This was interesting book that reads like several essays made into a thesis, i.e., a bit hard to read for the lay reader. It did give valuable insightThis was interesting book that reads like several essays made into a thesis, i.e., a bit hard to read for the lay reader. It did give valuable insight to how bubbles and crashes happen and a solution to crashes. Some of the interesting points to the book were how it is very difficult to avoid a bubble (even if you are on the good standard, those financial types can be very creative apparently) and when you are not able to stop a bubble (perhaps because you don't recognize it for what it is or you're the one that is feeding it) then you need a lender of last resort. I don't know if I entirely buy into that though, since we have confidence in the system (by the FDIC) yet we still have to bailout the economy, so when will it ever stop? Probably never since even if you have good regulation the financial types will find a way around it, so you have to go back to the lender of last resort but you have to make people think that you will not always be that even though there has always been a lender of last resort ever since the 1720s (when the book starts talking about the different crises).
Overall I would say it's a good read with lots of information but unless you're up for a challenging book you better pick a different one. Part of what makes this book hard to read is that it seems like he assumes you are already knowledgeable of financial history and it is a bit dry, I must admit....more
This was a fun book that gives you a little bit of knowledge/history/anecdotes/biographies of running/runners. Definitely a nice read just for the history of running and for modern day ultra runners. This book makes you want to go out and run a hundred miles...although I don't think I'll be doing that anytime soon!
If it's not one injury it's another. Now my calves are too tight so I've taken another break to get a chance to stretch them so I can run again. I've been running in Barefoot Ted's huaraches (http://barefootted.com/) and I love them, I'll never go back to regular running shoes again. Just not the panacea I was hoping for.
Previous comments: Heard about this on KUER, Utah's APM radio show. Here's a link with an interview with the author. Sounds like a really interesting book and makes me want to learn how they run (it seems ever since I hit 27 my body doesn't seem to like exercising due to aches and pains, doesn't seem right!). http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kue......more
Very interesting book. I especially enjoyed the historical commentary of what was going on around her. It will be interesting to learn more of the ideVery interesting book. I especially enjoyed the historical commentary of what was going on around her. It will be interesting to learn more of the ideas of Ludwig. Apparently Ayn Rand was a fan to....more
Just read this article on the book by Murray Rothbard: http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/r... Fascinating commentary on the book and a must read so yoJust read this article on the book by Murray Rothbard: http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/r... Fascinating commentary on the book and a must read so you understand the book better. I love this book since it gives a hope for liberty in the future through a nonviolent means. It also makes you understand how this can be done, through education of the minds. Everything else is secondary.
This was a fascinating short narrative, which reads almost poetically, on the subjugation of man (or the masses) by despots. It wonders how the many can be coerced by so few. He makes many good points of why this is. He then goes on to explain how the many can reject this oppression in a relatively peaceful way. He does miss the one point of why it is difficult to reject tyranny, which is, when only a few reject the tyranny then the masses cannot overcome the subjection of one. There must be a critical mass of the few that can make the change though, as was seen in the revolutionary war of the United States. Even though it is well accepted that the people carried the yoke of oppression from the British government many of the people still accepted this tyranny and wished that the colonies would not revolt. This put a great hamper on the people to overcome the king.
Below I argue that tyranny has been invading the American life for quite some time.
I would say that the tyranny of those in the national government has also become burdensome. This process has been occurring since the beginning of the creation of the constitution as the meanings and protections it provides have become more and more obscured. This seems to have happened by a dividing of the people in two groups. One group that is anti-war (not really, they just want to go at a slower pace) and pro-“nannyism” (the slow takeover of all parts of peoples lives). The other group is anti-“nannyism” (not really, they just want to go at a slower pace) and pro-war. Although there is much rhetoric between the two groups they seem to be, I paraphrase, two wings of the same cruel bird.
The narrative explained how the masses are willing to subjugate themselves. This was done by feeding the people occasional lavish dinners and providing shows and other entertainment to the people. Does this sound familiar? As seen from above today it is done by claiming that they need to “protect” us from the unseen or from far out possibilities thereby creating a military that has gotten out of control that are sent the whole world over to “protect” us by protecting others and by causing ravages the world over in the name of “protection” all the while killing its own citizens and 100s of thousands of others. They have also done this by giving handouts to the people by giving us drugs (and making us addicts), by promising continual health for all the people, by giving us food and shelter, by giving us shows and other “free” things, by claiming to make our old age “safe and secure”. All the while they do this they do not mention that they have taken far more from us than what they give back. We have seen a slowing in the economy in the last century caused by all these handouts. We have seen hidden taxes (inflation, taxing of corporations, etc) and not so hidden taxes (payroll tax, etc) increase without restraint....more
This book is a real eye opener on how commercial interests have superceded the health interests of people by being deeply imbedded in at all levels, iThis book is a real eye opener on how commercial interests have superceded the health interests of people by being deeply imbedded in at all levels, including the FDA, peered reviewed journals, our politicians, etc. The author goes over the best preventions for our health (exercise, good diet with lots of vegetables and fruit, and cessation of smoking are his main points). He goes over the minute effect of several drugs (and their bad effects on health) including statin drugs. He shows how statin drugs don't work nearly as well as exercise and have almost no positive effect on stopping heart disease.
The reason I didn't give the book 5 stars is due to the last section where the author proposes his plan to fix the health care problem and promotes universal health care. He knocks the republicans quite a bit in the book but if he saw what the democrats were doing now he would probably knock them too. He quotes Health Affairs "The inability of the health care industry to improve care sufficiently on its own and to increase the value that Americans receive for their dollars is an indication of private market failure." He also states that a new medical board free of political interference needs to be created like the Federal Reserve Board.
His assumptions are erroneous for several reasons. He assumes the federal reserve is unbiased and that they serve the public well (since they have created worse market imbalances and follow the Keynesian (the school of inflate the currency in order to have bubble on top of bubble on top of bubble) school of thought it baffles me how he thinks the medical community needs something like the fed). We also are seeing that the fed is very biased in its policies and not accountable to anyone (unless congress somehow gets to audit them). This also creates a public that assumes the federal entity is always right and they don't question them (as they do the drug makers).
The author assumes that we have a free market (from the quote above). What we have is a government-sponsored-monopoly market that has a pseudo-market inside the monopoly. The federal government required certification of doctors in the late 1800s which caused the Flexner Report (the review of the medical schools) which caused closing of many schools and burdensome regulation of the schools (hence the closing/merging of more than half the medical schools). Later FDR forced company pay caps which caused companies to offer insurance to its employees which has led to the mess we have today. Lessons learned, keep government out of our day-to-day lives and then we will have more choices and more people will have access to care and we won't have government sponsored monopolies.
See the following articles for a more in depth view of true health care reform:
From the introduction: "tests unlikely to improve patient care were being routinely ordered and expensive drugs that had not been shown to beny more effective or safer than the older drugs they were replacing were being routinely prescribed....What I found over the next two and a half years of 'researching the research' is a scandal in medical science that is at least the equivalent of any of the recent corporate scandals that have shaken Americans' confidence in the integrity of the corporate and financial worlds. Rigging medical studies, misrepresenting reasearch results published in even the most influential medical journals, and withholding the findings of whole studies that don't come out in a sponsor's favor have all become the accepted norm in comercially sponsored medical research....to insure its translation into medical practice-there is a complex web of corporate influence that includes diempowered regulatory agencies, commercially sponsored medical education, brilliant advertising, expensive public relations campaigns, and manipulation of free media coverage....[The corruption:] is now commonplace at even the most trusted of American health institutions, the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Adminstration."...more
I don't know how I could have a political opinion for national politics without reading this book first. I still need to learn so much. History is theI don't know how I could have a political opinion for national politics without reading this book first. I still need to learn so much. History is the teacher to look to. Jefferson learned most from history and his observations of it.
It was interesting to know that the basic political differences people have have always been around and that there will be two sets of people those for freedom and those for having others force them to do what they desire. It's unfortunate today that the two major political parties today stand for the latter.
This book has taught me that I need to continue to learn more history so I can better understand the world of today.
It would have been nice if the book expounded more on some of the constitutional principles, it seemed to gloss over some of them.
"John Adams was equally explicit: 'Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.'"
Comparing the Israelite law (which influenced the making of the Constitution) to that of the Constitution: "There was major emphasis on strong local self-government." - It seems many of the strifes that people have for one another (politically) could be solved by localizing many of the issues and keeping to the basic tenants in the constitution, i.e., keep the federal government to only constitutional issues and restoring some of the basic principles that separated the powers of the federal government....more
Fascinating look into the lives and customs of the Blackfeet Indians (East side of what is now Glacier National Park). The author makes an interestingFascinating look into the lives and customs of the Blackfeet Indians (East side of what is now Glacier National Park). The author makes an interesting and easy to read narrative about the Indians that could have been easily made boring and difficult to read.
It took me a while to get through book so I'll only quote some quotes I liked/thought were interesting towards the end of the book.
There is a well known trail we call the Old North Trail. It runs north and south along the Rocky Mountains. No one knows how long it has been used by the Indians. My father told me it originated in the migration of a great tribe of Indians from the distant north to the south, and all the tribes have, ever since, continued to follow in their tracks. The Old North Trail is now becoming overgrown with moss and grass but it was worn so deeply, by many generations of travelers, that the travois tracks and horse trail are still plainly visible. - Brings-down-the-Sun
I had no idea that the Indians were such a violent society. It was also interesting how their communal tribes would work to preserve the buffalo. It was also interesting how they used piskuns to get buffalo and other game before horses were available. It was sad to read about the loss of their old ways as they were pushed on the reservations and how the people became lazy because of it but even so some started to adapt and prosper under the new conditions....more
Nice to read many of the Prophet Joseph Smith's thoughts on basic church doctrine. It would be interesting to read directly in the History of the ChurNice to read many of the Prophet Joseph Smith's thoughts on basic church doctrine. It would be interesting to read directly in the History of the Church.
I feel funny rating church books (since there is an inherent bias and since I'm only reading for knowledge vs pleasure) so if anyone knows how to abstain from voting without affecting the rating let me know....more
I found this book to be quite insightful. You could see he understood how people worked (although that didn't mean he was able to interact with othersI found this book to be quite insightful. You could see he understood how people worked (although that didn't mean he was able to interact with others well) with an introduction which explained how people tend to keep to tradition regardless if it was wrong or not. It was fascinating to read how many of his arguments against the British constitution/government could be applied to the US constitution (apparently he was against the ratification of the constitution).
It was interesting to learn in the book club how he was probably the author of the US Declaration of Independence with Thomas Jefferson acting more as an editor and respected person to put his name on the document....more
This book is available for free from Mises.org in audio and pdf format.
This book was pretty cynical and didn't offer any solutions (be prepared to beThis book is available for free from Mises.org in audio and pdf format.
This book was pretty cynical and didn't offer any solutions (be prepared to be depressed after reading it). Written in 1935 it was fascinating to read pretty much exactly what has transpired since then. It makes you realize that we do just repeat history, over and over again. This book is a must read for anyone that wants to have a deeper understanding of human nature and "the state". Understanding history and philosophy is definitely important in understanding the political system around us. I would like to add that it doesn't matter what system of governance we have, if the people are wicked so shall be the government and its destruction and vice versa.
The book is broken up in six parts:
1) It goes over how the state gains power. He also makes observations about the US (one interesting one was how the two party system started from the beginning and how, since 1910, the two parties are not any different). 2) Then he goes over the difference between government and the state. 3) The then goes over the early history of the U.S. and it's experiences with Britain. He then goes on to tell how the State took over the U.S. 4) He then goes over the relationship of the state and land rights. 5) He then goes over how people consider the state to be social in nature but is truly anti-social. 6) He continues to go over how the state gains more and more power over the mindless masses taking every opportunity to increase its power. He says there is nothing you can do about it and that eventually it will topple just like all the other great civilizations of the past....more
Short and to the point this book did a nice job outlining the causes of the recent economic catastrophe perpetuated by the Fed and US government. A leShort and to the point this book did a nice job outlining the causes of the recent economic catastrophe perpetuated by the Fed and US government. A lesson learned from recent events...when the government is fear mongering, don't listen.
This book also does a short history of money and of the Federal Reserve. A cabal has taken place and it's in our own interest to become free from the wealth destruction that has and is occurring at the hands of our own government....more
Fascinating look into early Arizona history written by an early Arizonan. I had no idea that early Arizona was more of a liberal/democratic state. ItFascinating look into early Arizona history written by an early Arizonan. I had no idea that early Arizona was more of a liberal/democratic state. It makes a lot more sense reading the AZ constitution about why different provisions are in it. I wonder, when did AZ become more conservative? It would have been nice to have read the whole book, but I'll take what I can get.
Murdock starts the book out by telling the early history of AZ. It's interesting to read him talking about manifest destiny. He seems to defend it at the same time recognizing that all it was was land grabbing as did the Europeans, but it was OK for the US to do it because it was "practically uninhabited, or owned and possessed by backward people having no standing in the eyes of international law."
He talks of how we didn't purchase enough land because it would have been nice to have a sea port for AZ. He then talks of the slave issue and fights that the early territory had. He talks of how territories of the US were really just colonies by another name. He talks about how the politicians originally organized the territory by using "lame duck" congressmen to vote on it with the promise of political power in the territory. He then talks of the first capital (Prescott). He talks of how woman suffrage was denied by the US government. The good and bad of being a territory. The struggle for statehood (all the politics of it, people don't like change). Arizonans rejected the combination of New Mexico and Arizona.
Constitutional Convention of 1910
The delegates to the constitution (52 chosen, mostly democrats) fought over having "socialistic, populistic notions" for which the radical democrats wanted but the more conservative democrats were worried about the constitution being rejected. They fought over the initiative, referendum, and recall (recall of judges was reject by the national government but reinserted after AZ became a state, along with woman suffrage). The author states that the people of the US were tired of pure Republics because of the corruption of the elected officials, hence the reason AZ became a democratic republic. It's interesting to note how the governor of Oregon pleaded with AZ not to give the people a popular vote because it did not work but AZ did it anyways.
At the same time that AZ was becoming a state New Mexico was becoming a state too and had a much more traditional/conservative constitution. The author wondered which state would be more free as time went on. I looked up a liberterian study on this subject and it's interesting to note that AZ is claimed to be more free than NM according to the study. Of course, I don't know how much that has to do with democracy since we have seen how the election process can bring the people of AZ more freedom but it has done just the opposite too. See Freedom in the 50 States: An Index of Personal and Economic Freedom at http://mercatus.org/publication/freed... for the study. By the way it is unconstitutional for AZ to have a democratic republic from what I read in Article 4, Section 4, Clause 1, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_...
It's interesting to note how the author continually talks about how democracy is a new thing but, as seen in the above link, democracies have existed for quite some time.
At the time of the writing of the Arizona constitution the constitution was the "most progressive". Some of the progressive parts of the constitution are/were the corporation commission, public education, initiative, referendum, recall, water rights, decentralized executive department, long ballot, etc.
It was interesting to read about counties since no one pays attention to them very much so there seems to be much more corruption. He devotes a whole chapter to it and Arizona's counties.
Cities the Battleground of Democracy
Arizona uses a "commission form" that uses a "manager plan."
Arizona and Taxation
Arizona has a tax commission for the express purpose of dealing with taxation.
Arizona and Education
He goes into great detail on how education is funded in Arizona with $80 (~$1,343.80 in 2010 money) spent per child plus counties paying $1500 (~$25,200) for one-room schools and $3000 (~$50,400) for two-room schools. This makes me wonder what the actual per pupil spending was. How many kids would be in a school?
"The purpose of our education is to fit for proper living in a highly developed society, laying stress upon citizenship and the rights and duties of every member of the State. Arizona feels that her vast expenditure of money for education should result in a high type of citizens. For that reason, the teaching of the principles of free government is stressed as one of the first duties of the State supported schools....Yet the ancient principle holds true that those who govern must be intelligent. For that reason, the founders of this commonwealth made, as a part of the democratic foundation, provision that every future citizen should be trained in the best, free, non-sectarian school system that the taxpayers could possibly afford."
That quote just makes me cringe. The is perhaps the worst thing in the AZ constitution. What should have been in the constitution is that the State will not pay for any schooling of anyone in the state but let it be led by the free market, which will more likely bring about a righteous and freedom loving people.
The author states that the reason for the corporation commission is due to the rise of corporations and and it's damning influence on politicians who hand out special favors to these corporations.
This seems nonsensical that we would then create a year round governmental agency to create laws governing corporations while this commission is headed by the same people who are in these corporations. Let me see, corporations are corrupting politicians, therefore we need to just hand all the power over to the corporations through this commission. Doesn't make any sense to me. Let the free market rein is all I have to say. If they wanted to control the corporations from corrupting governmental authorities that should have just banned governments from supporting any type of business with money or any other type of favors. But instead we multiply the government and create a plethora of new laws.
Workmen's Compensation (amendment of 1925)
The forcing of businesses to purchase insurance for their employees. He uses this rationale for it being OK "It rather takes the edge off the criticism by pious souls that Arizona prohibits the teaching of the Bible in the public schools when it is perceived that the State of Arizona, through this insurance, exemplifies one of the greatest teachings in the Bible: 'Bear ye one another's burdens.'"
What he misses here is that the bible is talking about the individual not the collective.
"Until the Constitution of 1910, Arizona allowed aliens to vote if they were residents. This practice was fairly common, especially in the western states, where actual citizenship was often not a matter of great concern. Even the United States government had little interest in the matter until the Fourteenth Amendment was passed after the Civil War. Until 1917, it was fairly easy to enter the country legally and the question of citizenship was not stressed.
This makes me wonder what caused this change and what 14th amendment had to do with it. It would be interesting to read more on the subject especially with everyone advocating for national ID to "stop illegal immigration."
Arizona had alcohol prohibition before the country did and repealed it before the national government did.
Miranda was from Arizona.
The "thieving thirteenth" legislature which spent a ton of money. I wonder what they would call todays as they get us into more per capita debt than any other state.
Education takes more and more of the budgeted money (as a percentage of expenditures) every year. Is there no end?
There's an "Egg Inspection Board" which "regulates the size and weight of eggs." So does the chicken get her head cut off if she lays an egg that is too small?
One man's poetic desire for freedom. From voluntarism (ordered anarchy) to minarchy (he can't quite make up his mind. It was interesting to hear his iOne man's poetic desire for freedom. From voluntarism (ordered anarchy) to minarchy (he can't quite make up his mind. It was interesting to hear his ideas on slavery and the Mexican-American war. It was interesting to hear his view on being free even though he was in jail. It reminded me of the movie, "Brazil".
It was also interesting to hear all the terminology that he used. Much of it is still used today.
This book was downloaded from The Gutenberg Project (audio version). The movie came off off of youtube....more
Fascinating look into the principles behind the constitution. I disagreed with him on many points and didn't think he did an adequate job of justifyinFascinating look into the principles behind the constitution. I disagreed with him on many points and didn't think he did an adequate job of justifying some of the principles.
My two favorite principles that he talked about was the one about using logic to divine eternal truths of God. I also liked the anti-war principle. What other author would use WWI & WWII as examples of wars the US should not have been involved in?
I disagreed whole heartedly with the concept that governments should be the ones educating our children. I agree that a free people need to be educated in order to avoid tyranny but isn't it ironic to have the government educate your children when their interest is the government? Doesn't seem like a winning formula to keep the people out of tyranny.
I also thought it was interesting how he had the 11 points of a tyrannical government and every single one of the points are true today about the US. Did Skousen believe we lived under tyranny while he was alive?...more