Posts Tagged ‘rational maximiser’

Persistence

Thursday, April 24th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, persistence in the face of adversity is a sign of inner strength, and the only way to succeed. We all meet challenges in our daily lives. It is the human condition. To get mad, depressed or angry when we are held back is normal, but to move ahead is uber human. To advance when the ground has been cleared for us is no sign of strength but one of weakness. We grow in adversity and stagnate in ease. This truism is one of the counter intuitive facts of human existence. The old saying, “only the strong survive.” is more true than we like to think. Knowing this is one of the keys to success in life.

 

Persistence is not giving up. Many times we are told this or that cannot work, that we are not qualified or competent enough, but these are fallacies told us by the prince of lies. Virtually every advancement in human history was poo pooed by the “learned” in society. If those great men and women who advanced the cause of science, philosophy, government and invention gave up, we would still be in the stone age. None of the advancements that have freed us to pursue our dreams could have happened. If we allow ourselves to be frustrated by the gate keepers we cede the future of humanity to them.

 

It is all too easy to give up when we experience a setback by life. We can easily loose hope and fall into self recriminations. This is the path to mediocrity and failure. Those who have succeeded in the face of great adversity have always been those who get back up and move on. The truth is, anyone can lay down, but only the powerful of heart move forward. It is up to us to choose to be powerful of heart or weak in spirit. I suggest we choose strength instead of weakness.

 

It is human to get mad, feel despair, or turn inward when our ideas, plans and ambitions are turned back by the gatekeepers, but those very human emotions can be turned to our advantage. We can feed from anger to push against the tide of ignorant people. Despair however chains us as does turning inward. We must temper our emotions with logic, but as Freud proposed, the poor ego is attacked at every turn by the super ego and the id. It has also been said differently, but the same, that our emotions are like an elephant, our rationality the driver. The driver has limited control and it is the elephant that has the real power. If we let the elephant control us we are lost but if we nudge the elephant into the right path we can use it’s power to do real work.

 

Every good in the World comes through other people from God. We can use this to our advantage by asking other people’s advice. We must stay in communication with each other to get the good that God bestows on us because it is his will that we do. Allow others to teach us, help us and sustain us, it not only helps us but them as well. People need to be needed and by our asking or leaning on them, we tell them in no uncertain terms that we need them. Others can be a font of strength that we sometimes need when we have been pushed down.

 

Unfortunately some people don’t want us to succeed because it makes them feel big to see us fail. They toss road blocks in our way and laugh that we are too dumb, too ignorant or too idealistic to pass. They revel in stomping on our dreams because theirs are so mundane. In a barrel of monkeys none can get out because if one tries the others will pull it back in. We cannot be monkeys we must be human hearted people.

 

If success is because the road has been paved for us it is not real success. Those who are given awards they do not deserve, positions they do not merit and accolades they have not earned, are weakened by them not strengthened. It is human nature to grow in wisdom when a thing is earned and to grow in hubris when it is not. Those who get ahead this way never really mature they simply get older. It is not in our best interest to get ahead by these methods but to push through adversity. I sometimes feel that it is the struggle that is the most important thing… not the success.

 

Our world needs us to stand up pushing through the road blocks that the elite have tossed in our paths. We will be strengthened by doing so, while those the elite have raised on their shoulders, will become children. Our society, culture and governments will become more humane and free by our efforts. To shrivel back would be to allow those children to keep ruining our World. Not only would we allow but we would actually participate in it’s destruction. So, I say to you, push, strive and persist! That is the only way we will be successful. In life as in saving our planet from those who would enslave us.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

God and the State

Monday, April 21st, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, government is intent on replacing God, and in doing so they demand equal supplication. This is not a new thing, the ancient empires all did it. The Egyptian Pharaohs were considered the sons of gods, as were many other kings. It was a means back then, when people were ignorant and superstitious, to legitimize arbitrary rule by kings over the people. Today the idea is essentially the same, the elite claim there is no God, and if there is no God, then all of our rights come from the State. If our rights come from the State then the State can revoke them as the politically elite see fit. This circular reasoning is elevated to an actual religion in the case of Communist States where we see mass murderers worshiped like Gods. Lenin and Mao come immediately to mind as does the North Korean demon Kim. The communist manifesto argued that religion is the opium of the people, and by that logic that pernicious religion seeks to replace God with the State. As we slide deeper into the morass of Statism, we will find ourselves in exactly the same position as the ancient peoples, subjects and slaves. If we allow it then we deserve it.

 

The US Constitution is based on a Judeo Christian definition of God. This cannot be denied unless one is ignorant of the words of the founding fathers or intentionally misleading the public. Moreover the Declaration of Independence clearly states that our Rights come from God. Which means that the founders of the American republic recognized God and that the State is a necessary evil to protect us and our property from those who would take them. They sought the most limited State possible that would have the power to protect us, our children and our things. The US founding documents are unambiguous about this.

 

That paradigm doesn’t suit the progressive and socialist faction. They seek to unshackle the US government, and indeed all governments, from any limitations whatsoever. They imagine all the good they could do if only they had unlimited power to redistribute the goods of society as they see fit. The State could eliminate all the ills of society and culture by deciding who wins and who looses in various human and economic interactions. They even have the hubris to seek to change our very nature, as in Marx’s Manifesto, he claims that once we live under communism we will loose touch with our individual selves and evolve into our species selves. All of this implies a strong worship of the State and the power of the State.

 

Of course all the “good” that could be done by government is dependent on eliminating the limitations that Constitutions and a belief in God place on them. Under a system where eternal punishment is taken as a given we are more placid knowing everything is in God’s very capable hands. But the socialist needs people to forget the eternal and dwell in the moment. This makes us jealous of our things, scared of each other, it forces us to be politically active all the time and lowers us to the level of mere animals. All of which works in the favor of those that seek to replace God with the State.

 

There are very few who have not witnessed a miracle. Perhaps it is the birth of a baby, the spontaneous remission of cancer or an astonishingly unlikely happenstance that benefited us in some way, but most of us have witnessed an act of God. Not to mention the miracles recorded in the Bible… like the resurrection of Jesus Christ. This makes the task of those that seek to replace God with the State much harder, and so they deny any of these things are miracles. Like a shyster they tell us to ignore our lying eyes and believe their honest pleas. Only a fool however will ignore his own eyes, experience and history to believe in a scam being perpetrated on them by a huckster. Unfortunately many do.

 

It is not reasonable to deny God exists in the face of the miraculous and worship the State given the history of human government. The State is administered by human beings, who are greedy, conniving and fearful, making the State these same things. Only a State administered by saints would be different. Those who consider themselves saints however, are in fact demons, and those who are saints, eschew power, making it impossible for a State to be anything but greedy, conniving and fearful. A self interested people rightly understood, understand these basic facts, but those who remain willfully ignorant do not. A rational maximizer will weigh the cost of turning from God to the State and find the wager absurd, while a fool will not only go along, but will attack the rational maximizer as mean and old fashioned. The results of turning away from God and to the State are there for all of us to see, they are arbitrary rule, if only we open our eyes and look.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

The Honor System

Sunday, March 30th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the political elite only pledge to follow our various Constitutions, but are not forced to. This is nothing more than an honor system. To place such responsibility in the hands of so few without any real oversight, is not only dangerous, but it is unfair to them. The lessons of history are unanimous about this. Every nation, republic, democracy and empire has fallen due to corruption. Corruption stemming from both basic human nature, (self interest), and political favor. The fundamental problem in Ukraine that led to the loss of Crimea to Russia, was government corruption, the poor performance of the economy despite huge the energy reserves of Russia, is from government corruption, the present constitutional crisis in the US, is from government corruption… the list is endless. The point is, to change the paradigm to one that actually works in the interests of the people and the elite, is to force the political elite to follow the limits placed on them, in our Constitutions. Lacking that fundamental shift in governance, we can expect to see history repeat itself over and over again, resulting in war, unrest, famine and poverty.

 

Imagine a society where there are laws but everyone is on the honor system to follow them. The deaths simply from traffic accidents would be daunting. No one would be safe in their own home, unless they went to extreme measures to protect themselves, and people would have to. Our children wouldn’t be safe on the streets, far less safe than they are now! Moreover, the market system could not function under such a regime. Such a system would ring in epic poverty and famine. Everyone reading this article knows and understands this fact, but people are so brainwashed by the elite that as soon as I bring up a constitutionally empowered police of government, people have a visceral reaction against the idea.

 

The spurious arguments flow like a torrent. Some include… “it would be too expensive.” So, it isn’t too expensive to intrusively monitor three hundred million people to the nth degree, but it is too expensive to monitor a few thousand? “More bureaucracy is not the solution,” this ignores the fact that bureaucrats regulate every aspect of our lives, and grows like a kudzu vine strangling our economy and freedoms, but if government were held to Constitutional limits, the existing unconstitutional bureaucracy would have to be scaled back. “They would just get corrupt themselves.” This is the most pernicious argument for allowing the elite to continue in the honor system, crushing our liberty under the jack boot of government corruption. To believe that a Fourth Branch would necessarily become corrupt, one has to believe the local police, the State police and every other law enforcement agency is also utterly corrupt. If someone believes that, they must necessarily believe those agencies should be disbanded, putting the whole of society on the honor system.

 

Human nature is self interest. The market system twists our self interested nature into being rational maximizers, (civilized people). The difference is that a rational maximizer understands that his or her self interest is tied up in everyone else’s self interest. Our basic nature, (barbaric nature), is to follow our immediate self interest regardless of the consequences to society and others. The market system and American ideals have taught humanity the truth of Socrates argument in The Republic. That lesson is lost on those with political favor, because their self interest can be met outside of the market system simply by perverting it into it’s evil twin, crony capitalism. This is furthered by the corruptible elite who are also prevented from being rational maximizers by the lack of any real oversight.

 

There is not a nation on the face of our planet that would not benefit from policing the political elite. Even socialism would work better if it had a Fourth branch policing the actions of the political elite. Since the beginning of time people have sought ways to limit the political elite’s propensity to pervert government to their own self interests. Constitutionalism is a relatively new phenomenon. It has had limited utility because the political elite are still on the honor system. Once the political elite cannot use their offices for personal gain, without facing the imminent fear of prosecution and jail, government will shrink back to it’s Constitutional limits, the people will be prosperous and crime will dwindle. A Fourth Branch is a win win for society, culture and even government itself. The real winners however will be us, the people, stable government is a boon for everyone.

 

You can read more about it in my book, The Fourth Branch here; https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/277193

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

The Herbalife Chronicles

Thursday, March 20th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the news story about Bill Ackman shorting Herbalife stock, then going to the purchasable Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey, and getting him to gin up an investigation into Herbalife’s business practices, is a perfect example of how government undermines job creation and economic expansion. The crooked Senator who facilitated the ill gotten gains, Ed Markey, got a huge donation to the Democrat senatorial reelection campaign fund, and I am sure other undisclosed benefits and perks as well. That government can be so easily used by sordid businessmen is a testament to the corruptibility of the ruling class. This can be a teachable moment if the lesson is well illustrated to the public. If this kind of corrupt practice is dismissed, the damage to our economy, prosperity and posterity will be magnified by our discounting it.

 

The power of regulation gives government, and thereby those in it, the power to effect firms for the better, if they have political favor, and negatively if they don’t. Politicians and bureaucrats are human beings. As human beings they are self interested. When a person’s self interest is benefited by an action, especially when there is little or no oversight, as is the case with government officials, it is human nature to use the power invested in them to benefit themselves. In this politicians and bureaucrats are no different than you or I. We all have that monkey on our backs. For the rest of us, the police, laws and the likelihood of severe punishment is a strong disincentive, a disincentive that doesn’t exist for the political elite.

 

This is largely why the political elite so love regulation. Regulation allows them to benefit their cronies and punish their detractors. If a person is in a position to help a senator get reelected they have that senator’s favor. Regulation is one of the means the political elite can benefit their patrons. All a politician needs to do, is pass a regulation that protects their patron’s business from competition, gives them an unfair advantage in a transaction or subsidizes them directly. Regulation gives the politician a way to benefit their backers tit for tat.

 

Herbalife, their employees and their shareholders, are the direct victims of Bill Ackman’s scheme while the rest of us are dupes as well. This affair bears witness to the unseen victims of political corruption. Shareholders are mostly retirees, pension funds, savings and people’s IRA’s. Those of us with IRAs pensions and/or savings, are stolen from. Money we had to work hard for, is taken directly from our accounts, and given to the connivers who manipulate the system. Clearly, the incentive is to manipulate the system, instead of working hard, with all the negative consequences to society, our economy and good government that come with it.

 

Employees loose their jobs, have to take pay cuts and at the least, their lives are made more stressful. Those of us who participate in the market system by the sweat of our brow are just as victimized by this corruption as stockholders. Our jobs are destroyed, so that corrupt millionaires can get richer at the cost to workers, investors and retirees, our economy is damaged, economic growth is slowed, jobs are lost, people’s lives are disrupted… and corruption is rewarded. The answer is to severely punish those in government just as you or I would be if we damaged society by stealing.

 

The results of political corruption are far worse than stealing a ten dollar bill from a liqueur store, while the consequences for the criminal politician, are nonexistent. As I have offered before, a Fourth Branch or in other words, a constitutionally empowered police of government, would investigate and prosecute political corruption, just as local police and district attorneys investigate and prosecute infringements of the law by you and I. The ability of our lawmakers to participate in this type of damaging behavior used to be limited in our Constitution, as it was originally written, but politicians who are not held to any standard at all have corroded those limits, through years and years of political corruption. Until we can force our political leaders to follow the Constitution, by whatever means, we must react loudly and angrily, else our economic prospects will continue to be eroded… as effectively as the Constitutional limitations on government have been.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

The Retirement Paradigm

Monday, February 17th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the human body is not designed, nor is it suitable, for decades of physical toil, that is why people retire in their 50s and 60s. The system where we put aside some of our earnings for retirement is elegant, because it sets up a paradigm where people provide labor to the market system when we are young, and capital when we are too old to work. Those who claim, people will have to work until we are 70 or 80, have no concept of the physical toll of labor, because the have never physically toiled at a job. The system, where we provide labor when we are able and then capital once we have accumulated it, works well with the human body and it’s basic limitations as well as it’s abilities. Once we have moved from providing labor to providing capital, we can pursue new things, like starting a business, personal enrichment or helping with the grand kids. This is just another of the myriad of ways the market system benefits humanity and human beings.

 

The market system requires two basic inputs to function, labor and capital. When Marx derisively labeled the market system, capitalism, he was pointing to one of the fundamental requirements of the market. Marx considered labor to be the most important input, and that the introduction of capital into the equation rendered all human interaction, including that of the laborer and the manager, into a crass means of exploitation, the cash nexus as he called it. This is why he claimed, when we labor within the market, our work is alienating. What he failed to understand, is that the improvement in the human condition that the market system brought, and brings about, is based on capital funding the new ideas that create the improvement.

 

The market system allows the efficient transmission of ideas into production, while every other system, including and especially Marxism, discourages it. This transmission of new ideas requires capital, to purchase the means of production, and labor, to provide the production itself. As new ideas are incorporated into the existing system, old less efficient ones are rendered obsolete. This creates a basic instability to any nation that uses the market system, but that instability comes with a wage… an ever increasing standard of living for everyone.

 

When we are young we are able to labor without damage to our bodies. That is the nature of youth. But as we age, labor becomes more and more dangerous, even as our knowledge of our labor becomes greater. In the most efficient economies, as we become less able to labor and our knowledge about our labor becomes ever greater, we are promoted into management to take advantage of that practical knowledge. This has been undermined by the rise of the New Class, who go directly from school to management bypassing the labor phase. Thus crowding out those with practical knowledge. This means they enter management with very little practical knowledge but a large amount of theoretical knowledge and thus, hubris born of ignorance. Since this paradigm has become entrenched, the market system, which is ever evolving to meet the needs of humanity, has evolved to allow people to retire at earlier ages, even as our life spans get longer.

 

But our physical limitations remain. This is born out when we see ever more people getting hurt in their labor. The rise of physical therapists is the market system’s reaction to people laboring at older ages. Our bodies only have a few decades of physical labor in them, and then we must move from providing our needs from labor to either management, or by providing capital. Since the market system needs two inputs, labor and capital, both have value and either can be a means of support for people. Those who have labored for decades, and have set aside money for retirement, or where they have taken less in immediate wages in exchange for a defined pension, are able to retire from a labor based sustenance to a capital based one. Those who have been spendthrifts however undermine their own best interests.

 

Since capital is a basic input into the market it has value and in a functional market is paid commensurately with that value. This is upended when government policies lower the demand for labor, and thus wages, by importing cheap low skilled labor by immigration, making it harder to run a business through regulation, taxing labor, etc… or where national banks change the value equation of capital, through inflation or low returns on equity, caused by market warping policies, like money printing and nationalizing debt. When governments or central banks do this, they make it harder for those who have saved for retirement, to move from providing labor to providing capital. Other ways this paradigm is undermined, is when government’s seize the retirement funds of the people, (like in Argentina or Cyprus), or where the New Class manage companies so there is little return to shareholders, but huge wages paid to upper management. These economy damaging practices create the conditions, where people will have to labor far longer than is optimal for our bodies, and gives the incentive not to save but to spend.

 

Today we have people in the intelligentsia, (The New Class), who claim our children will have to work until they are ready to die. This is less of a burden for the new class, because they don’t labor, they manage. The human condition is such that, it is in everyone’s best interest to have a system where we labor when it is most efficient and least dangerous, and where we move to providing capital instead of labor, when our bodies become less efficient and more prone to damage. This has the added benefit of freeing up those who are retired to expand their minds, and perhaps provide some of the ideas, ideas that are fundamental to the market system’s growth. The practical knowledge and skills we build up throughout our working careers is excellent fodder for new ideas and new business possibilities. Rejuvenating the market with new ideas that become available, because people can switch from providing labor to providing capital, frees us up to pursue new ideas to the market, creating a rising standard of living. Unless the system is warped by our own leaders that is…

 

 

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

Should We Civilize Our Children or Make Them Into Barbarians?

Monday, January 6th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, to have a civilized society we must civilize our children. Those who raise barbarians have barbarism as the wage. This should be pretty obvious, but most of philosophy, if you think about it, is merely pointing out the obvious. To that end, raising civilized children and not barbarians, we as a society, culture and religions, must strive for. Those that seek to undermine the education and civilization of the youth act to bring about the end of our civilization. How can they be thought of any other way? Those that would prefer children be raised as barbarians must seek a barbarous society, if they seek a barbarous society then they seek, by definition, the downfall of ours. Those of us that seek a civilized society where difference is tolerated, and not only by one side, where people are polite, in as close to universal prosperity there can be, and where our churches, Temples, Synagogues, Mosques, and cemeteries are safe from fire and vandalism, not because of laws that force, but because we are civilized. We must point out the truth, call a barbarian what he or she is.

 

By civilized, I don’t mean bricks turned out from government monopoly schools, I mean stones as turned out by rivers and streams. There is an old saying, proverb or whatever, it goes; A teacher stands at the foot of a large tree, at the base are, a parrot, ape, elephant, porpoise, snake and fish. The teacher says, “The first to the top will get the best grade, then next will get the next lower grade. You will all be graded by this scale.” Clearly this scale is insufficient to capture the diversity of abilities in that group, nor scale them as individuals either within their own area of talent, but even as their talent compares to the others. This is the fundamental failure of nationalized systems of education. They make the teacher stand at the base of a large tree…

 

Think of what a barbarian is, a loutish person who has little self control, seeks primarily hedonistic pleasures, and is prone to violence. Isn’t that pretty much what you picture in your mind’s eye when you imagine a barbarian? Now look at what our schools teach our children, that God is fiction, the strong should take from the weak, it is better to appear good while being bad than to just be good, that honest gain is bad while dishonest gain is good… the list goes on and on. Not one of these lessons lead to civilized people, they must lead to hedonistic people, immoral, lacking utterly in self control, with a total ignorance of the social graces, such as courtesy, in short, people who are egoistic and therefore prone to violence…

 

To civilize a child is to teach them not only how to read, do math, understand science, know history, and write, but why they need to know these things. Grammar should be called philosophy and the reason for this explained to children. There is a whole arm of philosophy that deals in the failure of language to be a perfect deliverer of philosophical ideas. Kung Sung Lung for example. Once early philosophy (grammar) is done, then philosophy should talk about the ideas of the moral philosophers like, Plato, Socrates, Confucius, Buddha, Hsun Ching, Jesus, Abraham and Moses. The stories children should read need to have the theme of overcoming diversity, while striving to be good, like the ones written by Horatio Alger. Much can be taught by games, war games like, Russian Campaign, Panzergruppe Guderian, France 1940, Desert Fox, Saipan, ETC… teach basic math, geography, and history long with strategic thinking and an appreciation for the reality of war, where the numbers of men each unit represents is stressed. This is how I would set up an education system.

 

These innovations can only be done in small experimental schools, the good ones will be rewarded by the market and the bad ones will be punished by the same market. A market set up by the voucher system. Making the voucher system the means to civilizing children, since it is the only way educationally diverse opportunities would be available to children, who would potentially shine in them. To educate a child is to knock off the rough edges, but keep the eccentricities, to teach a child is to cut everything that doesn’t benefit the State off a child, fabricating them into equal rectangles, eliminating all political eccentricities. The first is strong inside but oddly shaped, the second weak inside but regular outside.

 

Our government is making more and more of our children into little barbarians, and when they act as government taught them, barbarous, government points to them as reason to limit all of our Rights. It is almost like those in our government want crime, poverty and strife, to justify the enhancement of their power over us, as shown by their actions IE, turning out barbarians from the government factory schools, instead of allowing us to civilize them. Be it for the sake of the Teacher’s union, political expediency or simply egoistic self interest, these are the actions of people who seek the downfall of civilization, with all that implies. We are the ones who must take action, demanding the voucher system be fully implemented everywhere in the US, with no religious exclusions. Pry our children from the trap of government factory schools, where they are being turned into mindless barbarians, and get them into schools where they can be civilized. The elite in government, media and culture are against us, but God is with us. With the scale tipped so far in our favor how can we but win?

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

The Commodification of Human Suffering

Thursday, December 5th, 2013

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, human suffering has become a commodity, to be traded and exploited for political power. If someone’s suffering can be misused to that end, it is displayed in neon lights, but if it serves no political purpose, or works against the elite’s design, it is ignored. In this truly diabolical scheme, the media are the major players, acting at the behest of the political elite. Both of which are members of the “New Class.” Our innate repulsion at suffering is being played upon, to steer us into a course that is profoundly against our own interests, but in the presumed interests of the elite… or in other words, the New Class.

 

We have an innate revulsion to suffering be it human or animal. It is a human thing, that when we see someone in pain we are made uncomfortable, (except for the sadist). When something makes us uncomfortable we try to make it go away. In the case of human suffering we turn our eyes from it or we do something about it. The political elite know and understand this vulnerability of human nature and use it to manipulate us as best they can. It is up to us then, to be rational in our assessment of what we are shown, judging what is real and what is being used for political purposes and act accordingly.

 

The commodification of suffering is why we are reminded of certain misery constantly, often fictitious ills, like the tragedy of a lack of unlimited access to birth control paid for by someone else, but true human suffering, like the deprivations of Mao, are ignored. The “war on women” is an example of fictitious human suffering, while the genocide against Christianity, that is happening around the World right now, is ignored. The first serves the new class’ objectives while the second undermines it. The fact of illegal immigration is abraded like a perpetual cold sore, so the elite can lower our wages and water down our vote, while the evil of abortion and the suffering it causes, is not only ignored but anyone who points it out is vilified. Our compassion for the uninsured was the tool the elite used to jamb Obama care down our throats. These are only a very few examples of human suffering that the new class uses to promote a political agenda, and that which they keep us ignorant of.

 

Yet the political elite constantly use the suffering of others, to guide us to making decisions that are not only against our interests, but will actually create more suffering of the type they propose to stop! The war on poverty, was ostensibly a means to eliminate poverty, but the results are the opposite. Despite spending trillions of other people’s money the war on poverty has created more poverty than has ever existed in the US before. This misguided program, where the State took the place of the father in the familial relationship, has led to an explosion of out of wedlock births. Out of wedlock births are the biggest source of poverty there is! This malicious program has made millions of people incapable of engaging in the market system, and thus escaping their poverty, locking generations into a cycle of dependency and want. Yet our society was guided to making this terrible decision by the elite playing on our compassion for the impoverished.

 

It seems reasonable that those in the new class, who have had the benefit of the very best education, should have known the logical outcome of disrupting the nuclear family. Otherwise they are stupid and shouldn’t be allowed in charge of a MacDonalds. If they did know, and used our compassion as a tool to get us not only to damage our own interests, but to damage the interests of the very people they purported to help, then it is clear evidence they have malevolence in their hearts. If we look into this one example further, we can see that the only people to really benefit from the war on poverty, are the elite and their minions…. the bureaucracy.

 

To exploit human suffering as a political tool is evil. Human suffering is not a tool like a hammer or wedge, it is a wrong that good people should try to stop. Those that exploit the pain of others to forward an agenda are psychopathic. To do so requires a certain level of malevolence and enjoyment of that suffering. Moreover, to purposefully ignore true human suffering because it is damaging to a political agenda, is sociopathic. To lack a conscience. I think we can all agree that sociopaths and psychopaths should be barred from holding any power over the lives of other human beings at all.

 

I am sure you can easily think of many other examples, where human suffering has been exploited for political advantage, and where human suffering that works against an agenda has been ignored. The pain of another human being is never a tool and to make it such is diabolical. To make suffering a commodity, like oil, gold or lumber, is the very definition of evil. Those that exploit human suffering for their own narrow objectives, should be thrown out of office and barred from holding any power over our lives ever again, and in a sane World… they would be.

 

 

Sincerely

 

John Pepin

 

The Deflation Bugbear

Sunday, November 10th, 2013

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, when economists worry about deflation it is like a doctor worrying about a runny nose, they both are concentrating on a symptom, not the underlying disease. The consensus among economists is that deflation is so bad a little inflation is needed to insure no deflation occurs. The possibility of deflation is why most economists agree we cannot go back to the gold standard, and why all the proven dangers of fiat money must be tolerated, else we would get the dreaded deflation. But, as we all know putting leaches on a patient because he has high blood pressure is not a viable solution, persistent inflation is as bad and probably worse than a little deflation. The safety of your IRA account and job security depend on this question.

 

The economy of a country is like the body of a person. The corpus economic is a complex system that reacts to stimulus as is the human body. If we give a person lead oxide, (as they did in the Roman times) it may have a temporary palliative effect but the long term effects will be profoundly negative. The state of modern economics is about where the Romans were in medicine. Our very limited knowledge gives our economists the hubris to prescribe lead oxide when penicillin is what the patient needs.

 

The argument against deflation is this; if a person knows his money will be more valuable in the future, a rational maximizer will not spend money and instead save it. Using the aggregate supply aggregate demand model as described by John Maynard Keynes, this incentive to save instead of spend, lowers aggregate demand below aggregate supply and this results in economic recession. This logic depends on the aggregate supply, aggregate demand model being an effective analog of how an economy works, it also presumes the incentives will outweigh the needs of individuals.

 

So, what he is saying is that we wont spend our money, if we know it will be more valuable later. Let’s look into this presumption. If I have a dollar in my pocket, and I know that next year it will be worth one dollar and one cent, is that sufficient incentive against my rumbling stomach? Further, if my washing machine breaks down today, is it logical that for the gain of a penny or two in a year, I will put off buying a new one, and instead wash my clothes in a creek with a washboard? Moreover, if we take the opportunity cost into consideration, in other words the good I could have today weighed against the good I could have tomorrow, it only makes sense to buy the things I need today.

 

Deflation does provide a greater incentive to save just as inflation does a disincentive to save. If we consider the effects of a greater savings rate in a country, say, the US, we can see a lot of good that can come of it. The balance of trade is effected by the savings rate in a country. Balance of trade is both in goods and money. If the demand for money, capital, exceeds the savings rate money will flow into that country. This importation of money is counted in the balance of trade. If the savings rate exceeds the demand for capital then money will flow out, again effecting the balance of trade, but for the good.

 

Another effect of a greater savings rate is that more capital would be available for entrepreneurs to invest in ideas, small businessmen to invest in equipment or start businesses and more money available to build homes, cars and washing machines. A greater availability of capital means lower capital costs. But this doesn’t come at cost to savers because the money they have put away is growing both by compounded interest and deflation. There is no need for government to use lead oxide to gin up the savings rate against the disincentives inflation creates.

 

Economists will scoff at he idea pointing to the Great Depression as historic proof that deflation is a bad thing. In doing so they will confuse the fact that deflation was a symptom not the cause. The cause was government’s tampering in the economy. Price controls, regulations about what farmers could plant, how much any given product could be made, what could be made and making it nearly impossible to start a business. The result was the lowering of the demand for labor, this caused high unemployment and lower wages, lowering demand below aggregate supply. The government poisoned the patient and economists blamed the symptoms not the cause.

 

Some of the times where growth was highest was in times of deflation. During the 1800′s there were times where the Dollar was deflating… but the economy was growing. This further undermines the historical argument that the consensus of economists use. Economists use this spurious argument against deflation while ignoring the pernicious effects of inflation, negative incentive to save, negative balance of trade that the low saving rate creates, perpetual lowering of wages through the devaluing of the wages that are paid, allowing government to run up huge deficits, all the negative effects of fiat currency… among many others.

 

Inflation is simply a modern form of seigniorage. Seigniorage is where kings would collect all the money, shave a bit from them all and reissue the coins a little smaller. Inflation allows Governments to rack up huge deficits and have confidence that those deficits will evaporate due to inflation. History shows us that where deficits were too big and money printing got out of control the effect has always been runaway inflation, or in other words, hyper inflation. This is far more destructive of the wealth of a nation than anything proposed by economists about deflation.

 

So, when you hear that government must do this or that, to defend against deflation, (like monetizing the debt), you will know they are engaging in group think. Today economists are giving the corpus economic lead oxide and leaches when what the economy really needs is the penicillin of deregulation and the nutrition of lower taxes. This doesn’t serve the interests of the elite however, who want more control, not less. So we will continue to be bled, suffer heavy metal poisoning and all the while our leaders will claim it has to be done. To the destruction of the wealth of our nations… and by extension, us.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin