Why I'm a Libertarian Populist

This was a recent email blast to friends and family.  Thought it was worthwhile to start compiling some of the good stuff I am hearing about Libertarian Populism.  Here was the email:

As for why I'm a Libertarian-Populist, I'll let these folks explain.  They do a very good job.

 

http://bit.ly/1aIbG2d - Timothy Carney - Libertarian Populism

"The game is rigged against the regular guy in America today. And it’s rigged in favor of big business, the politically connected, and the wealthy."

Carney may be the best spokesman for this idea.  He writes books and columns on business/government cronyism among Republicans and Democrats.  He is not partisan along the current left/right spectrum, but more along the big/small spectrum.
 

http://bit.ly/12wuigi - Conn Carroll - Economic Populism

"Ultimately, the basic prescription for the GOP is a healthy dose of economic populism... This includes a lot of changes Democrats would presumably enjoy, such as jettisoning the pro-big business, Wall Street-style conservatism that characterized the Romney campaign."

This article outlines some of the main policy points of a Libertarian-Populist agenda.  I essentially agree with all of these.  This agenda isn't inherently a GOP agenda, especially with regards to a McCain/Graham/Romney/Bush type GOP.  

 

I guess the reason these policies are usually approached from the Republican side of the isle is because they more closely match up with a small-government concept.  However, the recent GOP has violated that basic principle again and again.  Some of the best current politicians supporting these ideas are Rand Paul (Sen-KY), Justin Amash (Rep-MI), Mike Lee (Sen-UT), and Ted Cruz (Sen-TX).

 

http://herit.ag/10XXbRg - Mike Lee UT Senator - What Conservatives are For
 

"The essence of human freedom, of civilization itself, is cooperation."

Libertarianism-Populism (some overlaps to "Conservatism") isn't an "Ayn Rand everyone on their own view of the world", but a picture of voluntary cooperation among communities.  The illustration of a Libertarianism that is in favor of "No Roads, No Schools, Wild West, Every Man for Himself" is a straw man.  This idea is used by the powerful and connected to make themselves rich using the current, corrupt system.  This is the entitled class that hurts most Americans due to their cronyism, taxation and competition killing action.  This is the class that Libertarian-Populism is designed to de-throne.

Additional excellent reading:

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-case-against-cronies-libertarians-must-stand-up-to-corporate-greed/275404/
 

http://washingtonexaminer.com/the-middle-class-or-the-middle-men/article/2533415

The Parallel Universe of Prosperity and Peace

During discussions on economic policy, I sometimes utilize the Sci-Fi concept of a parallel universe.  To do this, I ask my friend in discussion if he agrees to the premise that capitalism - along with the required rule of law and protection of property - is the framework that enabled our relatively high standard of living compared to other countries and compared to our own past.  If he has any difficulties with this concept, we usually have to go back over some basic history and economics.  It is absolutely vital to know that this premise is true, that the economy is not a zero-sum game where there always was and will always be a fixed amount of wealth, but that through capitalism our wealth grew and we created general prosperity. 

Once he agrees to that premise, I like to ask him to imagine a world (or parallel universe) in which:

1. the government expanding follies of the New Deal were never committed, 
2. we remained on a Gold standard, instead of empowering the market-distorting, money-printing Federal Reserve, 
3. the labor force of the federal and local government had not grown to 22 million Americans, 
4. our debt had not ballooned to 16 trillion at the federal level and much, much higher at the local levels and when including unfunded liabilities, 
5. federal regulations had not grown to 170,000 pages, and 
6. the myriad of other market-distorting practices of government were never put into place.

How much richer would we be?  What would that level of productivity do to poverty in the United States? Or around the world?  What would it do to the average standard of living?  To what degree would the ills of society which are targeted by government social programs be fixed and eradicated through that wealth and the incentives of private individuals?

Every time an individual or group attempts to use the coercive power of government to get goodies for themselves (eg. farm subsidies, unnecessary military spending, energy subsidies, Medicaid, Medicare, Obamacare, etc.) they should have someone follow them shouting -

“YOU’RE MAKING US ALL POORER!”

I’ve always wanted to quantify how much poorer these short-sighted, power hungry oppressors are making us.  Luckily, some very smart individuals have done it for me.  John W. Dawson of Appalachian State University and John J. Seater of NC State University have conducted a study titled: Federal Regulation and Aggregate Economic Growth.  The study is also summarized, with some helpful additional information, by Reason Magazine in Federal Regulations Have Made You 75 Percent Poorer.  Both have excellent insight into how much richer we would be in the universe governed by sound economic principles.

I intend to uncover and discuss many of the ways government is making us poorer in subsequent blog posts.

Next time you hear someone talking about how they must have their pet big-government goodie protected, maybe you can be the person telling them how they are making us all poorer through their misunderstanding of economics.  But please, don’t shout.