An Important Misconception among Central Planners

An important misconception among proponents of central planning is that value is objective. In the light of common sense and daily experience, it's difficult to believe that this misconception is held by accident. However, proponents of central planning, in order to promote their various economic schemes, must adhere to that belief. The manipulation of the money supply and interest rates, legal tender laws, protectionist tariffs, price controls such as minimum wage laws, wealth redistribution, the "just compensation" which is used to justify the theft called eminent domain and all other economic machinations of central planners hinge on the belief that value is something which can be fixed for all people, in all places, at all times and in all situations by simply regulating price.

Attempting to determine value by setting the price is putting the cart before the horse. Price is determined by value, not the other way around and value is subjective. Value simply cannot be fixed.

The value of every resource is different for every man. There are those who would pay thousands of dollars for a pair of shoes. I wince at paying more than twenty five bucks. You might pay eighty-thousand dollars for a Corvette. While your neighbor wouldn't give a plug nickel for a GM product. Some folks won't touch a can of Spam, but they'll actually pay for a can of tuna fish. Some people will paint their own homes while I will gladly fork over hundreds of dollars for someone else to do it. Bob will pay to have ants exterminated, but Chuck will buy ants for his ant farm.

The value of every resource is different in different places. This one should be obvious. The less of a resource there is in a particular location relative to its demand, the more valuable it will be there. Likewise, sand is as cheap in the desert as lies are on a politician's tongue.

The value of every resource is different at different times. Improvements in technology have drastically increased the production of goods and services. The increase in supply makes those goods less valuable today than they were years ago. The value of produce is still effected by the seasons, but improvements in horticulture and transportation have lessened those differences considerably. By the same token, demand for things like typewriters has shrunken to where they are practically worthless. Keep that typewriter stored for five-hundred years and it might be worth a small fortune.

The value of every resource is different in different situations. Water is typically less valuable than diamonds, but a man dying of thirst will most likely give up his precious gems for a glass of water. Air is free, but a man with a low tire will still put quarters in the compressor at the gas station and a SCUBA diver will pay to have his tanks filled with the stuff.

The fact that value cannot simply be fixed could not be more obvious.

Manipulating prices or regulating them by force always results in distorting the market for the related goods and services. The supply and demand for goods and services is constantly seeking, but never finding perfect equilibrium. Picture it as a balance beam with supply on the left end and demand on the right. If the supply end gets too heavy you have a glut. If the demand end gets too heavy, you have a shortage. Price works as the natural fulcrum on which the beam rests preventing the beam from becoming too far out of balance. When government attempts to fix prices, three problems immediately present themselves.

One is that supply and demand are in constant flux. Very seldom do the two remain in equilibrium long enough for the price to catch up and put the beam in perfect balance. Therefor price must have the freedom to float as fast as the market requires.

The second is that the price scale itself is, for all practical purposes, infinite in length both positively and negatively with zero somewhere in the middle.

The third is that the measure used to determine the price is not permanently anchored either. Using the supply and demand for gold as our example, and the price scale measured in Federal Reserve Notes, it's easy to see how manipulation of the money supply will disrupt the necessary function of the price fulcrum. Even if we could eliminate that problem, we still have the problem of the infinite length of the scale on both sides of zero. Asbestos once had a positive value - people paid for it. After it was proclaimed that asbestos was a health hazard, its value went negative - people paid to have it removed. Even if we could somehow resolve those two, price fixing still runs into the problem of supply and demand being in perpetual motion. Without the price fulcrum allowed to float naturally with changes in supply and demand our balance beam will spend most of its time dangerously tilted toward either glut or shortage.

Perfect balance is Utopian. There are simply too many factors as variables for economic Nirvana to be a reality. The best we can do is use a measuring scale, which moves very slowly and is very difficult to manipulate, (like gold), on which the price fulcrum can move, and then free the price fulcrum from its government shackles so that it can react to the market as quickly as it possible.

GM Introduces the car for the 2010 depression -

The all new Chevrolet Descent.

At GM we're learning from our successes as well as our mistakes. Our slightly smaller engineering team started the Descent from a clean slate. They then compiled two lists of design elements and features, both positive and negative and carefully weighed them against such factors as whether or not consumers would value them and could afford them, and such as safety, durability, simplicity and ease of maintenance.

Exotic light weight materials which disintegrate on impact requiring high tech devices like air bags were removed and replaced with strong and inexpensive steel. Components which could not easily and cost effectively be repaired by the average person using a standard Sears 64 Piece tool set, were also ruled out. This eliminated the computer which governed everything from the stereo and door locks to the electronic fuel control and ABS brakes. In fact, all of the automated systems were removed. Our highly skilled team of engineers was even able to find a way to replace the power windows with an ingenious crank handle system conveniently located on the inside of the door just below the window,... and those hard to get to and expensive to replace quartz halogen headlights? On the all new Chevrolet Descent, we've replaced those with sealed beam headlights. Just a few turns of a #2 Phillip's head screwdriver and a quick pull on the three prong plug and you're ready to reinstall and hit the road.

The Descent's engine is a 170 horse power cast iron straight six cylinder engineered with durability and simplicity in mind. We've installed a fuel efficient two barrel carburetor, which can easily be rebuilt in an afternoon while watching the game and downing a few cold ones, (alleviating those headaches caused when the $700 electronic fuel computer leaves you stranded
and calling a tow truck.)

But the best feature of the Chevrolet Descent is the price. By simplifying and standardizing the components and eschewing all of the other superfluous encumbrances
mandated by our fascist government,
(and hiring employees who will actually work for less than
70 bucks an hour),
we are able to bring you the all new
Chevrolet Descent for only

$4995

The 2010 Chevrolet Descent
designed for today's depression era family,...

... rolling back almost fifty years of mistakes.
(Now if we can just get the government to roll back a hundred of them.)

Rights 101

I believe the most important tool for any task is knowledge. Without knowledge, the ability to successfully complete any task is only guesswork, trial and error, and luck. This includes the arduous task of defending rights.

There are two main factors responsible for the constant struggle of defending rights. One is human nature. Mankind has a built in inclination to obtain that which he wants and needs for the least possible amount of personal effort. This attitude is generally negatively referred to as laziness, however the inclination is morally neutral and produces both positive and negative consequences depending on the actions employed as the means to those ends. To some, this means fitting their concept of rights to suit their needs. The second factor is the nebulous and subjective definitions which people have in regard to rights. People will purposely or subconsciously make their definition of rights elastic to suit their desires. Others, without an objective, consistent concept of rights, are simply easily misled.

I have three dictionaries in the house. My favorite is the oldest one. (I would suggest that every home be equipped with a dictionary that is at least thirty years old.) In them, they attribute several meanings to the noun "right" but as it would be used pertaining to the concept of rights, they tend beat around the bush and don't get around to the meat of the word and the attributes which would separate it from "privilege."

Coming to an understanding of a correct and consistent concept of rights took time for most of us. And it's easier to have such an understanding than it is to relate that understanding to others in a concise manner.

That said, I'd like you to consider taking the time and effort to formulate a definition of rights which is correct, objective, consistently applicable and concise.

The question is, "What are rights?" I believe the following questions will assist in formulating the answer.


From whence do rights come?


To whom do rights belong?


What human actions can be applied to rights? (Or what can one human do in regard to rights, such as respect, violate, waive, transfer, defend...)


What human actions cannot be applied to rights?

To what do rights apply?


What is the difference between a right and a privilege?


Why is a concept of rights necessary?



right(s): n,

My own thoughts on these are;

From whence do rights come? I am a Christian, therefore my answer is theistic in nature. God granted mankind individual rights and is also the only one who can take them away. They are part of His gift of grace which sustains our every breath of life. They exist as part of nature and act in harmony with the laws of nature just as surely as the laws of physics. For the non-theist, consider them as part and parcel of the equilibrium of the natural world.

To whom do rights belong? Rights belong to individual human beings. They do not belong to groups of human beings or plants or animals or society or the Earth.

What human actions can be applied to rights? People can own rights, exercise them, defend them, respect them, transfer them, waive them, abdicate them or violate them, just to name a few.

What human actions cannot be applied to rights? This question is, in my opinion, more important than the last. People cannot grant rights or take them away. They are the inherent property of each individual regardless of his ability to exercise them due to natural limitations or the degree to which they are violated. I believe this is essential to rights for if they can be granted or taken away by men then they are not rights at all, rather they are privileges.

To what do rights apply? Rights are applicable to every form of human interaction. They have to do with what individuals may and may not do, not with what they can and cannot. They do not apply to God who, as creator of all, can snuff out the whole lot of us and justly so. They do not apply to nature. plants and animals do not have rights, nor can they violate your rights, neither can gravity, lightening, hurricanes, floods, or any other natural circumstances which deprive us of our ability to exercise our rights. We are at the mercy of God and nature. The loss of ones rights due to thirst, drowning, starvation, cancer, lightening strike, etc., does not constitute a violation thereof. Only human beings can have rights. Only human beings can violate them.

This brings us to the very important distinction between rights and privileges. Privileges can be granted and taken away by human beings. Privilege is a transfer of the exercise of a right from one individual to another and can also be granted to groups of individuals from the individual members of another. However, legitimate privilege can only be granted by the owner of the right associated with that privilege. Illegitimate privilege is when a third party, such as government by granting privileges, thus violating the rights of one individual, or group, for the benefit of others. A second important distinction is that privilege can be conditional. You may give me the privilege of using your pencil, so long as I don't write dirty words with it and I bring it back sharp. You may use the government's parks, schools and roads so long as you don't bring alcohol or glass containers, don't paint your name on the buildings, wear your seat belts, don't exceed the posted limits, pick up your pet waste, don't bring your defensive weapons and be home before curfew. Rights are absolute and never conditional. Conditions placed on the exercise of rights are violations of those rights regardless of their extent or good intentions.

What are rights? They are the fulcrum of equal justice, the balance of each individual's life, liberty and property against violations by all other individuals. I may not steal from you because you may not steal from me. I may not take your life, because you may not take mine. You may not enslave me, because I may not enslave you. You may not defraud me, because I may not defraud you. All the good intentions in the world, regardless of the number of individuals or governments you can get to back these violations of rights will never legitimize them.

See also this article by Robert Higgs:
http://www.fee.org/publications/the-freeman/article.asp?aid=1088

Please send your replies to:

http://bryandmorton.blogspot.com/2008/03/rights-101.html

Peace, freedom, justice and prosperity,

Bryan Morton

The Physical Laws of Economics

Economies and trade are natural occurrences. Like everything in nature, (created by God), the world's economy is in a constant state of flux while simultaneously seeking equilibrium. The natural laws of economics, like all natural laws, such as those dictated by physics, are laws because they are not variables. They are fixed and unchangeable. There's nothing man can do to permanently alter the balance they seek, but we can, through an expenditure of force, temporarily effect the balance. However, since the force required to effect the balance can never be sustained indefinitely against the natural equilibrium seeking forces, there is always an equal and opposite negative reaction, or in the case of economics, and equal and opposite cost. It is very important to remember that value is subjective and that supply and demand are not constants. It is, therefore impossible to regulate them by centralized planning.

A Few Examples:

Price Controls; The government's attempt at fixing the market price for a good or service above or below its naturally fluctuating value. Not long after price controls are put in place, that portion of the economy is knocked artificially out of balance and the natural economic laws of supply and demand, etc., begin to seek equilibrium. Prices fixed above or below the natural value of goods and services will disrupt the balance of supply and demand achieved through pricing flexibility. Additionally, black markets appear offering them at above or below the fixed price. Minimum wage laws and their unintended consequences are a great example of this in action.

Prohibition; The government's attempt to legally forbid trade of certain goods or services. The natural result is scarcity which drives up the price and provides the incentive to trade them on the black market. Prohibition has never achieved its stated goal and never will.

Professional licensing; The stated goal is consumer protection. That said, it seems odd that it's always the providers who cry for professional licensing, not the consumers. Here again, the attempt is thwarted by the economy's natural forces. Licensed goods and services become more scarce. The providers, with less competition to worry about, decrease quality and raise prices, again creating fertile ground for black markets.

Time is the key. An economy left alone in its natural state, (absolute free trade), will fluctuate with supply, demand and quality. The natural economy has a built in correction system which reacts almost instantly on each individual transaction, lessening the time involved in re-establishing the balance as compared with governmental meddling and tinkering which can delay market signals and makes the inevitable oscillation toward the natural correction longer and more severe.

Think of the economy as a physical object, like an aircraft. In its natural state it is on the ground and stationary. The four forces which act upon an aircraft are weight, lift, thrust and drag. Weight and drag can be temporarily overcome through force in the form of the expenditure of fuel. However, the more altitude and velocity one wished to achieve, the greater the fuel expenditure and the aircraft will exhaust its fuel supply. There's an aviation adage that landing a plane is the hardest part of flying. To the contrary, landing is the simplest part. All one has to do let go of everything and the plane will eventually find the ground all by itself. Landing a plane safely? That's a whole other story, but obviously the safest place where there's the least possible chance of disaster was on the ground where you started. The "altitude" and "velocity" of the economy can also be increased with quickly apparent benefits, but like the aircraft it will eventually have to come to rest back on the ground. And what of the fuel consumed for its temporary trip aloft? In economic terms, that's called wealth and to keep the economic aircraft moving high and fast, unfortunately burns wealth at a greater rate than it is created. At some point the foolish attempt to usurp the natural laws of economics must be paid for with an equal and opposite reaction. Activities, which artificially hold an economic situation aloft for too long, will crash.

I guess that's why politicians and socialists are so enamored with space travel. Vanguard I, the oldest manufactured object still in orbit was launched on March 17, 1958. The satellite itself, of course, is smaller than a basketball and weighs less than five pounds. It stopped transmitting in 1964. But even with the massive expenditure of time and energy to send it into orbit, it cannot break the physical laws which dictate its actions. Vanguard I will eventually succumb to gravity, if not on this Island Earth, on some distant planet.