• the shooting down of two Libyan planes in 1981

• the bombing of Lebanon in 1983 and 1984

• the bombing of Libya in 1986

• the bombing and sinking of an Iranian ship in 1987

• the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in 1988

• the shooting down of two more Libyan planes in 1989

• the massive bombing of the Iraqi people in 1991

• the continuing bombings and draconian sanctions against Iraq for the next 12 years

• the bombing of Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998

• the abduction of “suspected terrorists” from Muslim countries, such as Malaysia, Pakistan, Lebanon and Albania, who were then taken to places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, where they were tortured

• the large military and hi-tech presence in Islam’s holiest land, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere in the Persian Gulf region

• the support of numerous undemocratic, authoritarian Middle East governments from the Shah of Iran to Mubarak of Egypt to the Saudi royal family

• the invasion, bombing and occupation of Afghanistan, 2001 to the present, and Iraq, 2003 to the present

• the bombings and continuous firing of missiles to assassinate individuals in Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, and Libya during the period of 2006-2011

Keep dreaming...

Scarcity is considered one of the first truths of economics. Knowing that all things are scarce allows for the pricing mechanism to handle how these scarce goods should be utilized in the most efficient ways. Not only does this keep supply at a maximum, but also keeps prices as low as possible for the people that can actually benefit society the most by using them.

Let’s take steel for example. Steel is used in hundreds of products ranging from armor plating to cookware to building construction. It is truly a versatile and international commodity; people from around the world are constantly bidding on the price of steel. Since the quantity of steel is finite (both naturally, and by the amount that can be physically manufactured each year), there is not enough for everyone that desires to use it. Knowing this, people must continually try to outbid each other for the rights to the metal which results in its free market price. Only the people who are able to turn a profit while using highly priced steel are able to purchase it. In turn they are putting it to use where the most demand currently resides. Without the pricing mechanism as a derivative of scarcity, the steel could be used to make medieval breast plates instead of where the demand actually exists.

Enter the “All You Can Eat Buffet”. In the United States, there are buffets for literally any type of food imaginable: Sushi, Chinese, Pizza, BBQ, “Soul Food”, pasta/salad bars and some places with all the above. A place comes to mind named “Buffet City” which must be the epitome of “All You Can Eat”. For one price (~$10), you can indulge yourself on the food of your choice, and the varieties are nearly endless. There is no time limit on the duration of your meal, and no limit on the number of trips to the buffet. Eat and eat until your heart and stomach are both content. You can even choose from an array of pastries, cakes, pies and ice cream for dessert.

It seems as if the food will never end, and scarcity is no longer an issue. “Getting your money’s worth” is the theme of the outing, and you will definitely achieve this goal. The last thought on your mind is “Should I leave some for the next guest?” Not a chance! It’s there and it’s up for grabs!

How can a place like Buffet City exist in the face of the economic truth of scarcity? How can the merchant ever make a profit if everyone has the ability to continually eat, at times wastefully, until they feel that the amount of food consumed AT LEAST equals the price paid?

The answer is by having a stable currency. By using a stable currency, the buffet owner is able to continually project his costs in to the future and plan accordingly to overcome those potentially profit-eating customers. The Free Market force of scarcity requires the business owner to constantly manage his resources as efficiently as possible in order to remain cash flow positive and to stay in business, even though his customers are doing their best to eliminate his profits and bankrupt the establishment which they patronize.

Scarcity remains one of the most demanding of the free market forces, and every businessman knows that even the smallest miscalculation can cause his whole experiment to end belly up.

Watch gold go to the moon!

Events have satisfied my mind and I think the minds of the American people, that the mischiefs and dangers which flow from a national bank far overbalance all it's advantages.

Well said, Mr. Jackson.

That said, I think that the RIAA and record companies need to relax on simply suing "file sharers" and evolve their business model to fit new technology that they think can only harm them. A good solution to this is music subscriptions via cell phones.

Why not? The days are numbered where we have to pay "per minute" for calls. The bandwidth (amount of the internet needed) to make a voice phone calls is 100x smaller than videos and 10x smaller than music. Why give "unlimited" internet access, which could be in the 100s of MB for 1 price, yet keep charging for voice and text messages. A simple voice call is 10x larger than a text message. See what's going on here? Check out this link that shows 1MB of texting costs $1,310. This is OUTRAGEOUS!!!

Think about this; and average song is around 4MB, and can be streamed at any time from pandora.com. Say you listen to 10 songs a day, I personally listen to around 50-75. Your 10 songs a day, if priced the same as text msgs, would cost $13,100!!! Video is MUCH larger....but I digress...

Cell phone companies are really the only people that currently have Internet accessible virtually everywhere in the US. It's a fact that people enjoy listening to music on the go, and there are already applications, Pandora, Napster, iTunes, that allow you to take your music along, but most of these require you to connect your phone to your computer to acquire songs. Why not have something like "Napster-to-go" on your cell phone and listen to basically anything you want at any time. Incorporate Bittorrent so that no single person has to host all the songs all the time. Each bittorrent user could have a collection of songs saved to their phone (phones need more harddrive space firstly), and can "seed" music to others that have similar tastes. I don't need to BUY or OWN my music if I don't want to. I can simply rent it. THis is where the Telecom companies need to step in.

With so many people listening to so much different music, I am bound to find someone with my song, otherwise it would be up to the company providing the music to get it "out there" so that people can continue to share it. All of this would be legal because the phone companies would offer packages that include music streaming. The prices would eventually come down (which is what happens in EVERY area of the economy except when the Government is involved) and every one that has a cell phone can listen to all the music he/she wants without having to worry about buying each song, or illegally downloading it when they can't afford $1/song. This needs to be a network-free service so that all people on all cell phone carriers can participate and make it work. Remember that file sharing is a two way street.

This scheme would help the pitiful, complaining Music industry, help the artists get their name out (look at what Pandora has already done for bands everywhere), help the Telcom industries with possible lawsuits from the RIAA, helps Telcom industries by giving them another "package" to sell and attract customers, and lastly, and most importantly it helps the consumer by giving more choice and freedom with their music. Businesses are dependent on US THE CONSUMER, and we do not need them. They require our dollars to survive, yet we do not need music (or any other service good) to survive.

...or they can just keep suing people for $1M/song and see where that gets them.

-Desh