Since our country’s housing and financial crisis occurred, I’ve often felt like Don Quixote tilting at the windmills of public opinion and belief.

Not only have I claimed the meltdown not to be the result of Free-Market Capitalism or having had anything to do with it whatsoever; I’ve provided many an “amateurish” explanation, as well.

So, I was delighted and ecstatic to hear that one of my heroes; John Allison, had just come out with a book on this very topic.

It is entitled, The Financial Crisis And The Free Market Cure. This is an absolutely fascinating look at what really caused the crisis and the thinking/action needed to get us back on the road to liberty and abundance.

Important: This is not about Democrat versus Republican or Conservative versus Liberal; it’s about why free minds and free markets work (if, by work, one means abundance, prosperity and a higher standard of living for all) and why government — when operating outside its legitimate functions of protecting its citizens from force and fraud — does not.

Ask Most People What Caused This Crisis

If you were to ask most people today the main cause of the housing and financial crisis they would answer something like, “unfettered Capitalism”, “deregulation” or “not enough government oversight.” And, as Mr. Allison proves with compelling yet easily-understood facts…they couldn’t be more wrong.

Capitalism? Hardly. That such a large number of people believe it to be the cause in the first place is not only a shame, but perhaps the biggest problem of all. After all, it’s difficult to defend a concept when you don’t understand it and cannot define it. Capitalism is *not* the same as “corporatism”, “cronyism” or, as it’s often called, “crony-capitalism.” (Actually, Crony-Capitalism is to Capitalism what Chinese Checkers is to Checkers…NOTHING. But, I digress.)

There was a high degree of cronyism — not Capitalism — which led to the crisis.

Deregulation? Not one bit. It was not deregulation but horrible — as the author accurately terms it — “MIS-regulation.”

And, it was a huge amount of interference from the government and the government-sponsored entities that operate with government’s full force and backing. The Federal Reserve, several presidents, congressmen, government-sponsored entities, regulators; they all had a huge hand in this monstrosity that took place. And as usual, the fix was more (and all-too-similar) government solutions to the government-caused problems.

Mr. Allison lays it out for the reader in a very logical and easily-understandable fashion.

What Are The Author’s Qualifications for Writing This Book?

That the Harvard Business Review named him one of the decades top 100 most successful CEOs is certainly a nice shot of credibility. More importantly, however, during Mr. Allison’s tenure as CEO, his bank grew from $4.5 billion to $152 billion in assets. And, they were hugely successful during a time when many banks failed spectacularly.

This was accomplished via rational, long-term thinking, a desire to provide exceptional value to customers, employees and shareholders alike, and by acting from a base of uncompromising values.

Key Point: It is interesting to note that BB&T did not participate in sub-prime lending, choosing to write only conventional mortgages.

Having learned of Mr. Allison several years ago and watching some of his lectures, my expectation was that the book would be enjoyable to read and with great knowledge, information and insights that would never be gained from listening to the usual experts. It is that, indeed!

The bonus, however, is that anyone who wants to learn how to become a principle-based leader and a hugely successful individual, both in business and in life itself, can gain a TON of wisdom from reading and studying this book.

But, that is simply the bonus. What this really is…is one’s opportunity to understand why the crisis really happened. If you are already a believer in Capitalism but not sure where to separate fact from fiction regarding the financial crisis, you’ll love this book.

If you tend to want to believe that Capitalism is the enemy and that big government is the friend of the poor, I ask you to read the book, even if you choose to read it with total skepticism. That’s okay. But, at least read it. Then, come to your own conclusion.

I believe this book is a Masterpiece!

I must admit annoyance when hearing politicians campaign on how they will create jobs. The reason is because politicians cannot create jobs. Government cannot create jobs (at least not value-based).

The only thing they can do in terms of job creation is to ensure an environment where entrepreneurs are free to create and where people are free to buy, sell and trade freely with one another. To the degree government does this and then stay out of the way, they have a hand in job creation. But they themselves are not the job creators.

Entrepreneurship is the engine that drives the economy and resulting overall prosperity. And, in a free-market based economy (not to be confused with Corporatism or Cronyism), one can only become wealthy by providing value that others are willing to pay for, and by providing that value to many people.

In other words, both parties — the buyer and the seller — come away better off than they were before the transaction. There is no limited “pie” to carve up. When entrepreneurs are allowed to create value for the marketplace, an unlimited number of pies are “baked.” Everyone wins!

What is the gunk that slows up the engine? Government red tape and unnecessary regulations. Whether on a federal, state, county or local level, the more needless and even counterproductive hoops an entrepreneur must “jump through” in order to get his or her business started and to keep it running – the less incentive they will have to do so. Or simply not be able to make a profit and thus go out of business.

The result: less value provided to others (products or services people want or need), less employment of others as the business expands (based on profits) and less money being circulated throughout the community that helps others earn money.

Now, is any type of regulation ever necessary? Sure; that which will protect the citizenry from force or fraud.

That aside, no…nothing more is needed. Other than for the politicians and bureaucrats to stay out of the way and let abundance happen.

So, please. Next time you hear a politician — any politician from either party — announce on television that they have a 50-Point, or 30-Point, or 27-point, or 78-Point Plan for creating jobs, remember this much better plan:

In fact, let’s call it “Bob Burg’s 1-Point Plan For Creating Tons and Tons of New, Value-Based Jobs.” It goes like this:

Get out of the way politicians and bureaucrats and allow entrepreneurs to create jobs!

Too simple? Naw. Just simple enough. (I’m Bob Burg…and I approved this post)

As a libertarian, I respectfully make no bones about my belief that the highest value a country can embrace is the rights of the individual. With that, government’s major legitimate function is simply to protect those rights. This creates an environment where people can create value and trade freely with one another. (protected from force or fraud).

This results in a hugely prosperous society for all; one in which the poor are much better off and where charity abounds for those who truly cannot help themselves.

Very understandably then, I’m often asked if my belief in the rights of the individual conflicts with Law #3, The Law of Influence, from John David Mann‘s and my book, The Go-Giver:

“Your influence is determined by how abundantly you place other peoples’ interests first.”

Before answering, let’s take the question even a step further: “wouldn’t this focus on the rights of the individual make being part of an athletic team, a business team, a charity or committee nearly impossible? I mean, if one (or, if everyone!) is putting their own individuality first, how can they put other peoples’ interests first; how can they be part of a cohesive, effective unit?

Here’s my response to both:

A rational individual understands that he or she benefits most from cooperation with others (i.e., an “other-focus” rather than a “self-focus”).

A very simple example is the person who sells a product or service. They complete the sale (accomplish their individual goal) only by providing value to the other person. To do this, they must focus, not on their own needs, but on the needs of that person. By the “nature of the thing” they must put the other person’s interests first.

Now, take that same principle in terms of any type of relationship, whether business, social, sports, or romantic. It plays out the same way every time.

Politically speaking, the question might be: “Well, if individuals are so much better served focusing on other peoples’ interests, why, Bob, do you take such issue  with big government and Socialism? After all, this is where the rights of the individual are totally subjugated and the interests of the whole are put first?

Aside from the fact that socialism hurts the masses (especially the poor and middle class) and freedom helps everyone, the reason is simple: One is based on choice and the other on force.

And, to me, that makes all the difference.

Your thoughts?

—–

This afternoon at 4:00 ET / 1:00 PT is our big teleseminar. I hope you can join us (will be recorded, as well, if you cannot attend live). I’ll share with you Benjamin Franklin’s famous system that helped make him immensely more effective both personally and professionally. You’ll learn the 13 traits Ben chose to improve upon, and exactly how he did it. When I discovered his system more than 10 years ago, I immediately began applying it in my own life and my change was dramatic. Let me help you do the same. For information and registration, visit www.MasterYourTraits.com.

Like many content-providers, I am disturbed by the huge amount of intellectual property theft over the Internet. Sure, it occurred pre-Internet but the now robust amount of easily accessible information has made this a profound issue. Impacted most are movie producers, musical artists, authors, bloggers and many more.

Now, wouldn’t it be best to just find a way to work within this paradigm? After all, many enterprising musicians have realized they can actually utilize the piracy by certain fans to make even more money on the back-end.

Perhaps. But, it should always be the choice of the content creator. I’ve personally had my information copied and republished without permission (at best) and without proper credit (at worst). I truly believe some people don’t know and understand that this is wrong. Others do, and do it any way. Mine is not a lone example. It’s very widespread.

So, it would seem that I — and many other creators, purveyors and compilers of content — would be overjoyed by the recently-proposed House of Representative’s Software Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and its Senatorial cousin, the Protect IP Act (PIPA).

But, I’m happy and proud to say we’re not. Owners of huge websites as well as one-person businesses; those on the political left and the political right; those who usually believe in big government and those who want government mainly out of their lives are all — in their own way — saying, “Nope. We don’t trust you to control what is perhaps the foundational principle of liberty…Freedom of Speech.”

We don’t trust the FCC and its bureaucracy to choose winners and losers based on whose opinions they (or their elected official bosses) might not feel is, er…beneficial.

We don’t trust the politicians to resist pressure from their paid sponsors (I mean, donors) to tilt the playing field in one business’s favor over another.

No, while we would love protection from the pirates, we have more to fear from those who make the laws. Both intended as well as unintended consequences could eventually all but wipe out any freedom we have to make our thoughts and opinions known.

I appreciate and respect the owners of many sites such as Wikipedia and Google who participated in the blackout as well as the many individuals who called their elected representatives to complain.

Thank you for voting for Freedom, even though — in the short term — it still leaves us with the frustration of those who would steal from us.

Solutions? While a free-market solution is always (in my opinion) preferable, protecting its citizenry from theft is a legitimate function of government. So, I’m personally not opposed to a government solution, IF it can do it without causing more harm than good. Unfortunately, government has not proven to be especially proficient in this regard. Their solutions typically cause even bigger problems and tend to result in a greater lack of freedom for us all.

Please weigh in with your thoughts.

I often wonder if the well-intentioned people who call for more and bigger government have ever actually studied it past the “good intentions stage.” Does big government really help the poor? Does big government help anyone other than those politicians (from both parties), bureaucrats and special interests participating in Corporatism and other special favors?

The best way to help the poor is to create an economy so prosperous that anyone who wants a job can find one, and those who cannot help themselves have access to more charity and help than can be imagined. Charity is indeed a high value. And, the free market does it much better than does government.

John Stossel recently wrote about the onerous government rules brought to us through both major parties: “we’re drowning in rules — 160,000 pages worth. {This} kills opportunity and freedom.”

This reminded me of something from years ago. My friend and political mentor, the late Harry Browne was talking about the newly-enacted NAFTA (North American Free trade Agreement). He explained that this was not free trade at all. He said, “it doesn’t take over 1000 pages to say, ‘okay, you can all trade freely now.’”

According to the Competitive Enterprise Institute on October 3, 2011, “At the moment, the Federal Register stands at 61,247 pages — for 2011 alone.” (Emphasis mine.) In a recent television interview, Amilya Antonetti noted we have over 71,000 pages in our tax code. As she points out, “that’s good for accountants and lawyers, but it’s not good for small business.” Nor is it good for practically any private citizen because all of this inhibits job creation.

To those on both sides of the political aisle, might I suggest that, rather than calling each other names and accusing those who don’t agree with you of being bad people, let’s understand that, essentially, most Americans want the same thing: a society where people are free to pursue happiness.

Let’s also understand that, if we’re going to have such a society, we must respect each others natural rights to do such, and not try to burden others — through the force of government — with “our own” image of the perfect society.

People should be free to live their lives and pursue happiness in whatever way they see fit…providing they don’t infringe upon the rights of anyone else to do the same. (Can anyone really argue with that statement?)

And, all these rules and regulations — over and above government’s legitimate functions of protecting the citizenry against force and fraud — inhibits one’s right to own and use their property (meaning themselves, their possessions and their business) in the way they see fit. And, when that happens, people suffer, jobs are lost and the economy tanks.

It’s not that complicated. Universal Laws never are. But, they must be respected. If not, then…well, we are seeing the affects. Are we ready to let our elected officials know it is time for a change?