Is This the "Golden Age" of America?

In March, NS Kinsella wrote an article, The Golden Age of America is Now.

I didn't read it at the time because I wanted to focus on his IP work, before my debate with him.  I have read it now. The gist of the article seems to be "don't worry be happy," but it offers enough twists and turns that I may recommend it to Disney as a new type virtual roller coaster.

As per usual, Kinsella starts off with an odd use of words, in this case he titles his article using the words, "Golden Age" to define the present. But his article is about an optimistic future, which means the current would not be the "Golden Age".

 Wikipedia contains the following description:

Invariably, the term "Golden Age" is bestowed retroactively, when the period in question has ended and is compared with what followed in the specific field discussed.

The online dictionary informs:

 golden age - a time period when some activity or skill was at its peak;

The Oxford dictionary defines:

 an idyllic, often imaginary past time of peace, prosperity, and happiness.
 the period when a specified art, skill, or activity is at its peak

Thus, in the common use of the term, "Golden Age" means peak, which is the exact opposite of what Kinsella  is arguing in his article. Go figure.

Among Kinsella's "don't worry be happy" arguments is this:

Too many libertarians, especially of the “sky is falling” crowd (the ones who have been predicting major societal collapse for 40 years), are sure we are in End Times. 

But, as I argued in my speech on the collapse of the Soviet Union, countries have what can be considered reserve funds, that is, built up wealth that only dissipates over time, before full collapse occurs. For the USSR, it took some 70 plus years for full collapse.  Given that the United States is a much wealthier than the USSR means that the careful eye that understands trends and warns of eventual danger shouldn't be ignored because no collapse has yet taken place. Chiding such views can really only be done by those who have a simplistic view of the world and fail to understand its complexities. And with the right crackdowns and regulations, the dissipation can be speed up very quickly.

NSK goes on to list a number of new technologies that have been developed in recent years, as sort of a reason to not worry and be happy, I guess. He names the cellphones, portable computers and 3-D printing, but fails to mention drones, the growth of SWAT teams, the advanced bank monitoring of money flows and surveillance cameras. In other words, there is some very selective anecdotal evidence as to the direction in trends by NSK. Further, he makes this bizarre statement:

 We don’t have soccer hooligans and stampedes at football games here. 

Well, ugh, yeah, we don't have soccer hooligans because soccer is not that popular a sport here. But we have riots following Super Bowl wins, World Series riots and riots after NBA championships. 

But more important, the United States government still maintains a central bank, which has been trying its best to inflate the hell out of the economy. A large amount of newly printed money has founded its way into excess reserves and out of the economic system, but there is nothing from preventing that money to come flying into the system. We are teetering on the brink of monetary destruction, it could happen tomorrow or 10 years from now and I want to be prepared. A "don't worry be happy" approach is simply an irresponsible approach to advocate with this threat hanging over everyones head.

While failing to notice the potential major dangers to society, NSK does seem to notice some minor infringements on liberties and creates a theoretical model that suggests these are the only impediments and thus he concludes:

 We can still recognize it, take it into account, and prosper despite the state.

That's the NSK view: Things will never get so bad that you won't be able to prosper, "don't worry be happy." This attitude resulted in the death of many Jews. As part of his roller coaster ride, NSK does mention "Jews living in ghettos or even concentration camps in Hitler-era Germany," but he fails to note the lesson learned: Jews, who didn't recognize what was coming, were killed and Jews such as Ludwig von Mises and Sigmud Freud who recognized the dangers, left and survived.

To down play how dangerous the state can get is the height of irresponsibility. Kinsella does so in spades:

I am a personal optimist in the sense that I think I, myself, and many other people as well, can and will be able to live happy, successful, flourishing lives, despite the state.

And, he suggests his advocacy for liberty is just one notch above a parlor game:

I view my libertarian involvement not as typical political activism; it is more of my own hobby, or avocation.

Ah yes, a hobby, nothing to be taken to seriously, we can all still prosper. Oh yeah, with the Department of Homeland security buying more and more ammunition and the Federal Reserve doing what it can to pump even more money into the hands of banksters, this sure is party time and  the advocacy for liberty should be nothing more than a hobby.

I consider Thomas Paine's view much more sound:

If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.