You are browsing the archive for 2013 October 28.

Avatar of admin

by admin

New Submissions Guidelines For ‘Mises Daily’

October 28, 2013 in Economics

By Ryan McMaken

We’ve posted new guidelines for Mises Daily. If you are interested in submitting an article for publication, please consult the guidelines, and also look at the articles published over the past six weeks, which have been published under the new format.

Articles published since mid-August reflect the tone, length, and general style of what are currently seeking for Mises Daily. 

The Mises Institute is pleased to accept unsolicited submissions for Mises Daily. Articles for Mises Daily should reflect the mission of the Mises Institute:

The Mises Institute, founded in 1982, is a teaching and research center for the
study of Austrian economics, libertarian and classical liberal political theory,
and peaceful international relations. In support of the school of thought
represented by Ludwig von Mises, Murray N. Rothbard, Henry Hazlitt, and F.A.
Hayek, we publish books and journals, sponsor student and professional
conferences, and provide online education. Mises.org is a vast resource of free
material for anyone in the world interested in these ideas.

As an educational institution, we are interested in articles that explore the scholarship of free markets and the Austrian tradition, and which seek to change the intellectual climate. We are not seeking articles that call for political action such as the passage of specific legislation or the election of candidates.

We seek articles that are approximately 800-1,000 words. The longer articles we carry are generally written by our Senior Fellows and other Institute Scholars.  If you cannot fit all your ideas into one short article, consider that we prefer two short submissions to one long one.

Mises Daily articles should be written with a scholarly tone, yet easily grasped by an audience of intelligent laypersons of all ages. Articles should be rich in factual material and evidence backing your assertions. Hyperlinks to sources are preferable to footnotes.

The Mises Institute does not pay authors for Mises Daily articles at this time.

Submissions may be sent to Ryan at rwmcmaken@mises.org.

…read more

Source: MISES INSTITUTE

Avatar of admin

by admin

Joe Salerno Discusses War, Terror, and Banking

October 28, 2013 in Economics

By Mises Updates

LewRockwell.com today posted the transcript for Joseph Salerno’s podcast with Lew Rockwell about war and the state:

ROCKWELL: And, of course, as Hayek’s chapter in the Road to Serfdom on how the worst rise to the top — I mean, these are — as you say, these are the people who are the best at demagoguery, the best at lying, the best at fooling people, are the ones who have the comparative advantage. And so once being in that position, why are they not satisfied to simply rip off their domestic? But why do they want to conquer? Why do they want war?

SALERNO: Well, that’s a very good point. And the reason, of course, is that, at some point, the population becomes very, very — some of the population — dissidents, the Libertarians, the anarchists — notice that this is a big con game and they begin to spread, disseminate these ideas to the rest of the population.

The way to keep the population in line is always to have a tiger, a figure of a tiger at the gates. So you always want a foreign enemy. And so that is the reason why we’ll always have wars, the state will always engage in wars. So imperialism, in a sense, is a logical implication of having a state, and the fact that the state has to lie to cover the fact that it’s just a minority and it’s benefiting itself and not providing any sort of public goods or collective goods.

…read more

Source: MISES INSTITUTE

Avatar of admin

by admin

Thorsten Polleit Interviewed on Gold

October 28, 2013 in Economics

By Mises Updates

Mises Institute Associated Scholar Thorsten Polleit is interviewed on gold and central banking in the Swiss publication Finews.ch.

The interview titled “Central Banks Have Built a Potemkin Village” is available in the original German here, and in the English (Google Translate version) here.

Loosely translated:

Q: Mr. Polleit, after some twelve years of the gold bull market, it now appears noticeably to have lost its luster. Do you agree?

A: As long as the central banks printing money and manipulating interest rates so that the paper money regime does not collapse, the market forces are suppressed. That should be known by every investor.

In principle, the central banks have built a Potemkin village. Therefore, the main trend in the price of gold is still intact. But the paper money system that existed in the past hundred years, can no longer continue.

So far, the strategy central banks have used works quite well.

In fact. As it turns out, this little game can be kept up for a long time. Many investors were assuming that the system would collapse much earlier and were then surprised that it still holds so long.

Q: With what consequences?

A: The extreme case occurs when the demand for newly-created fiat money dries up and the people are no longer willing to hold the newly created money and instead take refuge in gold, real estate, and other assets. But this development is not yet apparent. Not yet.

Read the full interview.

…read more

Source: MISES INSTITUTE

Avatar of admin

by admin

Easy Money and Asset Bubbles

October 28, 2013 in Economics

By Peter G. Klein

Central to the Austrian understanding of business cycles is the idea that monetary expansion — in Wicksellian terms, money printing that pushes interest rates below their “natural” levels — leads to overinvestment in long-term, capital-intensive projects and long-lived, durable assets (and underinvestment in other types of projects, hence the more general term “malinvestment”). As one example, Austrians interpret asset price bubbles — such as the US housing price bubble of the 1990s and 2000s, the tech bubble of the 1990s, the farmland bubble that may now be going on — as the result, at least partly, of loose monetary policy coming from the central bank. In contrast, some financial economists, such as Laureate Fama, deny that bubbles exist (or can even be defined), while others, such as Laureate Shiller, see bubbles as endemic but unrelated to government policy, resulting simply from irrationality on the part of market participants.

Michael Bordo and John Landon-Lane have released two new working papers on monetary policy and asset price bubbles, “Does Expansionary Monetary Policy Cause Asset Price Booms; Some Historical and Empirical Evidence,” and “What Explains House Price Booms?: History and Empirical Evidence.” (Both are gated by NBER, unfortunately, but there may be ungated copies floating around.) These are technical, time-series econometrics papers, but in both cases, the conclusions are straightforward: easy money is a main cause of asset price bubbles. Other factors are also important, particularly regarding the recent US housing bubble (I suspect that housing regulation shows up in their residual terms), but the link between monetary policy and bubbles is very clear. To be sure, Bordo and Landon-Lane don’t define easy money in exactly the Austrian-Wicksellian way, which references natural rates (the rates that reflect the time preferences of borrowers and savers), but as interest rates below (or money growth rates above) the targets set by policymakers. Still, the general recognition that bubbles are not random, or endogenous to financial markets, but connected to specific government policies designed to stimulate the economy, is a very important result that will hopefully influence current economic policy debates.

[Posted originally at Organizations and Markets]

…read more

Source: MISES INSTITUTE

Avatar of admin

by admin

Obama's 'Social Cost of Carbon' Is at Odds with Science

October 28, 2013 in Economics

By Paul C. "Chip" Knappenberger

Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger

The Obama administration’s latest, greatest weapon to prosecute its war on global warming is something called the “social cost of carbon.” It is an instrument honed on ill-founded climate alarm and is readily blunted in the face of the best science.

The social cost of carbon is supposed to be a complete accounting of the market externalizes, both positive and negative, resulting from carbon dioxide emissions released by burning fossil fuels like coal, oil, or natural gas.

In its pursuit of a high social cost of carbon the administration is going further down a path that is divergent from the one paved by the very best science on the issue.”

But as its name implies, the government’s accounting of the social cost of carbon focuses almost entirely on conjured “costs” while ignoring proven “benefits” of carbon dioxide emissions.

The administration has determined that each ton of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere today from human activities leads to a future cost to global society of about $40 (in today’s dollars).

This assigned $40 premium on carbon dioxide emissions proves to be a powerful sword that the administration has been wielding to slash the apparent costs of a flurry of proposed new rules and regulations aimed at reducing emissions.

Here’s how it works: any new proposed regulation viewed as reducing future carbon dioxide emissions gets a cost credit for each ton of reduced emissions equivalent to the value of the social cost of carbon. That credit is then used to offset the true costs.

In this way, all qualifying rules and regulations, including the EPA’s promised emissions limits on new and existing power plants, appear less costly — a critical asset, as costs are often the greatest barrier to approval.

Since the war on global warming is a high priority within the Obama administration, finding ways to make the social cost of carbon appear to be as high as possible is the ongoing objective.

Back in May, the administration increased its previous estimate by more than 50%, from $25 to $40, which means that all proposed carbon dioxide emissions cuts are now some 50% more valuable.

But that increase doesn’t jibe with science. In fact, in its pursuit of a high social cost of carbon the administration is going further down a path that is divergent from the one paved by the very best science on the issue.

For example, its new estimate …read more

Source: OP-EDS

Avatar of admin

by admin

How Sustainability Planning Threatens the American Dream

October 28, 2013 in Economics

In response to state laws and federal incentives, cities and metropolitan areas across the country are engaged in “sustainability planning” aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In general, this means increasing urban population densities and in particular replacing low-density neighborhoods in transit corridors with dense, mixed-use developments. In a new paper, Cato scholar Randal O’Toole argues that such planning tramples on property rights and personal preferences.

…read more

Source: CATO HEADLINES