Economic self-regulation is always better than supranational regulation - even when it is less pro-market

The following is my comment to a blog posting on European Students for Liberty website titled The Myth of EU-induced Regulation, written by Daniil Gorbatenko.  The author claimed that the fact that most EU member countries set their economic regulations higher than what the EU mandates at minimum is the solid indicator that EU economic interventionism is minimal.  The author perhaps also intended it as a soft argument for why libertarians should prefer for EU countries to stay in the EU rather than leave, because as members they are more pro-free market than they would otherwise be.

In my comment, I pointed out that freedom of a country to make its own economic decisions is more important than being mandated to follow certain rules set by the supranational entity, even if the super-state happens to command more economic freedom at a given point in time than what its members would want.  See below:

You obviously don't get it, do you?  It is not about what country sets what regulations within the EU rules, but it is the fact that that they should be able to set regulations themselves independently of the EU that matters.  With EU giving itself the power to set any standards, no matter how minuscule as compared to those of individual countries, such regulatory creeping in with minimal footprint sets a precedent that it does gain the power to set regulations and fiddle with numbers. And later on, like all benevolent governments, it surely will tweak those numbers that will cause people to start to 'Feel the Bern' in their pockets.

Remember the US Federal Reserve upon its establishment?  Not a big deal in 1913, right!  And now?  Too late, my friend!  Pay your taxes or put hour hands behind your back and rot in prison like a criminal.  For wanting to keep the fruits of your own labor for yourself!

What if some EU country all of a sudden decided that VAT at 20% is detrimental to its economy and even cutting it down to the EU mandated minimum of 15% is not low enough for them and wants lower it down to 5% or even eliminate it altogether?  Got freedom?

The EU should not be entitled to setting any of the rules mentioned in the article, just like with the minimum wage.  But just wait a couple of years and see if things remain that way.  Let's see, it will be introduced at super low 2 EUR an hour.  Not a biggie, right?  And what will a member country that 10 years down the road, with EU minimum wage rate of 5 EUR an hour, all of a sudden realizes that minimum wage law hurts most exactly those whom it intends to help, and now wants to get rid of the minimum wage altogether?  Sorry, can't do!

Freedom of a nation to determine its own laws and compete in the market is better, even if chooses to be more anti-free market than the EU itself, because it has freedom to make changes, for better or worse.

Corporations have responsibility only to their shareholders

Corporations have responsibility only to their shareholders, and for that end they do whatever brings them profit. Or as Milton Friedman simply put it: "The business of business is business," Take that fact into consideration the next time you think about social responsibility of the media towards the public. What motives drive those who tailor your truth? How much trust do you have in their work?  See video below:

Further reading:

The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits

Why do we throw money at the funders of terrorism? - UKIP Deputy Leader ...

Grieving With People of France, Outraged by Militarism of Western Governments

Coordinated terror attacks claimed by ISIS Islamic terrorists of the Islamic State on Friday, November 13. 2015. in Paris, which resulted in hundreds of people killed and wounded, have caused a wave of solidarity by people across the globe with people of France.  Social media sites like Facebook, Twitter, Google + and others have been abuzz with generic messages of support for France, some of which included modifying profile pictures with French flag backgrounds.  Sites like Facebook even provided apps that make it easy for people to do so.

I personally fully identify with the innocent people of France for the horrible acts of terror by the Islamist jihadists. Killing of innocent people is inexcusable and needs to be condemned, regardless of how noble and holy the terrorists consider their cause to be.  However, what troubles me is the seeming universal quick knee jerk reaction by the masses, and their general lack of well reasoned perspective in regards to who all the guilty parties are.  While wrapping one's picture into the French colors of blue, white, and red is cool and visually may appear to speak louder than a thousand words, without providing specific supporting written thoughts it remains just a shallow convenience for the busy and the unthinking, but leaves crucially important unanswered questions to a thinking and reasoning mind.  I believe that this absence of intellectual effort on the part of the individual to think things through is part of the reason why the world is experiencing and will continue to experience this and other similar tragedies in the first place.

To defeat terrorism much more is needed than just solidarity with the immediate victims.  It requires an honest assessment of the problems at hand, which includes reevaluating our views about what creates terrorism, determining who all the real guilty parties are, and finding the proper solution. On the contrary, wrapping ourselves into French flags and providing little information as to what we really mean by that is an indicator of our shortsightedness, for there is an enemy of the French people also marching under its banner of red, white, and blue. The French flag associates to much more than just to the peaceful, cultured, hard working, and lovable French people.  In this particular case it also represents the French government, as an entity of its own, separate from the French people. 

To cut to the chase, whilst we grieve and stand in solidarity with people of France, we also ought to be outraged by militarism of Western governments, including the government of France.  But we cannot, for we have constantly been fed propaganda or are afraid of repercussions from being politically incorrect.  Therefore, we are either unable or unwilling to recognize the fact that terrorism on our shores is largely a blowback from regime change and nation building through military interventionism of the self-righteous rulers of the West. The great majority of the masses in the western world don't seem to know anything about criminal actions of their governments in the Middle East, especially over the past few decades.  Few are able to connect the dots that destroying countries, nation building, and propping up obedient dictators, all of which leads to unimaginable deaths and suffering of innocent people, leads to radicalization and creation of even more terrorists.

Western media has long been complicit in spinning a web of lies and propaganda, in order to keep the truth away from people and to prevent any serious criticism of the governments by the ignorant masses. There's only one thing that can break this cycle, however.  An open, well informed mind, unplugged from mainstream presstitute media and well versed in conducting some honest independent research.  If one digs honestly into actions of the French government in the Middle East in the past several years, many new horizons, which conflict with the interests of the French people and run counter with principles of free society which France prizes itself with, may suddenly come to light.  The only somewhat reassuring circumstance may be the fact that it is often done by and in concert with other powerful European and world governments.  But only when we are well informed about actions of our governments abroad can we stop the hate fueled by our fear and ignorance.

Wrapping our social media profiles in French flags will not save us from blowback of military interventionism around the world.  Ending preventive wars of aggression and ceasing of forcefully instilling our glorious democratic values on other nations will.  It will end when false flags no longer fly and when false excuses for going to war to "keep the world safe for democracy" excite nobody.  The first step in achieving that is being well informed, from perspectives long banished from the media by our rulers that finance and control them.  But no amount of direct evidence can possibly convince one as to the truth of such outrageous claims in one go. Coming to terms with the fact that our governments don't always have our best interests in mind requires time and effort in gathering and researching information.

For that purpose I invite you to do your own research and find your own truth outside of the mainstream media.  Here are just two recommended links to bookmark and pay attention to, which can help you discover many more.

Antiwar.com

Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

I'll end with the following:

In our solidarity with the good innocent people of France and condemning the recent Paris terrorist attacks, let's also turn our attention to an unbelievable hypocrisy and terrorist acts of military aggression of western governments, flying military jets and dropping bombs all over the Middle East for purpose of destroying countries, nation building, and propping up obedient dictators, all of which leads to unimaginable deaths and suffering of innocent people and to creation of even more terrorists.  So let's have the courage to stand together in outrage and condemn preventive wars of aggression conducted by our governments, financed with our money, to protect us from imaginary enemies, created on false pretenses, and sold to us and maintained through lies and propaganda.

Libertarian cooking? Why not!

I don't want it to appear as if this blog has all of a sudden become all about cooking instead of libertarianism, but I do like to experiment with cooking all sorts of foods, and for this particular post I do have something that brings libertarianism and cooking together.  Just recently I was inspired by David Friedman's post about Icelandic Turkey medieval recipe, where he experimented with chicken instead of turkey, and decided to try it out myself.

If you aren't familiar with David Friedman and his work, I recommend that you first read his Wikipedia page and then check out and follow his blog and read his famous book The Machinery of Freedom, available as free download.  Last year I was lucky to meet Dr. Friedman here in Hong Kong and attend and film his lecture on Law Enforcement Without the State, given at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.  I even had the privilege to interview him about various difficult questions about libertarianism, an hour long conversation which you might find very interesting.

Back to the Icelandic Chicken.  Reading through Dr. Friedman's instructions and description of his cooking results and by following the original medieval recipe in his culinary book How to Milk an Almond, Stuff an Egg, and Armor a Turnip: A Thousand Years of Recipes, I decided to make some improvements in my own version according to my desired taste.

Since I prefer chicken to be crisp on the outside, I decided to leave the top part largely uncovered - no dough.  Only the underside and the sides of the 1/2 chicken used were wrapped in dough, with some of it purposefully sticking out with an intent to achieve bread like browning.  Another modification I did was to mix the dough with yeast an leave it rise for couple of hours before knocking it down and shaping into a pizza like dough.  Finally, since I like roasted potatoes with roasted chicken, I decided to add them to the pan as well.  For that I peeled potatoes, added some garlic, onions, salt, pepper, Croatian multi-spice Vegeta, and mixed in a bit of olive oil for reaching higher temperature and crispiness of the potatoes.

The main ingredients are ready.  Using only 1/2 chicken. The dough had been previously prepared and let to rise for couple of hours.

Knocked back dough and shaped like a pizza.  The leftover chunk can be used to cover the chicken completely from the top, as per the instructions.  I opted to keep the top of the chicken exposed for crispiness.  Used the leftover dough to make some bread later.

Bottom half and sides of the chicken wrapped in dough.

Peeled and spiced potatoes for roasting on the side.

Chicken and potatoes ready for roasting.

It is interesting to note that every ingredient used in this dish is from a different country.  None of it is from Hong Kong.  What ever happened to that "buy local" mantra, eh? Do you think such campaigns make any sense?  Just think about it for a sec!

Finished Icelandic chicken, with a Balkans twist.

What I got in the end was a chicken that was crispy on top, dough that was soft underneath and filled with extremely yummy drippings mixed with flavor from roasted onions and garlic, and browned on the sides with a nice yeasty pizza bread-like flavor, and lots of roasted potatoes on the side.  In a way, it is like roast chicken and potatoes on a pizza, all in one.  Dangerously tasty stuff!

Peeking through the dough.  Can you see the drippings juice?

The underside looks good too.  A bit crisp golden yellow bottom and soft inside.  My mouth is watering right now!

 Torn piece above looks and tastes like pizza with a flavor of chicken, bacon, garlic and onion.  Heaven!

Leftover dough made into some fresh bread for later consumption.

I have to admit that cooked in a baking tray instead of a pan, and being half covered with dough and with addition of potatoes instead of just being covered with dough completely, my version looks like a completely different dish.  Though in reality they are not that different.  Someone please tell me if I'm wrong.

Dr. Friedman's version and my version side by side.

In any case, it is a great tasting dish that is very easy and fun to make.  My Chinese wife loved it too.  She has already made the request for me to make it again soon.  Now, what else looks interesting in that medieval cookbook?

Hong Kong Protests: Clash of Titans and a Sidetrack Struggle for True Democracy

It is an admirable cause to want to protest in fight for being allowed to choose your own representative dictator without outside interference.  It is exactly what Hong Kong protesters have been gathering in streets for.  They want freedom to elect their Chief Executive, without Beijing's prior approval of the candidates.

Regardless of how things will play out in the end, who will do what face saving move in order to bring an end to the current protests in Hong Kong, it is important to take a candid look at who all the major involved parties are and what is really at stake for each of them, for they and their interests can reveal what the future may bring to the world’s freest economy.

Hong Kong people as the main stakeholders are divided on whether to protest the issue of the universal suffrage.  While most Hong Kong people desire universal suffrage, not everyone is willing to go to conflict with the motherland over it.  Majority of those who have been protesting are students.  Born in the years well after the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre, they have never experienced turmoil in their life.  In comparison with the past, they were born and have lived in a prosperity that was once unimaginable, especially the young people that were born and raised Hong Kong.  Most people of older generations, having experienced many great economic hardships and political upheavals in the past, desire stability and don't want any confrontation with the central government in Beijing.  Still, regardless of their differences on this issue, most Hong Kong people resent the Communist Party, and don't want any interference in the territory's affairs by Beijing.  Therefore it is not a surprise that so many people of older generations came out in support of the young protesters, when fears developed that the Hong Kong government under Beijing's instructions might use force to crush the protests.  Shaped by the 155 year long history of British rule, Hong Kong people's patriotism of today does not include communism, something which is undeniably well manifested in these latest 2014 September – October protests.

However, the desire to be free from Beijing's influence is not all that many Hong Kong people want.   For some, it is merely a step towards much greater ends. The “Umbrella Revolution” also includes groups that openly call for a full democracy in Hong Kong.  Rise of welfare populism in recent years has put pressure on Hong Kong government to enact laws and collect taxes to pay for expanding social services.  Frustrated by difficulties in passing redistributive legislation due to government's relative illegitimacy under Beijing's command, the aim of these collectivist groups is to completely democratize the Hong Kong's government and therefore give it a full democratic legitimacy to exercise great many powers on behalf of the people of Hong Kong.  Others are frustrated by huge inequalities blamed on the elite's capture and control of the Hong Kong government in key industries such as property development.  Some have thus reasoned that democracy would bring down property prices, using it as another good reason for them to protest.

Hong Kong government, much of which is readily controlled by Beijing, is clearly split between serving the Hong Kong people and appealing to the greater powers in Beijing.  Those serving the interests of the Communist party are the Chief Executive along with all the judges and other public officials that he is entitled to appoint, and about two-thirds of the Legislative Council (LEGCO).  Opposing them are the minority civil servants from the Pan-Democracy camp, which favor checks and balances in government and universal and equal suffrage.

Hong Kong's powerful corporate special interests are another stakeholders in the game, who had seamlessly changed their loyalties from British to Beijing upon returning of Hong Kong to China in 1997.  Here we mean big corporations, which, as a result of their being deeply in bed with Hong Kong government throughout many decades, have established effective monopolies and cartels over some of the essential industries, and that is the actual cause of so many grievances of the people of Hong Kong.  According to the Crony Capitalism Index of the World, despite its small and efficient government, Hong Kong is ranked as the #1 on the list.

The next stakeholder in line is the Central Government of the People's Republic of China.  First of all, it is important to notice that China needs Hong Kong as it is now, because it depends on it as an important international financial center.  Therefore, it would not be in China's interest to fully integrate Hong Kong into the motherland even today, as it was not in its interest back in Mao's days when it relied on Hong Kong, not just for financial assistance but more importantly, to trade with the rest of the world.  A good example of this trade aspect are the China's Renminbi (RMB) denominated Dim Sum bonds issued by Hong Kong banks, which saved the day for the RMB currency after Shanghai's Panda bonds didn't find many foreign buyers.   The West does not trust Shanghai, but it trusts Hong Kong's financial system, which with its Dim Sum Bonds helped turn RMB into a respectable international currency, slowly intent on rivaling the US dollar's world reserve status.

Even though Hong Kong is today of much lesser economic importance to the Central Government than it was during Mao's reign or even at the time of its handover in 1997, the significance of its political obedience as an inseparable part of China remains great.  Endless and sometimes laughable mantra of a harmonious and prosperous society is espoused by Beijing officials whenever they talk about Hong Kong.  Said Premier Wen Jiabao in one of his visits to Hong Kong: “Motherland is good, Hong Kong is good.  Hong Kong is good, motherland is good.”  It is paramount for the Communist Party that all its provinces and territories are in line and loyal to the one party regime.  All calls for democracy are swiftly crushed and perpetrators severely punished. Hong Kong's disobedience is particularly troubling, because the central government cannot interfere in the territory without receiving a global condemnation, or even worse, economic sanctions and even resulting in war.  Yet, allowing even just one of its territories to go the way of democracy will encourage others to follow suit.  So the Communist party is using its various tools on disposal in Hong Kong to influence the protests.  Besides the already mentioned Hong Kong government and big business loyalists, the communist regime from Beijing is also employing NGOs and Triads gangs to disrupt and quell the protests.  Similar tactics with NGOs have been used in China's efforts at disrupting and suppressing Falun Gong practitioners in Hong Kong.

But the Communist Party has much more to lose than just a respectable global financial hub, if it lets one of its provinces to implement democracy unchallenged.  To them, democracy is a disease that would eventually spell the end of the one party rule, and the dream of "Zhōnghuá Rénmín Gònghéguó wànsuì" (中华人民共和国万岁; literally: "[may the] People's Republic of China [last for] ten thousand years") would surely soon come to an end.  On the side note, we all know what happened to a similar empire long live prediction, that of a thousand year Reich made by the Nazis.

So all China seems to be doing in regards to the latest Hong Kong protests is trying to bring an end to the unrest in hopes of preserving the status quo, so it can resume its subtle and covert strategy of gaining even more loyal support and control over the territory.  Other than through its long and twisted tentacles in Hong Kong government and big business, part of its strategy in ending the current Hong Kong protests also includes financing anti-protest groups that have been tearing down booths and clashing with the protesters.

Finally, there are also some major international third parties involved, without whom the current protests would not even have started at the present time, let alone be so well run and funded.  The chief among them is the United States government, which recently admitted to funding the Occupy Central movement through many of its government financed NGOs.  For example, the Washington-based non-government organization by the name of “National Endowment for Democracy” (NED), together with its many branches, is infamous in stirring up trouble around the world by financing groups that start color revolutions and overthrow elected governments.  “Arab Spring” uprising in the Middle East and “Euromaidan” civil unrest and government coup in Ukraine, all of which led to wars and unnamed thousands of people killed and displaced, the action that continues into the present day, are just a few more recent examples of their accomplishments. NED's work in Hong Kong with various local NGOs has been years in the making, and it bore fruit as their minions were amongst the most organized and loudest groups in the protests.

But the question of course is why?  Why would the US government create chaos upon chaos around the world?  And of all places, why also in Hong Kong?  It most certainly was not for the purpose of making the world safe for democracy, as they would like everyone to believe.  It is rather about Washington's imperial hubris, set on dominating the world. It is about global economic, financial, and military hegemony, necessary to keep the US house of cards standing upright.  It is a rigged system whose purpose is propping up the profits of Wall Street and military-industrial complex.

The US financial system is a Ponzi scheme, sustained only by the ability of the US government to use force and propaganda to extract taxes from its citizens, borrow from foreigners, and most importantly to inflate through printing of money out of thin air.  The last one is especially made possible by the dollar's world reserve currency status which allows for endless money printing and dumping it on the rest of the world as its chief export.  In order for this rotten system to keep on going, it must remain unchallenged by any would-be economic, financial, or military rivals in its quest for maintaining a complete hegemony over the world.  Maintaining this dominance calls for enormous spending on corporate media presstitutes to keep the masses at home and abroad brainwashed into compliance, running countless covert operations in many countries abroad, and maintaining the world's largest military budget which is greater than the budgets of the next top eight countries combined.

Simply put, Washington does not want a China, now the world's largest economy, capable of launching its own  reserve currency nor doing it jointly as part of the five-nation “BRICS” group, either of which could rival the US dollar and compete with the World Bank and the IMF.  It does not want a China competing in the US national interests around the globe.  It does not want a China capable of exerting military power to protect its own national interests in its sphere of influence which the US has its eyes on. It therefore prefers a China that is broken up into smaller and weaker countries, unable to put up any serious challenge to the US hegemony in any respect.  For that purpose, the US uses Hong Kong to weaken and destabilize China any way it can.

So yes, from the perspective of the Washington's chessboard, Hong Kong protesters are nothing else but useful idiots, tools for advancing the interests of US government and its corporate cronies.  On the other hand, US government's acts of exploiting genuine grievances and protests of Hong Kong people in order to advance its own agenda of destabilizing and weakening China, by supporting and providing financial resources to various populist groups in Hong Kong, is in effect sidetracking the Hong Kong people from real problems by ignoring and forgetting the facts that make this place so prosperous and by appealing to populist push for true democracy, which will slowly but surely take this shining beacon of economic freedom on the path of socialist Europe, Cuba, and North Korea.

Please stay tuned for my next post on why democracy does not equal freedom and why it will destroy Hong Kong.

Ukrainians Burning Military Drafts - Cowardice Will Save the World!

Ukrainians are burning their military drafts, refusing to hand over their sons to the Ukraine's Ministry of Defense.  I salute this brave act of these brave and independent thinking people.  Only if the rest of the world was like this, the wars would become the thing of the past.

 

 

Another more recent video:



 



And if anyone needs further explanation of why this is a good thing, please watch a 1964 American comedy-drama war film “The Americanization of Emily”

 

Here's one key excerpt to get you thinking: “That night, I sat in the jungles of Guadalcanal, waiting to be killed, sopping wet. Then I had my blinding revelation: I discovered I was a coward. That’s my new religion. I’m a coward. I’m a big believer in it. Cowardice will save the world.” … “We shall never end wars Mrs. Barum, by blaming it on ministers and generals, or warmongering imperialists, or all the other banal bogies. It's the rest of us who build statues to those generals and name boulevards after those ministers. The rest of us who make heroes of our dead and shrines of our battlefield.”

Read more of this interesting conversation from the movie here.