Posts Tagged ‘meritocracy’

Uplifted People

Thursday, April 17th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me… it is impossible to lift someone up by tearing them down. This logic applies in all walks of life and in every circumstance. Those who claim otherwise are abusers. To lift someone up, we have to raise their perspective with sound religious teachings, give them the confidence that comes from self assurance and the wherewithal to stand back up when they fail. When a human being reaches his or her highest potential it is always because they can stand on their own two feet. Moreover, when someone reaches their potential, the rest of us are improved both physically and spiritually. If a culture where people are uplifted is what we seek, then tearing people down is the opposite of what we should be doing, but if what we really want is a society where poverty, violence and social ills are the norm… we are on the right path.

 

To teach someone they cannot make it, they are subhuman or that they are hated, only lowers them. These memes in our society are forwarded by the progressive socialist faction, who benefit directly from poverty, need and depression. Socialism and Progressivism preys on victim hood. They drink social ills like a vampire drinks blood. Progressives pander to those who have been taught they are downtrodden, and who are so torn down they cannot see a path to self fulfillment, so they turn to government for the succor they believe they deserve. We have seen over and over this path leads to perpetual dependence, anger and social unrest. All of which lowers us all.

 

One of the schemes the progressive socialist left uses to lower people is to vilify accumulation. If you disagree, read Joesph Schumpeter’s Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, in it he outlines this as a means to socialism. (You have to actually read the book to know what is in it… just like a bill before Congress). High tax rates, and creating barriers to starting a business fetter capitalism and are a few of the means to this end. What the vilification of accumulation actually does in a market system is to keep people down. If we cannot accumulate wealth, there will be less and less to invest, both for our old age and for innovators to use to fund their innovations, further lowering us all.

 

Race baiting tears down people in the most pernicious way. Telling a group of people they are too stupid, they are hated or that they cannot make it in free enterprise, only destroys human beings self image, makes them angry, resentful and violent. None of which is uplifting in any way. The whole of the human race is lowered when people are taught they are worth less than others. This goes both ways. Some people are taught that simply by virtue of their birth and skin color, they inherit a propensity to hate, which is absurd and is not the least uplifting for anyone. This is furthered by hate crime legislation, or in other words, thought laws. Under such a regime everyone is lowered. They teach the vilified race they are evil, and teaches those whom the thought laws don’t apply to, that they are substandard, because they cannot be held to the same standard as others.

 

If what we want is to elevate people to their highest, we must not tear them down, we have to raise them up. Schools should teach basic economics. Children and teens would understand how the market works. Should that be done, they could more fully engage in it, to their and our benefit. Thought laws must be overturned especially those that ostensibly apply to only one race. People must be allowed to think and debate freely, and if some people act out on bad thoughts, there are laws that apply. It is not the role of schools to undermine the teachings of religion. To do so only cuts the ties that civilize children and lowers them. People who are atheists can never be at peace. Since their philosophy teaches them this is the only possibility, they have nothing stopping them from grasping at anything they can, especially hedonistic pleasures, like sex and drugs. Instead of self regulation, they must be policed from the outside, since they don’t believe in an everlasting reward.

 

If we want to lift people up we have to stop tearing them down. The results of tearing people down are plain to see for anyone brave enough to open their eyes and look. Humanity is not served when people are destroyed, told they are substandard or made dependent. Our goal should be to uplift everyone, by being good courteous people, teaching right from wrong, practicing the golden rule, treating people the same regardless of any arbitrary grouping, and most of all, stop abusing people by tearing them down. If we do… good will follow.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Justice

Thursday, April 3rd, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, justice is simply the golden rule, “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” This is the most realistic and clear definition of that mercurial term there can be. Any other definition requires people to do to someone else, that which they would chafe under where it done to them, and thus is not just. It is important to define such a widely used word as justice, because when a speaker claims he or she seeks justice, and ten people are listening, inevitably there are eleven definitions of justice in the conversation. This makes the term a sophist tool to trap people. Everyone has a sense of justice but few have a defined definition that is simple and universal. If we want true justice in our world, then we must agree on a definition, else it means nothing.

 

People bandy the term justice about constantly, to get the upper hand in an argument or to denigrate this or that action, thought or philosophy, but to do so if the term is not defined, is simply spurious. It is like me saying I will give a car for this or that. Every listener will have a different idea of what type of car I mean, but lacking a definition, no one will know. If I continue claiming I am going to give people a car I can convince people to do real damage to their self interests. Once I have got money, power or property from them for this car, I can give them a plastic toy car and have not overtly lied.

 

Any definition that is more complex than the golden rule opens itself to injustice. Once we say justice requires calculations and metrics, we have made the word so complex it looses all meaning, and devolves back to a mere tool of sophists. Furthermore, justice cannot mean doing different things to different people. The moment we say it is just to do this to him, and something different to her, we have waded into quicksand. For a thing to be just it must be universally just.

 

Justice as it applies to property is the golden rule as well. If I pick up a rock and using only my talent and another rock… I carve a figurine, that figurine is mine and no one else’s. To take it violates my right to that which I have made by my own hands, and also steals my liberty in the form of the time it took to make the figurine, because had I known it would be stolen I would not have spent the time to make it. This same logic applies if I have made a thousand figurines, because to take from someone while defending one’s own property, (and everyone defends his or her own property)… violates the golden rule.

 

Rawls definition of justice comes in two parts and is meant to show how socialism is just. The first part and therefore the foundational part is that any definition of justice must give people the most liberty possible without trampling their rights. The second is that for a person to make an unbiased decision about what economic system is just, they must do it in a, “Veil of ignorance.” This veil is supposed to show that if we don’t know where we will land in this new economic system we will want everything distributed equally.

 

Nozick’s take on Rawls, is that Rawls believes money and property are like mana from heaven, and that Rawls ignores the very real effort that it takes to get money and property. My take is that Rawls second principle violates his first. If any definition of justice must firstly give maximum liberty and not violate people’s rights, then it is not possible to take from one and give to another. The very act itself makes a slave of one of the parties. Only a twisted mind would argue slavery gives maximum liberty or that it doesn’t violate human rights.

 

So… justice can be simply defined as the golden rule. Doing something to another, you would not like done to you, no matter the societal good that would be theoretically gained, is fundamentally unjust. The term justice, undefined, can be used for all sorts of pernicious ends, and usually is. Economic justice must also rest on the golden rule, it cannot be given a complex definition, and must be universal, else it is spurious. Over the years, philosophers have tried to twist justice into a reason for injustice, using complex arguments and smart sounding phraseology, but what they propose is not justice but a perversion of justice. It is important for us to understand what justice really is, to stay clear of the pitfalls of sophistry, that brings into the world injustice called justice, always at the point of a gun.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Oligarchy of The Red Tapeworm

Thursday, March 27th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the legal system is supposed to facilitate market interactions, but in reality the legal system more often than not, is a parasitic drag on the free market. Like a tape worm imparts some resistance to diarrhea when it is small, it eventually outgrows it’s host, and if it isn’t dealt with, the host eventually starves to death no matter how much food they eat. This is not to say that there should be no laws. It is to say that the legal system in most western countries has out grown their hosts, the economies, and is draining those economies the vital sustenance, capital, they need. Many people have pointed this out to no avail. The reason the legal system always overtakes the national good is because Lawyers are a defacto oligarchy. Our economic futures rest on our ability to prune back the parasitic nature of our legal systems, else we and our children will live in an economy that is being starved, by the very legal system that is supposed to protect it.

 

Market economies need standards, this is a basic fact of any study on market economics. People have to be able to make valid legal contracts, that are binding, we have to be able to sue for redress of economic harm visited on us… among a whole host of other valuable services a functional legal system provides. No economy can do without laws and standards. However, as Madison said in The Federalist Papers, when those laws become so abstruse, even a person knowledgeable in the law cannot possibly understand them all, you have tyranny.

 

The legal system is essentially a faction. This faction, like all factions, seeks the best interests of it’s members, no differently than a labor union. The legal faction is made up of attorneys. It is not coincidental that all governments have a large portion of their members as attorneys. Modern governments are broken into three branches, Executive, Legislative and Judicial. This was Montesquieu idea, to limit the source of most tyranny that ruins republican government, an overly powerful Executive. Break the authority from the Executive to adjudicate over law, and form it into a new, or third branch, the Judicial, (the lawyer’s exclusive branch). So, since all three branches are largely populated by lawyers, most legislators are attorneys, most Presidents have been lawyers, and with one branch exclusive to lawyers, the legal faction is overly represented in government. This makes the legal faction an oligarchy. They eventually rule, not in the interests of everyone, but in the interests of their faction, the classic definition of an oligarchy, ala Aristotle’s wrong forms of government.

 

Many learned people have suggested tort reform but it never gets anywhere. That is because the very people who would have to pass it, lawyers, would suffer real harm from it. The legal faction’s power would be diminished and the members of it, attorneys, would suffer economic harm. That is why tort reform is always dead on arrival whenever anyone offers it. Moreover, every time a new regulation is written, a new law is passed, a court finds a business has to pay a litigant for burning herself with hot coffee, or a judge rules a legal contract is null and void, along with many other legal abuses, the demand for lawyers goes up. Economics 101 is supply and demand, as the barrier to entry is raised by more and more stringent testing and pretesting requirements, lowering supply, while at the same time the demand for attorneys is elevated by absurd rulings and tomes of arcane regulations and laws, raising demand, the profit for lawyers must necessarily go up.

 

That is why the media and lawyers attack oil company profits in the tens of billions but no one decries the profits of law firms that run into the hundreds of billions. Doctors are vilified for charging what they do to save the life of a child but the absurd charges attorneys get away with are ho hummed. The legal faction controls the government and thus the conversation. The fees of lawyers goes up, along with the regulations they pass and society has to follow, in a Fibonacci curve while economic growth dwindles away. No matter to the legal faction however, their fortunes continue to rise. But, like the Roman empire was destroyed, in no small part by the stifling regulation and bureaucracy, their legal system built up, our modern societies are being eaten from within by the red tape worm of the legal faction. Most likely, we will end up like the Roman civilization, because we refuse to learn the lesson history teaches us.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

The Way to Change the World For The Better

Sunday, March 9th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, what our society needs, is not more government, regulations or law, but kindness, love, and understanding. While the political establishments try to separate us and pit us against each other, it is up to us to come together, recognizing that the guy next door is as human as you and I. Yes we have flaws but the reality is we are at heart good people. The vast majority of us want to make the World a better place. There are very few of us that wouldn’t like to be recognized as a hero. We only lack the opportunity… or do we?

 

The media is full of horror stories about how evil your next door neighbor is. Murder, rape and terrorism fill the airwaves. This has the effect of separating us and making us fearful of each other. We try to find some common ground, and so we gravitate to those who look like us, act like us or have the same political view. We turn to an overly powerful government to protect us from each other… But to do these things leads us into a pitfall. Those who are evil are very, very few, while those of us who are good, hard working people… are many. To recognize this fact is the start of wisdom.

 

We don’t see the good in our fellow man, because he or she is at work, out of sight and quietly promoting the good of Mankind. We work diligently at our jobs, yes to make money, but also to get a sense of satisfaction, to feel like we are accomplishing something and to make a difference. I know this to be true, because the biggest complaint people give about their work is not money, but that it is not satisfying, we don’t get a sense of accomplishment or that we are not making a difference. That is simply the World fooling us into unhappiness.

 

I suspect most cases of depression in people is based on the messages the World, through the media, program into us about ourselves and our fellows. If we are bombarded by negative messages, we incorporate them, and it becomes nearly impossible to be happy. How can we be happy… when the World is so bad? But the World isn’t that bad. Yes there are murders, rapes, and human trafficking, but there is far more good going on in the World than bad. We have confirmation bias because of all the negative messages we are fed by the media. Therefore, those who consume news and culture the most are the most effected.

 

Mencius said the congenital nature of Mankind is good, because, “There is not one among us who is not distressed at seeing a child fall into a well.” Sage words from that ancient sage. While there are some very few psychopaths among us the vast majority of us are good and caring. That is why we can be so easily manipulated by psychopaths into damaging our own self interests, and the interests of Mankind, because at heart we are good and we want goodness in the World. Those who are sinister understand this, and use our goodness to control us, to enhance their power over us.

 

The answer is not to turn away from the World, it is to open up to the good in it, putting the bad into context. We would love to make the World a safer place for everyone, we would like to have everyone prosperous, no matter how each of us defines prosperity, and yes we must work together to make these things happen, but the means must align with the ends. The answer is in ourselves, not in some external force that purports to save the world through laws, regulations and taxes. We ourselves are the means to making the World a better place.

 

Our law books are filled with false idols but our holy books are filled with answers… love thy neighbor, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and forgive so that you can be forgiven. Those are answers that work and have worked every time they have been tried. It is not out of our hands, the way to change the World is not through empowering a few to force their view of what is good on the rest of us, but to change our own hearts, be good people both on the inside and the outside, smile at strangers, act out our goodness through courtesy, and most of all, practice the one rule that cuts across every religion, the Golden Rule. The rest will follow naturally.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Jobs and Wages

Thursday, February 27th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, if the government wants more jobs in our economy, all they have to do is cut job destroying regulations and taxes. While this is not a new idea, or a particularly novel one, it is an concept that has always worked. Government, and by government I mean politicians, pass more regulations every year with no end in sight. Tens of thousands of bureaucrats working diligently regulating every aspect of human existence. While this creates some good paying jobs, in the bureaucracy, it destroys private sector jobs, you know, the ones that pay for the bureaucrats. Unless we wake up to this fact, and stop believing their lies, our economy, jobs and wages will continue to suffer.

 

All politicians know this. They know that jobs are not created by government fiat or programs. Those programs and fiats destroy jobs. They certainly know, but so want the power their regulations give them over us, they don’t care about the consequences, our ability to earn a living. The hubris and egoism of the elite that engage in the type of job killing regulation, as their own actions show, care much more for amassing power than the economic well being of the people they are supposed to serve. In this self aggrandizing egoism, a few names stand out, as do the results of their regulatory policies.

 

Woodrow Wilson is one. He inherited a good economy and destroyed that good economy with growth stifling regulation, taxes and bureaucracy. The economy he passed to Harding was far deeper in recession than the US economy in 2008. Franklin Roosevelt took a bad economy and made it into “The Great Depression.” His policies were so intrusive that economic activity almost stopped altogether, and it wasn’t until his death, before the economy rebounded. The Second World War is often cited as the reason we came out of the depression, but had Roosevelt been President after the war, the economy would have hit new lows. Barack Obama has followed the policies of both Wilson and Roosevelt and the results have been exactly the same. This same experiment has been tried the world over and has failed every time. Proving it is impossible to tax and regulate an economy into prosperity.

 

If we examine the most productive economies we find that they all have several things in common. They all have low taxes, and they all have low regulation. Singapore, Liechtenstein, and Andorra are but a few examples. Those countries with the poorest economies all have high taxes and stifling regulation in common. Venezuela, North Korea and Zimbabwe are examples of this type. History shows, laissez fair capitalism enriches people every time it is tried, while socialist regulation impoverishes those same people.

 

Whenever laissez fair is offered as an option however, the elite in academia and politics make the spurious claim, we want to take the guard rails off the economy. This is entirely sophistry, because it is not regulation that protects consumers and workers, but standards. Regulations only benefit politically favored groups at the expense of everyone else. One example of job killing regulation is raising the minimum wage. Everyone knows, (politicians, economists and bureaucrats), that doing so will eliminate jobs, the only real debate is how many. Minimum wage jobs are filled by low skilled new workers. Statistics show that in the US there is huge unemployment in those areas, raising the minimum wage will eliminate some of those jobs, exacerbating the problem, and so low skilled new workers will have less opportunity to get work and start climbing the ladder out of minimum wage. Clearly, raising the minimum wage is counter productive, but those that don’t get laid off will think they have got a boon.

 

As long as the political elite can continue to fool the majority, into believing they are doing something for the economy when they are in fact destroying job prospects, we will continue to fall down the bottomless pit of poverty. Wages are like any other commodity, the more demand for workers the higher wages will be. As government drives down the demand for workers wages must naturally follow. This is no different than the price of gold or coal, if demand is high price is high, and if demand is low the price will be low too. Since Obama has taken office launching his war on business and enacted his job killing regulations, including Obama care, we have seen real wages fall, driven down because demand for workers has fallen. There has been no other recession, (other than FDR”s and Wilson’s), where the US economy has performed so poorly in the recovery, even going back to 1800. Obama’s great recession is due to the same policies that gave us the great depression. Isn’t it time to grow up and do what must be done? Stop listening to the glittering lies crooned by self serving egoists, and start believing the ugly truth, that government cannot tax and regulate us into wealth.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Socialism Makes Us All Enemies

Monday, February 10th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, as we progress more and more to socialism by means of the welfare state, we are sinking into a state of total war, everyman versus everyone else, where all vie against all. This is the opposite of the claimed goal of socialism but is the inevitable result of that pernicious notion. Even in a state of nature where, as Hobbs said, “life is brutish and short,” there is a strong incentive to rally together against the forces that threaten us, but in a state of total government that incentive is reversed, and is changed to a disincentive. While to the committed socialist this concept, that socialism pulls us apart, is an anathema, it is empirically provable. As we move from liberty to a total state this truism becomes more and more apparent. So, unless we want to live in a perpetual state of war, every man enemy to everyone else, we must change the direction we are traveling.

 

The welfare state is merely a means to progress us to a socialist state, where the distribution of the goods of society are made by political favor, instead of merit. As we progress to a total state and political favor becomes the primary means of deciding who gets what, the incentive ceases to be to work hard to get ahead, but to game the system. This is because the products of our labor will be taken, and redistributed to the politically favored, so a rational maximizer will logically eschew work and instead seek political favor, resulting in an ever shrinking economy. This should be obvious to anyone with their eyes open. The incentive under the total state is to gain political favor, as it is the only means to get ahead, and make no mistake, the more draconian the communist state the less equal people become, and the more we are torn apart.

 

Even a cursory look at historic examples of socialism show that equality is nonexistent under a socialist government. Those who don’t have political favor are lucky if they even get subsistence while those with political favor live like kings. Every example of a communist/socialist state show this to be true. Those in the party are not held to any standard at all. Socialism always results in a cleptocracy where those in the party steal from everyone else. Communist China is a perfect example. They have forsworn the communist means of production for the capitalist, which has resulted in huge wealth for party members by outright stealing, taking bribes, and other corrupt practices. They are almost never held to the law or morality, because the nature of socialism and socialist policies make those with political favor above the law. This shows the societal divisions that socialism begets.

 

It is clear that as we progress through the welfare state to socialism, our leaders are held to the Constitution and law, less and less. Their political favor gets them a get out of jail free card as well as riches far in access of what they have earned. That is why politicians become so wealthy while in office. They don’t produce, they steal the production of their constituents and give a pittance back, claiming they are liberal and charitable, when the exact opposite is true. If a thief stuck a gun in your face and took all your money, then gave you back a twenty and said, “get yourself a nice meal.” Would you call that crook liberal or charitable? If the thief was above the law, which would you rather be.. the crook or the victim?

 

Harry Truman said, “Anyone who gets rich in politics is a God damned crook.” Take the example of Senator Bernie Sanders. The man has never worked a day in his life. He was on welfare until he became the mayor of Burlington. Since then his brand of socialism has made him a millionaire many times over. Everything he has got was by political favor. When he was elected to the House, the Banking scandal broke. Sanders claimed the corrupt names should be withheld from the people, but as it turned out… Bernie had bounced checks the moment he got into office! You or I would be prosecuted for check fraud. Meanwhile he has made it harder and harder to make a living by honesty and hard work. This example shows, political favor allows those who have it to skirt the law, and is at least as good a means to wealth as being an entrepreneur, especially for the lazy.

 

The example of North Korea shows us how far we will be torn apart by socialism. In that hell hole parents are at war even with their own children. There are reports of parents eating their own children because hunger is so rampant. The gulags in North Korea are known as the most terrible places on the planet, where children will turn in their parents, for a slice of stale bread. During Stalin’s famine in the Ukraine, the teachers told the students to report their parents if they were hording food. An innocent little boy raised his hand and said his parents had a few potatoes in the floor boards. The police went to the home and indeed found several potatoes in the floor. The parents were arrested and executed as examples. The boy was called a hero and a statue was erected in his honor in Kiev. The boy starved to death the following year.

 

As I have said many times in these articles, when observation comes into conflict with theory, theory must give weigh. History in unambiguous about the fact that socialism creates a state of total war between people. We are pitted against each other in a race for political favor, else we run the risk of starving to death, or worse. The brutish and short life in a state of nature makes us band together, to get our needs met, while capitalism rewards collaboration, hard work and equality, creating conditions conducive to brotherly love, and the inhumane nature of a socialist government rends us apart in a never ending race to get our needs met in an ever shrinking economy, under a system where the party is oligarchy, and everyone else is a slave. I count this as one of the most evil things about the diabolical system called socialism.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

The Gap Between the Rich and the Poor

Thursday, February 6th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the disparity between the rich and the poor is so misused and so misunderstood, it ceases to be a metric of the justness of the market system, and has become a mere tool for leftist propaganda. The term is never fully defined, is it the difference between the income of the highest earners and the lowest earners, is it the difference between the wealth of the richest and the poorest, or perhaps it is the difference between the both income and wealth of the prosperous and the pitiable? The parameters are never stated, only left to the imagination of the observer, and as such becomes a subjective measure and not an objective measure. This makes the term spurious in that it appears logical but is in fact false logic meant to deceive. Yet this sophist measure is touted as proving the unjustness of the market system, and by extension, the justness of the socialist system. If we are to improve our standard of living and not backslide, as we have done under Obama’s reign, we must throw away this specious measure for one that is objective and empirical.

 

It is all the rage today in the unbiased press to claim the disparity between the rich and the poor is at an all time high. We are scolded by the rich media elite that we must do something about this disparity else we are immoral and self indulgent people. The media elite however never actually lower their own standard of living they only demand us to lower ours. Using this false measure to goad us into accepting government actions, that we know will harm our economic interests, for the supposed interests of the “poor.” As we are shamed into lowering our standard of living the elite in the media, government and culture increase theirs. Are we to assume then that we are the culprit when it comes to the disparity?

 

President Obama is constantly using this specious claim, along with the spurious admonition that all of us must give a little so that others can get a little. All the while Obama vacations on Nantucket island, the playground of the rich and powerful. He never vacations at a bowling ally, Detroit or Seven Flags. He spends all of his time with the rich, living the life of a king, at the expense of the taxpayer… you know, us… the ones who have to give up a little so that others can have a little more. Apparently we must give so the king can have more. How does this help the poor though? His spurious rhetoric makes Obama’s admonition that we “share” the sacrifice, hypocrisy at best.

 

Socialism is always touted as the means to close the gap between the rich and the poor, but when we examine the results of socialism, honestly and fairly we find the direct opposite is true. Take the most socialistic nations, Cuba and North Korea, there are many more but these two will suffice. In Cuba the socialist haven in the Caribbean, Forbes Magazine has deemed Fidel Castro one of the richest men on the planet.. A label he vehemently denied but is empirically true. He owns not only everything on the island of Cuba but everyone as well. If he arbitrarily orders someone to do a thing, they must do it else face jail, or worse. He decides what everyone gets, he decides every aspect of the county’s economy. This all makes Fidel Castro richer than rich, it makes him the slave master of Cuba.

 

In North Korea people must do and think exactly as the tyrant says, even crying at the death of the last tyrant, if the tears are not sufficient or realistic, they get punished for three generations in forced labor camps. People who have escaped those human atrocity factories, have given some of the most horrendous stories of human suffering, starvation and deprivations imaginable, where a child will sell out their mother to the hangman for a slice of stale dry bread! Meanwhile, the tyrant lives the life of a king. He has the best of everything while his people starve. Is it possible to have a greater disparity, by every measure, than between the master and the slave?

 

A better scale would be to compare the standard of living of the poorest in a society to the richest. If the poor are well fed, have multiple flat screen televisions, at least one car and the finest sneakers… as compared to another country where starvation is common, housing is filthy, leaky and subject to collapse, where it can be obtained, which of the two is more just? The wealthy will always have a high standard of living and the poor will always have a lower standard of living, that will never change, and is only exacerbated by socialism’s benefit to the politically favored versus the politically disfavored. When the actual disparity between the standard of living between the rich and poor is low however, the rich claim the environment and thus the carrying capacity of the planet is threatened. The truth is, it is not what they have that makes them happy, it is what we don’t have that they have. To that end, they use spurious arguments like the gap between the rich, (themselves) and the poor, (us) to further their selfish ends.

 

When we use the standard of living of the wealthy versus the poor we are using a metric that can be measured empirically, is objective and not subjective and is far more indicative of the real justness of an economic system. Moreover, if we add the rate of rise of the standard of living in a given system, we have a much more accurate measure. This is not done because if it were the market system would always win out hands down. Since the New Class sets the parameters of any debate on the justness of a given economic system, and they are the ones with political favor and power, they always seek to give us false choices, hanging us on the horns of a dilemma, so we are gored no matter what we choose, resulting in a system that further empowers them.

 

Since socialism in all it’s pernicious incarnations is simply distributive justice by political favor, and since the New Class has both political favor and political power, they benefit most when society is socialist. Therefore they want socialism despite the very real damage to the lives and welfare of the people. To this end, it is in the egoists self interests to use spurious claims of economic justice, to goad us into allowing government actions that do real harm to our economic, cultural and social interests. Spurious claims are by their nature difficult to counter and so they become memes in our society. It is up to us then, as self interested human beings, to do everything in our power to point them out as well as the sophist nature of them, else we fall into the rabbit hole of absurdity in the name of justice.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

The Ukrainian Riots

Monday, January 27th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the people of the Ukraine are ripping mad, and they have every right to be. They have been deceived and stabbed in the back over and over. The riots that have been going on now for weeks in Kiev are the manifestation of that anger. Now cities around Ukraine are joining the protests. Like in the United States and the World over, politicians in the Ukraine believe they can run on a platform, then rule in direct opposition to that platform without consequence. In the US politicians get away with it, with the help of the unbiased media, but in Ukraine their feet are being held to the fire. A real fire as it turns out. The Ukrainian government has offered several concessions to the protesters but they are too little too late. Perhaps the riots won’t end, until either the government stomps them down like the Chinese communists did in Tienanmen Square, or the government falls, but there is a way to solve the problem in both the Ukraine and the World over.

 

People have a great ability to forgive. We understand that others are flawed human beings as are we. Upon a continued assault however, no person no matter their demeanor, will remain calm forever. Politicians in both the Ukraine and the US run as conservatives and libertarians but rule as tyrants and socialists. This enrages the people who voted for those corrupt politicians based, as it always turns out, on lies. No one can stand ceaseless irritations without eventually becoming irritated and that is where the Ukrainian people are. How long will it take for the American people to wake from our slumber?

 

One of the concessions offered by the Ukrainian president is the amending of their Constitution. What the unbiased media fail to report, or even understand, is that if a President can unilaterally amend the Constitution… there is no Constitution. The Protesters understand this basic fact of Constitutional rule, but the elite in the media and government don’t, (or don’t want to). A Constitution is supposed to be a document that limits the power of the elite over the people. If the elite can change it willy nilly, it does not limit their power, but give their reign a faux legitimacy. If the protesters allow the Constitution to be changed by the political elite, it will be changed back again the moment the exigency of the riots are over, giving the government unlimited power again.

 

History has not been kind the the people of the Ukraine. They have suffered under the Mongol hordes, they have faced wave after wave of Muslim invasions, they have suffered under the Tzar’s tyranny and oppression and have endured under Stalin and his artificial famine. The unfortunate people of the Ukraine have no history of freedom and liberty to fall back on. They have only famine, oppression, war and slaughter to remember. Now they have an opportunity to forge a different path, one free from oppression, and they are seizing it. I pray to God they can pull it off, their lot has been so bad for so long, if anyone deserves peace and prosperity, it is the people of the Ukraine.

 

Clearly what is needed in the Ukraine is laissez faire capitalism, a strongly limiting Constitution and a NUMA to enforce it. Otherwise the government will continue to run amok, progressing to socialism and tyranny, as they are in the US. Barring that, as soon as a new government comes into power, it will act the same as the old one. A NUMA would change the paradigm in Ukraine for the better by holding the political elite to the Constitution’s limits. This is something very few political leaders have been held to, since the dawn of time, anywhere. Power must be limited else it limits the people. We have seen this played out throughout time and the World over.

 

Only time will tell how the protests in Ukraine will turn out. The strong likely hood is that some new dictator will emerge, charismatic and ruthless. History is not on the side of the people. The normal state of humanity is under the thumb of a tyrant, it is the exception where and when a people escape from it and forge a new way. The US did for a while, but the current of politics always wears away the people’s resolve, eventually eroding the limits put on government by Constitutions. Only a Constitutionally empowered branch of government could ever hope to have the authority to contain the avarice of the political elite. Without a NUMA, Ukraine will fall back into oppression, as the US is progressing to.

 

Perhaps it is a pie in the sky dream that Ukrainians could have liberty but every man woman and child yearns to be free in his or her heart. Freedom has lifted millions of people from poverty while arbitrary rule has lowered billions to slavery. I am on the side of the protesters, I believe liberty is the only way to lift all boats, and liberty is the protester’s goal, but the protesters need to have a plan. To that end, a NUMA along with a strictly limiting Constitution, would do just that. Let’s pray it happens and that the political current doesn’t wash away the hopes and dreams of the Ukrainian people. God speed and God bless the Ukrainian people… and may God help us here in the US.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

We Have Become Inured to Hypocrisy

Thursday, January 9th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, folks who advocate the State has the power to dictate how others live, should be forced themselves, first, to live that way. Were this the case I think we might see a bit more leniency in the thinking of many presumptuous people. Imagine for a moment, a World without hypocrisy in it’s leaders. It is of course not ours, but an imaginary one, where the elite are held to their own laws, regulations and orders. Do you suppose the laws, regulations and orders would be, let’s say, better thought out? If the people making the rules were held to them, doesn’t it seem reasonable, those people would make as few as possible? Wouldn’t everything, society, the culture, and the economy, be better if the laws were minimized, better thought out and applied equally?

 

But we all know that land is fictional, the land we live in is the land of hypocrisy. The First Lady advocates the rest of us living as aesthetic a life as possible, walking to work, easing the thermostat, eating nothing but kale and green beans… while she lives and eats like a queen. Now, I couldn’t care less how she lives nor should I. How she lives is her business, not mine. She, however, has a totally different way of thinking. She would like nothing better than to order me how to live. If I do something she finds objectionable she would love to regulate it, but if she does something I am offended by, her attitude is that I should be forced to pay for it, to open my mind.

 

People who seek political power almost always seek control over others. Why else seek political power? The only other reason is to lessen the power of government over the people. Those that seek power over others cannot run on that. It would be absurd. Vote for me, try a session with my oppression… Those who seek power over others have to couch their rhetoric with platitudes and handouts. The whip doesn’t come out until they have total power, but how offended the tyrant would be, if he felt a lash!

 

One thing about people who seek power over others, their egos are so fragile, they demand others applaud everything they do. You see this in how politically correct our speech has become. How many words can you think of that you would never say in public in the next ten seconds? A dozen, or more, is my average. Those that seek power over others have changed our language, and since we think in that language, they have also changed our thinking. They have become the thought police, but is their thought policed, for the betterment of mankind too?

 

Some people do seek political power to lessen the reach of government however. They are the ones who the elite call heartless, bigots who hate the poor, minorities, the environment ETC… When a politician is called heartless, that is a sure sign he or she seeks to limit the scope, role and reach of government. Those that seek power over others, must delegitimize those that seek to lower the power of government, because if those that seek to lower the power of government are successful, the potential power over the lives of others, of those that seek power over the lives of others, will be reduced.

 

The blatant hypocrisy of those that seek power over others using ad homonym attacks against those that seek to lower the power of government, is lost on most people because we have become so used to it. Live in a sewer and the smell will be invisible to you after awhile. We have steeped in the hypocrisy of the elite for so long we have become immune to it. Yes occasionally someone will point it out but we are quickly told, there is nothing we can do about it, so we go back to ignoring the stench.

 

So when you hear someone claiming to want political office to help people you know they seek power over others. When you hear a politician called heartless you know that politician seeks to lower the power of government over others. Many other things can be seen, and smelled, once you open your eyes and nostrils. The way to do that is to clear your eyes and nose, by imagining a land where politicians are held to their own laws, regulations and orders…

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

What if Life Were a Game?

Thursday, January 2nd, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, it would be really cool, if people lived under a system in which we all competed to help our fellow man the most, top prize going to the guy or gal who succeeded by helping the most, the most. If the competition were dynamic it would be even better. In other words, the system wouldn’t pick just one winner, but millions of winners every moment every day everyplace. Winnings piled upon winnings. The incentive would clearly be for every man woman and child to help their fellow man and be a blessing on mankind. Cuz that’s how you win!

 

We could set it up as a game. People would go out and provide some service or good for their fellow human beings to consume, then bring back the amount of products or service given and each would get a weighted prize based on the volume. The person who moved the most would get the top prize unless that person used underhanded measures to achieve the numbers. Inflating the numbers entered for example.

 

Perhaps we could allow entrants to lever their sales and positions with sublets. A sublet could be another contestant who gives a portion of his or her handing out numbers. This would be in exchange for some material help. Allowing people’s needs and wants to be met even more efficiently. If within the game contestants could combine freely and as needed to meet the needs of society.

 

New products and services could be scaled differently and by a different standard. One that leverages the producer of a new good, service, or way of combining resources. Contestants who invented such things and made them available to the public, could get a special scale that measures people served instead of volume of services or goods. The creator of new stuff could get top prize many years.

 

The contest would be free to enter, but a contestant could use money he or she has, to enhance their ability to provide products or services, or perhaps invent new stuff. The ability to add in new money to the game would improve the efficiency of the process. It would allow way of creation to get abilities sooner than it otherwise would or could have. Obviously, making creation of a product cheaper by the introduction of better ways of creation, sooner rather than later, would make the game more dynamic.

 

Imagine how much good that game would be, not only for humanity that would directly benefit, but for the entrant, who would get benefit both through societal improvements and by personal enrichment for having taken part in the rejuvenation of society. In this way entrants to the game would get multiple benefits, a third possible benefit would be one of the top prizes, which would be far more likely than the lotto. The incentives in such a contest would be to improve the lot of Man, not lower the lot of Man.

 

But of course, this contest exists. It is called the market system, or meritocracy, the same system Marx derided as Capitalism. In a truly market system there is nearly universal prosperity, while in the most socialist countries there is universal poverty. The difference is as stark as it is irrefutable. In a market system, but not under crony capitalism, the creator of new stuff, or the entrepreneur, is well rewarded for significant advances. We freely combine or in other words self organize, to meet the needs of society, economic efficiency and to include those who otherwise couldn’t be included. No person needs to be rich to enter the market system, just willing to work. If he or she is so inclined they can use the resources they have put aside, to purchase the way of creating, or in other words, means of production.

 

The way to have a prosperous society where no one falls through the cracks, unless they want to fall through the cracks, and lets face it, who are we to presume to deny a human being the right to fall out of society, unless they are escaping moral, rational justice. The contest we are engaged in, the market system, is why we are so much more wealthy than those who labor under socialist systems. Ours, is a game to improve the lot of Man, while theirs, is a game to take the largest portion of a dwindling pie.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin