Houston Area Liberty Campaign

[Original article from BrainonBrett.com ]

So…I was asked to look into what I feel may have caused a good number of our industries to outsource their jobs overseas. I spent the last day or so reading and going through some statistics. I’ve come up with a couple of reasons and opinions that I feel shed some light in MY eyes as to why this trend has been inching up over the years to the point of rocketing out of control. The questions that seems to coincide with “Why?” are “Who’s to blame?” or “Are we not good enough?”

I think, in the end, we have to look at our country and ourselves, as citizens, at what our home has become. As I have preached to anyone that will listen, accountability is the key to success. Hands down. No matter what you do. Or what it is you want to do. It has to be the foundation to which you base your work ethic. Accountability builds integrity. Integrity gives you power. And, this will start a chain reaction of success beyond belief. I think somewhere along the line there has been enough people that, to me, stopped realizing or refusing to acknowledge how critical integrity plays in the workplace. Like I said we all have to shoulder some of the blame. Whether it’s us, as workers, or our government. So, until we realize that our country, as a whole, has placed us in this situation where our very way of life is threatened.

Read the rest of this entry »

 This is done with some marginal language, but it is clearly an attempt to reach the average novice with concepts that are rarely clear to the masses… This video has been removed from many different locations on You Tube and other websites, but if you see it, you’ll know why…. The “powers-that-be” surely don’t want the word getting out to any more receptive audiences!!!!

Additional reading/viewing:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6260646431723948415#
http://americanistbookstore.com/books/shadows-of-power-by-james-perloff/

By Benito Segovia

Newsweek, the quintessential mainstream media publication (not a compliment) embodying all things globalism and collectivism, recently published an article titled “The Triumphant Return of Hayek” by Ruchir Sharma. When this exciting headline popped up I was tickled but wary – determined to discover what twist, if any, the story held for the Austrian School and its leader Hayek.

To my delight the article correctly described the public’s growing criticism of Keynesian-backed policy and the growing favor of Austrian School ideas. Yet ultimately concluded that it was distortions of Keynesianism and monetarism that lead to the systematic failure of these policies.

“Keynes would probably never have supported big government deficits during boom times, such as those that led to our current debt crisis. Likewise, Friedman would probably not have backed the new Fed use of monetary policy as a tool to engineer expansion rather than merely cushion the pain in a downturns.”

Sharma also continues the national narrative that unchecked free markets and sound money caused the Great Depression. At least he points toward high-tax policy as a contributing factor.

“Faith in the market’s purging power served the U.S. well in the 19th century, when the economy emerged stronger after each recession, but was taken too far in the policy mix of tight money and high taxes that led to the Great Depression and the rise of the Keynesians.”

I’m disappointed that a more candid assessment of the Austrian School wasn’t given a lead role in this article but at least it’s entering into the mainstream discussion. As they say in show business; any publicity is good publicity.

Quantitative Easing, also known as QE2, involves the Federal Reserve printing 600 billion dollars by buying Treasury bonds from Goldman Sachs can be a little tough to understand for the layman. This brilliant cartoon does a great job explaining it for the rest of us. Viewer discretion advised: There is a little foul language.

By: John Carney via CNBC

Libertarians frustrated by what they view as the lack of engagement by arch-Keynesian Paul Krugman with their arguments have come up with a clever ploy: they’re promising to donate $100,000 to the Fresh Food Program ofFoodBankNYC.org if Krugman will debate one of their stars.

The idea is meant to bribe and shame Krugman into debating Robert Murphy, an economist trained in the Austrian school of economics.

Basically, if Krugman refuses to debate Murphy, it will be tantamount to depriving the FoodBank of $100,000. What good liberal would want that on his conscience?

To make the debate even more enticing, the proponents have promised to have it moderated by Ezra Klein, the Washington Post’s liberal policy-wonk blogger. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted by STEPHEN GANDEL via Time.com

What is the most likely cause today of civil unrest? Immigration. Gay Marriage. Abortion. The Results of Election Day. The Mosque at Ground Zero. Nope.

Try the Federal Reserve. November 3rd is when the Federal Reserve’s next policy committee meeting ends, and if you thought this was just another boring money meeting you would be wrong. It could be the most important meeting in Fed history, maybe. The US central bank is expected to announce its next move to boost the faltering economic recovery. To say there has been considerable debate and anxiety among Fed watchers about what the central bank should do would be an understatement. Chairman Ben Bernanke has indicated in recent speeches that the central bank plans to try to drive down already low-interest rates by buying up long-term bonds. A number of people both inside the Fed and out believe this is the wrong move. But one website seems to believe that Ben’s plan might actually lead to armed conflict. Last week, the blog, Zerohedge wrote, paraphrasing a top economic forecaster David Rosenberg, that it believed the Fed’s plan is not only moronic, but “positions US society one step closer to civil war if not worse.” Read the rest of this entry »

By John Tamny

The financial crisis of not long ago has not surprisingly generated a great deal of anguish within the electorate. Americans were and continue to be a skeptical lot when it comes to the competence of the various federal bureaucracies which dot the Washington, DC landscape. Despite their skepticism about the competence of regulators, they were still disappointed when those empowered to oversee our financial system were seemingly caught unware by a banking collapse.

Rightly or wrongly, the US Federal Reserve has become one of the biggest targets within the financial bureaucracy when it comes to public distrust, and as a result, its ongoing purpose is increasingly being questioned. Some in the political class seek greater congressional oversight of our central bank, while others, including Rep. Ron Paul, would like the Fed to be abolished altogether.

The Fed’s greatly reduced reputation naturally raises questions about why we have a central bank to begin with. Although the Fed presently engages in a wide array of activities, its adherents generally support its continued existence on three grounds: They expect it to manage inflation through manipulation of short-term interest rates; to issue a currency which facilitates exchange; and, most important, they see an essential role as “lender of last resort” to banks during periods of tight credit.

These Fed functions seem compelling at first glance, but given a careful rethink, it becomes apparent that much of what it does is either ineffective or superfluous, and could be handled much more skillfully outside this government-chartered monopoly. Contrary to the broadly held view that we need the Federal Reserve, logic says we’d be much better off absent a central bank that economist George Selgin terms “fundamentally destabilizing.” Read the rest of this entry »