What is classical liberalism?

Many evangelical brethren would bristle at point #8 on toleration. But if we can grasp that a government large in scope has the power to enact positive law for the benefit of objectionable lifestyles and behaviors (as well as reduce our own liberties), we would be more inclined to desire limits on its power, which would afford the church and civil society greater influence in shaping social values and conduct.

The Featherblog: On the Clerisy and Occupy Wall Street

This piece was written by a friend who is a Lutheran seminarian. It is a cogent analysis of the Occupy Wall Street phenomenon and the rise of unemployable elites...

The Featherblog: On the Clerisy and Occupy Wall Street:

Christianity and Economic Law

This is a rough draft of a short paper I'm working on:

“Progressives may rail against economic theory, and given their influence in many areas of American life, they may even be able to use their powers to marginalize people in academic and public life who understand how economic theory both explains and limits our choices (Ron Paul is an excellent example). They cannot, however, undo the laws of economics any more than they can undo the law of gravity. But that does not keep them from trying, nor does it keep them from blaming others who actually understand economic law when progressive efforts to do things outside of theory inevitably fail.”

~ William L. Anderson, Ph. D. (emphasis mine)

One of the great insights of the 20th century Baptist theologian George Eldon Ladd was that the present age, between the first and second advents of Christ, is the “already/not yet” in terms of the kingdom of God. In other words, certain aspects of Christ’s kingdom have come into effect during the present day, while other aspects await a future consummation. The genius of Ladd’s scheme was that it corrected the extremes of classical dispensationalism (the kingdom has been postponed) and maximalism, as reflected in different schools that the church will be the instrument of transforming the world politically, economically and socially. Without developing this distinction further I will argue that part of the “not yet” of the kingdom is economic law. William Anderson summarizes some of the main features of economic law as “law of scarcity…law of opportunity cost, and marginal utility.” These laws are clearly observable in our present day – two thousand years after the first advent of Christ. Moreover, there is no more progress toward eradicating these realities than on the day of Christ’s ascension.

When Jesus Christ was on the earth He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand. He performed miracles that suspended the normal laws of nature, for example, feeding a hungry multitude with a mere five loaves of bread and two fish. On occasion he healed the sick and raised the dead. He also cautioned His disciples not to worry; that as their heavenly Father provided for the birds of the air and flowers of the field, so He would provide for all their needs. But clearly, Christ did not permanently or conditionally suspend the law of scarcity. When the satiated multitude sought to make Him a king, He fled. He warned His disciples not to miss the spiritual import of the miracle – that He is the bread of life, the new manna, come down from heaven. As such He himself, as the embodiment of God’s kingdom, is the source of new life, forgiveness, wisdom, sanctification and other blessings for those who believe in Him.

But believers still face want, sickness and death. Certain aspects of the kingdom of God await a future day when Christ returns in glory. In the meantime, conditions of the curse upon creation remain. The Old Testament clearly grasps economic law, protecting property rights (Exodus 20:15, 17), and demanding fairness in trade while proscribing fraud (e.g. Proverbs 11:1, 20:10). Unfortunately, some Christians believe that the coming of Christ has fundamentally changed the world, and that it is part of the church’s mission to promote the collectivization of goods and resources, as allegedly found in Acts 4:34-37. This is a kind of inadvertent dispensationalism; or an unintentional mirror of Gnosticism, which found the God of the Old Testament incompatible with the God of the New. But a key feature of the passage in Acts 4 is the voluntary nature of the believers’ actions. There was no compulsion or coercion. By contrast, many Christians, like political progressives, enthusiastically support the state’s expropriation of the property and income of its citizens in order to obtain the “greater good” – while economists demonstrate that such measures destroy productivity and job creation while increasing the number of state-dependent clients.

Moreover, we may ask whether the events recorded in Acts 4 were normative for the New Testament. Pressing on to the Pauline epistles, we find an apostle who worked in his own trade (cf. Acts 18:3) so as not to be a financial burden to his fledgling church plants (e.g. 2 Thessalonians 3:8). Paul was clear in his instruction that a believer unwilling to work should not eat (v. 9) and that each should labor to provide for his own sustenance (v. 12). This exchange of labor for goods (direct exchange, or barter) or for money (indirect exchange) was not in any sense decried by the apostle of Christ. Indeed, he had set the example himself. Paul availed himself to the agoras, the marketplaces, to sell his wares in support of his own ministry and, more importantly, to have opportunities to share the gospel with the variety of people with whom he came in contact. We find here that economic exchange is not an end unto itself, but rather a means to uphold first principles. If the marketplace were inherently evil, or a passing relic of more barbaric times, the apostle failed to censure it.

It behooves us, then, who live in the “already” of forgiveness, righteousness, wisdom, peace and “not yet” of scarcity, opportunity costs and marginal utility to use our God-granted wisdom to understand how to make proper use of the time and resources available to us. To criticize economic law and seek to transcend it is to attempt, as Eric Voegelin put it, to “immanentize the eschaton,” which Nazism and communism both tried and failed. Short of Christ’s return God has set limits on humanity, perhaps no better expressed than by the great Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek:

“The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.”

Ron Paul's Practical Solution

Legalize Currency Competition by Ron Paul

Ron Paul's Silver Moment

In Wednesday's night GOP debate Ron Paul responded to Michele Bachmann's campaign promise to get gasoline prices back down to $2.00/gallon.  Dr. Paul said we could have gas for a mere dime per gallon.  He was referring to a silver dime -- those struck by the Treasury before 1965 which contain 90% silver. 

If you check the web site http://www.coinflation.com/silver_coin_values.html you'll see what Ron Paul had in mind.  The silver content in a pre-1965 dime is worth about $3.00.  It was in 1965 that President Lyndon Johnson signed the Coinage Act that put an end to the striking of silver coins by the U.S. government.  Never mind the fact that the Constitution requires that coins be made from gold or silver.  Beginning with Johnson and concluding with his successor Richard Nixon, the federal government removed the currency from any metallic standards. 

Incidentally, the word "dollar" comes from the old Czech word Joachimthaler ("thaler"), the family name of silversmiths who struck the finest one ounce silver coins in the Europe.  From the beginning of this nation one U.S. dollar was composed of one ounce fine silver.  One dollar silver certificates were issued by the treasury -- "dollar bills" -- that could be redeemed for a silver dollar coin.  That is how our monetary system used to work.

But gold and silver exist in finite quantities.  In theory, the government could issue only enough bills to correspond to the actual amounts of gold and silver held in the treasury.  In reality, with the Cold War, the space program, the Vietnam War, the "Great Society," Medicare and so on, the federal government was issuing more dollar notes than could be redeemed in precious metal coins.  Hence, Johnson's and Nixon's actions to remove the gold and silver backing of our currency -- in contradiction to the Constitution.  The result of these acts was pure fiat currency (that is, currency by decree) which was more easily subject to monetary inflation -- that is, increasing the quantity of money in order to finance government programs.

The outcome is rather shocking; since 1971 the U.S. paper dollar has lost 82% of its purchasing power.  It now takes more than one income to maintain most American households.  Most of those households are servicing debt (mortgages, credit cards, etc.) because prices of housing and other goods and services are simply too high to be paid up front.  College debt has strapped young adults, many of whom are returning home to live with their parents.  With interest held to near zero percent by the Federal Reserve, millions of Americans have invested retirement savings in 401(k) accounts, most of which are held in mutual funds.  But adjusted for inflation, stock market investments have actually lost value since 2000.  With the dollar no longer tied to gold or silver, the government has "printed" up trillions in an (unsuccessful) effort to rescue the collapsing real estate market and finance bailouts, entitlements, and the "War on Terror."

All of these are results of a basic economic law -- the more money chasing a limited number of goods, the higher the price.

The Washington Post chided Ron Paul's reference to the silver dime as some archaic notion from the 18th century.  But scoffers should look closely at what Paul is saying.  A silver dime can easily be exchanged for three paper dollars.  Here in the southern Piedmont of North Carolina the price per gallon of gasoline measured in terms of silver is only about 12 cents.

In 1964 gasoline ran about 27 cents per gallon.  Silver has actually increased in value since that time while the purchasing power of the paper dollar has plummeted like a falling satellite.  This is what monetary inflation does to an economy.

But Ron Paul is a "kook."  We have grown too accustomed to an inflationary world.  We expect the sun, moon and stars from our government.  We especially dislike someone who tells us there are limits, that we simply can't do everything we put our minds to.

We prefer a "strong leader" to a sage.

So did the Germans in 1932. 

Dave Ramsey Revisited

And it's not a friendly visit...

How Dave Ramsey Made $55 Million by Being Good on Personal Debt, Naive on Business Debt, Lousy on Investing, and a Loudmouth Bully.by Gary North