever-present reality of economic law. He regarded interventionism as an attack on market economic forces that cannot succeed in the long run. In the last years of the Habsburg monarchy, he three times served as finance minister, fighting for balanced budgets, sound money and the gold standard, free trade, and the repeal of export subsidies and other monopoly privileges.

It was his research and writing that solidified the status of the Austrian School as a unified way of looking at economic problems, and set the stage for the School to make huge inroads in the English-speaking world. But one area where Boehm-Bawerk had not elaborated on the analysis of Menger was money, the institutional intersection of the “micro” and “macro” approach. A young Mises, economic advisor to the Austrian Chamber of Commerce, took on the challenge.

The result of Mises’s research was The Theory of Money and Credit, published in 1912. He spelled out how the theory of marginal utility applies to money, and laid out his “regression theorem,” showing that money not only originates in the market, but must always do so. Drawing on the British Currency School, Knut Wicksell’s theory of interest rates, and Boehm-Bawerk’s theory of the structure of production, Mises presented the broad outline of the Austrian theory of the business cycle. A year later, Mises was appointed to the faculty of the University of Vienna, and Boehm-Bawerk’s seminar spent a full two semesters debating Mises’s book.

Mises’s career was interrupted for four years by World War I. He spent three of those years as an artillery officer, and one as a staff officer in economic intelligence. At war’s end, he published Nation, State, and Economy (1919), arguing on behalf of the economic and cultural freedoms of minorities in the now-shattered empire, and spelling out a theory of the economics of war. Meanwhile, Mises’s monetary theory received attention in the U.S. through the work of Benjamin M. Anderson, Jr., an economist at Chase National Bank. (Mises’s book was panned by John Maynard Keynes, who later admitted he could not read German.)

In the political chaos after the war, the main theoretician of the now-socialist Austrian government was Marxist Otto Bauer. Knowing Bauer from the Boehm-Bawerk seminar, Mises explained economics to him night after night, eventually convincing him to back away from Bolshevik-style policies. The Austrian socialists never forgave Mises for this, waging war against him in academic politics and successfully preventing him from getting a paid professorship at the university.

Undeterred, Mises turned to the problem of socialism itself, writing a blockbuster essay in 1921, which he turned into the book Socialism over the next two years. Socialism permits no private property or exchange in capital goods, and thus no way for resources to find their most highly valued use. Socialism, Mises predicted, would result in utter chaos and the end of civilization.

Mises challenged the socialists to explain, in economic terms, precisely how their system would work, a task which the socialists had heretofore avoided. The debate between the Austrians and the socialists continued for the next decade and beyond, and, until the collapse of world socialism in 1989, academics had long thought that the debate was resolved in favor of the socialists.

Meanwhile, Mises’s arguments on behalf of the free market attracted a group of converts from the socialist cause, including Hayek, Wilhelm Roepke, and Lionel Robbins. Mises began holding a private seminar in his offices at the Chamber of Commerce that was attended by Fritz Machlup, Oskar Morgenstern, Gottfried von Haberler, Alfred Schutz, Richard von Strigl, Eric Voegelin, Paul Rosenstein-Rodan, and many other intellectuals from all over Europe.

Also during the 1920s and 30s, Mises was battling on two other academic fronts. He delivered the decisive blow to the German Historical School with a series of essays in defense of the deductive method in economics, which he would later call praxeology or the logic of action. He also founded the Austrian Institute for Business Cycle Research, and put his student Hayek in charge of it.

During these years, Hayek and Mises authored many studies on the business cycle, warned of the danger of credit expansion, and predicted the coming currency crisis. This work was cited by the Nobel Prize committee in 1974 when Hayek received the award for economics. Working in England and America, Hayek later became a prime opponent of Keynesian economics with books on exchange rates, capital theory, and monetary reform. His popular book Road to Serfdom helped revive the classical liberal movement in America after the New Deal and World War II. And his series Law, Legislation, and Liberty elaborated on the Late Scholastic approach to law, and applied it to criticize egalitarianism and nostrums like social justice.

In the late 1930s, after suffering from the worldwide depression, Austria was threatened by a Nazi takeover. Hayek had already left for London in 1931 at Mises’s urging, and in 1934, Mises himself moved to Geneva to teach and write at the International Institute for Graduate Studies, later emigrating to the United States. Knowing Mises as the sworn enemy of national socialism, the Nazis confiscated Mises’s papers from his apartment and hid them for the duration of the war. Ironically, it was Mises’s ideas, filtered through the work of Roepke and the statesmanship of Ludwig Erhard, that led to Germany’s postwar economic reforms and rebuilt the country. Then, in 1992, Austrian archivists discovered Mises’s stolen Vienna papers in a reopened archive in Moscow.

While in Geneva, Mises’s wrote his masterwork, Nationalokonomie, and, after coming to the United States, revised and expanded it into Human Action, which appeared in 1949. His student Murray N. Rothbard called it “Mises’s greatest achievement and one of the finest products of the human mind in our century. It is economics made whole.” The appearance of this work was the hinge of the whole history of the Austrian School, and it remains the economic treatise that defines the School. Even so, it was not well received in the economics profession, which had already made a decisive turn towards Keynesian.

Though Mises never held the paid academic post he deserved, he gathered students around him at New York University, just as he had in Vienna. Even before Mises emigrated, journalist Henry Hazlitt had become his most prominent champion, reviewing his books in the New York Times and Newsweek, and popularizing his ideas in such classics as Economics in One Lesson. Yet Hazlitt made his own contributions to the Austrian School. He wrote a line-by-line critique of Keynes’s General Theory, defended the writings of Say, and restored him to a central place in Austrian macroeconomic theory. Hazlitt followed Mises’s example of intransigent adherence to principle, and as a result was pushed out of four high-profile positions in the journalistic world.

Mises’s New York seminar continued until two years before his death in 1973. During those years, Rothbard was his student. Indeed, Rothbard’s Man, Economy, and State (1963) was patterned after Human Action, and in some areas–monopoly theory, utility and welfare, and the theory of the state–tightened and strengthened Mises’s own views. Rothbard’s approach to the Austrian School followed directly in the line of Late Scholastic thought by applying economic science within a framework of a natural-rights theory of property. What resulted was a full-fledged defense of a capitalistic and stateless social order, based on property and freedom of association and contract.

Rothbard followed his economic treatise with an investigation of the great depression, which applied Austrian business cycle theory to show that the stock market crash and economic downturn was attributable to a prior bank credit expansion. Then in a series of studies on government policy, he established the theoretical framework for examining the effects of all types of intervention in the market.

In his later years, Mises saw the beginnings of the revival of the Austrian School that dates from the appearance of Man, Economy, and State and continues to this day. It was Rothbard who firmly established the Austrian School and classical liberal doctrine in the U.S., especially with Conceived in Liberty, his four-volume history of colonial America and the secession from Britain. The reunion of natural-rights theory and the Austrian School came in his philosophical work, The Ethics of Liberty, all while he was writing a series of scholarly economic pieces gathered in the two-volume Logic of Action, published in Edward Elgar’s “Economists of the Century” series.

These seminal works serve as the crucial link between the Mises-Hayek generation and the Austrians now working to expand the tradition. Indeed, without Rothbard’s willingness to defy the intellectual trends of his time, progress in the Austrian School tradition might have come to a halt. As it was, his wide and deep scholarship, cheerful personality, encyclopedic knowledge, and optimistic outlook inspired countless students to turn their attention to the cause of liberty.

Though Austrians are now in a more prominent position than at any point since the 1930s, Rothbard, like Mises before him, was not well treated by academia. Although he held a chair in his later years at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, he never taught in a capacity that permitted him to direct dissertations. Nonetheless, he managed to recruit a large, active, and interdisciplinary following for the Austrian School.

The founding of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in 1982, with the aid of Margit von Mises as well as Hayek and Hazlitt, provided a range of new opportunities for both Rothbard and the Austrian School. Through a steady stream of academic conferences, instructional seminars, books, monographs, newsletters, studies, and even films, Rothbard and the Mises Institute carried the Austrian School forward into the post-socialist age.

The first issue of the Rothbard-edited Review of Austrian Economics appeared in 1987, became a semiannual in 1991, and becomes a quarterly in 1998, The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics. The Mises Institute’s instructional summer school has been held every year since 1984. For many of these years, Rothbard presented his research into the history of economic thought. This culminated in his two-volume An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought, which broadens the history of the discipline to encompass centuries of writing.

Through the Mises Institute’s student fellowships, study guides, bibliographies, and conferences, the Austrian School has permeated, at some level, virtually every department of economics and the social sciences in America, and in many foreign countries as well. The annual Austrian Scholars Conference at Auburn University attracts scholars from around the world to discuss, debate, and apply the entire Austrian tradition.

The fascinating history of this great body of thought, through all its ebbs and flows, is the story of how great minds can advance science and oppose evil with creativity and courage. Now the Austrian School enters a new millennium as the intellectual standard bearer for the free society. That it does so is thanks to the heroic and brilliant minds that make up the family history of the School, and to those who are carrying that legacy forward with the Ludwig von Mises Institute.

Source ; See blogroll

Voters Unhappy with Congress; and other things of note

May 18, 2011

Voters are, again, not so pleased with Congress, so says USA Today / Gallup poll. (Wednesday May 18,2011, front page USA today, by Susan Page.)

No kidding..? My, my, I never would have guessed that… Seems that the peoples mandate was in fact ignored by many that reside in hallowed offices in foggy bottom.

Just say what people want to hear, and go on about your merry ways.

Well folks, that, is specifically what the TEA Party is all about. Make it local, and in their faces, period. All this national TEA Party noise simply ignores why people joined together in this movement against higher taxes and ever expanding government. Government that intrudes on your life, right at home… Texas Fred does a great job exposing threats such as intrusion by government under color of law HERE.

Perhaps greeting politicians locally that are failing with a pot of tar and an opened down pillow will open their collective eyes..?

On to other things.

Seems that Emergency Rooms are still going the way of the passenger pigeon. Yet, the various stories that I have read, or watched on the news have been quite politically correct, and refuse to acknowledge one of the primary causes of closures nationwide. Use by illegal aliens, and others, of Emergency Departments for primary care; with no intent whatsoever of paying for the services rendered. It’s called fraud people, plain and simply put.

The Socialist scum head of the IMF get’s popped for alleged sexual assault. All fine and good; however as pointed out by Michael Savage on his show the other evening no proof is needed in this day and age for a woman to be able to destroy a man simply based upon her complaint of sexual or domestic battery. Sorry Michael, but you did not lead the charge. Do a search of “mysandry.” Better late than never though, and welcome aboard!

The middle east… What a mess to say the least. I’ve been calling for Dear Leader Gadhafi’s head to adorn a fence post for more years than I care to admit to. But just who will run the place after he has been ousted..? More Muslim Brotherhood types? Simply exchanging one despot for a group of despots is no solution. Same thing goes for Syria. While we are at it (examining ) the region. The U.N. will be voting on recognition of the Palestinian National State soon. Since epic fail obama, and his cronies are forever kissing the butts of Arabs / Muslims I suppose we can all guess what sort of support Israel will get from the U.S. on this issue of great importance. What’s yet another friend tossed under the bus..?

The Queen visits Ireland. Land of my forefathers never forget “Bloody Sunday.” But at the same time don’t allow Erie to whither because of old grievances.

The economy continues to falter, while the administration continues to tell us all how great things are becoming. This is a recording… (or so it seems!) If this lie can be pulled off, the epic fail obama is indeed assured a second term, and the destruction of America will be at hand.

That’s all for now folks.

ANTLER COLLECTORS REMINDED OF RESTRICTIONS

December 14, 2010

I have been called a “rollover” for the Colorado Division of Wildlife, and worse in the past. What follows has some very serious problems… I’ll respond to any serious questions about my reservations with this latest episode in beast verses man, and Mankind…

GUNNISON, Colo. — The Colorado Division of Wildlife is reminding antler hunters that the collection of shed antlers in the Gunnison Basin is regulated by strict guidelines.

The purpose of the regulations is to protect vulnerable wildlife species, especially Gunnison sage-grouse and mule deer, explained J Wenum, area wildlife manager in Gunnison.

Collecting shed antlers for commercial use has grown significantly during the last decade in the Gunnison area. The activity can disturb Gunnison sage-grouse during their mating period, and also cause unnecessary harassment of deer and elk on winter range. Collectors are cautioned to know the regulations. Violations could result in confiscation of antlers, a $68 fine and five penalty points against hunting and fishing privileges.

“The Colorado Division of Wildlife takes the disturbance of wildlife species during the critical winter period very seriously,” Wenum said.

Over the years, unscrupulous antler collectors have been observed chasing deer on foot and with snowmobiles, searching areas at night, and going onto private land without permission.

Shed antler collection on public lands in Game Management Units 54, 55, 551, 66 and 67 is closed completely from Jan. 1 through March 14 annually. From March 15 through May 15, collecting is prohibited from sunset to 10 a.m. daily.

The regulations were adopted by the Colorado Wildlife Commission and based on a collaborative petition submitted by the Gunnison Basin Sage Grouse Strategic Committee, Gunnison-area sportsmen and shed antler collectors. The DOW worked closely with those groups to develop the regulations.

The period of the first closure (Jan. 1 to March 14) assures that deer herds and Gunnison sage-grouse are not harassed during the difficult winter months. The second closure period (March 15 to May 15) ensures that Gunnison sage-grouse are not disturbed during the critical early morning hours of their mating period.

The closures will be strictly enforced. Collectors are advised to consult official sunset tables and to obtain accurate public lands maps.

For more information, or to report violations or suspicious activity, call the DOW office in Gunnison at (970) 641-7060.

For more information about Division of Wildlife go to: http://wildlife.state.co.us.


Who Got Stimulated?

December 3, 2010

(This shakedown has nothing to do with the TSA)

“The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. … They have seen, too, that one legislative interference is but the first link of a long chain of repetitions, every subsequent interference being naturally produced by the effects of the preceding.” –James Madison

Barack Hussein Obama, intent on increasing your taxes in January by way of letting the Bush-era tax reductions expire (ostensibly to reduce the deficits Democrats created), has launched a ruse to steal the budget-cutting thunder of his Republican opponents.

First, Obama ordered a freeze on bonuses for some 3,000 of his high-paid political appointees. Then he announced a freeze on the wages of all federal workers for the next two years.

One Social Security administrator summed up the reaction of her fellow federal union workers: “That’s why Obama’s ratings are below Bush’s, and that’s hard to be unless you’re Osama bin Laden. I can’t wait until I retire.”

Well, given the fact that federal bureaucrats are now endowed with grossly disproportionate wages and benefits, one can understand why retirement remains attractive for them. On the other hand, millions of private sector citizens will be working well beyond retirement age in order to make ends meet, especially given the increased tax burdens they’ll likely incur in the future to pay off Obama’s deficit.

Let’s review the most recent data.

Compared to more productive private sector employees, whose income is confiscated to pay government wages and benefits, hourly government workers are paid 57 percent more than those in the private sector for comparable jobs ($28.64/hour vs. $18.27/hour). Salaried bureaucrats enjoy average annual wages of $78,901, while those in the private sector average $50,111, and the number of bureaucrats collecting more than $150,000 a year has doubled since Obama took office.

When benefits such as taxpayer-funded contributions to pensions are included, government bureaucrats end up with 85 percent more compensation than their private sector comparables.

On top of that disparity, bureaucrat jobs are virtually tenured, both recession proof and unaffected by a dearth of productivity. Benjamin Franklin once famously said, “Nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” Today, however, you can add government jobs to the short list of guarantees.

Notably, Obama did not order a freeze on government hiring, and I can assure you that the number of exemptions for government agency wage freezes will eventually equal the number of government agencies. Additionally, Obama didn’t freeze promotions, meaning that any federal worker can receive a de facto pay raise by “promotion” into the next incremental GSA scale.

Since the beginning of the current recession, private sector employment is down 6.8 percent. On the other hand, Obama has used taxpayer funds and debt on future generations, his so-called “recovery program,” to grow the ranks of central government bureaucrats by more than 10 percent in the same time period.

Of course, Obama’s wage-freeze charade fails to put any noticeable dent into his accumulating $1,000,000,000,000-plus deficits. Taxes, he says, must be increased to do that.

Once again, let’s review.

Like any devoted Socialist, Obama’s objective is to break the back of free enterprise, in this case, with unbearable deficits. When challenged about his motives, Obama invariably claims that he “inherited this mess” from the Bush administration.

However, the Executive Branch does not set the budget. Congress does. And from the ’09 budget forward, budget deficits have increased greatly.

For the record, Democrats have controlled Congress since January 2007, about the time the housing market collapse began. Thus, Democrats controlled the budgets for FY2008 and FY2009 as they did with FY2010 and FY2011.

Obama Deficits Chart

For FY2008 Democrats compromised with President Bush on spending. However, for FY2009 Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid bypassed the Bush administration by way of continuing resolutions until Barack Obama took office.

Again, for the record, Obama was a member of the Senate majority in 2007 and 2008, and he voted for those spending bills.

The last budget deficit that Democrats “inherited” was FY 2007, the last of the Republican congressional budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and it was the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. Thus, the only deficit Obama has inherited is that which he and his Democrat majorities generated.

Those pesky facts notwithstanding, a Republican majority is about to take over the House, and Republicans in the Senate seem to have found a spine.

If Republicans are serious about budget and deficit control, they should start by cutting their own bloated salaries and budgets. There is no greater sweetheart deal than being elected to our national legislature, where members of Congress are paid exorbitantly, and are eligible for lifetime benefits after “serving” for just five years — one term for Senators. If they are perpetually elected, as is the case with many members, they are eligible for almost 80 percent of their salary as a guaranteed annual pension.

Membership certainly has its privileges.

If members of Congress don’t like the pay cuts, perhaps we can cut their time accordingly. Send them home more often, and see if a little of the reality outside the Beltway sinks in.

As my colleague Cal Thomas opined this week, “The Founders were keenly aware of the danger of a Congress divorced from the realities of the rest of the country. During the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Roger Sherman of Connecticut wrote, ‘Representatives ought to return home and mix with the people. By remaining at the seat of government, they would acquire the habits of the place, which might differ from those of their constituents.’”

If Republicans are really serious about the constitutional role of government, they should identify any and all taxes and expenditures not expressly authorized by our Constitution, and schedule them for termination. While they are at it, they should revoke congressional exemptions, and make themselves subject to the same laws and regulations they impose upon the rest of us. (Oh, and Mr. Speaker-to-be, sell Pelosi’s opulent Boeing 757, and refund the treasury.)

For his part, poor Barry Obama lamented this week that he might have to delay his “holiday vacation” to Hawaii in order to get his tax-and-spend agenda through Congress. (How many golf outings and exotic vacations must our nouveau riche lotto winner take?)

Perhaps Obama should take a tax lesson from John Kennedy, the father of the modern Democrat party: “A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget…. As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance.”

Indeed, tax reductions in each of the last five administrations have resulted in tax revenue increases to the fed’s coffers.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, The Patriot Post

California: Stuck on stupid!

November 24, 2010

Thank God that I got out of there in 1978. It was bad enough back then…

“In the future, historians may likely mark the 2010 midterm elections as the end of the California era and the beginning of the Texas one. In one stunning stroke, amid a national conservative tide, California voters essentially ratified a political and regulatory regime that has left much of the state unemployed and many others looking for the exits. … This state of crisis is likely to become the norm for the Golden State. In contrast to other hard-hit states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Nevada, which all opted for pro-business, fiscally responsible candidates, California voters decisively handed virtually total power to a motley coalition of Democratic-machine politicians, public employee unions, green activists and rent-seeking special interests. In the new year, the once and again Gov. Jerry Brown, who has some conservative fiscal instincts, will be hard-pressed to convince Democratic legislators who get much of their funding from public-sector unions to trim spending. Perhaps more troubling, Brown’s own extremism on climate change policy — backed by rent-seeking Silicon Valley investors with big bets on renewable fuels — virtually assures a further tightening of a regulatory regime that will slow an economic recovery in every industry from manufacturing and agriculture to home-building.” –columnist Joel Kotkin

And then these words of wisdom;

“In 1920, when the top tax rate was 73 percent, for people making over $100,000 a year, the federal government collected just over $700 million in income taxes — and 30 percent of that was paid by people making over $100,000. After a series of tax cuts brought the top rate down to 24 percent, the federal government collected more than a billion dollars in income tax revenue — and people making over $100,000 a year now paid 65 percent of the taxes. How could that be? The answer is simple: People behave differently when tax rates are high as compared to when they are low. With low tax rates, they take their money out of tax shelters and put it to work in the economy, benefitting themselves, the economy and government, which collects more money in taxes because incomes rise. High tax rates, which very few people are actually paying, because of tax shelters, do not bring in as much revenue as lower tax rates that people are paying. It was much the same story after tax cuts during the Kennedy administration, the Reagan administration and the Bush Administration. The New York Times reported in 2006: ‘An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year.’ Expectations are in the eyes of the beholder — and in the rhetoric of the demagogues. If class warfare is more important to some politicians than collecting more revenue when there is a deficit, then let the voters know that. And spare us so-called ‘deficit reduction commissions.’” –columnist Thomas Sowell

SOURCE

Reid Vows To Pass Lame Duck DREAM Act!

November 23, 2010

Reid-Pelosi Schedule DREAM ACT VOTE Nov 29th

ALERT: When Congress convenes for its lame-duck session on Nov. 29, it will be asked by ousted Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid to vote and pass an amnesty bill for illegal aliens.

Reid Vows To Pass Lame Duck DREAM Act!

Reid is scheduled to keep his arrogant promise to Univision TV reporter Jorge Ramos to bring up the Amnesty DREAM Act again for a vote in Congressional “Lame Duck” session.

Reid went on to say that it did not matter if he won or lost his Senate seat in Nevada, he was “going to get this passed.” I guess the will of the American people also doesn’t matter to Harry Reid, only the socialist agenda does.

Obama too has not veered from his liberal socialist agenda at all and is pressing on, ignoring the election results with the Spanish-language media as he lobbied last week for Amnesty, saying he was a “big supporter of the DREAM Act!”

The DREAM Act is a bill that Reid has been working on that will allow illegal aliens to expunge their criminal records AND obtain citizenship if they only serve for two years in the military or attend college. It is an outlandish idea that we take illegal aliens, who are lawbreakers and often associates of international criminal syndicates, and pay for them to learn how to fight and kill, pay for their food, pay for their education and then just forget about their criminal pasts and simply set them loose in America to do whatever they want. This is just another pathetic ploy by the Left to buy votes for a political party that apparently cannot get them any other way.

Tell Congress No Amnesty – No DREAM Act – Secure the Border NOW!
SELECT HERE – Stop Amnesty – Defend Arizona

They are spending YOUR money to buy votes, give away precious U.S. rights and citizenship, and to put people in power that don’t care a thing about you, your safety, or the security, sovereignty and prosperity of America. They only want to steal your money and give it to their cronies and supporters — bought and paid for.

However, the worst part is that Reid shouldn’t even “dream” of cramming this corrupted bill down the throats of the American people during a lame duck session. The American people have once again spoken out in defiance and in disgust of the liberal agenda. But the Washington Left just keeps on doing whatever they want. They don’t care that they have lost the majority in the House of Representatives — they have “been fired” in a resounding rejection of their agenda, but they say it is because we are too stupid to understand all the wonderful things they have done for us. Your opinion means nothing to them, they are going to go ahead and vote for this atrocious bill, and probably others before their replacements come into town and start to “clean House.”

It is unethical for them to be allowed to vote after their constituents have declared that they do NOT want them as their Representative. But like scheming snakes, in Washington they just are looking for another opening to strike against YOU, and the sore losers and the hard Left-wing see this lame duck session as their last chance to get away with murder against those of us who still stand for the Constitution. They know you don’t want Amnesty, they know they can’t pass it after the new Representatives are sworn in. So what do they do? They say, “Screw you, America!”

At every turn they minimize your voice. They squelch your vote. They care nothing for democracy, honor, or ethics. All they care about is themselves. Any politician who was defeated at the polls who votes on any bill during a lame duck session should be jailed. No questions asked. It should be made illegal. Once you have been voted out that is it, your term is up. Leaving a door open and a loophole like this is far too easy for corrupt practices, payoffs and pay-backs, and every kind of sore-loserism to rear their ugly heads. And we all know that if you give these politicians an inch, they will take a mile.

Stop corruption, stop the criminals, drug dealers, and rapists from flowing over the border and stop the DREAM Act. Tell your TRUE representatives, the NEW ones being sworn into the NEW Congress that any bill passed during a lame duck session needs to be repealed and those who voted for it need to be jailed for violating our Constitutional guarantee to a republican form of government!

Tell Congress No Amnesty – No DREAM Act – Secure the Border NOW!
SELECT HERE – Stop Amnesty – Defend Arizona

Obama lied to Governor Jan Brewer of AZ in the Oval Office before the election. Obama committed to present details within two weeks of meeting Gov. Brewer, regarding his plans for sending National Guard troops to the Arizona border and spending $500 million on border security.

Well, time’s been up for MONTHS, Obama did nothing, and CONGRESS in fear of facing their constituents at home passed a head-fake border security “beef-up” bill that will wallow in bureaucratic limbo. Gov. Brewer is not waiting for Obama to do the job. And neither are the rank-and-file officers and employees of ICE Enforcement and Removal – who have passed a unanimous “Vote of No Confidence” in their Obama- appointed Director, John Morton! Obama’s biggest action has been in retreat – in surrender to the Mexican Invasion he put up new Federal border signs warning Americans to stay away, as he cannot protect them if they travel within southern Arizona. More signs will no doubt be shipping into Texas, next, where innocent American tourists have been attacked and brutally murdered on the border! Gov. Perry says that Texas will have to act alone to defend herself against the invasion — when he pressed the Feds to step up regarding the latest killings, the Obama administration basically told him to “take a hike.”

AZ and TX need your help – do not leave them to defend the border alone!

Gov. Brewer has stated, “We need action from the federal government, not signs ceding sovereign U.S. territory to international drug cartels and human smugglers.” Brewer sent a letter to Obama outlining her Four-Point Border Action Surge Strategy. This strategy contains most actions advised in the 2005 Norwood Minuteman Report, and the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps Project has been calling for these vital actions to be implemented for 5 years – and whole-heartedly supports them TODAY. As Gov. Brewer enumerated in her Four-Point Strategy to Obama:

  1. National Guard Personnel and Aviation
  2. Border Fence
  3. Enforce Federal Law and Appropriately Fund the Effort
  4. Reimburse States for the Additional Burden of Illegal Immigration

We Say, “Defend AMERICA” – Obama And Feds Do Nothing but Sue AZ!

The tragedy is that the escalating violence in our southern sector could have been prevented years ago, and countless innocent American lives saved, if the federal government had responded to our warnings and recommendations, and had acted decisively for a secure border patrolled by the National Guard and a border fence! The level of accelerating violence and social chaos that has the President of the United States now ceding our territory to international bandits is the direct responsibility of the United States Government, and its gross dereliction of its duty under the U.S. Constitution.

The Obama Administration was and still is grossly negligent in their sworn oaths of office to protect the sovereignty of the United States. The government did not do its job and was complicit in the act when foreign nationals invade American soil and killed innocent U.S. citizens! And now the situation only worsens, as Obama plays politics with border security, and his Justice Department STOPS Arizona for acting to save American lives, property and sovereignty!

Why is Washington’s response to try to SUPPRESS Arizona’s proper and Constitutional defense of our people and lands from foreign invasion? The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps sounded the alarm 5 years ago and this border crisis could have been prevented if the federal government had done its job!

Support Governors Brewer and Perry — DO NOT LET Obama Put More Americans at Risk.

Tell Congress No Amnesty – No DREAM Act – Secure the Border NOW!
SELECT HERE – Stop Amnesty – Defend Arizona

Enough is enough! The line has to be drawn! The invasion of America has to end! Justice has to be done for all the good, honest, Americans who have been killed, raped, kidnapped, stolen from, and abused by criminal illegal immigrants! American sovereign territory must be DEFENDED and HELD SECURE!!

It is a dark time in America; it seems as if our voices aren’t being heard. WE MUST NOT BACK DOWN! The most powerful things you have as a citizen is your voice and your ballot, even if so far in Washington, they REFUSE to listen. THE HOUR IS LATE, MAKE THEM HEAR US — it is the right thing to do!

Help us mobilize common sense, patriotic Americans against this travesty!! The Obama Administration’s plan for Executive Order or USCIS Action mass Amnesty MUST BE STOPPED!

FULL STORY

Related Survey


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 179 other followers

%d bloggers like this: