Less Gov't = More Liberty!

Let's talk!   Talkwithmike2014@yahoo.com


The Free Market



The Free Market has NOT failed.

At the most basic level, personal choice is maximized by the Free Market. Producers and service providers are The Free Market. These entrepreneurs conduct voluntary exchanges that enrich each party via open and fair contracts.

The Free Market is the most efficient system to exchange goods and services within a society. Economic forces are far stronger and deeper-rooted than political expediency.

Two Choices

The polar-opposite of The Free Market is Socialism. Socialism takes away personal decisions and choice.

Under centrally-controlled Socialism:

  •   Taxes are extorted from producers
  •   Gov't attempts shortsighted social engineering via legislation
  •   A parasite (gov't) eats at the expense of the Free Market (producers)
  •   With each encroachment, gov't looks for its next encroachment - it has a voracious appetite!

Sadly, the United States is a mixed economy – part Free Market and part gov’t-created Socialism.

I advocate a move towards Free Markets and a purposeful abandonment of Socialism.

My 2¢

Gov’t, leave the economy alone!

“Let” the Free Market work. Abandon Socialism.


Gov't Nudges?

2009 Housing Crash and Depression

The 2009 Housing Crash, a.k.a. depression, was a direct result of federal, Socialism / social engineering.

This depression was caused by political desire to provide affordable housing to those who could NOT previously afford it – a purely Socialist desire that was in direct opposition of economic reality.

Easy credit, in mass volume, would have an impact. This naďve, shortsighted engineering was doomed to fail (and fail impressively). Could magnanimousness BIG gov’t simply will that some could afford housing? The answer was a resounding NO. And, continued gov’t interference caused the recovery to take almost a decade.

Gov’t “action” is much like a Rube Goldberg machine (right). Each addition and each complexity brings a new point of failure.

Other Disasters

Also, recent ill-conceived gov't "action" has burdened us with:

Gov't, ceasse and desist!

Gov't, ineffective and woefully inefficient

”If Socialists understood economics, they wouldn’t be Socialists.”
Friedrich A. Hayek, 1974 Nobel Prize, Economics

Please consider a primer on economics, like Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson.


Is More Gov't "Action" Ahead?

Please say NO!


There are too few “winners” with tariffs (or other Protectionist measures).  Most lose.

Tariffs on steel and aluminum [March 2018] will have large-scale unintended consequences. First, they will limit the amount of steel/aluminum available – lower supply = higher prices. There will be inflation, even with domestic manufactures rejoining the market; they are higher-cost producers with start-up costs. Second, every product that uses steel (and aluminum) will have increased costs of manufacturing… customers will pay more for these products.

Earlier ideas about tariffs “on Mexico” and “on China”? Again, the importers will increase prices to offset the ill-advised and ineffective tariff. This additional cost will be passed on to US consumers. Neither Mexico, nor China pay for these tariffs … or the wall… With tariffs we will pay for the wall via higher prices.

Remember history - The Smoot-Hawley Tariff (1929) preceded the Great Depression. This tariff was a direct cause of that massive financial collapse.

What a yugely, horrible idea!!

Trade War?

Protectionism, in all forms, invites a Trade War. A conflict where nobody "wins". The best move is... NOT to play.

Besides tariffs, the following moves are self-defeating:

  •   Sanctions
  •   Boycotts
  •   Embargos

With protectionism, products made more efficiently (for lower cost) are NO longer available. First, there is a smaller supply that raises prices. And, existing higher-cost producers have less pressure to keep cost “low”… higher prices (again). The consumer loses on two fronts.

So, who “gains”?

Only the protected industry/company gains - a small subset of the whole economy. While it may NOT create a monopoly, it is movement in that direction. Then, if other competitors are eliminated, a gov’t-created monopoly emerges. At this point, everybody loses – less choices and higher prices.

The outcome is in effect, a subsidy for an industry/company. The gov’t unwittingly picking winners and losers AND then forcing the bill upon taxpayers. I’m tired of paying for govt’s mistakes!

Trade Deficit

A trade deficit is NOT a bad thing of itself. If US consumers are purchasing lower-cost imports they are smarter purchasers and relatively richer – they have more money after buying a product. Buying goods that other nations have a Comparative Advantage raise the standard of living for US consumers and foreign producers. A win-win.

It is NOT about the (fiat) money. It is about what is received in exchange; what a consumer gains.

We have a trade deficit because we DO NOT make anything anymore. We don’t make anything because our labor is cost prohibitive. We are NOT completive with other nations’ workforces.


Gun "Control"?

How about a market approach?  "Let" The People make their own choices about firearms...

The truth is in, United States citizens and residents have spoken. Pickets and political stands have NOT deterred responsible gun owners. The Market has spoken.



Life, Liberty, Property!

Web Author - Mike Kolls