|
Working from a very low economic baseline, the Chinese command economy accomplished
some very incredible things. Scarce resources were centrally allocated by the
government into an economic master plan. The command economy was somewhat successful
in meeting basic needs like feeding large numbers of people and addressing issues
like population control. Ultimately however, command economies prove to be so
inefficient that they fail under their own weight.
Economic systems fail when the majority of people realize that political promises
have been broken. Capitalism and Communism are two different philosophies. Ironically
they share the same core political promise;
The economic life of the USSR is determined and directed by the State National
Economic Plan, with the aim of increasing public wealth, of steadily raising
the material and cultural standards of the working people, and of consolidating
the independence of the USSR and strengthening its defensive capacity.
The command system in China was close to failure, and we all witnessed the
command system in the Soviet Union fail catastrophically. To the Chinese leadership
the Tiananmen event, and the Soviet experience, provided politicians with the
pragmatism they needed to implement free market reform. It was preferable to
have political stability at the expense of ethos.
In both places, reform reduced the footprint of the command economy and the
economic system became more productive and effective with more winners than
losers. Russia blocked change and experienced a dislocation China slowly bended
to the inevitable and has been able to manage the dislocations.
In both cases, as standard of living improved the demand for revolution went
out the door. A risk remains in that new expectations were formed. Is it physically
possible to meet the expectations that More people in China have? People in
China are expecting to have higher levels of consumption, better housing, and
access to reliable electricity. Is this realistic given global resource constraint
and contention?
Mirror Mirror1: The US has been moving from a free market to a
command economy. Politicians don't want to break the basic promise. Would you,
as a politician, like to tell people that the American Dream needs to be redefined
to a global world?
Everything has and will be done to support the impossible! Inefficiencies
and divergences are creeping in as command dominates the free market. Market
mechanics are harder to explain.
What are people going to do in the US if expectations are not fulfilled?
In China people had limited expectations, both at the time of revolution and
at the time of reformation. The same could be said regarding expectations at
the dawn of Soviet Revolution and again at the inflection point of collapse.
The US has a huge standard of living and greater expectations.
People won't revolt when they can happily own, benefit from, and acquire property.
If you are "debt heavy" do you really own anything? If you are a
saver are you rewarded or punished? Basically, I believe the "Virginia
Declaration of Rights" by George Mason, had it correct in the first place
and for political reasons the US constitution got it wrong.
The "Virginia Declaration of Rights" by George Mason, had it correct
in the first place. That all men are by nature equally free and independent
and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of
society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely,
the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing
property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
More question than answers;
Control of information was a big factor in managing the expectations within
a closed society. In our society, are events being used to justify constraints
in information flow?
Will outside forces drive change by influencing events and elections to highlight
the unattainability of expectation?
What kind of events, or transition will we have? Inflation, Deflation, Both,
Revolution, Fascism?
Will gold ownership provide a hedge? I think it will.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Zero Down for the American Dream - Ron Paul
The House Financial Services committee on which I serve often passes legislation
that wastes taxpayer dollars, harms the economy, and egregiously violates the
Constitution. The "Zero Downpayment Act" recently passed by the
committee is a striking example of a bill that does all three.
This legislation is considered completely noncontroversial by both political
parties, and will breeze through the full congress later this summer with the
blessing of the administration. Nobody in Washington thinks twice about another
welfare scheme that further entrenches the something-for-nothing mentality so
prevalent today in America.
The Zero Downpayment Act, as its names suggests, creates a federal program
that allows some homebuyers to obtain federally-insured mortgages without making
a down payment. "Federally-insured" really means taxpayer-insured,
as taxpayers like you foot the bill for defaults. So while Congress congratulates
itself on yet another program that supposedly helps the poor, it is taxpayers
who pay for the inevitable defaults.
Every mortgage banker knows that even a modest downpayment greatly increases
the likelihood that a buyer will pay his mortgage as promised. A buyer who has
consistently saved money for a down payment is by definition a better credit
risk, and it's harder to walk away from an obligation if it means losing
a sizable amount of hard-earned money. A downpayment measures a buyer's
willingness and ability to make sacrifices in order to reach a goal and improve
his standard of living. Banks used to recognize hard work and thrift as indicators
of creditworthiness, and in a free market would demand a significant down payment
for virtually all homebuyers.
But as with all federal intervention in the economy, housing welfare distorts
the mortgage industry and makes ordinary Americans poorer. Banks, of course,
love federal mortgage programs- after all, the risk of default is transferred
to American taxpayers. The lending mortgage banks get paid whether homebuyers
default or not, and what business wouldn't love having the federal government
guarantee the profitability of its ventures? Between the Federal Housing Administration,
which is the largest insurer of mortgages in the world, and the government-created
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac corporations, the mortgage market is hopelessly distorted.
Millions of mortgages in this country are federally insured, and the tax bill
for defaults could be astronomical if the housing bubble bursts.
Despite the congressional rhetoric about helping the poor, federal housing
policies often harm poor people by pushing them into houses they may not be
ready to buy. Given the realities of insurance, property taxes, maintenance,
and repairs, many low-income buyers lose their homes and destroy their credit
ratings. Easy credit and low interest rates, courtesy of the Federal Reserve,
have dramatically increased housing demand and artificially increased prices.
Zero down payment schemes do the same thing by pushing renters into the housing
market. This increased demand actually serves to price many poor Americans out
of the housing market indefinitely.
The American dream cannot be lived courtesy of taxpayer handouts. The experience
of working hard, saving for a downpayment, and buying a home is the essence
of the true American dream. Eventually the beneficiaries of government programs
stop thinking of themselves as independent citizens, and start viewing themselves
as wards of the state. It is impossible to maintain a free society when more
and more people look to the state to provide what Americans used to provide
for themselves.
1Editorial Reviews Amazon.com When their mission
to secure a mineral trade ends in failure, a freak ion storm catches Kirk, McCoy,
Uhuru, and Scotty in mid-beam-up and sends them to a parallel dimension where
Federation leaders are as ruthless as the Klingons, and Star Fleet promotions
are attained by assassination. They find themselves on an alternate Enterprise,
peopled with evil counterparts to the individuals they know (all attired in
glittery, glam-rock uniforms), including most famously an evil, goateed Spock
whom Kirk must convince to overthrow the empire. Kirk and his landing party
try to fit in with this crew of villains who are threatening with annihilation
the planet where the mineral trade went sour, while searching for a way back
to their world and fending off assassination attempts.
|