Deficit spending means a debt owed to someone, whether it is owed to a foreign entity or to ourselves. Money borrowed must be repaid. Selling trillions of dollars in Treasury bonds to China or to anyone else means we are borrowing with the understanding that we will repay the debt. Ultimately, if the spending becomes too reckless, our lenders will begin to seriously question our ability to pay, and to express concern over the falling dollar with which they will be repaid. After all, what good is being repaid on a debt when what you are being repaid with is essentially worthless? Where Obamanomics is such a radical departure from Keynsianism is the size of the deficit – it is virtually inconceivable that it will ever be paid back. The rhetoric coming from the president and his administration that such spending and deficits are “unsustainable” and ”unacceptable” ignores the fact that they continue to spend and increase the deficit with even more programs and projects, all the while declaring that this is the most certain path to full recovery and “sustainable job growth,” etc., etc… It is all utter nonsense.

To be fair to Mr. Obama, those who blame him in full or in part for creating the “Obama Recession” are as foolhardy as their counterparts who blame Mr. Bush. One must also understand that had Mr. McCain been the current occupant of the White House, the situation would be very much the same because of the prevailing mentality among the political elite that only government is big enough to solve such dire economic problems. And, while the actions taken by both Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama have certainly contributed the worsening of the situation over the long term, neither one bears full blame for its cause. They do, however, deserve blame for failing to clearly see the best path toward a solution, which is letting the natural laws of economics and human nature work instead of propping up a bubble with fiat money and regulations aimed at benefiting the politically well-connected to the detriment of everyone else. Bad regulations and monetary policy brought us to this place, and more of the same is quite obviously not going to help. Whether the entities favored by the proposed new regulations and legislation are big Democrat donors or big Republican donors is immaterial. Those with money and access to power will benefit to the detriment of the rest of us, no matter how flowery the language of “hope” and “change.”

According to the AFP, Mr. Obama “stressed that the actions taken by his government had ‘helped to stem what could have been a disastrous situation for the economy,’ adding that ‘we are starting to see stabilization and indeed some improvement.’” Accordingly, one might be inclined to argue that ballooning the national debt to $12 trillion, and attempting to force passage of a national healthcare bill along with a Cap-and Trade tax bill piled atop of unfounded – and unfundable - government obligations already at $106 trillion is the actual disaster. Indeed, the vast majority of the blame for that unfundable debt of $106 trillion does not belong with Mr. Obama but, rather, with his predecessors going back to President Johnson. Regardless of who gets the blame, however, is the sad reality that the figure of $106 trillion is proof that these government obligations are inconceivable to the rational mind, and adding the current U.S. national debt of $12 trillion to this figure simply makes the further point that the government itself is insolvent, because even if every man, woman and child in this country were taxed at 100% for a decade, that amount could never be paid off. Hence, Mr. Obama defers to Mr. Bernanke’s strategy of monetizing the debt and massively inflating our currency in doing so – the epitome of Keynesian theory. Sure, the Treasury will be able to pay off the numerical figure of its’ trillions in debt bonds with “dollars” created out of thin air, but those dollars won’t be worth anything by the time that happens. Massive inflation only benefits the party who has to pay the debt. Everyone else suffers.  (Continued...)

President Obama once again demonstrated his utter lack of understanding of the basic principles of economics during a meeting with his economic advisors on Monday. He chooses to blindly follow the misguided and discredited theories of Lord Keynes, among others, given him by his advisors. It is also most unfortunate for this country that the entire cadre of the presidents economic advisory team seem incapable of objectively analyzing the Keynesian model that they are so attached to, for if they could only extricate themselves from this “third way” paradigm and experience a few moments of economic lucidity, it is highly possible that even they could begin to fully understand just how utterly disastrous Keynesianism has been for the global economy in general, and our economy in particular. Unfortunately, they ignore the continued warning signs that keep popping up and continue to dig the United States ever deeper into this economic black hole that threatens to suck the very life out of what remains of our economy, and will ultimately take what remains of our liberty with it.

Let me be clear: what we are presently witnessing in the ongoing economic crisis is the natural laws of economics giving their referendum on Keynes. The current national unemployment figure of 10.2% simply underscores the point. In short, Keynesian theory suggested what has been called a “third way,” not fully capitalism and not fully socialism. It sought a system where the government, both through the power of the central bank and intervention through regulation, legislation and manipulation would be able to bring about a condition of perpetual prosperity, an end to recessions and economic cycles of boom and bust, and end to the bubble economy. The problem with the theory is that the very controls and manipulations demanded by Keynesians to “grow” and “sustain” the economy are the very things responsible for the creation of the economic bubbles and the business cycle, precisely because these things violate the natural laws of economics. Mises, Rothbard, Hayek and others have proven this time and again. The natural laws of economics correlate with human thought and action, and these things are wholly incompatible with bureaucratized central planning boards and central banks fixing prices, wages and interests rates at values much different than those the free market would deem proper. Attempting to isolate these things from the reality of the marketplace in essence creates the bubbles that are bound to burst at some point because they are at odds with the market, with the decisions and choices producers and consumers make on a daily basis.

Keynesian theory has been the driving force behind the economic policies of the industrialized world since the early twentieth century. Keynes’ model economy was viewed as having evolved beyond capitalism, thus noted above as being a hybrid between capitalism and socialism. It advocates corporatism. It is therefore by its own admission decidedly not capitalism. Those who prefer to cast the blame for the current economic mess on unrestrained capitalism are flat out wrong and woefully uninformed, because there has been no unrestrained capitalism in the United States – ever. Sure, we came fairly close up until 1913; however, once the Federal Reserve Act and Income Tax Acts were passed and the Constitution amended through the ratification of the 16th Amendment, all hopes for true capitalism were indeed dashed.

Mr. Obama and his advisors like to remind us how they inherited this economic crisis from the previous administration. There is nothing untrue in that statement. However, for anyone, especially a well trained and educated economist, to lay the whole blame for this mess at the feet of the Bush Administration without taking into account the overwhelming number of far more important factors that are truly the root cause, is disingenuous, dishonest, and grossly insulting to those of us who have studied anything other than Keynes, as well as an affront to the common sense of anyone who takes the time to question the current scenario and really think it through. Those economists who regurgitate the official government talking points and try to put a positive spin on the current course of action undermine their own legitimacy in doing so. It is simply incredible that so many of these economic advisors are so quick to declare unrestrained laissez-faire capitalism the root cause of this crisis when they know full well that the prevailing Keynesian school of economic thought that has been driving economic policy for the better part of a century is itself specifically defined as being something that is not capitalism. There is far too much at stake to play semantics and talk out of both sides one’s mouth.  (Continued...)

Michael Moore the millionaire Marxist is at it again.  Everyone knew it was only a matter of time until he came out openly Marxist, and with his latest piece of pro-Marixst propaganda, Moore does not disappoint.   In the film, “Capitalism, a Love Story,” Moore seeks to illustrate how capitalism has failed and thus socialism is the only viable system by which a sensible and advanced people may prosper. Unfortunately for Moore it is clear from viewing many of his previous films that he doesn’t know what capitalism is. It is also clear that while Moore may well indeed have a true empathy for those financially less fortunate than himself, he has no intention of spreading his wealth around. Why? Because, in his own words, he is just like us. A recent interview with Larry King revealed the following exchange:

Moore: Who's got the money? And whoever has the money has the power. And right now, in America, tonight, Larry, the richest 1 percent have more financial wealth than the bottom 95 percent combined.

King: You're in that 1 percent, though?  (More...)

On March 18 in an almost perfectly orchestrated sequence of events that make conspiracy theorists like myself froth at the mouth, while the vast majority of Americans were obsessed with the feigned “outrage” by Congress over $165 million in bonuses paid out to AIG executives that they (Congress) themselves knew of and apparently approved in their passing of the co-called “stimulus” bill that not one of them read prior to voting on, a far more important and potentially catastrophic event took place almost without notice. Only a few patriots bothered to report it, and among those who did even fewer either bothered or were able to adequately and accurately explain it's meaning for us and for the future of our country.

What it means to say that the Fed's balance sheet assets will increase from $1.9 trillion to $4.5 trillion must be understood in the proper context, that being, that the neither the Fed nor the government has anything close to $4.5 trillion with which to purchase any assets. The reader will recall that the Treasury has been conducting auctions on a regular basis whereby it auctions off U.S. debt to whoever will buy it. And, just recently, Secretary of State Clinton made a special trip to China to assure them that the U.S. will make good on it's debts held by foreign entities and encourage them, particularly the Chinese, to continue to purchase U.S. debt. Considering that the U.S. government is in fact bankrupt, in order to embark on this bold new policy endeavor, the Fed will print $1 trillion dollars now, and certainly more later, with which it intends to purchase said “toxic assets.”

Through means of vastly increasing the amount of currency in circulation by printing it literally out of thin air, the dollar must necessarily become grossly devalued, its purchasing power will be greatly reduced and the unfortunate result will be hyperinflation of the kind mentioned in the examples above.

If allowed to continue, this policy will ultimately result in the total collapse of our monetary system, likely followed by a collapse of government. What will follow next is any body's guess. It is most unfortunate that those who currently wield political power so stubbornly cling to the same failed theories of interventionism that they predecessors also clung to. Indeed, at present how many times have we been told by those in Washington that because the current financial situation has deteriorated so rapidly that it is necessary to “change” capitalism in order to “save” it.

The fact of the matter is that we are in this current financial mess because they have already “changed” it. What was changed from the first half of the 20^th century was the almost universal adoption of a policy of active interventionism by western industrialized governments, based upon the misguided and now disproven theories of Keynes. Interventionism, it was posed, was to be neither true capitalism nor true totalitarianism, but rather, “as a third solution of the problem of society's economic organization, stands midway between the other two systems, and while retaining the advantages of both, avoids the disadvantages inherent in each.”³ In fact, all that interventionist theory has really accomplished is the mass deception free peoples, and the unsubstantiated and wholly unrealistic promises of “lasting prosperity” or “permanent” prosperity. An appeal to common sense would instantly reveal the impossibility of a permanently prosperous economy as the interventionists would define it.

In a very general sense, interventionism means government meddling or coercion upon the various aspects of the economy in order to effect specifically desired results. An example of a desired result is the buzz-word, “total employment,” sought by the governments of almost all industrialized nations whereby the government over-regulates and thereby influences various industries by a variety of means to “stimulate” the economy along a path of what it hopes to be a permanent state of growth, production and consumption. Yet what is missed by so many supposedly brilliant economic minds is the inescapable fact that wherever government intervenes, whether by passing mandatory “living wage” laws, price controls, or whatever, the immediate effect is to artificially raise the costs of production – and therefore raising the costs of the goods produced for consumption - above what the unhampered market (you and I) would wish to pay. If the price of the good becomes too high and consumers buy less of it, the costs of the producer increase further and ultimately end in higher unemployment. Thus, the means employed are entirely self-defeating relative to the intended goal. The law of unintended consequences thus manifests itself – what the interventionist policy sought was higher employment, but what resulted was higher unemployment.

Typically this result prompts even further interventionism on the part of the government as it seeks to correct the unintended consequence of the original policy. For example, in the case of price controls, the next move may be to decree that as the cost of the good to too high to attract consumers, then the price of the good will be fixed even lower. This still leaves high costs for the producer, who will be forced to either go out of business (because his revenues do not exceed his costs) or to seek redress from the government. Again, the typical response from government would likely be to fix the costs of those commodities employed in the production of the good to be produced. However, it becomes immediately apparent that the size and scope of the original policy has just been expanded instantly and exponentially, for in fixing the price of these commodities the government must continue fixing prices of others and mandating more and more controls over many aspects of the overall economy. Thus, interventionism, if not abandoned when the law of unintended consequences becomes apparent, must always lead to increased bureaucratic control incompatible with free market capitalism.

A worse form of interventionism, however, is the one that has been employed by the Federal Reserve since its creation in 1913: the policies of so-called “easy money.” The name is an irony in and of itself, for in the end there is nothing “easy” for those who suffer the results of massive credit expansion (creating money out of thin air), deficit spending, and inflationary monetary policy. Indeed, the fundamental underlying cause of the current fiscal crisis, and the thing that has enabled all of the other factors to come together to form this perfect economic storm that threatens to bring this nation and possibly the world to its knees is these misguided interventionist policies of massive credit expansion and inflation. And now, as the nation waits for results of an ill planned and mostly ineffective “stimulus” bill to be manifested, the Fed has been loaning money to banks, buying debt and printing money behind the scenes, almost unnoticed. What they do now, they do in relative obscurity, but the effects of their actions will certainly be felt in the years to come. With trillions upon trillions of dollars being newly created, printed, and injected into the financial system the short term effect may well be a temporary recovery. The effects of the massive inflation that will result have yet to be accurately estimated, as nothing on this scale has ever been attempted. The closest situation to ours was Weimar Germany, and the results, as we know, were not good. Inflation is bad policy to be sure. Just how bad it will ultimately be, and how devastating effects will be remain to be seen.