Nothing stops this train

Fountain

Radio Rothbard • Trump Is Wrong about Interest Rates • Listen on Fountain

Let's look at some of the reasons why President Trump and his supporters are so obsessed with demanding that the Federal Reserve force down interes...

When @Lyn Alden writes and @Guy Swann rants about it you know you're in for a good time.

Bitcoin Audible • Read_891 - The Rise of Bitcoin Stocks and Bonds • Listen on Fountain

View quoted note →

The collectivist seeks to replace the acting man with the abstraction of a collective will. But such a will does not exist; it cannot choose; it cannot value. It is always a mask—worn by the tyrant, the planner, the bureaucrat—who supplants the individual and extinguishes the only genuine source of progress: the spontaneous actions of free men. All collectivist doctrines—whether socialist, fascist, nationalist, or theocratic—demand the subjugation of the individual to a fictitious whole. They are not only morally repugnant; they are irrational. For they seek to annihilate the very mechanism of life: human action itself. So when we say that anything other than liberty—anarchy in a proper sense—is anti-human, we are not making an ideological claim, nor engaging in partisan rhetoric. We are stating a logical truth—one rooted in the nature of man as an acting being. Liberty is not a “value” in the relativist sense. It is a necessary condition for human action. Only a free individual can choose, prefer, and act. Without liberty, there is no actor—only obedience and decay. A system that denies liberty—by decree, coercion, and collectivist abstraction—seeks to extinguish the only agency through which human life is sustained: the individual choosing mind. To abolish liberty is to abolish action. To abolish action is to abolish life. https://mises.org/mises-wire/axiom-action-and-inescapability-liberty

The free market isn’t some naïve ideal. It is the only moral and practical framework for human cooperation. The real myth, the real danger, is your faith in Leviathan.

☕

Whoever wishes peace among peoples must fight statism. - Ludwig von Mises

The legacy of freedom is inscribed by those who envisioned a world liberated from tyranny, dared to challenge the fetters of oppression, and defended the pursuit of dignity and self-determination — ideals we must fervently uphold.

The reality of the Declaration is that it was far more radical than its critics are generally willing to admit. The Declaration advocated for an act of unilateral and illegal secession. Clearly, modern-day defenders of the regime attempt to downplay this whenever possible. Moreover, the language and ideals of the Declaration communicate a general disregard for ideals of political unity or loyalty to political institutions, in spite of British propaganda to the contrary. Thus, to act in the Spirit of the Declaration of Independence today is to reject calls for loyalty, unity, or respect for the regime’s so-called “rule of law.” Rather, the Declaration of Independence represents disloyalty, disunity, and a disregard for the law as laid down by the political ruling class. Part of the Declaration’s radicalism stems from the fact that the Declaration does not make a legal argument in favor of secession. Rather, the Declaration states that the right of separation stems simply from natural rights of self-determination that do not depend on legal or constitutional authority. The Declaration was a statement of contempt for the established legal order. British propaganda at the time, much like American propaganda today, sang the praises of political unity while encouraging an emotional bond between the ordinary subject and the ruling executive. Fortunately, the American secessionists saw such things for the absurdities that they were and have always been. The Spirit of the Declaration of Independence: Secession, Division, Disloyalty | Mises Institute https://share.google/r7ZLbxrg2fzhAsTuf

Now that the budget bill has passed Congress, we can see what the projections look like for deficits, government debt, and debt service expenses. In brief, the bill is expected to lead to spending of about $7 trillion a year with inflows of about $5 trillion a year, so the debt, which is now about 6x of the money taken in, 100 percent of GDP, and about $230,000 per American family, will rise over ten years to about 7.5x the money taken in, 130 percent of GDP, and $425,000 per family. That will increase interest and principal payments on the debt from about $10 trillion ($1 trillion in interest, $9 trillion in principal) to about $18 trillion (of which $2 trillion is interest payments), which will lead to either a big squeezing out (and cutting off) of spending and/or unimaginable tax increases, or a lot of printing and devaluing of money and pushing interest rates to unattractively low levels. This printing and devaluing is not good for those holding bonds as a storehold of wealth, and what’s bad for bonds and US credit markets is bad for everyone because the US Treasury market is the backbone of all capital markets, which are the backbones of our economic and social conditions. Unless this path is soon rectified to bring the budget deficit from roughly 7% of GDP to about 3% by making adjustments to spending, taxes, and interest rates, big, painful disruptions will likely occur. - Ray Dalio

Do not try to stop the train. That's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth.... Then you will see that it is not the train that stops, it is only yourself.

The Way does not mourn the paths untaken, but knows they were part of the choice. To walk one road is to leave behind a thousand others—not with sorrow, but with clarity. What is not chosen still shapes the meaning of what is. The sage sees the unseen cost, not as a burden, but as the shadow that gives form to light. Without the paths untaken, the one you walk would hold no shape

Water does not think about how to flow - it just moves, and in moving, it finds its course.

The fact which we must face is that nearly all of us come to the study of economics with very strong views on subjects which we do not understand. And even if we make a show of being detached and ready to learn, I am afraid it is almost always with a mental reser­vation, with an inward determination to prove that our instincts were right and that nothing we learn can change our basic convictions. Though I am verging dangerously on preaching, let me nevertheless implore you to make a determined effort to achieve that intellectual humility which alone helps one to learn. Nothing is more perni­cious to intellectual honesty than pride in not having changed one’s opinions – particularly if, as is usually the case in our field, these are opinions which in the circles in which we move are regarded as ‘progressive’ or ‘advanced’ or just modern. You will soon enough discover that what you regard as specially advanced opinions are just the opinions dominant in your particular generation and that it requires much greater strength and independence of mind to take a critical view of what you have been taught to be progressive than merely to accept them. - Friedrich A. Hayek https://share.google/OaWy8pK1ajKe0XQx9

Always enjoy listening to @Guy Swann rant after reading @allen

Bitcoin Audible • Read_887 - A Half Baked Thesis on Stablecoins • Listen on Fountain

View quoted note →

There are libertarians who are indeed hedonists and devotees of alternative lifestyles, and that there are also libertarians who are firm adherents of “bourgeois” conventional or religious morality. There are libertarian libertines and there are libertarians who cleave firmly to the disciplines of natural or religious law. There are other libertarians who have no moral theory at all apart from the imperative of non-violation of rights. That is because libertarianism per se has no general or personal moral theory. Libertarianism does not offer a way of life; it offers liberty, so that each person is free to adopt and act upon his own values and moral principles. Libertarians agree with Lord Acton that “liberty is the highest political end” – not necessarily the highest end on everyone’s personal scale of values.

You cannot model meaning. And without meaning—without ends and values—you do not have economics, you have pseudoscientific astrology in disguise.

Bitcoin Audible • Guy's Take_100 - You Already Own Nothing, Are You Happy? • Listen on Fountain

View quoted note →