Archive for July, 2010

Individualism vs Egoism

Thursday, July 29th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that when a millionaire ten times over says he or she will hurt the rich and help me… I know I am being lied to. Because for a rich person to hurt the rich violates human nature. They would have to hurt themselves. No one hurts themselves… No one. Unless they are mentally deranged. I hope not many of our lawmakers are mentally deranged… but their actions an the other hand…

John Kerry is a perfect example. He went to New Zealand to buy a 7 million dollar yacht. (Apparently he doesn’t like union workers in Massachusetts). Then he moored it in Rhode Island to avoid paying the five hundred thousand dollar sales tax bill and the seventy thousand dollar a year excise (luxury) tax, (that Kerry supports). Here is an example of a man who claims to help the poor by hurting the rich. I.e. Raising taxes on the rich. Apparently he doesn’t believe himself rich… People who have exponentially less money then him are rich. Their taxes are going up. But the billionaire is not.

The best part of this story is that a reporter asked Kerry; if he docked the boat in Massachusetts would he have to pay the Massachusetts tax then. Kerry responded, “It depends on who owns the boat.” [A very rare example of honesty in a lawgiver.]

The premise of this statement is that some people are subject to taxation and others are not. I ask you… What incentive does this set up in society? Where the people who set tax law are not held to that law? Is it likely, self interested, human beings will keep tax law fair if they are not subject to it? Of course not.

It is not human nature to hold the interests of others as high as one hold’s his or her own. In this instance Hsun Ching is correct that the congenital nature of Man is evil… Self centered. Philosophies that hold human nature to be wrong and force whatever the Elite believe, today, is “virtue” are flawed. To have at the core of a philosophy of ruling people a premise that is diametrically opposed to human nature is like building a gasoline motor and trying to run water in it. It is flawed. Not the motor… or the water… just that they will not work together.

Over and over we have examples of why people cannot self police yet we staunchly believe that the Elite will violate human nature. I.e. be un-self-interested. Even when we have grievous examples like the one above before us many say; “so what.” To them tomorrow is a white fog. Impossible to predict and mysterious as a Stephen King novel. I dare say too many people are of this persuasion. When the fruit of their nonchalance is visited on them they will lament that it was unforeseeable.

“How could this possibly have happened? I voted for the same people over and over but things never got better. They only got worse and worse.” is the lament of the willfully ignorant.

Another sophist argument that I hear and am dumbfounded at is that I personally have it ok now so why worry about the future. To make this argument and believe it a person must live in a one dimensional world. A point in time with no past no future, and no other possibilities then what is.

I love the way de Tocqueville called American individualism as opposed to egoism; “The doctrine of self interest rightly understood.” What a beautiful way to explain the truly civilized person. Someone who understands that sometimes we have to subordinate immediate gratification for long term gratification. To understand that self interest is intricately tied to societal interest. And that safe streets are in our own best interests. Of course the progressives are working to undermine this character trait in the American ethos.

The Elite are not held to the law in most places and times on the Earth. Their self interest need not be rightly understood. If they are not subject to a law will they give it the same scrutiny that they would if they were subject to it?

The modern Elite (progressives) seek to change people from individualists to egoists. Then the egoists will willingly forge the chains for the Elite and even bind themselves with them. Egoism is stupid self interest. It requires that one not think critically about our leaders. An egoist lives in a singularity. Egoism makes a person think a job flipping burgers is beneath him but being on the public dole is honorable. An egoist believes that the world owes him or her. An egoist calls another greedy because he doesn’t want to give more of his hard earned money to the lazy egoist but the egoist will scream like a scalded cat if a dollar of his money is missing.

By the way… did you hear about Barney Frank flipping out over not getting a senior citizens discount that he was not entitled to?

It cost him an extra dollar for the ride.


Sunday, July 25th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the environmentalists always look at everything as a zero sum game. They couch every choice as an either-or. In doing so they always overlook alternatives that would enhance both sides. Instead of destroying the interests of landowners in the name of the environment. In doing so they ensure the destruction of that which they seek to save.

When the market system was first being debated. Some argued that it would smooth out the differences among men and lower their disposition to violence. As I have said before, the guy who sells sofas doesn’t care what color your skin is… all he cares about is the color of the money. Hobbes and Voltaire was of this persuasion. Others argued that some lost while others gained. Rousseau took this side. The argument has raged from then to now. It lands in our laps with Rousseau’s side ceding some ground.

Most educated people realize that the market system is not a zero sum game. When people are involved in the market system their wealth is much higher then if they participated in some other system. The caste system, Where distributed justice says that the goods of society are distributed to those according to caste. Or the feudal system where the goods of society are distributed depending on patronage and parentage. Or still the communist system where the goods of society are distributed by one’s political power. All these other systems have one thing in common. Their version of distributive justice has, at it’s core, that the goods of society go to those with power. And from those that produce. This sets up a pernicious incentive that feeds back and lowers the economic output of every person. While the market system distributes to those with, at least, an eye to their production.

This analogy can be applied to environmental science as well. It is becoming obvious that economic prosperity and a healthy ecosystem can go hand in hand. It is also historical truth that countries that have overly powerful Elite have a very poor track record with the environment. When a small percent of the people make all of the decisions they can simply order environmental disasters be created far from their homes. They have economic incentive to disregard environmental concerns and little incentive to protect the environment of their slaves.

But all the means the environmentalists propose move power from those that live near to those who live far away. From the people to the Elite. They claim if so and so project goes through an owl, ent or sage grouse will cease to exist.

There is a controversy of just this nature going on in the US Midwest. It is over wind towers to produce clean energy or a sage grouse that is loosing the ecosystem it needs to survive. The environmentalists are arguing that the sage grouse must be protected and the BLM land should be “protected” exclusively for them.

To me the obvious answer is to place as many towers as possible. Then replant sage brush around them leaving only access roads to the towers for maintenance. The more land that is taken by towers and replanted with perfect habitat for sage grouse that more you ensure the survival of the sage grouse. In perpetuity. The economic value of the towers will ensure the protection of the land.

The environmentalists way forces land to be “protected.” But they never think about the consequences. ( Or maybe they do). The incentive is set up for the locals to, at best, ignore the interests of the sage grouse. But people being people, when our interests are subdued for the interests of others, we resent it. Especially people who are used to being free. Outright hostility may even be shown. No matter the best or the worst the interests of the sage grouse will hurt under the benevolent “protection” of the overly powerful State. Just like family farms have languished under the benevolent “protection” of the State.

Eventually the “protected” land will be put to some other important use and the sage grouse will go extinct. By putting people in charge who have less and less direct impact from the consequences of their decisions, give them less and less oversight and, you have a recipe for environmental degradation… down the road.

The very policies of the environmentalists will destroy that which they seek to protect… Because the benevolent protection of the State is neither benevolent nor protection.


Thursday, July 22nd, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that there has always been capitalism. The market system may be a relatively new invention but capitalism is as old as humanity. From the first time Ug traded Grug a spear head for a dear head there has been capitalism.

The market system has it’s roots in the time just before Adam Smith. It was the invention of the factory and the division of labor factories brought about that made production cheap and of higher quality. These innovations along with a capitalistic ethos have made our modern society so prosperous.

Imagine if the Romans had discovered the market system. Today Humanity would be striding among the stars. But they didn’t. It was after the last gasp of Roman Civilization (about a century after the fall of Constantinople) that the market system was being born in Denmark. The market system has evolved and devolved in steps since then.

But capitalism is a consequence of mankind’s social nature. It is a fact of our sociability that we mingle and trade. Each getting a need met in the trade. The one a plow and the other funds to build another plow and to feed his family for the day. Each getting more than he had before in the trade. No matter if the product or service is a spear head or fiber optic service the result is the same. It is a win-win.

That is the driving force of capitalism. That we all win when we engage in it. The buyer gets a good or service that in some way enhances his life and the seller gets to make a livelihood. Both have a positive outcome from the transaction. The small personal gains translate to huge societal gains in the aggregate.

Taxation lowers the good for each person. Some profit is diverted from new production or personal wealth to government use. Or some good or service costs more than it otherwise would, The good is lessened by taxation. Regardless of the societal good gained by the service paid for by the tax. There is a cost to a tax.

It is a valid role of government to protect the persons and property of it’s citizens. To that end taxation is a necessary evil. But it is never stopped at that end. Taxes are like an unstoppable tide. They rise and rise until they have drowned economic progress. Then the lawmakers responsible lament the lack of economic progress. But more importantly… the Elite lament the lack of tax revenues. So they raise taxes more…

This is because; if taxation lowers the good to the point that it is equal to or greater than the positive effects from all transactions, transactions will only go on, “under the table.” Off balance sheet transactions become more and more prevalent, when government taxation or other interference in markets are too onerous, erasing the benefit of a free exchange transaction.

If, a country want’s to measure how much it’s interference in the markets effect their markets, they need only compare the size of the black market to the legal market. If there is almost no black market the government is doing a good job not interfering in the markets. If there is a large black market then the government must look into it’s policies else it will face poverty and hunger in the future.

Capitalism is like air. The level of economic activity being like the pressure… The positive outcome is like the oxygen in the air. You can have plenty of air pressure but if there is no oxygen, (Because of government interference) then you cannot breathe. But if there is plenty of oxygen but little pressure you can breathe… If labored.

In other words… Business can go on in a poor country if the government doesn’t, tax too much, impose unnecessary rules, licenses, or other ways governments cause friction in their markets. The profit motive is still there. Even though business conditions are poor. But when government makes doing business too expensive to make a profit…

The point being that government policies have a direct bearing on the state of their economies. To blame capitalism for poor performance is like knowingly depleting the oxygen in a closed room then blaming the inanimate oxygen itself for our shortness of breath…

… if you use rhetoric, like “capitalism is dead.” no one points out the idiocy of the statement, and I believe it…who‘s the fool?

End of Socialism?

Sunday, July 18th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the time of the progressives, socialists and communists is coming to a close. With the wide dissemination of the internet and the dramatically enhanced access to information it offers people will increasingly be lifted from the ignorance enforced by the progressives, socialists and communists. Light will shine on their philosophy.

Today the power of that faction appears to be at it’s apex. The US is controlled almost exclusively by progressives. The President and both houses of Congress have sizable majorities of progressives. Most are democrat but some are republican. The Supreme Court is at the tipping point. A few more hard leftists and the job will be done there too.

But the power of progressives, socialists and communists lays in ignorance. Not of reading writing or arithmetic but in history, economics and current events. These are the ideas that undermine progressivism. People who have not been steeped in the tea of communism and the “benefits” to mankind that it offers see the world differently.

We have our eyes open. We are pragmatic not dogmatic. Progressives, socialists and communists are dogmatic. Even as they point the finger of dogmatism at every one who disagrees with them. But they fail to see their own dogmatism.

To follow a political philosophy that has at it’s core the fact that when it gains control millions of people will have to be murdered to “protect” the revolution requires quite a bit of faith. Those egoists, people who refuse to follow the tenets of social justice and communal salvation, will have to go. They have all done it. From Vladimir Ulanoff to Pol Pot. Moreover they will always to do it when ever they get power. It is ignorance of this fact that feeds the left. Ignorance of the atrocities that they have done and pledge to do if they ever get power.

But the ignorance that feeds progressivism, communism and socialism doesn’t stop there. Every modern event must be couched in just the right terms and in the right way. Until recently the progressives have controlled the unbiased media. The have controlled the horizontal, the vertical, they have controlled what we have seen. Welcome to the outer reaches of the progressive limits. (There are none).

US collages have a plurality of progressive, socialist and communist professors. They aim at convincing every student to follow their pernicious philosophy. The fact that most don’t is a testament to common sense. But it is also a testament to the power of knowledge. Those who know the history of progressivism in the US and it’s ties to Fascist socialism will recognize the parallels today. People who understand the difference between rhetoric and truth will see through the veil of half truths the unbiased media place in front of us. Folks that have access to the information to dull the blade of ignorance are less liable to be misled. Too many of us will refuse to sit in the cave and watch pretty shadows dance on the wall.

That is why it is imperative the progressive, communists and socialists control the internet. They must keep us ignorant, angry and dependent. Their power depend on it. The Elite that run the show on the left know this. If people knew the truth they would loose their power in a heart beat.

Fortunately people are waking up. The actions of the progressives are enlightening the people to the reality of who they are. The mask has been lifted a little. It should be totally removed. Then the people would recoil in horror at who they have voted for and supported in the past.

When that happens the progressives will have breathed their last breath, The socialists will have disheartened the last soul and the tyranny of communism will evaporate from the Earth. All this good from one thing… Light shining on reality.

Didn’t someone else say that evil grows in darkness and withers in the light?


Thursday, July 15th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the Progressive Elite want to force the people of the world to reset our way living. They believe that we must move out of our large homes that require us to have cars and move into high density apartments. Within walking distance to amenities. In that way, even if we are too stupid to do it ourselves, we can just be pushed to it. How do I know this… they are saying it on WSJR today, Sunday July 11, 2010.

By using government to drive up costs for energy, housing, transportation, etc… forces people to move closer together… to cut down on those costs. Taxing carbon is one way to artificially force up the cost of energy. Regulating the economy of cars (CAFE standards) is a way to drive up the cost of basic transportation. Government policies that create high unemployment rates drive people to accept dependence on government. There are many ways government can force society to this “more sustainable” way of living. The key is enough government power and the right people in charge.

The American Constitution forbids such power in the hands of our elected leaders… but today the Constitution is a “living breathing document.” If five people on the Supreme court agree… Voila, the Constitution is re-interpreted. The barn wall probably needed repainted again. The people in charge are critical…

People who are willing to move society away from independence and comfort to discomfort and dependence. People who, if it is needed, would eliminate those that would stand in the way of the revolution (fundamental change). People who have no squeamish qualms about the means. A cabal with only the goal in sight. The progressive Elite.

The progressive Elite constantly remind us that it is not possible for everyone on the planet to live as Americans do… Comfortably. Lower class Americans live better than middle class Europeans. Europeans know it and are resentful. But are not willing to give up dependence on the State. They are willing to give up personal independence and personal comfort for the support of the State. For them it is a good trade. But when they see the positive effects of the other side of the equation they are resentful.

Resentment is a tool to the progressive Elite. They make people resent the wealth of the capitalist. But keep the people ignorant of the avarice of government in both money and power. “After all comrade, would you deny a pig a place for his head?” People who are resentful are in a fog. Overwhelming emotions have that effect on us. People in a fog are easy to herd and then marshal into an army.

Like the Brown Shirts. They were resentful of the wealth of the Jews. (Wealth the Jews earned from being Capitalists).The National Socialist Party turned that resentment into hate and used the hate to herd the whole of Germany into one camp. Then the faction that controlled the camp marshaled the Germen people into a killing machine that visited great sorrow on humanity. Hate and resentment are bread and butter to progressives, communists and socialists.

But today capitalists are called racists, haters, bigots and everything that is an anathema to a capitalist. The progressive Elite tell us we should hate the greedy racist capitalist. While to be a true capitalist is to be the exact opposite of a bigot. Bigotry is bad for business. Bigotry is a luxury that is reserved for progressives, socialists and communists. When you sell a guy a sofa you don’t care about the color of his face… only the color of his money. The market system is the greatest eliminator of racism there has ever been.

The progressive Elite like to use bigotry to “fight” bigotry. After all, isn’t “affirmative action” a form of State sponsored bigotry? The means taints the ends. The progressive Elite don’t care if it does. The ends are so glittering. They are certain they are right… “So personal is their knowledge.“

Isn’t that the definition of a zealot though? Someone who looks at the end and disregards the means. The means being subservient to the end. And the end is total power… Thrasymachus would applaud.

Societal Structure

Sunday, July 11th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that government is one third of a structure that we live our lives in. (The other two being tradition and modernity). The form of government determines the real and potential standard of living of the people that live under it. Historically the more oppressive – the lower the potential. But no matter the form it has great influence on the structure.

That is one of the reasons I am so amazed by anarchists. They seek to destroy the structure. No matter it’s form. Never thinking for a moment, regardless how effectively they destroy the structure, that another will quickly rise to replace it. Most probably in the form of a tyranny (as a reaction to the chaos). Setting them back in their goal of total liberty.

The reason the structure will rise so rapidly is that, as Socrates said through Plato, we are social by our nature. It is our sociability that provide us the goods we need. In his day the division of labor was simple. There was a {warrior (and farming) division and a religious class}- Citizens, and a slave class. Slavery kept labor costs vary low. Very low labor cost meant little division of labor. That kept innovation low and prices for commodities high. But although there was a simple division of labor the benefit of society was an improved standard of living. Socrates and his fellows didn’t have the philosophical framework to understand that an economy is not a zero sum game. But they did recognize the value of our social natures. They didn’t realize that economies are dynamic. Like living organisms. They thrive when watered, aired and fed. They dry up and shrivel when they are not properly cared for. Economies rise and fall with innovation. To the ancient philosophers economies were static.

Adam Smith’s book “The Wealth Of Nations” was an innovation in the way people thought about markets and trade. Of course he didn’t produce his work in a vacuum. But he articulated his ideas well enough to start a new area of scientific enquiry.

This book, The Wealth of Nations, hints at an underlying law in human societal structure. One of the great energy sources of all human societal structure is our want to get ahead. (Greed). Every one wants better. When the governmental structure was such that it quashed this part of human nature. It was, and always will be, to protect the power of the Elite. The Elite always want a structure that ensures them their “rightful” power.

The irony of the ancient societal myth is never mentioned in anything I have read. That is, To be a citizen one must have means. But to want means is to have avarice. (And that) The labors of society rightfully belong to the Aristocracy. Anything they allow the peasants to keep is magnanimous (big in the soul). The producers of those goods had no right to the products of their labors. For them to want to keep their own products was greedy. But to want what one did not produce or help to produce was not.

Just like the rhetoric coming from the socialists, progressives and communists. The products of a person’s labor rightfully belong to the Elite. For those that labor to want a share is for producers to be greedy. If the State needs the funds, to buy votes for the ruling faction, it is the States right.

Communists, socialists and progressives want to bind society their leadership. They know, (if not explicitly), that to do that they must bring back the structure that was lost by embracing markets. Markets are natural levelers of men. As buyers you and I don’t care about the seller’s race, creed, ethnicity, tattoos, etc… all you care about is the price and the quality of a good or service. [ala Hume and Voltair] That is why the Statist Elite want to get off the market system. Markets have lowered sovereignty too low. (As far as they are concerned). Far be it… from wanting “Progress,” in truth they want an Retreat. They want to move humanity back to a time when the Elite were kings and the people were slaves. They long to move us back to that halcyon time.

The trick is to make the people believe that Elite are on their side. Just as Julius Caesar did to destroy the Republic and create the Empire. He took Roman societal structure back from republican rule to the arbitrary rule of tyrants. He made the people love him by giving out money, forcing the forgiving of debts and enacting some much needed reform. (No one is totally evil or totally good). In doing so he earned the absolute and blind following of the Roman people. He then used that following to make himself emperor. Fundamentally changing Roman societal structure. Today, history is repeating itself and, our historians are silent.

It all boils down to one fact… What kind of structure do you want your children and their children living in?

Arizona Law and Illegal Immigration Law

Thursday, July 8th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the stance of the Federal government as stated by Eric Holder is idiotic. To say that state authorities have no ability to arrest people found to be in violation of federal law opens a whole can of worms.

Is this a blanket statement? If it is then what about machine gun laws? They are federal. If a local law enforcement officer comes across a person brandishing a machine gun, that officer wouldn’t be allowed to even notify federal law enforcement about it… according to Holder. Let alone arrest him or her for it. Does this make sense to you?

If it is not a blanket statement then why the constitutional carve out for illegal immigrants? What legal basis could there be for it? So, if Mr. Holder claims that there is a carve out of federal law for illegal aliens, then is it because, there is a clear need for them in the US. One that is so important that it outweighs the mass of legal precedent. Legal precedent that is… all people are equal, under the law. Or has it changed to… all groups, are equal. There are some that are more equal then others. Illegal Aliens for example…

But if the administration is right, that local and State law enforcement cannot enforce Federal law, then I expect people will be getting out their printing presses and printing up $100 dollar bills. Only the FBI can enforce Federal law under the Holder leadership. A person could knowingly pass a printed counterfeit $20.00 bill and the Federal government would frown on a local police officer taking notice.

Slavery is another example. Does it make sense for local and State officials to turn a blind eye to a slavery ring operating in the US? Say…Trafficking in young girls? Under Holders assertion local and State police would be barred from reporting Human traffickers to federal authorities. To do so would make it less likely that people would report crime to the police. Using Holder’s logic.

What if Local police came across a treason plot that was about to be hatched? Holder would argue that it isn’t local police authority to intervene. If the government was overthrown and a communist regime set up, that then murdered twenty five million Americans, according to Eric Holder, that would be the price for liberty…. Or something. All to overturn a law Mr. Holder has not read.

No… Holder and the administrations want to use illegal immigration as a lever. A lever to use to move the American people to accept “comprehensive” reform. The law, as it is written, is “unsustainable.”

The definition of “comprehensive” is making all the illegal immigrants citizens… again. It had such a negative effect on illegal immigration the last few times it was tried it should definitely be tried again, and again, and again… Government loves to re-try things that have failed in the past. The bigger the failure the more it must try again.

The definition of “unsustainable” is anything the government wants to take over and control. If the government wants to take over and control health care they call it unsustainable. A word that, I am sure, has been thoroughly polled and tested… for it’s public palatability.

The real issue is that a faction of the American political Elite see an opportunity. They believe, if they make millions of poorly educated people who can’t speak English citizens, then the new citizens will reward that faction with their political support. It is not totally unfounded. Most of the poor and uneducated in South America vote reliably for communist governments. The faction of the American Elite that want to make them citizens agree with communist philosophy… they just call it progressivism. Their (illegal immigrants and the Elite’s) interests seem to be aligned.

Of course this would make a true underclass in the USA. Something the progressives have wanted for years. Real inequality… Not the ginned up, pretend variety they have been claiming is in the US. Real poverty, enforced by a language barrier and an education ceiling. Trapped in poverty and ignorance the Elite believe the Latinos will keep them in office forever…

Forever trapping the “undocumented workers” in poverty. Because to ever let them get up would undermine the power of the Elite… And if the power of the Elite is ever threatened… The Elite become dangerous even to their old allies.

Get the Economy Growing Again

Sunday, July 4th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that if the US government really wanted to get the economy moving again there is a well charted course. The problem is, the government does not like that course. It believes that if only it goes the way it wants, eventually it will prevail, regardless of the cost.

Cut taxes, rescind the health care law, stop all pending legislation to cap carbon, Lower regulation, cut spending, resume drilling, streamline the permitting process and sponsor public service messages promoting starting a business.

Cutting taxes should be a no brainier. The economy responds every time it has ever been done. In all of history there is no example where lowering taxes did not positively effect the macro economy.

If the government announced tomorrow that the health care law was abolished… the S&P 500 would gain 500 points in a week. The giant specter of uncertainty in the markets about how this legislation will effect the cost of labor will be lifted. Uncertainty in markets cool those markets. Raising volatility and lowering expectations.

Everyone who owns a business (if they are sane) know that if the cost of energy goes up dramatically their imbedded cost of doing business will also rise. They will have to raise their prices. The rise in energy prices causing the rise in consumer cost. They are inextricably entwined. If the government intentionally drives up the cost of energy through some power grab legislation the macro economy will suffer. Overnight inflation in the cost of energy will shock the economy. The reverberations will echo throughout the world economy. The impact will be spread out over a long time span. (So the people can better enjoy it).

Regulation is nothing but friction to an economy. It is selectively enforced and written with an eye to benefit the politically connected at the cost to the politically naïve. Regulation has become the epitome of Bastiat’s perversion of Law. Moreover regulation is seldom well written. This round of regulation was written by lobbyists outside the Capital grounds, (So the comings and goings could be kept secret). It is massive and fraught with carve outs for the Elite’s friends. (Wait and see).

It will do nothing to stop another fiasco but will drive up the costs to the financial sector. Remember, while the banking system was melting down, the regulators at the SEC were looking at porn. Porn that cannot be blocked from their computers due to their civil rights… or something. So this regulation will result in more government regulators. Who, I assume, will continue the great tradition of looking at porn instead of doing their jobs. Win win. If we suffer another melt down the government will simply create more friction for the economy and hire on some more people to look at porn.

Cutting spending, seems at first blush, to be counter intuitive. After all didn’t John Maynard Keynes claim that government spending drives up aggregate demand and thus keeps the economy going while private sector spending is at a nadir. He did but he was wrong.

Government demand is fundamentally different from private sector demand. In many ways. In marketing, in payment and where the money comes from. I have written many blogs on the subject. To go into it here would be redundant.

The drilling ban is a knee jerk response to a catastrophe. This catastrophe is a very rare occurrence and will drive a deeper understanding of how to deal with future catastrophes like this in the future. But in the meantime to stop all Gulf drilling is foolish. It will serve no purpose except as propaganda for the Administration. The economy of the Gulf region is negatively impacted. At a time when the US macro economy is in peril and the region’s economy is already damaged by the spill’s impact to the fishing and tourist economy. In this light this drilling moratorium is utterly stupid.

A good metric to use to determine if the legal costs have gotten out of control in a society is to compare the legal cost of a road project to it’s engineering costs. If the legal cost outweighs the engineering cost the legal system is set up for the benefit of the legal system not for the benefit of society. In this case regulation should be streamlined to lower the legal costs of doing business.

Today we are bombarded with public service messages. Keep off drugs, feed the pig, save a life don’t drink and drive, etc… The list is endless. What about public service messages that espouse the benefits of starting a business. Holding business owners as heroes in society.

Is it possible that these ideas could have a positive impact on economic growth?

Elana Kagan’s Nomination To The Supreme Court

Thursday, July 1st, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the inevitable outcome of the judicial philosophy of Aharon Barak is an oligarchy of judges. There is no other possible outcome of such a philosophy.

Elena Kagan, Obama’s newest supreme court nominee, says Ahron Barak is her judicial hero. To say such a thing implies, at the very least, some sympathy to the judicial philosophy of the man. To be sympathetic to such a philosophy is to be ignorant of the inevitable outcome or to sympathetic to the outcome. Neither is a resounding attribute for a Supreme Court Justice.

His philosophy, that I find so onerous, is;

Judges should be able to decide if the people can change the Constitution, Judges should have the final say in all matters relating to the government, Judges should be able to change the meaning of laws (a dynamic new power), Judges should be removed by other judges only, and that no human action whatsoever is outside the discretion of the law.

In other words, Judges should decide what the Constitution means, the meaning being dynamic, they should re-interprets the meaning of the constitutions they felt necessary, they should rewrite law to suit their needs and be unaccountable to no one for anything except themselves. I ask… Why bother with the expense and trouble of the other three branches then Aharon. Simply the convenient bureaucracy? Or the illusion of freedom?

I cannot believe that everyone on the planet including Aharon Barak cannot see the inevitable outcome, the fruit if you will, of the type of philosophy. Absolute power in the hands of unelected, unaccountable, flawed human beings without limit to their time in office. Hey, The military junta that rules Myanmar should start calling themselves the Supreme Court of Myanmar. Then Aharon Barak and the rest of the Progressives would have to, logically, turn their disdain to admiration. What the tyrant calls himself effects public opinion.

I am a great admirer and follower of the philosophy of William James. His philosophy of Pragmatism is a terrific guide to understanding the good and bad in a given ethos. In his method you look at the fruit of any philosophy to determine if it is “truth” or not. If the fruit is bitter… it is sophistry. If it bears sweet fruit for humanity it is, at least a form of, truth.

Under the philosophy of Aharon Barak, the fall into the tyranny of, a faction (Lawyers) that rule for it’s self serving interests will accelerate. Within a generation that faction will have seized control in perpetuity. (After all, who is more qualified to enact law, prosecute law, control and protect the Constitution, be commander and Chief and run the lives of the people… than an attorney). Democracy will mean (like it did in ancient Rome before the overthrow or Tarquinious), that the people will get to vote for the people who install their oppressors.

The US Constitution gives too much power to Lawyers. As a result lawyers have become a defacto oligarchy. Today they control all three branches of government. Every court ruling that awards someone millions of dollars for cutting himself while breaking a window to rob some people the result is more power for the faction (Lawyers).

Putting in a person who claims Aharon Barak as a hero on the Supreme Court is dicey at best. To do it without having seen sufficient jurisprudence to show temperament from Mrs. Kagan is just plain stupid.

I expect she will win overwhelmingly… Such is the caliber of our leaders.