Scott Horton Interviews Charles Goyette

Scott Horton, October 31, 2011

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Charles Goyette, former Antiwar Radio host and author of the upcoming new book Red and Blue and Broke All Over: Restoring America’s Free Economy, discusses why America’s economic and political problems can’t be solved until the red-blue paradigm is rejected; irreconcilable economic headlines where consumer spending is up while income drops – and nobody asks why; why the demand (Keynes) and supply-siders (Friedman) are two sides of the same government monetary intervention coin; a summary of the global debt crisis and European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF); the other PIIGS countries teetering on insolvency while Greek rescue plans founder; how “military Keynesianism” has bankrupted the US; the intertwined fates of US empire and the dollar; and why Americans prefer a stern father-figure for president, even one as clueless as Herman Cain.

MP3 here. (34:08)

Charles Goyette was a longtime award winning morning drive-time radio host from Phoenix, AZ. He is a libertarian commentator, who is noted for his outspoken anti-war views, his opposition to the war in Iraq, and his economic commentary. He is the author of the book The Dollar Meltdown: Surviving the Impending Currency Crisis with Gold, Oil, and Other Unconventional Investments.)

18 Responses to “Charles Goyette”

  1. Charles, can you provide a link to the Einstein quote? And explain the recent downturn in the UK in terms of the Austrian school.

  2. HERD SYNDROME — “Propensity of the people to want to be ruled”

    An excellent interview about “military Keynesianism” and why people are so eager to join the madding crowd.

    But the morality of it, what people fantasize that makes them feel they deserve to take all they can take — what is it?

  3. Most sectors of the US economy have already reduced their fat content to nearly zero and are now shedding themselves of muscle in order to give the appearance that they are making profits. But the medical-industrial complex is still making enormous profits, despite the fact that it is still very fatty and whatever muscle it does have is being suffocated by layers and layers of fat.

    The same thing can be said about the military-industrial complex. But I'm afraid that Obama-care and Obama's love for war will only increase the fat content of both of them. And what little muscle they do have with be quickly converted into fat. Some will argue that this proves that medical/military Keynesianism is a total failure, but others, like myself, will argue that this proves that capitalism is on its death bed, dying of a deadly cancer induced by government-backed corporate cronyism.

  4. I have grown very weary of this petty rift between the Freidman/Cato/Koch wing of the libertarian movement and the Rothbard/Rockwell/Raimondo wing. Reminds me of the knockdown drag out “ha’r pullin’s” my older sisters had when they were teenagers over the most insignificant matters. Freidman didn’t venerate Keynes (http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=_9DH07MBG_w) and Hayek didn’t vilify him. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5DQLQzavuU&NR=1). The Koch brothers may have done wrong by Rothbard, but that was forty years ago; way past time to bury the hatchet. Scott, you dream of a coalition between antiwar Marxists and antiwar libertarians (a union forged in the furnaces of hell by my reckoning) and can’t even form a coalition with your libertarian brethren. This nation is burning down…enough with the ha’r pullin’. Invite David Boaz on your show or even Ed Crane.

  5. No doubt that the wars and military expansion of the US over the past decade has hurt the US economy. In the last decade the costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, homeland security and the 70% increase of the Pentagon's base budget is responseble for about 70% of the Bush era deficits. And had W. not gone for the second round of tax cuts he would have actually come out ahead with his budgets. When Bush came to power the national debt stood at $5,7 trillion and when he left it stood over $10 trillion. And today the US national debt stands at $15 trillion or 100% of GDP. It's clear that without the increase in the defence and security outlays, America would have being in a much better position now. And if his administration wasn't so distracted by events abroad like Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran perhabs he could have prevented a few (economic) disasters back home. Like what was happening right under his nose in Washington DC, across town and what Franklin Raines was doing at Fannie Mae. But i think that even without the wars and military expansion the US couldn't have escaped the current crisis. The fact was that the US was losing more and more of it's industrial base while at the same time it's people where consuming more and more. This had to lead to some serious problems in the US economy sooner or later. Both the US government and the Chinese government intervene in there economies. While the Americans intervened mainly on the demand side the Chinese intervene mainly on the supply side. This in part helps to explain the huge trade inbalances between the two countries. In order to make up for the los in production (which is the real bases of wealth creation) the US had to prop up bubble's in the economy, one after the other in order to keep up the appearance of a strong and prosperous economy. This has helped the people and the country to feel richer than they actually are and both the people and the government went on an out of control spending spree that was unprecedented in world history. This has caused a catastrophe as America and Americans was getting poorer because of the los in production while they spend more and more money that they have borrowed from both abroad and from future generations. Today that process has accelerated. Everthing from the 0% interest rate to the QE programs are stealing wealth away from future generations and America's foreign creditors. They also help to creat new bubble's in the economy and pushes savers and pensioners under the bus. I'am afraid that there will be no change in America untill it hits a brickwall.

  6. More than 20 years ago when Communism appeared to be falling apart in the USSR people were saying 'Socialism cannot work because people can't their their 'brothers' needs' into consideration. It just isn't natural.' Now that Capitalism is coming apart at the seams, you're telling us ' The socialists are to blame. This wasn't even capitalism. You were all being fooled. We thought we'd give you another dose of socialism just to make sure you've really had enough of it. If you think you're ready, now we'll start the real capitalism… anytime you're ready… Just say the word! Now? Are you ready? Now?… Now?…. Now?'

  7. I'm not part of any libertarian civil war. I'm way too young. The fact is that I quit inviting them on the show because I got sick of being not worth even being told no. Hurt my little feelings and all.

    And picking on the Chicago School is like picking on Dick Cheney. They are evil, and their economics are corrupt. Not sure what that has to do with libertarianism, since they are conservatives, central bank lovers, and their "supply side" economics is simply demand side (welfare) for rich people. None of which is libertarian in the slightest.

  8. That's just it… There is no reasoning with these guys. They are like medieval healers… As the country is dying from the capitalist-class/imperial parasite they are saying that we still could have been bled more i.e. we need more of the free market. Meanwhile the decline that we have experienced coincides exactly with the age of neoliberalism which is frankly more similar to libertarianism than it is different. And the only "Keynesianism" that we get it militarism which wasteful supply side intervention in the economy.

    Why can't this site just be "anti-war" and not use the site as a platform for their nutty libertarian affectations?

  9. "Why can't this site just be "anti-war" and not use the site as a platform for their nutty libertarian affectations? "

    Probably because libertarianism is the ONLY political ideology that is actually consistent with peace. Socialism requires an army and violence to impose itself on those unwilling to submit. Just like its retarded brother Facism.

  10. Cynthia,

    What you're describing is not free market capitalism, but fascism. Very big difference. The former does not involve unending wars, central banking, bailouts, stimulus spending, enormous deficits, and unpayable debt. Until we realize this, there will be no recovery.

  11. The point is that none of this could have happened without massive and corrupt government. The corporation enjoy welfare as we speak. A lot of it. Governments inevitably become corrupt and use wealth of the nation for their own benefit and corporations feed off big government as the parasites are doing today. In a nation as vast and (potentially) wealthy as the united states a large government system is inevitably going to work out this way. The people who seek power do so because they crave it, not because they want to help people. When they get into power they take advantage. In a smaller government system people would have to take care of their own communities and help each other or the communities would fall apart. There would be no corporate bailouts, all these massive corporations that depend so much on subsidies from the government and crooked patents to get ahead wouldnt be able to do so.

    You seem to be suggesting that some heroic government is capable of coming to power in a country as vast as the united states and that the noble congressman would all be sure to take the real needs of their constituents into account. It isnt gonna happen. If governments have this much access to people's wealth through inforced taxing, they will always either use it improperly or use it for their own benefit. The larger and more centralized the government becomes, the more inefficient and corrupt it becomes. So you want more of what your getting right now I guess? You cant just say "lets strengthen the government, only this time make sure it takes care of normal people instead of taking care of corporations." Youre asking for a flawed system that created the problem to suddenly correct itself. We have never lived in a society where government did not exist to exploit people. Thats what governments do. Thats what theyve done throughout history, while giving just enough incentives to people to make sure they dont kick them the hell out.

    If you think the global system as it is now is capitalism than you just dont know what youre talking about.

    And to Eric Saunders below: the reason why antiwar.com is libertarian is because the only way to ensure wars dont happen is to keep a governmental system away from the massive amounts of money it would take to wage them. They dont really wax philosophical about libertarianism that often actually — but they do talk about the warfare/welfare state a lot because thats what we're living in. Today they were just talking about economics, not necessarily libertarianism. The economics of the situation as they discussed cant be avoided.

  12. Maybe because there are no anti-war Democrats when there is a Democrat in the WH
    and no anti-war Republicans when there is a Republican in the WH.

    Now consider how the no-initiation-of-violence foundation of libertarianism fits into the picture.

  13. [...] Horton had Charles Goyette on the show to discuss the farce that is the two-party system and the danger of America’s debt. [...]

  14. Scott Horton, I'm very surprised that Charles Goyette hasn't been interviewed by you since October, especially considering his new book is now out.

  15. Well, since I sometimes complain about the interviews, I thought that when I was impressed with one, I should say that, too. But I see that the other commenters disagree…

  16. Wow, This is what exactly I was searching, the information was overall very useful for me, thanks a lot.

  17. There are many things that should be considered and you have made me good point. Thank you for the nice article that you have done.

  18. Nice post. I like this post very much.

Leave a Reply