Austrian economics is scientific; Keynesians are evil

Keynesians call te economic hypothesis of John Maynard Keynes scientific, and deounce the Austrian school for not being scientific, because Keynes came up with formulas (which fail spectacularly, btw) whereas the followers of Menger, Mises, Hayek etc. do not bother with the error that the behavior of any single person can be encapsulated in flash formulas, so do don’t even try to do that with entire populations. Yet the Austrian scholastics did predict every single economic crash of the past century or so (the Skyscraper curse by Mark Thornton, available for free at http://mises.org)
The definition of science is to make predictions, based on theory. If those predictions prove correct, the theory has been scientifically validated.
If Keynesian econonists can predict the downturns, they are criminals that purposely cause large scale economic misery. It’s been sufficiently demonstrated that the economic crises like the great depression of 1929, and the crash of 2008 were caused by the Fed’s Keynesian policies. So either economic (monetary, fiscal) policy comes to an end, or it gets reworked and the concept of national money goes out the window. I believe Hayek wrote about the denationalization of money?

We owe it to ourselves; only we can defend ourselves against politics, don’t expect an MP to do so; they do not represent you, nor do they habe your best interests at heart.

Advertisements

Dividendtaks et al

Afschaffen van dividendtaks zal er toch zeker toe leiden, dat de Haagse junta minder geld gaat uitgeven (ipv dat te compenseren met andere vormen van diefstal). Wacht es even: “inkomstenmeevallers” worden ook niet terugbetaald aan het volk, maar de geplande uitgaven worden gewoon verhoogd. Tekenend voor het ravijn welke de politiek heeft gegraven tussen zichzelf en de burger, (in dienst van wie zij horen te staan, maar tegenover wie ze maar al te vaak vijandig staan).

Hitler the progressive

“Hitler was not a real socialist!”
Ugh. If your darling ideology produces such despicable outcomes, as Nazism, change ideology already!
The only way amyone can claim that Hitler was not a real socialist, is because Hitler went beyond classical socialism.

Classical socialism
Means putting the means of production in the hands of society (which cannot be trusted to keep it’s own pants up, and so needs the belt of the state). Ergo, socialism is the perfect ideology for totalitarian dictators

National socialism
Means nationalizing the people, so you don’t have to nationalize the MOP (the Nazis did so anyway, but Hitler said that wasn’t strictly necessary)

So just because Hitler went beyond classical socialism, he wasn’t a “real” socialist.

He was so, since he did nationalize the MOP, he just did not want to stop there, perhaps because his desire for control wasn’t satisfied.

Control
This yearning for control is corroborated by the fact that Hitler was the greatest ally in the fight against the Nazis, because of his incessant meddling in military strategy which lost Germany the war.
Which is why attempts to assassinate Hitler were halted, as that would adversely affect the outcome of the war.

Social experiment

Politics has been a long running social experiment for the search for the best way to unite a group of people.
Conclusion:
People unite best against a common enemy (the state).
But who conducted this experiment? God? Some mean extraterrestrials?
This experimenter sought simultaneously for how best to divide people. Force peoples that have almost nothing in common to live together, then claim that people one is very mean to the other, and call the one people all sorts of names; take legal measures against the first people (segregation, just like in the pre-1960s USA, but now in The Netherlands, where “positive discrimination” has been formalized and made law).

“Hitler wasn’t a real socialist!”

Ooh, big whoop, so Hitler was a progressive socialist, that does not make him any less of a socialist.
Hitler said that he would not have to nationalize the means of production (he did so anyway) because he would nationalize the people instead (hence National Socialism). How does socialising the people instead of the MOP make anyone not a socialist?
If you hate the effects of your ideology so much, why denounce the causator of the effects? Instead of denouncing the ideology (which is what I’d do, but then again, I’m not a socialistic kind of guy)

Politics enslaved the blacks, business (democracy) freed them

You gotta hand it to statists: without the state, the music scape would have looked & sounded very different, so the state has played a key role in culture.) Black kids of the 60s called the blues slave-shit and plantation music, then went on to buy soul records, but the blues would desegregate society (as whites would come to appreciate it. The Rolling Stones had asked for Howlin’ Wolf to come play the same national TV show they were to play, thereby introducing a whole nation to black music)
But the laws imposed by politicians were not so quick to follow. Without te blues there would not have been rock&roll (perhaps jazz also). Not to forget Elvis Presley (rock, also pop).
It was business innovation that freed the slaves, and got many blacks looking for a better life elsewhere. The “robot cotton pickers” (a sort of combine harvester for cotton, which replaced black manual labor, and got them moving to Chicago for work.) as can be witnessed on Youtube: Blues America part 2 of 2.
And Leonard Chess was a white guy, who made lots of money selling lots of albums of black blues musicians, thus enriching the black community (‘s musicians).

In short: politics tried to force segregation upon the people (both black and white), whereas the only color business cared about was $-green. Politics is the private institution of brute force (it only serves the desires of politicians, on which the public has no influence). Of imposing some politician’s will upon millions of people, business is democratic, aka public (business has to listen to its customers)

Crisis

De crisis is officieel voorbij. Wat (omdat de centrale monetaire planners van de ECB de economische ideologie van dhr. Keynes aanhangen) wel tijdelijk moet zijn. De krach van 2008 was al ruim van tevoren voorspeld door aanhangers van Mises e.c. (net als alle economische ellende van de afgelopen eeuw, trouwens), dus begin masr vastmet sparen, want de volgende (veel ergere) klapper gaat eraan komen. Maar dankzij de minkukels van de ECB wordt Rutte nog wel herkozen, en dat is het enige waar het ze om gaat: nog 4 jaar aan de macht zijn. De hoeveelheid macht die je hebt, wanneer je de economie door de knieschijven hebt geschoten met het hagelgeweer van inflatie, lijkt mij niet vermeldenswaardig.
Dus, burger: begin maar vast te sparen.