The major candidates all miss the real issues in the 2016 campaign. Both parties for the most part subscribe to the idea that the government must take away your liberties to "take care" of you. Authoritarians are rising on the Left and Right. Reject this!
The major candidates all miss the real issues in the 2016 campaign. Both parties for the most part subscribe to the idea that the government must take away your liberties to "take care" of you. Authoritarians are rising on the Left and Right. Reject this!
The major candidates all miss the real issues in the 2016 campaign. Both parties for the most part subscribe to the idea that the government must take away your liberties to "take care" of you. Authoritarians are rising on the Left and Right. Reject this!
Hello everybody and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
Today I'd like to make some comments about what I see is the big issue for the 2016 campaign.
Some have claimed that people vote from their heart.
Others argue we should vote from our head.
I'm convinced most people vote from their bellies.
That means that personal economic needs and perceptions of how to obtain them are what is most important to the average voter.
The welfare recipient looks for the maximum benefit and eagerly supports the politicians who promise the most.
This is not just about the poor, many of whom suffer as a consequence of bad government economic policy, but also the rich welfare recipients in the military-industrial complex, the medical industrial complex, the banking system, and many other forms of corporate welfare.
It also includes the benefits that the Federal Reserve generously passes out to its friends when bailouts are demanded by corporations too big to fail.
Foreign welfare is a significant part of the process as well.
Another group, which today is outnumbered by the recipients of the massive redistribution of wealth, seeks economic justice by arguing the case for free markets, sound money, and limited government with minimal taxation and regulations.
They also ask for conditions that allow those who generate wealth and are self-reliant to produce and take care of themselves.
Welfare redistribution in the U.S., now ongoing for nearly 100 years, has run its course as we face bankruptcy.
What Detroit, Puerto Rico, and many municipalities are facing is only the beginning.
The obvious failure of welfarism, corporatism, and inflation has created highly volatile conditions where the haves and have-nots are more at odds than ever.
Though ignored, free market economists have for a long time explained that a fiat monetary system inevitably leads to the destruction of the middle class.
The issue of income and wealth inequality will dominate the 2016 presidential election campaign.
As our country grows poorer, immigration, the Fed, and foreign military entanglements will not be the hottest issues that drive the campaigns.
Immigration's importance will reflect the economic concern for jobs and the bad economic conditions created by the Fed, government regulations, and taxation.
All political groups, from libertarian to socialists, agree on the obvious fact that the social and economic crisis we face is a consequence of resentment over the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer, and the middle class being wiped out.
There may be a general agreement on the apparent problem of income and wealth inequality, but there will be little agreement as to how the problems came about.
Therefore, the solutions will be manyfold.
One group will certainly argue that more government planning and interference in the economy and in our personal lives are what is needed.
Another group may argue that the answer will come merely by changing the managers of the system.
Neither side will have an understanding of the economic flaws we have been subjected to over the past century.
This lack of understanding and the fact that our country is getting poorer means we can expect the social and economic conflicts to continue to grow.
One of the biggest challenges to overcome in today's circumstances is for the people to understand the significant difference between the very wealthy so-called 1% who may have achieved this status by receiving government benefits and others who have become wealthy with effort and hard work and without government subsidies.
It will be difficult for a lot of people to accept that it is not wealth per se that is the problem.
It's the wealth that has been gained immorally by receiving government benefits that is the problem.
When wealth is created and earned in a free market, it naturally results in a large, well-to-do middle class.
This was certainly prevalent in this country for many years, but it has become steadily eroded in the past 45 years.
Others who argue for socialism will not admit that even in the socialist communist systems, there were always very rich politicians who lived well above the means of the average person.
Under those conditions, a huge number of poor persisted with a small middle class and overall a very much poorer society.
Can these two sides reconcile their differences in understanding why today's discrepancy between the rich and the poor is so prevalent and getting worse?
An attempt should be made to see if the causes can be agreed upon for the blight and poverty in the inner cities where the mantra of inequality is heard constantly and invoked while playing the race card.
An understanding of true poverty in the inner cities and throughout the country would require understanding the ill effects of drug laws, gun laws, how poverty is created by a welfare system run by a government, and politicians, the welfare mentality with a sense of dependency and the brainwashing of the government school system.
Accepting the principle that government aggression to redistribute wealth ought to be the answer is a tempting solution for many people.
To truly understand why there's poverty in the inner city and a dwindling middle class, one must understand monetary policy, artificially low interest rates, bailouts to the privileged class, and other mischief by the central bankers.
Accepting the notion that the government can freely use force while pretending it can help the poor and make sure that the rich are held in check by regulations and taxation will obviously not solve our problems.
That will only make things worse.
The motivation to solve this problem by simply taking from the rich, regardless of how the wealth was obtained, will only fuel the social conflict.
It will not encourage the productivity that is required to raise the standard of living of the general population.
Unfortunately, we live in an age where government benefits are passed out to the loudest and most aggressive special interest groups who are best organized and have the money to lobby for their particular interest.
Unfortunately, instead of changing the system, the demands for more material benefits will get much greater, coming from those who believe they have a right to be taken care of and it's the responsibility of the government to do so.
Under today's circumstances, it's a small minority that understands that money creation to pay the bills of the welfare state destroys wealth and pushes what's left into the hands of the few who are able to control the strings of government.
The victims of this process who are currently being ignored in this debate are those who produce and provide new jobs without any special benefits coming from the government.
And all they ask for is to regain their personal and economic liberty and assume total responsibility for all their needs.
This group, unfortunately, will not get a hearing from the politicians in 2016.
The welfare poor will compete aggressively with the corporate elites who benefit from corporate welfare, but both are using the same tools of demanding more favors from a government they want to control.
The military-industrial complex, along with many other special interests, is alive and well.
The political debate will be over who can reduce the discrepancy between rich and poor while ignoring the real cause of why our country is getting poorer and the size of the middle class is shrinking.
Sadly, the issue of true liberty will not be given serious consideration.
So far, the two candidates who are getting the most attention in the current presidential campaign are concentrating on this discrepancy in wealth distribution and are receiving a receptive ear from many potential voters.
Though both understand that the system is broken, the solutions are far from the same.
True Wisdom Not Pretense00:04:38
Bernie Sanders, a socialist running as a Democrat, attracts large crowds with his solution of expanding the role of government in sorting out the discrepancy that most people are now aware of.
He is quite willing to use the authoritarian governmental approach of taking from one group and giving it to another.
He has no concern about the principles of private property, free markets, or strictly limiting government in his rash promises.
Donald Trump is the Republican candidate who energizes large crowds with his philosophy of personally taking charge and offering magical cures for all our ailments.
Just like Sanders, he knows that the people are worried, angry, and are demanding changes quickly.
He offers a strongman strategy where his magical powers and edicts will make America great again.
The only problem is that both are willing to use government force to correct all the problems that were caused by the overuse and abuse of government force.
Both claim they know things that are not knowable by politicians who want to run the economy and our lives.
Neither one can know what is best for the personal lives of the people, nor do they know how to run an economy to satisfy the people's personal wishes.
Neither one looks to the principles of liberty to allow free individuals in a free society to solve the problems that the government has created by already interfering too much.
Ironically, what is not needed is the cockiness of a strong leader who somehow knows exactly how to run things, manage things, and order things according to his particular beliefs of interventionism in our social lives or in the economy.
What is needed is wisdom, not a pretense of knowledge that assumes the people must be taken care of by authoritarians in government because they won't take care of themselves.
The do-gooders must give the directions necessary to mold a society in a way that in their minds is necessary and fair to all or nothing will get done.
The authoritarian approach to government has been around for thousands of years.
The idea of liberty and allowing individuals to make their own decisions on how they want to live is a rather recent idea and tested in this country for only a short period of time.
It is not now being considered.
The demagogues appealing to a large number of frightened citizens with their wild promises are falling on receptive ears.
If there is not a better understanding of our dilemma, conditions will further deteriorate.
True wisdom is knowing exactly what governments cannot and should not do.
True wisdom is understanding how much governments cannot know.
It's impossible for politicians to know what is best for the individual.
They do not know how to run an economy, nor do they know what is best for other countries.
We could expect better results if our candidates would run on a platform of what they promised they won't do.
We should all be skeptical of the promises of material benefits coming from politicians looking for your vote.
Candidates who come across as quite confident in their promises are the ones least likely to deliver.
The confidence should be in the people, not the politicians or the government.
A free people living in a country that protects liberty will take care of themselves.
They will know what habits they enjoy and they will know exactly how to spend their own money without the government's onerous tax system and programs designed for the redistribution of wealth.
How can we accept the political system that gives us a government that notoriously steals, commits fraud, confiscates property, counterfeits money, initiates illegal wars, undermines liberty, and has no respect for our privacy?
A good president would admit he does not know what is best for you, nor does he have the moral authority to use force to get it for you.
Only a free people can solve the problems of poverty and constant wars.
We must strive for the protection of liberty so the people can make their own choices as to their habits, their religion, and how they can earn, keep, and spend their money.
Yes, it is true, a little more humility and wisdom from our politicians and a greater effort in guaranteeing liberty and equal justice under the law for all citizens would go a long way to solving our problems.