Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

A Wee Problem for the UK

johnm h Wrote: Sep 15, 2014 6:37 PM
Small is better because big is less accountable. Small can have all the economies of scale of the big by establishing free markets. It can have the lower costs of public goods by making them accountable and enforced on folks who share views, values, accents and tastes.
Finaally a conservative that gets the narrative right. God we're slow.
In response to:

Stiglitz vs. Krugman on Scotland

johnm h Wrote: Sep 15, 2014 11:17 AM
Let's make it siimple, small states have a better chance of creating the conditions for freedom under the rule of law hence the opportunities for prosperity and human flourishing. Those conditions are rare, have occured in the west only a half dozen times. But big states can't even preserve them, let alone create them. So good luck to the Scots.
In response to:

Max De Pree has the answer to Ferguson

johnm h Wrote: Sep 15, 2014 10:40 AM
Is 99% of the problems of alcoholism, drugs, dysfunction of indians living on reservations their fault or the result of putting them in reservations and providing all basic material needs with nothing expected in return. Those who wanted to left. There is a quick solution to making people responsible for their own decisions, make accountable for their own solutions. End welfare and all other liberal programs at all levels of government.
In response to:

Max De Pree has the answer to Ferguson

johnm h Wrote: Sep 15, 2014 9:48 AM
It cannot be instilled it results from living with the consequences of one’s own decisions. That is what destroyed it and that is what will bring it back. Then when we tell our kids something or expose them to ancient truths and morality, experience will reinforce it, otherwise it’s just talk and old outdated morality.
In response to:

Stiglitz vs. Krugman on Scotland

johnm h Wrote: Sep 15, 2014 9:40 AM
Yes there are few examples where a people goes from centralized stagnation to freedom, and those were all small. Singapore shook off British then Maylasian bureaucratic governance, ancient Greece was an oligarchy before freedom and human flourishing resulted then war centralized it again and it hasn't recovered since. Rome was a small republic and prospered because of the rule of law and trade, then it expanded and remains stagnant. More recently New Zealand went from stagnant dysfuncitonal welfare state to free market with the same good results. Big states don't. If we get our act together we may be the first. But I suspect we have to break apart as will Europe. Scotland will be a good test or a scary example. I'm glad my Hallidays left as well but there are a lot of Scots Irish hillbillys and red necks that aren't much different from the folks they left behind. They were hill billys then, were called crackers and red necks and not much was changed by immigration.
In response to:

Max De Pree has the answer to Ferguson

johnm h Wrote: Sep 15, 2014 7:44 AM
Star keeps getting better. Of course she is right, she always is. While it's easy to be right because the left is always so wrong, she brings personal insights that mean more. We can get depressed by just how bad things are, but it is amazing how fast all can turn around with the right policies. For instance Detroit and Chicago can in fact live with the rot of local and state government and still turn around if they had to spend their own money and received not a dime for education, welfare, roads, schools, etc. from the federal government. In spite of the Daly machine and the crime in Chicago, Chicago was a great city and a beautiful, because at the local level something of value must come out the other end or the machine will be replaced by another corrupt machine. Federal moneys changed that and there is no end to the depth of destruction corruption can cause with outside non accountable money.
In response to:

Stiglitz vs. Krugman on Scotland

johnm h Wrote: Sep 15, 2014 6:56 AM
In line with my comment below, I would add that if the Brits, the Spanish or any other large multi ethnic country wants to remain a unified nation state, it should pursue free market, non interventionist policies with emphasis on Hayekian rule of law and decentralized public goods. Large multiethnic diverse societies cannot be democratic and socialist, they must become totalitarian or break apart. We're on our way, and if Europe continues to try to unify fiscal and other public goods, it will drift toward German dominance and a harsh Germany at that.
In response to:

Stiglitz vs. Krugman on Scotland

johnm h Wrote: Sep 15, 2014 6:47 AM
There are economies of scale for private goods production and for for collective goods, i.e. government. For private goods the optimum size is the the whole world, so as long as Scotland pursues free trade it will enjoy them. Public goods in contrast depends on the good. The real costs in public goods is the decision making process and the fact that everyone has to consume the same good, whether they want more or less, different or not at all. In this case the economies of scale for output are nearly infinite, but the true economic costs grow with the extention of the market. The closer to the people and the more homogeneous the people the lower the economic costs, hence the economic arguements aganists are all short term costs of adjustment. Moreover, the Scottish left will soon discover that socialism in a small country shows it's negative impacts much sooner so that small countries are drawn to free market policies or they stanate and die.
In response to:

Mob Rule Economics

johnm h Wrote: Sep 13, 2014 1:36 PM
By mobilizing the mob.
In response to:

Mob Rule Economics

johnm h Wrote: Sep 13, 2014 1:33 PM
The point is it can't be shown to affect inflation. Inflation is driven by money and credit, not small relative prices changes of stuff..
Previous 11 - 20 Next