There is a lot of chatter in the media lately on the subject of self interest.  A.K.A. greed.

On one side, there are the Objectivists (like me) as well as noted economists (like the late Milton Friedman – view http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A).  Those in this camp claim that self interest is the motive power that makes a free economy work, in turn delivering the goods and services required for our amazing standard of living.

On the other side, there are those, mostly liberals and socialists, who claim that unrestrained greed is the root of all economic evil.  That it is the reason for the income/wealth disparity in America, that it causes evil companies (especially the CEO’s) to cheat and steal from us to satisfy their endless greed.

Which side is right?  Both are.  Self interest definitely is the motive force of a free economy, yet, in the form of simple greed, it can also destroy a free economy.  How can both be true at the same time?  Simple.  When self interest is enlightened, it is a force for good.  When it is not enlightened, i.e. is simple greed, it can be a force for destruction.  What is the difference?  Let’s analyze:

First, what do we mean by enlightened?  Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines enlightenment as:

1. freed from ignorance and misinformation
2. based on full comprehension of the problems involved

In my simple terms, it means understanding things – in the case of self interest, it means understanding the full effects of one’s actions.   By contrast, simple greed means acting without any regard to the harm done to others by one’s actions.  Let’s try a simple example:

Imagine I own a company that makes a medicine that all people must have in order to say alive.  I have a monopoly on this medicine so  I can expect a huge market.  And, this fits well with my self interest which is to sell as much of my miracle drug as possible, to feed my own profits.  There are a couple of ways I might approach my captive marketplace.

First, let’s use the simple greed approach.  I charge whatever I can, without regard to the economic damage it does to those who can ill afford my prices, without regard to the many of will die because they simply cannot come up with the money to pay me.  What will be the likely result?  First, I will get very rich, at least for a while – as will those who invested in my company.  Second, I will do obvious damage to the society I am part of.  So much that my “customers” are likely to rebel, most likely turning to government to regulate my prices, possibly nationalize my business.  In other words, my own greed is very likely to severely limit my business, ergo limiting the income I can make from it and causing my investors to lose part or all of their investments.

Then, lets use the enlightened self interest approach.  I charge a price that will cover my development and manufacturing costs and leave me a nice profit.  I make arrangements to use some of those profits to help those who can’t really afford my product.  What will be the likely result?  First, I will get rich, as will those who invested in my company.  Those whose lives are extended by my product will be helped — and, because of this extended life, will be around to buy from me for an extended time.  Because of the good citizenship my company demonstrates, it is likely to have a long life, continuing to enrich me and my investors while delivering something essential to my customers.

I could have framed my simplistic example any number of ways, but the point would still be the same.  The point being that it is the process, the “game” if you prefer, that is important.  To have a definite winner or loser means that the “game” has ended.  Yet, when the game ends, we are all worse off.  Me because of lost income, you because of loss of access to something you want or need.  Clearly, it is in all our interests that the “game” go on forever.  For this to happen means we all must be motivated to continue the “game”.  This happens only when all of the “players” perceive themselves better off for playing the “game” than they would otherwise be.  Put in even simpler terms, it means we all stay in the “game” for the simple reason that we want to.  That is, that we are free people, exercising our freedom to choose, in a free marketplace.

Which brings us to the definition of enlightened self interest (from Wikipedia):

“Enlightened self-interest is a philosophy in ethics which states that persons who act to further the interests of others (or the interests of the group or groups to which they belong), ultimately serve their own self-interest.”

“In contrast to enlightened self-interest is simple greed or the concept of “unenlightened self-interest”, in which it is argued that when most or all persons act according to their own myopic selfishness, that the group suffers loss as a result of conflict, decreased efficiency because of lack of cooperation, and the increased expense each individual pays for the protection of their own interests. If a typical individual in such a group is selected at random, it is not likely that this person will profit from such a group ethic.

Some individuals might profit, in a material sense, from a philosophy of greed, but it is believed by proponents of enlightened self-interest that these individuals constitute a small minority and that the large majority of persons can expect to experience a net personal loss from a philosophy of simple unenlightened selfishness.

Unenlightened self-interest can result in the tragedy of the commons.”

Well, that was enlightening, was it not?  Is it not true that each of us sees examples of both kinds of self interest/greed all around us?  And, it is not too extreme to suggest that, for the moment, the greed crowd is winning.  But, as discussed above, when the greed crowd starts “winning” this means the “game” is nearing its end.

So, you ask, why is there not more of this enlightened self interest?  Because it requires the ability to reason — to take in information and process it with critical thought to come up with rational answers.  The celebrated “dumbing down” of America works for just the opposite.  Can it be a real surprise that simple greed is becoming the norm?  Especially when you stop to consider that your own government is, by far, the greatest practitioner of simple greed the world has ever seen.  No, it was not meant to be that way, but that is the way it has become.  Because we let it.  Us, we the people, we sat on our hind ends, watching meaningless sports and mindless TV shows, while our government was perverted into the atrocity it has become.

I ask again, why is it that a CEO, who genuinely earns say $10 million, a CEO who is instrumental in providing thousands of jobs, is demagogued as a greedy, evil person while a sports star, who can barely sign his/her own name, is paid the same for delivering nothing whatever of value to civilization, squanders it all on drugs, and “bling”, and nobody complains?

I say, get mad, then get educated.   (Yes – you.  Sure you attended a major university but does that make you actually educated?  Think again.)

Tweet This Post 

In the essay I’ve Looked At Money From Both Sides Now http://www.troy.thoughtsaloud.com/2009/02/14/ive-looked-at-money-from-both-sides-now/  I mentioned my theory, mostly plagiarized from Ayn Rand, that money represents productivity.  Clearly a topic of little interest, given its low hit count.  But, I persist because I am convinced that the proper understanding of money and its relationship to productivity is one of the most important issues we currently face.  Likewise, the general ignorance about money is, in my opinion, largely responsible for our current economic/political mess.   So, here goes try #2, from a slightly different perspective…

As previously stated several times, money represents productivity.  This concept is easily illustrated by this ultra-simple example:  Suppose I have built a piece of furniture – built with my own hands.  This piece of furniture is obviously the result of productive work on my part.  Now, along comes you, you like the furniture and you propose to trade with me.  As it happens, I am not in need of any of the actual products of your productive work, so, you trade me money instead.  Money that you obtained from someone else in trade for your productive work.  Money that I have now obtained for my productive work.  Is it not clear then that this money circulates about, representing the result of productive work, in an endless string of trades?  Ergo I conclude that money represents productivity.

“So what?” you respond.

So this.  For purposes of our discussion, there are only 2 forms of productivity:

1. Past productivity (productive work already performed), and,
2. Future productivity (productive work expected to be performed sometime in the future).

Yes, I realize there is also current productivity (work being done this instant) but, any unit of productive work is in the “current” form for such a short time that it is not germane to our discussion.

So, if you are with me so far, we have determined that money represents either past productivity or future productivity.  Further, money that represents future productivity must be borrowed.  Borrowed from some entity that has an excess left form its past productivity.  Ergo, when we borrow money, we are actually borrowing productivity, with the promise that we will repay with our own productivity at some future time.

“So what?” you repeat.

Well, let’s apply these simple rules to the massive amounts of money being spent by our beloved government.  Since government is incapable of productivity itself, it must reply upon the productivity of its citizens.  Said another way, it must confiscate part of their productivity (money) for its own use.  Now, I don’t know about all of you, but I can assure you that I do not, at this moment, have enough money, left over from my past productivity, to pay the share that my government is spending in my name.  I think it is safe to bet that millions of other Americans share my predicament.  So, what is a government to do?

One thing they can do (and have already done to excess) is borrow the money.  Reflecting back on our rules, this means they are borrowing future productivity from some other entity.  It also means that me, your, and our descendants are on the hook to repay this borrowed productivity.  That is why we hear so many people (accurately) claim that government is “mortgaging our children’s future”.  Not a really desirable approach but it works (for a while).

But, what happens when our credit runs out?  That is to say, when other entities refuse to loan us more of their past productivity?  Interesting question is it not?  And, this is exactly what is happening as you read this.  Our largest creditor (China) is quickly coming to the realization they might not get paid for past loans to us, so why would they want to lend us more?  Can’t turn to Europe because they are swimming in debt just like we are.

So, our government laments, “what to do?”.  Ah ha! (imagine a light coming on in a politician’s hollow head)… we are the government, we own the presses, we alone have the right to “coin money”, problem solved!  We will simply print more money!!

Let’s apply our rules again.  Since money representing future productivity can only be borrowed, this new money cannot represent future productivity because our credit has run out.  Whoops, the only thing it has left to represent is past productivity.  Now, my friends, what happens when we add this newly printed money to the money that already represented past productivity?  Simple, it dilutes it.  Just like adding more water to you cup of coffee.  The coffee ends up not as strong as before.  Well, likewise with the money — it ends up not as strong as before.  That is to say, a unit of that money will buy less than it would before the dilution.

Our government calls this inflation.  I call it a clever way to steal our money and make it look like someone else did it.  That someone else being the grocer who must raise prices to offset the loss of money value.  Or the gas station, the clothing store, in a word, everyone you do business with.  End result?  It takes more productivity (on our part) to get us the same goods and services we are used to.  And the best part is that the stealing continues into the future, continues until the unlikely time when deflation restores the previous balance.

Think about it.  Government proposes to raise your taxes 10% and most of us have a fit.  Meanwhile, they steal 20% and we hardly even know who or what hit us.

Then, when the theives run for re-election, we send over 90% of them back to Washington to steal some more.  Why do we do this?  Usually because we let them convince us they will steal it from someone else and give part of it to us. Did you buy into this?  If so, ask yourself if the price of food, fuel and other necessities went up only for the rich?  You know better.  Yet we fall for it every time.  I can only conclude that, as a people, we enjoy being lied to and stolen from.  What else could explain this madness?

Tweet This Post 

The term “promote the general welfare” has been used (successfully) to justify creation of a welfare state and the constant march toward socialism we see accelerating today.  But, what does “promote the general welfare” really mean?  Let us analyze…

The phrase comes from Article I, Section 8 of our Constitution. Article I, Section 8 is that part of our Constitution that enumerates the Powers of Congress. The actual words are part of the sentence: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;”

It is very clear to me that the above wording refers to the welfare of the country as a whole, not to any specific individuals within it.  I bolster my contention with the words of James Madison, the acknowledged Father of the Constitution:

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

If the gentleman who inspired, indeed who actually wrote much of the Constitution understands it that way, who are we to argue the point?  Yet the point is argued and the argument has resulted in the interpretation of the opening sentence of Section 8 as a mandate to seize and redistribute wealth.

It has long been recognized that the right to one’s own property is one of the cornerstones of freedom.  And there can be no doubt that wealth is property.

Why are property rights so essential to freedom?  Simple.  Our freedom rests on a platform of free enterprise.  Free markets if you prefer that term.  And free markets involve risk.  Risk in the form of investments.  Investments used to build and expand “production engines” – those activities that provide the goods and services that allow us the free lifestyle we enjoy.

So, ask yourself how anyone could afford to make investments, taking the attendant risks, if they were not secure in the rights to their own property?  Why ever would anyone save money with the aim of starting or expanding a business or other entrepreneurial activity if there were a real threat that their saving might, at any moment, be seized, under threat of force, and given to another?  The obvious answer is that most would not.

With only this simple analysis to go on, is it hard to see that the best way to provide for the… general Welfare of the United States is to fiercely protect the free enterprise system upon which our general welfare rests?  Is it not obvious that, a welfare state does anything but provide for the general welfare?  Thus, are Congress and the Executive not in outright violation of the US Constitution when they knowingly move us towards a welfare (socialist) state?  Is the US Supreme Court not remiss in its duty and its oath when it does nothing to hold Congress and the Executive to operating within the Constitution?

The truth is that all three branches of our government routinely ignore the Constitution they are vowed to uphold and protect.  This being the case, what allegiance do we owe such a government?  I love my country and what it once stood for — but I detest what our government has become and what it is doing to my country.

Get angry and stop putting up with it!

Tweet This Post 

I often read how Americans, on average, are falling behind other nations is our understanding of science, mathematics, history, you name it.  We, on average, know less about most everything than our peers on other countries.  And, might I suggest this situation is far worse than most suspect.  Why?  Because that average includes a lot of truly brilliant Americans who do understand, and who translate that understanding into the near miracles we take so much for granted in our everyday lives

Yet, there is one area where I am sure we lead the world.  That is in wanting.  Yes, my friends, we can out want anyone from anywhere.  In fact, we value wanting so much that it is one of the first meaningful things many parents teach their children.  Sound like a stupid thing to say?  Well, how many of you were helping your children compose a letter to Santa – in other words, a “want list” – long before they could read or write for themselves?  Indeed, all most children are capable of, at that stage in life, is to point at things then pitch a fit because they “want” it.  And, we go right along, encouraging that kind of mistaken view of life, playing along with the notion that some magical being might just produce the things they want, just because they want them.  Well – it is true that the myth of behaving and eating yucky food may have been thrown in to the bargain but none of the children really take that part seriously.  But they darn sure are serious about the magic man with flying beasts who can get a fat body down a narrow chimney, carrying a bag of stuff they want.

No doubt, most of you have decided I am the Grinch, out to steal Christmas.  Not at all.  In fact, there is actually nothing at all wrong with wanting.  Instead, there is very much right about it – and its ability to motivate – that is totally good.  But only so long as, while being taught to want, we are also taught how wants are properly satisfied.

I propose that there are 2 basic kinds of wanting.  One I call an “idle want”, this being a want that I have but am unwilling to put forth effort to satisfy, expecting others to do that part for me.  The other I call a “true want”, this being a want that I have and that I will work to satisfy for myself.

You probably think that most Americans give up the Santa Claus myth fairly early in life and start to get more serious about things.  Well, you would be wrong.  Indeed, a dwindling minority do just that, but a growing majority merely substitute Government for Santa Claus.  Then go right on having their idle wants.

I contend that teaching the fine art of wanting, especially idle wanting, has been so successful in the USA that many of our people “want” themselves into the slavery of credit card and other consumer debt.  Just as wanting more house than they can afford has helped us into the current financial “crisis”.

Most of us have seen the recent news clip of a woman telling our new president how she wants a house, a kitchen and a car.  And, did said president respond, “be glad you were born here because, in this country you can work hard and have everything you want”.  Not at all.  Instead, if I heard correctly, he instructed a member of staff to get the woman’s name and address.  Presumably so that Uncle Sam Claus could pay her a visit.

As well, most of us are aware of the woman in California (where else?) who wants more children that she (read we) can possibly support.  So, some mal-practitioner, masquerading as a medical doctor, provides her with in vitro fertilization sufficient to raise her baby/body count to 14.  But, hey — she wants them.

Notice that, thus far in my rant, I have not used the word “need”.  This is because, in our country, we have so much more than we actually need as to have made the word more-or-less obsolete.

To make matters even worse, our sorry excuse for a government plays on our constant idle wanting by telling us we should want, even demand, what other have.  Simply because THEY have them and WE want them.  Not in the least because we deserve those things, have worked for them, would work for them, or, in fact, even need them.  No.  Don’t honor the system that lets these “others” satisfy their wants while we go on wanting.  No.  Despise the crooks.  Who do they think they are anyway?

Well (you saw this coming, right?) I propose to tell you who they are and how most of these supposed crooks got where they are (assuming they earned it rather than stealing it with government assistance).  Indeed, while the free enterprise system lasts in this country, anyone can do what they have done.  You see, most of them focused more on what OTHERS want than on what they want for themselves.  Many of them put their own wants totally aside, sometimes for a long period of time, while they focused on what others want.  And, (this is the important part) they focused on how to PROVIDE what the others want – while making a profit for themselves in the process.

We have several names for these people.  The ignorant call them crooks, greedy business people and the like.  The more enlightened call them entrepreneurs.  And, a lot of people on both sides of the issue end up calling them boss.

Yes, my friends, all one really has to do to flourish in a system of free enterprise, in a free and open marketplace, is learn what others want then figure out how to deliver it to them at a profit.  Does this require an MBA from Harvard?  Not at all.  In fact, once your enterprise grows enough, you can hire all of those you want.  Does it require advanced degrees in the sciences?  Nope.  You can hire those too, if you want them.  In fact, if you want to start a business, there are loads of folks already out there, running their own businesses, for the express purpose of providing you whatever you want to get your own business started, to grow it, and to flourish.

Now, I have to tell you, I find it hard to understand how anyone can manage to be poor, to have less than they truly want, with such an almost magical system just sitting there wanting to be used.  Yet, too many of us have allowed ourselves to be convinced that said system is evil.  That it only allows the greedy to feed on the downtrodden.  That it needs to be taxed and regulated out of existence to make room for more government.

Have any of you ever stopped to consider what governments, all types of governments, are really good at?  And I am referring here to Democracies, Republics, Monarchies, Dictatorships, you name it.  All you need do is glance across history to find the answer.  They are consistently good at stealing resources from the producers then using them for the aggrandizement of the so-called leaders.  Inevitably, said aggrandizement leads the “leaders” to play at war, using their people as the fuel the war machines consume.

Will we ever have enough of this?  Will we ever step up to the responsibility each of us has for our self, and stop this madness?  Or will we continue to let our idle wants drive us into servitude?  All you need to do is decide what you truly want then act accordingly.

Tweet This Post 

I have wanted to write about this for some time but it seems there was always something more entertaining to write about.  Now I have put it off long enough so, entertaining be damned, I’m writing!

I have long observed that people have very different views about money.  To oversimplify, there seem to be 2 primary views:

1. The view that money is a sort of commodity whose main purpose is to be spent.  Usually, spent as quickly as possible, even if that means spending money not yet earned (assuming debt).
2. The view that money is a resource – a tool that can be used to promote or improve productivity.  Usually with the express purpose of creating even more money.

To my simple reasoning, this goes a long way toward explaining that old saw that the rich get richer while the poor get poorer.  One primary difference between the rich and the poor derives from their view of money – their understanding of the very nature of money.

We all should have learned from Ayn Rand that, at the very basic level, money represents productivity that has been completed with the corresponding consumption deferred.  That is to say, money is basically a buffer between production and consumption.  In a primitive, barter economy, the product of one person’s productivity is exchanged directly for the product of another person’s productivity, usually for consumption by the receiver.  Ergo, money was not needed.  Indeed, the need for money only occurs when one entity can produce more than it can consume in the same time frame – both by direct consumption and by the consumption of products bartered for.

While this may seem too mind-rot simple for a blog, it does raise an interesting point; if one’s only view of money is of something only to be spent, then does it not follow that those with that view would tend to spend it all, including any excess?  Does it not also follow that spending would become the whole point?

Contrast that with the likely actions of those who view money as a tool.  Will these people not tend to save any excess?  And, will these savings not tend to be invested with the hope of making even more money?  And, since money is the result of production, does it not follow that the way to expand one’s supply of money, without expending additional personal effort, is to use it as a tool to promote and improve productivity?

Could it actually be true that a main cause of poverty is the simple lack of understanding of the true nature of money?  After all, the true nature of  money seems such a trivial thing to teach.

Worst still, could it be that our government run schools don’t provide this trivial education because they actually like poverty and the dependence on government it leads to?

And, always remember that the shortage of money is a symptom of poverty.  It, in itself, is not poverty nor is it the root cause of poverty.  The root cause of poverty is a lack of values and/or the unwillingness to achieve them.

Think this over.  Then get even madder.  Buy even more arms.  And stand by.

Tweet This Post 

Most of us know that a free marketplace, unencumbered by government “help” could take care of the current financial “crisis”.  Indeed, we know that a free marketplace could take care of most all financial problems, just as it is the most honest arbiter when shortages occur, just as it is the most amazing vehicle for the creation of wealth and prosperity that humankind has even known.

Well, you say, if a free marketplace is all that great, then why don’t we just sit back, reduce taxes and regulations, and let it do its magic?   Simple question, simple answer — because the marketplace, like nature itself, is faultlessly generous to those who get it right, but very severe in its treatment of those who get it less than right.

Being the spoiled Americans we have become, we want a hybrid form of both marketplace and nature.  That is, we want unlimited rewards when we get it right while being shielded from any discomfort or inconvenience when we get it less than right.  Now, a thinking person would know this cannot be.  But, a government that values the power to govern more than doing the right thing for those who created it will try to convince us it has the power to make this hybrid bit of nonsense come true.  And, the non-thinking among us eat it up like hogs eating slop.

And, what is the main reason used to justify this attempt to pervert both marketplace and nature?  The “children”.  My oh my, what will happen to the children if we let nature or marketplace take it course?  Well, the obvious answer is that they will suffer to varying extents.  While this is regrettable, and no sane person actually wants to see a child suffer, there is an element of reality that must enter the thought process.  The most obvious element of reality in this particular instance is this:  if you are born to, or in the care of, people who allow themselves to remain ignorant, uncaring, and/or dependent on government or other dangerous and addictive substances, you are going to suffer.  And, this will be true without regard to the handouts and empty promises of a dishonest government.

When children are born and raised in such environments, only the strong survive and only extraordinary come out of it as “normal” citizens.  And, those that do, do so by their own effort and determination, in spite of government, not because of it.

Bottom line, these pleas based on suffering children are calculated to get your acceptance of programs that, ultimately, continue the suffering into generations not yet even born.

It is good to have compassion for children and to help them when and where you can.  But do this directly while understanding that the “welfare state” exists solely for the welfare of the state.

Get mad.  Don’t put up with it!

Tweet This Post 

The original dollar hemorrhage, begun during the Bush administration, was called TARP.  A bit of research reveals that Tarp is a common abbreviation for TARPAULIN, a heavy cloth or plastic sheet used to cover things up.  That should have been our first clue.

Whatever the intent, it seems not to have worked, inspiring the new administration to propose yet another gash in the Treasury, starting yet another hemorrhage.  Let us review…

Last fall, just in time for the election, we noticed we were in a recession, just as the Dems and the MSM had been telling us for months.  Then, some entity or entities, currently unknown, started a panic in the Bush administration by liquidating a huge amount of money market funds.  This frightened the Bushies so much that they determined only a massive handout to certain banks could right the situation.  Their idea being that, if showered with sufficient funds, these banks would return to business as usual (BAU), lending money without regard to the borrower’s ability to repay.

The same situation, seen from the favored banker’s point of view looked a bit different.  To them it seemed that, having damaged themselves by caving in to government demands that they make stupid loans, all they had to do was stop lending, start whining, and the government handed them money.  Given the ease with which they were rescued from their own stupidity, the very LAST thing they wanted to do was go back to BAU.  Not when continued refusal to lend, along with continued whining, might keep the handouts flowing.  None of the financial wizards at the government seemed to have thought of this.

Let us do a quick and concise review…

• Government puts pressure on financial institutions to lend to unqualified borrowers.  This was done in the name of Community Investment.
• Somewhere along the line, government also forced the lenders to value the collateral behind these stupid loans using “Mark to Market” accounting, thereby ensuring a number of banks would be rendered artificially bound to fail.
• Meanwhile, the financial institutions begin unloading their bad loans by packaging them with some good loans then selling the whole package to other stupid financial institutions, who were guilty of what was once called “buying a pig in a poke”.
• The financial house of cards begins to collapse, sparked by a MSM-inspired recession and a run on money market funds.
• Government begins to shower money on favored financial institutions, providing the funds needed to devour the smaller artificially-failing financial institutions, making the big boys “too big to fail”.  (Hmmm… I wonder if I could overeat until I become too big to die?  But I digress.)
• Government assumes the favored financial institutions, once their greed is sated, will return to BAU and restart the economy.
• The favored financial institutions, having learned that accepting handouts is far easier and more profitable than working for income, whine for even more handouts.
• Enter new Treasury Secretary Timothy (why pay taxes) Geithner who has a plan.  A plan so brilliant that, as he describes it to a Senate committee, the stock market drops with every word from his mouth.

OK.  You are now up-to-date on this financial soap opera.  But, be not afraid because the Anointed One has assured us that “only government is big enough” to deal with this problem.

So, stop laughing and get angry.  Get very, very angry.

Remember, our only apparent options for ending this travesty are:

1. Convincing the states to call a Constitutional Convention, then adding words to the Constitution that will put the federal government back into the box it belongs in.  Failing that,
2. Convincing the sane states to secede and form a new federal contract along the lines of the original Constitution.  Failing that,
3. Enter a state of open rebellion against our own government.

Or, we could just sit here and wait for a president to publicly proclaim themselves “president for life” and join the ranks of dictatorship.

Tweet This Post 

Well… here I am just back from the World Money Show in Orlando, FL (more on that later).  But I want to start with a link a friend sent me.  Please watch this.  You only think you have seen or heard stupid before:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7mRSI8yWwg

And, as you watch the clip, remember first that it is real.  Remember second that this eejit is the Majority Leader of the U. S. Senate.  That’s right.  He is the guy who determines what will and what will not get voted on in the Senate.  I thought Queen Nancy, our illustrious Squeaker of the House was stupid when she claimed we are losing 500 million jobs per ?? Does it matter per what?  There are not that many people in the whole country at this time.  Could this, perhaps, include those jobs that will be lost in years to come because of the social programs she and Filthy Harry are promoting?  Why can’t they just go somewhere and start a comedy routine?  They would be far funnier in a true comedy role and would damage far fewer people with their stupid humor.

Meanwhile, back at the Money Show.  As one might expect, most of the famous economic prognosticators were there and most had certain recovery in their prognostications.  But, since they make their income selling prognosticatory publications, what else can they really say?  Would you take out a year subscription to a publication that assured you the country, its economy and its markets were all deader than Elvis?  Indeed not.

This got me to thinking about something that might be less than obvious…  most of us agree that the economic situation was ready for a major upheaval as it tried to vomit up all those toxic mortgages that Fannie, Freddy, Barney and Chris helped bring about.  But, have you wondered what actually precipitated the collapse?  After all, could not we have limped along several more years had a recession not raised its ugly head?  I say we probably would have.

So, you ask, what caused this raising of ugly recession heads (knowing full well I am about to tell you)?  OK, so I will.  Remember just a few months ago when were were in that seemingly endless presidential campaign?  Well, from the very start, the liberal, socialist Mean Strident Media (MSM) wanted a socialist to replace GWB.  What better way than to convince the people that, in addition to his other evil acts, GWB had led us straight on (and knowingly) into a recession?  Now, nobody else seemed to notice this recession at first but the MSM kept hammering away.  Until, they got the recession they so wanted.  How, you ask?  Simple.  What starts a recession?  First prize to the gal in the back who said “recessions start when people start acting like they are in a recession”.  In this case, perception truly does become reality.  Now, I doubt the $%^& at the MSM really understood what they had truly started because none of them are actually that intelligent.  But, looking back, could the cause be clearer?

Was electing the Obamination really worth what it will finally have cost, once all the bills are in and all the “aways” have been given?

Get mad.  Get loud.  Tell your elected “representatives” that you have had enough!

Tweet This Post 

I have pondered at great length how I might write this particular piece without coming off like an arrogant ass.  I can’t, ergo accept my arrogant assness.

We are all familiar with the famous “dumbing down of America”, indeed, most of us see the evidence all around us (perhaps even in the mirror?).  We know that many of our young have no manners whatever, and no respect for anything, including themselves (have you read any Tee shirts lately?).  We know that our common value system has sunk to shocking lows.  For those who might consider that last comment a bit extreme, just yesterday several hundred of our fellow citizens thought a discounted TV more important than the life of a security guard, who was trampled as the horde rushed into a store, after breaking down the doors.  For sure, only a few of them actually knocked the man over and trampled him to death, but many others stepped over or around the body in their quest for a discounted price on a TV that will be obsolete in just a few weeks when the newer models hit the shelves.  The poor man’s dying body was, at best, an inconvenience to them.  Many of us have seen the continuing stories in the press of college students who can’t find Canada on a world map, who have no clue in which century the Civil War was fought.  I could go on until we are all nauseated but I think you get the point.

Why am I repeating what we all know?  Simple, because it drives the most perplexing questions I harbor right now.  I will start with the simpler of the questions:

Can an ignorant citizenry, unfamiliar with its own systems of government and economics, with no demonstrable values, be entrusted with the self government of a free nation?

I submit that the answer to this question is obviously NO and that the recent and current history of nations all around the globe proves this beyond rational argument to the contrary.

Which brings us to the harder question:

How do we allow freedom for all while, at the same time, denying the ignorant, the stupid and the indifferent the easy means to destroy our systems of government and economics?

I readily confess that I know no obvious or easy answer to this.  But I do think I know the cost of not finding an answer.  It is simply the end of everything we and our ancestors have worked for, fought for, and, all too often, died for.  True, the country has not ended yet, and may well survive the current crises… but I am less sure of that than I have ever been.  Like the guy once said “it’s not the end of the world — but, you can see it from here”.

I do know that a part of the problem comes from the fact that many in politics, in business, and in religions, prefer the ignorant because they are easy to control, especially if they can be made dependent on their controller(s).  How is this control exercised?  Usually through fear.  Fear that, if you don’t do as I say, the devil will get you and you will burn forever.  Fear that the world, as we know it, will surely end, if so-and-so is allowed (or not allowed) to do whatever (think gay marriage, prayer in school, conservative talk radio, etc.). And, most of all, fear that the handouts they so depend on will cease if those other guys get power.

As we see lately, the ignorant are also easy to manipulate through envy.  Isn’t it obvious that anyone who has more than you got it because they are evil, lucky, or both.  Never because they work harder or smarter.  Never because they risk what they have already earned investing in the future.

Is there any magic pill, any simple action, that will make all this go away?  Not a chance.  But, my instinct and my rational mind tell me there is a place to start.  That is by withholding the voting privilege from any and all who refuse to exercise it responsibly.  Do I mean by that, any who don’t vote the way I want them to?  Not at all.  What I do mean is the clueless and the “takers”.  By takers, I mean those who habitually depend on the state for their sustanance, and who use their vote to try to select people who will steal from the national treasury, and from their fellow citizens, so that they can have ever bigger handouts.  By clueless, I mean those who haven’t a clue who they are voting for, what their candidate(s) stand for, or, indeed, any of the issues in the election.

I think the “takers” can be handled by simply generating an annual estimate of the dollar value of the benefits a person/family unit consumes from a governing entity, subtracting that amount from the tax the person/family unit paid to that governing entity, then awarding a voting “ticket” to all who have a positive result.  Note that, under this scheme, people who pay taxes to multiple governing entities would get to vote in all of them for which they have a positive result.

I have not yet devised a fair, hard to manipulate method for handling the clueless.  As we move more and more into computerized voting, perhaps some qualifying question could be posed for each item on the ballot.  For sure, the straight party ticket selection should be removed immediately as should party affiliation for the candidates.  When choosing a person for office, all one should see on the ballot is a list of names of those who qualified.  Nothing else.

Note that I did not mention serious repair of our educational system.  I agree that we desperately need that, but that is a long term solution.  Before we can tackle those, we have to stop digging the hole ever deeper.

Now the last question in this set:

Do the able citizens of a free, self-governing country actually have the right to be ignorant, indifferent, and/or dependent on government?

I have written this as if they do, but I am not sure that is really correct.

I am very interested in other ideas.  Do we really have the problems I suggest?  If so, please offer some ideas for addressing them equitably.

Tweet This Post 

Like many Americans, I have been watching the drama unfold at the “Big 3″ auto makers.  Will they survive?  Will those who hold our purse strings use our money to prop them up again, hoping the inevitable happens on someone else’s watch?  Will they take bankruptcy and re-emerge lighter, meaner, and ready to compete?  Nobody knows for sure.  It seems to be no secret that most of us object to our tax money being used to prop them up.  It is also no secret, to those who pay impartial attention, that the much problem here is the unions, just as it was with the airlines like Pan Am and Eastern.  Remember them?  They too were once the indisputable leaders of their industries.  The generation coming of age today will know them only from history books.

Yet, interesting as the fate of the domestic auto industry might be, that is not really the point of this bit of mental wandering about. No, what worries me most is the degree to which the state of these companies reflects the state of our entire economy, and, our very nation.

In the 1950’s, Charlie Wilson, then CEO of GM, was (incorrectly) credited with saying that what was good for GM was good for the country.  More recently, Lee Iacocca is credited with saying “As goes General Motors, so goes the nation.”  I am sorry to tell you that both were more right than they probably realized at the time.

The problems we face have so much in common:

• In al cases, making promises for futures payments that would require unprecedented, unrealistic growth to meet.  The auto companies did this through commitments to salaries, pensions and benefits; the government did it through commitments to Social Security, Medicaid, and a plethora of entitlement/safety net programs;  the average American did this through credit card and consumer debt, often for things they did not remotely need, and through mortages, often on houses much larger and grander than required for safe, comfortable living.
• In all cases, once realizing there may be a problem, putting off acknowledgment and corrective action.  Instead, “whistling past the graveyard”, propping things up and hoping for a miracle.
• In all cases, once denial and propping up failed, trying to blame everyone and everything except what we all know were the causes.

Now, I don’t know how long Ford, GM or Chrysler can last.  Nor do I know how long the United States of America, as we have known and loved it, can last.  But, this I do know.  No problem ever got solved by denying its existence, by blaming the innocent, by praying, braying or any other plea to the invisible and the non-existent.

Problems get solved when people step up to them, take responsibility (and take the lumps) for their own contribution, figure out the best thing for all involved, then get on with doing it.  Not just for a few elected officials that damn well knew better, not just for a few business leaders that damn well knew better, not just for the deadbeats who damned well knew better, but for the people who have, and continue to apply their sweat, their minds, and their talents to making this a working enterprise.

I am totally convinced that there is ultimately NOTHING that free, rational people cannot accomplish.  The recent histories of America and Western Europe prove as much.

I am just as totally convinced that the ultimate fate of a bunch of dependent whiners and blame-assigners is to be slaves.  The recent histories of some other countries proves this as well.

We have a choice we all MUST make.  It does not seem nearly as hard a choice as choosing between two candidates almost equally unqualified and unfit to lead this nation.  This is a simple choice.  Will we be free, rational, responsible men and women or slaves?

And, we do NOT need a new government committee to study the situation.

From a governmental view, the whole thing was figured out and written down, about as perfectly as humans are capable of, over 200 years ago.  Lucky us, the actual, original documents still exist.  In fact, we go to great lengths to protect them from physical harm.  Supposedly, we even revere the ideas they espouse.  You see how that has worked out for us.  How about we actually read them, then go on to actually understand what they say and why?  Who can imagine what kind of country might be built on the blueprint they contain?  We all can because we have seen it, have lived it.

From an enterprise view, the whole thing has been figured out and proven over and over until you wonder how anyone could not understand.  Many of you probably believe in a tale about a guy in ancient Israel who fed multitudes from a few fishes and loaves.  While I, personally, have no doubt whatever that this did not happen, I have no problem if some of you choose to believe it.  What I do know for sure is that it is not the sort of thing that happens often, and that there are NO people alive on this earth who have ever seen such a thing.  Yet we all have seen, and most of us participated in, a free economy.

My friends, free, rational people practicing laissez-faire capitalism can do, before your very eyes, what the gods are rumored to do only in mythology.  It works.  End of story.  Why any people would try any other method of providing for the needs of mankind is a greater mystery to me than the origin of the universe.

Yet, many of you don’t believe this simple truth.  Indeed, a lot of you have probably been convinced that laissez-faire capitalism is what caused the current crisis.  For sure there are many who would have you think that way.  I ask you, stop and think… who are the people telling you such?  Could it be the very ones that will do anything, literally anything, to get and keep power over you?  Please read the previous 2 sentences several more times before proceeding.

Is laissez-faire capitalism perfect?  NO!  What is?  Is it better than any, I mean, any, other economic system in the history of mankind?  YES!  What more do you need to know?

There is a side of laissez-faire capitalism that many of those who would enslave you will bring up again and again: it is harsh, it is unthinking, it lacks compassion, worst of all, it is unfair. Lets examine these claims:

• It is harsh.  Totally true.  Those who don’t produce (and those who depend on them) do without, except for the willing generousity of others, or the unwilling confiscation and redistribution of the products of others.  And, I know that there will always be those few who will choose to be dependent slaves rather than free, productive humans.  What to do with them is the topic of another rant – but, I confess it is a real problem.  What happens when you put your hand in a fire is harsh.  What happens when you step in front of a train is harsh.  These things are called “reality”.
• It is unthinking, it lacks compassion.  Of course!  It is a system, not a living creature!
  
• It is unfair.  Of all the claims made against laissez-faire capitalism, this one bothers me most. Practiced without government interference, it is the fairest system ever conceived because it requires and promotes FREE participants.  Do we not all crave freedom more that anything other than life itself?  For sure, not everyone will produce, and be rewarded, at the same rate.  But, how is this unfair?  Is having the government, using its right of force to confiscate your products to give away to others somehow fair?  If so, someone please explain it to this ignorant fool.

So, there you have it.  A simple answer to government, a simple answer to the economy.  And, they both require nothing more than free, rational people who are willing to produce value.  That is all.

Please note that I did not ask for a $500 Billion giveaway for this information.  Freedom, and the means to ensure it, belongs to us all.  If only we will demand what is ours!

If I managed to insult your religious beliefs: I’m sorry but I would otherwise be lying to you.  More to come on that subject because there really is a relationship to the current crisis.

Tweet This Post