In leu of our current economic woes, I think that a lot of good can come out of very simple solutions. By simple, I don’t mean that they are likely to come to fruition, but rather that these answers are not complicated in nature. There is a lot of political inertia that stands opposed to these ideas, but nonetheless I think they would do some real good. They are as follows:

Legalize Marijuana - The costs that are incurred by this War on Drugs are incredibly high. Billions and Billions of dollars are spent annually with absolutely nothing to show (Of course, there are increased amounts of aggressive crime due to the high demand for this illicit drug, so it does have something to show). Legalizing it would reduce the costs associated with incarceration and free up police to focus on real threats to society – not a stoner who wants to light up in his living room. Taxing it in a similar fashion to tobacco could even create substantial revenue for local governments as well as create jobs as new cannibis entrepreneurs make their way into the market to meet freed-up demand.

Minimum wage decrease – Lowering the minimum wage would allow employers to hire more unskilled labor, or keep the labor that they have while cutting back during recessions by reducing wages. If the government wants to see progress in the reduction of unemployment, they won’t get very far without this solution. Ideally, the most potent solution would be to get rid of the minimum wage laws altogether and let the employer and employee settle wages based on marginal productivities and opportunity costs. Economists might be worried about real wages falling during periods of inflation. But severing minimum wage laws simply gives the employer and employee the power to negotiate wages if one thinks that the real wage rate is too high or low. These laws do not help workers, (unless you are already in with seniority or part of the political game) they merely keep the standards too high for prospective employees.

Get rid of licensing (by the State) – These regulations keep out prospective entrepreneurs by creating barriers to entry into the market. Getting rid of licensure would free up individuals to enter the market and create a more competitive atmosphere. More people could enter the market, thus driving down unemployment and the few dollars they make doing business may be just what they need to feed their families. If quality service is of concern, why would the State’s interference acquire a higher level of excellence? State compulsion or rule-setting doesn’t create quality, competition creates quality. The Society of Actuaries and Casualty Actuarial Society have gotten this correct, I believe. The state does not hand out Actuarial certifications. A group of professional actuaries determine the standards that need to be met to maintain a quality atmosphere in their industry. The State has nothing to do with it.

Again, there are so many problems that need to be addressed in our economy, these don’t even scratch the surface. However, these are simple solutions that would remarkably help two of the major problems: unemployment and federal/state/local debt.

(Photo: Paul Stein/Flickr)

I’m late in getting into this discussion, I know; but the news and videos I’ve seen of the Occupy Wall Street movement stir up such mixed emotions.

I’ve heard men and women from Liberal and Conservative circles comment about this movement and none seem to agree with one another. Granted, the actual “agenda” that the movement is pursuing is unclear at the moment, but I think that despite the chaotic protesting, there are some fundamental insights that can be drawn from it.

The first is that I’m glad to see such a large group of people getting out and protesting peacefully. There is power in numbers and when those numbers are unified for a single cause, I think it can really make a large impact. However, there is no central, unified message. There is just a hodgepodge of unhappy citizens that feel like they have been shafted by the banks (which is true) and the rich on Wall Street. The lack of a central message just makes them look like a chaotic, annoying mess of people.

Secondly, I’m saddened that there are so many people missing the real problem. At least one young lad gets it (for those who care, there are a couple crass words) but the majority don’t. I really wish the masses would understand the real threat that exists in the Federal Reserve, fractional reserve banking, and Corporatism. I really believe a lot of the people have some intuition that these things are problematic, they just cannot put a label on them. But if all of the protesters marched under the banner of ending the Fed and ending special-interest handouts to big banks from the government, we would see some real progress.

We will never have a real free economy with a Central Banking system. Whoever controls the money, controls the nation. Whoever funds the Central Bank gets the money. Whoever gets that money wins at the expense of the “99%”.

We will never be a free economy while the government props up fools in the market that should fail due to poor business decisions. We will never be a free economy while the government continually funds only a few businesses (whose owners promise to supply them with campaign money and constant donations) and creates massive barriers to entry for smaller, better innovators.

I fear we will never be a free economy again because the “elite” business men and women, who are the real political decision-makers with their party and politician-specific donations, are utterly fearful of pure and aggressive competition. And that is precisely why they keep donating to their favorite politician – to make rules for the market that allow the elite to prosper and not have to really compete against better firms.

It is a real dirty game. And I hope the protesters catch on to this reality and focus their efforts on the leviathan of Corporatism and Central Banking. It is truly a powerful beast to go up against.