Tag: Freedom

  • Kansas Economic Freedom Index launched

    The purpose of the Kansas Economic Freedom Index is to identify Kansas legislators who vote in favor of economic freedom — and those who don’t. Financial issues like taxes and spending will be important, but I will include issues like smoking bans and seat belt laws.

    This is the first version of the index. As I become aware of votes that should be included, and as new votes are taken, I’ll update the index.

    In the index, each bill has a weight. This is a number from 1 to 10, with 10 meaning the bill is of greatest importance. When I calculate the index value for a legislator, I add up the weights for the bills being considered, and add up the weights the legislator “earned” based on their votes, and that’s the basis of the calculation.

    As this is a new project that I just started, I welcome feedback. Please write to bob.weeks@gmail.com or call me at 316-708-1837, day or evening.

    The permanent page for the index is Kansas Economic Freedom Index.

    Links to current versions of the Kansas Economic Freedom Index:

    Kansas Economic Freedom Index, Senate
    Kansas Economic Freedom Index, House of Representatives

  • The bamboozled public

    The intellectual arguments used by the State throughout history to “engineer consent” by the public can be classified into two parts: (1) that rule by the existing government is inevitable, absolutely necessary, and far better than the indescribable evils that would ensue upon its downfall; and (2) that the State rulers are especially great, wise, and altruistic men — far greater, wiser, and better than their simple subjects. In former times, the latter argument took the form of rule by “divine right’ or by the “divine ruler” himself, or by an “aristocracy” of men. In modern times, as we indicated earlier, this argument stresses not so much divine approval as rule by a wise guild of “scientific experts” especially endowed in knowledge of statesmanship and the arcane facts of the world. The increasing use of scientific jargon, especially in the social sciences, has permitted intellectuals to weave apologia for State rule which rival the ancient priestcraft in obscurantism. For example, a thief who presumed to justify his theft by saying that he was really helping his victims by his spending, thus giving retail trade a needed boost, would be hooted down without delay. But when this same theory is clothed in Keynesian mathematical equations and impressive references to the “multiplier effect,” it carries far more conviction with a bamboozled public.

    From Murray N. Rothbard, For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto, pages 59 – 60

  • Organizing for a free America summits

    American Majority is a national non-profit, non-partisan political training institute whose mission is to train and equip a national network of leaders committed to individual freedom through limited government and the free market. To support this goal, American Majority is offering a number of post party summits across the country. The goal of these summits, according to American Majority, is to “highlight and emphasize real tools that an organization, campaign, and individual activist can implement immediately.”

    American Majority also says: “It is not enough to stand on the sideline and it is not enough to protest — conservatives must learn how to implement freedom and liberty on the ground in their communities. With the right tools and training, conservative activists can be successful in taking their community back to the principles of limited government, individual freedom and the free market.”

    For those in Kansas, the closest event is on Friday and Saturday May 7 and 8, at the Embassy Suites KC – International Airport in Kansas City, Missouri. The cost for the event is reasonable, as is the special hotel rate.

    To learn more about the event and register, click on summit.americanmajority.org.

  • Importance of economic freedom explained in Wichita

    Yesterday Robert Lawson appeared in Wichita to deliver a lecture titled “Economic Freedom and the Wealth and Health of Nations.” The lecture explained how Lawson and his colleagues calculate the annual “Economic Freedom of the World” index, which ranks most of the countries of the world in how the “policies and institutions of countries are supportive of economic freedom.” The conclusion is that economic freedom is a vital component of well-being, income, health, and both personal and political freedom.

    Robert LawsonRobert Lawson

    The Economic Freedom of the World annual report is available in its entirety at FreeTheWorld.com.

    Lawson started his lecture by noting two methods of organizing an economy. There’s the way of Adam Smith, in which liberty, private property, and free trade are paramount, and government is to have a limited role. The other way is that of Karl Marx, where society would be planned and controlled by a central authority according to a national strategy.

    Lawson said he became interested in measuring freedom as a way to investigate the truth of the claims of Smith and Marx. By collecting data about economic freedom, we could learn more about which system — economic freedom or planned economies — works best.

    Lawson defined economic freedom as consisting of free markets, private property and personal choice; freedom to trade both within a country and foreign trade; freedom to enter markets; and security of property and the rule of law. He said that there is a role for government in this system to protect property rights and provide basic infrastructure, but the role of government is limited.

    Measuring economic freedom is complex and multidimensional. Data comes from 141 countries using 42 components that are grouped into five broad areas: size of government, including expenditures, taxes, and enterprises; legal structure and security of property rights; access to sound money; freedom to trade internationally; and regulation of credit, labor, and business. Ratings are on a scale from zero to ten, with ten representing the most freedom.

    Some of the components of the ranking are based on objective data, while some are subjective, perhaps from a survey. Lawson said that the report and book detail the methodology used in creating the index.

    The result is that Hong Kong ranks as most economically free country. Singapore is second, which Lawson said poses a problem. Singapore is economically free, but it is not politically liberal in terms of civil liberties. There is a strong positive relationship between political freedom and economic freedom, but there are exceptions like Singapore.

    The United States ranks sixth. Sweden is ranked fortieth, which is still in the upper quartile of countries. Lawson said that while Sweden has a reputation as a welfare state, the U.S. and Sweden are not all that different. Taxes in Sweden are about 50 perfect higher than ours, and Sweden has many more labor regulations, but otherwise the countries are similar.

    The big differences in the world, Lawson said, are between countries like the U.S. and countries like Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

    China is ranked eighty-second, below the midpoint. Lawson said that China is a problem to rank, having Shanghai which is relatively free, and then outer provinces which are still tightly controlled and repressive.

    Russia ranks eighty-third, right below China. Some of the former Soviet republics like Estonia are doing well, but the Ukraine has made little progress towards freedom.

    India ranks eighty-sixth. It is not an economically free county, but is more free now than in the past, Lawson said.

    To show how economic freedom impacts the lives of people, Lawson used a series of charts that showed the impact of economic freedom on various measures.

    Economic freedom is very important in determining the incomes of people. The countries in the highest-ranking quartile of the economic freedom index have a per-capita income of $32,443. For countries in the lowest quartile the income is only $3,802. Economic growth rates are higher in the freer countries, too, although the difference is not as great as with income.

    Lawson said that a frequent criticism of free economies is income inequality. He showed a chart presenting the share of income earned by the poorest ten percent in each country, grouped by quartile. There is very little difference between the groups. “It doesn’t really matter what kind of economic system you have — free market or not — it does not correlate in any way with income inequality. It’s simply not true that market economies, in general, are more unequal.”

    A follow-up, Lawson said, is that if you are poor, where do you want to be? The answer is in the economically free countries. The per-capita income of the poorest ten percent in the least economically free countries is $896, while in the most economically free it is $9,105.

    Life expectancy is also positively correlated with economic freedom, ranging from 59.40 years in the least-free countries to 79.12 in the most-free countries.

    Is there a relationship between economic systems and the environment? Lawson showed a chart showing that the free countries do better in a measure of environmental performance.

    Lawson said that political rights and civil liberties are also strongly associated with economic freedom, the example of Singapore notwithstanding. India is another exception, being a fairly liberal democracy but ranking low in economic freedom.

    Speaking about the United States, Lawson said that the numbers are likely to go down in the future. While the U.S. ranks above the world average, its measurement of freedom has been declining since 2000. At the same time, the rest of the world is on an upward trend. “It’s no longer accurate to say the United States is among the very top tier in the economic freedom index,” Lawson said, adding that he blames George Bush for this. The decline is partly due to the increasing size of government, but the largest cause of the decline is in the area of property rights. This area is measured largely by surveys asking people how they feel about property rights in America. The perception, Lawson, said, is that the security of property rights are on the decline.

    A question from the audience asked about reliance on foreign aid. Lawson replied that the economic freedom index methodology doesn’t include foreign aid. But there has been research done using the index and foreign aid, which concluded that countries get more foreign aid when they do worse on the index. Furthermore, after receiving more foreign aid, countries do worse in the index.

    A question about the cost of living in countries was answered by the use of purchasing power parity.

    Responding to a question about deficits, Lawson said that the size of government deficits doesn’t enter into the index calculations. The amount of government spending is part of the index, however. Lawson said that Milton Friedman argued that it wasn’t very important to freedom whether the government runs deficits. The size of government spending is important, Friedman said, with the method of financing the spending much less important.

    A question revealed that health care doesn’t play a part in the index calculations, as the composition of spending is not a factor. If the U.S. government decides to spend more on health care, its rating will probably decline, as government spending is in the index.

    A question asked how it can be that China and India are growing very rapidly, but still rank low in the index. Lawson answered that it’s the change or increase in the index that has been important for these two countries. There has been great change in both countries. “It takes only a tiny bit of relaxation to see a flourishing of growth in both China and India.” He added that both countries need to continue their reforms in order to maintain their rates of economic growth.

    Lawson added that regulation, not taxation, is the biggest threat to prosperity and economic freedom in America.

    Lawson’s lecture was sponsored by the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History and underwritten by The Fred C. and Mary R. Koch Foundation.

  • Smoking is healthier than fascism

    There’s a Facebook group named Vote NO on Statewide Smoking Ban (Smoking is healthier than fascism). Started by Wichita activist Wendy Aylworth, the description of the group starts with the rallying cry “We must stop this tyranny of the majority!”

    Yes, we must.

    I’m tempted to tell you — like many people do when discussing matters of public policy — whether I smoke cigarettes. But does that matter?

    It shouldn’t, because if it does, we shift the basis of policy decisions from “what is right and just and promotes freedom and liberty” to “what is my personal preference.” And there’s too much of that going on.

    Smoking bans are only the start of increased government regulation of more and more aspects of our lives. These things can backfire. As government control becomes more pervasive, smoking ban busybodies may well find themselves coming under onerous regulation that they don’t like. Once started, it’s hard for government to stop.

    We ought to remember the words of C.S. Lewis: “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

    For more articles from this site on smoking bans and the harm they cause, click here.

  • The myth of the smoking ban ‘miracle’

    Supporters of comprehensive bans on smoking often point to research findings that heart attacks decrease when smoking bans are implemented. But is this true? Christopher Snowdon reports in Spiked online:

    Tales of heart attacks being “slashed” by smoking bans have appeared with such regularity in recent years that it is easy to forget that there is a conspicuous lack of reliable evidence to support them. It is almost as if the sheer number of column inches is a substitute for proof.

    Later on he concludes:

    What is abundantly clear in each case is that the number of heart attack admissions has been falling for some time. Far from causing further dramatic cuts in heart attack rates, the bans had no discernible effect.

    If we’re going to cite public health as a reason for smoking bans, let’s make sure we’re working with complete and reliable scientific evidence. Snowdon’s full article is The myth of the smoking ban ‘miracle’.

  • ‘Economic Freedom and the Wealth and Health of Nations’ lecture to be in Wichita

    Do you know where the United States ranks on the global index of economic freedom? (Hint: It wouldn’t get a medal.) The answer is in the latest edition of the Economic Freedom of the World report.

    Dr. Robert Lawson of Auburn University is co-author of this popular and widely cited report. It evaluates 141 nations and jurisdictions using a combination of economic factors and then creates a ranking from most- to least-economically free. (For an executive summary of the most recent report, visit Economic Freedom of the World 2009 Annual Report.)

    Dr. Lawson will be the guest lecturer at a public forum in Wichita on February 25 at 6:00 pm at the Hyatt Regency Hotel. His presentation, “Economic Freedom and the Wealth and Health of Nations,” is sponsored by the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History and underwritten by The Fred C. and Mary R. Koch Foundation.

    Because meeting space at the Hyatt is limited, the lecture sponsors ask that those interested in attending please RSVP by email to RSVP@kochind.com.

  • Thoughts on Constitution Day

    Although Constitution Day has passed for this year, the article below contains important ideas for us to remember every day of the year. Thank you to Al Terwelp of Overbrook for authoring this submission. I apologize for missing it on Constitution Day.

    Thoughts on Constitution Day

    Today, September 17, is a little-remembered date in Kansas and arguably a day that eclipses even Independence Day in significance. On this day in 1787, occurred the signing of the U.S. Constitution. Not since the Magna Carta, (June 15, 1215) had there been such a progression by the purpose, mind and hand of mankind to peacefully join together to complete for themselves and their heirs guarantees of security against oppression.

    After the Revolutionary War was newly won our infant nation soon became adrift. Shey’s Rebellion in 1786 was evidence that we needed to jealously protect liberty and build a strong self government requiring secure checks and balances. The founders wanted a Republic ruled by law and purposefully avoided the tyranny of a superior few found in a monarchy or oligarchy and the overbearing force of the mob majority in a democracy.

    Unsatisfied with the Constitution’s original shortcomings and flaws, in 1789 anti-federalists and James Madison would introduce additional safeguards to the rights of man in a series of ten articles known as the Bill of Rights and would ultimately lead to the successfully completed ratification of the Constitution in 1790. Our Constitution has since been continually improved by a total of 27 amendments and has survived many challenges to become a near perfect example of governance and reference to human conduct. The result is the most unlikely, rare, opportunity and achievement in the chronicle of humankind.

    The American State Papers, (Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, Constitution, Bill of Rights, Amendments), are a clearly written exhibition of the virtues given to us by our creator. This acquired and instilled virtue is infused via the action of our Constitutional laws thus additionally preserving and fostering it in our citizens. No government through its temporal laws can make good citizens. We have free will. Neither was the Constitution’s intention to create laws that forbid all vices in men. Why should it. Our Constitution does however, dictate reason and facilitate the virtue by which we chose to be governed thus habitualizing good behavior in the people.

    Lovers of liberty see the virtue in our founding documents and the advantage that exists in being obedient to reason. The Constitution’s chain of reasoning serves as our foundation of principles and the intellectual origins which guide the destinies of our lives. Like the Ten Commandments, the Constitution provides us knowledge that proceeds from theoretical deduction and gives us simple black and white reference points to be used as a compass star to pilot a world of complex, confusing, gray issues.

    The Constitution and the other state papers are also established and accepted statements of a new system of knowledge. One based not only on legal rights and human laws but on natural rights, natural laws and their demonstrated conclusions. All people are born with these universal rights and they are not contingent on human law or acquired from government. These are the truths that Jefferson held to be self-evident and unalienable. These endorsements of truth give us not only knowledge about a belief, but continually communicate to us when to hold a belief to be true. This unsurrenderable document that framed laws by men not perfect in virtue is much more than a contract from which government limits and derives its authority. Its words ultimately bind us in conscience from a higher eternal law.

  • John Stossel urges reliance on freedom, not government, in Wichita

    John Stossel in Wichita, October 12, 2009John Stossel at Wichita State University

    Speaking at Wichita State University on Monday, former ABC News journalist John Stossel told a large crowd that free markets and limited government, not more government, are the best way to increase our wealth and prosperity.

    Speaking about his beliefs early in his career as a journalist, Stossel said, “By and large it’s [capitalism] cruel and unfair. We need government and lawyers to protect us from capitalists.”

    Eventually, he said, he began to realize the harm in excessive government regulation. Bureaucrats who propose licensing auto repair shops don’t do much to protect consumers. Instead, the cost of regulation and licensing makes auto repair a little more expensive — leading, perhaps to shops in poor neighborhoods going underground to escape regulation.

    So could trial lawyers do a better job of protecting the consumer? They have the ability to make bad guys pay. But Stossel said the best deterrent is the free market and competition. “Word gets out,” he said, and if you cheat your customers, they won’t come back. There’s also fraud laws.

    Stossel said that it’s easy for reporters to cover the victim who wins a large reward in a lawsuit. The unintended consequences, however, are harder to see. But they’re everywhere. He cited the reduction in the number of vaccine companies due to lawsuits, asking are we safer with five vaccine companies researching vaccines rather than 20? No, he said, we are less safe.

    Competition through free markets, he said, protects us all by itself without government intervention. There are exceptions — Bernie Madoff, for example — but the fact that these exceptions receive so much media attention is evidence of how well markets work.

    The way to get rich in America, Stossel said, is to serve consumers well, citing the example of Bill Gates.

    Stossel said that critics of free markets say that they don’t work for complicated things such as schools and health care. Don’t we need wise elites in Topeka and Washington to make decisions for us, he asked?

    The answer is no. Not everyone needs to be an expert. It’s sufficient for there to be a few “car buffs” — using the example of selecting an automobile — for free markets to work.

    We need some government, he said, to provide rule of law, to protect our property and person. But government needs to be limited. He showed graphs that illustrated the rapid growth of government spending since the presidency of Lyndon Johnson.

    “I’d say they were spending like drunken sailors, but that insults drunken sailors, who spend their own money.”

    He cited his own experience with his beach house, where government provides low-cost flood insurance. His beach house — right on the ocean, built on sand — was damaged. But the government insurance replaced it.

    The problem, he said, is that this insurance was not priced properly. Government ignored the price signals sent by the private market, which set high prices for this insurance, based on the risk they judged the properties faced. The below-market prices set by government have lead to a program that is billions in the read.

    Stossel said that in every newsroom he’s been in, and at all the elite universities he’s visited, people hate business. It’s intuitive, he said, to think of business as a zero-sum game. “If somebody makes a profit off me, I must be losing something.”

    But business is voluntary. Government is force. Business doesn’t happen unless both parties think they win, leading to the “double thank you” moment at the time of the transaction.

    Business is not like a pie, where if someone takes a big slice, there’s less for others. Business, he said, creates more pies. Entrepreneurship makes us all richer, but that’s not intuitive, he said.

    He also talked about his experience reporting on the risks we face in the world. He found that news media focused its reporting on sensational events such as airplane crashes that are actually quite rare. Flying takes an average of one day off each person’s life, statistically speaking.

    But driving takes an average of 182 days off of life. And because of the “hysterical coverage” of plane crashes, people are scared into driving instead of flying. Stossel termed this “statistical murder.”

    (Later, in response to a question, Stossel said that this type of reporting was difficult to get on the air. Two producers quit, saying this reporting was not journalism, but “conservative dogma.”)

    The most important danger to life, however, is poverty, taking over 3,000 days (about nine years) off a person’s life. “Wealthier is healthier,” he said. Regulation that prevents capital from flowing to its best use makes us poorer, he said, and fewer people get hired. Perhaps the headline should be “New OSHA rule saves four, kills ten,” he said.

    Our lack of perspective has made America fear innovation, Stossel said. He referred to Europe’s precautionary principle, which really means “don’t do anything for the first time.” He illustrated a mythical new product — a new fuel, domestically produced, but explosive, invisible, and poisonous, and would kill 200 people each year. And, he wants to pump it into your home. Would we allow that today? This product, of course, is natural gas.

    The innovation that we now fear has made our lives richer. Free people pursuing their own self-interest make America richer, and that saves lives.

    Questions in written form from the audience included one asking Stossel who in Washington he considers to be a leader in free market philosophy. He mentioned Ron Paul as a politician, and the Cato Institute as a leader in explaining the benefits of free markets.

    About the myths and lies of health care reform: Stossel said that President Obama is right, the current system is unsustainable, as it “promises everybody everything free.” The proposed reforms are likely to make the current situation worse. He mentioned that the rate of increase in spending on recreation is the same as the increase in spending on health care. No one complains about spending on recreation, though, because they’re spending their own money. It’s when government spends our money that problems arise. Also, other countries freeload off the innovation that happens in America, and they don’t bear that cost.

    At ABC News, Stossel said they rejected his stories about health care in favor of Michael Jackson stories. He believes this will improve at his new home at Fox Business Network.

    One of his favorite stories was “Stupid in America,” which took a look at public schools. American students do fine in fourth grade, Stossel said, but as time goes on, our students lag behind students in other countries. “The longer they are in our public school system, the worse they do.” The problem, he said, is that our public school system is a government monopoly. An important factor in the success of schools in other countries is that the money is attached to the student, not the school, as it is in America.

    In an interview session before his talk, I asked Stossel about the events of the past year: Is this evidence of the failure of free markets and capitalism? Referring to the rise in the Dow Jones average from 800 to over 9000 since 1982, he said that’s pretty good. “Perfect is not one of the choices,” and there will be booms and busts, he said. Plus, this bust was mostly a government bust, with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac contributing.

    I asked about regulation, and Stossel said that regulation increased greatly during the Bush administration. Republicans say they want to cut spending and rules, but they don’t do it, he said.

    About health care in Canada, Stossel said that Canadians like their system and think ours is horrible. But media reporting has exaggerated the defects of the American system, and most of the people surveyed in Canada aren’t sick. Also, Canada reduces their cost by freeloading off American innovation.

    At Fox Business Network, Stossel said he will have a show once a week “talking about the economic liberty that made American prosperous.” He also said that “I’m angry that smug people are claiming that central planning from government will make our lives better, despite the evidence in our face that it’s failed again and again.” He plans to confront these people.

    I asked if we in America are starting to look more to a European style of security, rather than relying on freedom. Stossel said yes, quoting Thomas Jefferson as “It is the natural progress of things for government to gain, and liberty to yield.” But it is a false sense of security to rely on government. Real security and what has made America prosperous is the innovation that comes from capitalism.

    Addional coverage from Kansas Watchdog is at John Stossel’s 20/20 Vision of Journalism and Free Markets.