Archive for September, 2011

The Golden Rule and Social Justice

Thursday, September 29th, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the concept of justice, as it has existed across time, civilizations and age, is rooted in the concept of the Golden Rule. You remember, the one that goes, “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.” Pretty simple really. Do things to other people that you would like them to do to you… And don’t do things to them that you wouldn’t want them to do to you. This is true justice. As opposed to social justice which means, “Do unto others before they do unto you.” Which is actually a form of injustice masquerading as justice.

Confucius went on and on about how the ruler should be the ruler he would want while the subject should be the subject he would want and the father being the father he would want while the son is the son he would want. He put it many ways like, maintain the fences to the left as you would have your neighbor on the right do his. Piled up they amount to the golden rule. So much so, we can safely say, one leg of Confucianism is the Golden Rule.

I bet almost all religions have at their core the Golden Rule. This should give us pause. If so many sages across the ages have agreed on the Golden Rule being a fundamental truth of life, I ask you, why do so many people eschew it for social justice? Perhaps it is because they have been misled? The media are full of questions.

Questions such as, should the government do all it can to improve the lives of it’s citizens are specious. They presuppose that an activist government improves the lives of it’s citizens. To presuppose such a giant thing requires hubris. Especially when a large and growing segment of the World’s population are relearning things that have been intentionally hidden. The advances of the Enlightenment.

The Enlightenment taught us that the market system is the only system that has ever raised the lot of mankind. Every other system, ever tried, has lowered or at best maintained the standard of living, for the few, at cost of the manys’ very liberty. This was one of the principle advances of the Enlightenment. To have forgotten such a profound truth is a tragedy. To have intentionally hidden it is a sin.

Social justice flies in the face of thinkers such as Voltaire and Hobbs. They were all about the liberty of the individual to seek his or her interests without government coercion. They were big promoters of the market system and free economy. They saw clearly that people, when left to their own interests, not only made their own lot better but in doing so, improved the lot of everyone else too.

But Social Justice finds the Golden Rule too simple. The promoters of Social Justice are looking for a more nuanced form of Golden Rule. They want to do what they want, to those they don’t like, the rich for example, while denying the “rich” the ability to do back unto them. In other words, the person who favors Social Justice, is a hypocrite.

The very definition of hypocrite (from “A person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.” We can say that hypocrisy is a form of breaking the Golden Rule. In this case the hypocrites are open about their hypocrisy. Not only open but actually yelling it from the rooftops. Unabashedly calling attention to their moral failings, while cajoling others to join them, with sophistry and rhetoric.

The promoters of Social Justice are not only hypocrites but are falling into the very trap Bastiat warned of. That people would come to have the mistaken belief that the role of government is to seize the wealth of those not in power and protect the wealth of those in power. We see this attitude in bills that seek to make the system “fair” by punishing some group that is disliked by those in power. This inevitably leads to the disordering of society due to everyone being acutely interested in the affairs of government, fighting with their political enemies and not looking after business.

So, we have reasoned, that Social Justice is actually hypocritical and destructive to the body politic, therefore it is indeed a form of injustice. The injustice of Social Justice must not be let to grow further. It’s growth leads directly to the lowering of the lot of mankind. If however, the truth of Justice is the Golden Rule, and people apply it to more and more situations, the lot of mankind will be improved greatly.

The question is, do we want injustice masquerading as social justice, or a better standard of living for everyone through real justice… the Golden Rule and the market system.

Neo Nero

Sunday, September 25th, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the best analogy to Roman leaders, as related by Plutarch, to Barack Obama is Nero, so much so that we could call Barack Neo Nero. He composes a play while the World burns. We shall have to wait to see how the play ends, unfortunately, our fates are caught up in the outcome, be it good or bad. Like the original Nero, Obama chooses to play, instead of organizing a bucket brigade.

As I recall, from my reading of Plutarch’s biography of the life of Nero, when Nero came to power he was heralded as a wise man to replace a corrupt Caesar. Initially he was a reformer but soon sank into madness, (possibly brought on by the lead put in the wine by elements of the Praetorian Guard to sweeten it and make the drinker insane). There were even rumors that Nero himself had started the blaze that engulfed Rome so he could rebuild it the way he wanted it to be.

This time around Neo Nero has indeed set the blaze. By his unwise rhetoric. When Obama called the original protester in Tunisia, you remember, the guy who set himself on fire, Rosa Parks. When he called for Hosni to step down but not Ahmadinejad and called for a youthful rebellion in the Middle East, Obama set the blaze, no less than if Nero himself had run naked through Rome, torch in hand, lighting every livery he came to.

The economic breakdown started before Obama came into office. What was Obama’s reaction to the fire he inherited? He tried to smother it with hay. Ratcheting up government spending to unprecedented levels, piled regulation upon regulation, creating a web of red tape only the most skilled, determined and politically connected lawyer could navigate. These piles of hay initially smothered the fire back to a smolder, but now, the fire is catching up to the added fuel.

So, what is Neo Nero doing, now the World is ablaze? He composes a sonnet. He plays the class warfare instrument instead of organizing a bucket brigade. Not a bucket brigade to heap more hay on the pyre but actual water. In this case, water would be to get deficit spending under control, to tamp down the fires in the Middle East and to clear the mounds of regulation from the books.

The Republicans in the House have passed a bill that meets all the needs of the US in regards to disaster relief and PAYGO. It was sent to the Senate and immediately rejected, no compromise, no negotiation. Then the Democrats in the Senate claimed the Republicans are being the party of NO. While never actually passing anything themselves…Yet. Every speech that proposes anything is simply more tax increases to keep us down, more regulation to make sure no one can effectively compete in the marketplace against the new oligarchs like GE, and increased deficit spending that will, sooner rather than later, bankrupt the US and lead to a total collapse.

Meanwhile, back at Radio Ranch, Dale is trying to balance her books. Her mother hasn’t had a social security cost of living increase since Neo Nero came into office. Her husband, Buck, is laid off. Neo Nero has befriended Ming and invited him to give a speech at the UN. Dale is working two jobs while Buck looks for anything that will pay the bills. Neo Nero tells them “Don’t worry, I’ll just extend Buck’s unemployment check a few more months.” Keeping the eventual cliff in the haze for our plucky couple to step off, into the abyss…

As the lot of the people goes down and down Neo Nero thinks Class Warfare is the way to go. He has burned down our economy, created millions of vehement enemies and equipped them with both nuclear weapons, (in the case of Iran) and is helping them aggregate a large geological presence for their Caliphate. The only possible result is a total collapse of the system as we know it along with a good bloody protracted war.

It seems to me that it is impossible that people educated in Harvard have no idea what they are doing. It seems equally implausible that they would want to collapse the system and have such a war. Yet here we have their actions speaking louder than their rhetoric. Actions that seen to imply, at the very least, that our leaders want the World to burn to the ground… So they can rebuild it anew.

In the form they find most pleasing to themselves.

But not the rest of us…

Third Party

Thursday, September 22nd, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, whenever two people meet to do business a third disinterested person to arbitrate any issues that come up, facilitates a fair outcome for both parties. This, is one of the legitimate roles of government, to be that third person. Sometimes two parties will disagree about an issue, often one party holds far more power to arbitrarily decide in their own interest. This is where government has a legitimate role to play. In other words, we can safely say that if person A is interacting with entity B, in a self interested way, then the interaction is facilitated by the introduction of arbiter C. But what if person A is you, and entity B, is the government bureaucracy? Who can, legitimately, take the role of arbiter C?

Why is it that when people interact in self interested ways it is helpful to have an arbiter? Because people cannot be objective when their self interest is involved. From the shop owner who demands his $20.00 on tab but the patron refuses to pay because the food is eaten, to the lady calling an insurance company, distraught and in agony over the loss of a loved one, and getting the run around… there is a need for an impartial arbiter to facilitate the fair interaction between individuals and entities… to address the imbalance of power in any interaction.

“But government is all of us, it must be fair” someone might claim. – Government is as much a self interested entity as is the most hideous conglomerate of big oil. Every person who works for government, is a human being, subject to all the failings that befall every one of us. They have the same failings but have no check on their acting them out. Call any government agency, with a real problem, examine their reaction from as much perspective as you can, and ask yourself, would you get fired if you acted this way to a customer? If you would, (and you work in the private sector), then we can safely say that the civil services worker is held to a lower standard of action, than a person in the private sector.

Why is that? Because there are no consequences. Look at impoverished countries, they all have one thing in common, a very corrupt civil service. I have a friend who lives in Guatemala… Brolio. I asked him about us partnering and buying land in Guatemala, we could apply Silvaculture practices I have learned here in the US, to forest land in Guatemala. He laughed and laughed. I asked him what was so funny, he replied, only certain people can own land in Guatemala… Of course only they can… How naïve and wide eyed of me…

But why are there no consequences for absolute corruption in the civil services? Because there is no third party arbiter. If a hairdresser in Afghanistan applies for a license to do business in Kandahar, she should not have to pay a bribe, not have to perform sexual services, she should be given the license if she meets the criteria. If any other criteria, outside what is required by government regulation is asked, then she should have an outside arbiter. Not only to punish and make an example of anyone engaged in corrupt actions, within the civil services, but to facilitate the smooth communication between Afghan citizens and the Afghan government.

A neighboring country cannot be the arbiter, because an outside government can never be trusted in such a task, due to human nature. Another means of finding a third party to arbitrate interactions between governments and their citizens. That means is a NUMA. A Fourth branch of government dedicated to overseeing the actions of government officials and arbitrating when citizens come into conflict with their government.

It would be far too dangerous to invest in a NUMA the ability to pass legislation and enforce it on the Elite, (like they do to us), so all other functions of government would be handled as they are now. Police would generally be under the Executive branch, legislative powers would be under the legislative Branch and Legal Jurisprudence would be under the aegis of a Judicial Branch. The NUMA would only be a police of government officials and arbiter of their interactions with the citizens.

The introduction of the rule of law and standards of measure greatly facilitated the market system. Just as the growth of the market system, can be said to flourish under conditions of smart regulation and fully considered standards, the introduction of an unbiased arbiter, to the interactions between the governors and the governed, would be greatly facilitated by an arbiter. This common sense solution to an age old problem is feared by the Elite, far more, than mobs in the streets.

Mobs can be gassed and shot… Handcuffs are more demanding.

Incapp’s Platform on Job Creation in the US

Monday, September 19th, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the International Capitalist Party should propose a platform of job creation for other parties to emulate. To that end, here is our platform on job creation, explicitly for the US in 2011-2012, and implicitly for every time and place.

1) Eliminate Obama care in it’s entirety; Obama care has already hit against some hard Constitutional walls. Walls that were set up to protect the people from their government. Obama care has, at it’s core, a fundamental reshuffling of power from the people to the government. This is an evil that is magnified by the fact that it is phased in over an extended period… to protect the ruling Elite from the political consequences. Moreover, it creates ongoing uncertainty in employers, as to future costs per employee.

2) Streamline all regulation; Swimming through regulation is like swimming in water with molasses. The more molasses added the more likely a swimmer will drown. Even the guy, who mows lawns for a living, has to have more on the ball than anyone in the Obama administration. A person who mows lawns professionally, must have a zero turn mower, (to be competitive), a line trimmer, probably a push mower, a truck and trailer to haul the equipment around. He has to keep track of personal vs. professional use, if his truck is diesel then fuel usage for both, as well as several other regulations for diesel work trucks. If he has an employee he has to keep track and pay social security, workers comp, and all the other regulated expenses government adds to his cost of doing business. God forbid he or she run afoul of some arcane EPA regulation… The academics in the Obama administration have had to struggle, in college, with toga parties, and in academia, with peer reviewed papers…

3) Standardize medical paperwork across fields and companies as much as possible; The stated goal of Obama care was to lower the costs of medical treatment. But as we have seen with every try at command and control efficiency drops and quality diminishes. Standardization and capitalist specialization are the way to lower costs and improve quality. This has been the Capitalist model since the 1500s. Standardization is the first step. Were this done a great deal of work in doctor’s offices would be averted. The increase in efficiency would help offset the skyrocketing costs of medical care. If every doctor’s office had a single sheet form to access insurance no matter the illness, injury or company they could focus more fully on medical care as one example of standardization.

4) Implement Capitalist Social Security; This would be a real step towards moving the US national retirement system from government, where it is subject to the whims of political parties and factions, to the market system which, over time, has shown itself to be a true performer. In short; Capitalist Social Security is a system where, under special government tax laws, a special federal/national corporation would be set up, that would be funded by some of the money that would otherwise be sent to social security and money invested by individuals and corporations. That money would be invested in dividend stocks and AA bonds. The dividend and interest would be reinvested across national markets and industries, but only in dividend bearing stocks and AA bonds. If a stock ceases it’s dividend it is sold and another dividend stock is bought to replace it. When a person came of age, or by his, her or it’s contract, became eligible to collect he, she or it would get 50% of their share of the total net proceeds, the other 50% reinvested. When they died their portion would be inheritable and so go on indefinitely. Generation after generation building and building… instead of costing and costing.

5) Move from a system that taxes income to a system that taxes spending; The demand sider would scream like a scalded cat at the very mention. But if spending only were taxed then the poor would not necessarily pay any taxes but the wealthy would pay in proportion to their income in a far more equitable fashion. It is a presumption of the present societal ethos that income should be taxed at a progressive rate. That is a pernicious twisting of the underlying idea that the wealthy should pay more as a percentage of their wealth for the machine of government. The first punishes the job creator and protects the existing Elite the second rewards the job creator and punishes the standing Elite. In other words… It promotes class mobility.

If one adheres to the philosophy of Schumpeter and believes that the economic expansion/contraction cycle is entrepreneurial driven and the aggregate supply/aggregate demand model is over simplified, then one would also believe these are the primary sources of economic friction in the US today. To lower them would be to unleash the economic pressure that has been building. The result would be another roaring decade of economic growth.

Until some political hack of a demand sider starts calling for more “fairness”… to protect the new Elite and his political backer’s interests.

Logic and Justice

Thursday, September 15th, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that just as logic, to be logic, must be consistent else it is spurious, justice, to be justice, must be consistently applied, else it is injustice. This may seem obvious on the surface but is not practiced by the Elite and the unbiased media. In fact the exact opposite of this maxim is true of the actions of these people. The real question is, whether or not you and I want to live in a just society, or an unjust one.

Lets say that an arguer observes that person A is bad because of action D, then it is brought up that person C is also guilty of action D, the original arguer claims however that it doesn’t apply to person C. The original arguer is not using logic but rhetoric or sophistry. If action D is bad it is bad no matter who does it. Logic does not broach transgressions in application else it ceases to be logic.

In the same way, justice must be evenly applied else it ceases to be justice and becomes instead, injustice. Another example in Aristotelian language is; Person A commit’s a crime. The crime costs society 17 million dollars, (to grab a number from the air). The State prosecutor decides that it is not in the public interest to prosecute person A. Person B commit’s a crime that costs society $20.00. That person is then tried and punished to the full extent of the law.

Can we honestly say that it was form justice, to not even prosecute person A, when his or her crime was so much more costly to society than person B‘s? What if, person A is politically favored, is it ok then? What about if person B is from a politically disfavored group? Now lets say that person C is observed trespassing but he or she is in a politically favored group. The police arrest the trespasser and are attacked in the unbiased media and their jobs are endangered by the State governor and the charges dropped. While person B is serving probation for petty larceny. To take the point further, lets say that in a hypothetical society, politically favored people or groups were held to a much different standard than the masses. Can we honestly say that this is justice? Or is it a case of injustice? Moreover is society well served thusly?

Lets also consider why a group of people are allowed to break certain laws that make them second class non citizens. They are tacitly protected, but still illegal, making them subject to all sorts of deprivations. Akin to the old practice of indentured servitude… or slavery. Would that be a just state of affairs? Or an unjust one?

So this illegal group, that are protected in some ways but always in fear of government punishment, is even more afraid of having to follow the law, because of the consequences. These people would be perfect to undermine the capitalist system in a country. They would work for peanuts, no labor law would apply to them, they could be sexually harassed with near impunity, they could be worked at too early an age for societal norms, and they could be murdered with far less risk of punishment. The introduction of such unjust labor practices would totally undermine the wages and employment of those citizens that are held to the labor laws. Would this be a just system or an unjust one? Moreover what would be the motivation for the Elite in a society to do this?

What if a certain group within a society were subject to a totally different set of laws than the rest of the society? There are many cases of this in history. Slavery is one such example, the old dark age laws where Christians prohibited Jews from most business except money lending… many countries in the World today. They all have one thing in common; they are all a form of societal injustice.

You cannot have a group within a society held to different laws than the rest of society. Was it right to have a totally different set of rules that Black people were held to in America? Was that time in US history a just time for Blacks or an unjust one? Would it be just to introduce such a system now? But what if the group effected wasn’t African Americans? Would it be just then? Of course not! The laws of a society MUST apply to EVERYONE uniformly. There can be no exceptions.

Exceptions break the rule. Any society that holds more than one set of laws under its jurisdiction is unjust. Unjust and illogical is not a way to have a healthy society, it is a means to destroy a healthy society, turning it cancerous. The overt injustice poisoning any society, that trips down this primrose path, eventually ending in a gut wrenching death. To argue otherwise is to argue sophically with spurious logic as your lance. It is like saying, “You can’t arrest him for taking a bribe, he is a Congressman!”

911 The Real Goal and the Real Enemy

Sunday, September 11th, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that before a person can fight he or she must know what they are fighting. To flail at a thing haphazardly is useless and opens the flailer to attack in his distraction. Once the true foe and his intention is understood flailing can turn into deadly blows. This is especially important when the barbarous threaten another dark age. A dark age that descends over the entire World, and may last another thousand years, or maybe lower humanity back to the level of the apes.

Today is the anniversary of the 911 attack on the United States. But really, was it an attack on the United States, or was it an attack on something else? Lets examine what was attacked. The first plane hit the World Trade Center. In other words; the center of World trade. The first attack was on something that had world trade in it’s very name… a symbol of what, do you think?

The attackers could have targeted the White House, they could have targeted air ports, they could have targeted a nuclear reactor or any of a number of terrifying things, but, they attacked specifically, twice, the World Trade Center, the focus of global Barter. What could have been their point? Is it possible the real target was, and remains, capitalism and the liberal democracy that capitalism and the free market system make possible?

The second target was the US Pentagon. The center of capitalism’s military power. Again, why target the Pentagon, if terror and humiliation is your goal? Perhaps a better target would have been the Washington monument, the Lincoln memorial or maybe the Capitol building. Rest assured, the Man burning in hell for eternity, thought of all those possibilities, and finally decided on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. We will never know where the last plane, taken down by the patriots over Pennsylvania, was headed, probably, given the modus operandi of the attackers it was the Pentagon again.

So, it seems apparent, that World Capitalism was and remains the target, not freedom. Freedom was only a tertiary target. Now that we have determined what the actual target is we can look at the attackers. They made videos before they committed the mortal sin of suicide and compounded it with the mortal sins of mass murder… What do you suppose they said when Jesus Christ came to them in their deaths and in profound mercy offered salvation?

The ethos that they espoused is, expansionistic, tyrannical, theocratic, monopolistic and an overtly violent philosophy. It has all the same characteristics of Nazism. Even to the oligarchal view of the market system and the vehement anti Semitism. The Islamo Fascists who perpetrated the crime were and remain a dire threat to the market system today.

They believe, that the fact that God put oil in the ground under their feet impels them to export their twisted fascist ideals on the World, funded by the wealth oil gives them. Instead of industrializing their societies and ensuring work for generations of their people, the Islamo Fascist goads the people into having many children, to grease the gears of the new Fascist War machine.

Now the US and NATO have provided Libya and Egypt as ground for the Islamo Fascists to till. Syria is tilting as are other powerful oil rich countries. Their fall will further encourage the Islamo Fascists to step up the War effort. Even while the US president calls for the ceding of power to the Islamo Fascists, he eschews calling for the primary Islamo Fascist, to step down, Ahmajinedad, amid cries for mercy from his people and rapidly expanding nuclear arms program.

So the enemy is an ideology that wants to destroy the World capitalist system. Very similar to another ideology that is bent on World domination and seeks to destroy the World’s capitalist system. The two have this one thing in common, they seek to destroy the World capitalist system… and are vocal about it. They both understand the consequences of this, if they were to succeed… The deaths of millions of people around the World through famine, war, and outright executions of those that fail to obey. This is a price the Islamo Fascists and the Communists are willing, for others, to pay.

As we have experienced from the struggle with the Marxist anti capitalist philosophy, bent on World domination, an ideology is very hard to fight. Especially one that is based in a perverted religious view, (atheism in the case of the Communists), and has such a powerful emotion impelling it, jealousy. This both ideologies share as well. It is jealousy that drives them to hate, jealousy that makes reason impossible and the hate generated makes them dangerous.

Now that we have a basic understanding what is at stake and who we are fighting it should be much easier to envision methods to fight. Stop the flailing, (enabling the Islamo Fascists through multi culturalism) and start landing some deadly blows. It took total war and the total destruction of Europe to wipe out the original manifestation of Fascism, lets hope and pray, that this crowd of Beelzebub sycophants will be defeated, at far less cost.

Why, do you suppose, the immediate call from the Elite was and remains, “Forget the Alamo!” er… 911.

Stop the Bailouts!

Thursday, September 8th, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that continuing to bail out Greece is the height of stupidity and can only result in a greater fall when the inevitable fall comes. Lets face it, the Greek model is unsustainable… put simply. It cannot work and any one with half a mind knows it. To continue to bail out a country that has no ability to pay, no interest in paying and wouldn’t pay the money back if it could is ludicrous. The truly laughable thing is that we all are involved, every one of us, you and I.

The problem with Greece is not it’s debt to GDP ratio but it’s spending to income ratio. Greece spends more than it can possibly take in without diminishing GDP even further than it’s onerous and dodged tax system does today. But, with a strong anti capitalist element in power, (communists, Fabians, etc…) culturally and politically, the ability of the Greek government to reign in spending is limited. So the problem will only grow until there is no ability of the World to bail out Greece. Then… oh well.

The very fact that there is a need for a bailout presupposes bad fiscal management. Lets face it, we are not talking about Greece bailing out Finland now are we? Greece is wealthy in many ways, it has a thriving tourist industry, it has a temperate climate, a large and well educated population and it has a magnificent history. The problem with Greece is the communists have so polluted the cultural ethos that Greece has been rendered, by the anti capitalists, mortal. At least this government…

Look at the attitude of the Greek on the street. When ever the media, that I am aware of, ask a Greek on the street what they think, they all act annoyed that anyone would have any problem bailing them out, and again… They display in full color the poisoning of the Greek cultural ethos by the communists. That there will be a fall is unquestionable, how disastrous it will be, is dependent on how far it is taken. The higher you climb a tree that is being cut down the farther you will fall with it.

But it is not only the Greeks in that tree. It is the rest of Europe along with the common currency. A fall of great magnitude would precipitate many other dominoes falling. If the Greek fall is done soon then others may not be drawn in. If however, others continue to climb with Greece, then the fall of the Euro will be assured. Which is unfortunate…

I say stop the bailouts. They are masking a growing problem with the welfare state. The people who espouse communist ideas must be forced to live under the consequences of them. As long as they can be masked by bailouts, they continue corroding the ethos of many other people, they will continue to wreak havoc on people’s lives. India is another country coping with a strong communist cancer. Now it is localized but any cancer can metastasize. The anti capitalist cancer spreads because people don’t recognize it for what it is.

If Greece is denied a bailout it will assuredly default on some of it’s debts. It will have to cut spending because it will not even be able to borrow the money it gives away, oh sorry, redistributes… The Greek government will become the example of why communist ideology is so corrosive of economics in a country. Any ideology that fosters an indigent society is a cancer of societal ethos.

But if Greece does default, on some or all of it’s obligations to it’s creditors, then their interests will be damaged. Some of it’s creditors are German Nationally owned banks. Some are actual capitalist firms and some are hybrids. (To be up front I own stock in at least one bank that will be affected). Those banks that invested in Greek debt seeking the high interest rates that the risk made possible should take the haircut. A truly capitalist country allows the corrupt and degenerate to decay and collapse so that new and vital business can rise to take it’s place.

The real problem is that the anti capitalists in Europe have put the Europeans in a catch 22 situation. The leaders are dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t. When one finds themselves in that situation, it is best to do what will turn out best in the long run, not what minimizes pain in the short run.. Those of us that are adults know well that life lesson. I wonder if those that are smarter than us do too?

Crony Capitalism and Distributive Justice

Sunday, September 4th, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, that the just distribution of societies goods, is of paramount concern to everyone who lives on the planet. The debate has been going on as long as humanity has strode the globe. Today the anti capitalists shout social justice as an vacant moniker. An empty bucket the listener puts whatever idea or notion of what he or she believes justice to be. Never actually defined except with emotionally charged rhetoric and slogans. Our collective lot is lowered thusly.

Social justice, most often, really means the distribution of the goods of society… through political favor. Another term for this is crony capitalism and/or oligarchal capitalism. Everyone knows, at a gut level, that crony capitalism is wrong but few actually understand why. It is the why of it that lets us effectively argue against crony capitalism and understand it‘s effects.

One reason distribution of goods through political favor is bad is that it sets up a whole host of pernicious incentives. These all create the conditions that make people despise work and despise the wealthy. No society becomes wealthy or even well fed that eschews work and hates the wealthy. Veblen said in America people don’t hate the rich because everyone in his heart believes that someday he might become rich. A more human hearted ethos I cannot imagine, But as poverty and deprivation are the wages of indolence, comfort and wealth are the wages of capitalistic virtue.

Lets say that a country is effective at protecting some native industry against competition. Innovation in that industry will slide. It is simply the nature of business and humanity. As the efficiency and innovation slips openings will appear, that other countries economies can take advantage of, where the protector counties laws are not in effect. When this happens, the industry protected will move very quickly, to the competing country. The workers laid off will be only trained to work in the old, formerly protected, industry. They will be expensive to retrain and what will they be retrained for?

In most countries where oligarchal capitalism is the primary means of distribution we see a few families have all the wealth of the country the rest impovershed. These few families are the only people allowed to open businesses. As a result the most competent people in those countries are kept out of business. Keeping competent people out of a counties economy puts that country at a disadvantage to the rest of the World in competitiveness and innovation. This naturally results in the lowering of the mean standard of living in a country… even for the few families!

Protectionism also protects competing counties from your products. Take the example of Brazil in the 1980’s. They sought to protect their nascent computer industry from competition and foster it’s growth by implementing protectionist measures. Imports of foreign computers was discouraged. The result was that every other industry in Brazil suffered slower native computers and less efficient software just as all their competitors were advancing quickly in efficiency from the implementation of state of the art computers. Every other industry suffered and the nascent computer industry collapsed. The lowered GDP will effect every Brazilian for generations.

The ideal for a capitalist society is to create the conditions for perfect competition to thrive. Industries that have perfect competition have low profit margins and high innovation rates. Low profit margins mean the products are available to the majority of working people. Television sets and computers are examples.

Unfortunately it is in the nature of democratic governments to lean towards crony capitalism. The elect who get power always owe some powerful faction or other. The rewards for support are always political protection of the supporter’s goods and despoiling the goods of the supporter’s competitors. Otherwise why support a politician to the tune of millions of dollars, and thousands of man-hours of donated labor. If we accept that people are rational maximisers then we must also accept this fact about the nature of democratic government.

Since democratic government is at the core of every efficient capitalist republican government then we must find a means to control this natural behavior in our elected officials. We here at the International Capitalist Party have the means at hand. It is a NUMA. Were it implemented in Oligarchal Capitalist countries, their economies as well as their standard of living, would be greatly improved.

The Chinese Empire

Thursday, September 1st, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that a light bulb burns brightest before it blows out. The current exceeds the filament’s ability to handle, the temperature of the filament goes up and so the light emitted goes up, while the filament is consumed. Once a critical threshold has been exceeded the filament breaks and the circuit goes open. China is the bulb of which I speak.

China today is an Empire in the traditional sense of the word. It contains within it’s boarders several distinct races and ethnic groups that are controlled by force, it has a hegemonic racial group and it is expansionistic both overtly and subvertly. The Communist Party, in whether in China or elsewhere, has no sympathy for the Right of Self Determination. China is truly an Empire in the most historical sense.

Empires can be ruled by emperors, aristocracies, democracies or republics, history has ready examples for any governmental structure. Athens ruled as a democracy, Rome ruled as a republic then as a tyranny. From The Seleucids to the Aztecs, history shows us that it is Empire that is the most common form of government, most people thorough history have suffered empire. But history also shows us that Empires reach critical mass and burn up, not unlike a filament burning out.

In the case of China, the Communist Party that has ruled, overtly, as a republic but in reality as an aristocracy. Their own actions have sown the seeds of the Empire’s destruction. One such mustard seed was the One Child Policy. The result of this evil and onerous law, foisted on the people of China, has created a huge disparity between men and women, a coming retirement collapse and inevitable social unrest.

When Romulus founded Rome and invited anyone who wanted to come and become a citizen he got mostly men. He knew that men make a strong, in the marshal sense, city, but not a long lived one. So he had a great celebration made to Bacchus. Then invited the Sabine people to it. Romulus then fed and entertained the Sabines until a predetermined time, when he stood and tugged on his robe in a certain way, the Roman men ran into the crowd and grabbed Sabine maidens. The Sabines ran in terror of their lives and only discovered later the loss of the maidens.

That the Romans went to such extremes to change the ratio of men and women in their society is important in this sense. The nature of people makes this so ala Schopenhauer on the will of the species from his book The World as Will and Idea. The men of China are no different than the men of ancient Rome. The Romans married the Sabine women and made them their wives. In fact the Sabine women stopped the final conflict between Rome and the Sabine people by throwing themselves between the armies and pleading their husbands and fathers to forgive. But the heartache and suffering of the families of the Sabine women were still felt. The heart ache that the men of China will inflict on someone will be no less felt.

In a very few years, there will be one worker supporting four retired people in China, due the One Child Policy. This will create huge economic tidal forces. Maybe the retired can be forced to work longer? No amount of threat can make someone who is no longer capable of working… work. Whipping will make a paraplegic only turn over. Cattle prods can not make a centenarian carry rocks. Demographics like economics is a dismal science. Mostly because it does not bend to the will of the tyrant like people tortured do.

Then there is the overt expansionist philosophy of the Chinese military. They claim the entire South China Sea and all bordering islands from the Philippines to Indonesia, parts of every nation that borders China as well. India is in direct odds over an Indian State that China claims. This expansionistic philosophy can only lead to war. War with Taiwan or some other unfortunate people unlucky enough to live on the boarder of an expansionistic Empire.

War of this kind always leads to the eventual collapse of the Empire. From Darius to Hitler wars of expansion have only led to heartache. The Mongols conquered more territory faster than any other Empire but was as short lived as it‘s expansion was quick. It flew apart like a defective bearing under load.

With all these stresses, not to mention some that are not entirely the fault of the Communist aristocracy, China has a tough row to hoe. The entire garden is littered with landmines. Most of which the Communist government placed to protect itself. But now have to hoe around. That might result in an bright light. At least for a few moments.