Author: Joshua D. Glawson

How the Government Ruined the Detroit Auto Industry

By Joshua D. Glawson | United States

The rise and fall of the Detroit automotive industry is a classic example of the problems of cronyism, labor unions, and corporate welfare. Thomas H. Klier, who is the author of “From Tail Fins to Hybrids: How Detroit Lost its Dominance of the US Auto Market,” points out some key concerns with the decline of the auto industry. However, Klier fails to demonstrate the imperative issues of US government marketplace meddling and power-drunk control, and how the government was the biggest driver for the auto industry’s demise and crash.

Klier begins his narrative with determining there are three distinct phases that made up the decline of the US auto market: One, The 1960s’ foreign imports; Two, the 1979 oil crisis; Three, the 2008/2009 Great Recession.

First, a market, in order for it to be the healthiest and most productive, is best left alone with little-to-no government involvement. A market thrives on competition, supply, and demand, while freely and voluntarily exchanging goods and services. When the US government involves ‘itself’ in the business of others, it automatically stunts the growth and capabilities of that industry.

After the gas-powered automobile was invented in Europe, Americans had gained an edge in the market with lower wages and overhead compared to that of Europe. By 1899, there were already over 500 automaker companies in the US. However, this created a saturated marketplace, and after WWI by 1929, there were only 44 companies making gas-powered automobiles in the US. The Great Depression would then finish off the remainder of these, dwindling that number down to an even fewer number which would eventually make way for the US “Big Three,” i.e. General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler. The Progressive Era, from the late 1890s to the 1920s, ushered in more government involvement in all industries, including that of the automotive industry.

By 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR), established the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) which was intended to give a coercive protection of these various special industries and workers, including that of the automotive industry. Not only did this Act provide economic protection to various industries, but it also subsidized, fixed prices, and destroyed market competition. FDR’s protectionism and cronyism led to the development of the United Automobile Workers’ Union (UAW).

Of course, as any labor union will proclaim, this coerces the market to higher prices in order to pay workers higher wages. Labor unions also restrict the flexibility of the company because once a labor union is established, there is more bureaucracy, red tape, fees, and fields where only the “specialized” laborers are allowed to do their part. This essentially drives out competition through a coercive government monopoly by fixing prices, and removing the flexibility of standard supply and demand, while only allowing certain political elites to arbitrarily determine what a “fair” price should be.

Simply put, if subject A, Jane, says she will only work for a certain price as determined by the government and labor union, but then subject B, Joe, says he will work for a lower price as to be more competitive, this would not have been allowed by law. So, along with many other economic factors, the prices of cars went up along with the subsidized pensions and wages of the auto industry’s workforce. In the 1960s, with an influx in imports due to more competitive pricing, the Detroit automotive market began to decline, as pointed out by Klier.

Klier is also neglecting the emphasis on tariffs, which choke markets. After WWII, any “benefits” the US had gained from the war had already begun to significantly diminish by the 1970s.

Second, almost since the very birth of the oil industry in the US in the 1800s, the US government has been involved in controlling who can and who cannot be involved via government cronyism. Examples of government tampering and controls of the marketplace, which includes that of the automotive and oil industries, are the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, heavy oil provisions to France and England in WWI, the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, the 1928 Red Line Agreement, 1933 oil production quotas, 1933 oil import duty taxes, WWII rations, 1948 Marshall Plan, 1959 Mandatory Oil Import Program, establishing OPEC in 1960, 1967 Arab oil embargo, and so on.

Along with these coercive involvements in the marketplace, by the 1960s there were also laws implemented to force car manufacturers to have certain safety features, which also leads to increased costs. Nevertheless, oil and petroleum products such as gasoline were already strictly regulated, and slowly choking the auto industry. Today, the US oil industry “benefits” from over $200 Billion in subsidies, and countless regulations. Much like the story of ‘I, Pencil‘, which demonstrates the complexity of the marketplace, so too are the numerous subsidies that plague many industries and stages of production, especially that of the auto-industry- petroleum, oil, gas, plastics, metals, workers, manufacturing, import tariffs, export tariffs, foreign manufacturing, shipping domestically and abroad, etc.

Three, the economic crash or Great Recession of 2008, or others cite 2009, which assisted in the temporary downfall of the auto industry of Detroit, specifically, was again caused by government involvement. With a minimum of nearly 600 confirmed laws that regulate and set pseudo-standards for the automotive industry in the US, it makes it so that running a car manufacturing company, much less starting one, is nearly impossible.

Various states and the federal government have continuously provided subsidies to the Big Three of Detroit, and this negates the standard of measuring supply and demand. When people or companies are given “free money” they do not have to compete in the market the same way, and they do not have to concern themselves with their next dollar earned as someone who must work and compete for it. Finally, when the bailouts came for the Detroit auto industry, it was nearing $90 Billion.

Of course, subsidies do more than redistribute wealth from those paying taxes to those that are gaining the plunder. Subsidies, as previously mentioned, also cut supply and demand, while also driving out competition due to inability to compete with increased funding, and stifles creativity and flexibility in the marketplace as demands and desires increase. It makes the company receiving the subsidies lose interest in market needs because they are doing better with the easy money from the government.

Many will support subsidies because they believe it helps save jobs or makes things cost less, but in fact, that is an economic fallacy to assume such. A subsidy is still supported through taxes, which come from the citizens, and this proves to add to inflation and falsifying prices as it helps falsely prop a market. It also influences the GDP as it assists in purchasing and subsidizing products that many people may not actually want. GDP will reflect as being up, when in fact it was all junk coercively purchased off the dime of everyday citizens.

While I can agree with the author that certain stages are evident in the downfall of the auto industry, especially in Detroit, it was ultimately caused by government influence, laws, coercion, subsidies, and cronyism, not the marketplace itself.


Get awesome merchandise. Help 71 Republic end the media oligarchy. Donate today to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you very much for your support!

Featured Image Source

Advertisements

Being a Writer in the Liberty Movement

By Joshua D. Glawson | United States

Difficulties as a writer are abundant and come as no surprise to most, and yet we are often finding ourselves in times of struggle in getting our work out to the masses. Most writers will also feel more validity when they see they have more ‘likes,’ ‘thumbs-up,’ ‘follows,’ ‘hearts,’ ‘shares,’ and ‘reads,’ even when it means zero financial gains from the increased viewership.

In the Liberty Movement, one can easily Google libertarian writers and articles and find a plethora of quality material available on the web and in print. We may even find ourselves competing with those other writers, and that is ok to a healthy extent. This is a natural part of the marketplace, where we compete for better writing and getting our messages out to the masses. Competition can make us better as writers and individuals, as it also helps to find the areas that will help our shared messages reach those that were either unwilling or unaware of the concept of Liberty.

In order to become a better writer in the Liberty Movement, we should be eager to read the great works of those we love and admire, as well as countless hours of gruesome reading of those we are not in agreement with. Knowing the way the opposing side thinks helps us become stronger, and it makes better writers when we know how to argue against those arguments. Some of the works of our supposed enemies are, in fact fantastic, and creative in their ways of articulating and deceiving the masses out of Liberty and Freedom.

Many amazing artists, musicians, and writers were never famous or popular during their time alive. Rather, they became validated and popular posthumously. Such people as Edgar Allen Poe, Oscar Wilde, Johann Sebastian Bach, Galileo Galilei, Henry David Thoreau, Emily Dickinson, Vincent Van Gogh, and many others. I am sure the same applies to the amazing works of Bastiat, Spooner, and the many others.

The validity of one’s writing, specifically, is not determined by the number of copies sold, the number of reads or views, or the popularity of the work produced. To appeal to such is a logical fallacy known as “Argumentum ad Populum,” (i.e. “Argument to the People”), or more commonly referred to as “Appeal to Popularity.” According to its definition, “This fallacy is similar in structure to certain other fallacies that involve a confusion between the justification of a belief and its widespread acceptance by a given group of people. When an argument uses the appeal to the beliefs of a group of supposed experts, it takes on the form of an appeal to authority; if the appeal is to the beliefs of a group of respected elders or the members of one’s community over a long period of time, then it takes on the form of an appeal to tradition.”


(Image citation: https://edu.glogster.com/glog/appeal-to-popularity/24j7txo2ffq )

If we settle with the validity of a person’s argument solely based on their popularity, then surely every dictator, tyrant, totalitarian, or Statist who has ever written anything is far more logically superior to that of everyone that speaks in defense of Liberty.

Adolf Hitler’s book, Mein Kampf, has sold millions of copies, and has surged in Germany in more recent years; the various works of Joseph Stalin have sold millions; Mao’s little red book sold millions; Marx continues to influence people today with millions of books sold, etc. The sheer number of books sold by each of these monstrous leaders does not grant them superiority in logic or provide their arguments extra validity. Simply put, more people read their work, and that is all that can be said about their book numbers. Mein Kampf:

The best thing that each of us can do in the Liberty Movement, as writers, is to continue reading, speaking, debating, discussing, and writing. In order for our naturally positive and realistic messages to gain ground with those in direct opposition of Liberty, we need to stay on top of our understanding, remain decent in our approaches with others, diligent and consistent in our philosophy and politics, and find more creative ways to reach the masses. As we each work in direct competition with the next libertarian writer and those that oppose Liberty, we are also working together with those fellow libertarians as Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” in getting our letters of Love, Liberty, Freedom, and Peace out to the world.

Keep reading. Keep learning. Keep writing. Never cease.


Get awesome merchandise. Help 71 Republic end the media oligarchy. Donate today to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you very much for your support!

The Distortion of Liberalism

Joshua D. Glawson | United States

 ‘Liberalism’ originally meant a system that recognizes the freedom of the individual while ‘liberating’ them from the chains that bind them. Modern liberalism has gone far past this idea of freeing the individual from systematic oppression to what we see as the tyranny of the majority found in democracy. Modern liberalism suggests that whatever the newest idea of oppression is, it should be fought against at all costs, even when the data and evidence does not hold up, such as “women make less than men,” “ban straws,” “force businesses to trade,” and almost every other idea that constantly changes on an almost monthly basis. This does not mean their intentions are bad, or that everyone who is a modern liberal is ignorant. Rather, it is of the Kantian philosophy that suggests a government should pursue what is deemed noble, no matter if the outcomes are constantly terrible and oppressive in their own right. Modern liberals are willing to advocate the oppression of one group in order to suffice the needs and wants of another group. This perpetuates votes and a false sense of confidence in order to gain votes.

Simple Libertarian Concepts:

  • If your friend needs money to survive, is it moral for you to coerce others with the threat of violence and death in order to pay for your friend’s needs?
  • If theft is immoral for one person, it is just as wrong for a thousand people, a million people, or a billion people, etc. to steal from one person as it was for the one person to steal.

These Aristotelian principles, along with the Non-Aggression Principle (or the Randian ‘Non-Initiation of Force’), and several other principles are what is core to libertarian values, and the principles of the Libertarian Party.

Libertarians recognize that every law established by a government is backed by the threat of force, while understanding non-compliance can escalate the violence up to the point of death.

E.g. Eric Garner was killed by police because he was supposedly selling cigarettes on the streets of NYC, and he denied the allegations and was trying to talk to the police as they began arresting him. The officer was not charged, although choke-holds were also deemed ‘illegal’ for police officers to use on people.

Libertarians also realize that the freer people are, the more economic prosperity there is for the vast majority of people as opposed to other systems of governments and economics.


Get awesome merchandise. Help 71 Republic end the media oligarchy. Donate today to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you very much for your support!

Featured Image Source

Are More People Advocating “Socialist Societies?”

By Joshua D. Glawson | United States

Perhaps more loud people are advocating socialist societies and making it seem like more people actually desire it.

The closer society gets to true capitalism, the better off the vast majority of people are. The closer we get to total socialism, the worse off the vast majority of people are. This is an empirical statement that defines “better” and “worse” as indicators of commonly accepted quality of life statistics, such as GDP, life expectancy, and freedom.

Too many people believe that a government just hands out free money and that it means little to nothing. As inflation and basic economics indicate, this is not the case. Moreover, with every law comes government coercion and the use of violence. Socialism and communism, alike, require the initiation of violence and death in order to forcefully remove property, maintain that property, and prevent anyone from doing better than anyone else.

(Global GDP Per Capita since the initiation of capitalism and its variants)

Here are some simple facts (citations as hyperlinks):

  1. With greater economic freedom comes greater gender equality. The countries with more, overall, economic freedom tend to have more gender equality.
  2. Everyone- the poor, the middle class, and the rich- has benefited more with an increase in free trade capitalism. There is not a significant growing difference between the socioeconomic classes. (I highly recommend the book Anti-Piketty)
  3. Abject poverty is dwindling to near zero due to countries moving towards more capitalism.
  4. Indeed, all socialist programs are destined to fail due to their premise of forcing others to pay for the needs and desires of a few. For example, U.S. social security is already failing. In the fist place, the government promised it on lies, according to its own website. As the number of people increases, their desires also increase, and with the steady shift left in the Democratic Party, so too do their votes to determine how to fill the desires. However, resources do not always meet the needs of demand. Socialism is, in fact, a form of slavery.
  5. Socialism and communism are negate of “civil society,” as it pertains to the definitions of, both, ‘civil’ and ‘society.

Socialism requires falsely making those that are not great to appear equal to others in a “society,” and requires making those that are greater (because of their work, capabilities, and natural differences) bland and simple like everyone else.

Under socialism and communism, your identity is your prisoner ID. Moreover, someone else gives it to you, robbing you of your own meritocratic potential. Socialism advocates the scramble for intersectionality. In this case, social value increases for victims and decreases for others. Socialism is the embodiment of the free-trophy-for-everyone doctrine. It requires stealing from one to give to another, and this is the very opposite of Justice.

If people are increasingly desiring Socialism, they are only fooling themselves into destruction. Quite possibly, they may be destroying other lives along the way.

The best solution, currently, may be to create varying states for the varying ideologies. One may adopt capitalist economics, and another socialist. This way, individuals may go towards the one that best fits their individual desires. However, it is quite clear that the capitalist society will see much more success. In fact, this has happened before, and the differences are quite clear


Get awesome merchandise. Help 71 Republic end the media oligarchy. Donate today to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you very much for your support!

Featured Image Source

Improve Your Life and Conquer Your Monday

By Joshua D. Glawson | United States

Many people fear their Mondays. They suffer the week just to live it up on the weekend, and then dread the return of the workweek once it arrives. Of course, not everyone has the same “Monday,” as it pertains to being the beginning of their working days. In either case, many people still fear the start of the week as reality and duties hit each of us, seemingly all at once, like a slap in the face.

It is time for you to help change that mentality and conquer your Mondays!

 

 

I, too, used to live the life of the humdrum, mundane, workweek with the fears that come with the return of Monday and all the responsibilities it accompanied. Instead of getting through Monday with gloom and depression, by just pounding cups of coffee and surfing the web when I got home, I decided to make some changes to reward myself for successfully making it through the day.

This began a shift in my understanding of Monday, as before I had always complained, both sincerely and half-jokingly, about it being the beginning of the workweek. Once I began rewarding myself on this day, I quickly saw the day as being different, unique, and now special.

By rewarding myself on this day, I don’t mean splurging, or doing anything that would completely harm my Tuesday morning. Rather, I sought enjoyable personal hobbies to partake in on Monday, which is something I thoroughly enjoy doing.

(NERD ALERT!) I first started going to a weekly chess club, playing in official tournaments. I was making friends, winning some tournaments, and improving my chess-playing abilities. After a few months, some friends told me about some free dance lessons that took place every Monday. So, I began oscillating between chess and dance for a few months, and eventually just attended dance so that I could start my own chess club on Thursdays instead. At dance, I made more friends, learned so much about the art and my own body movement, and the amazing people there helped me advance in my skill while we each honed our craft.

Unfortunately, I had to move in pursuit of higher education and accomplishing my other goals in life. Amazingly, once I moved, I found out there was a free comedy show near my new place that happened every Monday and without a drink minimum. I really enjoy watching stand-up comedy and people progress over time. I made several friends at the comedy show, just from attending, and I believe comedy is also great for the brain. Who knows, I may find other great activities on Mondays besides just comedy shows eating pizza and drinking beer, but I can honestly say that I now love Mondays and I look forward to every Monday.

This shift in thinking has led me to now be grateful for every day of the week, even the days that I do nothing but work, study, read, write, etc. It has helped me to realize that if I am willing to put in 8 hours for someone else, I should also put some time in for myself, and helping me to grow and expand my network. As cliché as it is, we do only live once; so, why should I let a day of the week and my responsibilities get in the way of my happiness and growth?!

Take control of your “Monday.” Find things to do in your area that are both fun and helpful in your growth as a person. Don’t let your life pass you by. Don’t let the arbitrary days of the week be the stresses that hurt you and stunt your development.

Some ideas:

  • Search meetup.com for groups to join in dance, chess, comedy, improv, public speaking, martial arts, book clubs, learning a language, cooking classes, etc.
  • Search your social media for events such as SoFar Music, or ask your friends and family if they also feel the same about their Mondays and see if you can do something together.
  • Check to see if ToastMasters is in your area to better public speaking.
  • Have a family day every Monday, playing board games and eating fun foods, or watching movies, etc.
  • Search if there are music or comedy shows every Monday in your area.
  • Try a new restaurant every Monday.
  • Try learning to cook a new dish every Monday.
  • Go on a date on Mondays.
  • Attend your religious institution every Monday.
  • Start your own club or meeting every Monday if you see there is a desire and a need.

What are some ideas you have for conquering your Mondays and looking forward to them every week? Leave your comments in the comment section below.


Get awesome merchandise. Help 71 Republic end the media oligarchy. Donate today to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you very much for your support!