Gary North, a prolific libertarian writer, has written two pieces recently on the future.  In the first one, he says that we are not on the road to serfdom, but on the road out of serfdom.  In the second piece, he says that our kids will have it better than us.  I like his optimism and I wish more people had it.

I find that the majority of people who are new to the libertarian movement are pessimistic.  In fact, I could say that even the majority of older libertarians are pessimistic.  They think we are at the breaking point.  They think that if things aren’t turned around immediately and dramatically, that we will be in full-fledged tyranny, if we aren’t there already.

I am relatively young, but I have been a libertarian much longer than most of the young Ron Paul supporters.  I was a child of the Reagan era.  I had libertarian leanings as a child and into young adulthood.  I really became interested at about the age of 25.  It was about 9 years ago at the age of 28 that I became a more hardcore libertarian.  If anything, I have become even more radical since then.

I heard Harry Browne give a speech in 2004 on the prospects of liberty.  He said that he doubted that one in a hundred libertarians understood this one simple thing in our fight for liberty: that human nature is on our side.  The natural state of human beings is not to live under tyranny.  Most people want choices in their lives and they want liberty.

In 2004, there weren’t a lot of libertarians.  But from everything I have read, there were far more libertarians in 2004 than there were in 1954, 1964, or 1974.  I can safely say that there are far more libertarians now than there were 8 years ago.  In fact, I’d venture to guess that the number has at least quadrupled.

I think Gary North has it right.  Barring something disastrous event like a nuclear war, the next generation should be better off.  I warn people about the next several years and the economic trouble ahead.  But long term, I am an optimist.  With technology and the free flow of information, I don’t see how the libertarian movement can be stopped at this point.

There may be certain areas where we are less free in America today.  We have the TSA at airports.  Business regulation is probably as bad as it has ever been.  There are surely other examples, but there are also examples of where we are more free.

There is no more slavery in America (although we could argue that we are all slaves to the state).  With the internet, the news media is no longer monopolized by a small number of networks.  While there are wars going on, there is no full draft as we saw during many past wars.  The top tax rate is far lower now than it was during much of the 20th century.

If there are two things that really symbolize our hope for liberty, it is free speech and guns.  They are both related to the first two amendments to the Constitution.  While there are gun laws and restrictions, most Americans can own guns.  Not only that, but a large portion take advantage and do own guns.  Americans may not be armed to the teeth like the Swiss, but there are tens of millions of American households that have firearms.

As far as speech, we are as free as ever.  That is why I think the best hope for liberty starts in America.  While I can’t say that free speech is 100%, it is pretty close.  Just use google and you can see for yourself.  I laugh when I hear people talk about how great the Founding Fathers were and how they defended all of our liberties.  Have these people never heard of the Alien and Sedition Acts?  If Barack Obama tried to do what John Adams did, he would have a revolution on his hands.  Of course, with the internet, there would be no way to enforce the Sedition Act today, unless the government tries to arrest 50 million Americans.

While there are no guarantees, I think we will move toward liberty over the next few decades.  Technology will help a lot.  The current group of Ron Paul supporters will help a lot.

It is ironic because there are many Ron Paul supporters who are pessimistic, not knowing that the libertarian movement has grown by leaps and bounds because of them.  Yet, it is because of the Ron Paul supporters that I am so optimistic.

You can view a short-term chart of the adjusted monetary base here:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/usfd/page3.pdf

You can view a longer term chart for a broader view here:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/BASE/

You can view a chart of the excess reserves held by commercial banks here:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?chart_type=line&width=800&height=480&preserve_ratio=true&s[1][id]=EXCRESNS

The increase in excess reserves has closely mimicked the increase in the monetary base since the fall of 2008.  I have seen little to indicate a change in this scenario.  This means that the creation of new money by the Fed has gone into excess reserves at banks.  It is not being lent out.  This is helping to keep a lid on price inflation.

The Fed has not really inflated since the end of QE2.  It is hard to believe, but it is almost 11 months since QE2 ended at the end of June of 2011.  The monetary base is actually slightly lower from that point.

The Fed is keeping its powder dry for right now.  It is walking on a tightrope and it doesn’t want to lean too far in one direction.  It does not want to trigger severe price inflation and it also doesn’t want the economy to fall off a cliff.  Eventually, I see it falling one way or the other.

I am guessing there will eventually be a QE3, but not until the economy gets visibly worse.  It is hard to read the minds of central bankers, but I don’t see them sitting on their hands if price inflation is relatively low and the economy is falling off a cliff.

We will continue to watch the adjusted monetary base to see if the Fed is doing what it is saying.  So far this year, the Fed has not been doing much.  Hopefully that will last, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

Dave Ramsey is a money guy.  I have written about him before.  I agree with much of what he has to say about money.  I don’t often agree with him when it comes to investing and anything political.  He does not understand the monetary system, which is rather critical when you are offering investment advice.

With that said, I was surprised to hear what he said this morning on a morning television show.  He was warning people about having state 529 plans.  He pointed out that many states are in financial trouble and that you should avoid contributing to a state prepaid college plan (or something like that) if your state currently has financial difficulties.

This is surprising because I consider Dave Ramsey as part of the establishment.  He has little clue about the monetary system while being a popular personality talking about money on television and the radio.  Yet, with this statement he made about being careful with state 529 plans, he is saying in a not-so-subtle way that some states are headed for bankruptcy.

That is all his statement can mean.  He is saying that states in financial trouble are at least somewhat likely to default on their promises.  This means that you could make contributions for your child’s college education and then see it all evaporate because of politicians spending too much and promising too much. If Dave Ramsey is suggesting something like this, then we can be almost certain that it is going to happen, because I don’t see him as someone who questions the system very often.

I completely agree with him on this topic.  I would go further and say that you should avoid these state plans no matter where you live.  First, college is way too expensive in most places and I would try to find a cheaper way to pay for your child’s education.  There are more choices now with community colleges and online courses.  You can also encourage your child to take college credit classes while in high school and maybe even test out of some college level classes.

Second, if you are going to save some money to help pay for your child’s college, then you don’t need to contribute money to the politicians in your state.  You can save your own money.

I would not contribute to any state plans, as things can change quickly.  Most of the 50 states are in financial trouble.  It is all relative.  But the worst ones that come to mind are California, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois.

Not coincidentally, the states with the highest taxes have the worst problems.  This could be for several reasons.  First, high taxes tend to drive productive people away.  Second, the high taxes meant high government “revenues” during the so-called good times.  When good times went to bad (the bursting housing bubble), then government tax collections went way down.  But the politicians had already made big promises and were already accustomed to spending huge amounts.  Third, the states with the highest taxes also tend to be the states most likely to elect big government politicians.  (I know “big government politicians” is redundant, but it is all relative.)

In conclusion, you should actually take Dave Ramsey’s advice on this.  Stay away from the state college savings plans.  If and when the economy turns south again, we could see a wave of state bankruptcies.  Don’t be one of the victims.

Yesterday, I wrote a piece giving three reasons why I think hyperinflation is unlikely.  Today, I want to add a key point about the subject.

Hyperinflation (or even inflation) is not all about the money supply, when we define it in terms of prices.  Supply and demand affect each individual price in the market.  For the overall general price level, it is affected by just a few things.

First, productivity and technology play a role in the overall price level.  We can see this in the computer and electronic industry today.  You can have falling prices, even in the face of monetary inflation.  In a world with a stable money supply, prices would most likely decline gradually as production increases.

Second, the overall price level is obviously affected by the money supply.  If you increase the money supply, then the overall price level will increase, assuming other factors stay the same.

Third, the overall price level is affected by the banks and lending, particularly in a fractional reserve environment.  Prices will tend to go up with more fractional reserve lending.

Fourth, and this is the main point I wanted to touch on, is that prices are affected by the demand for money.  This is also called velocity, which is the speed at which money changes hands.

The demand for money changes based on people’s thoughts and actions.  If people spend more, then velocity will increase (the demand for money goes down) and prices will tend to rise.  If people save more, then prices are not bid up as much and prices will tend not to rise or even go down.

One thing that affects the demand for money is people’s expectations.  This ties in with the subject of hyperinflation.  If people expect that the Fed (or any other central bank) will continue to inflate, then people may be more anxious to spend their money quickly before prices go higher.  This can just trigger even more expectations of higher prices and cause them to go up even faster.

In a hyperinflation type environment, the money in use can be destroyed quickly.  Prices will often go up faster than the money supply is increasing due to people’s expectations.

On the other hand, prices can also go up slower than monetary inflation.  If people expect that the increasing money supply will slow down, stop, or even go down, then more people are likely to save their money.  This will cause prices to go down, or at least go up slower.

If we hit a scenario where there is high price inflation, the Fed can most likely slow it down very quickly. The Fed just needs to tell everyone that it will stop monetizing debt.  If people believe the statement is credible, then price inflation will most likely slow down quickly.  You could have 50% price inflation go down very quickly if the Fed makes a credible statement that it will halt its increasing of the money supply.

Keep these thoughts in mind, particularly if we hit a scenario of high price inflation.  Things can change quickly, depending on the actions of the Fed and also the actions of millions of people in the marketplace.  Price inflation is not just about the money supply.  It is also about the future expectations of the money supply.

There are many Austro-libertarians who think that hyperinflation in the U.S. is practically inevitable.  There are certainly some good arguments to be made for the scenario.  The government debt is enormous, now exceeding 100 percent of the measured GDP.  The Federal Reserve has loaded its books with toxic assets that cannot be sold for what they are “worth” on the Fed’s books.  The banking system is still a mess, despite the massive excess reserves built up from the Fed’s monetary inflation over the last 4 years.

While I don’t think the threat of hyperinflation can be discounted, I still believe that it is unlikely.  I will offer three reasons why.

Before listing my reasons, let’s define hyperinflation.  The definition can vary.  Some people would say that 50% or more annual price inflation is hyperinflation.  Some might say that prices have to double or more every year.  Some might say that prices have to be rising every day.  Others would leave prices out of the equation and define it using the money supply.

For the sake of this discussion, we will say that hyperinflation is general prices rising 100% or more per year.  This would mean that prices are doubling each year or more.  (Note: I understand that Austrian school economists define inflation in terms of the money supply, but I would prefer to use prices for this discussion.)

So here are the top three reasons I see hyperinflation as unlikely:

1) The Bankers

The big bankers (and this includes the Fed) do not really want hyperinflation.  It does not benefit them.  It would destroy their pensions.  It would destroy their incomes.  It would destroy their standard of living.  It would probably remove them from their own power.

Why would the bankers commit financial suicide?  Even if they all had a stash of gold (which they probably don’t), they would still be worse off.  The bankers like to redistribute wealth from the average American into their own pockets.  But they should know enough not to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

I hear people casually talking about how we are going to have hyperinflation.  I tell them that if they are serious and if they really think it is going to happen, then they should be making major preparations.  They should be a hard-core prepper.  They should really consider moving to another country, preferably somewhere with a lot of farmland.  Hyperinflation in the U.S. would mean a breakdown in the division of labor.  It means that your paycheck would be worth almost nothing.  It would mean that trucks would stop delivering gas to the gas stations and food to the grocery stores.

2) Ron Paul Supporters

When the Republican primaries and caucuses are over, Ron Paul will have received about two million votes.  Sure, this is out of a population of over 300 million, but it is still a significant number.  While a few of those two million may not be libertarians in the slightest, there are also some Ron Paul supporters who never changed their voting registration to Republican to vote for Paul.  So there may be more than two million Ron Paul supporters.

Of course, one of the big issues that Ron Paul has continued to hammer away on is the issue of the Fed.  He wrote a book called “End the Fed”.  His supporters have a basic enough understanding of monetary policy.  They understand that overall price inflation is caused by monetary inflation, which is caused by the Fed.  They can explain to others that it is Fed policies that cause higher prices at the grocery store and gas station.  While some may not believe it right away, more people will be searching for answers if overall prices start going up like they did in the late 1970’s, at a 10 to 20 percent annual rate.

Ron Paul supporters are a big enough group now that they can be a check on Bernanke and the Fed.

3) The Internet

The number three reason goes hand-in-hand with number two.  Open information and communication is the enemy of big government and central bankers.  This is why big government relies on propaganda.  They need the consent of at least the majority of the people, if not more.

The internet spreads information.  Ron Paul supporters on the internet really spread information.

Imagine a scenario where prices start going up at more than 10% per year.  Imagine grocery bills going up at 20% per year.  Now imagine someone with 300 Facebook “friends” complaining about their high grocery bill on Facebook.  Out of 300 people, there will probably be at least one Ron Paul supporter.  Now that Ron Paul supporter can post a message, or maybe even a video.  It could be a two minute cartoon video.  It would briefly explain that a general rise in prices is because there is more money chasing goods and services.  The only way there can be more money (aside from fractional reserve banking) is because the Fed is creating more money.

If this Ron Paul supporter had posted this on Facebook before, it might not have gotten much attention. But when people really start feeling the pinch, they may pay attention.  The person complaining on Facebook also has 300 friends who will see the response.

Now extrapolate these results over millions of people.  If we all of a sudden have tens of millions of people who understand that general price inflation over time has to be caused by the Fed, then the Fed cannot get away with it.  It will have to stop creating new money or risk a complete revolt by the populace.

In conclusion, while hyperinflation is possible in the U.S., I don’t think it is likely.  I think high price inflation of 10 to 20 percent is somewhat likely.  The Fed cannot get away with things like it could in the past.  If you disagree with me and think hyperinflation is likely, then I hope you are making plans to get out of dodge.

Last year, I wrote a post on my “Libertarian Reading List“.  It covered books on libertarianism that were influential on me and that I recommend to others.  I was asked recently if I have a libertarian movie list.  While it differs quite a bit from my reading list, I do have some movie favorites.

There is a big difference between my reading list and movie list.  The reading list is mostly non-fiction and is overtly libertarian in most cases.  The books I recommend are for people who specifically want to learn more about libertarian philosophy and want to be able to better understand it and also defend the pro-liberty positions.

My movie list tends to be different.  I don’t know of many non-fiction libertarian movies.  If you want to watch a video of libertarianism, you are probably better off going to YouTube and finding what you want.  But there are some good movies that have very subtle libertarian messages, even if it is often unintended.  Many of these movies are good for non-libertarians.  They may plant a seed in the person’s head without them knowing it.

Joyeux Noel
This movie is based on a true story.  It is about soldiers fighting in World War I, who decide to call a truce during the Christmas holiday.  They come out and socialize with the “enemy”.  It shows the absurdity of war.  It shows that these soldiers had more in common than they realized and that they were fighting each other only because of their respective governments.

The Village
I enjoy the psychology of this movie.  The people in the village have basically been brainwashed, but they don’t really know it.  (Does anyone being brainwashed ever know it?)  The main character questions authority.  He is a thinking individual.  He questions the world around him.  I don’t want to spoil anything in case you haven’t seen it.  Again, there is no overtly libertarian theme, but there are messages about thinking outside of the box and questioning authority.

Star Wars
Most people are quite familiar with the Star Wars movies.  It is a story of good vs. evil.  It is a story of redemption.  It is a story of tyranny trying to rule the world.  It is a story of a group of freedom fighters (rebels) trying to defeat the evil empire.  These movies are not for everyone, but there is definitely an aspect appealing to libertarians.

The Patriot
There are some good libertarian lines in this movie.  Mel Gibson does not want to fight an American Revolution, but he changes his mind when tragedy strikes his family.  While I am anti-war and I even think there are legitimate questions about the Revolutionary War, this movie still deserves to be on my list.

V for Vendetta
This isn’t a purely libertarian movie.  I am against the use of violence unless it is strictly in self defense.  The methods used by the main character go beyond this.  However, this movie still deserves a place on my list due to the overall story of fighting for freedom against tyranny.

Lord of the Rings
I have to admit that I have not seen the entirety of these movies.  This is like Star Wars in that it is not for everyone.  But there is definitely a libertarian theme in that people cannot be trusted with great power.

Atlas Shrugged, Part I
This is completely different from the other movies on this list.  This movie is not subtle in its message.  It is libertarian and it doesn’t hide its message.  I would recommend the book over the movie first.  With that said, I was actually pleasantly surprised when I saw this movie.  For a low budget movie, it was actually decent and I look forward to seeing part II.

If I think of any other movies, I will update my list.

The price of gold, at least in terms of dollars, has been in a rut.  As of this writing, it is down to around $1,540 per ounce.  After 11 straight years of gains, many are wondering if this is the end of the gold bull market.

Of course, some of the weakness is due to the U.S. dollar.  It’s not that the dollar is that great, but with all of the problems in Greece and Europe in general, the euro has been down quite a bit.  Therefore, for Europeans, the price of gold is not down as much.

I think these retracements in the price are always a good test for people who own gold or gold related investments.  The true believers stay in the game.  The ones who don’t really understand why it is important to own some gold are the ones who are scared off.

Sometimes I am asked if I think gold will continue to go lower.  To be honest, if I knew the answer with any precision, I would be incredibly rich.  I would be trading futures every day and raking in money like Warren Buffett.  But there is no way that I can predict the short-term price movements of gold or anything else.

If there is one thing that Austrian school economics teaches us, it is that economics depends on human action.  I cannot predict how billions of people in the world are going to act tomorrow and I therefore cannot predict what the price of gold will be.  Maybe some futures trader in Singapore decides to get into a huge position tomorrow.  Maybe a whole bunch of Indians decide to buy gold for their daughters.  Maybe Ben Bernanke makes a special announcement that the Fed is changing its policies.

Because of all of the variables, it is impossible to predict the short-term price movements.  But we can make some predictions with a certain degree of accuracy.  We can predict that the U.S. federal government will continue to run up debt and spend money like crazy in the short term.  We can predict that the Fed will continue to monetize debt in the future if it feels it is necessary to keep interest rates down or to keep a major crash from occurring.  We can predict that an increase in the money supply will likely lead to an increase in prices, especially in things like gold.

I can’t even be certain that the Fed will continue to inflate.  Strange things can happen in this world.  Maybe Bernanke will resign and someone new will come in and stop monetizing debt.

While I can’t be certain that gold will go up in terms of U.S. dollars, I think it is highly likely to happen over the next few years, given the circumstances.  With that said, if you have been a procrastinator in buying gold and gold related investments, now seems to present a good opportunity.  Again, it may go down more in the next few weeks or months, but if I could call the exact bottom, I would be really wealthy.

I have often heard people talking about politics and they refer to others as being dumb, out of touch, or apathetic.  Then they say something like, “some Americans just want to watch American Idol while they let their nation get destroyed.”  You can substitute “American Idol” for other activities like reading celebrity gossip, watching football, playing video games, etc.

I use American Idol here because I happen to watch American Idol.  I am not at all ashamed to admit it and I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.  I don’t really care for people who like to pass judgement on others in such a way.  Just because someone likes to watch American Idol or do some other activity, doesn’t mean they necessarily don’t care about the political system or the world we live in.

Of course, some people who watch American Idol may not take any interest in politics or anything related.  They may be apathetic when it comes to discussing the latest legislation or the latest scandal with a politician.  In some ways, who can blame them?

But here is the most ironic thing.  Oftentimes, when I hear someone talk about our “American Idol nation of people who don’t care” (or something like that), it is usually the accuser who is way off base.  This person, instead of watching American Idol, listens to Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh and is mostly backwards in their thinking.  They may understand a few things and know current events better than the average American Idol watcher, yet I think I would prefer the American Idol watcher.

The American Idol watcher is oftentimes less brainwashed than the accuser of others being ignorant.  The American Idol watcher does less damage, in at least not explicitly consenting to big government and empire.  It is often the accuser who is more ignorant in many ways.

I have also heard libertarians make comments like this and I don’t really like to hear it.  They are perhaps correct that people should not be so apathetic.  Yet, from an economist’s point of view, the person watching American Idol may actually be making a rational decision.  He may derive more benefit from that than spending his time trying to get the “right” people elected, which never seems to matter anyway.

People are always going to have their hobbies and their interests.  If reading celebrity gossip or watching certain television shows is part of that, then it is no big deal.  You can watch American Idol and still understand the political process and current events.  For those listening to Sean Hannity, I would actually say that you are better of watching American Idol.  At least you won’t get brainwashed into promoting big government policies.

I have hit on this theme several times in the past.  I wrote about it last fall.  I wrote about it a few months ago.  It is inevitable that Greece will withdraw from the euro zone.  The country will no longer be part of the European Union.

The media and the establishment (that is partially repetitive) are finally admitting this fact.  Some of the people in the media may be dumb, but I can’t imagine they all are.  The elitist politicians, lobbyists, bankers, etc. are not that dumb.  Some of them may be, but most of them are more evil than dumb.

The headlines for the last couple of days in the financial markets is screaming that Greece may depart from the grand experiment that is called the European Union.  It was another step forward for the one-world government promoters.  Now they are seeing their dreams shattered.  The ironic thing is that their own socialist/ fascist policies have helped lead to the break up.  I assume that since the establishment is admitting that Greece may leave, that it will happen quite soon, maybe in the matter of days.

Look at what the interest rates were on one-year and two-year bonds from the Greek government.  The yield on the one-year went over 1,000%.  It is no longer tracked, presumably because it went into default.

All of those bailouts from Germany and others and where did it get them?  They basically just propped up the Greek system for a little longer than it needed to be.  It was wasted resources.

If and when Greece leaves, one of two things will happen.  The government has made promises in the past that simply cannot be kept.  It can deal with these by directly defaulting on them (just as they will do with their official government debt, also known as bonds).  It can also default on them by printing money.

Greece does not control a printing press right now.  It is much like the state of California.  That is why their day of reckoning has arrived sooner than others (like Washington DC).  When Greece leaves the euro zone, it will go back to its own currency.  It will have its own central bank again.  It will be free to use money creation as a tool to pay off some of its promises.

I hope that Greece does not do this second option.  It will lead to severe price inflation and will only continue the great malinvestment.  Greece needs to start with a clean slate, or at least as clean as possible.  Maybe they won’t cut off the welfare checks for people in their 80’s.  But anyone with government pensions, early retirements, and other government handouts should be cut off, almost immediately.  It is harsh, but the alternatives are worse.  I understand that many of these people worked hard in previous years to “earn” these pensions.  But it was the government that made these promises and current residents should not be forced to pay.

If Greece drastically cuts back spending, regulation, and taxation and has a reasonably stable monetary policy, then growth can return there.  On the other hand, if Greece continues in its ways and continues its big government policies and central planning, then we can expect massive price inflation and an economy that continues to deteriorate.  It will mean a lot of poverty for a lot of people.  Let’s hope the people decide on the first option.

One of the themes I have been hammering away at lately is that of government debt and the burden it imposes on us.  It is common to hear people say that we should not keep running up government debt because it is harming future generations.  But my position is that it is not future generations who are paying for it.  The harm government debt brings to future generations is because of the lack of savings and capital investment in the present.

Future generations can simply decide not to pay the debt that was previously run up.  In that scenario, it will be the bond holders who are left holding the bag.  But regardless of how resources are redistributed in the future, government debt is harmful to people in the present day.

For round numbers, the U.S. federal government is currently collecting about $2.5 trillion per year, while spending about $4 trillion.  This leaves a deficit of $1.5 trillion.  (I am just using these as approximate figures, as the yearly deficit is a little lower.)

If the federal government weren’t spending that additional $1.5 trillion in deficit spending, then it would instead be left in the hands of people and businesses who would choose to save it, invest it, or spend it.  When the government spends this money, it is being misallocated.  It is not necessarily all going to waste, or even destruction in the case of war.  Some of the money could be going to useful things like roads and bridges.  However, politicians (or anyone else) do not know the preferences of hundreds of millions of people.  So even if you had a group of really smart and really honest politicians, they would not know how to properly allocate trillions of dollars based on the wants and needs of hundreds of millions of people.

Since resources are misallocated, we are all poorer.  Our standard of living is less than it should be.  The government debt and overall government spending is hurting the current generation.

The U.S. government can cover this up for longer because of the Federal Reserve and its ability to create money out of thin air.  But even in the U.S., families are struggling more than ever and it is mostly because of the high levels of government spending and government debt.

A good example to look at right now is Greece.  It is a real world example of how massive government debt hurts right now.  The people living in Greece right now are not worried about future generations having to pay down the debt.  The debt will be gone anyway when the Greek government defaults in full.

The Greek people are suffering right now because of the massive debt and massive government spending.  The standard of living for the average Greek resident has fallen substantially.  Some people are just struggling to put food on the table.  The government has made so many promises (that can’t be kept) and has spent so much money (misallocated resources), that it has actually led to a decline in real wealth.  They are paying the price right now, in the form of poverty.

As the U.S. government continues to spend like crazy and accumulate more debt, it is not our unborn grandchildren that we should worry about most.  It is the people suffering right here and right now from a massive overdose of big government.  If the government drastically cuts spending as it did after World War II, then we will see a big improvement in living standards in a short period of time.