tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-68858702012-01-24T19:44:05.430ZThe Icelandic Right has a friend in me. The Icelandic Left has a therapist in me.Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.comBlogger3331100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-46606079675871395982012-01-24T19:28:00.002Z2012-01-24T19:44:05.441Z

Keynesianism, according to Keynes, is fascism. Says Keynes: The theory of aggregate production that is the goal of the following book can be much more easily applied to the conditions of a totalitarian state than the theory of the production and distribution of a given output turned out under the conditions of free competition and of a considerable degree of laissez-faire.(quoted from Hazlitt,

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-70375091691056434332011-11-09T13:51:00.003Z2011-11-09T19:44:56.072Z

Who proposed the following "method" to obtain a certain result or the objective that "we shall have an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all": Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. Was it Keynes? Was it some visionary in the Middle-Ages who saw this

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-4051915183682868272011-10-04T07:12:00.002Z2011-10-04T07:18:11.465Z

For not only are property rights also human rights, but in the most profound sense there are no rights but property rights. The only human rights, in short, are property rights. ...says Rothbard in Power and Market (chapter 6). I urge everyone to read the full context of this citation. It is enlightening. If we consider the problem in terms of property rights instead of the vague and woolly human

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-68285583047918749052011-09-30T08:02:00.006Z2011-09-30T08:12:06.519Z

For every capital good, there must be a definite market in which firms buy and sell that good. It is obvious that this economic law sets a definite maximum to the relative size of any particular firm on the free market. Because of this law, firms cannot merge or cartelize for complete vertical integra­tion of stages or products. Because of this law, there can never be One Big Cartel over the

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-82330492027658554652011-06-05T15:02:00.003Z2011-06-05T15:08:17.444Z

The free market always maximizes ex ante social utility as well. In political action, on the contrary, there is no such mechanism; indeed, the political process inherently tends to delay and thwart the realization of any expected gains. ... says Rothbard in Power and Market (chapter 2). This is why the libertarian is more interested in advocating the free market, than he is in advocating any

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-33069520288358581432011-05-21T11:55:00.002Z2011-05-21T12:10:14.652Z

The way to prevent a de­pression, then, is simple: avoid starting a boom. And to avoid starting a boom all that is necessary is to pursue a truly free-mar­ket policy in money, i.e., a policy of 100-percent specie reserves for banks and governments. ... says Rothbard in Man, Economy and State (chapter 12). And is time ripe for a gold standard resurrection? Many believe so, including Steve Forbes (

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-28906008058712176012011-05-21T11:48:00.003Z2011-05-21T11:55:20.292Z

[T]he boom begins to peter out from an injection of credit expansion, the banks inject a further dose. In short, the only way to avert the onset of the depression-adjustment process is to continue inflating money and credit. For only continual doses of new money on the credit market will keep the boom going and the new stages profit­able. Furthermore, only ever increasing doses can step up the

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-57087823006612298622011-05-19T08:55:00.003Z2011-05-19T09:03:39.723Z

Clearly, bank credit expansion cannot increase capital investment by one iota. Investment can still come only from savings. ... says Rothbard in Man, Economy and State (chapter 12). Also, and furthermore, The dis­tortion caused by credit expansion deceives businessmen into be­lieving that more savings are available and causes them to malinvest—to invest in projects that will turn out to be

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-3386707598697097712011-05-04T13:12:00.002Z2011-05-04T13:19:14.914Z

In sum, the free market always benefits every participant, and it maximizes social utility ex ante; it also tends to do so ex post, for it contains an efficient mechanism for speedily converting anticipations into realizations. With intervention, one group gains directly at the expense of another, and therefore social utility is not maximized or even increased; there is no mechanism for speedy

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-38289417853425498372011-05-02T20:59:00.002Z2011-05-02T21:13:36.966Z

Since all State actions rest on the fundamental binary intervention of taxation, it follows that no State action can increase social utility, i.e., can increase the utility of all affected individuals. ... says Rothbard in Man, Economy and State (chapter 12), defining "binary intervention" as an intervention where the intervener may compel an exchange between the individual subject and himself or

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-84314069474796860212011-05-01T09:34:00.003Z2011-05-01T09:52:29.926Z

The fact that each man, in pursuing his own self-interest, fur­thers the interest of everyone else, is a conclusion of economic analysis, not an assumption on which the analysis is grounded. ... says Rothbard in Man, Economy and State (chapter 12). Many people think that the reverse is true, that economics assume that the interest of "everyone else" should be furthered by allowing economic

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-67807544987714357012011-04-30T13:28:00.003Z2011-04-30T13:36:32.309Z

Rothbard is on fire in his article, Do You Hate the State?, where is urges libertarians to join forces in their fight against the State: Many people have wondered: Why should there be any important political disputes between anarcho-capitalists and minarchists now? In this world of statism, where there is so much common ground, why can’t the two groups work in complete harmony until we shall have

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-68070454808670039192011-04-27T14:35:00.002Z2011-04-27T14:42:40.816Z

At the heart of the stabilizationist ideal is a misunderstanding of the nature of money. Money is considered either a mere numeraire or a grandiose measure of values. Forgotten is the truth that money is desired and demanded as a useful commodity, even when this use is only as a medium of exchange. When a man holds money in his cash balance, he is deriving utility from it. Those who neglect this

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-4756043998548441842011-04-26T09:19:00.002Z2011-04-26T09:22:25.915Z

Consequently, at best, a union can achieve a higher, restric­tionist wage rate for its members only at the expense of lower­ing the wage rates of all other workers in the economy. Produc­tion efforts in the economy are also distorted. But, in addition, the wider the scope of union activity and restrictionism in the economy, the more difficult it will be for workers to shift their locations and

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-70783185099561634352011-04-25T11:37:00.003Z2011-04-25T11:41:22.224Z

[C]ontrary to the impression which socialism social-democratic style is intended to generate among the public, the difference between [socialism social-democratic style and traditional Marxist-style socialism] is not of a categorical nature. Rather, it is only a matter of degree. ... says Hans-Hermann Hoppe in Theory of Socialism and Capitalism (page 62). Remember this, next time you argue with a

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-91620607403616286022011-04-20T11:11:00.003Z2011-04-20T11:24:46.483Z

An increase in the supply of a producers’ good increases, ceteris paribus, the supply of a consumers’ good. An increase in the supply of a consumers’ good (when there has been no decrease in the supply of another good) is demonstrably a clear social benefit; for someone’s “real income” has increased and no one’s has decreased. Money, on the contrary, is solely useful for exchange purposes.

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-86060756329239615122011-04-17T21:26:00.003Z2011-04-17T21:33:12.427Z

The most popular argument for patents among economists is the utilitarian one that a patent for a certain number of years is necessary to encourage a sufficient amount of research expen­diture for inventions and innovations in processes and products. This is a curious argument, because the question immediately arises: By what standard do you judge that research expenditures are “too much,”

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-58558303655239804642011-04-03T17:16:00.003Z2011-04-03T17:29:40.226Z

Many from the Left think that libertarians are "obsessed with money" and think only of "material values" and leave out the "human values". The Left is fascinated with spending (other peoples) money, and Leftists don't really care where the money comes from. For them, State spending on whatever is simply less spending for the "rich" on some "selfish" consumption. But libertarians are not "

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-58149338358706865762011-03-29T17:42:00.002Z2011-03-29T17:53:54.372Z

In the production sphere, socialism is equivalent to One Big Cartel, compulsorily organized and controlled by the State. Those who advocate socialist “central planning” as the more ef­ficient method of production for consumer wants must answer the question: If this central planning is really more efficient, why has it not been established by profit-seeking individuals on the free market? The fact

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-84835733271630552622011-03-29T08:46:00.002Z2011-03-29T08:49:01.262Z

The weakness of the State lies in the fact that it is but an aggregate of humans; its strength derives from the general ignorance of this truism. ... says here. This is something I should keep in mind more often. Sometimes I feel that it is a hopeless cause to fight the State. However, when I simply keep in mind that the State is just an aggregate of humans, and that the strength of the state

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-28180833886616039612011-03-25T10:31:00.003Z2011-03-25T10:36:59.084Z

The reason for the impossibility of calculation under socialism is that one agent owns or directs the use of all the resources in the economy. It should be clear that it does not make any difference whether that one agent is the State or one private individual or private cartel. Whichever oc­curs, there is no possibility of calculation anywhere in the pro­duction structure, since production

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-71411427821687736792011-03-23T10:44:00.001Z2011-03-23T10:51:29.313Z

The “full employment” provided by the free market is em­ployment to the extent that workers wish to be employed. If they refuse to be employed except at places, in occupations, or at wage rates they would like to receive, then they are likely to be choos­ing unemployment for substantial periods. ... says Rothbard in Man, Economy and State (chapter 9). This is often forgotten. People talk about "

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-17440399539226535902011-03-18T12:52:00.003Z2011-03-18T12:59:16.932Z

That each man receives his marginal value product means that each man is paid what he is worth in producing for con­sumers. But this does not mean that increases in his worth over the years are necessarily caused by his own improvement. On the contrary, as we have seen, the rise is primarily due to the increas­ing abundance of capital goods provided by the capitalists. ...says Rothbard in Man,

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-90074423602306160582011-03-13T00:15:00.003Z2011-03-13T00:20:14.055Z

It is logically obvious that while cap­ital cannot engage in production beyond the limits of existing available knowledge, knowledge can and does exist without the capital necessary to put it to use. Technology and its improve­ment, therefore, play no direct role in the investment and pro­duction process; technology, while important, must always work through an investment of capital. As was

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-44253404637896842562011-02-17T23:04:00.003Z2011-02-17T23:08:51.245Z

A common fallacy, fostered directly by the net-income ap­proach, holds that the important category of expenditures in the production system is consumers’ spending. Many writers have gone so far as to relate business prosperity directly to consumers’ spending, and depressions of business to declines in consumers’ spending. “Business cycle” considerations will be deferred to later chapters, but it

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-54805633051758246732011-02-13T11:59:00.004Z2011-02-13T12:10:14.727Z

Thus, capitalists advance present goods to owners of factors in return for future goods; then, later, they sell the goods which have matured to become present or less distantly future goods in ex­change for present goods (money). They have advanced present goods to owners of factors and, in return, wait while these factors, which are future goods, are transformed into goods that are more nearly

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-44150857348104572042011-02-11T09:58:00.002Z2011-02-11T10:03:37.073Z

Factor payments are the result of sales to consumers and do not determine the latter in advance. Costs of production, then, are at the mercy of final price, and not the other way around. ... says Rothbard in Man, Economy and State (chapter 5). This important economic fact is mostly misunderstood by economists and the public in general. Most people think that prices are determined by costs of

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-3682358184576444802011-02-09T13:24:00.003Z2011-02-09T13:30:24.620Z

If the owners of land and labor factors receive all the income (e.g., 100 ounces) when they own the product jointly, why do their owners consent to sell their services for a total of five ounces less than their “full worth”? Is this not some form of “exploitation” by the capitalists? The answer again is that the capitalists do not earn income from their possession of capital goods or because

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-69294694673125165142011-01-17T21:52:00.004Z2011-01-17T22:01:09.469Z

There are many possible examples of grading exchangeable and nonexchangeable goods on one’s value scale. Suppose that a man owns a piece of land containing an historic monument, which he prizes on aesthetic grounds. Suppose also that he has an offer for sale of the property for a certain sum of money, knowing that the purchaser intends to destroy the monument and use it for other purposes. To

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-80143934959968696132011-01-13T15:12:00.002Z2011-01-13T15:14:24.637Z

Once one chases down the rabbit trails of "utility maximization" and the esoteric notions of "market failure," it is doubtful that one is going to understand simple opportunity cost. Exactly! More on this here: Krugman's Straw-Man Market System. Do you want to learn about economics? Then don't study economics in school.

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-11202251649554396342010-12-22T12:14:00.002Z2010-12-22T12:18:05.071Z

It is important to recognize the behavioral pattern of governments, NGOs, and scientists by looking at similar scares, such as acid rain, Y2K, mad-cow disease, H1N1, and now climate change and terrorism. Fear and guilt are the usual tools used to rob citizens of their liberty and money. These scares foster the centralized masterminding of our choices and allow ever-greater transfers of power and

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-78155480473269409602010-08-27T08:47:00.004Z2010-08-27T09:00:01.324Z

The movement for planning owes its present strength largely to the fact that, while planning is in the main still an ambition, it unites almost all the single-minded idealists, all the men and women who have devoted their lives to a single task. The hopes they place in planning, however, are not the result of a comprehensive view of society, but rather of a very limited view, and often the result

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-72965802937797118302010-08-21T19:24:00.002Z2010-08-21T19:27:44.315Z

The free market is not an ideology or a creed or something we’re supposed to take on faith, it’s a measurement. It’s a bathroom scale. I may hate what I see when I step on the bathroom scale, but I can’t pass a law saying I weigh 160 pounds. Authoritarian governments think they can pass that law—a law to change the measurement of things.Quote taken from here (which took it from here). And how

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-55812512085965047122010-08-19T13:50:00.002Z2010-08-19T13:54:53.308Z

Says Hayek in Road to Serfdom (page 14): "Freedom" and "liberty" are now words so worn with use and abuse that one must hesitate to employ them to express the ideals for which they stood during that period [the Renaissance]. Tolerance is, perhaps, the only word which still preserves the full meaning of the principle which during the whole of this period was in the ascendant and which only in

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-40341510016631463092010-08-13T08:29:00.003Z2010-08-13T08:34:13.906Z

Many socialists consider their ideals to be somewhat "just" or "fair", and that they have nothing in common with the terrors of Nazism of Fascism. But there is a strong resemblance. Hayek explains: "Planning", therefore, is wanted by all those who demand that "production for use" be subsituted for production for profit. But such planning is no less indispensable if the distribution of incomes is

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-21778294916521102822010-08-09T22:22:00.002Z2010-08-09T22:28:48.651Z

In a commentary about a month ago, I described how the economic world seemed to be drifting into two opposing camps: the Washington-based "Stimulators," who insist that more government debt is the best means to end the financial crisis, and the Berlin- and London-based "Austerians," who argue that debt is the crisis itself. If recent economic data and currency movements can be considered votes of

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-56777992695612640852010-07-09T09:22:00.003Z2010-07-09T09:28:57.757Z

Says Rothbard in A Stragedy for the Right: The left-liberal vision, then, of good conservatives is as follows: first, left-liberals, in power, make a Great Leap Forward toward collectivism; then, when, in the course of the political cycle, four or eight years later, conservatives come to power, they of course are horrified at the very idea of repealing anything; they simply slow down the rate

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-59199147903439596222010-05-11T23:03:00.001Z2010-05-11T23:05:39.820Z

In our monetary system, property rights in money are not adequately defined or defended, giving rise to inflationary credit expansion. Our fiat fractional-reserve banking system produces a tragedy of the commons, leading to an overexploitation of resources. A typical example of a tragedy of the commons is overfishing in the ocean. As fish swarms are not the property of anyone, the costs of

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-86722680765989881002010-02-15T21:38:00.001Z2010-02-15T21:40:27.012Z

In conclusion, it appears in the absence of formal government, that the Western frontier was not as wild as legend would have us believe. The market did provide protection and arbitration agencies that functioned very effectively, either as a complete replacement for formal government or as a supplement to that government.says here. Surprising?

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-28403103399164207842009-11-28T11:03:00.003Z2009-11-28T11:11:05.455Z

Do you think government is doing to little to fight the recession/depression? Do you wish for "more stimulus" and "government spending" to revive the economy? Do you think that the Great Depression was won with deficit spending and government programs (such as World War II)? Think again. Here is the real lesson to be learnt from the history of booms and busts during the Century of Central

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-64114209009845971102009-09-07T20:43:00.000Z2009-09-07T19:34:09.412Z

There are those who say: The free market is not to be left unbound or without regulation and interference. It needs to be "regulated" or "adjusted" to some or this political agenda. Fair enough. Free individuals and their companies need, apparently, a third party (or fourth or fifth, etc.) to push them in this or that direction for the benefit of something else than freedom, such as consumers,

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-83342318398309678412009-09-06T22:21:00.001Z2009-09-06T22:21:14.033Z

The Beatles got the point!

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-62558080128198285992009-09-06T22:08:00.001Z2009-09-06T22:08:10.778Z

Intellectuals and the Death of CapitalismPosted using ShareThis

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-48354527380373600852009-08-16T09:32:00.002Z2009-08-16T09:40:48.703Z

I have a proposal: Lets destroy all computers of the world! Why? Because this would create an enourmos amount of "jobs", where instead of a single computer hacking away trillions of numbers to find a solution, millions of persons would do the same, using pocket calculators and pieces of paper. Right? No, wrong. Destroying computers will not create jobs. It will destroy the productivity of all

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-4271200099488002042009-07-15T16:45:00.007Z2009-07-15T17:01:12.391Z

Ambition of central planners I must admit, that despite being a libertarian, then I cannot help it but to admire those who preach big government with a great, central authority over almost every aspect of every individuals' life. I cannot imagine a more ambitions program than the program of central planning over society, be it via law and regulation, or direct force and coercion. A project doomed

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-8245422927790113822009-05-16T13:00:00.007Z2009-05-16T13:14:51.267Z

This is a very interesting website: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2187rank.html It basically shows who are the debtors and creditors of the world. Now the creditors who have been supplying the USA with debt, used for consumption, will stop their lending, and spend on their own economies. More on this here (Peter Schiff is a genius). The US dollar is the

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-20232709504529159572009-04-26T18:31:00.002Z2009-04-26T18:34:16.662Z

Capitalism has been as unmistakable a success as socialism has been a failure. Here is the part that's hard to swallow. It has been the Friedmans, Hayeks, and von Miseses who have maintained that capitalism would flourish and that socialism would develop incurable ailments. All three have regarded capitalism as the 'natural' system of free men; all have maintained that left to its own devices

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-91098712770453219452009-04-20T19:37:00.001Z2009-04-20T19:37:54.735Z

In 1989, Icelanders had a Leftist government. Now, after the collapse of the international financial system, more and more Icelanders are beginning to long for another one. This video should deter at least some of them, I hope.

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-81199247103718573512009-04-14T17:37:00.001Z2009-04-14T17:37:53.913Z

Peter Schiff is probably the hardest working preacher of sound economics in todays media. So what does he have to say about the future of the dollar? Look no further: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8HRRQ6JkCw

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-65562489701057381202009-04-12T14:29:00.003Z2009-04-12T14:38:10.160Z

The remedy against air pollution is therefore crystal clear, and it has nothing to do with multibillion-dollar palliative government programs at the expense of the taxpayers which do not even meet the real issue. The remedy is simply for the courts to return to their function of defending person and property rights against invasion, and therefore to enjoin anyone from injecting pollutants into

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-82517252612034249652009-04-08T17:09:00.008Z2009-04-08T17:18:58.249Z

When it was realized that many paper bank notes were just that, their values began to collapse, many to zero (the same amount of gold you could get for it), and the money supply contracted at a ferocious rate. From the fall of 1818 to the beginning of 1819, demand liabilities at the central bank fell from $22 million to $12 million (Dupre 2006, p. 272) and the total money supply fell about 28% (

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-50677687711085871732009-04-04T12:35:00.002Z2009-04-04T12:37:47.015Z

Commercial banks can be expected to put their excess reserves to use, because base-money balances do not yield any interest: banks need to generate income to be in a position to pay interest on their liabilities (demand, time and savings deposits, and debentures). Extending loans is one option. However, in an economic environment of financially overstretched borrowers, banks might be hesitant to

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-35147821806641388012009-03-18T19:58:00.006Z2009-03-18T20:07:37.518Z

The following is from a statement from the The Reserve Bank of... (name of country follows quote) As Monetary Authorities, we have been humbled and have taken heart in the realization that some leading Central Banks, including those in the USA and the UK, are now not just talking of, but also actually implementing flexible and pragmatic central bank support programmes where these are deemed

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-22389618360722926432009-01-29T00:49:00.001Z2009-01-29T00:51:17.568Z

So in conclusion, while we can be fairly optimistic about the US economy in the short run because of the likely boom in business investments and in the long run because of its still comparatively market-oriented economic structure, the imbalances created by the Fed's cheap money policies make a sharp recession likely in the medium-term outlook. However, if this likely sharp recession will induce

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-24938341728086731372009-01-01T01:06:00.004Z2009-01-01T01:13:06.853Z

"[Asian central banks] increasing purchases of U.S. assets make them increasingly vulnerable to heavy losses if the dollar falls, but the increasing U.S. current account deficit forces them to increase their purchases to prevent their currencies from rising. The longer this unsustainable process is allowed to continue the heavier losses that will be inflicted on both sides." - America's

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-44235815294791479962008-10-20T21:54:00.004Z2008-10-20T22:05:32.444Z

It appears that the latest (of many, historically recent) shock in the international finance market comes as a huge surprise to most people. Some are even talking about a "market failure" and/or a "flaws in capitalism". I understand statements like these. I understand them because I know where they come from and what their basis is. They come from populist preachers of faulty economics. So how

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-16703195361338647892008-10-05T21:19:00.002Z2008-10-05T21:22:22.404Z

If libertarians refuse to hold aloft the banner of the pure principle, of the ultimate goal, who will? The answer is no one, hence another major source of defection from the ranks in recent years has been the erroneous path of opportunism. The Case for Radical Idealism, by Murray N. Rothbard

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-81204526913031279202008-08-19T17:56:00.001Z2008-08-19T17:58:00.034Z

Says Bastiat: We are deceived by money. To demand the cooperation of all the citizens in a common work, in the form of money, is in reality to demand a concurrence in kind; for every one procures, by his own labour, the sum to which he is taxed. Now, if all the citizens were to be called together, and made to execute, in conjunction, a work useful to all, this would be easily understood; their

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-82089778492064886172008-08-16T03:05:00.001Z2008-08-16T03:05:33.803Z

Those who use Copenhagen's metro service these days (or go to the movies in Denmark) cannot avoid seeing a ridiciouls advertisement clip that Copenhagen municipality is wasting my tax-receipts on. A serious man knocks on a door of a surprised citizen, who is told how many pizza boxes and plastic glasses he has thrown on the streets for his entire life. The point? To make people feel bad about the

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-67172721814712954252008-08-06T21:39:00.001Z2008-08-06T21:40:42.174Z

Economic science, in short, establishes existential laws, of the type: if A, then B. Mises demonstrates that this science asserts that laissez-faire policy leads to peace and higher standards of living for all, while statism leads to conflict and lower living standards. Then, Mises as a citizen chooses laissez-faire liberalism because he is interested in achieving these ends. The only sense in

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-63238379195095093662008-06-28T13:02:00.000Z2008-06-28T13:03:28.841Z

This is why.

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-75724516715046291982008-06-14T14:30:00.006Z2008-06-14T14:40:05.195Z

Many (false) arguments have been used to justify 'tax', i.e. the power of the State to forcefully demand a certain part of the individuals' property (for whatever reason). One of the most common arguments for taxation in the so-called "welfare" societies is the "distribution of the common burdens" of society, most notable the funding of the "rich" of education, health care and support for the

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-26735879889760439432008-05-17T21:20:00.004Z2008-05-17T21:29:14.288Z

"Taxation is not just a punishment of consumption without any effect on productive efforts; it is also an assault on production as the only means of providing for and possibly increasing future income and consumption expenditure. By lowering the present value associated with future-directed, value-productive efforts, taxation raises the effective rate of time preference, i.e., the rate of

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-38728635562045457852008-04-23T14:54:00.000Z2008-04-23T14:55:42.524Z

"That a fact is deemed true by the majority does not prove its truth." - Ludwig von Mises, Omnipotent Government

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-82807184753446482622008-04-13T12:59:00.004Z2008-04-19T10:59:33.715Z

Soon I will finish a book that I think everybody should buy for themselves, read, and buy for all others (e.g. for birthday presents or just for no special reason at all). The book is called The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism, and what a guide! It is the most compact executor of socialist myths I have ever come across. It doesn't dig into detailed analysis, but does just enough to

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-53719661677435720952008-03-24T22:26:00.001Z2008-03-24T22:27:58.367Z

But there is also a darker side to the current boom. It is to a high degree driven by the cheap-money policy of the Federal Reserve. And it is not just the American economy which rests on this shaky foundation. Most other economies in the world are also dependent upon the cheap money policies of the Fed. This is partly because the rest of the world has grown increasingly dependent upon the rising

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-42170353653733625722008-03-09T18:37:00.003Z2008-03-09T18:42:24.694Z

Schooled in the lesson that they were most valuable, the most deserving of reward, the most entitled to reward, how could the intellectuals, by and large, fail to resent the capitalist society which deprived them of the just deserts to which their superiority "entitled" them? I think this article is more or less accurate, and that the resentment of the word-smiths, the intellectual "elite",

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-68756225592191499162008-02-23T21:09:00.003Z2008-02-23T21:13:17.927Z

Now imagine that a prominent environmentalist writes an article or gives a speech in which he expresses the wish for a virus to come along and wipe out a billion people. What will be the reaction of the environmental movement? Will that individual be denounced for misrepresenting the movement? Will the rest of the movement's leaders rush to assure the world that that individual was so far from

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-66687138829984193622008-02-20T19:03:00.002Z2008-02-20T19:04:27.109Z

[I]f one thinks that people are unlikely voluntarily to donate to charity to help the poor, why is it assumed that they will support compulsory taxation for the same purpose? (#) Indeed!

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-32045135758243924832008-02-19T17:16:00.001Z2008-02-19T17:18:27.275Z

Here's the essential common core of hatred and destruction in the doctrines of Communism, Nazism, and Environmentalism. Only the concretes differ, not the fundamental principle of hatred for human life and happiness. Communism: The pursuit of individual self-interest causes monopolies, depressions, and exploitation of workers by capitalists. It must be replaced by

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-40790870653512414712008-02-11T23:01:00.000Z2008-02-11T23:03:41.232Z

The Comte-Dunoyer thesis, influenced by J. B. Say, was that "ruling class" may be defined simply as that class which manages to rule the State, while the ruled are those dominated by the former through the State. Thus, class conflict does not inhere in the free-market economy or society, but is strictly in relation of State. Class harmony exists only on the free market; class conflict is

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-24035654259950467542008-01-30T22:57:00.000Z2008-01-30T23:06:19.928Z

"As we go forward, the benefits of higher oil prices will go more toward the national oil companies and away from the major oil companies." (source) It seems that governments worldwide are squeezing "free" companies like Exxon and Chevron out of their fields, and bringing in their own national giants. This is bad news. In countries like Venezuela and Saudi-Arabia, all major oil fields are in the

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-59784862984767124032008-01-27T17:52:00.000Z2008-01-27T17:55:38.585Z

Also, "public" does not inevitably mean "state". Swiss health care is extremely decentralized. Switzerland does not have any Ministry of Health. Every canton and every self-governing administration unit is in charge of its own regulation, hospital accreditation, and funding. Thus, there are 26 slightly different systems in a country with a population of 7 million. A statist bureaucrat will

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-56353759355587600342008-01-19T18:08:00.000Z2008-01-19T18:18:05.247Z

"The inescapable conclusion is that the human contribution is not significant and that observed increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases make only a negligible contribution to climate warming." Source. Socialism disguised as "man made global warming" is quickly loosing all scientific credibility, thanks to scientists like John R. Christy and others. Of course, when Earth's climate

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-74866377508932703852008-01-10T22:22:00.000Z2008-01-10T22:30:43.958Z

I just found a very interesting site (by accident), and present two quotes from it about the climate and its warming (which some still stubbornly declare is man-made): In 2004 a group of UNIS geology students found an ancient polar bear jawbone at Svalbard. Now it turns out that this find could confirm that polar bear as a species has already survived one interglacial period, bringing hope that

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-64749437707980407552008-01-08T19:32:00.000Z2008-01-08T19:41:05.500Z

In school (as children), most of us are forced to read poems, learn how to play some musical instrument, know the names of the main rivers and towns in our country, learn the basics in a foreign language or two and read famous novels and books. Very few of us are forced to study the basic principles of economics while the State is in control of our education and forces us to attend school. We

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-36637005916678610622008-01-06T02:16:00.001Z2008-01-06T02:17:37.585Z

So answers Murray N. Rothbard: Then, when, in the jousting of debate, the inevitable challenge "are you an anarchist?" is heard, we can, for perhaps the first and last time, find ourselves in the luxury of the "middle of the road" and say, "Sir, I am neither an anarchist nor an archist, but am squarely down the nonarchic middle of the road." I must say that I am not happy with this answer. It's a

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-2797822136339545412007-12-26T01:45:00.000Z2007-12-26T02:39:44.478Z

Christmas is a joyous and festive time, and the economics of Christmas shouldn't spoil the fun. At the same time, however, we shouldn't harbor any illusions about Christmastime consumption providing a "boost" to the economy or anything like that. Consumption reduces the stock of goods available for use in future production. While there is certainly nothing wrong with this, it is important to

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-14552375898490416402007-12-25T01:59:00.001Z2007-12-25T01:59:02.689Z

John Stossel is an excellent myth-buster.

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-77997811652205155152007-12-18T01:55:00.000Z2007-12-18T01:58:38.496Z

Can you blame EVERYTHING on global warming? The answer seems to be: YES! (Thanks.) Environmentalism is surely the Socialism of the 21st century, so be aware of it!

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-28636099777173302822007-12-16T23:08:00.000Z2007-12-16T23:12:06.764Z

Who could have guessed? "Embarassingly, it also appears that the somewhat unsual recent melting of Greenland ice may have been due to naughty old Mother Nature, not evil capitalist man." (#) To blame everything on the evil free capitalism is perhaps a nice religion, but not always the correct approach!

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-56247792084944154782007-12-08T20:09:00.000Z2007-12-08T20:22:32.158Z

The State adds nothing I am always amazed that people consider the State to be the "provider" of something, for example: Health care, roads, courts, police protection, education. Some even say that if the State wasn't there to "provide", then that which the State "provides" would not be provided at all! This is wrong. The State is not a mystical being that has magical powers and without it, its

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-23240343628248935162007-11-28T21:41:00.000Z2007-11-28T21:44:50.402Z

Who throws most money away? Tag debatten om ulandsbistand. Anti-amerikanske aktivister og intellektuelle ynder at påpege, at verdens rigeste land "kun" giver 0,22 procent af bruttonationalindkomsten i ulandsbistand sammenlignet med tæt på 1 procent for de skandinaviske lande og omkring en halv procent i Frankrig og Storbritannien. Men disse tal dækker udelukkende over ulandsbistand fra det

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-52031137315194452022007-11-09T20:01:00.000Z2007-11-11T12:50:23.480Z

USA vs. Nordic countries - who wins? Do you know someone who is constantly saying that the Nordic countries are "better" than USA? Do you lack good arguments against that position? Then I have your solution! This report is it. Read it! "...Scandinavians are the poorest people in Western Europe once income is adjusted for taxes and the cost of living." "If nations are being judged on the

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-85346273967090527252007-09-18T19:24:00.000Z2007-09-18T19:33:53.421Z

Sicko? Not in the US! Far from being perfect (rather, far from being free), the health care system in USA has many advantages - especially when compared to the national health care systems found in most counties in the West. Let the numbers speak a little: In fact, Americans played a key role in 80 percent of the most important medical advances of the last 30 years. Eighteen of the last 25

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-88922033946027381552007-09-11T21:33:00.000Z2007-09-11T21:41:36.279Z

Water for life? Why not! I just finished reading a very interesting report about privatized water. A short quote from the (conclusion of the) Conclusion-section: Market based solutions to poverty and development should not be ignored: water privatisation has helped millions of people in the developing world. We should not let ideology get in the way of it. This should come as no surprise for the

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-26878436691382432382007-09-09T17:19:00.001Z2007-09-09T17:22:25.690Z

What is government? "Government is basically parents for adults." - Seinfeld, episode 4, series 5 Couldn't have said it better myself!

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-72054887837037272082007-08-31T12:30:00.000Z2007-08-31T12:35:54.824Z

Why all these bad policies? Here's one probable reason why: The typical voter, to whose opinions politicians cater, is probably unable to earn a passing grade in basic economics. No wonder protectionism, price controls, and other foolish policies so often prevail. The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies is a ray of light on an otherwise hard-to-explain mindset of (

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-23987704705961580742007-07-22T22:43:00.000Z2007-07-22T22:48:47.320Z

'Crimes' against the State are not immoral Illegal or immoral? These two concepts should not be confused with each other. Law er merely a description of what is legal and what is not. Morals are a description of that which is morally defensible behavior or action, and what is not. Lets give the word to Rothbard: If the State, then, is a vast engine of institutionalized crime and aggression, the "

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-87058640759883690372007-07-22T18:56:00.000Z2007-07-22T19:17:12.581Z

The 'right' to secede Free Tibet! is a common slogan heard today from sympathetic Westerners asking China to let Tibet become an independent State. Plans to "make" the Kosovo region an independent State are well underway, despite protests from the region's current ruler, Serbia, and Russia. Taiwan wants independence from China, and has supporters from all over the world for that cause. But how

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-56736393975540916932007-07-14T15:03:00.001Z2007-07-14T15:10:19.194Z

Radical Libertarianism The Case for Radical Idealism is a very inspiring article, of course written by Murray N. Rothbard. Cleaving to principle means something more than holding high and not contradicting the ultimate libertarian ideal. It also means striving to achieve that ultimate goal as rapidly as is physically possible. In short, the libertarian must never advocate or prefer a gradual, as

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-51502998851525115302007-07-04T01:09:00.000Z2007-07-04T01:23:18.324Z

Should we lower the interest rate? One of the big constant headaches of financial advisers is whether interest rates will be lowered or raised by the Federal Reserve Bank (or a related institute in any given country). If inflation is on the rise, the interest rate will be raised. If consumer spending is slow (and inflation is low), the interest rate will be lowered. This of course is government

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-87172575604075222532007-06-18T20:59:00.000Z2007-06-18T21:17:04.884Z

Reverse sociology They still exist, those who call themselves "communists" and "socialists". How to beat them - in a discussion - for good? At least argument for that they should shut up! Here's an idea. First you ask the Socialist: "So you want to abolish private property?" This will be answered with a: "Yes. It is oppression and blah blah.." Next is to ask: "Well, you are wearing some clothes

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-23848021227829222942007-06-14T21:33:00.001Z2007-06-17T19:27:09.374Z

How to win the war on the Left? The following quote is a part of the second comment to this post on the Mises Institutes's blog: The free-market advocates continually lose to the interventionists because the latter rely on a 'moral' position, namely that it is right to redistribute wealth. Until we compete with a different vision of what is right, they will continually win the war of ideas, which

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-25952406866573570052007-06-13T22:03:00.001Z2007-06-13T22:19:33.269Z

History repeats itself - again! Icelanders recently copied some Irish and Swedish laws which ban smoking in "public" places (private property open to the "public" for business activities). The arguments are well-known: Smoking is bad for your health, no-one should be able to work in a health-damaging environment (by choice or not), and the "public health" has to be protected (by the State) -

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-1383537558882930972007-06-12T22:15:00.001Z2007-06-12T22:27:47.415Z

A new name on my reading-list? When I see a piece of text like this, I cannot help but to add to my bookmarks-list in my browser: McKitrick has effectively laid down the gauntlet for both skeptics and alarmists by offering them a public policy proposal they both should be able to endorse, since both are convinced it will go their way. Only those of us who have independent moral and practical

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-36511380084328438912007-06-03T16:16:00.000Z2007-06-03T16:44:49.971Z

Is Democracy a friend or a foe? The introduction to the Cato Institute´s latest Policy Analysis - "The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies" - includes the following words: Economic policy is the primary activity of the modern state. And if there is one thing that the public deeply misunderstands, it is economics. People do not grasp the "invisible hand" of the market,

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-54779510991546345792007-05-29T17:21:00.000Z2007-05-29T17:25:08.676Z

What do we know about climate changes? The only current "evidence" for blaming carbon emissions [for global warming] are scientific models (and the fact that there are few contradictory observations). Historically, science has not progressed by calculations and models, but by repeatable observations. Some theories held by science authorities have turned out to be spectacularly wrong:

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-69037220437350662002007-05-23T22:29:00.000Z2007-05-23T22:30:53.507Z

The Lesson is: Abolish State subsidies! When I read a story like this I can't help thinking: Thank god my attitude is towards freedom, and not towards statism.

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6885870.post-44523457850659606142007-05-20T10:41:00.000Z2007-05-20T10:57:25.857Z

Whatever is necessary The environmentalists and their stooges in the media were not, and are not, concerned with logical consistency. That requires holding the context and making distinctions between different contexts. What they are concerned with is whatever can be used to strike fear in people: warming, freezing; flood, drought; it’s all the same. If it provokes fear, their tactic is to use it

Geirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12242683704962317847noreply@blogger.com0