Writes Andrew Snow:

I've been a daily reader of LRC for over six years. I guess hearing an Austrian viewpoint on contemporary issues for so long has been an excellent way to gain confidence in telling my friends and acquaintances about the real issues going on here - and suddenly, I find myself in high demand for all these "economic" questions as well as explanations for why our Government is... what it is. It's absolutely wonderful to be able to construct the incredible big picture - from the bailout to central banking to the inherent flaws in government itself.

Anyways, I work at a coffeeshop and to have access to two things: the New York Times, and people who read the New York Times and take it at face value, without asking relevant questions. ("Hey, didn't they urge us to cut out our excessive ways, and wasteful habits? Why are they hoping the Fed can resume the process of debt and credit?" "Hey, why is Microsoft a 'harmful monopoly' but Fannie Mae is 'too big to fail'?")

Having back-copies of the Times to compare to, day after day and now week by week - it's quite intriguing to see the Atlas Shrugged-esque nature of the journalism. (The front page on Sunday was quite amusing. An article starts off with a quote by Daniel Mudd: "Almost noone expected what was coming. It's not fair to blame us for not predicting the unthinkable."

Recently I saw an article in the NYT which tried to explain why "unregulated markets" are doomed to fail. The journalist invokes a "Race to the Bottom" argument: suppose an athlete discovers that while using steroids may prove risky, he gains immediate success in competing. Of course, the other athletes will start using steroids to continue to be competitive - and in the long run they all have to face potentially fatal consequences.True to form, he does not mention just where the "steroids" come from. In fact, the phrase "Fannie Mae" never appears.

I propose to modify the metaphor: The athlete's manager - who imposed his services upon the athlete for his own good - has racked up a huge debt, and seeking easy profit, decides to wager a massive bet on an athletic competition. How does he do this? Why - by gaming the system! He gives his athlete steroids, and assures him in full faith that it he will guarantee it. Word gets out that steroids arehighly beneficial - and risk-free!

Luckily, I was able to point this out to my customers - sadly, we don't have as many these days. But a small step's a step, I suppose. I know the metaphor isn't perfect - but if it got any more complicated, I could simply begin using macroecnomic terms. That, though, is something many of these people would rather not do.

In closing, The Helicopter just spoke on C-SPAN, and he closed by stating the lesson learned from past crises was not that government intervention failed - but that the government didn't intervene fast enough. I will rest easy at night knowing my future rests on Bernanke being "timely". I can only imagine how Ron Paul must feel...

Just had to vent a little. And thanks to these marvelous, non-coercive market forces - I can vent to the successor of generations of brilliant and truly insightful intellectuals, in the blink of an eye. Some people just don't appreciate the significance of things like that.

Thanks for your time - keep up the excellent work!