Support




Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd.aoshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
Powered by
Movable Type





Economics and Plato's Cave

boorstin.jpgIf you had occasion to take a Philosophy 101 course in college, you may remember the allegory of Plato's cave. Plato meant it as a discussion of what "reality" is -- whether it is an absolute thing, and whether humans can experience "reality" in its totality or if we are limited only to what we can experience and measure. The idea is that what we can sense and measure is only a subset of a larger reality that we cannot perceive directly.

I've long thought that this allegory works quite well for economics in many ways, especially as it pertains to concepts of money and wealth.

Take a dollar out out of your pocket and look at it. What is it? It's many things, actually: it is money, so it must be a store of wealth, a unit of account, and a medium of exchange; it is a manufactured good, intended by its manufacturer to be used as currency; it is a work of engravers' art; it is a complex piece of technology (especially modern bills with the various anti-counterfeiting countermeasures); it is a carrier for the oils, dirt, and germs of the people who have handled it; and so on.

You can think of money as a special kind of battery, only instead of storing electricity, it stores up economic value which can be expended at a later time. And just as a battery can store energy but not create it, money can store value but not create it.

It turns out that this dollar bill is a pretty complex object, all things considered. And yet it isn't a "real" thing in the sense Plato was speaking of. Whatever else it may be, a dollar is not in itself valuable; it is rather a signifier of a real thing we cannot see directly. A unit of money -- whether a dollar, a franc, a pound, or a quatloo -- is only "real" insofar as it signifies some existing value in the economy. (We can think of some value as being latent as opposed to realized, as it often is with investments. We invest in expectation of value being created and providing some kind of return on the investment. No value appears spontaneously out of the void. The invested capital is based on already-existing assets; a return is only realized if the endeavor creates additional value. Interest income or dividends don't just magically materialize -- interest income is your share of the value added and payment for the time-value of the money you invested. Nothing comes from nothing, as Parmenides reminds us.)

That dollar you hold in your hand is the shadow cast by something of value in the world of real things.*

If that much is true, then it follows that the dollar's purpose, its whole reason for existing, is bound up in the real-world thing that casts the shadow. Without the real-world good or service, there can be no shadow cast on the wall for us to see. If that connection is broken between signifier and signified, a good or service and the money that carries its value into the marketplace, then money loses its fabulous utility and becomes just a piece of ornately-printed paper.

That's why it's so important for us to talk about economics in terms of the real physical world (or at least the part of it we can interact with and experience), because this is where scarcity operates. The world of real things, where the allocation of scarce resources drives every economic engine, is where we have to anchor our understanding of economics. Money -- and all the complexity of finance, monetary and tax policy, etc. -- happens at a higher order of abstraction. Money is not value; money signifies value. Money allows value to move about on the marketplace in a fairly fluid and transparent fashion. Money is a carrier, not a generator, of value.

One of the major problems in the world economy right now is that this fundamental link between money and the world of real things has become terribly attenuated. This is partly due to the near-universal move to fiat currencies; partly due to the securitization of much of the economy (allowing investors to leverage at ratios from 10-to-1 all the way to 100-to-1 or more); and the increasing indebtedness of the world's sovereign governments. We are behaving as if the concept of "scarcity" no longer applies.

This mindset has caused a lot of problems, but the most pernicious is in the corruption of the pricing mechanism. The pricing mechanism is how a marketplace determines the value of a good or service, by using supply and demand to adjust prices upward or downward. Prices are not fixed; a good or service is worth what the market will bear. (In an efficient economy, prices will adjust to market-clearing levels.) However, this mechanism has been systematically undermined by governments, particularly during the age of fiat currency. Governments and their central banks attempt to harness market forces to move in the direction they desire, but often cause unintended (and harmful) side-effects.

As a result, it is becoming very difficult for the market to accurately price an asset. It's hard to tell what a good or service is actually worth, because the pricing mechanism of the market has been systematically (and deliberately) corrupted over the past several decades. Both supply and demand have been manipulated to the point that a "natural market state" is almost impossible to determine, which has the knock-on effect of breaking the pricing mechanism. This makes both investing and consumer purchasing far less efficient in market terms.

Governments and their central banks believe they know what prices should be, but they suffer from Hayek's "knowledge problem" -- they cannot fathom the amazing complexity of the national economy well enough to know what prices ought to be for the myriad goods and services, even to a rough approximation. Communist governments in the 20th century tried the central-planning approach and failed miserably, but it seems like the supposedly-capitalist governments of the 21st century have not taken those lessons to heart. Over-regulation, interest-rate manipulation, bad laws, a focus on financial tricks rather than productive output, and out-of-control entitlement spending (hence higher taxes), chronic and systematic indebtedness -- all are components of the problem.

If you remember nothing else about economics, remember this: money only signifies value insofar as it maintains a link to the world of real things. When that anchor is broken, an economy loses coherence because it becomes impossible to set an accurate price on any good or service. A marketplace without accurate prices is not a market at all, but a gambling den. You might get value for your money, and you might not.

In a sense, one of those real things that a dollar represents is something that cannot be touched, or felt, or seen: trust. Trust has real-world value (it is one of the most valuable commodities there is!), and it is in fact the most essential kind of value a fiat currency must anchor to.

------------

*One way in which the Plato's Cave allegory doesn't work well in the monetary sense is when considering an essential property of money: fungibility. For money to be money, it must be fungible -- that is, a dollar bill is exactly like any other dollar bill in terms of how it behaves in a monetary sense. I can buy a candy bar with any dollar, not just one specific dollar. The Plato's Cave allegory draws a 1-to-1 linkage between the "real" object we cannot perceive and the shadow we can perceive, but with money it is more like a probabilistic wavefront that only collapses when you spend the dollar.

This means that, in the economic sense, our "shadow" of a real world good or service is not a particular dollar but any dollar.

Posted by: Monty at 09:00 AM




Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 My eyes !!! Uncentered pictures !!

Posted by: TXMarko at January 27, 2015 08:52 AM (KpolL)

2 Doom?

Posted by: toby928(C) at January 27, 2015 08:53 AM (evdj2)

3 Monty two days in a row. Cool!

Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 08:55 AM (eytER)

4 Interesting.

A few of the CNBC talking heads were pontificating this morning about Uber's pricing policies, which are classical clearing mechanisms for supply.

But they called it "price gouging." And Uber has already backed away from its pricing model.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 27, 2015 08:55 AM (Zu3d9)

5 Deep thinking before ten in the morning?

If Ace were here, he wouldn't put up with this.

Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at January 27, 2015 08:57 AM (fL+1V)

6 I know you aren't dissing quatloos.

Posted by: blaster at January 27, 2015 08:58 AM (Rx8ML)

7 We don't actually have to read all that, right?

I got to "Plato's Cave" and started having flashbacks and thought "Fuck. No."

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 08:58 AM (da5Wo)

8 A dollar is now my fist in your broken face, unless you do what I tell you.

Posted by: Don Vito Corleone at January 27, 2015 08:59 AM (6HVzn)

9 Plato is a white guy right?

Posted by: SJW at January 27, 2015 08:59 AM (Ehjtd)

10 If you had occasion to take a Philosophy 101 course in college, you may remember the allegory of Plato's cave.

I got that in high school. No, I'm not bragging that back when when I was in HS men were men and we got education uphill both ways.

I'm thankful to one particular English teacher, Frank Freitag. I took all of his courses. I learned more about how to look at the world from him than from any college or grad school professor.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at January 27, 2015 09:00 AM (1xUj/)

11 Dissolute heirs of great wealth and poverty stricken recipients of various welfare funds have one thing very much in common: they don't feel like they earned their money. So the one becomes a liberal Democrat because they feel good forcing everyone to give away a lot of money to government programs for the poor, and the other becomes a liberal Democrat because they like forcing the hard working store owner or office worker to give them lots of money.

Everyone else is a Republican, or ought to be.

Posted by: MTF at January 27, 2015 09:00 AM (FCsIb)

12 The European Central Bank's balance sheet represents about 2.1 trillion euro.

What do they have in actual "capital and reserves"? 94 billion.

Do the math.

Posted by: Feh at January 27, 2015 09:01 AM (b8TSE)

13 Monty! Good to see you!

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:01 AM (2Ojst)

14 It's all relative.

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 09:01 AM (dfVpK)

15 I think that Plato's cave is just under Venus' Mons.

I read it in a classic somewhere.

Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at January 27, 2015 09:02 AM (fL+1V)

16 How many of Plato's students slept through class?

Posted by: eman at January 27, 2015 09:02 AM (MQEz6)

17 Er, I think that'd be Alcibiades's ass.

Posted by: Feh at January 27, 2015 09:03 AM (b8TSE)

18 For decades now the elites have been trying to deny the simple truth that a good cannot be worth something other than what someone else will pay for it. In my mind it all flows from that.


It's just that instead of trying to directly redefine value (remember the dalliances with the Labor Theory of Value?), the pressure is being put on the monetary side of the equation.

Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 09:03 AM (eytER)

19 A dollar is just a marker. The problem is that most people now-a-days think that the government creates them. While it's true that the government prints dollars (& has a monopoly on that for what should be obvious reasons) the actual value or wealth behind those dollars is created by the people who turn reddish dirt into pig iron, or patches of land into food, or bits of sand into silicon wafers, & so on.

Posted by: Anderson Cooper's Smoked Sausages at January 27, 2015 09:03 AM (MbqmP)

20 That was...wow. My econ nerd side needs a cigarette....

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:04 AM (2Ojst)

21 There is a debt wave and a real wealth wave.

Both go bouncing around the world and everybody hopes they never meet.

Posted by: eman at January 27, 2015 09:04 AM (MQEz6)

22 "but the most pernicious is in the corruption of the pricing mechanism"

A simple statement with incredibly far reaching impact. Worthy of greater investigation, but I'm still all in on the previous thread:

"Bourbon, cigars, tits. Can you imagine a better evening?"

Posted by: anon a mouse at January 27, 2015 09:05 AM (/jpU8)

23 What does the dog from Mickey Mouse have to do with this? He didn't even talk let alone have a cave! Are you fuckin' goofy?
Ha, ha. I crack me up.

Posted by: joey biden at January 27, 2015 09:05 AM (L6/+u)

24 Digital money really seems to dissociate things from pricing. If you just have your cellphone bill come out of your account it really doesn't get correlated to the value.

Posted by: blaster at January 27, 2015 09:05 AM (Rx8ML)

25 Plato meant it as a discussion of what "reality" is --


Perception IS reality.
Only explanation for liberals.

What they percieve to be true, to them, IS true.

Non-existent rape, Koch Brothers owning everything, shape shifting joos, etc.

Posted by: rickb223 at January 27, 2015 09:05 AM (TAu/7)

26 "One of the major problems in the world economy right now is that this fundamental link between money and the world of real things has become terribly attenuated. This is partly due to the near-universal move to fiat currencies"
Fortunately for the common citizen there is a simple solution to this. Store a portion ofthe value of your hard-earned wealth in gold and silver. Either that, or watch as your saved value is slowly stolen (devalued) by those who own the printing presses.

Posted by: Pining 4 at January 27, 2015 09:06 AM (jltpR)

27 So.... Did Monty like the movie?

Posted by: Virginia SoCon at January 27, 2015 09:06 AM (+/C3g)

28 "but the most pernicious is in the corruption of the pricing mechanism"

A simple statement with incredibly far reaching impact. Worthy of greater investigation, but I'm still all in on the previous thread:

"Bourbon, cigars, tits. Can you imagine a better evening?"



Depends on the price.

Posted by: rickb223 at January 27, 2015 09:06 AM (TAu/7)

29 It's twuth. But is it twue twuth?

Posted by: Francis Schaeffer at January 27, 2015 09:07 AM (2Ojst)

30 Did Luke go into Plato's cave?

Posted by: eman at January 27, 2015 09:07 AM (MQEz6)

31 Ol' Hef has one of those caves out at his swinging mansion in California. I hear it's pretty wild at times.

Posted by: Count de Monet at January 27, 2015 09:08 AM (JO9+V)

32 Wait - don't I get to define my own reality?

Posted by: Typical Liberal Democrat at January 27, 2015 09:08 AM (YYJjz)

33 so a man labors to produce buggy whips that no one wants to buy.

Meanwhile, consumers line up at the grocery to buy food, pockets stuffed with money, and the store shelves are empty. . . and government cheese is free to loyal party members, because fairness.

and the news media tells us what to think until it become reflex, no longer requiring thought.

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 09:08 AM (dfVpK)

34 The clarity of the zombie apocalypse looms.

Posted by: eman at January 27, 2015 09:09 AM (MQEz6)

35 30 Did Luke go into Plato's cave?
Posted by: eman at January 27, 2015 09:07 AM (MQEz6)

He killed my pet Wampa!

Posted by: Plato at January 27, 2015 09:09 AM (2Ojst)

36 So...

Plato was like this Jedi who made the Bad Guys think that Shadows were Money.

And he lived in a cave?

Weird movie review.

Posted by: naturalfake at January 27, 2015 09:10 AM (KBvAm)

37 33 so a man labors to produce buggy whips that no one wants to buy.

Doing my part for the economy, man, so stop hating.

Posted by: 50 Shades of Gray at January 27, 2015 09:10 AM (Rx8ML)

38 33 so a man labors to produce buggy whips that no one wants to buy.

If he's black or hispanic he can get a minority-owned small business loan to keep afloat for a while.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:11 AM (2Ojst)

39
It's too early in the morning to read all that.

I did read, well skim Cooke's article about Palin. He really doesn't like her, and then to complain about her rambling while writing that??? I think Palin decided against running for office again when she dropped out of the governor's position and that is ok. So why can't she ramble about whatever she wants in her private appearances? What on earth harm does that do? She's right more often than wrong.

Posted by: Lea hates Peppa Pig but will watch it for freedom (not really) at January 27, 2015 09:12 AM (lIU4e)

40

Plato's Retreat > Plato's Cave

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 27, 2015 09:12 AM (kdS6q)

41 so a man labors to produce buggy whips that no one wants to buy

I'll take a gross.

Posted by: Robert Mapplethorpe's AIDS-ridden corpse at January 27, 2015 09:12 AM (2Ojst)

42 The problem with "our" money is that Obama has been creating 50 to 80 billion dollars a month ever since he has been in office. Which is why real inflation is 20%+.

Posted by: Vic at January 27, 2015 09:12 AM (wlDny)

43 Monty is correct. Our currency needs to be perceived as backed by hard assets, not just printed as needed.

However, most who agree with this reality forget that the country has been accumulating assets for centuries. And within this subset of people who believe in asset based currency and the wealth of the nation, are a group who also believe that a federal government has no business "owning" the vast majority of these assets.

Should the government own a courthouse? Sure. Should the government own vast areas of states, including the mineral rights? Fuck no.

We're currently in a situation where the taxpayers are on an endless treadmill, paying interest on debt and trying to catch up on failing infrastructure while simultaneously hording trillions in assets. There is an opportunity for a one-time reconciliation and fresh start.

We should take it.

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:12 AM (9ZZd+)

44 How much money can I get for my White Privilige Certificate?

Posted by: eman at January 27, 2015 09:13 AM (MQEz6)

45 I did read, well skim Cooke's article about Palin. He really doesn't like her, and then to complain about her rambling while writing that??? I think Palin decided against running for office again when she dropped out of the governor's position and that is ok. So why can't she ramble about whatever she wants in her private appearances? What on earth harm does that do? She's right more often than wrong.
Posted by: Lea hates Peppa Pig but will watch it for freedom (not really) at January 27, 2015 09:12 AM (lIU4e)

She's not OUR sort of people, my dear. *sniff*

Posted by: Charles CW Cooke III, Yacht Club Member at January 27, 2015 09:13 AM (2Ojst)

46 Its so easy a cave man could do it.

Wow, intense reading. I feel I'm full of doom this morning.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at January 27, 2015 09:14 AM (l1zOH)

47 "so a man labors to produce buggy whips that no one wants to buy. "

It's a good thing that citizens can not be forced by the Government to purchase goods or services against their will, right?

Otherwise, somebody will pass a law forcing people to purchase buggy whips against their will.

Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at January 27, 2015 09:14 AM (fL+1V)

48 Should the government own a courthouse? Sure. Should the government own vast areas of states, including the mineral rights? Fuck no.

Shit. I agree with jwest. Those must be the hoofbeats of the Four Horsemen I head in the distance...

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:14 AM (2Ojst)

49 So it's a thought-provoking post before noon. Is that allowed? Without a quart of Val-U-Rite under the belt, I mean.

Posted by: physics geek at January 27, 2015 09:15 AM (MT22W)

50 Time to go to work and earn more value markers.

Posted by: eman at January 27, 2015 09:16 AM (MQEz6)

51 47 "so a man labors to produce buggy whips that no one wants to buy. "

It's a good thing that citizens can not be forced by the Government to purchase goods or services against their will, right?

Otherwise, somebody will pass a law forcing people to purchase buggy whips against their will.
Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at January 27, 2015 09:14 AM (fL+1V)

It's my next initiative to support the Leather Industry and Manufacturers' Protection bill, or LIMP for short.

Posted by: President Obama at January 27, 2015 09:16 AM (2Ojst)

52

Played around with that "Cave" theory in my head a lot too in my earlier years.

I've long thought that this allegory works quite well for pretty much everything in life.

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 27, 2015 09:16 AM (IXrOn)

53 To shore up confidence in the eurozone, Draghi says he'll buy eurozone government treasuries. With what? His bank, which is capitalized by the very banks his bank is supposed to support, is already leveraged beyond any rational standard.

It's a shell game played almost entirely with IOU's.

Posted by: Feh at January 27, 2015 09:16 AM (b8TSE)

54 It's a shell game played almost entirely with IOU's.
Posted by: Feh at January 27, 2015 09:16 AM (b8TSE)

*cough*

Posted by: Social Security at January 27, 2015 09:17 AM (2Ojst)

55 Too many words. The picture looks like it should be in the wall of a head shop.

Posted by: Citizen X at January 27, 2015 09:17 AM (7ObY1)

56 jwest

You're recommending a Debt Jubilee?

Posted by: Feh at January 27, 2015 09:18 AM (b8TSE)

57 or bits of sand into silicon wafers, & so on.

So, dollars are created by the Chinese.

Posted by: toby928(C) at January 27, 2015 09:18 AM (evdj2)

58 I saw Plato's Cave open for Van der Graaf Generator, The Roundhouse, London, 1972.

Posted by: Citizen X at January 27, 2015 09:18 AM (7ObY1)

59 It's twuth. But is it twue twuth?

I tried that, and I got my ass handed to me for eternity.

Posted by: Pontious Pilate at January 27, 2015 09:18 AM (Spluw)

60 *cough*Posted by: Social Security at January 27, 2015 09:17 AM (2Ojst)You should read 'When money dies' if you want to scare yourself about currency. Hyperinflation sucks and should be avoided at all costs.

Posted by: Lea hates Peppa Pig but will watch it for freedom (not really) at January 27, 2015 09:18 AM (lIU4e)

61 -- In a sense, one of those real things that a dollar represents is something that cannot be touched, or felt, or seen: trust. --

Indeed. In a fiat money economy, that's *all* it represents: the holder's confidence that it will remain exchangeable for some good or service with intrinsic properties that people value for their own sake.

Posted by: Francis W. Porretto at January 27, 2015 09:20 AM (d2g9U)

62 TLDNR

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 27, 2015 09:20 AM (JpC1K)

63 Can we go back to the Rolex v Timex piece for a minute?

In some cases, those Rolex's were gifted to many celebs for marketing purposes. Just like super beautiful jewels for women are. And fab tennis attire for Federer to wear. Super duper jumpy basketball shoes for Kobe. Showcases. The rich are used as Storefront Mannequins quite often.

The Timex? Not so much. We need to really buy those things with real money. Especially if we have to travel for a living.

a tiny ot...

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 27, 2015 09:21 AM (IXrOn)

64

I need nourishment to read this post tho.
Going to go make breakfast.

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 27, 2015 09:22 AM (IXrOn)

65 Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 27, 2015 09:21 AM (IXrOn)

Well done. The funds will be wired to your Cayman Islands account within the hour.

Posted by: Timex Inc at January 27, 2015 09:23 AM (2Ojst)

66 My favorite color of Plato is blue!

Posted by: Joe Biden at January 27, 2015 09:23 AM (lidPb)

67 You're recommending a Debt Jubilee?

Posted by: Feh at January 27, 2015 09:18 AM (b8TSE)


First, I'm advocating for a the establishment of a quasi-government entity that would be able to monetize the assets immediately and recoup the funds over a long period - 100 years at least. The reason being that we would need the money now but don't want to fire-sale the assets.

Next, to be politically acceptable, it would take a wide approach to most every segment of the population. While eliminating the national debt, we would need to pay off all student debt, consumer debt and mortgages.

This may sound radical, but in the overall scheme of things, it's just a few more trillion.

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:24 AM (9ZZd+)

68 fiat

Right, which is why the Fed is good when it's managed properly, and ruinous when it's not.

Reduce the size of government. Tear down barriers between tax brackets. Burn the red tape. Make it easy for people to start and run small businesses and be creative.

The federal government is pretty much a big, rotting carcass hung around the neck of America.

The main beneficiaries are the maggots of the Political Class.

Posted by: Feh at January 27, 2015 09:24 AM (b8TSE)

69 Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:24 AM (9ZZd+)

To be clear...you're suggesting the government sell not only things like mineral rights, but forest land, etc...to pay off people's student loans and mortgages?

Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 09:25 AM (eytER)

70 We have major concerns about social theory courses in which white men are the only authors assigned. These courses pretend that a minuscule fraction of humanity -- economically privileged white males from five imperial countries (England, France, Germany, Italy and the United States) -- are the only people to produce valid knowledge about the world. This is absurd. The white male syllabus excludes all knowledge produced outside this standardized canon, silencing the perspectives of the other 99 percent of humanity.

The white male canon is not sufficient for theorizing the lives of marginalized people. None of the thinkers we studied in this course had a robust analysis of gender or racial oppression. They did not even engage with the enduring legacies of European colonial expansion, the enslavement of black people and the genocide of indigenous people in the Americas. Mentions of race and gender in the white male canon are at best incomplete and at worst racist and sexist. We were required to read Hegel on the "Oriental realm" and Marx on the "Asiatic mode of production," but not a single author from Asia. We were required to read Weber on the patriarchy, but not a single feminist author. The standardized canon is obsolete: Any introduction to social theory that aims to be relevant to today's problems must, at the very least, address gender and racial oppression.

Posted by: not a single woman or person of color at January 27, 2015 09:25 AM (e8kgV)

71 New orders for manufactured durable goods in
December decreased $8.1 billion or 3.4 percent to
$230.5 billion, the U.S. Census Bureau announced
today. This decrease, down four of the last five months,
followed a 2.1 percent November decrease. Excluding
transportation, new orders decreased 0.8 percent.
Excluding defense, new orders decreased 3.2 percent.
Transportation equipment, also down four of the last
five months, led the decrease, $6.8 billion or 9.2 percent
to $66.7 billion.

via market ticker via census .gov manufacturing.

Posted by: willow at January 27, 2015 09:26 AM (nqBYe)

72 66 My favorite color of Plato is blue!


I think you meant "favorite flavor", there, Joey Plugs.

Posted by: Citizen X at January 27, 2015 09:26 AM (7ObY1)

73 When you think about money as a "reserve" or "store" ready to be exchanged for the work of another, it is a helpful illustration.

For example, it illustrates the danger of giving people money- welfare- for no work. In those cases, you have claims on another's work products when you have not worked to earn such reserves. You usually value items that are given to you less than those items for which you toil. Heck, look at any boy with a baseball glove. If you had to earn the money yourself over months to purchase that glove, you clean and oil it and take great care of it. If it is a present, then it is forgotten in the rain, thrown in the mud, and generally abused (especially if the boy knows that his parents will buy him a new one).

What happens, in a society, if everyone decides that they no longer want to work? Well, you more or less get Greece and the FSA.

Posted by: Virginia SoCon at January 27, 2015 09:26 AM (+/C3g)

74 Here's what I always wondered about Plato. Why is that he walks on four legs and doesn't talk, but Goofy (also a dog) walks on two legs and talks?

Posted by: Muldoon, a solid man at January 27, 2015 09:27 AM (NeFrd)

75 I missed the Palin fight, but I heard that her teleprompter stopped working and she was ad-libbing.

I love that woman but I don't think she'll run.

Posted by: votermom at January 27, 2015 09:29 AM (XWRce)

76 Here's what I always wondered about Plato. Why is that he walks on four legs and doesn't talk, but Goofy (also a dog) walks on two legs and talks?

---

Maybe it's related to the reason why Donald Duck doesn't wear pants, but he puts a towel around his waist when he gets out of the shower.

Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 09:29 AM (eytER)

77 "so a man labors to produce buggy whips that no one wants to buy. "


1. Market to BDSM crowd.
2. Profit!

Marketing 102.

Posted by: rickb223 at January 27, 2015 09:29 AM (TAu/7)

78 "To be clear...you're suggesting the government sell not only things like mineral rights, but forest land, etc...to pay off people's student loans and mortgages?"


Yes. The government should sell off everything that isn't critical to the daily operation of the government. Paying off the various forms of debt is just a way to return the capital to it's rightful owners - the citizens of the country.

Would you even have a mortgage (or student loans or consumer debt) if you and your forefathers hadn't needed to give a substantial amount of your income to the government for these unnecessary assets?

Time to get your money back.

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:29 AM (9ZZd+)

79 First, I'm advocating for a the establishment of a quasi-government entity that would be able to monetize the assets immediately and recoup the funds over a long period - 100 years at least. The reason being that we would need the money now but don't want to fire-sale the assets.

Next, to be politically acceptable, it would take a wide approach to most every segment of the population. While eliminating the national debt, we would need to pay off all student debt, consumer debt and mortgages.

This may sound radical, but in the overall scheme of things, it's just a few more trillion.

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:24 AM (9ZZd+)



Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 09:29 AM (da5Wo)

80 70

Thank you. The Critical Theory people are down the hall and to the left.

Posted by: Feh at January 27, 2015 09:31 AM (b8TSE)

81 Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 09:29 AM (da5Wo)

Heh. Never gets old.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:31 AM (2Ojst)

82 Yay Monty!!!

Yeah, 'full faith and credit' doesn't carry the weight it used to

Posted by: ginaswo at January 27, 2015 09:31 AM (2EgyQ)

83 Would you even have a mortgage (or student loans or consumer debt) if you and your forefathers hadn't needed to give a substantial amount of your income to the government for these unnecessary assets?


I'm not sure I follow...the argument is that I could have paid for a house in cash if only my great great grandfather's tax bill didn't pay for some portion of the construction of Shenandoah National Park?

Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 09:32 AM (eytER)

84 Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 09:29 AM (da5Wo)


If you are so enamored with the government owning so much as it does now, why not empower it to own everything?

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:32 AM (9ZZd+)

85 In a sense, one of those real things that a dollar represents is something that cannot be touched, or felt, or seen: trust. --

Indeed. In a fiat money economy, that's *all* it represents: the holder's confidence that it will remain exchangeable for some good or service with intrinsic properties that people value for their own sake.



Tulip bulbs FTW!

Posted by: rickb223 at January 27, 2015 09:33 AM (TAu/7)

86 It's just that instead of trying to directly redefine value (remember the dalliances with the Labor Theory of Value?), the pressure is being put on the monetary side of the equation.

Heinlein has an excellent putdown of the Labor Theory of Value in (what else?) Star Ship Troopers.

Posted by: Fox2! at January 27, 2015 09:33 AM (qg2Qe)

87 If you are so enamored with the government owning so much as it does now, why not empower it to own everything?

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:32 AM (9ZZd+)



*repeats quote*

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 09:33 AM (da5Wo)

88 Posted by: not a single woman or person of color at January 27, 2015 09:25 AM (e8kgV)

Your copy and paste functions work, I see. Interesting that you didn't name a single woman or person of swarthiness that has contributed anything of significant worth to man's canon of knowledge.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:33 AM (2Ojst)

89 And to be clear - I'm not ipso facto opposed to the idea of a government sell off of land and stuff. I'm just working out your rationale.

Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 09:33 AM (eytER)

90 In the deep dark recesses of Plato's cave, lives a horrible, hideous, troll-like creature grown so vile his mother wouldn't recognize him. This troll, who we'll call "Paul" has been condemned to wallow in his own filth and feces for an eternity.

Stay away from the troll, children!

Posted by: Fritz at January 27, 2015 09:34 AM (UzPAd)

91 Would you even have a mortgage (or student loans or consumer debt) if you and your forefathers hadn't needed to give a substantial amount of your income to the government for these unnecessary assets?

I know I'd have a shit-ton more money if the fcuking government stopped robbing me at gunpoint to give to give my hard-earned cash to their welfare-leech constituents.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:35 AM (2Ojst)

92 90 In the deep dark recesses of Plato's cave, lives a horrible, hideous, troll-like creature grown so vile his mother wouldn't recognize him. This troll, who we'll call "Paul" has been condemned to wallow in his own filth and feces for an eternity.

Stay away from the troll, children!
Posted by: Fritz at January 27, 2015 09:34 AM (UzPAd)

Don't listen to him, kids. Trolls only live under bridges.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:36 AM (2Ojst)

93 "I'm not sure I follow...the argument is that I could have paid for a house in cash if only my great great grandfather's tax bill didn't pay for some portion of the construction of Shenandoah National Park?"


What percentage of your income (and your father and grandfather, etc.) was spent on our government acquiring and maintaining assets that have no business being owned by government?

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:37 AM (9ZZd+)

94 Here's what I always wondered about Plato. Why is that he walks on four legs and doesn't talk, but Goofy (also a dog) walks on two legs and talks?


Goofy/Pluto theory

http://tinyurl.com/mzv583f

Posted by: RWC - Shopping for Justice! at January 27, 2015 09:37 AM (fWAjv)

95 Health care is a right; everyone has a right to live and it is the duty of government to enforce the people's rights. Health care providers will be paid a fair, living wage to provide health services to those who desperately need those services.

Government will also pay a fair, and equitable, living wage to those who labor to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure; roads and bridges, broad band internet, education. Food production will be administered by experts in agronomy, and animal husbandry to ensure that all of our citizens are adequately fed. The resulting prosperity will enrich the lives of every citizen and no longer will prosperity be the condition on the fortunate few who inherit their luxury.

Progress will no longer be held prisoner by the privileged few who hold hostage the good people of this great nation. Freedom, Equality, and Sharing of our great prosperity will restore hope to everyone who has lost their faith. We shall overcome and no one will ever again be denied their fair share.

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 09:37 AM (dfVpK)

96 Would you even have a mortgage (or student loans or consumer debt) if you and your forefathers hadn't needed to give a substantial amount of your income to the government for these unnecessary assets? I've seen this argument floated before. Admittedly, I'd be far better served if I had control of my money instead of SS. And a host of other shit.

Would that obviate a loan for a large purchase? I doubt that.

Posted by: Blue Hen at January 27, 2015 09:38 AM (Spluw)

97
If you are so enamored with the government owning so much as it does now, why not empower it to own everything?





Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:32 AM (9ZZd+)

So, if your world, either the government owns everything and people have to pay their own debts or it owns almost nothing and pays for everyone? Sorry, I'll go with BCochran on this one.

Posted by: Virginia SoCon at January 27, 2015 09:38 AM (+/C3g)

98 I know I'd have a shit-ton more money if the fcuking government stopped robbing me at gunpoint to give to give my hard-earned cash to their welfare-leech constituents.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:35 AM (2Ojst)

High speed internet and free cell phones are a Constitutional right!!

Posted by: RWC - Shopping for Justice! at January 27, 2015 09:38 AM (fWAjv)

99 So Bibi is a shoo-in for reelection with Captain Shitmidas in charge of his defeat. No?

Posted by: maddogg at January 27, 2015 09:40 AM (xWW96)

100 Representation before the lawis a right; everyone has a right to live and it is the duty of government to enforce the people's rights.legal expertiseproviders will be paid a fair, living wage to providelaw services to those who desperately need those services.

I'll sign off on this.

Posted by: Blue Hen at January 27, 2015 09:40 AM (Spluw)

101 Wasn't Plato's Cave that bar in Juarez where a naked woman would come out and dance around a little before picking some guy from the audience and having sex with him in the middle of the floor?

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at January 27, 2015 09:40 AM (KDbAT)

102 In principle, I'm in favor of the gov't selling federal lands to private citizens. The US has done this before; the program completely eliminated our national debt for a short time in the 1830s, I believe.
That being said, I have no confidence that the land would actually be sold to Americans, or that the proceeds from the sales would go to paying down the debt. The gov't would probably look at the cash and say 'Hey, a surplus! Let's make a new, useless program to spend all that sweet, sweet money!' So a good idea in principle becomes useless in practicality.

Posted by: right wing whippersnapper at January 27, 2015 09:40 AM (ThxKk)

103 Barack Obama is a SCOAMT.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at January 27, 2015 09:40 AM (kff5f)

104 Monte, at the end the Soviet market and pricing system was so corrupted that they had to send "secret shoppers" to western economies to have some idea of how to price their consumer products.
When all items were manufactured for the subsidies there was no interest in actually figuring out either pricing, profit or costs of manufacturing. This was the basis of Tafta.

Scarcity and demand are two elements that are ignored by the modern economists, one because it is anti-Marxist, apparently, and the second is excluded when you have the base concept of "trade must be equal or it is exploitation". (The reality is that scarcity is universal and an element of biology as well, and everyone who engages in trade is looking for an advantage or a profit beyond what they are offering, otherwise it is pointless)

Posted by: kindltot at January 27, 2015 09:41 AM (t//F+)

105 Caverns of Socrates FTW!


...Okay, now time to read the actual post.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at January 27, 2015 09:41 AM (kff5f)

106 I think that anyone who receives welfare should not be allowed to vote for one year following receipt of such benefits.
I think government employees should not be allowed to vote either (and yes, that includes active military, but wth, their votes get thrown out anyway most of the time).
Basically only private citizens, not agents or wards of the state, should have the vote.

Posted by: votermom at January 27, 2015 09:41 AM (dj5Kp)

107 I agree that the Feds probably sit on valuable assets like land that could better be used by the private sector.

Posted by: Feh at January 27, 2015 09:41 AM (b8TSE)

108 Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 09:37 AM (dfVpK)

Did Cloggenstein and Dorcas get a boyfriend to share, or is this a troll?

Posted by: right wing whippersnapper at January 27, 2015 09:42 AM (ThxKk)

109 Cede all those federal lands back to the states and let them disburse them as they wish.

Posted by: Squirrel at January 27, 2015 09:42 AM (FFqaj)

110 Obama/Jarrett would probably like to sell US land to the Iranians.

Posted by: Feh at January 27, 2015 09:42 AM (b8TSE)

111 >>>Trolls only live under bridges.

Thought they lived in Mt Horeb WI

Posted by: Bigby's Signifying Hands at January 27, 2015 09:43 AM (3ZtZW)

112 jwest is right about the feds owning land though. The NPS should be
about 50 people taking care of a few National Parks in D.C., and that's
it.

Posted by: lowandslow at January 27, 2015 09:43 AM (+ebSh)

113 I like that idea, squirrel.

Posted by: Feh at January 27, 2015 09:43 AM (b8TSE)

114 o, if your world, either the government owns everything and people have to pay their own debts or it owns almost nothing and pays for everyone? Sorry, I'll go with BCochran on this one.


Posted by: Virginia SoCon at January 27, 2015 09:38 AM (+/C3g)



I'm open to different distribution arrangements. The elimination of those types of debt just seemed to be the easiest, most broadly held way of dispersing a few trillion.

If you agree with the premise of divesting the government of all unneeded assets, the next thing is to make sure the government doesn't keep the money.

There probably is a better way to distribute the cash, I just can't think of one right now.

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:43 AM (9ZZd+)

115 Yay Monty!!!

Yeah, 'full faith and credit' doesn't carry the weight it used to
Posted by: ginaswo


Doesn't carry squat.

Posted by: rickb223 at January 27, 2015 09:43 AM (TAu/7)

116 Nice piece Monty.

I'll post something when I'm back at the house.

Posted by: Sven10077 at January 27, 2015 09:44 AM (/4AZU)

117 "109
Cede all those federal lands back to the states and let them disburse them as they wish."

Put them on the auction block, if the state wants to bid that's up to them.

Posted by: lowandslow at January 27, 2015 09:44 AM (+ebSh)

118 What percentage of your income (and your father and grandfather, etc.) was spent on our government acquiring and maintaining assets that have no business being owned by government?

----

I guess I'd look at it from the other side...I would expect that absent government interventions, real incomes up until now would likely be lower. That isn't to say government distortion is a good thing...it isn't...but that it has had a corrupting effect on incomes. Kind of like when you borrow money, your available cash is higher than normal. In our case, the government went into a lot of debt to buy assets (and therefore have to hire people to manage them).

I think there's an assumption that real income would remain static through all of this. I don't think that's the case.

And then there's the practical side of things. A government agency with a 100 year charter that's tasked with liquidating assets will come under all kinds of political pressure to dispose of those funds "fairly." I doubt a significant percentage of proceeds would ever go to debt service...and even if it did, that would have its own ramifications.

Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 09:45 AM (eytER)

119 Excellent post, Monty! And wonderful follow-up by Virginia SoCon in #73.

I've always passed on unemployment benefits the few times I've been eligible for them. When asked why by incredulous acquaintances, I tell them that it would create a mental disconnect between me and my money. I always strive to maintain these connections coming and going: money comes from what I earn, and money goes according to what I consume. (This explains my high deductible insurance plan, my pay-as-you-go cell phone, limits on Internet data usage, etc.)

The disconnects you both describe explains something else - the general anger of the disconnected. Money for nothing or free stuff isn't natural, and when people who live an unnatural existence seem to innately know it's wrong. I've found that such people carry a general anger about them all the time. They blame phantoms for nonexistent misfortunes and are always wary of some imaginary monster who would victimize them.

(Besides, there may come a day when I'd need those unemployment benefits and I wouldn't want to use them all up before then. Scarcity again - I value a welfare program that I've never used.)

Posted by: FireHorse at January 27, 2015 09:45 AM (r+LOT)

120 >>>Wasn't Plato's Cave that bar in Juarez where a naked woman would come
out and dance around a little before picking some guy from the audience
and having sex with him in the middle of the floor?<<<

No, you're thinking of the Titty Twister.

Posted by: Chet Pussy at January 27, 2015 09:45 AM (UzPAd)

121 "trade must be equal or it is exploitation".

Oh! Does this mean we get to vent about "Fair Trade" coffee and other such items?

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at January 27, 2015 09:45 AM (kff5f)

122 112 lowandslow,

JWest and I are in agreement my long post will center on why enforced divestment still won't fix it though.

Posted by: Sven10077 at January 27, 2015 09:46 AM (/4AZU)

123 That being said, I have no confidence that the land would actually be sold to Americans, or that the proceeds from the sales would go to paying down the debt. The gov't would probably look at the cash and say 'Hey, a surplus! Let's make a new, useless program to spend all that sweet, sweet money!'


Direct deposit to the debt as soon as "Sold!" and the gavel come down.

Posted by: rickb223 at January 27, 2015 09:46 AM (TAu/7)

124 I'd like to examine the sick mechanism where taxes flow to the Federal government, and then states are coerced into adding services, all in the hopes of recouping some of the money that flowed out.

There;s more than wistfulness or isolationism at work here; this can't be fiscally sound.

Posted by: Blue Hen at January 27, 2015 09:47 AM (Spluw)

125 jwest, I think many of us agree with you that the federal government should divest itself of the many, many larges swaths of land it holds, especially in the western US, and not seize/restrict additional large parcels, as Obama has just proposed to do in Alaska.

However, I do object to paying off existing mortgages and student loans, because that punishes individuals who 1) did not go to college because of the cost (including debt); 2) went part-time to pay their way as they went; 3) lived within their means and paid off their student loans, as opposed to deferring and forbearing them for years or decades; 4) bought a house within their means, as opposed to using extraordinary mortgage products to live in a McMansion; 5) Paid off their mortgage; 6) Rented because they did not have the means and stability to handle a mortgage; 7) Paid cash instead of getting a mortgage and investing those funds in different assets; etc. etc (I could go on.)

Selling off federal assets should be used to pay off existing debt. However, this should also be done unless the government also restructures itself to no longer have a permanent deficit. Otherwise, our debt situation will simply return within a few years, only without the assets to rely upon, just as an inheritance may temporarily solve a gamblers troubles, but not the underlying problem.

Posted by: Virginia SoCon at January 27, 2015 09:47 AM (+/C3g)

126 >>>>Plato meant it as a discussion of what "reality" is --

>>>Perception IS reality. Only explanation for liberals.

IIRC he also believed in [forget the proper word] idealised forms, such that the Idea of a Dog is personified by some perfect Dog specimen, perhaps located in Heaven amongst the gods or whatnot and all dogs on Earth - the reality ones - are the shadows of the Hyper-real Dog.

Which, I dunno, sort 9f explains the Leftists too

Posted by: Bigby's Signifying Hands at January 27, 2015 09:47 AM (3ZtZW)

127 Apologies to the Horde for any earlier typos, most especially WRT names I was posting while power walking.

Now on to "my point."


Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at January 27, 2015 09:48 AM (/4AZU)

128 "If you are so enamored with...."

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:32 AM (9ZZd+)

Enamored of.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 27, 2015 09:48 AM (Zu3d9)

129 That being said, I have no confidence that the land would actually be sold to Americans, or that the proceeds from the sales would go to paying down the debt. The gov't would probably look at the cash and say 'Hey, a surplus! Let's make a new, useless program to spend all that sweet, sweet money!' So a good idea in principle becomes useless in practicality.
Posted by: right wing whippersnapper at January 27, 2015 09:40 AM (ThxKk)

Absolutely. They'd sell it to their cronies, and immediately piss away the proceeds.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:49 AM (2Ojst)

130 12 hour graveyard shift+10 Miller Lites+this post=brain shut down

Posted by: wisconbowhunter at January 27, 2015 09:50 AM (lidPb)

131 124 I'd like to examine the sick mechanism where taxes flow to the Federal government, and then states are coerced into adding services, all in the hopes of recouping some of the money that flowed out.

There;s more than wistfulness or isolationism at work here; this can't be fiscally sound.
Posted by: Blue Hen at January 27, 2015 09:47 AM (Spluw)

It's not. That's why some state governors told the feds to fcuk off when it came to Medicaid expansion.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:50 AM (2Ojst)

132 Didn't Plato believe in Atlantis? I still remember the Fuzzy Pumper Barber Shop.

Posted by: Boss Moss at January 27, 2015 09:51 AM (PuQW/)

133 Ann Barnhardt has a what money is for dummies a while back.

Almost like this but in more detail.

Posted by: Bob from table9 at January 27, 2015 09:51 AM (WNERA)

134 I would expect that absent government interventions, real incomes up until now would likely be lower.

The question is "what is a 'real' income?"

Is "real" income absolute dollars? Is it inflation-adjusted dollars? Is it the buying power of your dollars, regardless of inflation?

It is simultaneously true that what a dollars buying power today is greater than it was in 1900 AND that the dollar does not buy as much as it did back then.

A car in 1900 might go for $5000.00. Obviously, you can't get anything beyond a used car (and probably not gently used) for that price now.

However, in 1900, no amount of dollars you had could buy near-instant communication across the entire world.

Ultimately, government intervention in markets may be necessary to some extent (at the very least, laws against fraud require investigation and enforcement of those laws), but however necessary it is, it will certainly be a distortion of the market.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at January 27, 2015 09:53 AM (kff5f)

135 The only debt manipulation I would even entertain is converting all debt held by China, Russia, Saudi Arabia (and assorted OPEC nations) into shares in a corporation to which the ownership of all national parks is transferred to.

Since current federal law does not allow any development, they could build fences around their land and charge admission. but that's it.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 27, 2015 09:53 AM (Zu3d9)

136 Far out, man!

Posted by: FDR's Television at January 27, 2015 09:54 AM (1XxkF)

137 Did they make a movie out of Plato's Cave yet?

Posted by: Boss Moss at January 27, 2015 09:56 AM (PuQW/)

138 This troll, who we'll call "Paul" has been condemned to wallow in his own filth and feces for an eternity.

What did I ever do to you?!

Posted by: Paul Lynde at January 27, 2015 09:56 AM (6HVzn)

139 Scarcity and demand are two elements that are ignored by the modern economists, one because it is anti-Marxist, apparently, and the second is excluded when you have the base concept of "trade must be equal or it is exploitation". (The reality is that scarcity is universal and an element of biology as well, and everyone who engages in trade is looking for an advantage or a profit beyond what they are offering, otherwise it is pointless)

Posted by: kindltot at January 27, 2015 09:41 AM (t//F+)


Indeed. If trade is "equal" (at least if that means what I think it means, though it's marxist, so maybe not) then no-one gains. If no-one gains from the trade then there is no motivation to produce the goods to be traded.... Which is why wheat production just set an all-time record in the Soviet Union, tovarich!

Strangely, it never occurs to the marxists that I can buy goods at such a price that I can make money (say by installing hardwood flooring) & yet the person who sells to me also makes money, & we can decide (because we all have competitors in the market) what the right price is without any government telling us.

Posted by: Anderson Cooper's Smoked Sausages at January 27, 2015 09:56 AM (MbqmP)

140 There;s more than wistfulness or isolationism at work here; this can't be fiscally sound.

It's not. And it's a pathway for Tyranny. There is *no* good in sending our tax dollars to DC just for DC to turn around and dole them back out to the States.

There is even less good than that (which is to say: active harm) in sending our tax dollars to DC just for DC to turn around and dole them out to specific persons.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at January 27, 2015 09:56 AM (kff5f)

141 The Goldbugs, I guess, would have their candidate for the Idealised Form of Money of which currency is the pale shadow, etc. but I think that's actually a different beast altogether as gold is beholden to sources and miners while currencies are beholden - technically - to other measures entirely. The gold is more solid but self-limiting and prolly insufficient for present-day economic scales.

Posted by: Bigby's Signifying Hands at January 27, 2015 09:56 AM (3ZtZW)

142 Beautifully written, Monty. Plato's allegory of the cave gave me akind of shock of recognitionin high school. I had been wrestling with the concrete reality of things and the idea of the things, perceptions and realities, and reading Plato made it come together in a way I could grasp and understand--which was, of course, his intent.

True fact: hardcore progressives believe perceptions are de factoreality, truly intertwined and interchangeable, which means reality is malleable and truth is relative and situational. Thus, when Obama says batshit crazy things like 'Al Queda is on the run!' or 'The economy is doing great!', he really believes it. Really.

Posted by: troyriser at January 27, 2015 09:56 AM (CAJL/)

143 In an odd way, this reminds me of baseball cards, which are not unlike dollar bills in some ways.

We have seen a run on baseball cards, where their value has waxed and waned over the years. Some maintain very high value, while others have not. What this has created is a glut of high quality items that appear to fluctuate in value in ways that make no amount of sense to the casual observer (like me).

Why is a Derek Jeter rookie card worth "only" $20, while a Mariano Rivera card is worth $40 (I'm pulling these numbers out of thin air, so don't quote me)?

The whole thing gets discouraging to the casual observer (again, like me), in that you really have no idea how to dabble in this sort of thing, and while I would place a high degree of value on cards from my youth, regardless of their condition, it would appear that the market has rendered them valueless... so they appear to not exist.

Anyhoo, this may be a long-winded way for me to say, I think collectors markets, of any sort, whether it's stamps or butterflies or Hummel figurines, all of them are artificial in their "values," and yet, very very real.

Again, much like the dollar.

Posted by: BurtTC at January 27, 2015 09:56 AM (TOk1P)

144 "A government agency with a 100 year charter that's tasked with liquidating assets will come under all kinds of political pressure to dispose of those funds "fairly." "



In my proposal, the agency only liquidates, it doesn't have any say over dispersals.

Just like a family with a large debt load, trying to make the payments while not wanting to sell the art collection and stable of horses.

Time to downsize.

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:57 AM (9ZZd+)

145 137 Did they make a movie out of Plato's Cave yet?
Posted by: Boss Moss at January 27, 2015 09:56 AM (PuQW/)

It was an obscure 70s porno. Or it should have been.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 09:57 AM (2Ojst)

146 112 Posted by: lowandslow at January 27, 2015 09:43 AM (+ebSh)

The Federal Government owns ~ 55-60% of American land depending on how you count it but the crisis is through EPA they control ALL of it.

America's greatness was wrought by people being free to exert maximum utility from their assets and having the flexibility to put their holdings into play by whatever method maximized its earning potential.

That ship sailed with the birth of EPA and other Federal interventions under the auspices of "mining impact control."

Suppose for the sake of argument we merely forced the feds to divest only of land that was non-game preserve, non national park prior to the birth of the EPA and usurpations of the DoI since 1972. This land lays fallow and is not being used as a wealth magnifier of any degree for the "private" economy, and as such (in theory) private ownership of ANY sort should add to the US economy. Environmental hyper-activism will deny mining, fracking, ANY recreational use of said land, limit its potential use for housing, for any sort of manufacturing, and depending on the whims of the DoT gods cannot even be used for office space or simple storage is some GS-11-15 gets a bur up their ass that it creates "traffic congestion or pattern distortion."

Prior to the rise of the hyper-regulatory super state one could lease Federal land and exert your will on it.

These days the state will micromanage land you own and deny all perogatives of ownership on a whim. That is at its heart what the Sheldon Silver case is about. He was known as a "power broker" b/c he could slay the dragons or make them rise based on willful abatement or fierce application of zoning and other laws.

His being prosecuted while there is not reform of the beast itself going on is a joke.

He is

Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at January 27, 2015 09:58 AM (/4AZU)

147 In my proposal, the agency only liquidates, it doesn't have any say over dispersals.

So the money goes into the General Fund?

Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 09:58 AM (eytER)

148 Hmmm...the total of the current US federal debt, mortgages and student loans is north of $30trillion.

Now, I know the govt owns a shitpile of stuff, including about 650mil acres, but would selling off even a substantial portion of those things result in $30trillion in revenue?

And where is that money coming from? Are you people holding out on me? Whose got the extra trillion lying around and why doesn't the Horde have it's own island yet.

And is there anyone here who believes that the federal fucking government could put its hands on $30trillion and not spend it like sailors in Thailand?

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 09:58 AM (da5Wo)

149 All your 401Ks are belong to us.

Posted by: Boss Moss at January 27, 2015 09:58 AM (PuQW/)

150 142 Posted by: troyriser at January 27, 2015 09:56 AM (CAJL/)

to a degree it is worse than that Troy...

it is one thing that Barack Constanza believes whatever he force-perceives at any given instant.....

the libs demand we embrace his delusions as a better reality than reality.

Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at January 27, 2015 09:59 AM (/4AZU)

151 Direct deposit to the debt as soon as "Sold!" and the gavel come down.

Posted by: rickb223 at January 27, 2015 09:46 AM (TAu/7)

You're a better optimist than I. No way the feds wouldn't find a way to get around your proposal. It's a good idea, but it probably won't happen.

Posted by: right wing whippersnapper at January 27, 2015 09:59 AM (ThxKk)

152 All I know is that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Unless you own the bush and it's enclosed in a cage.

Posted by: Bob Belcher at January 27, 2015 09:59 AM (cNJvW)

153 152 All I know is that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Unless you own the bush and it's enclosed in a cage.

Posted by: Bob Belcher at January 27, 2015 09:59 AM (cNJvW)


Or if the bird is endangered.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 10:00 AM (da5Wo)

154 >>Nothing comes from nothing, as Parmenides reminds us.


I could have sworn it was Billy Preston.

Posted by: Mr. Dave at January 27, 2015 10:01 AM (kWDSz)

155 142 -

Maybe, but I think it's more accurate to say leftists have decided that "objective reality" is of no concern to them. The so-called victim classes are given special consideration, not because their realities are any more believable than others, but because it is an avenue to power.

I really think the hardcore leaders of the left know damn well they are selling lies.

Posted by: BurtTC at January 27, 2015 10:01 AM (TOk1P)

156 In my proposal, the agency only liquidates, it doesn't have any say over dispersals.

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 09:57 AM (9ZZd+)

Are you truly ignorant of the behavior of every government in the history of Man, or are you being purposefully obtuse to elicit reactions (trolling)?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 27, 2015 10:01 AM (Zu3d9)

157 Or the bush is deemed a wetland.

Posted by: Boss Moss at January 27, 2015 10:01 AM (PuQW/)

158 Great post, Monty. Someone with the technology should send this to every politician everywhere.

The Elite Rulers have no idea how economics should work, especially capitalism. Which explains why our economy is in the shitter.

Also, no Doom Kitteh? I haz a sad.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this sh1t at January 27, 2015 10:01 AM (0HooB)

159 Who were those fools that voted for the 16th amendment?

Posted by: Edmund Burke's Shade at January 27, 2015 10:01 AM (cmBvC)

160 To relate to the issue of "federal" and "state" lands, you have to look hard at the politics of the early 1790's. There's a good digest in a new book, "The Victory with No Name," about the native defeat of the entire new US Army in Ohio.

The kind of thinking that created the Northwest Ordinance ("the second Constitution," except that it's older than the actual Constitution) saw the new states as fundamentally less sovereign than the original 13. The big important cession of those times was the cession of existing states' war debts to the national government, and then paying them off by very fast (and, naturally, dodgy) sale of territorial lands.

On the buggy whip front -- have you priced one lately? I get a kick out of that insurance/investment company ad with the big tall hats. Those are some guys who'd have told you to stay in buggy whips, because They'll Be Back. And they are.

Posted by: Stringer Davis at January 27, 2015 10:02 AM (xq1UY)

161 Yeah, the notion of selling off land to finance the debt is insane without a balanced budget amendment. It would be like giving an alcoholic $20 for food: It ain't buying food.

Posted by: Anderson Cooper's Smoked Sausages at January 27, 2015 10:02 AM (MbqmP)

162 Interesting that you didn't name a single woman or person of swarthiness that has contributed anything of significant worth to man's canon of knowledge.

Know anything about war, son?

Posted by: Sun Tzu at January 27, 2015 10:02 AM (1xUj/)

163 You're a better optimist than I. No way the feds wouldn't find a way to get around your proposal. It's a good idea, but it probably won't happen.

Let's say you're right.

How are we worse off than today? If the federal government were forced to divest itself of all its lands (for a given value of "all"), but didn't spend one dime of that on debt reduction, how does that make us worse off than we would be otherwise?

I submit: it doesn't. It's just DC still being fiscally irresponsible. They're trying to spend us into oblivion anyway.

And, in return, that land gets into private hands where it at least becomes useful.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at January 27, 2015 10:02 AM (kff5f)

164 Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at January 27, 2015 09:58 AM (/4AZU)

-------

I like that.

One of the mental blocks I'm having is kind of selfish. For example, I hunt. I fish. I go out hiking and backcountry camping and all of that. So I happen to like that there's some attention being paid to wildlife management to ensure that an area isn't hunted or fished out. And yes, I get the arguments that a private company can do that kind of management too.

But to me it seems to be trading one master for another. I hate to sound all 99%er anti-corporatist, but I'd rather have a state government manage a forest over, say, the dimwits at Microsoft who would turn it into a hippie preserve or something. At least theoretically the state government is accountable, kind of.

Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 10:02 AM (eytER)

165 Anyway, the Cave is where Dana kept her drugs.

Posted by: Bigby's Signifying Hands at January 27, 2015 10:03 AM (3ZtZW)

166 Are you truly ignorant of the behavior of every government in the history of Man, or are you being purposefully obtuse to elicit reactions (trolling)?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 27, 2015 10:01 AM (Zu3d9)



*cough* not mutually exclusive *cough*

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 10:03 AM (da5Wo)

167 So the money goes into the General Fund?

Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 09:58 AM (eytER)



It wouldn't be politically viable to say the money would just go to the general fund.

In order to get the divestiture of assets passed, it would take almost universal public support - like getting all the people who have student loans, mortgages and/or consumer debt to back it.

Those who didn't have debt are the very poor and the very rich, who would get out-voted on this one. Chalk one up for the tyranny of the masses.

Of course, some other dispersal could be included for those without debt. Just to be fair.

Posted by: jwest at January 27, 2015 10:03 AM (9ZZd+)

168 153 152 All I know is that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Unless you own the bush and it's enclosed in a cage.

Posted by: Bob Belcher at January 27, 2015 09:59 AM (cNJvW)

Or if the bird is endangered.
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 10:00 AM (da5Wo)

In which case the Feds seize the bird, cage, and the bush, and fine you a gazillion dollars for having an endangered species confined on your property.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 10:03 AM (2Ojst)

169 Is this the same cave where they put all the gold?

Posted by: Boss Moss at January 27, 2015 10:05 AM (PuQW/)

170 >>>In which case the Feds seize the bird, cage, and the bush, and fine you a gazillion dollars for having an endangered species confined on your property.


They get to shoot the dog too.

Posted by: Mr. Dave at January 27, 2015 10:05 AM (kWDSz)

171 The US Dollar is backed by the full faith and credit in our ability to kick your ass. America's biggest hypocrisy lies in the liberal's reliance on conservatives to defend and support their profligate ways.

Posted by: Anthropology Guy at January 27, 2015 10:05 AM (e61y8)

172 I didn't know Plato had a cave but I used to have a Plato Fun Factory.

Posted by: Joe Biden at January 27, 2015 10:06 AM (WbRgK)

173 Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at January 27, 2015 10:02 AM (kff5f)


You're kidding with that, right?

What would the government be spending the money on???

My guess....more "assistance" programs. Meaning more and more people who are deeper and deeper down the rabbit hole of subsistence and subservience to the government.

That, my friend, is worse.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 10:06 AM (da5Wo)

174 169 Posted by: Boss Moss at January 27, 2015 10:05 AM (PuQW/)

We melted all the gold to make the escape ship...

//Jor-El of Krypton

Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at January 27, 2015 10:06 AM (/4AZU)

175 156 -

jwest starts a post with the words "in my proposal..."

The only real question is, is he really that delusional, or is it simple trolling? In the end, I don't think it matters, but as a case study it would be interesting to know the extent of each.

Posted by: BurtTC at January 27, 2015 10:06 AM (TOk1P)

176 Is this the same cave where they put all the gold?
Posted by: Boss Moss at January 27, 2015 10:05 AM (PuQW/)

Daffy Duck flashback: 'MINE MINE MINE MINE MINE!'

Posted by: troyriser at January 27, 2015 10:06 AM (CAJL/)

177 >>All I know is that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Unless you own the bush and it's enclosed in a cage.

What if the bird in your hand is a stinking seagull and the birds in the bush are two archaeopteryxes that had gotten trapped in a glacier and then thawed? I'm thinking those two birds would be worth a shitload more than a seagull.

Posted by: JackStraw at January 27, 2015 10:07 AM (g1DWB)

178 162 Interesting that you didn't name a single woman or person of swarthiness that has contributed anything of significant worth to man's canon of knowledge.

Know anything about war, son?
Posted by: Sun Tzu at January 27, 2015 10:02 AM (1xUj/)

I read your book, you magnificent bastard. I was making the point that the people who screech most about "dead white men" know fuck-all about the actual significant contributors to mankind's knowledge outside of the West. All they can trot out is Andrea Dworkin and Maya Angelou.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 10:07 AM (2Ojst)

179 Fiat Money in [revolutionary] France
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6949

This will make you depressed.
***********

And a quick run-down on John Law, the man who may have destroyed France, the first couple of times.

http://mises.org/library/john-law-proto-keynesian

Posted by: kindltot at January 27, 2015 10:07 AM (t//F+)

180 But to me it seems to be trading one master for another. I hate to sound all 99%er anti-corporatist, but I'd rather have a state government manage a forest over, say, the dimwits at Microsoft who would turn it into a hippie preserve or something. At least theoretically the state government is accountable, kind of.

Other way 'round, actually.

The government, by being "accountable to everyone" is actually accountable to no one. Microsoft (in your example) is directly accountable to their customers. The hippie preserve (can I get a hippie hunting permit?) has to provide value (usually in the form $$$) to the share holders of the private company. So if no one *uses* the hippie preserve, it will be sold off or re-purposed.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at January 27, 2015 10:07 AM (kff5f)

181 Let's say you're right.

How are we worse off than today? If the federal government were
forced to divest itself of all its lands (for a given value of "all"),
but didn't spend one dime of that on debt reduction, how does that make
us worse off than we would be otherwise?

I submit: it doesn't. It's just DC still being fiscally irresponsible. They're trying to spend us into oblivion anyway.

And, in return, that land gets into private hands where it at least becomes useful.

Posted by: AllenGYou're right on one score: debt-wise, we wouldn't be worse off. But, what if the Chinese or the Russians buy the land? It is and should be almost impossible to regulate that- shadow buyers, shell corporations, etc- and I don't want foreign nationals controlling any more American assets than they already do.


Posted by: right wing whippersnapper at January 27, 2015 10:08 AM (ThxKk)

182 The worst thing about the Gov't when it runs things from war to wheat it brings guns to enforce the latest laws. We made chunky peanut butter and you will like it or else.

With the power comes the corruption. The best solution has been to take away the power and let millions play little parts in the scheme of things.

There will always be those with a god complex who have our best interest in mind and have the ego and power to do it. I think we have one in the white house now.

We were not made equal and no son of a bitch can make us equal.

And there is the problem with the central bank, controlling the cost of money. One small person in charge. Well, it won't work out.

Posted by: Bob from table9 at January 27, 2015 10:08 AM (WNERA)

183 Back when the Presidio and most of Fort Ord were being de-accessioned, some libertarian wag computed just the acreage at Cali real-estate rates, and estimated that their sale should pay off the entire national debt.

As it worked out, of course, what with federal-to-state workfare programs, industrial park funds, and such, the government lost money getting rid of some of the primest land on the face of the planet. Between special pleadings, tribal claims, and crony-phony capital "Ism," I'm sure we could sell off the National Parks and end up owing on the deal.

Posted by: Stringer Davis at January 27, 2015 10:08 AM (xq1UY)

184 Well it's all just a bit of fantasizing anyways, my opinion is, even if we didn't have a staggering debt load the feds shouldn't be the majority landholder of the nation.

Posted by: lowandslow at January 27, 2015 10:09 AM (+ebSh)

185 179 Posted by: kindltot at January 27, 2015 10:07 AM (t//F+)

Now for a REAL bout of "someone left the irony on" the entire revolution itself was enflamed in part through the wildly corrupted and dynamic disequlibrium of the King's Rentes system and overtly for sale patronages...

so it was literally meet the new bosses as debauched and insane(and way more violent) than the old boss...

Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at January 27, 2015 10:09 AM (/4AZU)

186 California reduces identity theft by the thousands.



http://tinyurl.com/pw8xjvj


Only for the special class though.

Posted by: RWC - Shopping for Justice! at January 27, 2015 10:09 AM (fWAjv)

187 >>>This will make you depressed.

It isn't like France was doing well in the money dept prior to the Revolution.

Posted by: Bigby's Signifying Hands at January 27, 2015 10:10 AM (3ZtZW)

188 Slightly OT but I recommend "Currency Wars" by James Rickards.

Posted by: Mr. Dave at January 27, 2015 10:11 AM (kWDSz)

189 My guess....more "assistance" programs. Meaning more and more people who are deeper and deeper down the rabbit hole of subsistence and subservience to the government.

Yeah. And my point is they're doing that anyway. Either they accelerate to keep pace with the liquidation, in which case we're not actually (fiscally) worse off than we were before, or they don't- in which case the liquidation at least buys us some time.

If you "require" that money to go to debt reduction... well, money is fungible, so sure it'll go to debt reduction, but all the normal funds that would go toward the debt will be re-purposed to other expenditures.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at January 27, 2015 10:11 AM (kff5f)

190 183 -

Make no mistake, federal land holdings are not just forests and national parks. They also own a great deal of real estate in metropolitan areas, most of which is NOT being used as sites for federal buildings.

What are they being used for? Commercial stuff.

What are they paying the federal government to use it?

Hah!

Posted by: BurtTC at January 27, 2015 10:11 AM (TOk1P)

191 >>>So if no one *uses* the hippie preserve, it will be sold off or re-purposed.

Could also just say "Do you even Tragedy of the Commons?"

Posted by: Bigby's Signifying Hands at January 27, 2015 10:12 AM (3ZtZW)

192 187 Posted by: Bigby's Signifying Hands at January 27, 2015 10:10 AM (3ZtZW)

at least the bonds were bonds not direct bucks you just shat out.....

but yeah there was a simulator based on hard research of the Louis the Whatever's patented Rentes debauchery system for High School kids back in the '80s....

I'll try to remember it... if you bribed the banker you could get 16,000% rates of return

Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at January 27, 2015 10:12 AM (/4AZU)

193 " So if no one *uses* the hippie preserve, it will be sold off or re-purposed."

Not necessarily. For example, oil drilling leases that are not being explored to keep oil supply off the market and out of the hands of competitors.

We already have the problem in the US, and over the entire planet where everything is owned by someone. You can't go anywhere without encountering someone's claim to ownership. Hunting federal land is a good example, and even there, you go out into the forest and encounter other hunters, or those who are growing marijuana.

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 10:12 AM (dfVpK)

194 190 Posted by: BurtTC at January 27, 2015 10:11 AM (TOk1P)

or entire air bases that have been used for "nothing" for decades...

but yeah the majority of value in Federal real estate is not used for Federal purposes and is also not a park.

Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at January 27, 2015 10:13 AM (/4AZU)

195 California reduces identity theft by the thousands.



http://tinyurl.com/pw8xjvj


Only for the special class though


"Call for Anonymous on the white courtesy phone. Call for Anonymous on the white courtesy phone."

Posted by: rickb223 at January 27, 2015 10:13 AM (TAu/7)

196 If you "require" that money to go to debt reduction... well, money is fungible, so sure it'll go to debt reduction, but all the normal funds that would go toward the debt will be re-purposed to other expenditures.

Don't forget that the gubmint's overhead is something like 45%. Only the remainder will be applied to any reduction (like that'd ever happen).

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this sh1t at January 27, 2015 10:13 AM (0HooB)

197 How about a lesbian seagull?

Posted by: Jonathan Livingston Seagull at January 27, 2015 10:14 AM (6HVzn)

198 >>Nothing comes from nothing, as Parmenides reminds us.





I could have sworn it was Billy Preston.

Posted by: Mr. Dave
=======

Funny, I thought it was Oscar Hammerstein

Posted by: mrp at January 27, 2015 10:14 AM (JBggj)

199 I'm getting these numbers from http://www.usdebtclock.org/ to put some of this into context.

US Total debt is in the $59 trillion range. That's everything. Of that, the National Debt is $18 trillion. State and local debts are about $3 trillion, so that puts, household debt, etc, around $38 trillion.

The idea floated is to sell government-owned property to pay off that $18 trillion, but in order to do that it would also be required to throw money at that $38 trillion number.


Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 10:16 AM (eytER)

200 Yeah. And my point is they're doing that anyway. Either they accelerate to keep pace with the liquidation, in which case we're not actually (fiscally) worse off than we were before, or they don't- in which case the liquidation at least buys us some time.

If you "require" that money to go to debt reduction... well, money is fungible, so sure it'll go to debt reduction, but all the normal funds that would go toward the debt will be re-purposed to other expenditures.

Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at January 27, 2015 10:11 AM (kff5f)



You're missing my point. Whether we'd be worse off financially is debatable and I concede the point in this instance. My point is that the country as a whole will be worse off. Not financially, as a country. As a citizenry.

"Assistance programs" are destroying this country. They, as they are currently implemented, are turning our citizenry into wards of the state. Destroying the will and desire to work and provide for oneself and family.

Dumping trillions more into those programs will only make that problem worse.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 10:17 AM (da5Wo)

201 "Money for nothing, and the chicks are free" -- Dire Straits

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 10:18 AM (dfVpK)

202 John,

There are a lot of numbers tossed around for the 59 trillion. I think that number is low because not every obligation is counted, by the feds or states.

Posted by: Bob from table9 at January 27, 2015 10:19 AM (WNERA)

203 We are behaving as if the concept of "scarcity" no longer applies.

Yes. Yes. Yes.

This IS the fundamental problem at all levels, from the global to the personal. The idea that "I' or "we" can have. it. all.

And not only "can", but "deserve to". Nay, are "supposed to".

It appears that we are doomed to have to re-learn a very basic lesson at a very painful price.

Posted by: Tex Lovera at January 27, 2015 10:19 AM (wtvvX)

204 Plato? That pussy.

Posted by: Him at January 27, 2015 10:20 AM (TzeLs)

205 I think the idea behind fiat money and the Federal Reserve system is sound, but the practice is ultimately and inevitably corrupt. By having the universe of dollars keep pace with the total of goods and services available, you avoid deflation. However, the temptation to inflate is irresistible to politicians. It's essentially free money to them and a hidden tax on wealth.

Posted by: toby928(C) at January 27, 2015 10:20 AM (evdj2)

206 It appears that we are doomed to have to re-learn a very basic lesson at a very painful price.

*cough*

Posted by: The Gods of the Copybook Heading at January 27, 2015 10:21 AM (evdj2)

207 Corruption is like rust -- it never sleeps.

Posted by: Bob from table9 at January 27, 2015 10:21 AM (WNERA)

208 The hippie preserve (can I get a hippie hunting permit?) has to provide value (usually in the form $$$) to the share holders of the private company. So if no one *uses* the hippie preserve, it will be sold off or re-purposed.

---

Maybe an example I'm thinking of are stadium naming rights. These are vanity things, considered net positives because of PR or goodwill. I don't think stadium naming rights actually provide tangible value to a company, after all...

So I would think a private corporation headed by Michael Bloomberg would be happy to buy up all kinds of land being sold at a fire sale isn't that much better than a government managing it.

Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 10:21 AM (eytER)

209 Oh, and shameless self promotion....AtC and I's latest podcast is up. Link in nic.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 10:22 AM (da5Wo)

210 157 Or the bush is deemed a wetland.
Posted by: Boss Moss at January 27, 2015 10:01 AM (PuQW/)

Oh it is!

Posted by: Sandra Fluke at January 27, 2015 10:22 AM (2Ojst)

211 210 Posted by: Sandra Fluke at January 27, 2015 10:22 AM (2Ojst)

*rolls eyes and counts money*

//KY Jelly Stockhlders

Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at January 27, 2015 10:24 AM (/4AZU)

212 203 -

Maslow's hierarchy is useful here. People in this country are being sold on the idea that levels one and two are covered, so they start working on three and above, pretty much from the start.

The realization that one needs to go back to the basics is a virtually impossible concept to many. Cold, hard reality cannot and must not be contemplated.

Posted by: BurtTC at January 27, 2015 10:24 AM (TOk1P)

213 9 Plato is a white guy right?

Posted by: SJW at January 27, 2015 08:59 AM (Ehjtd)


Privilege allowed him to think so damn much.

Posted by: Badda bing 'now with added Badda Boom' at January 27, 2015 10:25 AM (klaU/)

214 Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 10:22 AM (da5Wo)

So you weren't getting enough attention from public intoxication and bar brawls?

I keed, I keed. I listened to the last podcast, and y'all did a good job. AtC sounds exactly like I imagined when she gets...uh...animated.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 10:25 AM (2Ojst)

215
Have to admit, Governors unilaterally restricting travel on Federal interstate highways is a nice touch.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 27, 2015 10:25 AM (kdS6q)

216 So you weren't getting enough attention from public intoxication and bar brawls?

I keed, I keed. I listened to the last podcast, and y'all did a good job. AtC sounds exactly like I imagined when she gets...uh...animated.

Posted by: Insomniac at January 27, 2015 10:25 AM (2Ojst)



Hahahaha. I try to avoid those as best I'm able. And yeah, she gets wound up. Stunningly, I was way more profane than she was this time around.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 10:26 AM (da5Wo)

217 Economics can be complicated but for sure we know there's man made Global Warming. Easy Peesy.

Posted by: Badda Bing 'now with added Badda Boom' at January 27, 2015 10:26 AM (klaU/)

218 Or the bush is deemed a wetland.
Posted by: Boss Moss at January 27, 2015 10:01 AM (PuQW/)

Oh it is!
Posted by: Sandra Fluke


Go long on Preparation H for the burning times.

Posted by: rickb223 at January 27, 2015 10:27 AM (TAu/7)

219 I guess I'm with AllenG, BCochran, and others on the asset sale issue, although I come at it from a slightly different angle.

The estimated market value of all the assets of the United States (public and private) was $270 trillion as of Q1 2014 and the book value of the liabilities was $146 trillion. Of that, the book (not market) value of the federal, state, and local governments' assets was about $10 trillion as of 2009 and the book value of the liabilities was about $19 trillion. And that does not count all the unfunded liabilities -- no one really knows the total of that, but there are estimates that it is more than $200 trillion. Granted that some of the assets owned by federal, state, and local governments would sell for more than book value -- let's say, just for argument, that we could sell a book value of $8 trillion and realize 3x, or $24 trillion for it -- we would not even come close to the size of the book value of liabilities plus the unfunded liabilities. So distributing the proceeds of the asset sale to the taxpayers or citizens, assuming Congress could find an equitable and politically viable way to do that, would just put us deeper in the hole of not being able to pay for all the promises we have made to people. In the end, it is this problem of scale that defeats the debt jubilee.

That is not to say that asset sales should not be a part of deficit reduction before thinking about tax increases (obviously, spending reductions should be first). There is nearly a trillion dollars of student loans now on the books, thanks to Dodd-Frank, that the federal government has no business holding. Shrinking bureaucracies means less need for office space, furniture, etc., but putting more commercial real estate on the market quickly doesn't seem like a great idea from the seller's (e.g., the taxpayer's) point of view. It does seem that there is likely an awful lot of unrealized wealth tied up in oil, gas, and mineral rights that could and should be sold off.

But the real problem, th elephant in the room, is the size of all entitlements, and in particular Social Security and Medicare. There is no question that they are sustainable only if there is a lot of inflation and the benefits are indexed below inflation (i.e., real cuts in benefits); otherwise, the arithmetic just does not work. Be prepared for both programs to go broke. It is just about inevitable.

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at January 27, 2015 10:29 AM (5f5bM)

220 Speaking of economics, the dow is off a little this morning.

Posted by: Bob from table9 at January 27, 2015 10:29 AM (WNERA)

221 But to me it seems to be trading one master for
another. I hate to sound all 99%er anti-corporatist, but I'd rather
have a state government manage a forest over, say, the dimwits at
Microsoft who would turn it into a hippie preserve or something. At
least theoretically the state government is accountable, kind of.


Posted by: @JohnTant at January 27, 2015 10:02 AM (eytER)


How would you like the gov. to lease rights to parcels of lands, just like the timber sales:
A parcel is listed for the lease auction, like a timber sale it lists terrain, tree species and sensitive areas, and what mitigation the lease requires.

Boise Cascade, GP, a hunting organization or the Sierra Club and the KGB (fronted by GreenPeace) bid on 20 year exploitation rights, or set up to combine for thinning and management.
The 20 year lease is up, and the lease is up again for auction with no predjudice. The government is happy because it has people to boss around about how to run a forest, the timber companies are happy because the have timber to cut and they don't have to do it all at a time when the market is soft, and the hunters are happy because they have access to leasable hunting rights. And everyone is happier because the Sierra Club has to put its money where its mouth is and compete in the market, and will come to realize that they have on hand assets that need to be actively managed to bring in even greater profits instead of locking it away for the next wild fire to destroy down to the mineral soil.


Posted by: kindltot at January 27, 2015 10:29 AM (t//F+)

222 Nood.

Posted by: rickb223 at January 27, 2015 10:29 AM (TAu/7)

223 Nood.

Posted by: rickb223 at January 27, 2015 10:29 AM (TAu/7)

224 NOOD?!

Posted by: Al Sharpton at January 27, 2015 10:30 AM (2Ojst)

225 Another example of what happens with private ownership of land, speaking of the federal land held by Bureau of Land Management (BLM), under federal rules you can apply for 'permits' for grazing, you can hunt and 'recreate' freely.

Let those lands become private and you have to be a member of the private club (think hunt clubs, sportmans clubs), and they will be exclusive with restricted membership, at least the best preserves will be. Any hunt club with land open to the general public will be the marginal quality, poor producing and will be over run by people who otherwise would have no access. It's that whole scarcity thing.

The rich and powerful get the good stuff because they are rich and powerful and can afford it. If all the land in the US were to go private, the not rich and not powerful would be imprisoned in their own ghettos. (Ya, I know. They are anyway because they are not rich and powerful.)

As was pointed out up thread, it isn't just that the Federal government has large land holdings, it is that the federal government controls everything.

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 10:31 AM (dfVpK)

226 Fiat money stole the free man's dream. It makes the impossible (and undesirable) possible. Fiat money is not free money. Quite the opposite.

Posted by: Anthropology Guy at January 27, 2015 10:32 AM (e61y8)

227 Stunningly, I was way more profane than she was this time around.Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at January 27, 2015 10:26 AM (da5Wo)

No way. Shit, did I accidentally take the yellow pill this morning?

Posted by: 1bulwetweft at January 27, 2015 10:33 AM (TR90z)

228 Oh good, the goldbug is back with another issue of Silver Dimes Digest. Your recommendation a few years ago for everyone to flee stocks and buy precious metals has worked out great!

Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at January 27, 2015 10:34 AM (1RNgT)

229 Asset sales, Senator Feinstein's Husband scores a 4 billion dollar commission to sell unused government buildings.

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 10:35 AM (dfVpK)

230 It isn't like France was doing well in the money dept prior to the Revolution.

Posted by: Bigby's Signifying Hands at January 27, 2015 10:10 AM (3ZtZW)

Well, part of that was because of John Law's property backed money scheme, the chasing of Gold out of the system and the collapse of the Mississippi bubble.

Posted by: kindltot at January 27, 2015 10:35 AM (t//F+)

231 Fiat money stole the free man's dream. It makes the impossible (and undesirable) possible. Fiat money is not free money. Quite the opposite.

Specie is not without it's own problems. Particularly when it's production doesn't keep up with the production of goods and services.

Posted by: toby928(C) says Rubber Dingy Rapids, Bro! at January 27, 2015 10:35 AM (evdj2)

232 "Specie is not without it's own problems."

Or new sources of supply suddenly flood the market with silver dollars, and gold coins as happened during the westward expansion and the discovery of gold and silver.

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 10:37 AM (dfVpK)

233 Reggie I am a lot less fearful of willful misuse of Federal land by private citizens than I am wary of the 536 assholes and the caste of thousands obliterating liberty across the whole continent.

Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at January 27, 2015 10:40 AM (/4AZU)

234 Or new sources of supply suddenly flood the market with silver dollars, and gold coins as happened during the westward expansion and the discovery of gold and silver.

True. Though in fairness, a rapid expansion of the gold and silver supply has been a rarity in history whereas the steady expansion of goods and services is almost a constant.

Perhaps an argument could be made for diverse fiat money rather than centralized via State Banks. A competition of monetary meddlers, as it were. But that's been tried before and found wanting.

Posted by: toby928(C) says Rubber Dingy Rapids, Bro! at January 27, 2015 10:42 AM (evdj2)

235 Posted by: toby928(C) at January 27, 2015 10:20 AM (evdj2)

Toby, there is no government in the history of the world that has failed to see fiat money as a way to profit itself-and to hell with the plebes.

Fiat money in itself is a corruption, it is a theft, it is the destruction of the economic system by the organization that is supposed to be running it.
It is the CFO and CEO and board selling off corporate property for Astin-Martins and Blow, it is the General commanding a base selling arms and ammunition to buy male prostitutes.
It never starts out that way, it starts out as "easing" something through to smooth out a rough patch, but then it gets easier and really convenient.

It is corruption.

Specie or real bills of goods do not stop this, it just makes it that much harder for the corruption to be carried out, and it also does not depend solely on the "good will and faith" of any-freaking-anyone to make it work.


Read Fiat Money in France. It is 180 pages, open easy prose, it is free on Gutenberg.

Then talk to me when you are done and I will have you read Jesus Huerta de Soto

Posted by: kindltot at January 27, 2015 10:44 AM (t//F+)

236 Jesus Huerta de Soto

$30 on Amazon. I could probably get a copy from the library. He's from 'the Austrian' school, so I would probably agree with him, and he talks about 'fractional lending' so if I extrapolate from that, how far off the mark would my conclusions be?

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 10:55 AM (dfVpK)

237 I am willowing myself


Or new sources of supply suddenly flood the
market with silver dollars, and gold coins as happened during the
westward expansion and the discovery of gold and silver.

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 10:37 AM (dfVpK)

the flood of silver was caused by Congress demanding that the Treasury buy larger amounts of Silver, at higher prices, which spurred production. The problem was not only the overproduction of the mines bringing the comodity price down, but also the fact that Congress had fixed the price of silver against gold currency above the market or spot price: this was a three fold hit, Inflation of the value of the currency, the overpricing of purchasing, leading to overproduction and this lead to the collapse of the bubble in the Panic of 1893. This is what deflation is: collapse of the bubble or business cycle.This was caused by the Free Silver movement starting in the 1870's You would want to look at the Sherman Silver Purchase act of 1890
Mind you, even mild inflation is creation of a bubble, and the longer you draw out a bubble the worse its deflation will be.

Posted by: kindltot at January 27, 2015 10:57 AM (t//F+)

238 $30 on Amazon. I could probably get a copy from the
library. He's from 'the Austrian' school, so I would probably agree with
him, and he talks about 'fractional lending' so if I extrapolate from
that, how far off the mark would my conclusions be?

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 10:55 AM (dfVpK)

He claims to be of the "Salamanca" school, but I would suggest you judge for yourself. He has a special hatred for fiat money and fractional banking, but he believes the protestant work ethic is responsible for a lot of Marx's thinking on value and work being the basis of value.His lectures are gems, but you have to speak spanish to understand them and he is far more low-key in English.He does talk about inflation and how it and taxing and the bread and circuses destroyed Rome and Western Civiliation for a century.

I have a special hatred for fiat money since I don't like being compelled to accept IOU's from people I don't trust. But I have other issues as well, it is best to ignore me when I start to foam.
Gotta go to work

Posted by: kindltot at January 27, 2015 11:03 AM (t//F+)

239 Ya, the boom and bust cycle. We had a lot of them. I don't know the details nor the Federal efforts to 'manage' the currency. It was a big deal back then. Just as it is now.

People who had silver wanted price supports relative to gold. I'm assuming that was William Jennings Bryant's "Cross of Gold" speech.

Thing is, boom and bust are self correcting, but people on the wrong side didn't what to have to suffer the loss for a wrong guess. Who would?

Then farmers out in the western territories generated surplus and the railroad monopolies wanted high rates to haul that surplus to eastern markets.

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 11:06 AM (dfVpK)

240 "but he believes the protestant work ethic is responsible for a lot of Marx's thinking on value and work being the basis of value"

I could probably agree with that also. Marx went wrong in other areas, and economics are more complex than one or two simple things.

Posted by: Reginald Smythe-Beufort at January 27, 2015 11:10 AM (dfVpK)

241 Awesome post. Missed you, Monty. I kept harping on a similar point in the healthcare debate - the third party payor employer based model has wrecked the pricing mechanism in healthcare. I've had medical accounting experts testify to the fact that no one really knows what the "reasonable value" for any given medical service is anymore, and qualified that testimony before the Court. If you have someone who knows their stuff walk a jury through how Byzantine and multi-layered the process of generating medical bill and getting it paid really is, they have to reasonably conclude that the end price is as mostly arbitrary and circumstantial. It has more to do with where you get treated and how you're paying than what services you received or who performed them.

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at January 27, 2015 11:12 AM (QKIQb)

242 Our practically nonexistent interest rates of money to the banks has also broken the connection.

They're doing that so as to keep the debt service lower as the amount of debt is so huge that a reality based interest rate would bankrupt the US.

Many other countries are doing the same thing.

The lowering of interest rates devalues labor as labor is the fundamental basis of all added value.

If you cannot receive a commensurate profit or payment for the removal of value from you to someone else then you are working for free or as some might say; You're a Slave.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at January 27, 2015 11:20 AM (RZzX3)

243 Right now we're operating with a Schrodinger's Cat Dollar.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at January 27, 2015 11:21 AM (RZzX3)

244 land labor capital
wealth production

Posted by: heavily armed redoubt at January 27, 2015 11:28 AM (cviLU)

245 Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at January 27, 2015 11:12 AM (QKIQb)

The healthcare industry's cost/payment model has always been divorced from reality.

Where else can you require a service and not know (or have approximated) ahead of time how much the total cost will be with some accuracy? Where else are services performed before
an agreed upon price is arrived at?

They are responsible to an extent for the clamor for gov't healthcare due to the opacity of the pricing structure, standard prices that vary only normally due to demographics from place to place. They also overprice many services, add services and providers that are not germane to the patients health. I've experienced this directly. When in hospital I found myself meeting all sorts of doctors and therapists that had little or nothing to do with my recovery.

It reminds me of the pricing of boat hardware.

Take a stainless steel screw sells for .10 in a hardware store. Now sell it in a boat chandelry and it's .20.

They do this with hospital consumables and fees for services.

For years Health care has constantly outstripped the rise in the cost of living elsewhere percentage wise.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at January 27, 2015 11:29 AM (RZzX3)

246 "A competition of monetary meddlers, as it were. But that's been tried before and found wanting."

Rather like checks and balances are broken in the era of Uniparty politics.

Collusion and unanticipated conflicts of interest are the death of any self-regulating system of allegedly competing interests. Permitting the monetary system to be manipulated by government makes it subject to the same corrupting process.

It's why I'm always bitching about the fallacy of "always choose the lesser evil" in politics. When the two allegedly opposing parties adopt the same goals, put on a kabuki show of opposing each other and collude in backrooms to increase their share of the national wealth and bribe their respective constituencies to repeat the process, it's a downward spiral.

Likewise with central bankers - when everyone decides to go on the float, there's no longer any benchmark to evaluate what's real. We're borrowing "money" from China that doesn't really exist because there are no goods and services to back it up - it's a fiction cooked in their books.

I strongly believe that the real world "money supply" in the sense of goods and services is overstated on paper and in our financial markets by a factor of at least 2x or 3x. When that bubble finally bursts, it's not going to be pretty.

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at January 27, 2015 11:34 AM (QKIQb)

247 "It reminds me of the pricing of boat hardware."

Good analogy - I'm familiar with that problem.

A further headache is that the service provider is in a strongly information-dominant position. You don't know if he's full of shit when he tells you you need his services for XYZ, and the consequences for ignoring him can be dire. When you get collusion among professionals to "lift everyone's boats" among the good ol' boys and fleece the uninformed (see medicine, State Bar of California, Washington D.C. in general) Joe Six Pack is pretty much screwed. It's why I don't believe in hermetic "self-policing" by State Bars for lawyers, Medical Boards for docs, etc.. Obviously the professionals have to have a say in the process, but both disinterested and adversely interested parties need a seat at that table.

A friend of mine floats the idea of a "government efficiency bureau" ala police internal affairs whose budget is based on what they hack out of other budgets. Good concept, subject to regulatory capture, of course, but it's a step in the right direction. I think the competing interests model with checks and balances is still the best thing out there, but it needs external forces once in awhile (e.g. third parties in politics, or a Whig-Republican style turnover every few decades). When that stops, its "water the tree of liberty" time. All institutions grow corrupt over time - "meet the new boss..."

In medicine, I have some hope that we'll get a "grey market" of medical pricing going with physicians who're going to cash-only, but it's a very nascent market and obviously almost completely restricted to the wealthy at this point.




Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at January 27, 2015 11:44 AM (QKIQb)

248 That usurper in the White House is making worse worser.

Posted by: torabora at January 27, 2015 11:56 AM (gjnnS)

(Jump to top of page)






Processing 0.02, elapsed 0.0349 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0127 seconds, 257 records returned.
Page size 167 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.



MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!

Real Clear Politics
Gallup
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat