[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
Glad to hear that you found the Nolan Chart "neat." I'm especially glad to hear that people relatively new to the ideas of liberty find "libertarianism" somewhat respectable nowadays instead of dismissing it outright.
As one explores the ideas and traditions of western liberty, one will soon come upon the difference between Anarchy vs. Chaos: contrary to what's parroted at statist public schools, the two are not the same at all. In fact, it's the interventions of the state that are usually at the root of social chaos. Nixon's wage and price control led directly to economic chaos (and we will probably see plenty of that again in the world in the coming years); the housing boom and bust worldwide is vivid current illustration of government intervention causing chaos. There are numerous articles written on this subject of government intervention and inevitable resulting chaos arising from it; a quick google search can bring up plenty. The Nolan Chart actually gives an interesting insight to this phenomenon: along the diagonal line from 0% to 100% intervention, it is a line of increasing chaos and capriciousness. At 0% government intervention, "left" and "right" are convergent and have little to fight over; departing from that point along the diagonal line towards 100% intervention, the line represents an increasing step-function gap, dicontinuity: in real life that means people become more and more at each other's throats and social stability is gradually replaced by increasing chaos. If you have to find a balance point on that chart, it is actually at the 0% intervention point. That being said, I don't consider myself anarchist, mainly because I still see one legit function for government: that of preventing its own replacement by a more repressive government. All the hardships that people are usually "taught" to fear about anarchy is actually the rise of a maximal repressive government in the power vacuum. A classic example of that was Russia in 1917, and central Europe in the 1920's and 30's. IMHO, the cultural habits of totalitarianism in those countries, and lack of exposure to liberty historically, had much to do with it. It was easy for Russians and Germans to submit to totalitarianism, in the latter case especially after the hyperinflation.
Aside from that one role (passive defense against take-over by more abusive versions of itself), it's actually very hard to make the argument that government monopolistic solutions for any problem would be better than solutions through people making choices in the absence of monopolies enforced by guns. If I were to propose that you are forced to give 1/2 of your income to me, and I will take care of your parents' retirement and your kids education, no competition allowed as I'd already have taken your money leaving you with no means to pay alternative service provider, you'd probably laugh at me for the silliness of such a proposal, and ask aloud "just who the heck do you think you are?!" Yet, that's precisely what bureaucratic monopolies are allowed to do nowadays in the name of "government." It should be no surprise that the economic life in the society has become chaotic and living standards stagnate because new creative solutions at lower cost (the hallmark of competitive market place) is snuffed out in favor of bloated expensive solutions that bureaucratic monopolies prefer in order to expand their own bureaucratic reach.
BTW, it's the "general" board, where any non-model specific and off-topic discussions go, including sail boats.
Also, repricing to a sustainable level, getting rid of bad debts in the process, is not at all "doom and gloom" but how a capitalistic free market rejuvinates itself. The damage is done during the binge, not the purge. Rising asset prices due to monetary expansion (not increasing productive return on the asset itself) is actually very bad for the economy: it reduces rate of return on capital, increases taxes, and puts productive members of the society further into hock by the banks. Asset speculation is literally waste of capital. Capitalistic free market economies correct those problems through repricing during market downturns, so resource misallocation can be stopped. What brought down the soviet economy was exactly the lack of real economic correction (purging the deadwood, reallocating labor and natural resources to more productive pursuits) for half a century: factories that made Lada's in 1940's kept making the exact same car into the 1990's.
posted by 96.233.42...
, Sat, 27 Nov 2010 10:54:30
, Fri, 26 Nov 2010 07:46:32
, Thu, 25 Nov 2010 07:43:14
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
