As noted in a story by James W. Harris at The Advocates for Self-Government, a group that wants to provide free medical care to out nation’s poor is being blocked by government bureaucrats:
An organization of volunteer doctors and other health care professionals wants to provide free medical care to tens of thousands of poor people across America.
But — incredibly — government bureaucrats won’t let them.
That’s the extraordinary story told by journalist David Freddoso in the Washington Examiner newspaper.
The article begins this way:
“Stan Brock just wants to help. The former co-star of ‘Wild Kingdom’ wants to deliver free medical, dental and vision care to the poor. … Brock simply wants to provide care free of charge, at the hands of unpaid volunteer doctors and dentists using donated equipment.
“Brock’s group, Remote Area Medical, wants to bring its services to Washington [D.C.], and soon. He wants his volunteer eye doctors to grind new glasses on the spot for those having trouble seeing.
“He wants his dentists to pull rotten teeth and perform root canals in badly neglected mouths. He wants to give checkups and HIV tests to the uninsured and the underinsured. No questions asked.
“The only question is whether the bureaucrats will let him do it.”
The GDP numbers out yesterday, which showed economic growth at 3.5% in the third quarter, brought a deafening chorus from public and private economists who all agreed that the recession is officially over. With such a strong report, they are happy to tell us that not only has the Fat Lady finished her aria, but she has left the building and is sipping champagne in the bath. As usual, it falls on me to rain on the parade.
Even the giddiest commentators admit that the upside GDP surprise resulted almost entirely from government interventions. But, by pushing up public and private debt, expanding government, deepening trade deficits, and pushing down savings rates, these interventions have succeeded only in putting our economy back on an unsustainable path of borrowing and spending. Accordingly, they have prevented the rebalancing necessary for long-term health. Could there be a simpler illustration of trading long-term pain for short-term gain?
Rather than asking these pre-K economists to make such a three dimensional leap, it may be easier just to give them a brief history lesson.
During the decade that corresponds to the Great Depression, annual GNP expanded for six years and contracted for four. After nose-diving in the early years of the decade, GNP turned positive in 1934 and then logged three more years of solid growth (the four year average annual growth rate was 8.5%). But does anyone really believe the Great Depression ended in 1934, when the economy first stopped contracting? Unemployment reached 19% in 1938, nearly the peak of the entire Depression, almost a full decade after the stock market crashed! Why will we be so much luckier this time around?
Ron Paul appeared on Larry King Live tonight following Michael Moore to refute (and agree) with some of what Moore said. It was a very good appearance by Paul. He spoke about health care, foreign policy, and the difference between capitalism and corporatism.
Ron Paul questioned Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner today on Capitol Hill. Both men seemed to be talking past each other a bit. Geithner reminds me of a friend who never gives you a concrete answer; thus, he is perfect for his position as tax collector. I cannot resist asking the question… what is going on with his hair? Did it always look like that or is it just due to poor video quality?
“How did I go bankrupt? Two ways. Slowly, and then all of a sudden.” — paraphrased from “The Sun Also Rises” by Ernest Hemingway
“May you live in interesting times.” — a proverbial Chinese curse
President Bush and the Republican Congress expanded government more than any administration in history. They also laid the basic foundations for a future police state. Now, President Obama and the Democratic Congress have . . .
Retained, and in some cases expanded, all the Bush-era policies — the wars, the PATRIOT Act, warrantless spying, REAL ID, imprisonment without due process, extraordinary rendition, etc.
Begun to extend the already existing foundations for a future socialist state with things like direct government ownership of businesses, the health care bill, cap and trade, and a host of other measures big and small
Put the Bush and Obama policies together, sprinkle in a couple more terrorist attacks, and one or two more state-caused financial calamities, and you have a recipe for . . .
The destruction of American liberty
The blossoming of a Leviathan State
Read the signs . . .
We are living through a Statist revolution.
Statism is a mindset that prefers coercion to cooperation. Statists love the State because they are blind to its fundamental nature . . .
The State is a monopoly that you cannot easily fire, replace, or even control
For the most part, the value of the dollar is given cursory attention by the financial media. Typically, its movements are assigned an importance on par with much less determinative metrics such as natural gas futures and construction permits. It’s only when major milestones are reached that anyone really takes notice of the dollar. We are living through one of those times.
The great dollar rally of 2008-2009 has come full circle. When the financial crisis exploded in its full ugliness in mid-2008, the dollar, which had steadily declined over the previous four to five years, put in a rally for the record books. By March 2009, as investors across the world sought safety from the financial storm, the index had surged more than 25%. Since then, the dollar has steadily declined to the point where nearly all those gains have vanished. In short, the panic rally has given way to the long term trend.
So, as the dollar index makes fresh 52-week lows on a nearly daily basis, discussion on the greenback is heating up. And while real insight on the topic is hard to find, the debate centers on the battle between two conventional opinions – both of which are wrong.
The first camp, which is generally supportive of government intervention in the economy, argues that dollar’s decline is a positive for both the economy and the stock market. The second camp, which tends to fall on the more conservative end of the political spectrum, views the dollar’s decline as a problem but feels that tough talk and slightly higher interest rates are all that is needed to restore ‘King Dollar’ to its throne.
First of all, a weak dollar is no better for Americans than a lower paying job is for a worker. And although I would prefer that the dollar remain strong, I know that currency values are a function of supply and demand, not wishful thinking. The past years of reckless monetary and fiscal policy have created conditions that must push the dollar down. Vastly expanded debt levels and monetary expansion have created a greater supply of dollars, while poor investment performance and diminished industrial capacity have lessened the demand for dollars.
The good news is that President Obama isn’t going to Copenhagen to sign a treaty, but he may sign a proposal that could lead to a treaty at a later date. The Copenhagen proposal is designed to create an international scheme to control carbon emissions (and the entire world economy in the bargain).
President Obama wants to have the “cap and trade” (cap and tax) bill passed before he goes to Copenhagen.
Our goal should be to send him to Denmark empty-handed.
It probably isn’t the best way to control carbon emissions, assuming you believe that’s important
The climate models that supposedly justify cap and trade have been consistently wrong
Cap and trade needs 60 votes to come to the floor in the Senate. If we can stop that from happening now then there’s no way that 67 Senators will come together later to ratify a treaty for the same purpose, especially if that treaty cedes American sovereignty to international organizations.
We must defeat cap and trade. We must send Obama to Denmark empty-handed.
by John Browne – Senior Market Strategist, Euro Pacific Capital
In a small bit of Washington irony, a government panel convened this week under the guise of ensuring ‘expressive freedom’ on the Internet, while at the same time the Obama Administration put Fox News on notice that ideological rectitude would be a prerequisite for White House engagement.
This heightened wrangling with the media comes at a time when ordinary Americans are rapidly becoming disillusioned with the major parties. Their disgust is evident in innumerable web discussion sites that, for many, have replaced the major media outlets as the primary source of information. In its focus to keep control of the conversation, the Administration is seeking to disguise the fact that the ‘change’ Mr. Obama promised in the election is unlikely to materialize.
Wishful thinking of the Nobel committee aside, what we have seen thus far from Obama is simply more of what had been delivered by the prior administration.
Obama renewed our military commitment to the quagmire that is Afghanistan. But he is hesitating now that the United Nations has uncovered fraud in the recent presidential elections there. Whether or not one believes the war is winnable, this type of hollow chest-pounding did not help anyone under G. W. Bush, and will not under Obama.
On October 15, 2009, I gave a lecture at Moravian College in Bethlehem on the horrendous economics of the stimulus plan, and why free market solutions will work far better. An MP3 is not yet available, but a PDF is here. The video playing prior to the lecture is below. This is only the latest in a series of economic lectures, including on the financial crisis. If you are interested in having me speak with your group, feel free to contact the campaign from the TowneForCongress.com home page.
First, I want to reassure everyone this talk will not be a campaign speech; its based on an economics article that I wrote in January 2009, before the stimulus plan was passed and before my candidacy – although I am from Nazareth, which by the way, was the original settlement the Moravians founded when they arrived from their failed colony in South Carolina – at the time I was living in Shanghai.
Regardless, these days when one looks at the economy, you must clearly also factor in the interventions by government. So much so, it is a wonder that the field has not yet been renamed “governomics.”
While all the talk at present is about economic corners turned and markets charging ahead, no one is paying much notice to an American economy deteriorating before our eyes. These myopic commentators seem to be simply moving past the now almost-universally held conclusion that before the crash of 2008, our economy was on an unsustainable course. If these imbalances had been corrected, then perhaps I too would be joining in the euphoria. But evidence abounds that we have not veered at all from that dangerous path.
Last week, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that consumer spending as a percentage of U.S. GDP has risen to 71%, a post-World War II record. This level is notably higher than other wealthy industrialized countries, and vastly higher than the levels sustained by China and other emerging economies. At the same time, our industrial output is contracting, our trade deficit is expanding once again (after contracting earlier in the year), and our savings rate is plummeting (after an early year surge).
The data confirms that government stimuli are worsening the structural imbalances underlying our economy. The recent ‘rebound’ in GDP is not resulting from increased economic output, but merely from the fact that we are borrowing more than ever. That is precisely how we got ourselves into this mess. An economy cannot grow indefinitely by borrowing more than it produces. Not only is such a course untenable, but the added debt ensures a deeper recession when the bills come due.
This soon-to-be-called depression will not end until the pendulum of consumer spending habits swings violently in the other direction. This will be a jarring change, but it is the splash of cold water that we need to return our economy to viability. I believe that consumer spending as a share of GDP will need to temporarily contract to roughly 50% of GDP, before eventually moving toward its historic mean of 65%. Such a move would indicate a restoration of our personal savings, a decline in borrowing and trade deficits, and an increased industrial output. That would be a real recovery.
In the meantime, the higher the spending percentage climbs, the more painful the ultimate decline becomes.
Liberty Maven
As noted in a story by James W. Harris at The Advocates for Self-Government, a group that wants to provide free medical care to out nation’s poor is being blocked by government bureaucrats:
by Peter Schiff, president of Euro Pacific Capital and author of 
by John Browne – Senior Market Strategist, Euro Pacific Capital
by Peter Schiff, president of Euro Pacific Capital and author of 
Follow LM on Twitter