tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18777505250987774842024-03-13T07:54:02.552-07:00LibertariumFelipehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15318028192336484772noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-64807339964832898282010-03-22T12:14:00.000-07:002010-03-22T13:15:51.859-07:00Brilliant!Via <a href="http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2010/03/chinese-currency-question.html">Greg Mankiw</a> (who if you're not currently reading, add him immediately to your daily list!)Alfonso Grimaldohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12255097224817272714noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-7888630484383578092010-03-10T11:33:00.000-08:002010-03-10T11:58:35.162-08:00Well, an issue certainly<span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">Sebastian Piñera becomes President of Chile this </span><a href="http://mensual.prensa.com/mensual/contenido/2010/03/10/uhora/inter_2010031013353296.asp"><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">Thursday</span></a><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">.<br /><br />Chile is, by nature, a centre-of-right country. The energy sector and the waterworks are within the private sector and the law makes the existence of wide-scale deficit-financing basically verboten.<br /><br />So, after the years of Bachelet, who was in all accounts a terrific president, pushing constantly for the social aspect of liberty, Piñera's reign was bound to be pleasant and straightforward.<br /><br />He would overturn slowly but surely many of Bachelet's economic decisions and steer the country gently back towards the path that has shown to lead to immense progress.<br /><br />But the earth was shaken from beneath him.<br /><br />No, </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Chile_earthquake"><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">literally</span></a><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">.<br /><br />So now, Piñera's first years of economic progress will instead be dedicated to a large-scale project for the restoration of Chile.<br /><br />When disaster strikes, the reply "Let the markets take care of it" sounds callous, evil yet. Even if it </span><a href="http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj9n3/cj9n3-2.pdf"><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">works</span></a><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;"> (PDF link).<br /><br />Now, Piñera, who must fight to keep afloat above Bachelet's exiting 80+% exit approval rate, will no doubt invest heavily in government solutions to the earthquake crisis.<br /><br />I'm not saying this is right or wrong. In the face of strong adversity, it is even inhumane to stand back and wait for the market to take care of things, even if it will necessarily do so.<br /><br />Politically though, this means that Piñera's honey-moon year will be spent on rebuilding. With deficit-capping legislation, the Piñera administration might even have to raise taxation percentages to fund the restoration.<br /><br />Within the realm of palatable politics, the Piñera administration should help eagerly in the rebuilding of Chile, even if it means reshifting its planned budget to fund mainly infrastructure projects.<br /><br />Parallel to this, however, he should also press for market solutions, viz. (i) enforcing property rights to prevent looting; (ii) avoiding price controls which would force already destroyed businesses out of, well, business; and (iii) cutting government expenses across the board (except in infrastructure brackets) so that the private sector can rapidly fund itself back to its feet.<br /><br />If this path is taken, and the expenditures and results are carefully monitored, Piñera will come out with a strong case for market forces and will have earned sufficient approval to carry out system-wide free market reforms.<br /><br />Reforms which, after all, got Chile to its current superior economic position.</span>Alfonso Grimaldohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12255097224817272714noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-44600524840510427202010-03-08T10:57:00.000-08:002010-03-08T11:31:38.814-08:00O kírios tha plirósi giá óla<a href="http://mensual.prensa.com/mensual/contenido/2010/03/08/hoy/negocios/2115800.asp">This</a> bit of news comes as an interesting study between short-term gain and long-term catastrophe.<br /><br />I am thoroughly uneducated with regards to this matter, but from what I can deduce from the article and additional research, a law is in the making in Nicaragua that would allow thousands of local low-income producers to renegotiate their debt with microfinancing institutions.<br /><br />Usually, poor families do not have either the money to pay and sustain a bank account or gain proper credit rating or do not have sufficient collateral to pledge as security for bank loans.<br /><br />Therefore, they are usually left outside of traditional banking schemes. Not because banks are evil profiteering entities, mind you, but because if they granted these loans with very little security they would be losing <em>your</em> money in the process.<br /><br />Enter the microfinanciers. Microfinance seeks to take care of that demand of loans by providing low-income families with low quantity, short term loans at reasonable interest rates, allowing millions of families around the world to have funds to finance their own projects, say, a new chicken coop or a new cow. Nothing big, but it definitely is substantial for them.<br /><br />However, this article points out an interesting trade-off. One the one hand you have the short-term gratification of producer interests. They can't pay back right now, so a renegotiation opportunity would allow them to get lower interests within the same or longer time frames. This goes against the natural grain of lending practices, which states that the longer a loan lasts, the higher the interest rate.<br /><br />On the other hand, if you were a microfinancier, you wouldn't be interested in setting up shop in a country where government could unilaterally modify private loan documents.<br /><br />In fact, you would be driving microfinanciers away, because regardless of their kind hearted goals, they still must break even or profit if they are to continue in business.<br /><br />So, what is the solution? Renegotiate debt and save thousands of indebted producers? Or protect the microfinancing industry from the ravages of government sanctioned intervention?<br /><br />Maybe the correct response lies in neither option.<br /><br />Many economists agree that local low-income families in many Latin American nations have thousands of dollars of collateral, but cannot touch that bounty because of socialist land redistribution schemes.<br /><br />With proper property rights and a decent credibility in the rule of law, low-income families could use the land they own (but is currently not recognized as property by the government) to access thousands of dollars in loans. Rather than building a new chicken coop, they could invest in high-end technical solutions, like the Chickentron Egg Replicator 3000.<br /><br />Ok, well, maybe <em>two</em> new chicken coops.Alfonso Grimaldohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12255097224817272714noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-25839201366606236042010-01-04T08:53:00.000-08:002010-01-04T09:21:03.797-08:00On AVATAR, The Greens and Private Property<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_3v6R65nj74I/S0IhDvCsgmI/AAAAAAAAAlw/AgdMU-XZT8E/s1600-h/200px-Avatar-Teaser-Poster.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 297px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_3v6R65nj74I/S0IhDvCsgmI/AAAAAAAAAlw/AgdMU-XZT8E/s320/200px-Avatar-Teaser-Poster.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5422933249358594658" /></a><br /><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style=" line-height:115%;Tahoma","sans-serif";font-family:";color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">So...beforehand I was warned I was about to watch a "greennish" kind of movie. Still, decided to go and contributed to the $</span><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8438824.stm"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">1 plus billion it had made</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">, worldwide, after its opening weekend. I wanted to see the "awesome tech" behind it. Here are my pennies on it:</span></span></span><span style=" line-height:115%;Tahoma","sans-serif";font-family:";color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">WHAT I LIKED (AND NOT SO MUCH...):</span></b></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">1. Production was incredible, 3 hours of landscape made interesting by watching it on a huge screen and the 3D thingy. However, there were not remarkable quotes or lines throughout the movie...let alone memorable speeches. The story plot itself was pretty plain.</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">2. The way Cameron tried to make the fiction real. Read this piece to learn the “</span><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20091221/sc_space/therealscienceofavatar"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">real science behind Avatar”</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">. One of the elements I liked the most was the explanation Dr. Augustine gave of the connection of the Na'vi to all other living organisms within Pandora was great. The neurological connection linked as a net was pretty neat…would have prefer more of this and less of that…(asking forgiveness for killing their food type of thing....) Anywho,</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">3. The Avatar concept itself. The sci-fi potential behind the idea is mindblowing. If your one body gets ruined, you could reborn -sort of- in a new body with your very own mind. Yeah, cool.</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"> </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">WHAT I THOUGHT WAS WRONG:</span></b></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">1. The senseless-cliché of having "private corporations" as the essence of pure evil.</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"> I agree with Felipe when he states “[Cameron] does not </span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">portrays a critique against laissez-faire. He rather criticizes corporate mercantilism and violation of property rights”. However, there’s never said -or imply- a critique to the government by providing privileges to this company. Therefore, the audience walks away without grasping that it is mercantilism which is wrong, not free market competition.</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">2. Again another cliché: making look bad wanting to make profits, by saying they get them at all costs. </span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">This is represented in the scene where the company director explains his stockholders do not like the bad press generating from the Na’vi been killed. However, he then asserts that what it would upset them the most would be the fact of losing profits. </span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">That is so not true. It is indeed the sole purpose of private enterprises to make profit by respecting individual rights, of which one is to respect others private property.</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">3. Contradiction people contradiction: they spent around $300 million to do it, including more than $150 in marketing that includes banners, toys, set, all the set props for the movie (products coming from mines anyone...?) They are criticizing the very same wealth that allowed them to do this high-tech movie. </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /><br /></span><span class="apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">WHAT WAS THE REAL ISSUE, YET NOT QUITE GRASPED BY PRODUCTION</span></b></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">1. This was an issue of property conflict.</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"> </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Roy Cordato tells us that "environmental problems" are problems of "interpersonal conflict" which arise from the incorrect definition of property rights. </span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">In this particular case, it appears the Na'vi were the rightful owners of the property the "evil humans" wanted to get. Humans were invading some sort of private property. They surely didn't have the right to claim such property by force, because it wasn't theirs to get. It should have been a negotiation. If the humans in fact had nothing the Na'vi would find valuable, well, they would have to go somewhere else.</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"> Commerce is the most pacific transaction among humans. Two entities who are willing to voluntarily exchange one value for another of higher value to them. </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /><br /></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">2. Intrusion is indeed a violation of individual rights, but I would dare to say it is mostly done by governments and not private enterprises. Besides, it is very likely that in the future, the "evil human" will be played, in fact, by government officials since "space anything" is permitted by legal-law (this isn’t really saying the same, another whole post on it…) only to the government. There are, so far, very mild and timid efforts by private enterprises (Virgin's commercial suborbital flights to be precise). As the book "Space: The Free-Market Frontier" states, space enterprises are still legally under the government power. </span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"> </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height:115%;Tahoma","sans-serif";font-family:";color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">3. The false dichotomy between preserving the environment or reaching a better standard of life by acquiring services or technologies that destroy the environment. It had been showed that the issue is rather to whom the property belongs to. When in private hands endangered species or total ecosystems are better preserved when in the hands of government. </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style=" line-height:115%;Tahoma","sans-serif";font-family:";color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">However, these points weren’t quite understood by the director of the movie. Cameron laid it out on the context of the global warming mainstream propaganda saying it is us humans who destroyed our planet and then go like virus destroying the home of somewhere else (Matrix anyone...?). They do all these by atrocious greed of making money by killing if necessary. </span></span></span><span style="line-height:115%;Tahoma","sans-serif";font-family:";color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /><br /></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">I mean, what a coincidence it was released just the week the Copenhagen Climate thingy went through. </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style=" line-height:115%;Tahoma","sans-serif";font-family:";color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Well, and that’s that. </span></span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="line-height:115%;Tahoma","sans-serif";font-family:";font-size:5.5pt;color:#333333;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 18px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:x-small;">The picture comes from the wikipedia site</span></span></span></p>Susette Españahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11906270994233579255noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-90598411274578555642009-12-28T19:45:00.000-08:002009-12-28T20:14:33.020-08:00And then there were noneWhoomp, <a href="http://mises.org/daily/3956">there</a> it is. A self-contained experiment in credit expansionism gone wrong.<div><br /></div><div>I think this article from the Mises Institute describes the situation fairly well, and while it is indeed a cop-out to writing a full post, it is Christmas season, so I get off the hook easily (let's start with a bang in January, say, free apartments in Burj Dubai to all who suscribe?)</div><div><br /></div><div>However, I would like to add two things to the LvMI article.</div><div><br /></div><div>No. 1. The article raises an interesting point, but leaves it undeveloped. Judicial institutions will now be extremely important in the UAE and the perception the world will have of Dubai will depend heavily on how it will manage the fact that its most attacked defendant will be the State itself.</div><div><br /></div><div>The lesson here is that the judicial system is extremely important for the market to develop its self-corrective forces. I don't want to sound statist, I am convinced that any sort of judicial system is favorable (though I do vouch for the existence of a state-run judicial system coexistent with private means of arbitration), so the important thing is a clear headed system that protects property rights and is not afraid to lay the blame where it should rest.</div><div><br /></div><div>No. 2. Hey, invest in Dubai. No, no, I'm not being paid to fuel another bubble. But asset-price correction is driving the cost of Dubai homes and estates down like crazy. Maybe by mid-2010 the properties will be accessible to non-institutional investors in the int'l marketplace. Mortgage liquidation procedures will definitely help.</div><div><br /></div><div>What better way to aid the ailing Dubai economy and at the same time find a great, luxury estate at an at-cost price than relocating to Dubai?</div><div><br /></div><div>Fellow bloggers, am I wrong in this prediction?</div>Alfonso Grimaldohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12255097224817272714noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-46798228321534067522009-12-07T17:01:00.000-08:002009-12-07T17:26:36.425-08:00World Domination By Taxing The Air You Breath<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_3v6R65nj74I/Sx2rNnXfbII/AAAAAAAAAlg/wAqSZj9apqI/s1600-h/_46876168_industrial_sunrise226_201x150.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 201px; height: 150px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_3v6R65nj74I/Sx2rNnXfbII/AAAAAAAAAlg/wAqSZj9apqI/s320/_46876168_industrial_sunrise226_201x150.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5412670577563364482" /></a><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" color: rgb(128, 128, 128); font-family:'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;font-size:11px;"><h3 class="GenericStory_Message" ft="{"type":"msg"}" style=" color: rgb(51, 51, 51); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; font-size:13px !important;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">This type of news gives me the creeps. It makes me think that the future could make Rand's Atlas Shrugged look like a walk to the park. My unnerving mood arises from various very grave reasons. To name a few:</span></span></h3><h3 class="GenericStory_Message" ft="{"type":"msg"}" style=" color: rgb(51, 51, 51); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; font-size:13px !important;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></h3><h3 class="GenericStory_Message" ft="{"type":"msg"}" style=" color: rgb(51, 51, 51); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; font-size:13px !important;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">-That the EPA (</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 19px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Environmental Protection Agency)</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" line-height: normal; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family:'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> can ORDER cuts in emissions without the approval of Congress...surely paves the way for a SUPRANATIONAL MONSTROUS ENTITY aiming to control our lives through the environmental case.</span></span></span></h3><h3 class="GenericStory_Message" ft="{"type":"msg"}" style=" color: rgb(51, 51, 51); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; font-size:13px !important;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></h3><h3 class="GenericStory_Message" ft="{"type":"msg"}" size="13px !important" style=" color: rgb(51, 51, 51); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">-That they're saying using cap-and-trade as a</span><span class="text_exposed_show" style="display: inline; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> more efficient way of reducing emissions doesn't pay it off for me. This is an artifitially created market in which they do mess around with the way resources are assigned.</span></span></h3><h3 class="GenericStory_Message" ft="{"type":"msg"}" size="13px !important" style=" color: rgb(51, 51, 51); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; "><span class="text_exposed_show" style="display: inline; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></h3><h3 class="GenericStory_Message" ft="{"type":"msg"}" size="13px !important" style=" color: rgb(51, 51, 51); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; "><span class="text_exposed_show" style="display: inline; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">-How they dare to categorically say "The US government has declared that greenhouse gases threaten human health" and then add "the EPA's "endangerment finding" was needed to allow the agency to regulate carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases released by vehicles, power plants and factories under the federal Clean Air Act." What?! This means that you no longer are allowed to breath for free because carbon dioxide comes from where...? Yes, you got ir right: your own breathing.</span></span></h3><h3 class="GenericStory_Message" ft="{"type":"msg"}" size="13px !important" style=" color: rgb(51, 51, 51); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></h3><h3 class="GenericStory_Message" ft="{"type":"msg"}" size="13px !important" style=" color: rgb(51, 51, 51); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; "><span class="text_exposed_show" style="display: inline; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> I mean, haven't you just read how very important raw data and econometric models had been manipulated to fit the EPA's claim and tricking people into believe this is all true. Notice the marketing effort on making it all seem necessary by portraying the picture of pipelines in the midst of the work. Now, to me what this image represents is the picture of progress for everyone in this planet. </span></span></h3><h3 class="GenericStory_Message" ft="{"type":"msg"}" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></h3><h3 class="GenericStory_Message" ft="{"type":"msg"}" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; "><span class="text_exposed_show" style="display: inline; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The picture is from the BBC News site and you can read the full report </span><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8400323.stm"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">here</span></a></span></h3></span>Susette Españahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11906270994233579255noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-78750351003296568332009-12-01T23:19:00.000-08:002009-12-01T23:38:06.462-08:00Candidato Libertario podría forzar una segunda vuelta electoral en Costa Rica<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2009/diciembre/01/_Img/2634712_0.jpg"><img style="text-align: justify;display: block; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: auto; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 243px; " src="http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2009/diciembre/01/_Img/2634712_0.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">¡Saludos a todos nuestros lectores! Mi nombre es Felipe Echandi Lacayo y soy el tercer autor de este blog (que hasta ahora se incorpora al la discusión). Soy costarricense de nacimiento y panameño naturalizado y creo firmemente en la libertad individual en todas sus manifestaciones. Junto con Susette y Alfonso estaré subiendo noticias y posts relacionados con las ideas que defendemos.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Como primera participación mía, quiero compartir una noticia que salió en el diario La Nación de Costa Rica el día 1 de diciembre de 2009: <a href="http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2009/diciembre/01/pais2178024.html">Otto Guevara duplica apoyo y emerge opción de 2a ronda</a>. En esta noticia, se presentaron los resultados de una encuesta que revela que el candidato del Partido Movimiento Libertario, Otto Guevara Güth duplicó su apoyo desde el mes de septiembre de este año contando con una intención de voto del 30%. Este resultado lo posiciona como segunda fuerza política detrás de Laura Chinchilla, del partido socialdemócrata Liberación Nacional quien cuenta con un 43% de la intención de voto.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">La Constitución Política costarricense requiere que para que un candidato presidencial sea elegido, éste debe obtener al menos un 40% de los votos válidos. Por este motivo, el hecho que Chinchilla haya reducido su apoyo de 63% a 43% desde el mes de septiembre podría significar que luego de las elecciones de febrero del año que viene, los costarricenses tengamos que acudir a una segunda ronda entre Chinchilla y Guevara.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">En lo personal, esta noticia me ha alegrado muchísimo. El Movimiento Libertario es el partido que representa de manera más fiel el ideal liberal que defiendo como modo de vida. Entre las propuestas de Guevara figura hacer apertura económica unilateral, dolarizar la economía (eliminando el Colón), eliminar trámites que entorpecen la creación de empresas, y desregular ciertos sectores que se encuentran fuertemente intervenidos por el Estado.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">¡Se puso emocionante la contienda electoral en Costa Rica! Especialmente considerando que podría ganar un gobierno libertario.</div>Felipehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15318028192336484772noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-83072963944898659912009-11-26T14:42:00.000-08:002009-11-26T14:45:05.119-08:00THANKSGIVING for Private Property<span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">On this National Holiday in the USA, there is a wide range of news on Thanksgiving telling ways in which several of its citizens have decided to celebrate it. From college kids who are planning a 4 day-hard-core party-time to those who find it as a way to share with their dear families.<br /><br />However, very little, tiny, minuscule attention is given in the mainstream media to the real <strong>origins of this celebration</strong>. Standard school text books say, it is a way to celebrate the sharing of a good crop, back in the days the Pilgrims came to this continent. However, it is my suspicion, <strong>such books might suffer from Alzheimer -or something along the lines, because they constantly forget to tell how such crop came to be</strong>. They initially tried common property under the motto "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need". However as this Bloomberg columnist, Caroline Baum, reminds us: “young, able-bodied men resented working for others without compensation.” They thought it an “injuestice” to receive the same allotment of food and clothing as those who didn’t pull their weight. What they lacked were appropriate incentives.”<br /><br />To read an entertaining article on how <strong>Thanksgiving is really a celebration of how the establishment of private property in the USA paved the way for progress and freedom</strong>, go </span><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=ar_eY28ZfKCc"><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">here</span></a><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">.</span>Susette Españahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11906270994233579255noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-83183953017468669592009-11-25T15:44:00.000-08:002009-11-25T16:09:52.933-08:00Fluffy Regulation leads the way for Political Banking<span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">For very long, it has been said that private business and politics should not mix. Like that old saying of “don’t mix business with pleasure”. I have my doubts about the accuracy of the old saying...but of the former I have none. It is indeed tragic when such a mix takes place. It is far worse than teens wearing <a href="http://www.sheepskinbootssale.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Celebs-Uggs-ugg-boots-266152_301_329.jpg">Ugg boots in heated summer</a>! Yes, that bad!!!<br /><br />Now, the Public Choice School explains that although in both economics and politics it is the same people who act, they are moved by different incentives in each case. In the political arena the concern is maximizing election votes. So, they tend to fulfill the short-term requests of pressure groups to achieve this goal. Alas, in economics the concern is to generate as much profit as possible, which in a free economy is achieved only by fulfilling the consumer demands. <br /><br />Ever since the present crisis was unveiled it is been said that more, puffier, fluffier, stronger (no, I’m not talking about <a href="http://i.ehow.com/images/GlobalPhoto/Articles/5397017/359000_Full.jpg">80’s overly sprayed hairdos</a>) regulation is the much needed solution to prevent it from happening ever again. Think again and get back at your history books, wasn’t it the regulators with <strong>endless baloney regulation</strong> who got us there in the first place?!<br /><br />BBC had reported that several banks “saved” by the “Stimulus Package” are now undergoing a politization process. As if it wasn’t enough of responsibility been accountable to the company’s stakeholders, the report also adds “...it has become clear that the banks will have to negotiate with more and more lobbyists, unions and campaign groups as government-owned companies are forced to become more responsive to issues in the public interest.” The sole more important <strong>responsibility of a private enterprise is to make profit for its owners</strong> (this, by no means imply it will be done through unethical behavior, so hold your guns anti-profit people!)<br /><br />However, given the banks accepted the taxpayer’s money to bail them out of their mistakes, they will have to deal with claims as ridiculous as this: “Royal Bank of Scotland Plc has been targeted by indigenous groups from Canada. They aim to stop RBS from lending money to companies that invest in oil sand extraction in northern Canada.” On the Cadbury hostile bidding by Kraft, the bank is receiving the following claim “Trade unionists and Labour Party politicians have demanded to know why a bank that is majority-owned by the U.K. people is helping out with the dismemberment of a fine old local company.”<br /><br />There is an underlying and unfortunate issue here. <strong>This very same lobbying process that is seeing bankers act like polititians, will see bankers in a future crises turning to polititians to save them again</strong>. They won’t be taking their lending decisions based on productivity, but instead in social groups complains. They will be lending money to people who won’t be fit to pay and -Yes, you have guessed that right- a new chain of insolvency will come our way…yet again. </span><br /><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">Read the full report here...wait no, I meant <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=abxAJN7w74LQ">here!</a></span>Susette Españahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11906270994233579255noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-86028622841774077182009-11-22T22:57:00.000-08:002009-11-22T23:03:41.453-08:00Right, so, finally?The situation in <a href="http://mensual.prensa.com/mensual/contenido/2009/11/23/hoy/mundo/2004362.asp">Honduras</a> seems to be coming to an end after most political parties which had threatened not to participate in the late 2009 elections, well, had a change of heart.<div><br /></div><div>It's good to see that the candidate from Zelaya's own party, Elvin Santos, has declared that 21st century <del>nonsense</del> socialism has no place in Honduras. Let's see if hopefully he can take the lessons he has acquired through his life as a businessman and let the market forces salvage the Honduran economic system.</div><div><br /></div><div>Regardless, this Sunday Honduras will vote and the Zelaya - Micheletti quandary will be put to an end.</div><div><br /></div><div>I hope.</div>Alfonso Grimaldohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12255097224817272714noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-19106204333440091732009-11-22T10:24:00.000-08:002009-11-22T10:30:33.717-08:00Environmental Debate reaches CATACLYSMIC ProportionsThere is indeed a debate going, a debate of CATACLYSMIC PROPORTIONS -just so we get into the environmental lingo-. The debate could be labelled as the “debate for environmental concerns” and it had been taken to several differing -contrasting levels. It is discussed in politics, economics and academic research (nothing unusual about that).<br /><br />However, we see the debate had reached other rather dissonancing grounds: such as school groups where kids are asked to join save-the-environment-groups if they want to show they’re moral beings. The entertainment industry had identified it as a major source of getting mass attention and we hear how almost every single entertainer who claims to defend the “right things” is an environmentalist. You can get a glimpse of that as they go errands around Tinseltown running their environmental-friendly-cars. They’re also very vocal about their concern and let you know through concerts, public speeches, marches, charity events, galas, movie premiers…the list is endless.<br /><br />However, taking the debate to its more fundamental grounds, it seems it is not even near to be clear out. For a lot of years now, there are scientists who claim the planet will perish to the hands of the ruthless destroying behaviour of human beings. And there are those scientists (the minority) who claim the earth had gone through dramatic climate change throughout all its history and the impact of human beings is very infinitesimal.<br /><br />These two sides are clearly identified in two videos. One is the massive promoted video by Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” and the other is the BBC produced “The Great Global Warming Swindle” (TGGWS). The first states as a major claim that the alarming increased levels of CO2 had been produced by the contaminating industries of irresponsible industrialists. While the TGGWS rejects this and states CO2 is just a very-tiny-part of the green-house gases and that most of it is produced by natural processes (decomposition, breathing…mind you).<br /><br />So, we have the public left without really knowing which side is telling the story right. To spice up the debate a little bit, the Wall Street Journal reported how “Hacked Emails Show Climate Science Ridden with Rancor” and it states “In several of the emails, climate researchers discussed how to arrange for favorable reviewers for papers they planned to publish in scientific journals. At the same time, climate researchers at times appeared to <strong>pressure scientific journals not to publish research by other scientists whose findings they disagreed with</strong>”. Ohhh, how very interesting, the reports continues “the tension between those two camps is apparent in the emails. More recent messages showed climate scientists were increasingly <strong>concerned about blog postings and articles on leading skeptical Web sites</strong>. Much of the internal discussion over scientific papers centered on how to pre-empt attacks from prominent skeptics, for example.”<br /><br />Read the story for a full scoop <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125883405294859215.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLTopStories">here</a>Susette Españahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11906270994233579255noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-31786602293434829612009-11-21T00:00:00.000-08:002009-11-21T00:41:57.788-08:00Medical MELTDOWN<span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">There are so many lessons all over the World on how mandatory health care insurance had not contributed to decreased poverty; or improve access to medical services of low-income people. Still, many politicians in the US insist on <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aaLQxPj7QoyE&pos=8">passing a 2,074-pages bill </a>to make it mandatory<br /><br />This is a clear example of how government officials think of the citizens as handicapped creatures that need to be told what to do with their own lives.<br /><br />It is true not all cases are the same. However, health care reforms that demand more government intervention are doomed to fail. This is so because the success of such reforms depends on the accuracy of the planning done by central planners. It had been stated that the three biggest employers in the world are the Indian State Railways, the Chinese Army and England’s National Health System (NHS). Of the latter one, about 1 out of 23 English workers are in the NHS; and of those about half the employees are administrative. This means a large percentage of the budget goes to pay for bureaucracy rather than medical services. This makes it extremely inefficient: i.e. cancer survival in the UK reduces to 77% as opposed to a 100% in the US. </span><br /><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;"><br />In those countries where there's massive government health care, waiting lists become mortal and <em>medical tourism </em>becomes the norm. Except that with this bill -you see- <em>medical tourism</em> will be over since many countries have adopted similar reforms. So much for your "inexpensive-access-to-all public-health-system". Review this piece by <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=8227482">John Stossel </a>for a more in-depth analysis. </span>Susette Españahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11906270994233579255noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-28859367981068842952009-11-20T19:36:00.000-08:002009-11-20T20:31:13.181-08:00My Corner of the Universe.<span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">Hi, I’m Susette and I confess I’m a hard-core advocate of the Individual and the system which allows him to be the best he can be: Capitalism.<br /><br />So, after that smooth preamble, I state it is my intention for Libertarium to be a witty, updated source of knowledge by analyzing news -and endless ways in which people communicate- from a libertarian point of view.<br /><br />Economics, business, politics, art, science, entertainment, education and even your-very-random-everyday-little-stuff are all more related than you might think. They all fall within the realm of human action which implies decision-taking, and whether this decision-taking should be left to the individual or to a higher-collective entity.<br /><br />Now, before we get into business, I am pleased to say it is indeed a thrill to contribute to this space along with the witty minds of both Alfonso and Felipe. Because we share principles but continually challenge our own arguments, this shall be a fun place to stick around!</span>Susette Españahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11906270994233579255noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-57615915084997866842009-11-19T20:20:00.001-08:002009-11-19T20:22:14.119-08:00Small Victory for Free MarketsThe European Union has announced that it will reduce the tariffs it imposes on the importation of bananas, which strikes an amazing deal for both European consumers (less costly) and regional producers (more profits).<div><br /></div><div>More <a href="http://mensual.prensa.com/mensual/contenido/2009/11/19/hoy/negocios/1999220.asp">here</a>.</div>Alfonso Grimaldohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12255097224817272714noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-40231381332529749152009-11-18T21:18:00.001-08:002009-11-18T21:18:49.098-08:00The PARLACEN Affair<span class="Apple-style-span" style=" ;font-family:Tahoma, 'Sans Serif', Arial;font-size:11px;"><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Panama is leaving the PARLACEN, and may I add, finally. The Minister for Foreign Affairs reported recently that should those countries that oppose the departure (by PARLACEN rules, if one single country opposes the exit of another member state, the latter is barred from quitting) do not withdraw their objections, Panama would leave the organization unilaterally.</span></span></p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "> </p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Now, the process through which Panama would do that is highly dubious. The Government would be invalidating the original bill through which Panama’s National Assembly ratified the PARLACEN treaty.</span></span></p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "> </p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Regardless, this is a momentous occasion. The PARLACEN has shown, in my opinion, to be needless bureaucracy and as far as I can tell, my life as a citizen of Panama is no better after our adherence to the PARLACEN than before.</span></span></p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "> </p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Now, I ask, could we please get the money we will stop paying PARLACEN members back as a tax rebate. Rather than waste that money in unnecessary government expenditure, why not hand it back and let the private economy deal with it in the most efficient way?</span></span></p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "> </p><p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Most likely it won’t happen, but that’s alright. In my opinion, leaving the PARLACEN is good news for all Panamanians.</span></span></p></span>Alfonso Grimaldohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12255097224817272714noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1877750525098777484.post-18074167743099482962009-11-16T23:52:00.000-08:002009-11-16T23:55:15.957-08:00Hello, World!My name is Alfonso Grimaldo and I am one of the contributors to (the?) Libertarium. The purpose of this blog, for me, is to spread economical and political knowledge from the point of view of classical liberals and free marketeers.<div><br /></div><div>It will be a great way to engage in discussions with other like-minded people, in particular, the two great and really smart people who will be also contributing to this blog.</div><div><br /></div><div>To conclude rapidly, I hope we can keep this place brimming with interesting stuff, new points of view and great and intelligent debate, and keep you coming for more!</div>Alfonso Grimaldohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12255097224817272714noreply@blogger.com0