Here
is the issue of the Liberator Online that
you requested.
Please note: If this is an older issue, some of the hyperlinks
may not be active.
Enjoy!
And please tell your friends about the Liberator Online.
To be sure you get each new issue via email, subscribe
today.
|
In
This Issue:
Mexico's
major move towards drug decriminalization... Star-Spangled silliness...
Does government fail because "the right people" aren't
running things?... Gallup says 20% of Americans are (broadly speaking)
libertarian... And much more!
xxx
The
Liberator Online
Vol. 11, No. 10 | May 11, 2006
Circulation: 67,152 subscribers in over 100 countries.
The world's largest-circulation libertarian publication!
Published by the Advocates for Self-Government
Edited by James W. Harris | Email: james(a)TheAdvocates.org
...
"The
Advocates for Self-Government [is] bringing about a freer
world by discovering new libertarians, changing the political
map, and helping libertarians become powerful and persuasive
communicators."
-- The
Whole Ed Catalog |
Contents
PRESIDENT'S
CORNER
* How to
find millions of libertarians
WHAT'S
HAPPENING WITH THE ADVOCATE
* Alan Colmes boosts the World's Smallest
Political Quiz
* Advocates in Libertarian Party News
* Freedom Cruise
GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS, UNBELIEVABLE NEWS
* Mexico's
Bold Drug Decriminalization Move
* Is President
Bush Above the Law?
* Star-Spangled
Silliness
* QUICK
SHOTS:
Libertarian named #1 Tax Cutter in Congress...
PERSUASION
POWER POINT #202
*
"Are government failures due to the wrong
people running it?" by Michael Cloud
ASK
DR. RUWART
*
Three questions
about banking, gold and the Federal Reserve System
SOUNDBITES
FOR LIBERTY
*
Harry Browne, Henry David Thoreau, and Milton Friedman
...
PRODUCT
REVIEW
* HUGE savings on the "Best
of Bergland"!
...
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
 |
President's
Corner |
Dear friends,
A few days
ago I got this email from someone who had just taken our World's
Smallest Political Quiz:
"At
last, a place I fit. Not a left-wing Liberal nor a right-wing Conservative.
Didn't know there were organizations that supported this view. Thanks."
I love
hearing stories like that. (And I love that he included a $100 donation,
so that others could have that same experience!)
It shows
the importance of the World's Smallest Political Quiz. There are
millions of people out there who are libertarians or strongly libertarian-leaning,
but just don't know it. For these people, the Quiz can be a life-changing
revelation. And for libertarians, these people hold the possibility
of rapid growth for our movement.
This isn't
just theory. Last issue I mentioned that, in August 2000, the respected
polling organization Rasmussen Research gave our Quiz to just under
1,000 representative likely American voters. Sixteen percent scored
in the "Libertarian" sector. Other organizations -- including
Gallup and Pew -- have found similar results.
But here's
a shocker I didn't mention. The survey further found that, of those
16%, only TWO PERCENT used the word "libertarian" to describe
their political views.
That means
that millions of Americans who are mostly or entirely libertarian
in their beliefs don't realize there is a *name* for what they believe.
And they don't know there is a vast, fast-growing movement of organizations,
publications, and activists working to put their beliefs into effect.
What a
tragedy -- for them personally, and for a movement that desperately
could use the energy and enthusiasm of millions of new supporters.
That's
where the Quiz comes in. The Quiz is a powerful solution to this
problem.
When someone
scores Libertarian on the Quiz, they are immediately offered free
online resources to help them learn more about the ideas of liberty.
They are offered free information about the leading organizations
in the liberty movement. Also, they discover tools and techniques
to help them in turn take these ideas to their friends and associates
in the most effective ways possible.
It's a
proven program that works, 24 hours a day, opening minds and building
the liberty movement.
I'm not
talking about small numbers, either. Currently the Quiz is being
taken over 25,000 times every day! And that number keeps growing.
With your
help and support, we're building a powerful movement for liberty
that is changing the world. And that is good news indeed!
*
* *
Welcome
to 635 new Liberator Online subscribers this issue. Thanks
for joining our subscription "family" of over 67,000 liberty-loving
readers in more than 100 countries!
-- Sharon Harris, President | Email: sharon(a)TheAdvocates.org
PS: To learn more about the Advocates and our
work for liberty visit: www.TheAdvocates.org.
To learn more about libertarianism visit: www.Libertarianism.com
.
PPS:
David Bergland is a master libertarian communicator and writer.
Now, for a short time only, you can get a copy of the newly-revised
edition of his acclaimed book, Libertarianism In One Lesson
-- AND a CD recording of his wonderful speech, "Libertarianism
101" -- at HUGE SAVINGS!
Our
"Best of Bergland" package gives you Libertarianism
In One Lesson, widely considered the best short-and-sweet introduction
to libertarianism ever written. You also get the "Libertarianism
101" CD -- David's brilliant speech that draws on 20+ years
of outreach to explain how to persuade others about the benefits
of liberty.
The book
usually costs $12.50. The CD usually costs $10.00. That's a $22.50
value. Shipping adds another $4.50. Total: $27.00.
*** But
for this limited-time offer, we'll send you both the book and CD
for only $15.00 -- and we'll also throw in FREE SHIPPING. ***
You save
a whopping $12.00!
For
more details or to place your order, click here: http://www.theadvocates.org/liberator-online-special.html
Or see the Product Review at the end of this issue.
[Offer
good until May 24 2006.]
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
What's
Happening With The Advocates
* The Quiz and Alan Colmes: A prominent link to the World's
Smallest Political Quiz is on the front page of the Web site of
FOX TV and FOX radio news star Alan Colmes. Holmes is the most prominent
liberal TV/radio personality in America, and Hannity and Colmes
is the second-highest rated program on cable news television. Thanks,
Alan!
http://www.alan.com
* Advocates in LP News: The May issue of Libertarian Party
News, the official newspaper of America's third-largest political
party, featured an excellent article on effective libertarian outreach,
by Advocates Board member James W. Lark. The previous issue quoted
Advocates President Sharon Harris in a tribute to the late, great
Harry Browne, and also printed the address of the Advocates' Harry
Browne Memorial Web Page
(http://www.theadvocates.org/harry-browne.html).
Thanks, LP News!
* Freedom Cruise: It's
not too early to mark your calendar for the 2007 Freedom Cruise.
This event, the tenth annual, will take place from February 19-March
6, 2007. You'll sail from San Diego to Hawaii (and back!) on Holland
America's ms Zaandam. The event is organized by Ken Bisson of Freedom
Cruises. (This isn't an Advocates' event, but Ken is on our Board
of Directors, and libertarians who have been on past cruises rave
about them.) For more information, visit:
http://freedomcruises.biz/CRUISE2007.html
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
 |
Good
News,
Bad
News,
Unbelievable News |
By
James W. Harris
Mexico's Bold Drug Decriminalization Move
In
a dramatic move that shows crumbling support for the U.S.-driven
worldwide War on Drugs, Mexico came very close this past week to
passing perhaps the boldest drug reform bill in the world.
Passed
by the Mexican Congress, the bill would have decriminalized the
personal possession of small amounts of numerous currently-illegal
drugs. Possession of up to 25 milligrams of heroin; 5 grams of marijuana
(about four joints); 0.5 grams of cocaine (about 4 "lines");
and similar small amounts of other drugs would no longer have been
a crime. The sale of drugs, and possession of larger amounts, would
remain serious crimes.
This
reform would have put Mexico in the forefront of world drug reform,
joining the Netherlands and a few other countries in a far more
sensible and humane approach than the scorched-earth neo-Prohibitionist
"zero-tolerance" Drug War madness of the U.S.
Unfortunately,
Mexico's President Vicente Fox -- who has long expressed interest
in decriminalization, and who at first endorsed the bill -- refused
to sign it. Although he cited concerns that the bill was too radical,
critics say the real reason was enormous pressure from the U.S.
government.
Regardless,
the passage of the bill by the Mexican Congress is a sign of true
progress. Indeed, the only serious criticism of the bill, from a
libertarian perspective, is that it did not go nearly far enough
to deal with the worst problems caused by drug prohibition.
As
Ted Galen Carpenter of the libertarian Cato Institute points out:
"Ironically,
the legislation was only a modest step in the right direction. One
of the more odious features of the war on drugs around the world
is the practice of filling the jails with small-time (often recreational)
drug users. Mexican legislators merely proposed to end that cruel
folly in their country."
However,
notes Carpenter, the bill "did not get to the root of the growing
incidence of drug-related corruption and violence in Mexico.
"Both
problems have reached epidemic proportions. There have been numerous
cases of police personnel moonlighting as security forces for drug-trafficking
organizations. Prominent officials tasked with implementing anti-drug
laws have been caught taking bribes from drug kingpins...
"Violence
connected with the illegal-drug trade has been on the rise for several
years in Mexico. Such cities as Tijuana, Ciudad Juarez, and Nuevo
Laredo have been especially hard hit. Nearly a thousand people perished
in killings connected with the drug trade in 2005. Some Mexicans
now worry that their country is spiraling down into a maelstrom
of violence similar to that which afflicted Colombia during the
late 1980s and the 1990s.
"Most
of the corruption and violence is caused by the enormous black-market
premium in the illicit-drug trade. The risk factor involved in defying
the law means that drugs sell on the street for ten to twenty times
more than they would in a legal setting. An aggressive trafficking
organization can make tens -- or even hundreds -- of millions of
dollars a year. That huge financial lure attracts those people who
are most inclined to risk jail or death in a cutthroat trade --
in other words, the most ruthless and violence-prone elements."
Concludes
Carpenter:
"Decriminalizing
the possession of small quantities of drugs was a modest sign of
enlightenment. But Mexico (like other countries) needs to abandon
the entire prohibition model to produce truly meaningful benefits.
Unfortunately, given Washington's fanaticism on the subject, the
prospects for intelligent reform anytime soon are virtually nonexistent.
President Fox's capitulation to U.S. pressure demonstrates that
point all too well."
Still,
the issue is far from dead. Members of Mexico's Congress are talking
about overriding President Fox's veto, or redesigning the bill.
And London's prestigious Financial Times ended an editorial on the
matter with this simple declaration:
"[T]he
"drug war" is being lost. It is a bankrupt policy."
(Sources:
"Strung Out: Prohibition Stays Put South of the Border"
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6386
)
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/434/nomexico.shtml
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/995a60ea-de2e-11da-af29-0000779e2340.html)
xxx
President
Bush: Above the Law?
Just because Congress passes a bill, and President
Bush then signs it into U.S. law, doesn't mean that Bush has to
obey that law.
At least,
that's what President Bush says.
Since taking
office, Bush has quietly attached "signing statements"
to more than 750 laws that have been passed by Congress and signed
into law by him. These signing statements essentially say that if
Bush believes the laws unjustly restrict his powers as president,
he can simply and quietly ignore them.
Many
of the affected bills are major, far-reaching legislation. According
to the Boston Globe:
"Among
the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations,
affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told
about immigration services problems, "whistle-blower"
protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against
political interference in federally funded research."
In recent
months, Bush has declared he can ignore a federal law banning torture,
as well as requirements that he inform Congress about how he is
using the Patriot Act. He further claims he can ignore laws that
Congress passed to provide Congressional oversight over his own
actions.
"He
agrees to a compromise with members of Congress, and all of them
are there for a public bill-signing ceremony, but then he takes
back those compromises -- and more often than not, without the Congress
or the press or the public knowing what has happened," Christopher
Kelley, a Miami University of Ohio political science professor,
told the Boston Globe.
Many critics
charge Bush's "signing statements" strategy is part of
a deliberate plan to greatly expand the president's power beyond
that of the legislative and judicial branches. In doing so Bush
is tossing out the constitutional balance of powers, giving himself
de facto lawmaking powers, and making himself the ultimate judge
of whether or not a law is constitutional.
Some
more examples, from the Boston Globe:
* Bush
says that, because he is commander in chief, he can ignore any act
of Congress that seeks to regulate the military.
*
Bush signed several bills prohibiting U.S. troops from engaging
in combat in Colombia, where military advisors are involved in misbegotten
Drug War operations. But he later issued signing statements declaring
he didn't have to obey them.
* He has
argued he can ignore laws requiring him to report to Congress on
efforts to fund secret military operations.
* He says
he can ignore laws that prohibit the military from using intelligence
that was illegally collected in violation of the Fourth Amendment
-- even though such laws were passed in response to disclosures
about Bush's warrantless domestic spying program.
*
After the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, Bush signed a series of new
regulations for military prisons and numerous related matters --
then wrote a signing statement saying he could ignore them all.
Indeed,
at this point no one even knows which laws Bush will obey and which
ones he won't.
And then
there is the further question of whether he feels obligated to obey
laws passed *before* he became president.
As
David Golove, a New York University law professor and expert in
executive-power issues, told the Boston Globe: "Where
you have a president who is willing to declare vast quantities of
the legislation that is passed during his term unconstitutional,
it implies that he also thinks a very significant amount of the
other laws that were already on the books before he became president
are also unconstitutional."
By such
thinking, Golove said, Bush could, in essence, make the Constitution
simply "disappear."
Conservative
scholar Bruce Fein, a deputy attorney general in the Reagan administration,
has emerged as one of the strongest critics of this practice.
"This
is an attempt by the president to have the final word on his own
constitutional powers, which eliminates the checks and balances
that keep the country a democracy," Fein told the Globe.
"There is no way for an independent judiciary to check his
assertions of power, and Congress isn't doing it, either. So this
is moving us toward an unlimited executive power."
(Source:
"Bush Challenges Hundreds of Laws," by Charlie Savage,
Boston Globe http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/04/30/bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/)
xxx
Star-Spangled
Silliness
Anti-immigration
forces went ballistic recently about the hit song "Nuestro
Himno," a Spanish-language adaptation of "The Star-Spangled
Banner."
Indeed,
the weirdly fierce hysteria over the song even reached the White
House, where President Bush felt compelled to assert that "the
national anthem ought to be sung in English."
Some prominent
Congressional doofuses quickly went further. Senator Lamar Alexander
(R-TN), joined by a gaggle of other senators, introduced a nonbinding
resolution proclaiming that the national anthem, along with various
other patriotic statements and songs, "should be recited or
sung in English."
Amazingly,
but perhaps not surprisingly, the U.S. Senate quickly *passed* it
-- unanimously. A similar measure has been introduced in the House.
It's nice
to know that, even though Congress can't be troubled to deal with
out-of-control spending, a frightening federal assault on fundamental
civil liberties, and similar minor matters, they can always be counted
upon to take quick action on the really *important* issues.
Now, the
rest of the story.
It turns
out that there were no less than four Spanish translations of "The
Star-Spangled Banner" already on the U.S. State Department's
Web site when all this controversy erupted. Indeed, the U.S. government
published a Spanish version as far back as 1919. Versions in German,
French, Yiddish and other languages were commissioned by the government
decades ago and are available, too.
So it seems
that, for nearly a century, the U.S. government has had no trouble
at all with the idea of folks singing "The Star-Spangled Banner"
in other languages. Indeed, the government has funded it and encouraged
it.
Further,
there are eyewitness accounts that President Bush himself, while
running in 2000, sang "The Star-Spangled Banner" in Spanish
to woo Hispanic voters. Bush now denies that, saying his Spanish
is so poor he would be incapable of doing that. (Given his well-publicized
troubles with the English language, one is inclined to believe him.)
As for
Senator Lamar Alexander, a few years ago, when bilingual education
was more popular with voters, he was a strong opponent of "English
only" policies. Indeed, in 1995 he stated: "My dream is
that every child in America grows up learning two languages."
Just don't try *singing* in more than one of them, kids.
And what
about America's first national motto, still enshrined on the national
seal -- E Pluribus Unum? When are we going to do something about
that?
Finally,
someone needs to point out to our rulers that the Pledge of Allegiance
was written by an avowed socialist, Francis Bellamy, who said he
hoped it would help American schoolchildren embrace state socialism.
Resolutions, anyone?
Sources:
http://www.reason.com/links/links050806.shtml
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060504102609990019&ncid=NWS00010000000001
http://www.bergen.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUV FeXk2MDcmZmdiZWw3Zjd2cWVlRUV5eTY5MzI3MzkmeXJpcnk3ZjcxN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXky
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0605080165may08,1,1768147.story?coll=chi-opinionfront-hed
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo54.html
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1281
xxx
QUICK SHOTS...
* Libertarian Named
#1 Tax Cutter in Congress: Human
Events, a highly respected conservative publication, has named
libertarian Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) the top tax cutter in the
U.S. House of Representatives. Human Events noted that Congressman
Paul "is a co-sponsor... of a constitutional amendment to repeal
the Sixteenth amendment and end income, gift, and estate taxes.
Regularly pushes for tax cuts. Sponsor of bills to allow tax credits
for private school tuition, to permit tax deduction of college tuition,
and to stop all taxation of Social Security benefits. Opposes all
unconstitutional spending programs." Congratulations!
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2006/pr042606.htm
* Lots of Libertarians: "Gallup polls have consistently
found that 20 percent of Americans are neither liberal nor conservative
but libertarian, opposing the use of government either to "promote
traditional values" or to "do too many things that should
be left to individuals and businesses." That's only slightly
below the percentages for liberals and conservatives." -- "Where
There Is No Vision, the People Perish," David Boaz, Cato Institute.
* * *
"Good News, Bad News, Unbelievable News" is written by
Liberator Online editor James W. Harris. His articles have
appeared in numerous magazines and newspapers, and he has been a
Finalist for the Mencken Award, given by the Free Press Association
for "Outstanding Journalism in Support of Liberty."
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
 |
Persuasion
Power
Point
#202 |
Are Government
Failures the Result of the Wrong People Running It?
By Michael Cloud
* "Tonight's
news will show exactly who caused the failures of disaster relief
for Hurricane Katrina's victims."
*
"The reason we're not making more progress in Iraq is the Secretary
of Defense," says a critic. "We need to put someone in
charge who knows how to bring together Iraqi factions."
*
"We need no-nonsense, tough teachers and administrators in
our public schools to shore up poor math and science skills,"
says a candidate.
*
"We've got to get the right people in charge of Social Security
-- so we can secure it for Baby Boomers," says a talk radio
host.
These
claims and hundreds like them rest on one unchallenged premise:
that Big Government programs can regularly and reliably deliver
the positive results their backers promised.
But
Big Government programs repeatedly fail. Why? Their defenders respond:
1.
These programs fail because the wrong people are in charge.
2.
Big Government programs will succeed when we put the right people
in charge.
If
you believe this, you will focus your efforts on firing the incompetent
bums running Big Government programs -- and hiring competent, high-quality
leaders and managers to take their places.
Read
the opinions, discussions, and debates at Web sites and on blogs.
Listen to them on talk radio or cable TV. Most of the sound and
fury centers on why a person in charge of a Big Government program
is right or wrong for the job. Or why someone else has the right
stuff and could straighten things out.
That's
why most mainstream political debates focus on who's in charge.
But
what if it's not a people problem?
What
if it's the nature of government itself that causes the problems?
What if it's a design characteristic of government itself that causes
the problems -- and makes them unavoidable and unfixable? What if
"Why Government Doesn't Work" by Harry Browne is right?
Do
a thought experiment.
What
if YOU were in charge of the Federal Emergency Management Agency?
You're subject to the same laws, regulations, budget, constraints,
and political reality as the person currently holding the job. Can
YOU make this Big Government program work? Why or why not?
What
if the great Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises were alive -- and
put in charge of the Internal Revenue Service. He's subject to today's
mandates, laws, regulations, budget, constraints, and political
reality. Could Ludwig von Mises make the IRS collect the money while
NOT damaging lives -- or the economy?
What
if Charles Murray were put in charge of welfare? He's subject to
today's mandates, laws, regulations, budget, constraints, and political
reality. Could the author of Losing Ground make welfare
effective?
Pick
the brightest and wisest free market economist or libertarian to
run any Big Government program you choose. Remember that he's subject
to the nature of government, as well as today's mandates, laws,
regulations, budget, constraints, and political reality. Can HE
make Big Government work?
Of
course not.
Fire
burns, water's wet, and gravity doesn't play favorites.
Big
Government programs turn out the way they do because of the nature
of government.
There
are 5 Iron Laws of Big Government:
I.
Big Government Programs Don't Work.
II.
Big Government Programs often make things worse for the very people
they're intended to help.
III.
Big Government Programs create new problems.
IV.
Big Government Programs are costly and wasteful.
V.
Big Government Programs divert money and energy from positive, productive
uses.
So,
when you hear political debates that focus on who's in charge --
and who should be in charge -- bring the conversation to the real
cause of the repeated and massive failures: Big Government itself.
Persuasion
can simply be a matter of having the right conversation.
* * *
Michael Cloud is author of the acclaimed book Secrets
of Libertarian Persuasion available exclusively from the Advocates:
http://www.TheAdvocates.org/secrets.html.
In 2000, Michael was honored
with the Thomas Paine Award as the Most Persuasive Libertarian Communicator
in America.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
 |
Ask
Dr.
Ruwart |
Dr.
Mary Ruwart is a leading expert in libertarian communication. In
this column she offers short answers to real questions about libertarianism.
To submit questions to Dr. Ruwart, see end of column.
Banking
and Currency
QUESTION:
Your ideas of decentralized banking
with notes backed by gold may be sound libertarian philosophy, but
they are impractical and inefficient.
I have
three questions that I think you will be unable to answer without
conceding my point. The first is: "What gives gold intrinsic
value?"
My second
question is: "Under the gold-standard, would there not be deflation?
If not, why not?"
My third
and final question: "True or false: liquid currency facilitates
economic transactions and economic transactions bolster an economy.
A single recognized currency is most liquid, so, therefore, isn't
a central bank most efficient in terms of facilitating economic
growth?"
MY
SHORT ANSWER: Historically, decentralized
banking with notes backed by gold has worked quite well. For example,
prior to 1933, countries with few banking regulations, gold-backed
currencies, and no central bank had eight times fewer banking runs
in which depositors lost money (see Figure 9.1 from the 2003 edition
of my book, "Healing Our World," or G. Selgin's "Bank
Deregulation and Monetary Order" (New York: Routledge, 1996),
pp. 195-200). The United States had a wave of banking failures from
1921 to 1929, shortly after adoption of the Federal Reserve System.
American depositors lost an estimated $565 million. Meanwhile, across
the border, none of the less-regulated, decentralized Canadian banks
failed.
In response
to your first question, the value of anything, including gold, is
determined by supply and demand, and thus fluctuates as industrial
uses and personal preferences change. Historically, however, this
fluctuation has been moderate for gold, especially when compared
to easy-to-inflate paper currencies.
Of course,
commodities are not the only way to "back" currency. Some
groups, for example, use "Time Dollars" (www.timedollar.org),
which are also inflation-resistant.
In response
to your second question, currency deflation usually occurs when
the money supply's rate of growth is suddenly slowed by the Federal
Reserve or other central banks. Businesses have a more difficult
time borrowing money, expanding, and creating jobs. As job creation
slows, stops, or even reverses, wealth creation slows. As layoffs
occur, people begin selling their houses and other assets to survive.
Because fewer people can afford to buy, and some people must sell,
price deflation can also occur in real estate and other saleable
assets, like stocks. People can no longer afford luxuries, so businesses
that produce them start firing workers and the cycle begins again.
Currency deflation by central banks generally produce economic hardship
(e.g., the Great Depression).
Price deflation
that might occur under a gold standard would happen slowly as wealth
creation increased faster than gold was mined. We see this type
of price deflation today in computers. The computer that would have
cost $5000 a few years ago costs only 10% as much today and has
many more features. Wealth creation in computer engineering is occurring
faster than the increase in the money supply. Consequently, more
people have computers and their enhanced efficiency leads to even
more wealth creation (e.g., prosperity).
Historically,
price deflation has not been dramatic under a gold standard. As
the purchasing power of each ounce of gold increases, the profit
from working hard-to-mine gold deposits increases too. More gold
is mined and the price deflation is offset. Even if this didn't
happen, price deflation caused by increased wealth creation is economically
positive, not negative.
In response
to your third question, nations with multiple, gold-backed currencies
have historically used clearing houses to promote liquidity. Differences
in liquidity between the two systems you describe would be minimal.
The price
of potentially gaining a small advantage in liquidity is the inflation
that central banks invariably cause. Studies show that inflation
is highly detrimental to growth. All other things being equal, a
nation with a single paper currency, controlled by a central bank,
will experience less prosperity and growth than one with multiple,
commodity-backed currencies simply because the single paper currency
will inflate more rapidly.
* * *
Got questions? Dr. Ruwart has answers! If you'd
like answers to YOUR "tough questions" on libertarian
issues, email Dr. Ruwart at: ruwart(a)theAdvocates.org. Due to volume,
Dr. Ruwart can't personally acknowledge all emails. But we'll run
the best questions and answers in upcoming issues.
Dr. Ruwart's previous Liberator Online answers are archived
in searchable form at: http://www.TheAdvocates.org/ruwart/categories_list.php.
Dr. Ruwart's outstanding books Healing Our World and Short
Answers to the Tough Questions are available from the Advocates:
http://www.TheAdvocates.org/Merchant2/merchant.mvv.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
 |
Soundbites
for
Liberty |
CHOICE,
NOT FORCE: "Whatever
the issue, let freedom offer us a hundred choices, instead of having
government force one answer on everyone." -- Harry
Browne (1933-2006), Liberty A to Z: 872 Libertarian Soundbites
You Can Use Right Now
GET OUT OF THE WAY: "Government never furthered any enterprise
but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way." -- Henry
David Thoreau
THE VIRTUE OF MARKETS: "The great virtue of a free market
system is that it does not care what color people are; it does not
care what their religion is; it only cares whether they can produce
something you want to buy. It is the most effective system we have
discovered to enable people who hate one another to deal with one
another and help one another." --
Milton Freidman
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Product
Review
Special
Offer: Get a GREAT book and a WONDERFUL CD for only $15 -- and
we'll pay the shipping!
xxx
There are two great joys for libertarians. First,
libertarians love LEARNING about liberty. Second, libertarians
love SHARING the good news about liberty.
That's why we're making a special offer -- that combines both
aspects into one irresistible, money-saving package. We call it
"THE BEST OF BERGLAND."
We're offering David Bergland's acclaimed book, Libertarianism
In One Lesson. Many say it's the best introduction to libertarianism
ever written!
PLUS, we're offering the CD of David's brilliant speech at our
recent 20th Anniversary Celebration. It's entitled "Libertarianism
101" -- and it may be the best short explanation of how to
bring people to libertarianism.
Here's the money-saving part: Libertarianism
In One Lesson regularly costs $12.50. The "Libertarianism
101" CD usually costs $10.00. That's a $22.50 plus $4.50
shipping & handling -- a $27 value. But take advantage of
this special offer -- and the book and CD are yours for only $15!
PLUS: We'll pay the shipping. You save $12!
Here's what you get:
 *
Libertarianism In One Lesson
by David Bergland
(242
pages, trade-size paperback)
There are some questions people ALWAYS ask about liberty: What
exactly is libertarianism? Are libertarians conservative or liberal?
Where do libertarians stand on the issues? Does libertarianism
work in the "real world"?
In this ninth edition of Libertarianism In One Lesson,
David answers those questions with insight and candor. He lays
out the central premise of libertarianism -- "You own yourself"
-- and explains how that deceptively simple statement has a far-reaching
impact on your relationship with government.
He reveals exactly where libertarians stand on Social Security,
gun rights, the War on Drugs, poverty, the environment, taxes,
and terrorism. And he contrasts the conservative, liberal, and
libertarian positions on those issues.
*
"Libertarianism 101" by
David Bergland
(Audio
CD, approx. 50 minutes)
Are you looking for a way to explain the fundamentals of liberty
in a concise and persuasive way? In this 50-minute speech (and
follow-up audience questions), David Bergland shows how.
David offers lessons he learned from explaining libertarianism
to THOUSANDS of journalists, voters, and students during five
campaigns for public office -- including a run for the presidency
in 1984. He touches on common concerns about liberty; self-responsibility;
where libertarians fit on the political map; how to discuss controversial
issues; and roadblocks to clear thinking about government.
David has spent his life mastering the art of communications.
In this speech, he distills all that he's learned down to 50 minutes
of specific guidelines and language!
Libertarianism In One Lesson is the theory. "Libertarianism
101" is the practice. Put them together -- and you'll instantly
do a better job of understanding and promoting liberty!
"THE BEST OF BERGLAND"
is a $27 value! Order now and it's yours for only $15
(including shipping). Order today.
ORDERING
Via Web: To order this Liberator Online special, you can
visit:
http://www.theadvocates.org/liberator-online-special.html
This will take you to a special page at our online store where
this offer is featured. You can order via credit card from there
if you wish. Our site is credit card secure -- you can order with
the same confidence you'd feel at your local department store. While
there, you can browse our other libertarian products and order any
you wish.
You can also, of course, order by phone, mail or fax, from the address
below.
Your order helps support the essential work of the Advocates --
thank you!
[Offer good until May 24, 2006.]
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
See
you in two weeks! You can contact the Advocates at:
Regular Mail:
Advocates for Self Government
213 South Erwin Street
Cartersville, GA 30120-3513
Phone: 770-386-8372; for orders, 18800-932-1776
Fax: 770-386-8372
Email: info(a)TheAdvocates.org
Web site: http://www.TheAdvocates.org/
If you wish to subscribe, unsubscribe, or change your address
for receiving the Liberator Online, visit:
http://www.TheAdvocates.org/publications/liberator-online.html
We
never send the Liberator Online unsolicited. We
encourage you to forward the Liberator Online to interested
friends. And if you received this issue from a forward, please subscribe.
It's free!
To see previous issues, visit: http://www.theadvocates.org/liberator/archive.html
The Advocates for Self-Government is a non-profit educational
organization. Contributions to the Advocates are tax-deductible.
If you would like to support the world-changing work of the Advocates,
we *welcome* your donation. Please see: http://www.theadvocates.org/year-end-report-2005.html.
Or give us a call at 1-800-932-1776. Thank you!
"May it be to the world...to assume the blessings
and security of self-government." -- Thomas Jefferson, June
24, 1826.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
|
