The regular Daily Bell contributor Frank Suess included one of my articles at FauxCapitalist.com in his weekly Mountain Vision newsletter, on October 4, 2012.
“Gary North: “The FED operates for the benefit of the largest banks”
Unlike fellow Mises devotee, Thomas DiLorenzo, who keeps calling the Fed a “national bank” and “government bank,” to obscure the fact that it´s 100% privately owned and operates at a profit for its shareholders, Gary North admitted on March 9, 2011, that the Fed “operates for the benefit of the largest banks.”
Go to Story“
This is from the Daily Bell‘s bio on Suess:
“Who is he: Frank R. Suess is CEO & Chairman of BFI Capital Group Inc. and he heads up the BFI group of companies in Zurich, Switzerland. They provide wealth management and consulting companies including the Global Gold Program offering secure gold storage in Switzerland. Frank also personally advises a select group of BFI’s high net-worth clients around the world. Suess’s vast knowledge of Switzerland and Liechtenstein is appreciated in his capacity as a member of the Advisory Board for The Foundation for the Advancement of Free-Market Thinking (FAFMT).
An advocate of free-market principles, Frank frequently speaks and writes on global economic, geo-political and financial matters. He is the editor of the Mountain Vision Update, BFI’s complimentary weekly newsletter. Furthermore, he is a regular contributor to The Daily Bell.“
This is ironic, given what I have written about the Daily Bell.
Read Full Post »
Canadians recognize the importance of private property rights
Posted in Uncategorized, tagged barber, Canada, comment, gender equality, Human Rights Tribunal, Ontario, private, property, property rights, religious freedom, Toronto Star on November 16, 2012 | 3 Comments »
From the November 15, 2012 Toronto Star article, Woman denied haircut goes to Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, in Canada’s largest newspaper, I posted the following comment:
“Private property rights
Why is a store owner required to do something on his own property against his will? It’s too bad that he’s challenging this on religious freedom, when it should be a matter of private property rights — to do with your own property as you wish, so long as you’re not depriving anyone else of their rights. And it’s not anyone’s right to get a haircut at a particular barber shop.
Nov 15, 2012 9:48 AM Agree (68) Disagree (22)”
After 13 hours, my comment is the 13th-highest-rated among over 600 comments. I’m pleasantly heartened to see the message of private property rights resonate with so many readers, given the false frame of the article in portraying it as a matter of gender equality vs. religious freedom.
Read Full Post »