The Affordable Transmission Care Act

While my fried was driving through Illinois and very far from home, his car broke down. It turned out that his transmission broke and his car was towed to the Aamco. As it turned out, the local Aamco was the only place he could get his transmission fixed. The cost to fix his car was far more than he could afford, and he had to call friends and relatives and credit card companies in order to get enough money together to fix his car.

This was a clear example that transmissions do not fall under free-market principles. It was completely unfair that his transmission broke during a time in his life when he couldn't afford it. There were no competitors to take his car. The Aamco was able to charge him a couple of thousand dollars for something that was a need, not a want.

It seems obvious to me that everyone, whether they own a car or not, should be forced to purchase Transmission Insurance. In fact, perhaps we should simply go to a single payer system that the Federal Government controls. The IRS should be able to fine/tax/confiscate private property, imprison and be empowered to kill anyone that tried to avoid paying into such a system.

You may think this is a joke, but the argument is exactly the same for health care. If health care is a right based upon some kind of radical egalitarian false premise, then the same false premise must be applied to transmission care. Of course the Political Left will balk at such an argument, but inconsistency is the sign of a failed argument. But then again, perhaps they would agree and desire government control that too!

Berry For Police State/Sheriff

It's that election time again. Every where I drive throughout Scott City, KS, I see signs Berry For Sheriff. Now I want to be clear. I do not know Bill Berry personally. I am concerned with the monopolistic police state growing and thinking that the citizens of Scott City are in some kind of constant danger and in desperate need of protection.

Recently, Bill Berry, the man running for sheriff was able to show off his K-9 at the local library. Apparently, these dogs are going to save us from drugs. Although we know factually, the war on drugs has only increased the number of drug related deaths, indoctrinating our children that they will save us from evil drug lords is all part of the world of Hollywood and the State.

As facts demonstrate, the police state is far more dangerous. Simply watch the recent PBS special on Prohibition to see the truly dangerous people. Remember that the first men who fired shots at those who wished to actually carry beer were the police/Federal agents. Perhaps re-watching the Untouchables might give some food for thought, but it is completely backwards. It was the Federal government that began the WAR on alcohol and now drugs.

The Police State has successfully managed to put itself in the position in the minds of many citizens as being our savior as can be seen in how Berry's childhood was affected by the State's self-perpetuating propaganda. As Bill Berry website states,

I recently found a grade school project that indicated an interest in being your sheriff even as a boy. Now it’s my time to come home to watch over a new generation until another young boy decides to follow his dream.

So it is his dream to watch over us. With the broad movement to militarize our police departments, my concern is about men who think we need to be "watched over". Perhaps he doesn't think watching us with Drones is a good thing (I'm willing to bet he does), but as one who works with the Department of Defense, I suspect he has no problem with Federal laws stealing out liberty (think Patriot Act). I also suspect he agrees with all of the Federal Laws which allow local/state police to steal private property, put people into boxes and/or kill people for "non-violent crimes".

It is men like Berry who seem to have no foundation for what liberty is based upon. They seem to be completely unaware that sheriffs are to secure private property rights as per the American Tradition, not trample all over them. But hey new ideologies is apparently where it is at!

Scott County has a unique opportunity that has not happened in modern history. We finally have the ability to benefit from a beginning of new and refreshing ideologies of law enforcement.

Most of the great work done by Scott City's finest is to make certain we all behave properly such as making certain we follow all of the driving laws. Of course it is interesting to watch the zealous drive around town at high rates of speed and running red lights making certain we behave properly.

Another great concern is the lack of patrolling.

An area of concern is the lack of protection provided to the stakeholders of our community by the lack of patrolling by the current sheriff’s office.

When elected, it is my goal to increase the amount of patrolling in our county. The citizens of Scott County should have police presence 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

No, Scott City doesn't need to militarize our police. We don't need K-9s saving us from drugs.

What we need is a sheriff, who simply recognizes that Americans do not need a police state to "watch over" us, that the police are not a separate class of people who may carry guns while the rest of us peons are subject to them. Americans are a self-governing people. Liberty requires private property rights, and the right to bear arms in self-protection even from police. Liberty requires that we do not empower the State to have power over people who do things with which we may not necessarily agree.

Berry wishes to centralize government, especially by increasing the monopoly of the police state. Let's continue the American Tradition by not following the "new ideologies".

Why are we in a depression? Is this just a natural phenomenon of a free market economy? Do free markets inevitably go into depression therefore the politicians or the Federal Reserve [The Fed] should manage the economy?

Do you understand the importance to the answer to these questions and how they effect you personally? Your liberty? Your ability to provide for yourself and your family? No other external factor has as much impact on your life as this.

The Fed has been holding interest rates at or near zero for almost a decade now. Interest rates are a price just like the price of a home or a car. It is the price of borrowing money. Just like any price, it relays information. Just like the price of a home signals how many and who will buy homes, the interest rate signals investors as to what and how much investment the economy can put into capital.

When people save money they are exchanging purchases today in exchange for purchases in the future. (They are saying- I won't buy something today, I will buy at some date later). And this increases the money supply which in turn lowers the interest rate.

That lower rate now signals to investors that people are saving and now is the time to invest in capital (new businesses, homes to build, etc.)

And because this signal happened naturally, once the investors complete their project (new business, building homes, etc...), there is purchasing power to support those projects because people saved their money (so when the future comes and people retrieve their savings to buy, they will support these new businesses, buy homes, etc...)

But when the Fed drives interest rates down to zero by printing tons of money, it sets a mis-allocation of resources into play. The low interest rate signals the investors to start new projects (new businesses, build homes, etc...) but there was no actual savings to support these new projects in the future. People did not actually save money and exchange purchases today for purchases in the future.

So once the projects are near complete, they fail.

This is known as the boom/bust cycle. It is the inevitable result of the Fed holding down interest rates through monetary expansion.

The answer to the above question is NO, the economy does not naturally go into depression. The Interest rate insures a natural balance of capital resources and consumers support of them.

The Fed is the root cause for the housing bubble. It is the root cause for this depression.

So what's their answer to this crisis? Print more money and hold down interest rates to spark investment.

They have done this now for so long that they are having difficulty even getting another bubble!

The real solution? Stop printing money, allow interest rates to return to their natural level. If we do this, we will go through a deeper depression that will cause deflation and allow market corrections to occur. After about 18 months of the government and the Fed of leaving the economy alone, the economy will recover.

If you want to know if this will end. Just look at the interest rate. As long as they hold it down this low, we're in bigger trouble than ever!

Centralized Power Is the Answer?

Yesterday on my Facebook, I linked to an article by William Grigg about how Tennessee officers are using legal tactics in order to confiscate money from citizens without any charges of wrong doing along Highway 40. I then made a comment about how I just watched the 80s movie, Rambo, in which a local Police Chief uses his authority in a way that was also abusive.

Now a good friend of mine responded initially (although I think he may be rethinking this) by stating,

Rambo, isn't that proof that small town governments are even more corrupt? Kinda like this small town police officer? Your proving my point! Aren't u glad the Feds busted him? No, you want no outside help, no one to police the small town guys. Leave us alone!! You can't make this stuff up.

Now although he may be walking this back some, please notice the assumption that the average state educated and propagandize American citizen immediately responds. He appeals to a higher governmental authority! As if Rambo didn't already have enough trouble. Now let's centralize power even more.

Now I want to be clear. We all know about the tyranny of local communities. I remember reading one Supreme Court decision in which they made the same observation. But even the High Court didn't think that meant the Federal government should trump local governments in every way. As Jeffery Hebener states in his article,

Not only did small states constrain each one's predation by the competitive process among them, but within each realm the struggle for supremacy came to center around the assertion of rights. Representative bodies, religious communities, chartered towns, universities, etc., each claiming its rights, limited the power of the king. Eventually, private property rights came to be defined more in line with the nature of human persons and human action, leading to further gains in prosperity and liberty. Innovations in technology, organization, and institutions were permitted by right, giving rise to the distinctive features of capitalism: capital markets, joint stock companies, entrepreneurial activities, capital accumulation, and so on.[11]

Yet my point is that today, most people have some kind of altruistic view of government. The more centralized it is, the better. Yet this is simply not true as has been demonstrated by libertarians and the article cited above. To put it simply, centralization does not improve economies or the arts or technology among other things, including the police!

In other words, why is granting a monopoly on centralized tyranny better? If one watches the movie, Rambo, I fail to see how the bigger government helped Rambo out? If you recall, the military shot a bazooka like bomb at him. Yet my friend later seems to see a problem that the movie asks, when he wrote,

If your local police is corrupt, and you hate central planning, who arrests the corrupt police?

An accusation brought to the State police and the chief that Rambo was being abused was responded by the character, Sheriff Teasle. Basically, he states if something bad is happening among his men, then the prisoner goes to him and the Sheriff fixes the problem. Now think about that. The very sheriff that arrested Rambo and gave him over to his underlings is now the one who wants the monopoly on authority. However, many today wish for an even more powerful and centralized monopolistic government to have this power. And pray tell me, who has authority over them? A world court?


To even ask these questions is anathema to a people that have been indoctrinated on centralized power/government. Yet it was not that long ago that the very Framers of our Constitution believed in nullification in order to protect itself from an ever growing centralized power as Tom Woods more than demonstrates here.

So as even my friend seems to see, the police that stole the thousands of dollars apart from any charges or trial, based squarely in a made up/artificial war on drugs [a war that is never meant to be won BTW] is bogus on some level.


So in conclusion, appealing to higher and more centralized governments as being the answer to small town tyrants is an answer that gives bigger governments even more monopolistic power. How this solves any dilemma can only be found in the modern mind.

The Federal Reserve Explained

There are a whole bunch of these kinds of videos that explain what the Federal Reserve is and how we are getting ripped off.

Why the Chatter?

Obama says the constitution is a charter of negative liberties. That it only says what the government can't do and says nothing about what the government must do for the people!

He is absolutely right!

The founders believed a basic understanding about government that most today do not understand. Government does not have the ability to give you anything. It has the ability to give you something it steals from others, but for the simple fact it doesn't produce, it cannot give. So in order to do anything, it must engage in some form of tyranny. They understood this and created a document of limitations.

Why this is such a topic of debate today (following the constitution) I am a bit perplexed. Since almost everything the federal government does today is unconstitutional, why all the chatter?

They have already passed social security, dept of education, dept of agriculture, FDA, and on and on, which is all forbidden by the constitution! So why do people stand up and say "this health care bill is unconstitutional"?

This is where republicans ignore all the unconstitutional bills they passed and pretend they are the defenders of the constitution.

 by Jim Fisher

Division of Labor

Do cheap goods from China hurt our economy?

Do Japanese cars with higher quality and lower cost hurt our economy?

Is Detroit dead because of foreign auto makers?

The answer is no ! This is a difficult concept to explain. It's called the "division of labor" and it's the real reason Americans are rich in comparison to many countries. Let me explain it.

Pretend for a moment there were two different technologies for building cars. The first is the way you know, Detroit builds them in their plants. The second is farmers from Kansas put X amount of grain onto a boat and send it to a magical island called Japan.

On this island the X amount of grain magically turns into a car and returns to Kansas. So the farmer actually makes cars by growing grain (just pretend with me).

Now let's say 1 auto worker in Detroit can build 1 car in 1 day. In Kansas, 1 farmer can produce enough grain (2X) in 1 day to make 2 cars. Which process would be be smarter to use? Which process would make Americans more wealthy?

The fact that we get a TV from China that takes less of your labor to buy makes you able to buy more scarce goods with your same money. Should you hope to spend your same money to get less goods?

You say- but what about the jobs? They are stealing our jobs.

This is a wives tale. We can all work and produce. Since the car sales do not decrease, the auto producer from Detroit is assimilated to other industries. Yes, that auto worker may be making less money, but it is at the expense of making all Americans (including himself) richer by being able to spend less income on the same goods.

So while a few people must find other jobs (maybe with less income, maybe not), all Americans are richer because they can spend less money on the same car. So there is now a car in your driveway and more money in your pocket.

The fact that it comes from Japan or China is irrelevant.

The free market has no borders when it comes to the division of labor (letting who can make something the most efficiently make it). Borders do not matter.

Do you ever say- don't buy from outside Massachusetts?

Why stop there? Wouldn't you be better off not buying anything from anyone outside your family? Only purchase from your family members!

You can see how absurd this is, because if you insisted, you would only buy a TV from your Uncle, yes you would employ your uncle but it would likely take him a year to make it and cost you $100,000.00

The division of labor is how the free market makes us all rich. Whoever figures out how to make something cheaper ends up making everyone more wealthy. Because the rest of us get more for less.

Where someone draws borders, it has nothing to do with economics.

--Written by Jim Fisher