Even a broken clock can be correct two times per day.
The average Venezuelan eats eat more and better than they did before Chavez took power in 1999.
One of the most applauded achievements of his 14-year rule was to make food affordable through price controls and subsidized grocery stores, a triumph recognized in 2013 by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization.
Since 1990, Venezuela achieved a 50 percent reduction in the number of citizens facing hunger, the U.N. said - two years ahead of a global target date for reaching that goal."
, but such top-down destruction of the free market always ends disastrously.
With the midwest oil bonanza over the past years, USA is approaching being an oil and natural gas exporter and the largest producer in the world ahead of Russia and Saudi Arabia.
Also the comments at the wakeupfromyourslumber.com link on that article are very interesting and in line with my view of how the energy has been suppressed by the cartels.
What we really have going on is always a mix of people trying to fight for freedom and the banksters exploiting human nature to their ends.
Hitler's experimentation into state-socialism failed. We can claim that Germany was more prosperous for a few years by printing its own money, just as we can claim China is more prosperous now by printing its own Yuan and directing it top-down to infrastucture.
But we see how it always ends, because such activity is not economic. The bankers bided their time while Hitler created a social liability, then when the time was right, they used their leverage over oil to force Hitler into aggression, because Hitler had to keep the socialism apparatus funded with cheap energy. Yeah okay we can say that Stalin had threatened Poland, but in reality these states were competing for resources, because they had promised socialism.
It is always the result that social, e.g. universal healthcare, results in war and failure.
We can say that Hitler was fighting the bankers, but he could only win the hearts of the people, by promising them more than the bankers were. So he increased the socialism and misallocation of capital. Remember my recent article, wherein I explained the math that top-down systems always fail.
Of course in the early stages, misallocation via top-down control appears to be prosperous. It is only in the latter stages (e.g. what China is approaching now) where the failure sets in.
Perhaps Hitler's hand was forced sooner than it would have been otherwise, if Germany hadn't been so dependent on external oil. But even if he had oil internally, the socialism would have eventually imploded on him any way.
So I still stick with that universal health care created the mindset that the weak are to blame for not being able to give away for free, that which is not free.
Excellent article! I learned a lot. Hilter was definitely a meglo-manaic, but he thought he had a better way. Of course, socialism is always failure, not matter what the intentions.
> I believe you are misjudging it. In my view most money they spent was spent productively.
Never is top-down spent money the most productive, but it often takes a long time for this to become clear.
In 5 years or less, we can talk about what happened to China after it is proven because they have collapsed.
The vital infrastructure typically is the least wasteful, e.g. the autobahn. But it is more wasteful than what a free market would have done with the same human capital. The politics and type of economy we see today in Germany was molded and shifted course somewhat by those infrastructure in Weimer era. And Germany is a failed state right now (depend on China and PIIGS imports).
This will all be more proven in a few more years.
It is silly for us to argue about it. We will know the outcome in a few years at most. Let's just wait to see.
> It was not the healthcare that killed them but
> the war effort.
Agreed, but the healthcare socialism (and its economic failure)
contributed to the development of the mindset for purging the weak.
When we promise healthcare to all, we socially get concerned about the cost of the weak.
It fits into the German psychology that men can improve and perfect the world. The German philosophers all exhibited this trait, and I can even see it in the Germans I meet here, they think they are better than everyone else. And Germans are known to write down an inventory of every item they buy for their household. I remember there was a time in the 1980s (when my WordUp software was published in Germany) when Germans did not want to adopt color computer screens for publishing, because they felt the B&W was more purely focused on the content and the essence of the layout.
I have German blood. I know that is where the perfectionist in me comes from. It is genetic. I have it more so than my father's side of the family, which is Welch and southern French.
I also got this native Cherokee blood, which gives me a bit of emotional and harmony with nature side, like the filipinos.
Hitler was an artist. He was dreaming of a perfect world where the superior race can do art and be prosperous. His dream was not all that far from my dream with an Inverse Commons where we can focus on knowledge creation and art. (software is an art).
The difference I hope is that I am not a megalomania in extremis. If ever I find I am top-down controlling my creation, I am likely to be repulsed and conflicted.
> War is always unproductive, even destructive and it
> was that that did them in financially in the later years.
Oh I agree. But they would have ended up a failed state any way, because Hitler fundamentally did not understand nature and economics. Top-down planning always ends up economically failed. Always. And you can try to rationalize that there has never been a test-case without the bankers meddling, but mathematically I am sure that is a strawman or red-herring.
I have explained it in my last two papers:
http://www.coolpage.com/commentary/economic/shelby/Understand%20Everything%20Fundamentally.htmlhttp://www.coolpage.com/commentary/economic/shelby/Demise%20of%20Finance,%20Rise%20of%20Knowledge.htmlI don't expect you to agree with me, because you really want to believe that if we could wipe out the bankers, that we could reach some nirvana.
For some reasons, the Germanic cultures think that nirvana is possible with man.
It violates entropy. It is mathematically false. I would have to try to explain this mathematically better than I have. But for now, I have no time to do that.
Erik Verlinde is proving that everything in nature is emergent from entropy:
I find Erik's explanation in the following video makes it easier to understand.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yk_Yy6TqgJs#t=675s> Of course the Jews will deny that forever, because Hitler's financial model cannot be allowed to make school, then and now.
Bill Still of the Money Masters via fame, along with Karl Denninger, are promoting this
"if the state can print its own money" school of thought.
The USA did during the Civil War apparently (the notes ended up worthless, but that is besides the point).
Any way, it will fail economically, because it is more top-down management of the economy.
There is no solution about money. And the reason is because money
represents passive capital and not active knowledge.
And thus I work on making knowledge a tradeable fungible unit in the Inverse Commons.
> Where would the
> money printers end up if each country started to print its own money?
They would wait for the economic failure of top-down money printing, and then they would be right back in business.
> Everything Hitler did must be demonized.
The bankers were probably helping him too, because they are smart enough to know that his model was doomed.
It is not as B&W as one might want to think.
> Of course, in the end his model was wrong too, because a government doesn't have any business printing money.
Bravo!
Happy we could agree on that!
I was worried you were going to idolized centralized solutions.
> Money is produced by the
> people in the form of products and services. If counterfeit money is printed, whether by Rothschild assholes or governments, it's still counterfeiting and theft.
Wow. We agree on a lot then.
Karl Denninger and I got in a very nasty argument in email, because he believes government printing its own money is a solution.