Posts in "Economics"

Michael Geist on the Global Copyfight

aheram — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:44:58 +0000

Michael Geist’s keynote address discussing “the role of digital activism in countering bills like SOPA and the ongoing copyfight over the use of WIPO, ACTA, and aggressive laws to promote restrictive copyright rules.”

A Libertarian Primer on the Copyright Wars

aheram — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:21:41 +0000

On Jan. 18, the world was audience to the one of the most visible online activism yet in Internet history. Taking part in the 24-hour protest were thousands of websites and millions of Internet users going head-to-head with Hollywood to oppose a pair of anti-piracy bills — the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) — currently making its way through Congress.

Leading the charge were Wikipedia, Google, Craigslist and several other Internet heavyweights which blacked out their websites or otherwise called attention to the anti-piracy bills. More important than just calling attention to these bills, the many websites mobilized users to directly contact legislators’ offices.

Just how effective were the protests? According to the Los Angeles Times, 162 million people directly experienced Wikipedia’s blackout. Additionally, 8 million users looked up their representatives in Congress. Reports suggest that the online activism led to an avalanche of real-world activism as thousands took to calling their representatives’ offices.

All Hail Campus Protectionism!

Eric Sharp. ETF — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 17:48:19 +0000

Check out this satirical letter I wrote for the Opinions section of MTSU's student newspaper Sidelines. If it reads like my previous satirical letter in Sidelines this is quite intentional.

Aramark, our food services provider, recently enacted a rule at MTSU that student organizations could only have one bake sale per semester (excluding Greek organizations of course). We speculate that this is because our YAL chapter sold too many tasty tamales and apple pies. MTSU is not the kind of campus where it is easy to walk or drive 5 minutes away for lunch at back in time for class, so the cartel granted by contract particularly effects what choices and prices students have to deal with. Aramark is a large company and may even be doing the same thing on your campus.

Anyway, on with the letter:

Dearest Aramark:

You, my favorite of food-service giants, have recently undertaken some measures, which I must praise.

Specifically, you have insisted that a section of your contact with MTSU be enforced – the one that binds radicals and hooligans in "student organizations" to a satisfactory one bake sale per semester.

Craigslist: How the founder espouses liberty ideals

BenLevine16 — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:11:27 +0000

All of the quotes and information used in the post can be found in Founders at Work by Jessica Livingston.

Craigslist was founded in early 1995 by Craig Newmark; it started as a simple e-mail list that grew exponentially over the next few years. Newmark, who worked in the tech industry, would send an e-mail full of what he considered "cool events" happening in the SF area to a list of friends. They would then send that list to their own friends, who would in turn want to be on the original "list," which became "Craig's List."

When the list of e-mails simply became too long, Newmark decided to put his list on the internet. He wanted to call it "SFEvents" or something simple but his friends insisted that he go a different route: craigslist.com. Why not? The name had already stuck. But that's not what Newmark settled on. Instead, he went for craigslist.org. Why? Because ".org" exudes a feeling of community and trust, something Newmark loves.

The story of how his business progressed is really amazing; after working all day, Newmark would work through the night hours on the website and has said that, "If I was billing for my own hours, it would have been a great deal of money." Essentially, he worked his ass off. It was still more of a hobby at that point but one he took great pride in.

State of the Union: Ten Economic Graphs That Should Scare The Hell Out Of You

Wes Messamore — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 00:39:13 +0000

Crisis takes a much longer time coming than you think, and then it happens much faster than you would have thought. ~ MIT economist Rudiger Dornbusch

At President Obama’s State of the Union Address this year, which was heavy on recycled platitudes and light on substance, the president did more to prepare for the upcoming general election than actually give a genuine assessment of the state of the union, but that’s pretty par for the course. A sincere state of the union by the President of the United States may be more than most Americans are ready for yet – the horror of listening to the president describe the true economic realities we face might be more than many people could handle. I hope I’m wrong and most Americans would welcome an honest word from a major politician as a breath of fresh air.

What would a sincere state of the union address look like? The president could just show us graphs of economic data and leave it at that. It would be the most radical truth-telling we have heard from the White House in a long time. If you really want to know the state of union and you have the stomach for it, here are ten economic graphs that show just how precarious the state of the union really is and just how long our current economic troubles are likely to last:

1. Graph of the world’s reserve currencies and the duration of their reserve currency status since 1400 C.E.

Are you seeing this? When I saw this on ZeroHedge earlier this month, I decided instantly that this graph should be everywhere. Nothing lasts forever and this graph eloquently and poignantly demonstrates that world reserve currency status is no exception.

What is money? (Part I)

Wes Messamore — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:59:21 +0000

Oh yes, we’re tackling the big question today. No more subtly alluding to a certain view of money and economics while assuming you “get it” too. I’m going to break it down to the fundamentals here and do so as painlessly and simply as possible.

If you’re an advocate of “sound money” or “honest money” and you want to understand your own views better or find an easier way to explain them to others, read on! If you have a friend who is new to this kind of economic thinking, this might be a good article to share with them.

Economic thinking isn’t hard. In fact, it’s quite natural and intuitive in a lot of ways. People who make it more complicated than it really is are doing so to keep you from thinking about it and to convince you that you can’t really understand it like they can. Knowledge is power. So the less honest stewards of economic thought have decided to keep that power to themselves by making the knowledge seem unattainable to people without advanced degrees or Nobel Prizes. Don’t be intimidated! Finance and economics are for everyone.

McDonald's shows how we're still in a recession

Elliot Engstrom — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:30:11 +0000

McDonald's reported record profits of $27 billion in 2011. Hooray, evidence of a global economic comeback, right? Not so fast.

For most people, McDonald's isn't necessarily their food of choice. Sure, there are some people who voluntarily eat at McDonald's very often. But overall, the food at McDonald's is low quality and extremely unhealthy. In economic terms, it's what we call an inferior good.

Usually when we think of goods and services, we are thinking of normal goods. Normal goods are items for which demand increases when income increases, and vice versa. Sports cars are a normal good. When people make more money, they are most likely to buy sports cars.

Inferior goods run the opposite way. When people's income overall decreases, demand for inferior goods increases. This is because people are substituting the inferior good for something that they would rather have, but cannot afford. Case in point -- low quality food from McDonald's.

Food from McDonald's is probably not at the top of most peoples' menu of choice. However, as real income (not actual money in pockets, mind you, but rather real purchasing power) decreases as it has over the past several years, we should expect demand for inferior goods like McDonald's to increase. Don't be surprised if at the end of fiscal year 2012, we find that McDonald's profits have increased even more.

Where did you get your shoes?

mvwindsor — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:01:59 +0000

It's a common question I used to ask Occupy activists while being present at some of their rallies during the peak of the movement in autumn 2011.

Caught off guard by a perfectly normal question, the anti-corporate activist would inevitably drop his head down towards the ground in guilty contemplation of whatever shoes he was wearing during the protest, with his "corporations are evil" sign suddenly beginning to waver uncertainly in his hand. As if contemplating the issue for the first time, his mind races for a quick response to a disarmingly simple question. He flounders around awkwardly for a few minutes, thinking out loud with an "um, well... ah" mumble, fidgeting nervously with the wounded and confused look setting deeper and deeper into his well-meaning yet misguided face.

If there's any one question I've found that silences an Occupier who decries the evils of corporate greed which puts profit before people, it's "So where did you get your (fill in the blank) from?"

The Unintended Consequences of Government Policy

maske1ka — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 21:11:11 +0000

The law of unintended consequences, often cited but rarely defined, is that actions of people -- and especially of government -- always have effects that are unanticipated or unintended.

Consider the following short list of legislation and packages of bills:

Federal Reserve Act of 1913
The New Deal
The Great Society
The Civil Rights Act of 1964
Sarbanes-Oxley Act
Dodd-Frank Act
Department of Education Organization Act
Reorganization Plan Number 3 (Environmental Protection
Agency)
Food and Drugs Act of 1906 (Food and Drug Administration)

It seems that most people take these pieces of legislation at face value and defend them based on what they were taught in school or what they see and hear on television. Popular opinion is quick to point out the sincere intentions of these pieces of legislation and the importance they play in our lives. Popular opinion is also as quick to shy away from talking about the reality of these pieces of legislation in what is commonly referred to as the unintended consequences.

We're on Our Way

BenLevine16 — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 20:59:17 +0000

I wrote a recent article urging Washington and the media to listen to those who predicted the economic mess we're in right now. Not surprisingly, as I mentioned, many of those who saw the housing bubble and financial collapse coming are in the liberty movement. However, these economists and public figures are still laughed at when they discuss cutting government spending (real cuts, not false streamlining) and creating a true free market system. It seems like the battle has been lost. But if we look hard enough we'll find a silver lining. That is the mere fact that we have created awareness for so many issues. Google News shows we're making strides.

Take the Fed for example. If you search "Federal Reserve" on Google News, there are 12,300 returns. For a comparison, search "Alabama football" -- the team that just won the BCS National Championship -- and you'll get 14,000 results. That means just a week after one of the biggest sports games in America, the Fed is making news on par with the team that won. Sure, this might be an odd way to measure success but it certainly says something about how far our movement is pushing issues into public opinion. Anyways, just a few years ago -- although I am speculating here -- I bet there wasn't half that number of results for the Fed. Even more, Bernanke is now constantly questioned and his policies analyzed, even by the mainstream media.

Listen to Those Who Saw It Coming

BenLevine16 — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 21:14:53 +0000

"Air Force veteran Nellie Cooper thought she was following good advice when she refinanced her home's mortgage with an adjustable-rate loan," writes Gidget Fuentes of armytimes.com. Turns out this was not the case. Rather, following many years of illusionary expansion and soaring prices in the housing market, people like Cooper faced "financial ruin" when it all came crashing down. After an environment was created by the government in which anybody could buy a house -- whether they could afford it notwithstanding -- the situation quickly changed. The bubble burst and the price many individuals paid went beyond a dollar value.

Unfortunately, we are still stuck in this rut as the government has not decreased its active role in our lives and in the market. However, we can look back before the housing bubble popped and observe something very impressive: There were many people who actually saw it coming. Not surprisingly, they all have something in common: they're a part of the pro-liberty movement.

34 Facts about the National Debt

Bonnie Kristian — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 18:09:24 +0000

The original headline for this article said these were "shocking" facts, but I'm guessing they're not such a surprise to YAL blog readers. Here are some of my...uhh...favorites:

#1 During fiscal year 2011, the U.S. government spent 3.7 trillion dollars but it only brought in 2.4 trillion dollars.

#5 The U.S. government spent over 454 billion dollars just on interest on the national debt during fiscal 2011.

#14 If you divide up the national debt equally among all U.S. taxpayers, each taxpayer would owe approximately $134,685.

#15 Mandatory federal spending surpassed total federal revenue for the first time ever in fiscal 2011. That was not supposed to happen until 50 years from now.

#20 U.S. households are now actually receiving more money directly from the U.S. government than they are paying to the government in taxes.

#34 The U.S. national debt is now more than 5000 times larger than it was when the Federal Reserve was created back in 1913.

See the full list here. Which facts do you find most galling?

Who Are the 1 Percent?

aheram — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 16:01:52 +0000

I gave an antiwar speech at Occupy the Rose Parade, where I sought to define the "1 Percent" for my fellow occupiers.

Feds looking to hire six-figure salary "invitations coordinator"

Elliot Engstrom — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 15:33:39 +0000

As I was going through the news this morning, I found a link to this federal government job listing, looking to hire an "invitations coordinator" for the Consumer Financial Protections Bureau. Now, I know it can look like I'm just trying to be mad for the sake of being mad when I see one incident like that and highlight it. But the point is that it's not just one isolated incident, it's part of a trend that has been going on for some time now.

Consider this federal workforce pay chart from USA Today for 2011. Some of these seem completely reasonable. For example, I have no problem with physicians making $184,395 on average, or dentists making $141,012, even if they are working for the federal government and receiving tax money as their salary. Physicians and dentists have unique skills sets that are difficult to acquire and in very high demand.

However, consider some of these other federal jobs along with their average salaries:

Civil rights analyst -- $106,783
Public relations -- $90,560

Pentagon to Cut Troop Levels, But Does It Mean a Smaller Military?

aheram — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 15:11:30 +0000

The Washington Post has this bit of news regarding President Barack Obama's announcement of a new leaner approach towards militarism:

The Obama administration on Thursday unveiled a new military strategy that shifts the Pentagon’s focus towards Asia and says the country’s dire budget problems necessitate a more restrained use of military force and more modest foreign policy goals.
The strategy will almost certainly mean a smaller Army and Marine Corps as well as new investments in long-range stealth bombers and anti-missile systems that are designed primarily to counter China’s military buildup. It explicitly states that America can make due with a smaller nuclear force.

Why does this sound familiar? Donald Rumsfeld, the Bush administration's defense secretary, attempted to do the very same thing a few years ago:

[Rumsfeld's] goal in this pivotal year is to keep Iraq and Afghanistan at bay so he can turn to closing bases at home and realigning global forces even as combat continues...
[...]
But across the Pentagon, officials acknowledge that the twin tasks of building Iraqi security forces and defeating the insurgency stand in the way of Mr. Rumsfeld's longstanding ambitions to fundamentally transform the nation's military into something leaner, more agile and thoroughly modern. Success in Iraq would allow troop withdrawals to begin, relieving strains on budgets and personnel.

What happened instead? Rumsfeld oversaw the surge in Iraq and a military budget that has become more bloated year after year. Defense spending in the United States has more than doubled since military conflicts began in 2001.