Sunday, January 24, 2010

Thoughts about government intervention

By Mat McClain

It is baffling to listen to and read what proponents of government intervention into the market say. Take Medicare for example, the interventionist points out that vast numbers of people are satisfied with their coverage. What they fail to address is that medical care was cheaper and more accessible before government intervened in the market place not to mention that the program is insolvent.

Talking about prosperity is mute in a debt system. In the current fractional reserve lending system that has been evolving since 1913, bankruptcies are inevitable, even designed by the arbitrary availability of credit. Until commodity backed currency is restored and replaces credit, governments will continue to weaken peoples wealth. The laborer is the one most harmed by an inflated currency. The lenders and those close to them are the ones who are most enriched.

The problems of high taxes and high unemployment are created in a bi partisan way politically. A sound monetary system backed by a commodity, preferably gold, would serve as a way to tie the hands of the political class and promote a greater availability of scarce resources that have alternative uses. Some, like Webster Tarpley, would argue that there has never been such a thing as a completely free market. It is hard to dispute that claim. It is in mankind's nature to gain power and steal from weaker people. That is why Constitutional limits on government are best when followed.

Finally, since there are no free markets today, only regulated ones, giving the free market a chance is the logical conclusion. Trade agreements like NAFTA, CAFTA and GATT are misnamed as 'Free Trade Agreements'. They are nothing more than mercantilist agreements that attempt to bind members to global regulations and erode sovereignty.


Post a Comment

<< Home