Home » Posts tagged 'People'
Tag Archives: People
Albert Einstein: “A Foolish Faith In Authority Is The Worst Enemy Of The Truth” Washington’s Blog
Albert Einstein: “A Foolish Faith In Authority Is The Worst Enemy Of The Truth” Washington’s Blog.
Don’t Be Foolish
Albert Einstein said:
A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of the truth.
Indeed, scientists have shown that people will go to absurd lengths – and engage in mental gymnastics – in order to cling to their belief in what those in authority have said.
Part of the reason so many are so vulnerable to naive belief in authority is that we evolved in small tribes … and we assume that the super-elites are just like us.
In reality, there are millions of psychopaths in the world … and they are largely running D.C. and on Wall Street.
These people have no hesitation in lying to promote their goals.
The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs told Morley Safer of 60 Minutes and CBS News:
Look, if you think any American official is going to tell you the truth, then you’re stupid. Did you hear that? — stupid.
And studies show that the super-rich lie, cheat and steal more than the rest of us.
Who’s to Blame … Big Government or Big Business?
Conservatives tend to believe that the captains of industry are virtuous and that the government can’t be trusted.
Liberals tend to believe that government servants are virtuous and that corporations can’t be trusted.
But the truth is that psychopaths are psychopaths … whether they’re in the private sector or government.
And there is no such thing as representative government or free market capitalism anymore. Big corporate money has coopted the government; and ill-guided politicians have destroyed the free market.
Corrupt government agencies and officials and corrupt corporations and executives have become intertwined in a malignant, symbiotic relationship.
And they’re trying to grab more and more power and wealth every day.
Big Business Has Turned Into a Criminal Syndicate
Big banks and giant oil companies have more or less become criminal enterprises.
And conservatives are not amused.
Government Has Gone Rogue
If the government were accountable, then government corruption, deceit and wrongdoing would be held to a modest level.
But the government is not accountable.
When bad government policy leads to bad results, the government manipulates the data … instead of changing policy.
Government pumps out massive amounts of propaganda through the mainstream and “gatekeeper” alternative media, movies, video games, and other venues.
The government has launched a war on journalism, and censors and manipulates social media. And see this.
The massive NSA is spying on all of us – including government officials, reporters, and everyone else – as a way to crush dissent.
And people who criticize government policy or government officials may literally be labeled terrorists.
No wonder the American public has lost faith in the 2 party system. And see this.
People of faith shouldn’t be fooled into blindly deferring to government authority.
100 Years Ago: Why Bankers Created the Fed :: The Circle Bastiat
100 Years Ago: Why Bankers Created the Fed :: The Circle Bastiat.
Christopher Westley writes in today’s Mises Daily, on the Fed’s 100th birthday:
The boom and bust cycle, explained by the Austrian School in such detail, became worse and worse in the period leading up to 1913. And with the rise of Progressive Era spending on war and welfare, and with the pressure on banks to inflate to finance this activity, the boom and bust cycles worsened even more. If there was one saving grace about this period it would be that banks were forced to internalize their losses. When banks faced runs on their currencies, private financiers would bail them out. But this arrangement didn’t last, so when the losses grew, those financiers would secretly organize to reintroduce central banking to America, thus engineering an urgent need for a new “lender of last resort.” The result was the Federal Reserve.
This was the implicit socialization of the banking industry in the United States. People called the Federal Reserve Act the Currency Bill, because it was to create a bureaucracy that would assume the currency-creating duties of member banks.
It was like the Patriot Act, in that both were centralizing bills that were written years in advance by people who were waiting for the appropriate political environment in which to introduce them. It was like our current health care bills, in which cartelized firms in private industry wrote chunks of the legislation behind closed doors long before they were introduced in Congress.
SPECIAL BRIEFING: Attacking Fracking’s Achilles Heel — Economics
SPECIAL BRIEFING: Attacking Fracking’s Achilles Heel — Economics.
We’re being told that – thanks to technological advances like hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling – the US is undergoing an energy revolution, leading the US to become energy independent and huge economic benefits in communities where fracking is taking place.
WHEN: Monday, December 16 from 8-9:30 pm EST (5-6:30 pm PST)
WHERE: Online, please use the following link to view the live presentation: http://www.twitch.tv/postcarbonNote: You will need to sign in using Facebook or create a new justin.tv account in order to view. To create a new account go to:justin.tv/user/signup.
Divisions on the Left: Jeffrey Sachs Responds to Summers and Krugman | CYNICONOMICS
Divisions on the Left: Jeffrey Sachs Responds to Summers and Krugman | CYNICONOMICS.
Here’s an excerpt from a provocative article written by Jeffrey Sachs this week:
[I]t is very frustrating to read Paul Krugman again today write about our current stagnation with so little reflection on his part that his own preferred stimulus policies can’t solve the problem. It’s of course even worse to hear this from Larry Summers, who Krugman quotes favorably today. Summers was the architect of Obama’s economic policies during the first term, and now he tells us that the administration’s policies haven’t worked.
Both Summers and Krugman subscribed to Keynesianism, the idea that larger budget deficits and short-term stimulus after 2008 would revive the economy. Neither of them reflected on how the macroeconomic policies after 2008 should respond to the causes of the crisis. If they had, they might have recommended a very different strategy. And the debt-to-GDP ratio might not have doubled in the meantime as a result of the reliance on Keynesian stimulus policies.
…
Keynesians like to say that there is a savings glut (an excess of saving over investment). They try to remedy it by spurring consumption. This is a mistake. There is an investment shortfall, because the financial, regulatory, and policy barriers to high-return investments have not been addressed. America urgently needs investments in modernized infrastructure, advanced science and technology, and job skills appropriate for the 21st century.
Sachs then builds on his list of preferred supply-side policies.
I took the pointer from Arnold Kling and share his caution about Sachs’ enthusiasm for top-down solutions. That said, I’m always glad to see him weigh in on the big macro issues. He seems able to separate futile policies from those that could conceivably have a net positive effect.
Another perspective that’s similar (but not identical) to Sachs’ message is this:
Keynesians rely heavily on their notion of potential output, while failing to understand that the more important concept is sustainable output. In a credit boom, they ratchet up their potential output estimates roughly alongside observed GDP growth, even as this soars well above what’s truly sustainable. The difference is approximately the malinvestment that occurs in the boom.
And then in the bust, their flawed approach leads to an insistence that demand should be forced back to previous levels, which layers on still more malinvestment.
The real challenge, though, is to create an environment that’s conducive to the growth of sustainable output.
Update: Here’s yet another interesting perspective on Summers/Krugman that someone e-mailed me, this one from outside the U.S.: “Immorality Play – Deciphering Krugmanomics.”
We’re Paying for Bad Energy Policies | Candice Malcolm
We’re Paying for Bad Energy Policies | Candice Malcolm.
It’s tough competition for headline space in the media lately. Tax policy and energy price adjustments just don’t have the same appeal as a mayor smoking crack or secret cheques to cover fraudulent housing expenses.
However, the boring stuff has far more impact on our lives than the circus that follows the eccentric and scandal-plagued leaders in our country.
Not all scandals are equal.
The Ontario Liberal’s political decision to cancel gas plants in vote-heavy ridings, on the other hand, actually affects our bottom line. The consequences of the gas plant boondoggle are now coming to fruition, as evident in the drastic rate increase in our power bills starting on November 1st.
The price for off-peak power has increased by 7.5 per cent per kilowatt-hour, and 4 per cent during peak hours. Compare that to the rate of inflation, which is currently about 1.2 per cent. Our off-peak power rates — the time of day we were previously told to use energy to save money — has been hiked by more than six times the rate of inflation!
Political interference from the premier’s office is responsible for the exasperating price tag of the cancelled gas plant, which could actually exceed the estimated cost of $1.09 billion. The recent auditor general’s report states that $625 million of that tab will be passed on to electricity ratepayers in Ontario, who will foot the bill over the next 20 years.
And, as of November, we will fork over more of our after-tax income to the Ontario Power Generation.
Politics often boils down to concentrated benefits and diffused costs. The Liberals — who benefited significantly from cancelling these plants by saving at least four seats during an election where four seats really mattered — are hoping that no one will notice this rate increase.
When thirteen and a half million Ontario residents split the tab and pay it off over 20 years from both their tax bill and energy bill, it’s less noticeable. That is diffused costs. And that is how our politicians get away with such blatantly partisan, self-interested decision-making.
Unfortunately for this government, that isn’t the only factor contributing to rising energy prices in Ontario. The cancelled gas plants are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the mismanagement of the energy file.
The costly and ill-conceived Green Energy Act, which saw billions of taxpayer dollars go to corporate welfare and subsidies to foreign firms, also drives up costs for electricity ratepayers.
Meanwhile, taxpayers pay for a billion-dollar-a-year subsidy known as the Ontario Clean Energy Benefit, a 10 per cent discount to household energy bills to cover the skyrocketing price tag for green energy.
Yes, taxpayers subsidize both the production and the consumption of green energy.
It gets better. Our government also pays some green energy producers not to do anything at all. We learned earlier this fall that Ontario pays some of its wind turbine farmers not to produce energy.
Ronald Reagan must have been talking about Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli’s policies when he explained how government works: “If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”
Ontario taxpayers and ratepayers will be stuck for the tab for the incompetence and mismanagement of our energy ministry for years to come. We may not always see it in the news, but we certainly see it in our electricity bills and on our pay stubs.
Noam Chomsky Criticises Canada’s Energy Ambitions
Noam Chomsky Criticises Canada’s Energy Ambitions. (source)
Noam Chomsky, the famed linguist, philosopher, and political commentator has recently taken part in aninterview with the Guardian, to discuss Canadian Prime Minister Steven Harper’s exploitation of the Alberta tar sands in an effort to pursue economic development no matter the cost.
“It means taking every drop of hydrocarbon out of the ground, whether it’s shale gas in New Brunswick or tar sands in Alberta and trying to destroy the environment as fast as possible, with barely a question raised about what the world will look like as a result,” he said.
Referencing the indigenous Canadian’s opposition to the expansion plans at the Alberta tar sands, one of the most polluting and fastest growing sources of oil in the world, Chomsky said that “it is pretty ironic that the so-called ‘least advanced’ people are the ones taking the lead in trying to protect all of us, while the richest and most powerful among us are the ones who are trying to drive the society to destruction.”
Related article: U.S., Canada Lead World in Shale Gas Production
Recently, in response to an indigenous movement called ‘Idle No More’, which was set up to oppose Harper’s aggressive promotion and expansion of polluting tar sands projects and his disregard for the environment, armed Canadian police forces raided a camp of shale gas protestors in New Brunswick. A sign that the conflict between the government and environmentalists is becoming more heavy-handed.
Chomsky explained that the calls to save the environment are currently ineffective, and that they must be worded in a way that emphasises how fighting climate change is can improve people’s lives.
“If it’s a prophecy of doom, it will act as a dampener, and people’s reaction will be ok, I’ll enjoy myself for a couple of years while there’s still a chance. But as a call to action, it can be energising. Like, do you want your children, and grandchildren, to have a decent life?”
Related article: Canada and China Deepen Cooperation but Potential Roadblocks Loom
He suggests that mass transportation, localised agriculture, and higher energy efficiency are easy ways to reduce energy consumption and therefore reduce emissions, giving an example that it is much better for an individual, and the environment, to spend 10 minutes on the underground travelling across a city, than an hour stuck in traffic on the surface.
One of the greatest foes of climate change, according to Chomsky, are the markets. “Markets are lethal, if only because of ignoring externalities, the impacts of their transactions on the environment. When you turn to energy production, in market exchanges each participant is asking what can I gain from it? You don’t ask what are the costs to others. In this case the cost to others is the destruction of the environment. So the externalities are not trivial.”
After the 2008 financial crisis banks were able to ignore free market systems and ask the government to bail them out, unfortunately “in the case of the environment there’s no one to bail it out,” and it is fast approaching a major crisis point.
By. James Burgess of Oilprice.com
Related articles
- Chomsky slams tar sands and fracking plans (theguardian.com)
- Noam Chomsky: Canada on Fast-Speed Race ‘to Destroy the Environment’ (commondreams.org)
A Baby-Boomer’s Apology: “What Were We Thinking?” | Zero Hedge
A Baby-Boomer’s Apology: “What Were We Thinking?” | Zero Hedge.
Related articles
- Baby Boomers (woody452.wordpress.com)
A Brief Visual History Of US Military Interventions | Zero Hedge
A Brief Visual History Of US Military Interventions | Zero Hedge.
Related articles
- “Intervention” (thecosmicsandbar.wordpress.com)
- Germany Speaks Up Against Military Intervention in Syria (novinite.com)
- Yoder says no to military intervention in Syria (kansascity.com)
- China Warns Against Syria Intervention (voanews.com)
- Western Military Intervention in Syria Could Be a Warning to Egypt, Says Estonian Experts (news.err.ee)