Posts Tagged ‘capitalism’

Distribution of the Goods of Society

Wednesday, March 1st, 2017

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, society functions best when the fruits of the economy are distributed by merit, as in capitalism, rather than force, as in anarchy and corruptocracy, or political favor, as in socialism, communism, feudalism, cronyism and corporatism. While the distribution of the goods of society have been a hot topic for well over a century, the functionality and utility of the economy under each system isn’t actually debated. Those who are connivers prefer arbitrary rule, they fall in the camp of the political distribution of the goods of society, while those with a propensity for violence would rather force be the measure of who gets what, and while each has his or her own natural tendencies, the best for everyone is free enterprise, or in other words… Meritocracy.

Take the example of three mansions. The first is owned by the CEO of a fortune 500 company, the second is owned by a US Senator, the third by the founder of a company. Which mansion is justly got? The politician realized the fortune that paid for his mansion by selling the interests of the nation to special interest and delivering on those sales with regulations. Perhaps the CEO, who did nothing of any notoriety, other than have the good fortune to be born into the clique that sends it’s youth to Harvard and Yale, to be groomed for that position. Certainly not the founder of a company, who by founding a company… created jobs for people, delivered some value to the lives of people and created wealth not only for him or herself but for society as a whole, and did all that by thinking of an idea, taking a chance to make it happen. In the case of the senator, the mansion was won by political favor, the second was also political favor but the third, the founder of a company, was won by improving the lot of Man.

Many arguments have been made as to the superiority of the planned economy… by those who seek to plan the economy. They all expect us to think they are angels, or saints who are above the common lot of Man, calculating, self interested, untrustworthy, undependable and backstabbing. They, who are the angels, want to plan the economy for “our” good, they will subsist on the scraps, like Kim Un. His people pick their own feces for corn while he scrapes by on caviar and champagne. While there are no examples of a planned economy that created wealth, rather than destroyed it, devout socialists and progressives will lament… real socialism has never been tried! One thing you will not hear a progressive avow, is that the economy be planned by an AI, unless they are the ones to program that AI. What good is a planned an economy if someone else is the one planning it?

Societal cohesion is negatively effected when the goods of society are distributed by either force or politics. Everyone of us has a little hypocrisy detector in our brains. There was a recent study done on dogs to gauge their morality, and it was found in that study that dogs have a similar sense of morality as human beings. Quite interesting that only dogs and some monkeys tested so close to human reactions when presented with a moral question. In the case of the dogs, one human participant was stingy giving out treats to most but favored some dogs, the other human participants gave treats equally to all the dogs. The dogs then reacted, supposedly as a human would, by preferring the human participant who was more fair. We know in our hearts when someone’s wealth is ill got. Even as we are told to despise the founder of a company for her wealth we are told to ignore the riches of the politician, lawyer and the corporate executive.

The productivity of an economy is directly related to how close to meritocracy an economy is. When talking about a macro economic effect it is the small things that count. Small actions done by many people equate to large changes in macro economic outcomes. People are naturally at rest. It takes a force to move and inanimate object, as it does a human being, that force to move a person is an incentive. Where there is an incentive to come up with a better way, invent a new product, create value, help someone in their daily routine or any other way of improving the lot of Man, there will be a commensurate reward, people will act. Where there is a disincentive, the idea will be stolen, the bureaucracy will crush you for even trying, only certain people are allowed to do that, etc… the small things people do in our daily lives will, in the aggregate, change the macro growth of an economy.

In a more productive economy one’s piece of the pie need not get bigger since the pie itself is expanding. This is especially true when the growth rate of the “pie” exceeds the inflation rate by a large margin. Each sector in a fast growing economy will experience some growth, even if tangential or even competing with, the present central driver of that growth. Demand for employees will grow as will as opportunity’s to make an honest living. Why be a criminal when legitimate sources of money are available? The easier it is to make an honest living the fewer people will be motivated to crime. It is human nature to go the easiest route just as electricity will follow the easiest route to ground. Even more like electricity that follows every route to ground even when there is a large shunt, there will be those who follow crime as a means to wealth, but where the means is easier only the sadly deranged will follow the harder path.

All this is why society operates best that is closest to a meritocracy. The small effects of rewarding merit, rather than political favor or propensity to violence makes the economy on a large scale, (the macro economy), grow faster. The obviously more fair distribution of the goods of society, to those who do the most good for everyone and remains open for anyone to become rich, simply by meriting it, creates far less stress in society and gives everyone a stake in society. That growing economy draws in people who otherwise would be unemployable, giving them incentive to become employable, so they too can gather some of that ever expanding pie. While the crime rate of a meritocracy will naturally be lower due to it being easier to get money from legal activities rather than illegal ones. The trouble is, those who are at the top today, like the way it is, political favor being the arbiter of who gets what, that is why the senator’s mansion is twice the size of the CEO’s, while the founder of a company, the hated bourgeoisie, lives in a nice house in a suburban development, not much different than his employees.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Keynesian Economic Crystal Meth

Thursday, March 17th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, economists have been seeking the holy Grail of nonstop economic growth for as long as there have been economists… but as with all natural complex systems, the economy must expand, sleep then expand again. The expansion part of the cycle is where new ideas are implemented, and the recession part is where old inefficient ideas are destroyed, to free up the resources for the next wave of new ideas. Like an animal or plant, an economy grows rapidly for a while then sleeps. If someone were to force a plant or animal to stay awake forever, as speed addicts do, the animal or economy becomes sickly. Economists and politicians want the laws of economics to bend to their will but like all of God’s laws they do not lend themselves to bending.

A politician may want to be able to eat belladonna, but no matter how much they might want to, the moment they do, they die. Someone else might want to fly without wings but jump from a towering cliff and God’s law of gravity enforces itself. The point is, God’s laws are not flexible, breaking them always has consequences. No matter if someone poisons himself, jumps from a cliff or snorts crystal meth to stay awake, God’s laws do not broach noncompliance. Trying to force an economy to only grow is just such a violation of God’s law of economics.

Great depressions are caused when government backed by economists try to stop the boom bust cycle of economics. FDR turned Herbert Hoover’s recession into a great depression by trying to force economic growth by fiat. Following Keynesian economic theory, Roosevelt attempted to force economic growth by controlling how much and what a farmer could plant, determining the prices retailers could charge, employing people to do absurd things like count the tips on maple leaves and huge government paid for engineering projects. What he got was a depression that lasted for a decade, soup lines, mass unemployment and a dependency class.

Obama and his economic brain trust have attempted the same thing. He has had the good fortune of having a federal reserve that has kept interest rate at or near zero for the entirety of his term, he has run up a deficit greater than all the Presidents before, he has passed reams of new regulations and usurped a third of the national economy with the Affordable Care Act. Meanwhile, like FDR, he has had a fawning media cover for him at every turn. Today, the soup lines are hidden by food stamps which is at an all time high, the unemployment numbers are massaged by the BEA with terms like U6 unemployment, virtually all the jobs that have been created are low paid part time work and the stock market has expanded because of firms buying back their own shares, on margin, instead of organic growth by investors.

Now the latest gimmick the brainiacs are trying are, negative interest rates, helicopter money, bail ins, and banning cash. Negative interest rates are already being used in Europe and Japan to push demand. What they are, is exactly what it says, savers are charged interest to stash their money in a bank or by buying bonds! To keep people from pulling all their savings from the banks and setting on cash, which would drive the banks out of business, the masterminds want to ban cash. Helicopter money is where the Federal Reserve would print a few billion dollars, lowering the value of all the money now in circulation, and deposit it in people’s bank accounts. If all that fails to save the economy and threatens the banks, those of us who have saved money will have our money withdrawn from our bank accounts, and given to the banks.

Methedrine can make a tired person wakeful, the negative side effects will manifest themselves sooner or later. Keynesian economics, or demand side economics, is like using crystal meth to keep the economy awake even when it needs to sleep. There are two competing philosophies of economics that don’t seek permanent economic growth, the Austrian school which stresses the effect of savings on an economy, and Joseph Schumpeter’s boom bust theory. The Austrian school’s theories have only been used twice in the US, once during the 1920’s and then in the 1980s. The result was fast economic growth with short weak recessions. Meanwhile, every time Keynesian crystal meth has been tried, the long term effect has been depression and outright economic collapse. Gods laws cannot be compromised, no matter how smart a brainiac is, or how much she might want to. Isn’t it time for politicians and economists to grow up and follow the laws of economics? Just say no, to economic crystal meth.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Islamism, Russia, NATO and WWIII

Monday, December 21st, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if you beat a dog over and over, it will eventually become vicious, then to justify further beatings because the dog has become vicious is just plain evil. Russia is a nation that has been invaded many times and every time has lost a huge percentage of their population, had their economy devastated, industry burned and lost more liberty in the reconquering of their land. In short, Russia has been beaten time and time again, so now the Russian people have become vicious, and now our leaders claim we need to beat them since they are vicious? During the Cold War, global Marxism needed to be challenged and defeated, since the primary global sponsor of Marxism at the time was the USSR, NATO was an alliance that had utility. Today, global Marxism has moved into our own governments and universities and so NATO has lost it’s utility, but the elite want to keep the alliance growing, not to stem Marxism as it was intended, but to advance it.

To the Russians, NATO is a knife at their throat. They rightly see NATO as another approaching invasion force. Since they have become all to accustomed to invasion from the west they are rightly nervous about a growing NATO. As the buffer around them, that the monster Stalin built after WWII, shrinks and NATO gets ever closer to their boarder, Russia will inevitably become more belligerent. It is human nature. They see NATO has lost it’s stated purpose, to stop the spread of global Marxism, and is scratching around for a replacement. That is why Ukraine is at war with Russia, Russia took two territories from Georgia and the Russia people love Putin. All because of the deep genetic fear that their history has ingrained in the Russians.

Russia is not all daffodils and honeycombs. Russia is no different than other countries in it’s use of evil to achieve it’s goals. After the 1917 revolution the Marxists who ran the Soviet Union marched across all their neighbors. Soviet armies marched west conquering the Baltic States, east and south subjugating Ukraine, Georgia, and central Asia. Before Germany invaded the USSR in operation Barbarossa, the Soviet army had attacked Finland driving that Norse nation into the Axis. The crimes of Russia, especially during the Soviet period were heinous, and were more about expanding Marxism than protecting their boarders. The fall of the Soviet Union however changed the paradigm on the planet, to the chagrin of the new class intellectuals, Marxism had been proved a failed system.

Gorbachev and then Yeltsin moved Russia into the world community, they allowed the vassal states to cede and they opened the Russian economy to capitalism. This angered the intellectuals even more. That their chosen system had failed as bad enough, but adding insult to injury, the sponsor of their system had become a turn coat and embraced the hated capitalism. That is why instead of helping Russia overcome it’s transitional pains, the West turned the screws on Russia. The new class elite, who had always thought the USSR would win the cold war, despised the new Russia.

Meanwhile the elite had this powerful military alliance they had built for decades to defeat the USSR, and their enemy had simply crumbled from economic malaise. Loathe to disassemble that which had taken so long to build the leaders of NATO scratched around for a new mission for it. In keeping with the old axiom, the leaders of today always prepare for the last war, they retained NATO and even expanded NATO’s mission. Gobbling up nations, ever closer and closer to Russia, NATO went from containment to aggression. Every time another country would join NATO, the Russian people, out of a deep sense of historical perspective, would become more nervous.

Today, the US and Europe are in the unenviable position of defending the Islamic State against Russian attacks. Our tax dollars and military assets are being used to protect people who are committing Genocide against Christians, Jews and Yazidis. Our military machine is defending those who are raping little girls in ritual fashion and our children are put in harm’s way to stop the Russian’s from bombing monsters. Out of their blind lust for power, ideological hatred of Russia for proving Marxism a failed system and their backward mindset of fighting the last war, our leaders have put us squarely on the wrong side of history and human heartedness.

The former Soviet state have every right to be able to defend themselves from Russia, who they rightly see as a threat to their sovereignty, but expanding NATO, an existential threat to Russia, was not the way to do it. Missile defense systems, arms sales and strong diplomacy would have achieved the result without antagonizing Russia. Moreover, NATO should have been disbanded immediately after the breakup of the Soviet Union. Our leaders have failed us over and over but this failure could lead to world war, and indeed it appears we are on the cusp of world war. Instead of alienating a potential ally wouldn’t it be a more intelligent move to embrace the Russians, and ask Russia to join the European Union, (although I sincerely doubt they would given the way Europe is on a mission to commit suicide), bringing Russia into the West?

The people there have suffered a century of Marxist tyranny, they have withstood multiple invasions from the West and they have persevered. The Russian people are tough and pragmatic, but have been kicked over and over, and so have become wary. Sure Putin might be an ass, although I have never met the man, but the Russian people deserve respect, even admiration. The same people that told us not to offend the USSR as it was tyrannizing it’s own people, are telling us now to be aggressive with Russia, and coddle the Islamists. Perhaps even the war in the Ukraine could be stopped, if instead of putting a dagger to Russia’s throat, we disbanded NATO.

Russia is like a dog that has been kicked too much, but is there any question that in a fight, the guy with a dog on his side will almost always emerge victorious? We have to ask ourselves, what do we want to happen in the world? Do we want war with Russia to defend the Islamists? Do we want Ukraine to keep bleeding? Or do we want to defeat the Islamists who are slaughtering their way across the globe, invading Europe and will soon take up Nazi Germany’s role in world history? Do we want to restore Ukraine to peace and prosperity? What we do, or more to the point, what our leaders do, will answer those questions.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Argentina’s Election of Macri

Thursday, December 17th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, Argentina is one profoundly corrupt nation, and that bodes ill for any possible economic prosperity. This isn’t news from the perpetual failure, Argentina, is no exception it is the rule. Argentina seems to have an ability to choose the wrong path as an intrinsic attribute. The corruption in it’s government is as legendary as is it’s economic failures. Argentina has become the poster child for everything wrong with modern government. Lately we have prosecutors found dead in their bathtubs, who have the audacity to write up criminal charges against the former President over collusion with Islamic terrorists from Iran to kill Jews, and is it a shock to anyone that the new prosecutor and the courts refuse to hear the case? Such endemic corruption would be unthinkable in a market based country, but Argentina is a socialist nation, and so such corruption is merely the way to do business, which is the future of any nation that chooses socialism. Argentina however, has just changed course, for how long no one can tell but electing a capitalist is a start.

In 1900 Argentina had the same GDP per person as the US. Since then Argentina has gone down the path to socialism in a big way. All governments like to hand out other people’s money, it makes the government appear generous without costing the elite that run it anything. Argentina has taken that strategy to a new level. Their healthcare system is open to anyone who needs healthcare from around the world. People flock to Argentina from all over South America to cash in on it which costs the Argentine people tons of money. The costs are paid for by the people through lower wages, lower standards of living and a shrinking middle class. The costs are born by the people and the benefits are given to the elite.

This year Argentina elected Mauricio Macri who ran on a platform of economic transformation. He claimed he will change the direction from socialism, which has failed so spectacularly in Argentina, to laissez faire. We will have to wait and see if he does, but that the Argentine people elected someone who will change course from socialism to capitalism, is encouraging. With it’s history of socialism and the outright destruction of the middle class through many bouts of hyper inflation is worry some however. It shows the people of Argentina will likely be expecting an immediate economic miracle, which after so many years of corruption and economic absurdity, will inevitably be slow, especially since Macri will have to fight against the entrenched bureaucracy.

The corruption became even more evident after Macri’s election. The record office had a suspicious fire, which destroyed all the records of who is owed what from the Argentine government, as well as all the pay offs and corruption of the last regime. Convenient eh? Then dozens of armored trucks left the Central bank will all the Argentine gold reserves and foreign reserves delivering them to waiting airplanes to be whisked out of the country to private accounts only God knows where. Such shenanigans highlight the results of socialist governments. Socialism is not for the benefit of the people but for the elite. The elite live like kings while they steal everything that is not nailed down.

The endemic corruption within the government will not just go away because a new president has been elected, it will need to be dug out and excised, like the cancer it is. How such a feat can be done with people who are corrupt themselves will be an enigma, unless Macri can somehow get the government and people to agree on a Constitutional amendment that establishes a NUMA. Drawn from people outside government such a branch could effectively root out the corruption that has so hobbled Argentina. Anything short of a NUMA would be smashed against a wall of corruption decades in the making.

Argentina has a long hard road ahead of it to get their economy and government functioning again. The new President Macri is facing an entrenched bureaucracy that will try mightily to stymie his every effort at reform, corruption in every nook and cranny of the government, a people anxious for results, and a media that is at best hostile to his reforms. He does have the benefit however of presiding over a nation that is rich in natural resources, has good access to the ocean, has an educated people willing to work, and fairly good infrastructure. We should pray for the people of Argentina, that Macri’s reforms do the trick and that Argentina puts its socialist past behind it. Not just for the Argentine people, but as an example for all the people in poor countries beset by socialism and corruption.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Why the Elite Do Such Absurd Things

Monday, November 30th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, chaos, terrorism, crime and fear create conditions where tyranny is not only likely but inevitable, and so anyone who seeks tyranny or in other words, arbitrary rule, merely sow these things and their job is almost done. To argue that no one would want tyranny is to argue no one would want to eat. It is human nature to seek power over others, as evidenced by all of human history, just as it is human nature to eat. Moreover, those that seek political power do so usually to use that power, else why seek it? So, those in political power, not all that have or seek political power, but a large majority, actually want tyranny, (as long as they are the tyrant) and therefore will actively sow chaos, terrorism, crime and fear in society, as a means to that goal.

It was the ancient Greeks who actually admitted and debated the faction that favored arbitrary rule. Today our schools, colleges and universities avoid teaching about arbitrary rule and so most people educated by the new class have no concept of it, as a philosophy or even that there are always those who favor it. To understand the philosophy of arbitrary rule one has to read Plutarch’s Lives, Plato and Aristotle. Since few actually read them, and many are told what they said, few really know and many think they know. The philosophy of arbitrary rule is, that the people are better served when they are ruled by a person or group, that can pass laws arbitrarily. It is as simple as that. Those that favor arbitrary rule believe humanity is better off if we are controlled by our “betters.” That people are so ignorant of this philosophy is damning to our education system but even more telling of the intentions of the new class.

Rationally self interested people, rational maximizers as economists label us, and self interested rightly understood as Tocqueville put it, struggle with those who favor arbitrary rule. We believe that humanity is better off when we the people have a say in our laws, customs and economy. We believe that people in the aggregate are better equipped to understand what society needs than a group of “superior men.” We understand that it is only through the protection of individual liberties that society can flourish… and our philosophy is born out by empirical testing. The period since the invention of Constitutional rule, a form of government that intentionally limits the elite and explicitly forbids arbitrary rule, has seen the greatest advancement in the human condition since the first man and woman walked upright. Those times where arbitrary rule has reasserted itself have seen famine, slaughter and suffering, without exception.

If you listen to the rhetoric of the elite, every solution they offer, is always more power in the hands of the few. Each time a problem pops up, a new regulation, law or form of surveillance is the only answer the elite allow us to debate. It is logical to conclude that due to their default position, of more government power and their favorite economic system socialism, that the elite favor arbitrary rule. It would be absurd to claim someone who always and everywhere seek more power in the hands of fewer and fewer people, favors individual liberty and eschews arbitrary rule! So since they favor and seek arbitrary rule it follows that they will do what it takes to create the conditions favorable to establishing arbitrary rule, for the good of humanity as they see it.

Perhaps that is why the political establishment goes to such lengths to create chaos in society. The elite have been undermining those institutions that create stability for over a century. The nuclear family is the most stabilizing force and is increasingly under attack by the elite. From the welfare state to gay marriage the elite have launched an all out war against the family. Christian religious institutions also create stability and so have been cowed by the elite. No church is willing to give up it’s religious tax exemption and so is unwilling to speak out, afraid to offend those who have the power to remove it, and so they have made themselves irrelevant. The list of stabilizing institutions is far too long to go into here but I am sure if you try you can think of many that are under attack or no longer exist.

Maybe the elite’s drive to tyranny is why the elite seek more terrorism instead of less. No one in their right mind believes that mass migration of Muslims will not create more terrorism in Europe and the US. To argue that it won’t is to argue up is down and down is up. Moreover, flooding a country will people who despise the culture and the people, then giving the invaders free everything is a terrifically destabilizing force, and can only lead to resentment, violence, backlash and more violence. Smashing the stable tyrants in the Middle East intentionally sowed the seeds of the migration which will inevitably lead to violence in Europe and the US on a wide scale, that violence can only lead to fear.

It is possible that the people who want to establish themselves as arbitrary rulers create the conditions for crime to flourish. More law doesn’t prevent crime, it only makes more people criminals, moreover, more regulations makes it harder to start a business or make a profit in an established business. This leads to less employment opportunities, lower wages and more crime because of it. History shows that periods of rapid economic expansion see very low crime rates and periods of low economic expansion and recession see rising crime, social strife and hate groups. All of which makes the people afraid, of their economic outlook, their property and their very lives.

Fear is the uniting element that makes the others so effective. Terrorism, chaos and crime all create fear, and a human being who is blinded by fear will run into the arms of anyone claiming they can put that fear at rest. Since we have been carefully conditioned to believe that more government power is always the answer to every question and all exigencies, most people will turn to a strongman who will “get them” and “fix it.” Like Germans did after Wiemar. Fear limits the mind and terror shrivels the soul, making people little more than animals, willing to burn another at the stake for causing the plague, behead a Virgin to restore the crops, and wipe out a race of human kind. Fear that will answer all the dreams of those that seek arbitrary rule, because the end justifies the means, and in the end, they believe arbitrary rule is in all of our best interests, especially theirs.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Political Heroin

Monday, October 26th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, addiction to heroin always results in poverty, sickness and a loss of one’s soul, socialism is exactly the same. Like addiction to heroin, political heroin, socialism, promises good times but delivers anguish. Both addiction and socialism make people dependent, they ruin lives and remove the incentive to get ahead. Both are alluring however. The idea that something can be had for nothing, wealth in the case of socialism and euphoria in the case of heroin, is very attractive. Today we have politicians who are nothing but pushers. They shill for socialism as a cure all for the ills socialism has visited us with. They offer a free sample, later doses of socialism will cost you dearly though, your job, your family and your soul. Even many so called conservatives offer out socialism, they say a little socialism won’t hurt you, just like a pusher claims a little heroin won’t hurt you. Both types of pushers are villains.

Imagine all the people who’s lives have been ruined by addiction to heroin. We have all seen the television shows where the heroin addict is a pathetic figure, emaciated, jonesing for a hit, strung out and will do anything for another hit of heroin. They live on the streets, stink because even taking a bath gets in the way of their addiction and plead with passers by for money. They have given up their humanity, their lives and their very souls. Of course they didn’t start out that way. Most heroin addicts started as attractive, personable and outgoing people who had it going on. They thought a little high wouldn’t hurt so they open the door and walked through. It doesn’t happen overnight, and that is the trick. Their friends see them going on as if everything was well with them and try it for themselves. Then they too walk through the door to ruin.

People in socialist countries mirror heroin addicts. The nation usually starts out as relatively wealthy. They have people that are attractive, personable and have it going on. They convince themselves the country would be better off if they tried a little socialism. The fall doesn’t happen immediately, some nations last longer than others, but the fall is inevitable once that first taste of socialism has been tried. Eventually the people are starving, the middle class is destroyed, the family unit has collapsed and the people have turned from all morality and religion. All anyone wants is the next free handout. The work ethic is corroded to the point where fewer and fewer people work and more and more become dependent on the handouts. People live in the streets from lack of opportunity and when the government runs out of other people’s money, famine, filth and despair fill the land.

The examples of nations that have gone down the path to addiction are legion. Venezuela is only the latest, but that nation, rich in natural resources, was preceded by hundreds of others. The socialist politicians like to point at socialist countries that haven’t lost everything yet, like a high school kid points to the functional addict, who is still on the football team, as an example of who he wants to be. They claim the functional addict is happier, more popular and cooler than you. All the while offering a free try. This has happened since the invention of political heroin by Rousseau. It is the functional addicts however that keep getting more people, and nations addicted to heroin and socialism. Even the most functional addict eventually falls and becomes destitute.

Today our politicians claim we need to become more socialist to solve the problems that the welfare state has brought about. They blame capitalism, but there hasn’t been capitalism since the 1920s. They point to the functional addicted nations as examples of what we should do. They point at the results of our past use of political heroin and offer that we just need to do a little more and everything will be better. No different than an addict who believes things are terrible now but everything will be better once they find a dose… and it seems to be while the dose lasts, but every dose, either of heroin or socialism, needs to be bigger to get the same result. Eventually, no matter how large and potent the dose it only keeps the addict level, the high has gone, but they need it just to stop the pain.

Heroin and political heroin, socialism, have the same attractive qualities, they both have the same addictive nature and they both ruin. At first the high seems harmless but as the addiction progresses it becomes all powerful. The answer is not to only take heroin on Friday nights, that becomes impossible, the answer is to go cold turkey. Of course, that answer is not what the addict wants to hear. They will argue to the head of a pin that it wont work, will be too painful, and that it might even kill them. What they really fear however, is the withdrawal. A heroin addict feels like their bones are breaking as they withdraw from heroin and a nation will feel similar pain as it withdraws from political heroin, socialism, but unless the drug is kicked, the fall is eventual. Both heroin addicts and political heroin addicted nations will eventually reach rock bottom, and will be forced to quit, Venezuela is almost there. Sadly, the draw is so strong, even after the pain of withdrawal, both will usually become addicts once again the moment they get back on their feet… and so, the addiction seldom ends, until the addict dies.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Empathy, Compassion and Civilization

Monday, September 28th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, compassion and empathy are at least as important factors as intelligence and wisdom, in the ascension of Man to the place we are now, in technology, philosophy and our understanding of the universe. These under appreciated and overlooked attributes of humanity appear to be waning in the world today. Compassion and empathy have served us well through the ages. Throughout history, wars have come and gone, civilizations have risen and fallen, all based on their innate compassion and empathy, these two intimately and uniquely human attributes have waxed and waned, but never to the point they seem to be declining today. Compassion allows us to benefit each other and empathy create in us a sense of other, without either, the human condition must be one of violence, famine and want.

Neanderthals ruled Europe for over one hundred thousand years until they were supplanted by our ancestors. Consider how long one hundred thousand years is, all of recorded human history is a mere three thousand years, that is only three one hundredths of the time Neanderthals lived. Many scientists believe, that it was the domestication of dogs, that gave our ancestors the advantage to replace Neanderthals. Consider the attributes it would take to domesticate a wolf into a dog. One would have to have compassion for the puppy who’s pack you just killed, so you take that orphaned wolf in. It would take empathy to care for it and give it some of your hard earned food. All this must happen before there is any payback in the form of hunting advantage from the domesticated wolf. Therefore, compassion and empathy allowed modern man to replace Neanderthal man.

Most great civilizations all have one thing in common. At their start they were birthed out of compassion and empathy. The Roman Republic was founded out of empathy for all the citizens not just the powerful, Ancient China had the Sage Kings, ancient Greece on the equality of citizens and the US was founded on the liberty of the individual, which is to say compassion for the person. They grew in power and might until they lost their compassion and empathy, then in their decadence they fell in calamity, that was all too predictable in their lack of compassion and empathy. Civilization requires as a prerequisite compassion and empathy, once lost that civilization falls back into the sea of barbarity.

Even the term barbarism connotes a lack of empathy and compassion. A barbarian lacks compassion, a savage lacks empathy, while a civilized man has both. To be civil is to have empathy for another and to treat him or her as such. To be humane is to have compassion. The term human itself denotes compassion and empathy. No one would say the lack of either makes one human. To have humanity is to have compassion, to have empathy is to be human. One can be a genius, but if that person lacks compassion and empathy, no matter how smart they are, their industry will come to naught. A society is no different, no matter how smart, rich, or blessed with natural resources it is, that society will be violent, impoverished and despotic, that lacks compassion and empathy. Clearly, empathy and compassion are more important to the advancement of civilization than industry, intelligence, science or wealth.

All true religions teach as their highest goods, compassion and empathy, that is the basis for religion. Those who are atheists who claim that they have compassion and empathy outside religion, are fooling themselves. Were it not for religion, teaching compassion and empathy, there would be no foundation upon which they could learn doctrinal compassion. If there were no religion, systematic empathy would be unknown. Everyone has some compassion and empathy, except for psychopaths and sociopaths, but it is in religion that a system is created whereby compassion and empathy can be doctrinally established. Those who claim to be above mere religion, are indebted to it for the civilization they live in, even as they decry it, and have no compassion for it and no empathy for the adherents.

Poverty for a society comes from a lack of compassion and empathy. A market society is based as much on compassion and empathy as it is the profit motive. A market is an excellent system for a society to become wealthy, but that system needs certain foundations, one of the most important is compassion and empathy. How can someone discover a new business idea if one lacks empathy? If someone cannot put themselves in another’s shoes, then it becomes impossible to imagine what someone else needs, and meeting a need is the basis for wealth in a market system. Those business owners who lack compassion will ever be searching for employees, they will lament the lack of available good employees, yet will push away anyone who works for them, because no one will work long for someone who treats them as fodder. How can a business owner get customers who lacks empathy and compassion? Customers will quickly learn of a firm that rips off their customers and that firm will soon have no customers to rip off. Compassion and empathy are critical in a market system for it to function.

We must guard against false compassion and misplaced empathy however. They are the paths to ruin. Those who lack compassion will use our empathy and compassion against us, by tricking us to have empathy and compassion for fiends, and to act on compassion by empowering demons to act on our behalf, this can only result in monsters gaining power over us. That is how socialism gets started and why socialist countries quickly loose compassion and empathy. Once we are ruled by uncaring egoists their lack of compassion and empathy taints us. As we start to feel the pinch of hunger in our stomachs, the sting of tyranny over us and the hopelessness that despotism begets, we loose compassion and empathy, narrowing our focus for those who deserve our empathy and compassion, to an ever smaller and smaller group, until we have no compassion or empathy whatsoever. Once that happens poverty becomes rife, violence is endemic and hopelessness fills the land.

Moral relativism is all about a lack of compassion and empathy, those who say all cultures are equal, are peddling poison. What makes a culture great and what makes a culture evil is it’s empathy for people and it’s compassion for the downtrodden. Those cultures that lack empathy even for the least powerful are by definition evil and those that only have compassion for certain groups are villainous. They are not equal to a culture that has compassion, they are not the peers of a culture that has empathy for everyone. Love they neighbor as you love thyself. Moral relativism is an example of misplaced compassion and deranged empathy.

Today the lack of compassion and empathy is alarming. A recent poll showed that up to a third of Americans would not protect a Jew from the Nazis! One third of our fellows would turn in a Jew to go to the gas chambers knowing full well that is what would happen! Abortion is a case of misplaced compassion, it allows a great evil to be done in the name of compassion. Genocide is televised but people have become so calloused we could care less. Christians are returned to the Middle East where they will be slaughtered because of a lack of compassion and empathy. Yet we are excoriated if we lack empathy for those who would subjugate us, and return us to barbarism, by those very people who have no compassion for an unborn child, Christians facing certain death, a little girl being raped daily or the masses of people living under despots.

A story has been told of a rich man who once stepped over the leper Lazarus every day, when the rich man died, his lack of compassion and empathy caught up with him. The rich man looked up from his burning abode, and seeing the former leper relaxing in heaven, he begged God to have the leper dip one finger in water, so he could sip of it. God said no, the gulf was too great. The once rich man begged God to send the leper to his brothers to warn them. God replied, if his brothers had ignored all the prophets and wise men, they would ignore a leper as well… the rich man and his brothers had been taught of compassion and empathy but had ignored the teachings. Today we are no different than that rich man in our lack of compassion and empathy. Since civilization requires, as a prerequisite, compassion and empathy, the lack of can only result in the fall of civilization… no matter how smart the people are, how wealthy the society, how lofty their philosophy or how arrogant the people.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Right Principles for a Nation

Sunday, August 30th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, while abandoning right principles is the ruination of a great nation, those very same principles provide a handy road map to prosperity, low crime rates, and a rising standard of living, for nations wishing to become so. Moreover, any nation adopting those universal right principles will have a positive effect on human history going forward. Everyone knows this truth in their hearts but the lure of power corrupts the elite and keeps them from it, while the lure of free money, keeps the people corrupt and prevents them from demanding it. So, instead of universal profit for everyone, people allow their greed, envy and lust bar them from it. Should a nation, even if old and set in it’s ways were to adopt these principles, it would see a turnaround in it’s fortune that would astound the world.

Wealth can be had for all, not by redistributing a dwindling amount, that is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, but by creating access wealth. Society has the ability to create huge accesses of wealth easily. To create such prosperity however, does not require a government program, nor a large bureaucracy, but by empowering people to achieve their goals. Government’s role in creating societal wealth is to provide standards, not regulations. Any country could do it, few actually want to, and even fewer will. Here is a list and explanation of the right principles leading to a prosperous, free and vigorous nation.

Protecting the individual from the collective is of the utmost importance. Whenever the collective decides what is good for the individual, both the collective and the individual suffer. The individual because the collective never has morals or compassion, it is pure force. Moreover, the incentives in a system where the collective good supersedes the individual’s good, become pernicious. That is because instead of being motivated by self interest everyone is motivated by self preservation. The collective always has a ready reason to kill an individual for the collective good. Where the collective is king those who create wealth are stepped on, their inventions taken and they are personally attacked, because anytime someone rises above the rest in a collective, they become a threat. That way a society that values the collective over the individual must stagnate.

The free market system is the path to societal prosperity. Not welfare state capitalism, which is no more than a more palatable name for socialism, actual free market capitalism. Of course a free market is predicated on individual liberty and cannot function in a collective. A real free market however is the surest path to national prosperity there is, history shows this to be empirically true, while crony capitalism and socialism are the surest path to poverty and famine. During the era of actual free markets the economies of Europe and the US grew exponentially, not at the pathetic 2% we have come to expect since capitalism became crony and the rise of the welfare state. During the only time in the 20th century the US engaged in a real free market, under Calvin Coolidge, the economy soared to new heights of growth and prosperity, which led to a rocketing rise in the standard of living, low crime, less racism and huge access of national wealth. Until Herbert Hoover and FDR took the US down the path to cronyism and the welfare state.

In a real free market, one with standards, it is easy to get rich but hard to create monopoly. Building a monopoly requires at least some government intervention, to suppress competition by creating a barrier to entry, stifling innovation by regulations, having obscure tax codes or outright cronyism. Occasionally a monopoly can grow organically, where an innovation is too expensive or complex to implement, by the time the patent runs out, it is very hard to compete with it. If however, lacking government barriers to entry, the profit gets too high, other companies will compete for that high profit.

Limited government that creates standards not regulations is another principle that leads to prosperity for a nation. Imagine if a gallon was a regulation and not a standard? The volume of a gallon would depend on who was selling it, what liquid it contained, the shape of the container would be prescribed and the political favor of both the buyer and seller would be paramount. The regulations regarding the volume of a gallon would quickly run into perhaps hundreds of pages. In this way regulations create the conditions where monopoly can form, politically favored individuals can become extremely wealthy without providing any value and sand is thrown into the mechanism of the free market. Standards however facilitates the free market like oil an engine. Standards cannot be used by corrupt politicians to pass out money to their cronies, hinder the competition of unfavored businesses or enrich themselves at the cost to everyone else. Standards are a principle that leads to a prosperous nation while regulations lead to poverty and cronyism.

These fundamental, universal, right principles, wherever and whenever they are adopted, will inevitably lead to prosperity, a rising standard of living, less racism and low crime. All the goods people say they want. The elite will always argue against them however, because then the elite would have to provide value for their wealth, like you and I have to, and that is unacceptable to them. That is why the elite are in love with collectivism, cronyism and regulations. They intentionally confuse regulations with standards, they wrongly claim the collective is more important than the individual and they spuriously argue there needs to be monopoly to produce high value products, all to move us away from right principles and towards wrong principles. Those very few nations that do adopt right principles will be the movers of history in a positive way.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Change is the Nature of the Universe

Monday, June 29th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, everything is transitory, even those things we see as bedrock. Even bedrock eventually wears away into sand, silt, and clay. We hang our hats on this or that seemingly solid manifestation but when it turns to sand, as everything does, we are thrown into chaos. The ground shifts beneath our feet and we are put off balance by it. No one has such balance that they are immune. Change is the nature if this universe and that change will always keep us off balance. Our very lives are transitory. We struggle through, trying to be good people, avoiding pain and seeking pleasure as best we can, but in the froth and turbulence of life we only hold on as best we can. The answer is not to be so strong we break, or so weak we fold, but to bend when it is required, have the wherewithal to get back on our feet when we are knocked down, and we must stand hard against the vicissitudes of life we can defeat.

Change is the nature of this universe. Even the stars themselves have limited life spans and so how much less our realities? Once there were dinosaurs roaming the Earth, now they are gone, through no fault of humanity, but because all things have a beginning, a middle and an end. There is nothing other than God that doesn’t follow this pattern. Change is everywhere you look. A billion years from now the Earth will be swallowed by the Sun and life on this planet will become impossible. Nothing is permanent… but change.

Change is the quality of our existence. Perhaps that is why life arose in the first place, because life is nothing but change. Every aspect of life is change. We eat, digest the food and excrete it out, every step is change. We are born, we live and then die, changing the whole time. The very molecules within us change to make our existence possible. Even our thoughts, emotions and spirits exist by changing, thought by the changing of electrons and proteins, emotions by the changing of our fortunes and our spirits grow and thereby change as we age. Life, being so intricately involved with change, is the epitome of the nature of our universe.

Maybe that is why the market system is so effective, it is noting but change. In the free market, innovations changes the way business is done, it changes how things are made and it changes peoples fortunes, some from good to bad and others from bad to good. Those how have it good seek to stop change, through regulations taxes and monopoly, but they struggle against the very nature of our universe. The market system is constantly changing, which puts it in alignment with the nature of the universe, while socialism seeks to stop change, putting it at odds with creation. To contend with the nature of the universe is to fight an unwinnable battle.

To seek to stop change is to seek to stop the universe. You might as well stop the planets from orbiting the Sun. People dislike change however, the weather changes and we go from hot to cold, the seasons change and we go from sowing to reaping, our fortunes change and we go from poverty to wealth or visa versa. Change is difficult for us because it causes disruption, and by definition we must adapt to that disruption, we cannot force it to adapt to us. Innovation is a form of change and therefore is resented by those who are comfortable in the present paradigm. That is why so many of us struggle against change, even to the point of accusing humanity of being the author of change, that is a ludicrous charge since nature is the author, we are merely spectators.

Since change is the nature of the universe, it is the height of foolishness to expect to stop anything from changing. To stop the globe from heating or cooling is to spit in the face of nature, to stop economic innovation is to expect the universe to bend to us, and to demand that morality not change is to be Pollianish. Change sometimes is good and other times it is bad. Changing morality will lead to lower standards of living, persecution and eventually a collapse of our civilization, but that is also change. The best we can do is try to mitigate the negative results of change, or guide it to a better result as best we can, but change is inevitable.

The pendulum of fate swings from good to bad, it cannot be held to good forever, that would violate the nature of our universe. Even the Bible’s description of the Millennial reign says it will change, after a thousand years Lucifer will be loosed on us again, and since the author of the Bible is the same as the author of the universe, change is written into it too. Today the pendulum swings to bad, as it must do, but rest assured, while it will get much much worse, that same pendulum will eventually swing back to good. Only God knows when, but it will. How do I know this? Because change is the nature of the Universe.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

 

You Cannot Control or Plan an Economy, It Can Only Be Ridden…

Thursday, November 27th, 2014

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, an economy is an organic thing, like a horse or a flock of birds, as such it cannot be controlled it can only be ridden. Control is a science and riding is an art. Science can only be applied in a scientific, (controlled) setting. An art can be plied in the real world, where everything is messy, and where “control” is a relative term. This is one of the fundamental reasons communism and socialism cannot work with human beings. Socialism and communism require an economy to be controlled. An economy cannot be controlled. Whenever someone tries, the economy explodes, destroying lives, fortunes and families.

The economy of even a tiny nation or city state, is far too complex to be tightly controlled, and if control is attempted, a long tailed event always occurs, destroying the economy. The random inputs to even a small fruit business are too many to be controlled. A small business person will tell you that he or she does everything possible to control costs, monitor employees and maintain quality, while satisfying the customer, but that it is impossible to control everything. That is where intuition and experience come in, a business cannot be controlled it must be managed, or in other terms, ridden.

Riding a horse is an art, as is, managing a business, herding cattle, painting a picture and running a government. What do arts have in common? All these endeavors seek only a portion of control. They take elements that are disparate, and keep just enough dominance over them that those elements work together, but not so much it breaks the system. If a cowboy tried to control every single cow, the herd would immediately scatter, if the rider tried to control the placement of the horse’s feet, the horse would quickly fall, if a manager tried to micro manage every action of every employee, the business would rapidly fail, an art requires domination of that which can be mastered and accepting that those elements that cannot be mastered will look after themselves. Only those things that can be completely manipulated with absolute mastery over every input and reaction can be controlled, everything else must be ridden.

To control something one must have a way to control any unforeseen exigency. In a complex system control is impossible because there is no way to have a mechanism in place to deal with any possible emergency. The universe of potential emergencies are too vast to be thought of let alone controlled for. Only when someone has total power over every facet of a system, process or reaction, can he or she be said to control it, and even that level of control is subject to God’s laws. In fact that is the scientific method. It is the way scientists have gleaned out the nuances of God’s laws in Physics, Mathematics, and Chemistry… Economics, sociology, psychology and even history are pseudo sciences and while subject to God’s laws they escape humanity’s grasp due to their complexity.

A pseudo science is a field of study that approximates a science but in fact is an art. History for example is written by the victors and as such cannot be a perfect illustration of the facts. A Periodic Table of the Elements would not be science if large portions of it said, “Dragons be made of this…” It would not be chemistry it would be alchemy. Chemistry is a science where alchemy is mere pseudo science. Economics cannot be a science in the true sense until sociology, psychology and a whole slew of other pseudo sciences become real sciences, because economics depends on them for many of it’s theories and assumptions, if an assumption is that “dragons be made of this,” then it is not scientific. Someday, economics may become a science but until then, it is only a pseudo science approximating science.

And so, if all the inputs, the wants, reactions, fears, hopes, desires, knowledge, work ethic, illness, cheating husbands and wives, etc… for every human being in existence cannot be controlled, an economy cannot be controlled. What is the next best thing then, if we don’t want a chaotic economy that doesn’t do what we want it to? To ride it, control what we can and accept that which we cannot, set the parameters and incentives such that most of the economic actors stay in the herd, go after the strays and bring them back into the fold, establish standards, eliminate micro managing regulations, and accept the truth that total control of the economy or in other words, the planned economy, is impossible. Only when we give up trying to control our economies and instead ride them, can we have better functioning economies that do what we all want them to do, create widespread prosperity, keep our nation’s militarily strong, (to protect that wealth), and provide a rising standard of living to our children and their children.

Sincerely,

John Pepin