Posts Tagged free markets

“Ideas having sex” – The never-ending cycle of innovative progression

a recent article in Reason Magazine here, describes the fact that the law of diminishing returns simply does not apply to society as a whole.  The human mind is capable of innovations and collaborative idea generation that seem to create an augmentation of returns, leading to our current societal success.  We have advanced more and more rapidly while many continue to say “its unsustainable and we can’t continue to grow this way. Eventually it will slow down”.  The interesting part is that every time they say that, when eventually arrives, we are moving faster. Then the next econ pundit or whomever states the same “eventually it will slow down.” I’m not so sure it will!

The wholistic interconnected environment of the world allows innovation to spring up in one place, then when it appears to slow, it springs up in another.  Then ideas combine (or “have sex” as the author states) and the results are greater than the sum of the individual ideas involved!

This is a great article regarding open-market natural innovation.  Again, check it out here.

Post to Twitter

Tags: ,

Book Review: FREE, The future of a Radical Price by Chris Anderson

Free: The Future of a Radical Price Free: The Future of a Radical Price by Chris Anderson

My rating: 5 of 5 stars
Chris Anderson did a wonderful job with this book. It is fascinating to see the economic trends of today’s digital age. What I find interesting with Chris as well is the fact that he is editor-in-chief of WIRED magazine, periodicals being one of the most damaged industries by “free”. Chris, however, is embracing free and incorporating it into Wired’s business model. He identifies many forms of free in the marketplace and how business models have and are being developed around it. A few reviews and criticisms I’ve read about the book make me wonder if these critics have even read it! The idea is not some interesting version of radical social reform where we ought to give everything away and frolic in the meadows holding hands. It is a very productive economic innovation that is naturally occurring as the marginal costs of digital information fall to near zero. The trick is simply to identify and accept it, thus opening the creative capacity to find unique and new innovations to traditional business modeling. We simply have to turn the ol’ brain back on and think a bit! What happens is a universal win/win. Innovation is more rapid, consumers have more affordable (free) choices for services, and business continues to expand in new ways. There definitely exists an element of creative destruction as some industries are dismantled by new technologies, making way for new businesses or simply requiring old businesses to adapt more readily (some have, some haven’t and are toast). I highly recommend this book.

View all my reviews >>

Post to Twitter

Tags: , , ,

Book Review: Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt

Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics by Henry Hazlitt

My rating: 4 of 5 stars
A phenomenal synopsis in economic thought. This is a book that everyone ought to read as informed citizens, allowing us all to make wiser economic decisions versus voting for what “sounds” good. Hazlitt writes so all will understand and does a fantastic job at it. That doesn’t mean it is the most exciting thing you’ve ever read, however. It can be a little dry but remains understandable and clear. Hazlitt’s examples illuminate economic concepts better than most. He is not distracted by the complexity generated by many economists of a discipline that should not be so. This tends to be the issue of many academics and can be seen in the economic learning process. As you advance through economic theory, simple concepts are often discredited and replaced with complex ones creating substantial contradictions. Hazlitt’s observations continue to be relevant 30+ years after the latest edition of this book. We haven’t learned much, apparently. This is one lesson everyone should read.

View all my reviews >>

<iframe src=”http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?lt1=_blank&bc1=FFFFFF&IS2=1&bg1=FFFFFF&fc1=000000&lc1=0000FF&t=busiwealservo-20&o=1&p=8&l=as1&m=amazon&f=ifr&md=10FE9736YVPPT7A0FBG2&asins=0517548232″ style=”width:120px;height:240px;” scrolling=”no” marginwidth=”0″ marginheight=”0″ frameborder=”0″></iframe>

Post to Twitter

Tags: , ,

The Entrepreneur is the Answer. You’re trying too hard mr. Gov.

I like to think that proponents for big government solutions have good intentions.  In fact, most of them likely do.  There is the occasional power-hungry participant that is downright scary but the majority are well intentioned.  The problem lies in a fundamental understanding of the purpose of government and what works vs what doesn’t.  No matter how much you support Che Guevara and Fidel Castro’s 59′ revolution for the ‘working man’, Cuba’s recent past has been less than ideal and glamorous.  It just didn’t work.  Now that might be an extreme example but either way… Even Sweden has been working back toward free market economics with the near collapse of it’s socialized system in the early 90’s.  If someone tries to show Sweden as a model for success, make sure you differentiate today’s results from yesterday’s causes.  They had to reform their system from near collapse due to socialization and now, nearly any successes they see are from free enterprise.

Now back to us… the government is just not that good at business, and that’s okay!  It was never meant to be.    I believe it is well summed up by Claude from the Ben Stiller movie “Along Came Polly”, check it:
BlankSo the moral is the gov needs to accept that it is a “hippo” and not a “zebra” (big business) or even a “leopard” (small business), it’s a hippo and if it ever accepts it, it can live happy as a hippo….

Ramirez, in his artistic eloquence, shows the gov’s enterprising history…

Not the best track record… Let’s just accept that it’s a hippo, then maybe we all can be “happy as a hippo”… hehe…

Post to Twitter

Tags: , , ,

A look back at the Depression may help today

I recently came across a collection of articles and information compiled and published by the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) here.  This is an excellent collection that I would argue all should read and understand before making rash decisions regarding our current economic circumstances.  The media and certain groups are quick to demean and blame capitalism which, in my opinion, is not only jumping to harsh conclusions but outright wrong.  It is important to obtain multiple perspectives and this page and information offers one of those perspectives. Following is from that page on FEE’s site:

Articles About the Great Depression

Check out the list of books they recommend here on the page.  I have read many of the articles and a book or two and highly recommend them.  These will give you a historical understanding that allows for improved support and solutions in today’s situation.

Post to Twitter

Tags: , ,

“Charter Cities” as a gateway to Libertarian ideals…

A recent talk on TED.com by Paul Romer describes a concept called “charter cities” which, as a foundational concept, is extremely interesting and potentially revolutionary in nature, paving a pathway to reforms for freedom in any country, including the United States.  The US is definitely not a purely free market and a charter city would allow a “free market experiment” to exist here as well as other parts, just as Hong Kong was, and is for China.  Countries could have their own “Hong Kong” and people would be able to choose to participate.  As demand grows, new charter cities are started, eventually whole countries may be reformed.  What a concept for nations that have been over-run with imperialist regimes and freedom-less government monopolies that have forgotten how to live with freedom or aren’t even sure if they want it.  Allow people to choose, countries and communities to transition.  If each charter city works, you now have examples and evidence of effectiveness.  Good stuff!

Post to Twitter

Tags: , ,

Real Solutions for better health care by Whole Foods CEO?

He may not be the first you’d think to offer “capitalist” free-market solutions to health care but Whole Foods CEO and co-founder John Mackey is offering some capitalist solutions to our nations health care problems.  The fact that the White House is only willing to look at government controlled solutions is what is frustrating.  Instead of weighing out the options, addressing the desires of the country and population, they ignore all in an all out blind effort to ramrod government policy down our throats.  I definitely recognize that if you are going to oppose one issue, you better be ready to offer an alternative solution and John does a pretty good job in his recent commentary for the Wall Street Journal here.  It is especially interesting when he is receiving a fair amount of backlash from Whole Foods’ liberal customer segment.  News flash! He might agree with you on dietary choices and wellness but it is allowed to differ in opinion on public policy! John Stossel addresses this commentary and the opposition to it in a recent blog post here.  Stossel said the following about this:

The hostility of some of his customers is breathtaking. Disagree with his opinion if you will, but Mackey is making a good-faith effort to offer his views on health care reform. Because they don’t conform to liberals’ fantasies for  some iteration of a government-dominated plan, they want him to shut up? They seem to think they own the man’s opinions.

Mackey first identifies that we do need health care reform but when government has restricted the free market from working in health care to such an extent, blaming the market for the problems is fantasy.

While we clearly need health-care reform, the last thing our country needs is a massive new health-care entitlement that will create hundreds of billions of dollars of new unfunded deficits and move us much closer to a government takeover of our health-care system. Instead, we should be trying to achieve reforms by moving in the opposite direction—toward less government control and more individual empowerment.

He offers the following solutions to help replace the proposed reforms with capitalist freedoms:

• Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs)… This creates incentives to spend the first $2,500 more carefully. Our plan’s costs are much lower than typical health insurance, while providing a very high degree of worker satisfaction.

• Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair.

• Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable.

• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying.

• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care.

• Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost. How many people know the total cost of their last doctor’s visit and how that total breaks down? What other goods or services do we buy without knowing how much they will cost us?

• Enact Medicare reform. We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare is heading towards bankruptcy and enact reforms that create greater patient empowerment, choice and responsibility.

• Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren’t covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

These are just a few possibilities and allow people to more fully control their own destiny and life.  It is interesting that so many have decided that equality in health care is so essential. As Mackey asks, more important than food and shelter?

Health-care reform is very important. Whatever reforms are enacted it is essential that they be financially responsible, and that we have the freedom to choose doctors and the health-care services that best suit our own unique set of lifestyle choices. We are all responsible for our own lives and our own health. We should take that responsibility very seriously and use our freedom to make wise lifestyle choices that will protect our health. Doing so will enrich our lives and will help create a vibrant and sustainable American society.

Although I may not agree with Mr Mackey on other things, I applaud this effort…

Post to Twitter

Tags: , ,

Cash for Clunkers, another political blunder…

Cash for clunkers is simply another political blunder that economically skews the markets, misplacing resources through malinvestment (Mises’ term) all at the cost of the common tax payer.  Isn’t that what we need? This vid is sweet…

Post to Twitter

Tags: , ,

Our forgetful nature brings Keynes to the economic forefront once again…

Oh Paul… Paul Krugman, our Keynes Reincarnate…  here to influence us to continue walking toward the “Keynesian light”.  I recently read an article by Lilburne from the Ludwig von Mises Institute regarding Paul Krugman’s current influential role in our political economy.  The article is titled “The Second Coming of Keynes” and highlights some interesting points regarding America’s tendency to NOT learn from our experiences.  He states:

Paul Krugman is a devotee of John Maynard Keynes. He’s such a hard core disciple that he was Keyensian when Keynesianism wasn’t cool: the period between the 1970s stagflation, which seemed to disprove Keynesian doctrine, and now, when it is groundlessly renascent due to our society’s stunted memory span.

And what of the years and years of proofing done by classical economists, testing the original ideas of Adam Smith?  Richard Ebeling (former president of FEE) wrote in the Freeman a few years ago:

The classical economists of the eighteenth and nine­teenth centuries had persuasively demonstrated that government intervention prevented the smooth func­tioning of the market. They constructed a body of eco­nomic theory which clearly showed that governments have neither the knowledge nor the ability to direct economic affairs.

…During the Napoleonic wars of the early nineteenth century, many European countries experienced serious inflations as governments resorted to the printing press to fund their war expenditures. The lesson the classical economists learned was that the hand of the government had to be removed from the handle of that printing press if monetary stability was to be maintained.

I will leave the evidence behind these claims to the authors (see their articles and other writings for detail).  Suffice it to say we cannot recall our past with the prudence to understand that the social collectivist movements– no matter the name albeit communism, socialism, or progressivism–  are not effective systems.  We are set to govern ourselves and no individual carries a divine calling as supreme decision maker for the collective (which is interesting considering Marx was anti-religious. I wonder how he assumed his calling?).

Now back to Krugman… as a devout Keynesian disciple, he once stated:

one of the high points of the semester, if you’re a teacher of introductory macroeconomics, comes when you explain how individual virtue can be public vice, how attempts by consumers to do the right thing by saving more can leave everyone worse off. The point is that if consumers cut their spending, and nothing else takes the place of that spending, the economy will slide into a recession, reducing everyone’s income.

I must agree with Lilburne that such as statement is an example of “childish theory.” As Lilburne quotes Gary North:

peak of saving as if it were a system for hiding paper currency under a mattress. They refuse to answer this crucial question: What does the bank do with the money that a consumer deposits instead of spending? Put another way: What analytical or conceptual difference does it make whether a saver deposits a dollar [in] his bank, which the bank will lend, or whether he spends it, enabling the seller to deposit the dollar in his bank, which his bank will lend?

The Keynesian theory is either ignorantly arrogant (as Keynes himself often was) or completely naive to banking and finance processes.

The best part is this country’s people and leaders’ willingness to accept it without a thought or research.  I guess that’s the definition of progressivism: “Don’t look back, don’t read old thinking, we must move forward with “new” ideas that you don’t call “classic” cuz that’s too old and un-progressive…”

It may be much simpler as to why this thought realm is so popular with politicians and governments, as I’ve previously quoted and discussed here, from Ebeling again:

What Keynes succeeded in doing was to provide a rationale for what governments always like to do: spend money and pander to special interests.

Welcome Back Maynard… I mean Paul… whatever…

Post to Twitter

Tags: , , , ,

Apple, Google, AT&T, and the FCC?

Well, apparently the FCC doesn’t like to see siblings quarrel.  It’s latest venture into regulatory practice has it asking questions about why Apple rejected the latest Google App?  Why!?!?  This is not a question of monopoly or cruel business treatment!  It isn’t a matter of unacceptable moral programming!  (not that either should be their biz).  It is simply one business rejecting a product of another!  Let the free market breath just a little bit please… Check out this article from Reason.

Now the FCC wants the whole story. Last week, it sent an abrupt letter to all three companies—Google, Apple, and AT&T—demanding answers. Why the rejection? Was AT&T involved? Is this normal? What are Apple’s usual policies for rejecting an app?

A better question, however, might be why the FCC is sticking its nose into this business at all. As Jerry Brito of the Mercatus Center and Adam Thierer of the Progress and Freedom Foundation recently pointed out, it’s not clear that the agency has any authority to do so. Not that that’s stopped it before: As Thierer notes, the FCC has a long history of overreach. This may simply be a way of flexing its regularity muscle as its defines—and perhaps expands—its territory under the Obama administration.

As it goes on, has it been necessary to meddle?  NO!! A lot of cool stuff has come from the competing cell companies since the iPhone’s inception. Let’s not stop now!

Post to Twitter

Tags: , ,