Trump is not bashful about flipping positions. While campaigning, he correctly pointed out that we're in a bubble and that The Fed is responsible for it. But as President, will Trump flip and call on Yellen to keep rates low, or even lower them? Will he call for more air to be blown into the bubble? Dr. Paul tackles this (and more) on today's Myth-Busters!
By Ron Paul
Ralph Raico was one of the founding fathers of the libertarian movement. As a student of both Ludwig Von Mises and FA Hayek, as well as a lifelong friend and colleague of Murray Rothbard, Ralph made numerous contributions to the scholarship of liberty.
As a graduate student at the University of Chicago, Ralph was a founder and senior editor of The New Individualist Review, one of the most significant journals of libertarian-conservative thought ever produced. Ralph not only served as senior editor but contributed many important essays, including several answering conservative objections to libertarianism.
Ralph later served as a senior scholar for the CATO Institute, and was a senior editor of CATO's publication Inquiry. Ralph was also active in the early days of the Libertarian Party.
In his later years, Ralph helped preserve and expand the legacy of his beloved teacher Ludwig Von Mises and his friend Murray Rothbard by serving as as senior fellow with the Mises Institute.
As the leading libertarian historian, Ralph made a number of significant contributions. His dissertation, "The Place of Religion in the Liberal Philosophy of Constant, Tocqueville, and Lord Acton,” which was completed under the supervision of FA Hayek, is essential reading for those wishing to combat the lie that libertarians and Christians are natural antagonists instead of natural allies.
Ralph also played a leading role in restoring the proper understanding of class conflict. Instead of the fallacy that class conflict is between workers and owners, true class conflict theory focuses on the very real conflict between the state -- along with the special interests who profit from it -- and the majority of people whose liberty, prosperity, and even livlihoods are sacrificed for their benefit.
Ralph's major contribution to libertarian scholarship was in providing concrete examples of how European and American wars led to the growth of the state and the loss of liberty.
While Ralph lives behind an important body of scholarship, his greatest legacy will be the generations of scholars, journalists, and activists that he helped infuse with a passion for liberty and truth.
I was honored to receive Ralph's support for both my congressional and presidential campaigns and I join Ralph's many friends and admirers in expressing sorrow at his passing. Fortunately, Ralph leaves behind a legacy of the many individuals who are inspired to pursue the cause of liberty.
By Chris Rossini
The great Judge Andrew Napolitano met with President-elect Trump today for an hour.
They discussed the characteristics that the incoming president should look for when appointing the late Supreme Court Justice Scalia's replacement.
Listen to the Judge explain it below:
There is plenty of reporting about what is going on in Aleppo, but there are very few reporters. In today's Liberty Report we are joined live from Syria by independent journalist and researcher Vanessa Beeley for some rare on-the-ground reporting.
Dr. Paul's appearance on Fox Business' Mornings with Maria:
By Chris Rossini
The Fed raised interest rates by a measly .25% and already cries from the right can be heard. The Fed must be sabotaging the incoming Trump Administration!
Let's look at an example from Ann Coulter. She tweeted:
To dispel rumors that the Fed is political, Yellen to raise interest rates for 1st time during Obama admin ... in time for the Trump admin.
First let's start with what Coulter got right. The Fed is political. They are the financier for the wars and welfare of the biggest government in the world. To think that Fed officials hover over the world like angels, disconnected from politics is pure naiveté. So Coulter has that part right, but goes downhill from there.
Today is actually the second time that the Fed has raised rates during the Obama Administration. The first time was back in December of 2015. So Coulter has her facts wrong.
But the real error is in the implied belief that artificially low interest rates are a good thing.
An environment of artificially low interest rates is when the damage to the economy is done. It's when all the bad investments are made. It's when all the pie-in-the-sky companies are started (Remember eToys and Pets.com?). It's when all the projects that should never be undertaken, are undertaken. (Remember all the shopping centers and neighborhoods that went up during the housing boom?).
Artificially low rates are poison. They enable economic behavior that should never occur. But here's why politicians love them: They give the outward appearance of things being great. It appears that the economy is sound and business is booming.
Unfortunately that's all government and politicians care about...outward appearances. They suppress reality with as much ferver as they can on a daily basis otherwise.
Artificially low rates cannot last. A great analogy is to compare it to a night out drinking with your friends. While the alcohol flows, the world becomes an artificial wonderland. Some are more confident than they would be without the alcohol. Some are funnier, more gregarious and outgoing.
The outward appearance (much more often than not) is that it's great, right?
But the alcohol can't flow forever, lest one happens to have a death wish. Ultimately, a return to reality must commence. It's painful. Let's not mince words. But the damage that was done during the binge must be repaired.
Since artificially low rates screw the economy up, a rise means a return to reality. All the bad investments are exposed. The businesses that should never have been started go bust. All the waste that The Fed brought into being must enter liquidation (unless of course they know somebody in power that can get them a taxpayer bailout).
This is what the Fed does. It creates a false economic reality. The vast majority of people must suffer as a result. Only a very small handful are able to position themselves correctly to avoid being a part of the carnage.
This doesn't have to be. It exists because the Fed exists.
Economic reality is not a bad thing. But politicians hate it with a passion. They always want the appearance of an economic boom. More money out of thin air!...More credit!...Turn those machines back on!
Ann Coulter obviously doesn't want the bad investments exposed during the Trump Administration. How will he get re-elected?
It has to happen sometime. The market always beats The Fed. No exceptions.
The market must set interest rates, not a bunch of people in marble palaces. There is no other way off The Fed's boom/bust roller-coaster.
We need supply and demand, not Fed Chairmen. What the Fed thinks, what their outlook is, and what their next move happens to be is all bubkas.
End The Fed.
This afternoon the Federal Reserve is expected to announce the first interest rate hike of the year and only the second since June, 2016. What do they base this on? Do they have the right data?
By Chris Rossini
Turn on the mainstream media and you may start to think that Putin has taken over the United States. His picture is everywhere. We're told that he rigged our elections. Yes, Hillary Clinton castigated anyone who dared breathe the words "rigged election". Such people were deserving of purgatory. But it's alright now, because she lost.
If Putin did rig the election, would it be crazy to ask for some semblance of proof? Any evidence whatsoever?
Tucker Carlson recently dared to ask for evidence but was instead told to take his show to RT!
At this point, there is no proof, but as our authoritarian neighbors like to say: "the science is settled".
Not only did Putin rig the election, he's also been secretly hiding a conjoined twin named Rex Tillerson. They'd have to be twins right? Turn on the TV and that's all that you're presented with: Vladimir Putin and Rex Tillerson.
Just in case you wisely cut the cord, this type of image is plastered everywhere:
Tillerson is being presented as Putin's double.
Tillerson has "ties" to Russia, and is "very close" with Putin, even "pals" with him. And now Tillerson has been nominated to be Trump's Secretary of State.
Putin-palooza has reached an even higher crescendo. The guy has a hot hand! First the election, and now this?
It's amazing that the media is just telling us about Putin & Tillerson now. After all, Tillerson has been the CEO of one of the biggest companies in the world. Why didn't the media ever warn us?
Why didn't they tell us that Putin has been virtually running Exxon all along? Were they too busy sending their articles to John Podesta for proof-reading?
Tillerson has also been donating money to both Republicans and Democrats. Does that mean Putin has been bankrolling our politicians by proxy?
Tillerson donated to Trump's opponents during the Republican primaries. He never donated a dime to Trump, which is odd because Putin obviously wanted Trump to win and even rigged the election for him.
Why did Tillerson break rank? Did Putin feel slighted by the betrayal?
It's all very confusing. Perhaps The Washington Post could straighten it all out for us. Then again...
Tillerson has met with many world leaders throughout his tenure at Exxon. That's what happens when you run a giant multi-national corporation. But the only meetings that matter (and the only meetings that everyone should focus on) are the one's with Putin.
Because it's Putin-palooza!
Americans are trained to always obsess over a villain. The military-industrial-complex didn't reach a budget of almost $1 Trillion per year by accident you know. There's a long line of villains who helped pave the way to that pile of money.
Trump may end up getting along with Russia, and let's hope he does. Confrontation with any nuclear power (including China) can't end well for anyone.
Let's just hope Trump doesn't trot out another villain for everyone to obsess over.
A break would be nice.
What happens when you combine tax cuts with massive increases in domestic and military spending? A debt tsunami. With the waters churning around Donald Trump's "guns and butter" approach, can Congress be counted on to step in and rein in spending?
By Robert Wenzel
President-elect Donald Trump is in love with military planners. He said recently during a FOX interview that he likes Generals. He has already named/nominated three to key positions in his incoming Administration to former Generals.
Gary North has a different view about military planners:
The main problem with military planners is they are central planners. They think through their plans from the top down. They assume that they can coordinate the intricate complexity of life. They face this inescapable problem: “The best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry.” Definition: No matter how carefully a project is planned, something may still go wrong with it. Then, once they have dragged the nation into war, they must finance it. They must plan to run a war from a top-down military command, but they must tax the market to pay for the war. As Hayek showed in his 1945 essay, “The Use of Knowledge in Society,” no central planning committee has sufficient knowledge to plan the entire economy. Only individuals in a free market possess this kind of detailed local knowledge. The price system provides individual decision-makers with the information they need to allocate resources rationally, i.e., in terms of customer demand. In short, central planners are blind. They are also arrogant. They think they have the ability to coordinate all aspects of production. Military central planners are the blindest central planners of all. They have guns. They shoot people who resist on both sides of the battle lines. Yet they can barely figure out how to coordinate a single battle plan.
This means that Gary North knows a lot more about Generals than does Donald Trump.
This article was originally published at EconomicPolicyJournal.com