The Road to Poverty for a Nation

October 30th, 2014

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if we want to live in a nation of prosperity and liberty, but not one of poverty and tyranny, it is up to us to use our common sense when we vote. We all want to be prosperous that is a natural desire of humanity. The drive for liberty is a heart felt feeling that people have had since the days of Adam and Eve. How unfortunate then that these two mutually compatible wants are almost never met? Instead we always get tyranny and poverty. Our leaders constantly lead us astray, lowering our standard of living and becoming ever more tyrannical, until the nation state, city state or empire becomes so rotted from the inside, it collapses from something that wouldn’t have been a bump in the road a mere generation earlier.

I believe this is because of the fiction of enough. Oh, we can have enough pain, enough hunger or enough sickness, but it is impossible to have enough wealth, power, luxury, food or happiness. We might be sated for a short time after a huge meal, the giant bonus might make us happy for a day, but as soon as the food is digested or the bonus is put in the bank, we want more. There can never be enough of a good – while even a little of a bad is too much. It is in our nature to strive for more good and less bad and only a saint is immune.

This maxim applies to government and it’s officials as much as the common laborer, possibly more. Those in government want more money, sex and power. The seven deadly sins are all the more deadly when exercised by the political elite, because they not only destroy the virtue of the elite, but the nation they lead as well. No matter how much power the elite get they demand more. No matter the problems they created with the power they were already given, they want more, to fix those same problems, which will certainly be used to create more problems… so they can get more power. They can never have enough power over the individual, sex with young interns or wealth at the expense of the people.

History says nothing if not, when government grows beyond simply protecting the people from foreign states, safeguarding our lives and watch over our property… poverty, plague and war result. In fact, the fiction of enough is exactly why there is war in the first place. No nation has enough land, no matter how much land it has, no nation has enough wealth, no matter how rich it is, and no country on Earth is satisfied with the resources it possesses. All countries look upon the wealth, land and resources of their neighbor with a greedy eye. Perpetual war is also the most efficient way to remove our liberty from us, from subjecting us to tyranny, to “protect us” from this or that bogyman. This is made easier, by the fact the new class elite control the media in all nations, including the US. We are so easily deceived.

The covetousness of the political elite is not spent only on the property of other nations it is most hungry when turned on the wealth of their own people. Those in power will think of all kinds of ways to plunder our wealth for their own use. In this, the more power the government has, the easier it is to take what we earned through labor, to line the pockets of the elite. President Harry Truman said, “Anyone who gets rich in politics is a God damned crook…” How many politicians, in any country on Earth, are not rich within a year or two of gaining office? The more socialist the nation’s government is the richer the political elite and the poorer the people. That is because no amount of wealth is enough, even if it costs the nation it’s economy, liberty and happiness.

The only answer is to limit government’s power over us. But power taken is never returned except by a collapse and reset. Of course the elite will scream to the rafters that they need that power to do us good. But as I have pointed out, that power will do us no good, it will enrich the political elite and destroy our culture, society, nation and economy. The political elite know this as well or better than you and I but their greed, lust and hunger, overpowers their patriotism. When a politician tells you that he or she needs to be able to take from someone to give to you, they are really telling you they want to be able to legally steal from others, including you. You will get no benefit but your children will live in poverty and tyranny because of it. They appeal to our greed to satisfy their greed and call it progress. We are as lazy as the elite and seek wealth without work too.

We follow our leaders, we want to get rich in politics as well, even if we are not members of the political elite. They exploit this tendency in us to manipulate our selfish desires, desires they have put in us when we look at their wealth, power and prerogative, and stand in awe of it. We become desirous of those things ourselves. But in no nation or country ever constituted, has wealth been taken from the people and been given back, at no point in time has power been returned to the people, never has an oligarchy ruled for the benefit of all, and no place where the people have fallen for the deceit that they can vote other people’s money into their own pocket… has there been anything but increasing poverty, lowering of liberty, and eventually, catastrophic collapse. Yes, the elite start it because they can never have enough, but we always go along, voting the most corrupt politicians in, because they claim they will “give” us the wealth someone else has piled up… suckers that we are.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Shall Not Be Infringed

October 27th, 2014

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, guns are the most regulated tools in the United States, despite the clear prohibition against gun regulation in the United States Constitution. The Second Amendment of the US Constitution states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Those who oppose limits on government, limits that are the very reason for our Constitution in the first place, spuriously argue the Second Amendment is to give government the right to keep and bear arms, which of course is absurd on the face of it and is based on perverting the meaning of the word “militia,” and ignoring the phrase, “being necessary to the security of a free State.” They bolster their argument by claiming guns are dangerous, and as dangerous tools they must be regulated, for the safety of us all. But, is that really why guns are so regulated, or are these just distractions to the real purpose of gun control? I would posit that the real reason the political, cultural and social elite seek gun control is for a far more insidious agenda.

Of course regulation is the very definition of an infringement. Regulation and laws are there to keep people from doing something, or having something, the elite have decided are bad. In infringing on an action, product or thought, the argument is always that it is for the greater good. In the case of laws against murder, the reason for them is that if a person’s life is taken, that person has been denied his or her fundamental individual Right to exist. In the case of laws against theft, the rational is that people have the Right to their possessions, and taking something from someone denies them the enjoyment of that possession. Right law protects individuals – not society. In all cases law that is in keeping with Our Constitution are there to protect our person, property or liberty. Gun control however is different, gun laws are there to deny us the ability to defend our lives, to protect our property and to make it possible to remove our liberty, the exact opposite of right law.

The rabid gun control advocate demands all people, especially law abiding citizens give up guns so the fearful man or woman can feel safer. In that the crux of their argument is “guns are dangerous and therefore they must be regulated, the Constitution can go to Hell.” But in making such arguments they forget that all the Rights enumerated in the Constitution are dangerous. The Right to free speech is very dangerous, far more dangerous than the Right to keep and bear arms. The most an armed lunatic can kill is a hundred, maybe a few more, but the damage an armed terrorist can visit on humanity is limited by the response of law abiding armed citizens as well as law enforcement. The damage a pamphleteer can do to the well ordering of society is exponentially worse. Hitler wrote Mein Kampf which in large part abetted the slaughter of sixty million human beings and the rewriting of the world’s map. Marx and Engels penned The Communist Manifesto which to date has justified the extermination of well over one hundred million innocent people! Clearly, if safety is what the gun control advocate wants, freedom of speech is far more dangerous then the Right to keep and bear arms, and so must be outlawed.

If we examine the results of gun control laws, both in the united States and elsewhere, a clear pattern emerges. In the cities with the greatest infringement on the Right to keep and bear arms, violence of all kinds is out of control, especially gun violence. In those places where guns are the least regulated, there is the least violence, especially gun violence. Furthermore, where guns are outlawed most of the violence is stranger on stranger violence, and where guns are legally protected, almost all the violence is between people who know each other, in other words, crimes of passion. In countries where guns have been outlawed, like Australia, gun violence has skyrocketed. So the argument that gun laws keep people safe is obviously untrue.

The new class elite who seek to take guns from the hands of law abiding citizens, argue that since the Right was prefaced by the term Well regulated Militia, it was meant to apply to the government and not to individuals. Even a perfunctory examination of this argument shows it to be absurd. That the founders would place a Right in the Bill of Rights that gives government a Right, that has already been granted elsewhere is clearly spurious, that they would place a government Right among Rights specifically designated for individuals to protect us from tyranny, shows it to be sophistry of the most diabolical kind. The Bill of Rights was specifically designed, under great debate, to protect the people from a despotic government. Certainly not to empower government to become despotic! Madison himself said, Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. At the time the Bill of Rights was written militia meant all able bodied men. Like I said, even a cursory glance at the spurious claim that the Second Amendment is to give government the sole power to keep and bear arms is absurd.

The Bill of Rights was added to our Constitution as a secondary bulwark against government becoming despotic. Madison initially objected, arguing what need a of a Bill of Rights, since the Constitution forbade government from doing anything it is not specifically allowed to do under the Constitution. Going further he reasoned, if the Bill of Rights forbade the regulation of jumping jacks, could it then therefore regulate tiddlywinks? He eventually came on board with the Federalists who called for a Bill of Rights and wrote them himself. But as we now see, our government has become so extra constitutional, even the “parchment barriers” of our Bill of Rights can be ignored by a government intent on ignoring them. Now that our Constitution, and even our Bill of Rights means nothing, tyranny cannot be far away. That my friends is why we need to add a Fourth Branch… but that is another article for another time.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Post Constitutional America

October 22nd, 2014

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the United States has entered a post Constitutional era, similar to when Rome passed from a republic to a tyranny, America has thrown off her founding principles and replaced them with the authoritarian credo of a despot. All nations founded in liberty eventually follow this path. In all cases the path to authoritarianism is led by the elite, political, cultural and social. Sadly in every case the entering of an authoritarian era always leads the known world into a dark age. The distance in time between abandoning of the societal myth and the complete fall, depends on how tenacious the people are in holding onto their societal myth, divided by how corrupt the ruling class has become. The economic might of the nation is another factor crucial to the length of time a republic has, after it ceases to be a republic in fact, but in name only. In the case of Rome, the people held tightly to their societal myth, while in the US, the people have all but cast aside our societal myth. Given that fact, the time between entering our post constitutional era and the total collapse of our republic is probably very short indeed. When the US republic falls the world will be plunged into a dark age with horrors visited on mankind which could have never even been imagined before.

America is not any different than any of the republics that have come before. I like to use the example of Rome, because it was founded in liberty and collapsed in tyranny, making it a perfect example for the American experiment. The founding fathers looked to Rome for inspiration even considering using the consular system. That system was rejected in favor of the newer system of Constitutionalism. That Rome was a precursor and template for the American experiment is shown in our edifices that follow the Greek and Roman patterns. In fact even the very idea of a nation founded in liberty has it’s roots in the Greco-Roman tradition.

When Rome followed the republican path she saw an uninterrupted string of successes. No city state or empire could defeat her in war. The Roman economy was second to none and the people had a freedom of thought and action never before seen in humanity. Sparta was unbeatable when it followed the laws of Lycurgus. Once the Spartans tossed out Lycurgus’ laws they quickly collapsed and were subjugated by the Macedonians. Athens followed the laws of Draco then Solon. Once Pericles began using the ostracism as a political tool the fall of Athens to Sparta was at hand.

Athens, perhaps the most renowned democracy, gave rise to some of the most influential thinkers in human history culminating in Aristotle, who wrote Nicomachean Ethics. In which he enumerated the right forms of government and the wrong forms. His right forms were, monarchy, aristocracy and polity, and explained the wrong forms are perversions of the right forms, tyranny a perversion of monarchy, oligarchy a perversion of aristocracy and democracy the perversion of polity. He went on to argue a republic, or blending of the right forms, was the best possible form. That history was well known to the founding fathers of the American republic.

In all cases the elite led the people to ruin. My favorite story from the Spring and Summer Annuls, is the story of the Duke of Lu, who asked Confucius how he could get the people to be less greedy, not engage in adultery, and stop shirking their duty. Confucius answered by saying the Duke could stop doing these things himself and lead by example. Confucius and his disciples had to flee Lu state shortly after. The point of the story is that corruption flows from the top down, never from the bottom up. The people, busy with their own lives, have very little time to oversee the rulers and typically have no power over them anyway. So without consequences for villainy the rulers become ever more corrupt. The people see their leaders corruption and follow. Eventually, the society becomes a house of cards, so rotted it collapses at the first gust of wind.

Constitutionalism is supposed to strictly limit the ability of any government to become tyrannical. The concept was that a constitution is to be a contract between the governors and the governed, in which the people would give up some of their sovereignty to the government, for purposes of protecting the people’s property, lives and liberty. That concept has been evolved by the new class elite to mean something very different. Today constitutions are living breathing documents who’s meaning changes with the wants and avarice of the ruling elite. The words change meanings, the intent is ignored and the most absurd things are inferred into it. The US Constitution has become merely a pretty cloak to cover the emperor’s tyranny. Today the Constitution means whatever the elite claim it does.

The meaning of the US Constitution has been so bastardized it bears no resemblance to the original document at all. This started under Teddy Roosevelt, was accelerated by Woodrow Wilson, was cast in stone by Franklin Roosevelt and our Constitution has become utterly irrelevant under Barack Obama. Obama creates legislation by fiat, the legislative branch has become nothing more than a chatterbox that has given away all it’s real power to the bureaucracy, while the Judicial branch has overseen the transition to our post Constitutional era with delight. The amendments have been so perverted they mean nothing. Freedom of religion has given way to the state religion of atheism, the freedom to keep and bear arms has been so infringed the people have been effectively disarmed, the police have become militarized to the point of becoming a modern praetorian guard, the Tenth amendment is superfluous, since virtually all power has been elevated to the Federal government, the list goes on and on.

Yes the United States has abandoned our Constitution and most of the people could care less. The few who stand for our founding principles are attacked as extremists while those who openly avow to overthrow our system are mainstream. Our economy has been hollowed out so badly it takes over two hundred billion dollars printed a month, to keep our economic balloon inflated, our government has us in a perpetual state of war, our standard of living is diminishing at an ever faster rate, the President now has arbitrary rule, our universities have become mere indoctrination centers for Marxists and our entertainment elite parade a plethora of absurdities in front of us to keep us distracted. Elitist theory is adamant about one thing, great civilizations are never overthrown from without, they are always hollowed out by corruption from within… and once the fall comes, it is because the civilization is ripe for it.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Creative Destruction, Say’s Law and the Pseudo Science of Economics

October 20th, 2014

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, supply really does drive demand in the creative phase of the creative destruction cycle, and arguments to the contrary are most often based on observation bias. The theory that supply drives demand is Say’s law, but I am changing it a bit. Keynesian economic theory is that demand drives supply which is the opposite of Say’s law. These two theories have been at odds since John Maynard Keynes developed his theory. Keynes theory falls short of the mark, as does Say’s law, but if we combine Schumpeter’s theory with that of Say, the amalgam provides us with a better snapshot of the workings of a healthy economy. This is because an economy is a complex system, and complex systems are by their nature messy, making it impossible to quantify and measure the inputs to any real degree of reliability, therefore economics are a pseudo science or in other words, an art. This is important because our lives are better when we live in an expanding economy with a rising standard of living.

Economics is not a real science in the strictest of terms. The theories cannot be independently verified because the fundamentals cannot be effectively measured. Moreover economics, like any of the humanist “sciences,” are subject to the personal bigotries of the “scientist.” These pseudo sciences have built in traps for those who would promote their theories over those of another. One of those traps is observation bias. In the hard sciences like physics the parameters can be set, measured and quantified. The bias of the observer is irrelevant, a stone dropped accelerates at nine point eight meters per second squared, no matter who is observing it, but since humanistic sciences, economics and climate “science” are not hard sciences based on directly observable phenomenon, but are instead complex systems that have far too many inputs and interactions, so observing and measuring any number of inputs and interactions, many of which are not directly observable at all let alone measurable, gives very little insight into the emergent phenomenon that is different in kind than the sum of the inputs… a key distinction of a complex system.

Since economics is the science/art of a complex system, theories cannot be measured by looking at any of the inputs, but instead must be measured from the emergent phenomenon that rises from the complex system itself. In other words, we cannot reason from the bottom up, like the hard sciences, we have to reason from the top down, and even then, we find observation bias creeping in. In the aggregate demand aggregate supply model, the assumption is that if there is no demand for products and services, any supply is over supply, and therefore demand drives supply. In Say’s law, that supply drives demand, the foundation is that if there is a supply of something there will be demand, even if the demand is at a price point that is lower than the manufacturing cost. In Schumpeter’s theory of creative destruction, the theory rests on the concept that new ideas draw in the means of production until the idea is fully implemented, then the outmoded ideas are destroyed.

All those theories start at some sub function of the complex system, demand, supply, new ideas, etc… then reason from the sub function or input, to the emergent phenomenon. As I have explained this is not an efficient way to reason about complex systems. If we instead look at the desired results, the emergent phenomenon we seek in an economic system, IE. a “healthy economy,” and then reason down, we are more likely to find workable theories that are less subject to observation bias… as long as the term “Healthy economy” is agreed to at the outset. Let’s set the parameters for a “healthy economy,” to be full employment, an expanding economy and a rising standard of living. Notice I didn’t make one of the parameters no recessions. This is because recession’s are clearly a facet of a healthy economy as we have described. We can deduce this by the fact that all complex systems grow in fits and starts, animals and plants grow rapidly, slow, then grow rapidly again, until they have reached maturity. Weather patterns change constantly from rain to clear and back to rain, all complex systems wax and wane and therefore reasoning from the top down, we can reasonably conclude recession is a function of a healthy economy, just as sleep is a function of a healthy body.

The emergent phenomenon of a healthy economy, requires a high utilization of workers, increasing demand for products and services, innovations that improve the standard of living and rising wages relative to the cost of living. From this we can see that driving demand by whatever means has no effect on innovation, it has no direct correlation to wages and only a tangential correlation to demand for labor. Creative destruction correlates well with innovation and tangentially with demand for labor but falls short of the mark when it comes to wages and demand. Say’s law that supply drives demand also falls short. If we combine them however we can get closer to describing conditions required for the emergent phenomenon we are calling a healthy economy.

Justus Moser lamented the fact that the market system invents new products then creates a demand for them. Before there were home computers there was no demand for them, in fact many of the economic brianiacs of the day argued there would never be a need for a home computer, because who needs all that number crunching power? Once the PC came out however, many new uses, from word processing and spreadsheets to computer games followed, giving the home computer uses that exceeded anyone’s initial concept of what a home computer would do. These innovations drove demand for the products they created and for their ancillary products as well. The same holds true for new innovations that have not even been thought of yet.

Aggregate supply aggregate demand, being easy to quantify is therefore scientific appearing, it is an oversimplification however that leads to many negative policies that hinder an economy from being healthy. Moreover it is especially subject to observation bias. This model is easy to understand. The most pernicious effect of this theory is that it’s inherent observation bias gives rise to bad policies. Policies that encourage politicians to deficit spend and redistribute other people’s money. It argues all demand is equal. If that was so then full aggregate demand of anything would give rise to a healthy economy. This is reasoning from the bottom up however. For example, if the only demand in an economy was for cocaine and all the productive resources was put to that end, would that lead to a healthy economy? Of course not, a truly sick economy would arise from such demand, even though aggregate demand exceeds aggregate supply, proving the weakness of the aggregate demand aggregate supply model.

If however, we combine Say’s law with Schumpeter’s creative destruction, reasoning from the top down, we find we have a better description of what is needed to have a healthy economy, ergo… sufficient demand for supply, innovation that betters people’s lives, increasing demand for labor and a rise in real wages driven by the demand for more complex labor. Put simply the theory simply works. Reasoning further down, we can observe the conditions that give rise to creation and the supply produced driving demand. The lower we descend however the more observation bias is likely to come into play. Creation requires as a prerequisite, ease of starting a business, else there can be no creation. This presupposes access to the capital necessary to start a business along with the tax and regulatory environment conducive of it. If these conditions are not met, lacking the supply that creation provides, demand falls short, and an economy fails to meet our definition of healthy. That is why I say, creative destruction must be wedded with Say’s law, to better explain the factors that give rise to the emergent phenomenon of a healthy or sick economy, which then points us to policy directives that will result in a healthy economy.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Air War against ISIS

October 16th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the elite don’t want the air war against ISIS to be effective, because their end game is an everlasting ground war. The air war against Gaddafi was highly effective however, which forces the question, why was that air war effective against Gaddafi and the air war against ISIS is not? We are constantly told we must intervene to stop ISIS but there are ever present news reports of American advisers helping train ISIS fighters, US equipment in ISIS hands, The Toyota Trucks driven by ISIS given to them by the US, The Benghazi weapons network, etc… Perhaps these reports are propaganda or possibly they are true, given the predilection of this administration to lie when the truth would serve them better, anyone with an open mind must at least question the reasoning behind the call for ground troops. Remember, those “troops” are someone’s child, maybe yours, anytime an American soldier is sent to fight in a foreign land, it is incumbent upon us to insure the plan is to win, and not to simply fight a war of attrition.

 

The US has a recent history of sending American’s children to fight in wars they are not supposed to win. The most glaring example was Vietnam. In that war the greatest enemy of our sons was the government that sent them there. Our fathers and brthers guarded military bases without ammunition for their guns, they were used as test subjects in experiments that would have made Mengele proud, all while under a legal microscope. There was no support for them on American streets, in academia or by the political or cultural elites. Even when they returned home they were vilified as baby killers. Rich Hollywood actors and actresses went to North Vietnam to support the Marxist regime. Jane Fonda even gave aid and comfort to the Marxists! Clearly, they were not sent to Vietnam to win… only to die at the hands of communists.

 

In Iraq the American people supported our sons and daughters but the cultural and political elite did not. Our children were hamstrung by a steady litany of condemnation that undermined the war effort… by the very people sending them into harms way today! American soldiers have to fight terrorists who have no limitations on the atrocities they can perform, even as our kids have to fight under a legal microscope, manned by teams of lawyers looking for any transgression on the terrorists “rights.” There are American soldiers today who are serving life sentences for returning fire and killing terrorists that were firing on them! Only a fool of the highest order would believe there is any intention of the backstabbers who run the US government today to win any war they send our children to fight.

 

When Gaddafi had all but won the war against the terrorists the US and Europe went in with only air power and annihilated Gaddafi’s forces. Once the air war started the war was over quick. The effectiveness of the US air force was staggering. All at a cost that is pennies on the dollar of the air war against ISIS today. We are supposed to believe what was so effective against Gaddafi is utterly impotent today? That is absurd on the face of it. The US has spent more money attacking ISIS from the air to no effect than they did utterly obliterating Gaddafi’s forces. In other words we are to believe up is down and down is up.

 

If the air war was supposed to be effective… why doesn’t the air force target massed ISIS troops? Why don’t they target reinforcements? Why not jdam the hill ISIS is using for artillery attacks into Kobani? Why not provide close air support to the Kurds? Why allow Turkey to attack Kurdish forces with air power? Why not interdict ISIS supplies? Why not eliminate ISIS armored forces? Why are they using multimillion dollar smart munitions to kill a single guy out behind his hut smoking a cigarette? Why are they attacking civilians? These are questions everyone should be asking… but are not.

 

Then there are those alarming reports of US special forces training ISIS, US government arming and equipping them as well as the Benghazi weapons network. These, let’s call them rumors for now, are not reported by the unbiased media, they are in the alternative press. Since the unbiased media have been caught so many times fabricating stories out of thin air to political ends, only an ignoramus would believe them. The CBS story about Bush’s air guard service coming out a week before the election that were proved to be utterly false is just one egregious example. Couple that with Susan Rice’s lying tour of the Sunday talk shows about Benghazi which they slavishly lapped up is another. The point is, our press that calls itself unbiased cannot be counted on to give us even a hint of actual unbiased truth, so we have to give the alternative press some credibility.

 

Why would our government do that to our children though? Why would they seek to send our kids, children our wives gave birth to in great pain, we cleaned their skinned knees, wiped their noses, changed their diapers and suffered with them when their boyfriend/girlfriend broke their hearts, why would our government send them to die in a foreign land, with no intention of winning? Many theories have been promoted, from the military industrial complex to outright traitorous action on the part of the elite. Perhaps it is the Cloward and Piven war strategy to destroy America by bleeding her to death, or perhaps it is to deny us our posterity but whatever the reason, it is diabolical. If the air war was supposed to be effective, it would be, clearly it is not, could that be so the political elite can justify sending our kids to fight again? What is possibly the most telling of the heinous intentions of the ruling elite today, is that they refuse to call Islamist terrorists, terrorists, you know, ISIS… people who behead innocents, crush babies, rape and sell women and girls, and commit genocide… but our government does call our returning soldiers, terrorists. Which in and of itself is traitorous.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Ebola Pandemic

October 13th, 2014

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, you have to ask yourself, what the heck are the global elite thinking? Their actions, especially of late, seem to defy any connection to common sense. When a nation is embroiled in a plague with the mortality rate of Ebola, (up to 90% of victims dying horribly), anyone with sufficient brains to keep their heart beating would know not to keep a steady parade of flights to and from that country. Yet the global elite refuse to stop air traffic between Liberia, Sierra Leone, Nigeria and the rest of the world. In fact they claim stopping air traffic would make the outbreak worse. With the number of infected people doubling every month or less, it would seem, keeping the friendly skies open has little effect on stopping the spread at least in the countries that are suffering, it only puts the rest of the world at risk. Not that I am a doctor of have any more medical knowledge than the average guy but there are questions that I would think should be answered, because… If you end up having to watch your children die of this horrible disease you can thank your representatives in government for enabling it.

I recently read in Science News that an experiment was done to find out if Ebola can spread by air. They took a cage of pigs that were infected and put it next to another cage with uninfected monkeys. The two cages were sufficiently far apart there could be no physical interaction between the two. After some time the monkeys came down with Ebola. The conclusion was that Ebola cannot travel by air… which is absurd on the face of it, since the virus clearly traveled by air between the two cages. The scientists however said that pigs have a tendency to aerisolize the virus and so making it possible to transmit via the air, but they concluded, it cannot be spread by air between monkeys. Which again is absurd because that is not what they tested for. I haven’t read any other tests between monkeys in separate cages. (Probably because they don’t want to find out).

Something that makes the Ebola outbreak so scary is that so many healthcare workers are coming down with it. You know, those guys wearing space suits, somehow they are getting it. If the virus is so hard to get then why do people dressed in hazmat suits get it? How could that be possible? Presumably they are not wading in diarrhea or drinking vomit. There have been no studies that I have read about explaining why health care workers get it at such high rates. Perhaps there are studies underway, I would hope so, that seek to explain this enigma of Ebola, but if so they haven’t been printed in any article that I have seen.

Another very concerning risk is that even in the very unlikely event someone has survived Ebola they can still be contagious for almost two months! That means anyone who has made it through the disease could go to London, Paris, Moscow, New York or any other city on the planet and spread it there unwittingly, or intentionally, perhaps in brothels. With a ten to twenty day incubation period, many people could become infected before anyone knew it… Starting a whole new outbreak on another continent.

The elite are peddling the fiction that isolating the outbreak would make it spread faster. They make no logical arguments, except calls to sympathy and charity to back their claims up. Some claim people would flee if air traffic is stopped, while other’s claim the economies of the stricken countries would collapse, but what would happen to the global economy if it goes planet wide? I agree that the world has a duty to send healthcare workers to stricken areas to try to staunch the outbreak. Moreover, doing so protects the planet’s population from future outbreaks, from the knowledge gleaned from this one. We should also send plenty of equipment and supplies to back up those brave doctors and nurses. To do anything less is to be less than human hearted. But human heartedness is not a suicide pact.

Now I’ll stoke some tin foil hat conspiracy theories… The Georgia Guidestones are often called the American Stonehenge. They were placed on a hill in Elbert county Georgia. They call for the lowering of the human population to under five hundred million. That represents a drop of almost eighty percent! They claim they represent a “new age of reason.” Added to that the date 2014 has been very recently added to the Guidestones. Perhaps it is crazy, but given the profound evil of some people, the Nazis, Marxists, Twelvers and many in the new class progressive movement, is it at all pragmatic to ignore them? Especially with the Ebola pandemic now on at least three continents enabled by unrestricted air travel?

The simple fact remains however, that we are dealing with a deadly virus that has no sympathy, is not sentient, cannot be offended and passes between people and animals in ways our doctors and scientists have not yet fully determined. It has now spread to Europe and North America by unrestricted air travel and if it gets to South America the virus will find fertile ground to spread. If that does happen, there will be a tsunami of illegal aliens infected with Ebola fleeing to the United States, one that would make the present wave look like a kid splashing in a kiddy pool. Should that happen there would be no way to stop the epidemic from killing hundreds of millions of people in the most awful way possible.

Remember, the Nazis slaughtered over six million Jews, two million Gypsies and untold Russians and other Slavs. Marxism has been a force for the extermination of human beings the world over, with over one hundred million people killed, some tortured unmercifully. When asked what he would do if he overthrew the US Constitution, Bill Ayers said he would install a Marxist government. When the FBI informant pressed Ayers further, as to how he would handle those that disagreed with Marxism, Bill Ayers, Obama’s close friend who it is rumored wrote Obama’s first biography, said, “about twenty five million…”

There may be no tin foil hat reason the global elite refuse to stop air travel between the afflicted nations and the rest of the world, the Georgia Guidestones may be just some crazy Marxist dream of utopia, it may even be possible that restricting air travel between the afflicted nations and the rest of the world would spread the pandemic faster, but any rational person must reason for him or herself. Common sense would lead us to recognize the danger of spreading this deadly plague around the world via air travel. Couple that with the history of the socialist elite to slaughter people and any sane person should be very worried.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Anti Corruption Laws

October 9th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, anti corruption laws are only as good as their enforcement, and if the same corrupt politicians enforce those anti corruption laws on themselves, those laws are as good as worthless. If self policing worked then why do we have police? Why not just have everyone pledge to follow the law and be done with it? Wouldn’t that be far less expensive than having a standing police force? Especially now that the police have become so militarized. The cost saving would be huge! But of course that is absurd, people cannot self police, and that applies more to the elite than to the average citizen.

The world is awash in corrupt governments. Story after story is written in the unbiased press calling attention to it. Hectares of forests have been cleared to produce the paper necessary to print the articles. All to no avail. Before Ukraine collapsed into chaos every news organization on the planet reported the endemic corruption in Ukraine’s government. Africa has suffered more than any other continent under government corruption with South America a close second. The US is suffering with the most corrupt, by every measure, government we have ever had, bar none, and Europe is close behind. Corruption, it would seem, is a quality of all governments.

Corruption in government is the single most effective way to determine if a nation’s economy will thrive or fail. The most corrupt governments universally have the lowest standards of living, for the people, but the highest for the elite. This is one of the few universal truths there are. Africa was a bread basket until the colonial powers were overthrown today Africa is a basket case. The the governments that rose up after the colonial era were riddled with corruption. The elite became richer than rich while the people became poorer than poorer. The standard of living in the US has gone up on average every half decade except for the 1930s and today. The single closest attributes of the FDR administration and the Obama administration is the endemic despotic corruption.

There is not one historical example of a corrupt nation that had a rising standard of living. The economies of South America are the perfect example of this in action. In South America, and Africa for that matter, all capitalism is crony capitalism. I have a friend that lives in Guatemala. I mentioned to him one time, we could buy land there, and grow valuable timber using modern silvicultural practices. He laughed hysterically. He told me only certain people can own land and make a profit there. I was aghast at the implication. Any economist worth his salt will tell you crony capitalism is not capitalism at all, but a form of redistribution, from the people to the wealthy. In the case of crony capitalism, all the market mechanisms that grow the pie and provide an invisible hand, are turned upside down. Crony capitalism, that can only survive in a corrupt country, is a zero sum game. One person’s gain is another’s loss.

All the laws the elite pass to eliminate corruption are simply used to crush political dissent. Law is supposed to protect the property and lives of the citizens, but when government is corrupt, law has a different purpose. Law is used as a bludgeon to protect the prerogatives of the elite in power. Obama has shown this in living color. He uses the IRS to punish his political foes, he wiretaps reporters, he rules arbitrarily by executive fiat, he bestows billions of dollars of crony welfare to his allies, and the list goes on and on… As Obama has corrupted the US government we have seen a steady decline in the wages of the people while the lot of the politically favored elite has skyrocketed.

Where government is corrupt violence and crime are rampant. Confucius recognized this thousands of years ago and taught about this propensity of the elite to his disciples. He rightly pointed out that people follow their leaders, if the leaders are corrupt then the people will follow and be corrupt. If the leaders are virtuous the people will follow and be virtuous. The concept is simple, but in practice the leaders will always be as corrupt as they can get away with, dragging the whole of the nation into corruption. The Duke of Lu asked Confucius how he could get the people to stop lusting after each other’s wives, refrain from theft, and so forth. Confucius told the Duke of Lu he could stop doing those things himself and lead by example. Confucius and his disciples had to flee Lu state shortly after.

It is human nature to test limits, seek comfort and avoid pain. Bastiat said, “Now, labor being in itself a pain, and man being naturally inclined to avoid pain, it follows, and history proves it, that wherever plunder is less burdensome than labor, it prevails; and neither religion nor morality can, in this case, prevent it from prevailing.” When and where the elite having the ability to plunder the property of the people, without consequence, they will certainly resort to plunder, especially as their plunder destroys the economy, lowering the property available for plunder. The problem of corruption is epidemic in the world and we people have no immediate power to stop it. Even the vote is undermined by fraud and abuse.

But is all lost then? No, because there is a way to limit the ability of the elite to abuse their power. Constitutions were designed for just this purpose. A constitution is to limit the power of government not expand it as the new class has dishonestly argued. That the elite have so perverted the nature and reason for Constitutions is a testament to the propensity of the elite to corruption. I would say, lets use what has proven to work in the past on the people, and apply it to government. That is police the government. Not with a police force the elite have dominion over, that leads to Eric Holder’s using government to punish political foes, not at all, make an independent police force that has the power to act, buttressed by a Constitutional amendment granting such power. Police that can actually force the elite to follow our Constitutions and their own laws. I call it a Fourth Branch and have titled it a NUMA after Numa Pompilius the lawgiver of Rome. Only when government is effectively policed, can we as a human race escape the bonds of government corruption and start to live as we were supposed to… in liberty and prosperity. Until then we face an ever lowering standard of living until we are nothing but slaves.

 

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The “Greater Good…”

October 6th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, whenever someone claims something is for the “”greater good”.” it is always for their personal good and against the best interest of the rest of us. Connivers always use such deceptions to get us to act against the interests of humanity, by appealing to our humanity. When humanity is used to lower the lot of Man it is patently evil. This type of falsehood is evident in much of the propaganda we see and hear every day. Politicians calling for banning guns, separation of church and state, censorship, more redistribution, etc… The meme is always that it is for the “”greater good”,” while nothing could be further from the truth. Those of us who are human hearted must always be on the lookout for connivers, who appeal to our humanity, to lower the lot of Man, else we become unwitting pawns of evil.

 

Most people want to do the right thing. We often get caught up in bad things from our impetuosity however. Those who scheme for power know this and exploit those qualities to manipulate us. When they do, and we go along, we become unwitting accomplices in the lowering of our own standard of living, while ceding arbitrary power to evil people. Our desire to help others, coupled with our innate impetuosity and laziness, combine to make us very susceptible to this type of manipulation.

 

Calls for banning guns is one such example. Those who seek to disarm the general populace always arm themselves and their cronies to the teeth. This leaves the rest of us at the mercy of those without mercy. The more we are maneuvered into giving up our guns for self protection the easier it is for a usurper to seize power by the violent use of force. The US Constitution guarantees the Right to keep and bear arms as a bulwark against potential tyranny. The framers of the Constitution understood all too well the propensity of the elite to abuse any power that is given them, and the people’s Right to self defense was to apply equally to an out of control government, as to a murderer. The violent despots however argue it is for the “greater good”… peace.

 

Separation of church and state is another spurious argument that calls for the “greater good”, while actually separating us and our children from the font of goodness, and brings us closer to the pit of despair. Why would someone who is an atheist do good works if there is no God, punishment or afterlife? There is no reason to, why not just live for today? Moreover, why do good at all since the very concept of goodness is based in religious philosophy? Abolish Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism and the source for any incentive to do good works is gone. Now that the pernicious intolerant meme of separation of church and state has become ingrained in the zeitgeist, the diabolical elite are moving it a step further, of freedom from religion. The elite are systematically banning Christianity, the philosophical foundation of the US Constitution, our Rights and the reason we are essentially good people. In their intolerance of religion and goodness, they pervert right into wrong, and wrong into right, all by appealing to the “greater good”… tolerance.

 

The Internet has been a boon for free speech. The monopoly of information that the new class progressives once had has been demolished. We are awash in information, information that would never have seen the light of day when the exclusive control of all information, was from the new class progressives at ABC, CBS, NBC, and PBS. The new class is fighting back with subtle, (and some not so subtle) demands for censorship. The British government has openly called for the silencing of “nonviolent extremist speech.” But notice who is called extremist today. Tea party conservatives are called extreme by the new class elite not violent Islamic terrorists. We are supposed to believe, those who follow the law and want government follow our Constitution are extreme, and those who wish to overthrow it by force, if necessary, are mainstream. The elite’s desire to exclude anyone who is not on board with the Fabian socialist/progressive agenda from the marketplace of ideas, is just another call to the “greater good”… inclusiveness.

 

This is why when someone appeals to the “greater good” our radar should go off. Those who actually seek the “greater good” never demand from others, they do it themselves, connivers demand from others that which they refuse to give up. Hypocrisy is the bailiwick of such people. They call for the rest of us to give up our sovereignty while they demand arbitrary power, they look teary eyed into a camera and argue it is for our own good to give up guns while they surround themselves with well armed bodyguards, they claim we are too demanding if we ask them to follow their own laws because their laws are too hard to follow… for them. They argue Christianity should be removed from the public square, while imposing a diabolical agenda that calls evil good and good evil. All the while, they seek exclusive control of information, to render us incapable of mounting effective arguments against their perverted agenda. Done by calls for us to destroy ourselves, our children and our society… all for the “greater good”.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

On The Protests in Hong Kong

October 2nd, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the protests in the streets of Hong Kong are a testament to the natural human desire to be free, the coming crackdown is the natural desire of the elite to rule with arbitrary power. Hundreds of thousands of people have been marching in Hong Kong for a month to protest the vetting of candidates for election by the Chinese politburo. The people simply want a choice; the elite want power. Given the Chinese government’s history, I worry this latest episode will end in a government crackdown, like Tienanmen square. I pray it won’t, but communists are communists, and their thirst for absolute power is unquenchable.

 

The history of communism is one of slaughter, bloody revolution, violent suppression of the people, atrocities, and crimes against humanity. There is not one chapter of history where communism resulted in anything but human suffering on an unimaginable scale. Today communism has gone underground in most countries. Those who adhere to that evil doctrine now call themselves socialists, (because most of us have forgotten who the National Socialists were), they call themselves Progressives, (because no one remembers the evils Woodrow Wilson visited on the American people) or some other flowery name that implies human heartedness.

 

Communism is anything but human hearted though. The goal of communism is total power. Marxists always come into power at the point of a gun, led by the new class and soldiered by the peasants, once in power they slaughter as many as they can. Fidel Castro was one of the least bloodthirsty dictators of the Marxist ilk, because when he marched into Havana he “only” slaughtered fifty thousand people, 50,000 human beings! Enough to fill a stadium! That is what passes for not bloodthirsty in Marxist circles. The atrocities of Mao with tens of millions starved in forced famines, beat to death in his cultural revolutions, or simply executed, should be taught in schools across the planet, but are not.

 

The new class media always gloss over the atrocities of Marxists because the new class has been indoctrinated in the universities and colleges. Academia hides the crimes against humanity of communists while shouting to the heavens anything a capitalist has done that is bad. The false narrative, that American constitutionalists are Nazis, shows the extent that this indoctrination has gone. Only a profoundly ignorant, or evil, person would make that mistake. The Nazis were the national socialists and got many of their heinous ideas from American Progressives, so much so, that before the second world War, Rockefeller Center had a mural praising Hitler and Mussolini’s national socialism! It was painted over once the war broke out, but the fact such American progressive luminaries so liked Hitler, they would commission a mural in that evil man’s honor, show who is the real Nazis. The Nazis gave credit to Wilson for his eugenics policies the Nazis emulated in their Final Solution.

 

The Soviet Union was famous for putting dissidents into insane asylums. The atrocities of Stalin and Lenin are legendary. North Korea punishes dissent for three generations in internment camps where starvation is rampant and children are encouraged to turn in their parents for food. In Cambodia when the communists captured Phenom Penn, they slaughtered thousands on the spot and marched every man, woman and child into the killing fields, where they methodically murdered millions. Bullets became too expensive, (since the Marxists had destroyed the economy) and so they gave boys clubs, to club people to death, and little girls bread bags, to put over the heads of people until they suffocated!

 

The Marxists that run China have pragmatically given up on the communist economy. They rightly saw the abject failure that always follows communist ideology put into practice. In that they had decades of historic evidence from their own nation as an example. They haven’t given up on the planned economy, or absolute power, but even allowing a modicum of capitalism has led to an unprecedented rise in the standard of living in China. If China were to see a full utilization of the market system, with strong standards regulating a laissez faire implementation, the industrious people of China would quickly make it the most wealthy nation on Earth. By trying to hold onto power the communists will destroy China like the Keynesians have destroyed Japan.

 

Today in Hong Kong the people are protesting the usurpation of their rights by the Chinese communist government. The agreement between Briton and China guaranteed the sovereignty of Hong Kong but only a fool would believe Communists would keep their word. Marxists, socialists and progressives hold themselves to no standard whatsoever, while demanding absolute compliance with whatever the Marxist arbitrarily demands. It will not be long before the Chinese communists roll into the crowds with tanks. Academia will remain silent as they did Tienanmen square, the new class media will downplay the atrocities like they always have, and our progressive leaders will look on with jealousy at the free hand the Chinese communists have. We should all keep the people of Hong Kong and China in our hearts and prayers, and by doing so, we pray for our own liberation from the progressive Marxists that run the rest of the world. God bless Hong Kong and China!

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

How Government Can Help the Economy

September 29th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, if a country wants a growing and dynamic economy, the most important thing a government can do is get out of the way of entrepreneurs. What ever government tries to help it actually destroys simply because of the nature of government. That is why government cannot help entrepreneurs it can only hurt them. If government gets out of the way however, the dynamic forces of the marketplace and self interest will encourage entrepreneurs to start business, implement their ideas, and create real economic growth. Unlike the fiction that is economic growth by inflation or government spending. Real economic growth raises all boats, it helps the poor by providing jobs as a way to escape poverty, it helps workers by driving up demand for labor and thus wages, it helps the new class by increasing general wealth they can steal, and it provides for the common defense, both by enriching the nation that has a good economy and real economic growth will heal the rot of crony capitalism.

Economies grow by fits and starts, that is the nature of economic growth. Even Lord Keynes understood that trying to suppress the boom bust cycle would result in stagnation. He thought it a good stagnation, but we all know in our hearts that where growth stops, decay starts. The Federal Reserve was started for just that purpose, to stop the boom bust cycle. To that end the Fed has been a total disaster since it has multiplied the negative effects of the busts while limiting the upside of the booms. To counter the negative feedback, the US government, (and all governments that exist today) have used deficit spending to boost perceived economic growth. I say perceived because the measure of GDP growth is flawed.

The flaw(s) in the way GDP is measured is that it fails to take fully into account inflation which is washed into GDP numbers like it is real growth. The other failure of the present method of measuring GDP is that it includes government spending, which as I have opined many times in these articles, is not real economic growth, only actual private enterprise and individual’s spending is real economic growth. I don’t have time to go back over all those arguments here, so if you are interested, look up sofa salesman in the search parameters of my blog page.

Real economic growth starts when someone has an idea. It could be to make a product more efficiently, for a new way of organizing business, for a new product or service etc… When new ideas are actually implemented, they necessarily draw in workers, capital, real estate and other means of production to realize. This kicks off the boom part of the business cycle. As the idea becomes fully implemented the top is reached, and older less efficient firms or products rendered outdated by the new idea, are eliminated. This kicks off the bust part of the cycle. Each step in the cycle raises the efficiency of the market and therefore wages, standards of living, etc…

When government tries to suppress the bust they keep older less efficient firms operating lowering the total efficiency of the market in that country. This is essentially crony capitalism. Crony capitalism, or oligarchical capitalism, corrodes a nation’s economy from within. Entrepreneurs face a high bar to entry for their ideas because government protects less efficient businesses. Businesses that have political favor due to the fact that government only works on bribes and power. Older firms are by definition larger than new ones, and can afford the costs of regulation that keeps out competition, they have greater largess to hand out as bribes, (campaign contributions) to their political patrons and by these methods, older firms can pull the strings of government to eliminate entrepreneurial competition.

All governments have this propensity. Everyone likes to help their friends get ahead, if it requires holding a new idea back so a friend doesn’t have to face perhaps mortal competition, who cares? The problem is that, as firms with political favor get bigger, less efficient and more entrenched in government, the ability of entrepreneurs to start the boom part of the business cycle is undermined and eventually destroyed. Once that happens the standard of living necessarily drops, eventually creating such anger in the people, that government must point a finger at some boogy man to protect it’s power and privilege, as well as that of their cronies in business. That finger usually points at the market as the culprit ushering in calls for socialism to stop the decline. Once socialism is introduced, the fall in the standard of living accelerates, like in Venezuela.

Each step in the entrepreneurial cycle improves the lot of mankind. When the mechanical loom was invented Marx claimed it would lead to the destruction of the labor economy and mass starvation. What it did do was allow the average worker to buy a wool coat to walk to work in. They no longer had to stuff their shirts with straw to keep warm. The electric light didn’t help the rich, who could afford the price of candles and the laborers to tend them, it allowed the average person to read after dark. There are amazing inventions and products waiting in the wings, like 3D printing, cloth displays, etc… that will improve everyone’s standard of living, if only government would allow it.

Everything government tries to help it actually destroys. So the way for government to improve the economy is not to help politically favored firms escape competition, it is not to pass reams of regulation that aborts start ups before they are born, it is not to tax firms so much that profits are diverted to tax havens instead of CAPEX… it is to get out of the way. Let firms fail and allow entrepreneurs to thrive. Since FDR the US government has tried to support family farms and has outlawed drugs. Today we have no family farms and our streets are awash in drugs. Failure of government is not an option it is a standard feature.

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin