Conservatism is Not About Principle

Limbaugh put Republicans who work "around the edges" of the president's policies under his heel

Yesterday I wrote that conservatism "is not about principle; it is about "preserving" the status quo from the liberals attempts to rip apart conservative values any further than they already have. Conservative values are not based on objectivity, but rather on the subjectivity that the free market is the best, not that it is right."

This is the reason Rush Limbaugh is said to be driving a wedge in the Republican Party, with about twenty-five percent of Republicans--according to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel--rooting for Limbaugh, and leaders like Mitt Romney distancing themselves from him by not mentioning his name in their own comments of caution.

"'He is the voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party. And he has been up front about what he views, and hasn't stepped back from that, which is he hopes for failure. He said it. And I compliment him for his honesty, but that's their philosophy that is enunciated by Rush Limbaugh. And I think that's the wrong philosophy for America,' Emanuel said on CBS' 'Face the Nation.'

"I want Barack Obama to fail if his mission is to restructure and reform this country so that capitalism and individual liberty are not its foundation? Why would I want that to succeed?" [Limabugh] asked. Fox News Politics

Listen to the conservatives and the Republican leaders. Unfortunately, they don't want President Obama to fail, because if he fails, the nation fails, and if the nation fails, the world-wide depression would be politically disastrous--for anyone who thinks his mission is to "restructure and reform this country so that capitalism and individual liberty are not its foundation."

It would be disastrous politically for people like Romney and Huckabee and any other politician who says he or she does not want this un-Constitutional theft of free enterprise to fail. They are giving the Libertarian Party a big boost as the only free-market party. But that is good, if the Republicans don't think capitalism is morally right.

This is what I mean when I say is not about principle; it is about "preserving" the status quo from the liberals attempts to rip apart conservative values any further than they already have. Conservative values are not based on objectivity, but rather on the subjectivity that the free market is the best, not that it is right.

Limbaugh put Republicans who work "around the edges" of the president's policies under his heel, grinding on them for trying to make those policies work because in doing so they are giving up their beliefs--beliefs which unfortunately are not principles.

If they thought capitalism was right--morally, politically, and economically--they would have seen the warning signs when President Bush told them about it in 2003, and when Congressman Barney Frank said Bush was wrong.

"According to an article by Kathleen Day in the Oct. 8, 2003, Washington Post, Frank opposed giving the Bush administration the right to approve or disapprove business activities that 'could pose risk to the taxpayers.' He told the Post he worried the Treasury Department 'would sacrifice activities that are good for consumers in the name of lowering the companies’ market risks.'

"Just a month before, Frank had aggressively thwarted reform efforts by the Bush administration. He told The New York Times on Sept. 11, 2003, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s problems were 'exaggerated,' a gross miscalculation some five years later with costs estimated to be in the hundreds of billions.

“'These two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis,' Frank said to the Times." Business and Media Institute

Not acknowledging that capitalism is morally the only economic system that allows investors the freedom to create wealth will be a disaster for Republicans, if they manage to regain power. They will only seek their own forms and programs of "stimulating" the economy. Most Republicans said over and over that "something has to be done" to save the economy. All but one or two failed to mention free enterprise as the solution. The rest were on board with bail-outs and loans and stimulus packages.

But if the Republican return to power and play the same game as Obama and the Democrats, but with different bail-out/loan programs that eliminate what they called "pork", their programs will only contain what the Dems will then call pork.

The government needs to back off, let businesses fail because that is what businesses are supposed to do when times are bad, and everything will work its self out. That is what capitalism does. It is a self-regulating, self-correcting market, as we found out after President Reagan sat back and watched as:

"an economic tidal wave was moving in on the US Monday morning, October 19, 1987. The Tokyo exchange had experienced a record collapse in prices and panic selling. The Hong Kong exchange was wiped out. The European exchanges experienced the worst single day in their history.

"In the US panic first hit in the Chicago commodities exchange and within five minutes of the opening the markets went into free-fall. It then spread to Wall Street and the NY exchange.

"The Dow-Jones averages fell 508 points. By the time the NY exchange closed up stock market prices had dropped 22.6%, almost double the record losses of the crash of 1929. An astonishing 604.5 million shares had been traded that day more than double that of the crash of 1929. It was the greatest crash in US economic history.

"Black Monday was followed by Terrible Tuesday which was never reported by the US press. On the following Tuesday the world’s financial system came to within one hair’s breadth of extinction. It appeared that by noon that the market had in fact died. All trading in stocks, options, and futures shuddered to halt. For almost one hour the world’s capitalist system had completely collapsed. There were no buyers at any price.

"At this point of maximum crisis the Federal Reserve Board stepped in and flooded the banks with cheap credit. At 12:38 that afternoon the stack market rose from the dead. The resurrection of the market was the result of the deliberate manipulation by a few major firms to save the markets.

"Essentially leading corporations were entering the market after 1pm to buy back their own stocks which they had dumped that morning in order to stabilize the situation. Buying resumed on the market." [condensed from] The Reagan Revolution

The Fed did what it was supposed to do, and within hours the market was correcting itself. There was no rush to "nationalize" banks or insurance companies or mortgage lenders or the stock markets themselves.

There was no appeal to Congress to help with financial aid. It was not necessary then, and it was not necessary last fall when Bernanke and Paulson presented Congress with a three-page spending proposal for $800B.

"The Bush/Paulson/Bernanke 'panic' and 'plan' to hand unlimited funds and power without judicial or congressional oversight was ripped straight from the 'Chicago School's' playbook of inducing a financial panic in developing nations and then moving in to 'reform' the system... As noted here before: [the nation was] told we had only hours til the Apocalypse on Thursday, Sept. 18, [yet] we find the world still working 12 days later."

Before $1 of any of that money had been paid as bail-out, the market was beginning to correct itself. Only after spending the money did the economic system start tanking because "capitalism and individual liberty [were] not its foundation" any longer.

So I want Obama to fail too. Maybe then the capitalists will be allowed to step in repair the damage, and I hope that if that day comes the socialist pigs will be charged with crimes, maybe under the RICO laws for collaborating in dirty business.

The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists is the ^sm of
The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists LLC.
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism ^tm,
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger ©,
Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger Extra ©, and The Metaphysical Naturalist ©,

are the educational arms of the LLC and are:

© 2008-2009 by Curtis Edward Clark and Naturalist Academy Publishing ^tm
mailto:freeassemblage@gmail.com

1920-21 Was Worse; Obama Ignores History

The left is talking directly past the free-market economists because the left isn't willing to admit those economists have anything to offer.

President Obama's epistemology is the reverse of the average American.

In simple terms, this means he thinks backward from the way most Americans think. Most Americans right now are thinking something like, "We can't depend on business alone to get us out of this mess; the mess is too big. We need some government help. How much help, and where to put it, is the trillion dollar question."

Mr. Obama, on the other hand, does not think that the government is the economic savior of last resort. He thinks it is the first resort.

"It is absolutely true that we can't depend on government alone to create jobs or economic growth," he said Monday in his first press briefing. In other words, he thinks of private enterprise as the back-up to what ever the government thinks it can or ought to do, because "we can't count on government alone." But he would like to; it is the only way to redistribute wealth according to a process that is not free enterprise, which does not "redistribute." It pays wages, instead.

While most people who don't have a full grasp of the power of free enterprise to pull us out of this mess are of the opinion that it takes at least some government help, Obama is saying it is going to take at least some help from private enterprise!

"...the federal government is the only entity left with the resources to jolt our economy back into life," said the President. "It is only government that can break the vicious cycle where lost jobs lead to people spending less money which leads to even more layoffs." [emphasis added]

Really?

"Despite its brevity, this depression [of 1920-21] was extraordinarily sharp: the U.S. price level declined by over 40% in a single year (Friedman-Schwartz, 1963), and output and employment likewise fell considerably.

"In one crucial respect, [it] was actually more severe than the Great Depression itself: there was a rapid decline in the price level of between forty and fifty percent within the course of a single year. As Friedman and Schwartz (1963) explain, “From their peak in May [1920], wholesale prices declined moderately for a couple of months, and then collapsed. By June 1921, they had fallen to 56 per cent of their level in May 1920. More than three-quarters of the decline took place in the six months from August 1920 to February 1921. This is, by all odds, the sharpest price decline covered by our money series, either before or since that date and perhaps also in the whole history of the United States.” (1963, pp.232-233.) The wholesale price index during the Great Depression took about three years to fall by the same amount." [emphasis added] The Depression of 1920-21

And from another source:

"Prices began to rise [in 1920], and rumors of a buyers' strike spread. After commodity prices peaked in May, they declined rapidly, precipitating an unprecedented cancelation of orders. Money was extremely tight, although the stringency did not become acute until autumn. A noticeable flight of gold from the country caused a marked advance in money rates, and the end of the year saw a 30 percent decline in industrial stocks. Depression—characterized by inactive industries, business failures, and a severe decline in foreign trade—continued throughout 1921. Answers.Com

If this brief depression was perhaps the worst "in the whole history of the United States", how did we get out of it before the end of 1921?

By doing nothing, as far as government intervention was concerned. There were no tax breaks, no stimulus, no lending of money. The government was strictly laissez-fairre about it. Free enterprise and the will of the people to return to work was the saving grace.

President Obama is ignoring not only history, but also ignoring naturalist economics that protect the rights of people to operate in a free market place.

"The second unusual feature of the depression of 1920-21 was the rapid recovery in employment and output, in sync with a swift adjustment of the real wage to its new equilibrium position. Although this is a short time span, there were simply extraordinary movements in macroeconomic variables during this period..."

Using what is called the Bernanke-Carey Model--(yes, Ben Bernanke, who along with Professor Kevin Carey of American University devised a model used by most economists--Google it)--it has been discovered that one of the most striking differences between that brief yet severe depression, the Great Depression, and the economic difficulties of today, is the swift response by needy employees to lower their wage expectations dramatically.

The United Auto Workers had to be put in the position of making concessions which for the UAW were awkward and that could hardly be called "dramatic," before any bail-out money was given to General Motors and to Chrysler.

But something Bernanke wrote in 2000 in a book called Essays on the Great Depression stands out strikingly as a comparison to the crisis of today:

"For many years, economic research on the origins and persistence of the Great Depression bore a striking resemblance to historical research on the causes of the American Civil War. Both sides to the respective debates talked past one another, and little, if any, intellectual progress was made."

Today, the 200+ economists who took out a full page ad in several newpapers a week ago are not being heard by the left who, led by Obama (or perhaps who is leading Obama, who is not an economist but a Constitutional professor and attorney) are going out full force for the idea that "only government" can bring the country out of recession.

The left is talking directly past the free-market economists because the left isn't willing to admit those economists have anything to offer. Instead, they are hell-bent on painting those with philosophical differences as:

• people who wish to do "little or nothing at all" and as people who "still [don't] believe this constitutes a full-blown crisis". It implies the left is the only hope for salvation by saying "we have come together around a plan" when in fact the free-market economists do not "come together" on it and would have proposed vastly different plans; and because "as long as I hold this office," said the President, "I will do whatever it takes to put this economy back on track," except by listening to those voices who say that the billions of dollars in what are traditionally labeled "appropriations" belong in appropriation bills, not in a stimulus package.

The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists is the SM of
The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists LLC
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism TM,
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger TM, and
Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger Extra TM are the educational arms of the LLC and are:
© 2008-2009 by Curtis Edward Clark and Naturalist Academy Publishing ®

mailto:freeassemblage@gmail.com

http://freeassemblage.blogspot.com/

How Many Capitalists Does It Take?

Obama, the Democrats, and the Republicans have the entire idea of how a capitalist economy works backward. The mortgage melt-down was because government promoted unethical and unhealthy capitalist processes.

Q: How many people does it take to "stimulate" the economy?

A: Only as many capitalists as have the money to do it.

I ask and answer this question, because of several things that have come to the attention of the public:

• 200+ economists publicly declared the President is wrong;
• President Obama goads legislators on both sides of the isle to forget that wealth is created by capital investments, and to forget that
• [A]spending money without
• [B] thinking about where it is going,
• [C] where it is coming from,
• [D] how long this spending spree will take to work,
• [E] how long it will take to pay itself off, or even
• [F] whether our grandchildren will be illegally indentured servants to the spending whimsies of Obama and the 111th United States Congress--is not capitalism;
• In order to spend more money on projects than would be necessary under a fair-bidding policy, President Obama signed an Executive Order that stating that "it is the policy of the Federal Government to encourage executive agencies to consider requiring the use of project labor agreements in connection with large-scale construction projects in order to promote economy and efficiency in Federal procurement," where "project labor agreements" mean the exclusive use of union labor, as described elsewhere in the Order. A "large-scale" project is one over $25 million;
• The spending of public monies by Wall Street capitalists and others on projects that put people to work is strictly forbidden, as in the example of the corporate jets that are no longer acceptable to purchase or use, and the junkets that are no longer acceptable that would have put hundreds of hotel and restaurant workers to work, which puts hotel and restaurant suppliers to work, which puts the manufacturers to the suppliers to work, which puts farmers, textile workers, commercial laundries, garbage removal companies, cab drivers, truck drivers, and gasoline suppliers, and others to work.

In other words, Obama and the Democrats and the Republicans who agree we must spend, have the entire idea of how a capitalist economy works backward. The mortgage melt-down was not because of capitalism; it was because government promoted unethical and unhealthy capitalist processes.

It has been argued by many that if the government wants to put people to work and create or save jobs, it should give the money directly to those who will spend it immediately. Brookings senior fellow in governance studies Pietro Nivola suggested that Congress "proceed in two tranches. The first would pump money directly into the hands of consumers and businesses through a combination of judicious tax relief and quick-hitting expenditures (including, as one example, ramping up military equipment procurement and recruitment of personnel). Subsequent legislation could take up the long-term infrastructure spending and more exotic projects..."

But it would seem President Obama would rather injudiciously scold Congress for their attempt at being responsible with the people's money. "I’ve heard criticisms of this plan that echo the very same failed theories that helped lead us into this crisis," he said.

Would these be the theories of Congressman Barney Frank, who encouraged the sub-prime lending that got us into this crisis? "These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—" said Frank, "are not facing any kind of financial crisis." Frank was (and remains) the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

Would these be the theories of President Bush who as early as 2003 sent out the distress calls that the mortage crisis was on the way? Would these be the theories--[1][2][3]--never listened to, that statistically demonstrated how government spending, when used as stimulus, never works?

No. Instead, the President said, "Let’s not make the perfect the enemy of the essential. Let’s show people all over our country who are looking for leadership in this difficult time that we are equal to the task."

What he means is that what is "essential" is the profligate spending that Vice President Joe Biden publicly declared had only a 70% chance of success. "If we do everything right, if we do it with absolute certainty, there's still a 30 percent chance we're going to get it wrong," Biden said.

"Some critics, said the President, contend the bill 'is full of pet projects. When was the last time that we saw a bill of this magnitude move out with no earmarks in it? Not one.'
"Ratcheting up the sarcasm, the president said: 'So then you get the argument, "well, this is not a stimulus bill, this is a spending bill." What do you think a stimulus is?'
"'That's the whole point,' he said, as the audience hooted and applauded."

From Wall Street to Main Street, every business owner and capitalist knows you don't throw money at debt hoping for a 70% success rate at getting out of debt.

The Democrats and Republicans both should leave it to the free market to solve the problems. Their success will come faster than anything government can do, but 21st century government doesn't want to ever have to admit that capitalism is better than socialism. Biden warned that the consequences of failing were too great for the country, to allow it to allow politics to prevent action.

What Washington can't see is how greatly they have prevented the free market from acting, by promising free money that generations of Americans will discover is not free at all.

The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists is the SM of
The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists LLC.

The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism TM,
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger TM, and
Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger Extra TM are the educational arms of the LLC and are:
© 2008-2009 by Curtis Edward Clark and Naturalist Academy Publishing ®

mailto:freeassemblage@gmail.com

http://freeassemblage.blogspot.com/

Obama's Economics in Wide Public Dispute

"Capitalism is based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights..."

"There is no disagreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan that will help to jumpstart the economy," said President (Elect) Barack Obama on January 9, 2009.

With no respect on my part for the ignorance of a President who embraces Marxism and ignores the Austrian economic school of free enterprise, I can tell you that 200 of our leading economists who are not Keynesians say the President is wrong. This includes William Poole, former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

They said so in full-page newpaper ads in The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal [see below] against the trillion dollar spending binge proposed by democrats.

"The ad, sponsored by the Cato Institute, blasts the massive boondoggle that funds liberal projects under the guise of "stimulating" the economy."

"Keynes distilled a fantastically wrong theory of capitalism and of a socialist paradise erected out of paper money. Moreover, Keynes offered no theory of stagnation at all." Ludwig von Mises Institute

"Capitalism is a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in which all property is privately owned...

"The moral justification of capitalism does not lie in the altruist claim that it represents the best way to achieve the common good. It is true that capitalism does—if that catch-phrase has any meaning—but this is merely a secondary consequence." Ayn Rand

Keynesian politics embraced by President Obama and the Democrats deny the justice attendant with capitalism, of allowing the people to prevent, let alone clean up, the mess made by the government. Instead, Keynesianism adds layers of government on the layers of the mess.

Republicans also believe in Keynesian economics, to the extent that at present they are decrying those parts of the "stimulus plan" which are not "stimulating." They like certain parts of the plan. They don't want the parts that appear to be only pork.

However, if some of those pork projects were proposed outside of the stimulus plan, they would vote for it. So would I. Example: no one disagrees that the National Mall is falling apart and needs repair. But resodding it should not be called "stimulus" and be expected to help the economy, nor should any "stimulus" be called "government partnership" with capitalism. Government interference in the economy should always be voted down.

When the government becomes a "partner" with capitalism, capitalism no longer exists. Then, the system becomes what is called a "mixed economy." To the extent that the economy is "mixed" in this way is the extent to which that economy is socialist--or worst.

We are in a world of hurt right now, because of government actions in the wrong places, and government inaction in the wrong places.

The rallying cry of the laissez-faire capitalist is, "Get out of my way!" Our government is doing everything it can to stand in the way of economic recovery, which can only come from consumer interest in goods produces. When the government dictates where capital is to be spent, the consumer is likely to be uninterested in the product, because it is a politically-motivated product, like wind farms and goat milk instead of cow milk.

Let the market do its job. The job of the government is to keep a watchful eye on the ethics in the market place, so the Birney Madoff's of the world, and the Enrons, and the sub-prime markets don't ruin us in the future.

You can put my signature on that, too.

Read this important report:

majicJack rips off consumers; leaves behind spywar...

The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists is the SM of
The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists LLC.
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism TM,
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger TM, and
Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger Extra TM are the educational arms of the LLC and are:
© 2008-2009 by Curtis Edward Clark and Naturalist Academy Publishing ®

mailto:freeassemblage@gmail.com

http://freeassemblage.blogspot.com/

Laissez-faire At War Against Socialism

Try acting as a laissez-faire capitalist. It will get you a prison sentence for ignoring all the laws that prevent it.

On the subject of the economy, VP-Elect Biden is reported to have said, "We’re at war.” Biden told this to congressional leaders of both parties during their sit-down with Barack Obama in the Capitol, according to two sources familiar with the exchange.

Gene Healy at Cato at Liberty, writes "Libertarians and conservatives who fear that Obama’s inauguration heralds the coming of a new New Deal have new cause for discomfort, then. FDR’s embrace of the war metaphor was central to building support for the New Deal..."

I hardly think the "embrace of the war metaphor" is the heralding of the new New Deal--but it is most certainly coming, and it is going to hit American's swiftly. Obama already has asked for the $350 billion not yet spent so he has it on his first day in office. Thank that God, in whom we supposedly "trust", to have put some severe reservations about that money in the heads of even the liberal Democrats. They want it properly accounted for.

But there is no doubt it is coming. Obama has trumpeted loudly how about approximatly how much it is going to cost the taxpayer to pay for public works projects which will "pay off" quickly in the form of jobs created, in cash flow, and in such things as alternative energy, which of course the consumer will wind up paying twice for: once in the debt created by the loan, and once in the purchase of the product created.

And our children and grandchildren will pay off the loans that do not create direct profits, as a wind farm or some other means of production might. Someone will have to pay for the infrastructure rebuilding of roads and bridges, which, let's face it, really do need rebuilding.

But the Governors and the Mayors of America have been asked for their wish lists. Obama has already said many things will not be financed from this economic "stimulus" package.

But the fact that it already has a name--"stimulus package"--means the new administration won't have to give it a formal name, like the "New Deal."

Even the New Deal didn't spend as much of the GDP as a percentage, as did Eisenhower's interstate freeway system, which took 35 years to complete. When it was complete, Congress approved funding to go to work building a few more freeways, and upgrading the old ones.

"Roosevelt’s first inaugural address tends to be remembered as an attempt to calm the public, a warning against “fear itself.” The martial metaphors that appear throughout the speech make clear, though, that F.D.R. wanted fear replaced by collectivist ardor," Healy writes.

And what is it that Obama has already been saying? "The US economy will become 'dramatically worse', wrecking the dreams of a generation of Americans, if Congress does not act quickly to drive through huge fiscal stimulus plans, as fresh data showed deepening recession. He said the unemployment rate was at risk of reaching double digits and recession "could linger for years".

While very probably true, it is the rhetoric used in politics about such subjects that, Cato says, is good for nothing but "centralizing power."

How much centralization can a supposedly capitalist economy take, before it breaks down as the forces of collectivist policies clash like butting-heads against the free market ideas so well established and so taken to heart by the very people and corporations who actually make the economy profitable?

It does appear that the big corporations who are reaping billions of dollars are beginning to allow "czarism" to dictate how they operate. There will be a "car czar," for example. Of course, the CEOs and all those in the upper eschelons of the banking and mortgage systems have had to be rightly criticized for doling out hundreds of millions of that money in golden parachutes and bonuses.

But what about the bedrock of capitalism, the entrepreneur, the mom-and-pop operation, the proprietor? Will they be so willing to allow centralization to push them this way and that, when they all know for certain, knowledge gained by experience and from historical perspectives, that decentralization is responsible for profit-making and for profit-motivation.

No one can be too motivated when a czar is looking over your shoulder, and you and I know that such a czar and his/her soldiers can look over the shoulders of small businesses much easier than over the shoulders of the likes of GM and "banks that are too big to be allowed to fail."

Big business and our leaders, both left and right, including the avowed whom Socialist Obama hired who does not need Senate confirmation, are selling the small business owner and the Average Joe down the river.

I hope the Average Joe knows how to quit before he gets behind. He is already saving whatever money he can, rather than spending it. New savings accounts in banks jumped several-hundred percent over the last six months.

But the next thing you know, our New Socialist government will be taxing our savings to pay for the loans they are making because we are not spending our savings. Obama said to Katie Couric just yesterday, "Failure is not an option, not in America."

As far as his Marxist "spread the wealth" attitude goes, I think he intends to use every means at his disposal to spread the misery. He is a Constitutional Law professor, and a brilliant man. I have no doubt that America is going to see him use tricks of law we have not seen before. After all, he has not been sworn in yet, but plans to get his hands on the $350 billion one way or another. He has told Congress he will use his first veto on his first day in office--to get that money. Congress will cave, one way or another.

We should all buy gold, because our paper and coins will soon be worth nothing, comparatively. From 2000 to yesterday, the price of gold rose more than $549 from $280.10, to $829.57, or nearly 350%. Relative to the GDP deflator, the dollar only rose 19.82%.

What will the dollar be worth when Obama gets done manipulating it? The free market, left alone, tells the truth. When manipulated by government economic engineering, it always lies, relative to the free market.

We are at war, but it is the honest capitalist at war against the dishonest, and against the illegal usurping of his powers in the market place by government rules he cannot conform to without become a socialist himself.

Try acting as a laissez-faire capitalist. It will get you a prison sentence for ignoring all the laws that prevent it.

The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists is the SM of
The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists LLC.
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism TM,
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger TM, and
Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger Extra TM are the educational arms of the LLC and are:
© 2008-2009 by Curtis Edward Clark and Naturalist Academy Publishing ®

mailto:freeassemblage@gmail.com

http://freeassemblage.blogspot.com/