How To Enroll Your Kids In School Without the 13-36 Vaccines Forced On Kids America
With the new school year coming up, parents around the United States are facing the choice of vaccinating their children with the dozens of vaccines forced on children in America, or face the hassle of […]
The post How To Enroll Your Kids In School Without the 13-36 Vaccines Forced On Kids America appeared first on The People’s Voice.
Ex-CIA Wife Of Globalist Max Boot Indicted For Failing To Register As Foreign Agent
Sue Mi Terry, the 54-year-old wife of globalist journalist Max Boot, was indicted on Tuesday for failing to register as a foreign agent of the South Korean government.
Terry was a CIA analyst who was also working for South Korea since 2013, according to the Washington Post.
?Washington Post columnist @MaxBoot’s wife was just charged with being a foreign agent.
— George Papadopoulos (@GeorgePapa19) July 18, 2024
This after years of him writing and calling me, Trump and others agents of foreign powers.
You cannot make this up. pic.twitter.com/K5mkh9hPgo
The outlet, known by many as an arm of the CIA, was forced to publish an editor’s note on op-eds it published by Terry following the indictment.
The outlet also frequently publishes pieces by Terry’s warmonger husband Boot.
The Post’s message on Terry articles states, “On July 16, a federal indictment was made public alleging that Sue Mi Terry had acted as an unregistered agent of the South Korean government beginning in 2013. If true, this is information that would have been pertinent for The Post’s publication decision. Ms. Terry has denied these charges and has asserted through counsel that the allegations in the indictment are unfounded.”
The government’s indictment of Terry claims she wrote articles published by WAPO that were ordered directly by the South Korean government.
One of the articles reportedly instructed by the Koreans was co-authored by Boot, who is not being charged with any crime.
The suspected South Korean agent was caught on camera being gifted lavish items from foreign officials, including Bottega Veneta and Louis Vuitton handbags as well as a Dolce & Gabbana coat.
Boot and Terry have allegedly been forced to put up their apartment in New York City’s Upper East Side as collateral for her $500,000 bond.
The New York Post reports Terry had to hand over her passport as part of the terms of her release and that her next court date is scheduled for July 30.
Was Boot aware his wife was potentially acting on behalf of South Korea in violation of the law?
Illegal Alien Indicted on Slew of Child Sex Crimes in Ohio
An illegal alien has been indicted in Ohio for a slew of crimes against underage victims, including rape and sexual battery, authorities say.
On Wednesday, Butler County Sheriff Richard K. Jones announced charges against Isauro Garcia-Cruz, a 44-year-old Mexican citizen who is illegally present in the country.
Garcia-Cruz is believed to have targeted at least two juveniles, including a 15-year-old Honduran girl who may have been trafficked into the U.S.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE….
— Richard K. Jones (@butlersheriff) July 17, 2024
July 17, 2024
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT INDICTED FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT CHARGES INVOLVING JUVENILES
Sheriff Richard K. Jones reports Isauro Garcia-Cruz, 44-year-old illegal immigrant from Mexico, was indicted by a Butler County Grand Jury for multiple sexual… pic.twitter.com/EbXL3Tdhor
On March 4, Garcia-Cruz was arrested in Bedford County, Virginia, on warrants for first-degree kidnapping, felony unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, and felony gross sexual imposition.
Authorities tracked the suspect down at a Virginia hotel after he allegedly abducted an underage girl on February 29 in Ohio and transported her across state lines.
“The victim in this case is a 15-year-old unaccompanied female from Honduras. She was placed in a sponsor’s home in the City of Middletown [Ohio] by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,” the Butler County Sheriff’s Office (BCSO) explained in a statement at the time.
“Her sponsor is also an illegal immigrant and was the girlfriend of the suspect Garcia Cruz.”
BCSO said they were investigating if the girl was a victim of human trafficking, but results of that probe have not been made public.
At the time of his arrest, “Cruz had additional pending warrants for aggravated sexual battery of a minor relating to a separate incident,” the Bedford County Sheriff’s Office revealed in a press release.
A grand jury in Butler County indicted Garcia-Cruz this week on charges against two underage victims, including two counts of rape, eight counts of sexual battery, six counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, one count of gross sexual imposition, and one count of disseminating matter harmful to juveniles.
He is being held in Butler County Jail awaiting a future court date.
InfoWars has been documenting the surge of crime fueled by the ongoing Biden border invasion.
Revival Pastor: Trump Must Lift Up Jesus Christ to Save the United States
Zuckerberg: Trump Pumping Fist in Air After Getting Shot ‘One of the Most Badass Things I’ve Ever Seen in My Life’
Donald Trump’s defiant fist pump after nearly being assassinated impressed Mark Zuckerberg, the Meta CEO admitted in a recent interview.
In a clip from an interview going viral on social media, Zuckerberg explained he’s learned from past experiences not to publicly endorse either candidate, but that Trump’s bravery following his near-death incident left him with a patriotic feeling.
MARK ZUCKERBERG:
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) July 19, 2024
“Seeing Trump get up after getting shot in the face and pump his fist in the air with the American flag is one of the most badass things I’ve ever seen in my life.”
He’s right. pic.twitter.com/yuyxtbvDcf
“Seeing Trump get up after getting shot in the face and pump his fist in the air with the American flag is one of the most badass things I’ve ever seen in my life,” Zuckerberg tells interviewer Emily Chang.
“But…I think, look, at some level as an American, it’s like hard to not get kind of emotional about that spirit and that fight, and I think that’s why a lot of people like the guy.”
Zuckerberg’s tech sites, which include Facebook and Instagram, have been blamed by both the left and the right for influencing elections, prompting him to testify before Congress on multiple occasions.
Meanwhile, Trump has been critical of Zuckerberg’s tremendous influence at one point earlier this year calling Facebook “the enemy of the people” after claiming the tech CEO spent $500 million on “Zuckerbucks drop boxes” and calling for him to be jailed.
Trump reacts to potential TikTok ban: “You have to look at Facebook. Facebook is the enemy of the people. Zuckerberg is spending $500 million dollars in the last election and nothing happens to him? I think Facebook is an equal threat.” pic.twitter.com/bQM8oGT5Dd
— TheBlaze (@theblaze) March 14, 2024
Trump says banning TikTok will make Facebook dangerously bigger: “I consider Facebook to be an enemy of the people. What Facebook did with drop boxes, with the $500M Zuckerbucks drop boxes that he put in, I consider illegal.”
— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) March 11, 2024
Says Mark Zuckerberg should be in jail pic.twitter.com/rRijEEF4u6
Perhaps the assassination attempt and Zuckerberg’s kind words toward Trump can forge a connection between the two industry titans.
Barbra Streisand Says ‘Bully’ Trump Bought Assassination Attempt on Himself
Hollywood celebrity Barbra Streisand has blamed Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump for the attempt on his life, accusing the former president of being a bully and thus bringing the violence on himself. According to […]
The post Barbra Streisand Says ‘Bully’ Trump Bought Assassination Attempt on Himself appeared first on The People’s Voice.
Government Regulation of Competitive Firms Creates Monopolies
Monopolies are believed to undermine individuals’ well-being, including being the cause of large increases in the prices of goods and services. According to Jean Tirole, the 2014 Nobel winner in economics, monopolies undermine the efficient functioning of the market economy by influencing the prices and the quantity of products, making consumers worse off.
Thus, monopolies supposedly cause market conditions to deviate from the ideal state of “perfect competition.” Effective enforcement of government regulations, then, is needed to control monopolies. Tirole has devised methods to strengthen the regulation of industries dominated by a few large firms.
The ‘perfect competition’ model
In the world of perfect competition, the following features characterize a market:
- There are many buyers and sellers in the market.
- Homogeneous products are traded.
- Buyers and sellers are perfectly informed.
- There are no obstacles or barriers to enter the market.
In the world of perfect competition, buyers and sellers have no control over the price of the product. They are price takers. The assumption of perfect information and thus absolute certainty implies that there is no room left for entrepreneurial activity. For in the world of certainty there are no risks and therefore no need for entrepreneurs. If this is so, who then introduces new products and how?
According to the proponents of the perfect competition model, any real situation in a market that deviates from this model is regarded as suboptimal to consumers’ well-being. It is recommended that the government intervene whenever such deviation occurs.
Contrary to this way of thinking, we suggest that competition emerges not because of a large number of participants as such but because of a large variety of products.
Competition in products, not firms
The greater the variety, the greater the competition is going to be and therefore more benefits for the consumers. Once an entrepreneur introduces a product, he acquires 100% of the newly established market.
A product that makes a profit attracts competition. The producers of older products must come with new ideas and new products to catch the attention of consumers. The popular view that a producer that dominates the market could exploit his position by raising the price above the truly competitive level is erroneous. The goal of every business is to make profits, but producers must offer consumers a suitable price and, if possible, secure a price where the quantity that is produced can be sold at a profit.
According to Henry Hazlitt, “In a free economy, in which wages, costs, and prices are left to the free play of the competitive market, the prospect of profits decides what articles will be made, and in what quantities—and what articles will not be made at all. If there is no profit in making an article, it is a sign that the labor and capital devoted to its production are misdirected: the value of the resources that must be used up in making the article is greater than the value of the article itself.”
To set a suitable price, the producer-entrepreneur must consider how much money consumers are likely to spend on the product. He also has to consider the prices of competitive products and his production costs.
Any attempt by the alleged dominant producer to disregard these facts will cause him to suffer losses. Furthermore, how can one establish whether the price of a product charged by a dominant producer is above the so-called competitive price level? How could one establish what the competitive price is supposed to be?
Murray Rothbard wrote, “In the market, there is no discernible, identifiable competitive price, and therefore there is no way of distinguishing, even conceptually, any given price as a ‘monopoly price.’ The alleged ‘competitive price’ can be identified neither by the producer himself nor by the disinterested observer.”
Furthermore, “There is no way to define ‘monopoly price’ because there is also no way of defining the ‘competitive price’ to which the former must refer.”
Also, “On the free market there is no way of distinguishing a ‘monopoly price’ from a ‘competitive price’ or a ‘sub competitive price’ or of establishing any changes as movements from one to the other. No criteria can be found for making such distinctions. The concept of monopoly price as distinguished from competitive price is therefore untenable.”
Definition of monopoly
Rothbard wrote, “Let us turn to its classic expression by the great seventeenth-century jurist, Lord Coke: A monopoly is an institution or allowance by the king, by his grant, commission, or otherwise … to any person or persons, bodies politic or corporate, for the sole buying, selling, making, working, or using of anything, whereby any person or persons, are sought to be restrained of any freedom or liberty that they had before, or hindered in their lawful trade …
“In other words, by this definition, monopoly is a grant of special privilege by the State, reserving a certain area of production to one particular individual or group. Entry into the field is prohibited to others and this prohibition is enforced by the gendarmes of the State.”
He concluded, “Hence, monopoly can never arise on a free market, unhampered by State interference. In the free economy, then, according to this definition, there can be no ‘monopoly problem.’”
It is obvious, then, that monopoly can never arise on a free market. If government officials attempt to enforce a lower price this price could wipe out the incentive to produce the product. So rather than improving consumers’ well-being, government policies will only make things much worse.
Again, in contrast to the perfect competition model, what gives rise to a greater competitive environment is not a large number of participants in a particular market but rather a variety of competitive products. Government policies, in the spirit of the perfect competition model, are destroying product differentiation and thus destroying competition.
Erroneous idea of homogeneous products
The idea that suppliers should offer a homogeneous product is not tenable. Since product differentiation is what the free market sets in motion, it means that every supplier of a product has 100% control as far as his product is concerned, making him a monopolist. What gives rise to a product differentiation is that every entrepreneur has different ideas and talents. This difference is manifested in the way the product is made, the way it is packaged, the place in which it is sold, and the way it is offered to the client.
For instance, a hamburger that is sold in a beautiful restaurant is a different product from a hamburger sold in a takeaway shop. So, if the owner of a restaurant gains dominance in the sales of hamburgers, should he then be restrained for this?
Should he then alter his mode of operation and convert his restaurant to a takeaway shop in order to comply with the perfect competition model? All that has happened here is that consumers have expressed a greater preference to dine in the restaurant rather than buying from the takeaway shop. What is wrong with this?
If consumers were to abandon takeaway shops and buy hamburgers only from the restaurant, does this mean that the government must step in and intervene? The whole issue of a harmful monopoly has no relevancy in the free-market environment.
A harmful monopolist is likely to emerge when the government, by means of licenses, restricts the variety of products in a market. (The government bureaucrats decide what products should be supplied in the market.) By imposing restrictions and thus limiting the variety of goods and services offered to consumers, government curtails consumers’ choices, thereby undermining their well-being.
Conclusion
The idea that government can regulate monopolies to promote competition is a fallacy. If anything, such intervention only stifles market competition and lowers living standards. Furthermore, what matters for individuals’ well-being is not the number of firms but the variety of goods and services. Harmful monopolies cannot emerge in a free market. Instead, we can expect monopolies to emerge when governments heavily regulate an industry and become involved in production and licensing firms and individual occupations.
MESSAGE TO DEEP STATE MINIONS: Don’t Follow Your Orders, Come Out With Your Hands Up & Join The Resistance