Rand Paul on the Daily Show, U.S. Mint Reaching Out, and Charlie Sheen Calls the CFTC?

If you want to see John Stewart's interview with Sen. Rand Paul, check it out here.  It is broken into three parts with part two being the best part in that Paul is critical of the Federal Reserve and central control of the borrowing interest rate.  Though the interview could have been way better (especially if Paul had pointed out that government legislation didn't automatically make food safer but rather it was the increased standard of living that brought about a demand for better foodstuffs.  It is precisely what is happening in China now.) it is always nice to get some Fed bashing on mainstream television.

So after the dollar has lost almost 95% of its value since the Fed's inception in 1913, the U.S. Mint has decided to get our input on what kind of precious metals should be used to mint coins for now on.  I am not joking.  Check this out:

United States Mint Seeks Public Comment on Factors to be Considered in Research and Evaluation of Potential New Metallic Coinage Materials

WASHINGTON - The United States Mint today announced that it is requesting public comment from all interested persons on factors to be considered in conducting research for alternative metallic coinage materials for the production of all circulating coins.
These factors include, but are not limited to, the effect of new metallic coinage materials on the current suppliers of coinage materials; the acceptability of new metallic coinage materials, including physical, chemical, metallurgical and technical characteristics; metallic material, fabrication, minting, and distribution costs; metallic material availability and sources of raw metals; coinability; durability; sorting, handling, packaging and vending machines; appearance; risks to the environment and public safety; resistance to counterfeiting; commercial and public acceptance; and any other factors considered to be appropriate and in the public interest.

Read the rest of the letter here.  All I can say is,well, at least the Mint is asking us now.  I am too young to know if they did prior to 1964 when quarters had 90% of silver in them.  Flacon from Zerohedge says it best:

You know, that request from the mint is just downright INSULTING! Who the HELL do they think we are?! Keynesian "peasants"?

So apparently someone named Charlie Sheen (it hasn't been confirmed if it's the bitchin' rock star we all know and love) called the Commodity Futures Trading Commission urging them to crack down on the rampant online rumor of supposed silver shorts.  I don't quite get the whole thing (the Charlie Sheen calling situation, not the rumor of silver shorts), but you can read more about it on EPJ.

Now its graph time.  Check out Mark Perry's wonderful chart on the negatives of protectionism:

Brief summary: However, the two pink triangles labeled “Societal Loss” are the amount of losses to the consumers and the economy (society) from the protectionist tariffs that are NOT offset by a gain to some other group: producers or government, and represent what economists call the “deadweight loss” or “deadweight cost” of protectionism.  

Bottom Line: The deadweight losses from protectionism mean that the economy is worse off on net, or that there has been a reduction in total economic welfare, the total number of jobs, wealth, prosperity, and/or national income.  You could argue about the size of the deadweight loss triangles, but it would be really hard to argue that they don’t exist.  Protectionism has to make the country worse off, on net, and that proposition is supported by 200 years of economic theory and hundreds of empirical studies. 

Check here for the rest of the description.  Now if you want some great Zerohedge conspiracy theory, check out this graph from a guest post today:

It's a bit complicated, and the rest of the blog post contains more evidence and graphs supporting the conclusion, but all I can say is "wow."  We certainly are living in a very turbulent time.  Check out this chart showing the Libyan rebels have taken most of the country's oil infrastructure:

Did You Know that gas prices in Europe have hit an all time record of $8.632?  Things aren't looking good for Portugal, and Europe in general, as it's 10 bond's yield has reached a record of 7.558%.  Same goes for Ireland and Greece where bond yields have also increased.

To end with some quotes.  First up is the great John Tamny on why tax breaks are so destructive for a competitive economy:

The simple truth is that economics is about scarcity. What's perhaps not discussed enough is how tax incentives that encourage the purchasing of capital inputs raise the cost of everything for all businesses, large and small.

If for instance FedEx chooses to buy new delivery trucks rather than maintain its existing fleet thanks to the former being tax efficient, there are necessarily fewer trucks for businesses more needful of them to grow. The artificial demand wrought by tax breaks must on the margin drive up their cost.

The end result is that smaller enterprises on the way up face higher equipment costs due to tax breaks for existing businesses. Thanks to the tax code, large companies, by virtue of being large, make the launch of a new business concept more costly.

Tax breaks are just a politician's way of giving special privileges to their corporate buddies that got them elected.  Just get rid of tax breaks and lower the rates across the board.  It's unfortunate a simple solution like that isn't option when lawmakers stand to benefit electorally by handing out what are essentially subsidies.

Next up is Tim Carney on Government imposed environmentalism via Don Boudreaux at CafeHayek:

Environmental policy is not driven by tree-hugging activists, earnest liberal bloggers, or ecologically minded citizens. Instead, it flows from the lobbyists and executives of well-connected multinational corporations and built-for-subsidy startups that see profit in the loan guarantees, handouts, mandates, and tax credits Congress creates in the name of saving the planet.

Same concept as tax breaks and subsidies.  To end we have old Honest Abe himself from Robert Higgs' Mises Daily:

There is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

This was stated in a debate Lincoln had with Stephen Douglas in 1858.  If only they taught it in K-12th grade.