I come to you today to declare and warn you that we have a communist, red, socialist in our midst. I levy this most unfortunate charge after much consideration and research over the course of several years. Whether it is supporting international organizations, such as the IMF and the World Bank that were created to advance socialism throughout the world-- indeed these organizations were founded and shaped by a socialist and a communist so it is no wonder that these organizations help to promote world -wide socialism; the spirited defense of such organizations using well crafted attacks used by free market detractors, namely asymmetric information and perfect competition (he even had me fooled); allaying our concerns over these organization's growing powers saying that "... IOs are good because the only ones that have succeeded or will succeed will be in our net interest", but we have seen how this turned out; supporting the government gaining control over the internet through the FCC regulations ; his love for rock music and his well crafted support for ending the drug war; this man has been slowly advancing with Karl Marx through his long, corrupting march through America's institutions--to include this blog-- helping to corrupt the very foundation of our free society and our belief in the free market of those of us on this blog. This man is none other than MelMarx codename Melkor. This case will be laid out over the coming year/s.
"Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress in the arts and the sciences and a flourishing socialist culture in our land" We mean that as much as Chairman Mao did. We're all about diversity of opinion at RTP&GG.
ReplyDeleteHowever, a commie witch hunt will be a fun thing. Go get 'em Jeff!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI sure hope we don't mean this as much as Mao did as he made people wear dunce hats and shipped people off to prison camps and killed about 40-80 million people that disagreed with his views.
ReplyDeleteI make this charge in the spirit of jesting, but supporting and defending the IMF and World bank and other IO's does help advance the cause of socialism. It will take a very long post to make my point.
First off, the link to my argument that the most powerful IO that affects our lives everyday and is to our net interest, the WTO, you respond with a link to the European Court supporting carbon taxes. The ECJ is not the WTO. It isn't close. The only thing you show with this argument is that you're capable of hyperlinking URLs. Congratulations. Furthermore, given all the problems of the Euro-crisis, it's pretty sad if you're argument against it is a link to a ECJ decision over a suit brought to the ECJ about state sovereignty brought forward by airline industries and not the states themselves.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, I never supported FCC regulations over pricing schemes on the internet. Re-read my arguments, I stated both times that I disagreed with the government's decision, I argued that I thought there were better arguments for countering liberal arguments on the issue than grandiose conspiracy theories about Dems controlling your google searches. If citing evidence to support a claim, it's considered good form to read it beforehand. A gentleman would especially do so if he's arguing with the person who he's about to cite.
Third, instead of arguing that "leftists created these IO's 65 years ago so they must be left now" you should argue what their policies are now that provokes your ire. Then I will say what other things they do that help us, and then we will have dialogue. Your arguments, as they stand now, are on the verge of ad hominem (the weakest logically and creatively), with a tenuous link (at best) to a conclusion that by supporting long dead men I am now a Marxist.
You haven't proven anything or said anything particularly clever but I'm sure you thought you were both.
Melkor, maybe Jeff is just laying out the charges here and will flesh out the arguments in upcoming posts.
ReplyDeleteAs for asymetry of information, even Hayek supports state action to assist people in finding jobs that they would otherwise not find in their original condition (Road to Surfdom Ch 7). No one doubts that it exists, The debate is over the proper reaction that determines our economic affiliation.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that you are so irate must mean there is some truth in what I said...remember that I did this post in a spirit of jesting, so get hurt. I accept your criticism. This post is not meant to be an argument against any of your positions, but it is rather calling you out. Most of your arguments sound good.
ReplyDeleteI do think that the IMF and World Bank does help implement socialism around the world, but I will have to do a lot more research to form an articulate argument. A lot of what they say and their stated purposes do sound good and like they are based on free market principles: free trade etc. I think the fact that the intellectual founding fathers of these organizations were a Fabian Socialist and a Communist speaks volumes for these organizations, but take away this point and there is still a good case in support of my point: funding dictators, bailing out socialist nations etc. Even the modern day directors of the IMF like Khan Strauss are socialist. Keynes envisioned these organizations as evolving into a world central bank. Central banking is not compatible with free market principles. Much of the rational behind the IMF and WB is that central planning is good and the free market is not. And on the carbon tax airline issue, Nations have protested against it and oppose it, yet the airlines will still comply with them. A good book to read is "The Creature From Jekyll Island". I don't agree with some of it, but it is a good overview of central banking.
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/the-international-monetary-fund/
http://mises.org/daily/5326 a good article
There is a lot more to be said on these topics.
It was on July 1, 1944, just three weeks after the Allies had landed in Normandy, that the most significant intergovernmental conference of the century began. The conference took place at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, and it represented, in the main, the thinking of two individuals, Harry Dexter White and John Maynard Keynes. Both of these men had grave doubts about the beneficence of market processes and preferred to put their faith in the ability of national and international “managers” to coordinate the world’s economic affairs. And in 1944 White and Keynes were not alone in their views. As some 45 countries met to plan out the “new economic order,” there was consensus on the necessity for increased economic coordination and a general view that the international gold standard was undesirable because of the restraints it placed on a nation’s ability to pursue the “full employment” policies prescribed by the nouveau Keynesian wisdom.[1]
ReplyDeleteOften when a country has depleted its reserves, the IMF enters and offers loans which enable the inflating government to continue its folly by providing it with the funds to negate (temporarily) some of the consequences of the inflation. According to Henry Hazlitt: “If nations with ‘balance-of-payments’ problems did not have a quasi-charitable world government institution to fall back on and were obliged to resort to prudently managed private banks, domestic or foreign, to bail them out, they would be forced to make drastic reforms in their policies to obtain such loans. As it is, the IMF, in effect, encourages them to continue their socialist and inflationist course.”[11] The IMF thus facilitates inflationary policies (euphemistically called “full-employment policies”) in member nations by being a “safety net”—it is always there to bail out its profligate members with fresh funds.
There is no doubt that by rescuing LDC governments, the IMF has helped make possible the massive monetary inflation which has occurred and is still occurring in many of these countries. Even more important, it has allowed governments the world over to expropriate the wealth of their citizens more efficiently (through the hidden tax of inflation) while at the same time aggrandizing their own power. There is little doubt that the IMF is an influence for world-wide socialism.
However, the conditions imposed by the Fund are seldom free-market oriented. The Fund concentrates on “macro-policies,” such as fiscal and monetary policies or exchange rates, and pays little attention to fundamental issues like private property rights and freedom of enterprise.[20] Implicit in the Fund’s stated policy of “neutrality” with regard to national political decisions is a belief that with proper “macro-management” any economic system is viable, whether it be socialist or capitalist. Because the Fund does not advocate the true prerequisite for economic prosperity—a lawfully constrained government which respects private property—its record as an economic manager is rather poor. There is every reason to believe that in the absence of the IMF, private lenders would require conditions (in return for further loans) which would be at least as effective in promoting economic health for the LDC.[21]
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/the-international-monetary-fund/
ReplyDelete"""The IMF is seen by many within government (as well as banking and academic) circles as “the world’s master economic trouble-shooter,” and there is a growing call for an increased role for the Fund in world monetary and economic affairs.[25] More than 40 years after the Bretton Woods Conference, the same call continues to be echoed: “We need more international economic coordination.”
Yet the faith that governments around the world are ever willing to place in a supranational organization like the IMF seems ill-founded. After all, the IMF has failed to achieve its original goal of maintaining fixed exchange rates, it has failed to attain its subsequent goal of improving the balance of payments problems of LDCs, and it is currently failing to solve the world debt crisis. Moreover, its “successes” also are open to serious question. It has financed statist policies in LDCs, it has transferred billions of dollars from citizens of industrialized nations to Third World regimes—some of them despotic—and it has facilitated worldwide inflation.
Why, then, the widespread support for the IMF?[26] The reason is more straightforward than many of us would like to believe. When governments speak of the need for “increased economic coordination,” what they mean is that governments around the world want to better synchronize their inflationary monetary policies. Inflation is politically expedient for every government in our age. It temporarily stimulates economic activity and in so doing buys considerable political favor. Only later when the unpleasant effects appear rising prices, economic dis-coordination, consumed capital, and unemployment—does the inflation become a political liability. The illusive goal pursued by governments around the world is to reap the political benefits of inflation without paying its subsequent costs.
The IMF is seen as a means to achieve this goal of simultaneous world monetary expansion. As Hans F. Sennholz observes, the IMF represents the “spurious notion that the policy of inflation can be made to last indefinitely through cooperation of all member governments. It acts like a governmental cooperative with 146 members that tries to coordinate the inflationary policies of its members."[27] It is this vain pursuit that has sustained and nurtured the IMF throughout its history. [] """"
I will be making some post latter on that will show where Melmarx is wrong.
ReplyDelete