Robert Wenzel on the government-corporate central planning complex
What can one say other than this is banana republic talk. Companies have no duty to drive “national competitiveness”. The only goal of businesses should be to service their customers at a profit and compete against those in the same market they are in, whether those competitors are down the street or in Hong Kong. The use of the term “national competitiveness” is downright scary and suggests some kind of national planner designing rules or the government financing ”national competitiveness”. This, of course, has nothing to do with free markets. It does, however, suggest the potential for the government to interfere with free markets and harass small businesses for the benefit of the corporate elite.
As far as a “coordinated commitment among business, labor and government”. There really is no role for government in a sound economy. A government would contribute nothing. And business should be allowed to offer its workers whatever it chooses, while workers should be free to choose or pass on any offer. This “coordinated commitment among business, labor and government” is central planning that will benefit the corporate elite, union bosses and the government—and will be an overall suffocator of the economy. (Full article…)
Michael Kleen: Fortuna and the Free Market
Every day at the roulette table, that merciless turn of the wheel makes some people rich and others broke. I have seen a man win thousands of dollars over the course of an hour, only to lose it all in a matter of minutes. What never changes, however, is the cold probability that decides a gambler’s fate. Gamblers are famous for courting Lady Luck with all kinds of strange tokens and gestures, but every gambler knows that someone has to win and someone has to lose. For every story of a gambler who strikes it rich, there are dozens (if not hundreds) of untold stories of failure….
In economic terms, those who accept the rise and fall of fortune favor a free market, those who seek to control fortune are socialists, and those who try to manipulate the system in their favor are state-capitalists. A socialist is one who goes broke at the roulette table and then asks, “How can I rig this game so that no one ever loses?” A state-capitalist, on the other hand, asks himself, “How can I rig this game so that I always win?” Only the anarcho-capitalist, or the free marketer, accepts the game as it is, knowing that there is always a chance to lose, but if you never make a bet, there will never be a chance to win either. That is the understanding every gambler takes to the table….(Full article…)
I disagree with the delivery of health care by the government. Any time the government delivers a service, the cost goes up and the quality goes down, and whether it’s education or whether it’s medical care. I want medical care delivered more like cell phones and TVs and computers, because… there’s the least amount of regulation, the prices keep dropping, and poor people end up with TVs and cell phones. That’s what would happen with services, too… — Congressman Ron Paul
Wendy McElroy on the intrusive Google-government complex
Stephan Kinsella on the deadly pharmaceutical patent monopoly
Ann Coulter: Mud Libel
Darian Worden: A Dire Warning to Tyrants
William Grigg: Who Gave You Permission to Notice?
Steven LaTulippe:The Internet and Muhammad Bouazizi
Stephen Walt: Can the United States ‘control’ the Middle East? (Nope)
Tim Murphy: Peter King’s Terrorism Problem
Jacob Hornberger: Bringing Up Hitler
Henry Blodget: The coming tax revolt against high government salaries
Robert Kaercher: What You Can Do to Detoxify Political Debate
George Will: Hubris heading for a fall
Beth Harpaz: What happens when mom unplugs teens for 6 months?
Philip Giraldi: Serving Up Palestine One Slice at a Time
Thomas Szasz on the Tuscon massacre
Laurence Vance: The Nanny State and Baby Cribs
Michael Boldin: Null. Void. Of No Effect.