During my recent sabbatical, I found myself with the time to catch up on a good deal of reading, including the recently published collection of Ronald Reagan's personal diary entries from his years in the White House. At the opposite end of the scale I also caught up on some of the writings of Karl Marx that are not commonly distributed or read.
I say "opposite" because one cannot help but compare what the writings of these two men tell us about them as human beings and how it reflects on the belief systems each espoused. And the comparison tells us not only about these men, but about those who honor them and their beliefs.
This is actually an important point to recognize about people who believe in such diametrically opposed beliefs. It's the key to comprehending what the followers of such systems will do if they are placed in positions of power...and that is vitally important when we make decisions at election time.
Of course we should study each candidate for office in a professional capacity...what does their "resume" tell us about their experience, training, competence, and work ethic? But that is not the only criteria for making a hiring decision. Heaven knows Stalin was competent and worked hard, as did Hitler, and Mussolini.
We also seek some insight into the candidate's ethics, sense of honor, and attitude toward others. This is important because there will be many a time when we have to trust that elected official to do what is in our best interest, and not what is in their own. In fact we expect them to put their interests aside completely.
I read Ronald Reagan's diary with the intent to look into historical events of the time from an insider's viewpoint, and I discovered something I hadn't intended to find. I found an insight into the man himself and who he was, and why so many people who knew him loved him. It was because, above all else, and as his daily comments tell us, that he loved others more than anything including himself.
His greatest joy came from meeting people every day. He loved it when children came to the White House. He loved meeting the representatives of organizations for the handicapped or disabled. He would always write about them in glowing terms, stating that they were the "best of us...the bravest and most inspiring." He would hug strangers, cry with parents who had suffered loss, and was unapologetic and genuine in his feelings.
He often wrote about his love for Americans, their strength and generosity. He thought the world of everyone he met. He found something good to think and say about even his most caustic political enemies. He adored his wife and missed her terribly when she was gone. He admitted his greatest weakness was that he wore his heart on his sleeve, and had a difficult time thinking ill of anyone...no matter how many times they might attack him personally.
The man who was Karl Marx also comes out clearly in his more personal writing and articles. His book on economic theory is how most people know him, but he wrote prodigiously on other subjects and matters. What "intellectuals" tell us is that Marx was a "genius" and a pioneer in economic thought...and true believers follow his words like a southern baptist preacher follows the Bible.
When one actually reads Marx, particularly if they've read economists of the time, one realizes he was basically a plagiarist who created long and rambling diatribes which were considered "academic" in the 19th century. In fact, the more long-winded and the more repetitive a writer was at that time, the more "intellectual" they were judged to be.
But when one ignores the academic blather, and stops trying to keep it all straight, one can't help but note the most important aspect of his inner self. This comes out most clearly in his personal letters and articles. That aspect was a general hatred for all people not within his tight little group of cohorts. Marx was an overt racist and anti-Semite, a believer in euthanasia of the disabled and handicapped, and firm in his belief that the vast majority of mankind was made up of idiots who were expendable.
I couldn't help but notice that hatred of others, in general, was a hallmark of socialist and progressive groups whose meetings I attended when a young man and studying those organizations. What I didn't connect at the time as clearly as I do now, was the reason they were universally so.
It boils down to the original thought process of Marx himself and is the main reason why he is still not only remembered, but why his memory has driven so many violent political movements. Marx's "genius" was not in economic thinking; it was in appealing to the basest, most negative, of human emotions and feelings; mainly greed, laziness, jealousy, envy, hatred, and fear.
He not only appealed to those emotions, he rationalized them and gave them a key role in a political "system" where they were not only justified, they were praised as the highest example of "revolutionary thinking." In fact, what we would normally think of as vile became righteous. In addition, he enforced the natural desire of every person to see themselves as intellectually superior to the masses...and in accepting his belief structure, his bigotry and hatred, his bitterness...the believer became one of a select few who could be considered modern, progressive, and revolutionary in thought.
To this day, a century and a half after Marx, every Marxist believes the masses don't follow Marx...not because he was vile and hateful or because his system has been proven a failure every time its been forced on a nation, but because the masses are intellectually inferior to the true believer. Most I know are careful never to read about opposing ideas, or engage in rational debate, because they have convinced themselves they are far above such wasteful efforts to convert the idiots who don't revel in the truth of socialist dogma. In reality, any debate or discussion immediately lays bare the self-perceived superiority they so very need to believe in.
So what is my personal response to these two men's writings? Reading the words of Ronald Reagan, I have to admit, inspires me to become a better man...a better husband and father...and to show more respect and compassion than I have for those less fortunate than I. I read this man's innermost personal thoughts and know that I am lacking and not nearly the man he was...and I wish to be better.
I read Karl Marx and feel something entirely different. I sense the darkness of history, the genocides, the mass killings, the dictatorships, and I'm sickened by the horrors this small-minded and bitter-souled philosophy has wrought on the planet. I look at the men who followed his beliefs, I mentioned three at the beginning of this article, and recall the horror they have brought on the world and how that horror fit in with Marx's personal beliefs. I am not inspired...I am repulsed.
At one time Ronald Reagan sat in the highest office of the land, and carefully considered every decision taking first into account the dignity and value of every person in this nation. Today we have self-avowed Marxists working in the same building and advising the chief executive.
It seems beyond expectation, if an actual crisis arises, and not one manufactured to aid them to grow personal power and wealth, that these believers in Marxism will somehow transform themselves and rise to the occasion...and will show their countrymen...all of their countrymen...the respect and dignity openly displayed by President Reagan. After all...this current crew has stately openly they will "punish those who oppose us."
How will this end? How will America change as a result of this 180-degree turn in the way leaders feel about those who they serve? Only time will tell us...and hopefully the loving spirit of America, the spirit so openly expressed by Ronald Reagan, will win out and remain long after the hatred and bitterness that is Marxist dogma has ceased to exist.
Entitlement and Self-Destruction
The United States is one of the most unique cultures that has ever existed; unique in both the variety of sub-cultures that contribute to the whole, as well as the end result of that blending. Still, after all the hooplah about diversity and multi-culturalism, America has a base-line culture that is recognizable and speaks to the world.
As the wealthiest, most powerful, and most innovative nation on earth, our culture reflects not only the immense capabilities and responsibilities that rest on our people, but reflects as well the weaknesses inherent in a nation that grows to predominance.
Any such nation, and the US is certainly no exception, has a wide diversity of opinions and general sense of direction. It will always be imbued with certain trends. In the US we most notably see a general shifting from being a people of "obligation" to a people of "entitlement."
My parents generation, the WWII generation, were most definitely people of obligation. They felt, despite the desire to be isolationists and not meddle in world affairs, that there came a point when those privileged enough to be born into freedom should step up and be willing to sacrifice all to give other people's such an opportunity.
That generation grew up during the great depression. They grew up "hard scrabble"...in a society where little was given to them nor expected from others. Their parents struggled and sacrificed to a degree we don't now appreciate simply to keep their children from going hungry. They often went hungry themselves in order to spare their children such pain. Everything they did was to give the next generation the chance to rise up and create something better.
And they succeeded! Millions of their children, mainly teenagers, stepped up to the plate and many sacrificed all. They did so that their children, my generation, would have opportunities they didn't have. They created factories and foundries. They built homes and communities. They grew a nation capable of leading the people of the world to a better future.
We built on that foundation, and created an amazing new world; a world where people are interconnected instantly by hand-held devices never imagined by science fiction writers. A world where dictators and demagogues could be exposed by a child with a camera in a phone. A world where common products might be built of parts manufactured in thirty different factories in as many different countries.
But as each generation struggled to make the lives of the next generation easier and more rewarding, a sea-shift took place. It did so slowly, but surely, and human nature played the vital role in making it happen.
I recall hearing JFK's speech in which the famous line "ask not what your country can do for you" was spoken. He was fighting back at the growing sense of entitlement that was beginning to work its way into the culture of America. If he could see what was happening today he would be shocked and disgusted.
No sooner had he passed, when LBJ jumped with both feet into the world of promising "stuff" in return for votes. His "War on Poverty" was as badly planned as his war in Vietnam. He forced our military to fight a winnable conflict in an non-winnable way. He used a similarly flawed strategy in "eradicating poverty in our time."
Not only did LBJ's social programs fly in the face of JFK's ideals, they did so at full speed and with maximum effect. We were thrust, in a matter of years, into a cultural change that might have taken decades to evolve under normal circumstances.
I recall sitting in Econ classes where professors warned us how such government programs were tools to guarantee a large, dedicated, voting block of people who would be dependent on government for all of their needs...and who could be threatened to maintain politicians in office for life in order to guarantee their own survival.
Oddly enough, we seem to have a lot of folks in congress who obviously appeal to that voting block...and have been in office for four decades and more. Ever wonder why no one has been able to put forth a "term limits" law?
Our parents generated and enjoyed far greater wealth than their parents, and we did the same, as have our children. But suddenly the apple cart seems to be wobbling. I see dramatic differences in the young people I deal with. When I work with military personnel I recognize the fire-in-the-belly along with the sense that they stand on the shoulders of past generations and have a duty and obligation to their communities and nation.
But when I interview young people for the private workplace I am shocked to hear how many turn down desirable jobs because they won't get stock options, or three weeks vacation their first year, or the type of benefits they feel they "deserve." I am amazed at how many will "throw" interviews so they can remain unemployed and stay home playing video games. When they get bored with that, they join the "Occupy" movement.
I hear the self-indulgent and self-important scream about their needs, how society owes them "stuff," and how they have "a right" to other people's labor in the form of services. I see students at Ivy League schools moaning on national television because someone else won't pay all of their expenses, including the costs of entertainment and hobbies. I see people who sob in joy because they believe a politician will "pay their mortgage" or give them a new car...and they are serious in these beliefs.
I contrast these people with generations past and I am ashamed. I am ashamed because we have allowed such idiocy to become acceptable and because we have not had the courage to step up and denounce it. We vote incumbents back into office because "well...they're experienced" and it's just easier than to study the resumes of challengers. I am ashamed because the buck stops here...and unlike this ruined and worthless segment of the new generation, we should be willing to take responsibility for our actions, or lack thereof, and now step up to make things right...and so far we haven't done so.
I feel ashamed when the media attacks anyone who does step up...and we don't strike back and defend those brave souls. When someone in media challenges the idiocy, instead of being champions of provocative thought, we approve when their advertisers back away in fear. We literally endorse censorship when we do so.
I feel ashamed when we "go along" with pop culture because we don't want to offend anyone or be labeled an outsider, a denier, or a racist (I was called a racist for my stand against giving our tax money to a certain solar energy company that recently went broke).
So how do we fix this before it's too late? I'm not sure I know the answer, but we have to be honest, we have to speak out, and we have to use tough love on those we personally know who are trapped in the "culture of entitlement" that is destroying their lives as well as our culture and our future.
And if the going gets rough...we have to recall our parents and their parents and how tough the going can really be, and could be again, if we don't succeed.
As the wealthiest, most powerful, and most innovative nation on earth, our culture reflects not only the immense capabilities and responsibilities that rest on our people, but reflects as well the weaknesses inherent in a nation that grows to predominance.
Any such nation, and the US is certainly no exception, has a wide diversity of opinions and general sense of direction. It will always be imbued with certain trends. In the US we most notably see a general shifting from being a people of "obligation" to a people of "entitlement."
My parents generation, the WWII generation, were most definitely people of obligation. They felt, despite the desire to be isolationists and not meddle in world affairs, that there came a point when those privileged enough to be born into freedom should step up and be willing to sacrifice all to give other people's such an opportunity.
That generation grew up during the great depression. They grew up "hard scrabble"...in a society where little was given to them nor expected from others. Their parents struggled and sacrificed to a degree we don't now appreciate simply to keep their children from going hungry. They often went hungry themselves in order to spare their children such pain. Everything they did was to give the next generation the chance to rise up and create something better.
And they succeeded! Millions of their children, mainly teenagers, stepped up to the plate and many sacrificed all. They did so that their children, my generation, would have opportunities they didn't have. They created factories and foundries. They built homes and communities. They grew a nation capable of leading the people of the world to a better future.
We built on that foundation, and created an amazing new world; a world where people are interconnected instantly by hand-held devices never imagined by science fiction writers. A world where dictators and demagogues could be exposed by a child with a camera in a phone. A world where common products might be built of parts manufactured in thirty different factories in as many different countries.
But as each generation struggled to make the lives of the next generation easier and more rewarding, a sea-shift took place. It did so slowly, but surely, and human nature played the vital role in making it happen.
I recall hearing JFK's speech in which the famous line "ask not what your country can do for you" was spoken. He was fighting back at the growing sense of entitlement that was beginning to work its way into the culture of America. If he could see what was happening today he would be shocked and disgusted.
No sooner had he passed, when LBJ jumped with both feet into the world of promising "stuff" in return for votes. His "War on Poverty" was as badly planned as his war in Vietnam. He forced our military to fight a winnable conflict in an non-winnable way. He used a similarly flawed strategy in "eradicating poverty in our time."
Not only did LBJ's social programs fly in the face of JFK's ideals, they did so at full speed and with maximum effect. We were thrust, in a matter of years, into a cultural change that might have taken decades to evolve under normal circumstances.
I recall sitting in Econ classes where professors warned us how such government programs were tools to guarantee a large, dedicated, voting block of people who would be dependent on government for all of their needs...and who could be threatened to maintain politicians in office for life in order to guarantee their own survival.
Oddly enough, we seem to have a lot of folks in congress who obviously appeal to that voting block...and have been in office for four decades and more. Ever wonder why no one has been able to put forth a "term limits" law?
Our parents generated and enjoyed far greater wealth than their parents, and we did the same, as have our children. But suddenly the apple cart seems to be wobbling. I see dramatic differences in the young people I deal with. When I work with military personnel I recognize the fire-in-the-belly along with the sense that they stand on the shoulders of past generations and have a duty and obligation to their communities and nation.
But when I interview young people for the private workplace I am shocked to hear how many turn down desirable jobs because they won't get stock options, or three weeks vacation their first year, or the type of benefits they feel they "deserve." I am amazed at how many will "throw" interviews so they can remain unemployed and stay home playing video games. When they get bored with that, they join the "Occupy" movement.
I hear the self-indulgent and self-important scream about their needs, how society owes them "stuff," and how they have "a right" to other people's labor in the form of services. I see students at Ivy League schools moaning on national television because someone else won't pay all of their expenses, including the costs of entertainment and hobbies. I see people who sob in joy because they believe a politician will "pay their mortgage" or give them a new car...and they are serious in these beliefs.
I contrast these people with generations past and I am ashamed. I am ashamed because we have allowed such idiocy to become acceptable and because we have not had the courage to step up and denounce it. We vote incumbents back into office because "well...they're experienced" and it's just easier than to study the resumes of challengers. I am ashamed because the buck stops here...and unlike this ruined and worthless segment of the new generation, we should be willing to take responsibility for our actions, or lack thereof, and now step up to make things right...and so far we haven't done so.
I feel ashamed when the media attacks anyone who does step up...and we don't strike back and defend those brave souls. When someone in media challenges the idiocy, instead of being champions of provocative thought, we approve when their advertisers back away in fear. We literally endorse censorship when we do so.
I feel ashamed when we "go along" with pop culture because we don't want to offend anyone or be labeled an outsider, a denier, or a racist (I was called a racist for my stand against giving our tax money to a certain solar energy company that recently went broke).
So how do we fix this before it's too late? I'm not sure I know the answer, but we have to be honest, we have to speak out, and we have to use tough love on those we personally know who are trapped in the "culture of entitlement" that is destroying their lives as well as our culture and our future.
And if the going gets rough...we have to recall our parents and their parents and how tough the going can really be, and could be again, if we don't succeed.
Steps to a Better New Year
A new year has begun, bright and shiny and full of promise...if we make it so.
There is a lot to be learned from the past few years as we forge ahead. Let's review some of the most egregious economic errors of the recent past and what we might do as individuals to solve the problems that have arisen as a result.
Firstly: It's about time we start to demand responsibility from our elected officials...especially those who directly represent us in legislative branches of government. Our constitution set up the US Congress to be the most powerful entity in the land. Our Founders did this for a very good reason...congress was designed to be large and have many members therefore requiring a great deal of debate before creating laws and regulations. This was intended to make certain such laws would be limited in their impact and power, and balanced in their effect.
The Executive branch was meant to be the weakest of branches as that branch would be limited in size...normally the President and cabinet. The intent was to minimize the power of a small group of individuals, as throughout history the failure to restrict the power of a small cadre had always produced dictatorships.
Over the last few decades, and increasingly so in the last few years, our Congress has voluntarily handed over power, a bit at a time, to the Executive branch. In the last few years that branch has added literally thousands of new "laws" in the form of regulations mainly over the businesses which power our economy. In response the economy has been forced into reducing production and employment, all done by proxies of the Executive branch of government, most of whom are unelected, with no input from the people's representatives in the legislature.
It is past time for our congressional members to step up to their responsibilities and shut down this abuse of power. But we have to demand it or it won't be done. With House elections coming up, this issue should be a measuring stick for judging the candidates...will they shirk their duties, or step up to the plate and act as responsible adults?
Secondly: to move our economy forward we must demand truth and accountability from our elected, and unelected, officials. While hundreds of thousands of jobs are being lost each month, the federal government has been busy redefining what "jobs" are and the number of such jobs (how can jobs be "lost" if they don't exist...oddly they did exist a few years ago). This has enabled them to make vague claims of an "improving" economic picture so as to hide their incompetence. When the media talking heads tell us that losing 380,000 jobs is "good" because we might have lost 400,000 jobs...let them know we are not idiots and they shouldn't be a party to such pure nonsense. Then let your elected representatives know as well.
The above is simply one example of the communications we receive from a government trying to maintain and increase its power. Don't be afraid to openly repudiate such garbage and to demand the truth. Remember...they work for us...they are our employees.
Thirdly: we have to start thinking critically. We are inundated daily with nonsense and pure propaganda, and normally either ignore or absorb such messages without analysis. This "information" is designed to sway us in a direction that will benefit the messenger instead of society.
For example; probably the most important thing we can do at this time to put our economy on track and guarantee our future is to push for aggressive policies that will quickly increase the energy supply available to our economy...energy being the cornerstone of production and wealth creation. Uncapping sealed oil fields, building the proposed pipeline, and clearing the huge backlog of permits that the EPA has stalled for political reasons would be a start. In the past, simply threatening these actions has caused world oil prices to drop in half, or greater, and has been a huge boon to the US economy. So why has our government refused to even threaten such steps?
Our government officials are literally petrified by the environmental movement working hand-in-hand with leftist radicals and foreign oil companies. This weird lobbying and protesting block has become the most powerful political force in WA DC and they will not go down without a fight. Their tactics include creating phony environmental and economic think tanks and "research centers" which inundate us with constant propaganda.
A perfect example being a recent "finding" by an economic think tank, actually founded and paid for by a large Brazilian oil firm, "warning" US citizens that the currently proposed pipeline project would actually decrease US supply, therefore increasing the price of gas. Such strange violations of economic law is the bread and butter of foreign corporations using "front groups" to help support lobbying efforts against US business and consumer interests.
If our elected representatives learn we are aware of such shenanigans, and are willing to belittle and denounce such in public, they will begin to grow fearful of us...their employers...instead of radicals, protestors, and foreign monied interests.
But we need to make it happen. Get the email addresses of your state and federal law makers...send them polite, but firm, messages on these issues...and politely demand they work for us instead of special interests, lobbyists, and foreign corporations. If we, the people, don't control our futures...those with hidden agendas will...and it will not be a good thing for our children and generations to come.
There is a lot to be learned from the past few years as we forge ahead. Let's review some of the most egregious economic errors of the recent past and what we might do as individuals to solve the problems that have arisen as a result.
Firstly: It's about time we start to demand responsibility from our elected officials...especially those who directly represent us in legislative branches of government. Our constitution set up the US Congress to be the most powerful entity in the land. Our Founders did this for a very good reason...congress was designed to be large and have many members therefore requiring a great deal of debate before creating laws and regulations. This was intended to make certain such laws would be limited in their impact and power, and balanced in their effect.
The Executive branch was meant to be the weakest of branches as that branch would be limited in size...normally the President and cabinet. The intent was to minimize the power of a small group of individuals, as throughout history the failure to restrict the power of a small cadre had always produced dictatorships.
Over the last few decades, and increasingly so in the last few years, our Congress has voluntarily handed over power, a bit at a time, to the Executive branch. In the last few years that branch has added literally thousands of new "laws" in the form of regulations mainly over the businesses which power our economy. In response the economy has been forced into reducing production and employment, all done by proxies of the Executive branch of government, most of whom are unelected, with no input from the people's representatives in the legislature.
It is past time for our congressional members to step up to their responsibilities and shut down this abuse of power. But we have to demand it or it won't be done. With House elections coming up, this issue should be a measuring stick for judging the candidates...will they shirk their duties, or step up to the plate and act as responsible adults?
Secondly: to move our economy forward we must demand truth and accountability from our elected, and unelected, officials. While hundreds of thousands of jobs are being lost each month, the federal government has been busy redefining what "jobs" are and the number of such jobs (how can jobs be "lost" if they don't exist...oddly they did exist a few years ago). This has enabled them to make vague claims of an "improving" economic picture so as to hide their incompetence. When the media talking heads tell us that losing 380,000 jobs is "good" because we might have lost 400,000 jobs...let them know we are not idiots and they shouldn't be a party to such pure nonsense. Then let your elected representatives know as well.
The above is simply one example of the communications we receive from a government trying to maintain and increase its power. Don't be afraid to openly repudiate such garbage and to demand the truth. Remember...they work for us...they are our employees.
Thirdly: we have to start thinking critically. We are inundated daily with nonsense and pure propaganda, and normally either ignore or absorb such messages without analysis. This "information" is designed to sway us in a direction that will benefit the messenger instead of society.
For example; probably the most important thing we can do at this time to put our economy on track and guarantee our future is to push for aggressive policies that will quickly increase the energy supply available to our economy...energy being the cornerstone of production and wealth creation. Uncapping sealed oil fields, building the proposed pipeline, and clearing the huge backlog of permits that the EPA has stalled for political reasons would be a start. In the past, simply threatening these actions has caused world oil prices to drop in half, or greater, and has been a huge boon to the US economy. So why has our government refused to even threaten such steps?
Our government officials are literally petrified by the environmental movement working hand-in-hand with leftist radicals and foreign oil companies. This weird lobbying and protesting block has become the most powerful political force in WA DC and they will not go down without a fight. Their tactics include creating phony environmental and economic think tanks and "research centers" which inundate us with constant propaganda.
A perfect example being a recent "finding" by an economic think tank, actually founded and paid for by a large Brazilian oil firm, "warning" US citizens that the currently proposed pipeline project would actually decrease US supply, therefore increasing the price of gas. Such strange violations of economic law is the bread and butter of foreign corporations using "front groups" to help support lobbying efforts against US business and consumer interests.
If our elected representatives learn we are aware of such shenanigans, and are willing to belittle and denounce such in public, they will begin to grow fearful of us...their employers...instead of radicals, protestors, and foreign monied interests.
But we need to make it happen. Get the email addresses of your state and federal law makers...send them polite, but firm, messages on these issues...and politely demand they work for us instead of special interests, lobbyists, and foreign corporations. If we, the people, don't control our futures...those with hidden agendas will...and it will not be a good thing for our children and generations to come.
Global Warming...the movement explained
I recently attended a relaxed and informal meeting of learned and critical-thinking folks whom congregate now and again to discuss random subjects of interest. These gatherings are noted for their free-flowing nature, along with the disposal of a good volume of fine Bourbon which is conducive to that nature. The last meeting led the group to the topic of the Global Warming movement and why it exists.
To really understand the subject one has to get into some history...and we were fortunate to have a dabbler in "Paleo-Climatology" to help us. In this discipline, scientists have focused on the last BILLION years of the earth's history...that's a whole bunch of years. Evidence leads us to believe that climate cycles during this period lasted some 200 MILLION years each. During these climate swings, the planet would go from being a virtual ice-ball to being a semi-tropical paradise in which plants and animals thrived, and indeed evolved into giants.
The last period of tropical climate began to ebb some 70 MILLION years back during the Cenozoic period. The cooling trend that followed advanced in 3 major steps about 36 MILLION, 15 MILLION, and 3 MILLION years ago. That brings us to the last 1 MILLION years.
The vast majority of that time period found the planet locked securely in a series of small ice-ages, all subject to the overall 200 MILLION year cycle. Interestingly, global temperatures varied somewhat radically during this period. They went up...they went down...they went all around. Ice sheets receded, then advanced, then receded and advanced some more. The last major leap was about 11,600 years ago...a tiny drop in the bucket in time...and ended the worst of the last small ice-age abruptly. Planetary temperature went up better than 20 degrees F in about 50 years. It's an attribute to our egos as humans that we refer to that ice-age as the "great" ice-age...when in reality it was a minor blip within the 200 MILLION year cycle....but hey...our ancestors had to live through it so we think it significant.
The causes of all this jumping up and down in temperature are numerous and mainly theoretical. Scientists are pretty certain that plate tectonics play a major role in global climate, and as the continents have drifted, bumped, broken apart again, etc, these land masses affected not only planetary winds but ocean currents and "metamorphic degassing." In essence, there are hundreds of live volcanoes active at this time...all due to the fact that the earth's crust is flimsy and floating on the 99.9% of the plant which is still liquid rock. That thin, flaky, crust could break apart at any moment and everything on the surface would be vaporized...leaving no trace of our passing whatsoever.
Now you see why these conversations require Bourbon.
Other inputs include such juicy items of conversation as: weathering of silicates, organic carbon weathering, burial of organic carbons, and of course the cycles of solar output. Astrophysicists tend to put more emphasis on solar cycles and the earth's orbit; affected by cycles of precession, eccentricity, and obliquity. Geologists tend to emphasize plate tectonics.
Since that point some 11,600 years ago, the planet has gone through literally hundreds of mini-climate cycles. There was an overall cooling trend from about 1500 AD into the 1850's known as the "little ice age." Prior to that was a short warming trend with a high about 1000 AD. That time actually shows similar characteristics to our current climate. As a whole, scientists believe we will be emerging (hopefully) from a long cycle of ice-ages to a tropical state over the next 100 MILLION years. Obviously you shouldn't run right out and buy a new swim suit...a bit premature perhaps.
That brings us to the modern day and "the movement." Since the 1880's scientists have pondered planetary climate changes, and every decade or so one group or another has announced that the planet is either warming or cooling. The vagaries of weather, and regional climate cycles, have made it impossible to actually nail down where we are in any one particular mini-cycle...even with the technology available today.
Since the early part of the 20th Century however, climate change has become a political tool. An ironic note is that British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was the moving force behind the modern global warming movement. When she became PM one of her first moves was to create the Hadly Center for Climate Prediction in order to help create a "crisis" that would help her fight the National Union of Mineworkers as an opposing political powerhouse.
She had a number of related problems: the UK needed to have more nuclear plants in order to move forward with growing and modernizing nuclear forces. She also needed to break the union. Nuclear power was costing 4 times what coal power cost, so she needed something scary and emotional to support her push for nuclear power plants. She had the Hadly Center create a series of predictions showing climate warming, also claiming CO2 from human activity to be a major cause, and to issue a warning to start closing mines and building nuke plants.
Then the laws of unintended consequences stepped in. The potpourri of Marxist and Malthusian radicals throughout the world took note. If "global warming" could be used to fight unions and close coal mines, why couldn't it be used to bring down industry, business, and capitalism all together? No reason at all, of course.
Greenpeace jumped on board...commissioning a survey (1992) of 400 climatologists to prove that global warming was caused by industrial societies. Only 15 of the scientists even agreed there was global warming, so the study was swept aside. The movement seemed to be stuck in "park."
But governments began to make some calculations. If they could push for restrictions on US businesses, they could gain a competitive advantage in manufacturing and energy production. Thus was born an outburst of "protocols" and "treaties" meant publicly to control CO2 emissions while actually meant to handcuff the US and a handful of other industrial giants. A mass movement to fund academics who would "prove" global warming became a government tool to push the agenda. The movement took on a life of its own fueled by billions in grants. Universities made disagreement by academics punishable by firing. Government agencies sprang up to support the movement...and then to simply support their own funding.
Human beings, the psychologist in the group reminded us, have a strong penchant for controlling their lives through controlling their environment. Since the beginnings of the species, people have fallen for shamans and charlatans who promised to help them do so. Everything from throwing virgins into volcanoes (which he reminded us was a terrible waste of virgins...the Bourbon was kicking in by now) to selling us "carbon credits" could be pawned off on folks afraid of change. You just had to package the change as a "crisis."
As a result of such packaging, by numerous special interests and radical groups, the US has suspended a great number of industries and manufacturers. We have ended, or curtailed, most energy exploration and production, and spent billions upon billions of taxpayer dollars on wasteful studies and academic exercises. This orgy of "environmentalism" is largely traceable to an ongoing effort to crush the evils of modernity, take us back to the Malthusian dream of a pre-industrial society, "bring down" capitalism, and more recently to make a profit thru fear-mongering. The special interest groups pushing "Cap and Trade" and carbon credits are set up to make billions of dollars without actually doing or providing anything except paperwork...a scam of absolute brilliance.
I recounted to the group a speech given at a climate change conference. The speaker, a radical environmentalist, told the audience the best solution would be to reduce the world's population to 2 million "care takers" who would monitor and care for the planet. He received a standing ovation from half the folks in the hall...mainly college students.
These enthusiastic "idiots" obviously assumed they, and their families, would magically be among the 2 million superior humans who would be chosen to live while euthanizing the other 6 billion of us. I hated to tell them the 2 million survivors would be the best-armed, most psychotic and anti-social SOB's on the planet...and that neither they nor the speaker qualified. They also, quite obviously, weren't thinking about who would supply them with ipods and tennis shoes when productive folks were gone. It was a display of total, abject, stupidity.
So we have two histories to observe in accounting for the phenomenon known as the global warming movement; the geophysical history of the planet, and the political history of the movement and the associated movements that use it. Combined they give us a bottom line from which we can determine whether climate change is an issue we should concern ourselves with.
Things we now know:
1) The planet is constantly changing...will always change..and there is no "normal" condition.
2) Humans have a tendency to panic over matters of which they are completely ignorant...and then do foolish things like wasting virgins.
3) The planet could possibly warm, or cool, by a degree or two over the next hundred years. The average temperature at the south pole will remain about 70 degrees F below zero. Our great-great-great-great grandchildren will figure out how to deal with this "change" the same way we have dealt with it over the last 11,600 years.
4) If you want to lose sleep over something...worry about your job...worry about being one of the 6 billion who get euthanized...worry about the crust breaking up and getting vaporized by lava.
5) Good Bourbon is proof that God exists and loves us.
6) The global warming movement is made up of opportunists, anti-social radicals, and absolute nut-cases, all of whom use it to advance their whacked agendas...and that is why it really exists.
That should clear it up...let's have another shot of that Bourbon.
To really understand the subject one has to get into some history...and we were fortunate to have a dabbler in "Paleo-Climatology" to help us. In this discipline, scientists have focused on the last BILLION years of the earth's history...that's a whole bunch of years. Evidence leads us to believe that climate cycles during this period lasted some 200 MILLION years each. During these climate swings, the planet would go from being a virtual ice-ball to being a semi-tropical paradise in which plants and animals thrived, and indeed evolved into giants.
The last period of tropical climate began to ebb some 70 MILLION years back during the Cenozoic period. The cooling trend that followed advanced in 3 major steps about 36 MILLION, 15 MILLION, and 3 MILLION years ago. That brings us to the last 1 MILLION years.
The vast majority of that time period found the planet locked securely in a series of small ice-ages, all subject to the overall 200 MILLION year cycle. Interestingly, global temperatures varied somewhat radically during this period. They went up...they went down...they went all around. Ice sheets receded, then advanced, then receded and advanced some more. The last major leap was about 11,600 years ago...a tiny drop in the bucket in time...and ended the worst of the last small ice-age abruptly. Planetary temperature went up better than 20 degrees F in about 50 years. It's an attribute to our egos as humans that we refer to that ice-age as the "great" ice-age...when in reality it was a minor blip within the 200 MILLION year cycle....but hey...our ancestors had to live through it so we think it significant.
The causes of all this jumping up and down in temperature are numerous and mainly theoretical. Scientists are pretty certain that plate tectonics play a major role in global climate, and as the continents have drifted, bumped, broken apart again, etc, these land masses affected not only planetary winds but ocean currents and "metamorphic degassing." In essence, there are hundreds of live volcanoes active at this time...all due to the fact that the earth's crust is flimsy and floating on the 99.9% of the plant which is still liquid rock. That thin, flaky, crust could break apart at any moment and everything on the surface would be vaporized...leaving no trace of our passing whatsoever.
Now you see why these conversations require Bourbon.
Other inputs include such juicy items of conversation as: weathering of silicates, organic carbon weathering, burial of organic carbons, and of course the cycles of solar output. Astrophysicists tend to put more emphasis on solar cycles and the earth's orbit; affected by cycles of precession, eccentricity, and obliquity. Geologists tend to emphasize plate tectonics.
Since that point some 11,600 years ago, the planet has gone through literally hundreds of mini-climate cycles. There was an overall cooling trend from about 1500 AD into the 1850's known as the "little ice age." Prior to that was a short warming trend with a high about 1000 AD. That time actually shows similar characteristics to our current climate. As a whole, scientists believe we will be emerging (hopefully) from a long cycle of ice-ages to a tropical state over the next 100 MILLION years. Obviously you shouldn't run right out and buy a new swim suit...a bit premature perhaps.
That brings us to the modern day and "the movement." Since the 1880's scientists have pondered planetary climate changes, and every decade or so one group or another has announced that the planet is either warming or cooling. The vagaries of weather, and regional climate cycles, have made it impossible to actually nail down where we are in any one particular mini-cycle...even with the technology available today.
Since the early part of the 20th Century however, climate change has become a political tool. An ironic note is that British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was the moving force behind the modern global warming movement. When she became PM one of her first moves was to create the Hadly Center for Climate Prediction in order to help create a "crisis" that would help her fight the National Union of Mineworkers as an opposing political powerhouse.
She had a number of related problems: the UK needed to have more nuclear plants in order to move forward with growing and modernizing nuclear forces. She also needed to break the union. Nuclear power was costing 4 times what coal power cost, so she needed something scary and emotional to support her push for nuclear power plants. She had the Hadly Center create a series of predictions showing climate warming, also claiming CO2 from human activity to be a major cause, and to issue a warning to start closing mines and building nuke plants.
Then the laws of unintended consequences stepped in. The potpourri of Marxist and Malthusian radicals throughout the world took note. If "global warming" could be used to fight unions and close coal mines, why couldn't it be used to bring down industry, business, and capitalism all together? No reason at all, of course.
Greenpeace jumped on board...commissioning a survey (1992) of 400 climatologists to prove that global warming was caused by industrial societies. Only 15 of the scientists even agreed there was global warming, so the study was swept aside. The movement seemed to be stuck in "park."
But governments began to make some calculations. If they could push for restrictions on US businesses, they could gain a competitive advantage in manufacturing and energy production. Thus was born an outburst of "protocols" and "treaties" meant publicly to control CO2 emissions while actually meant to handcuff the US and a handful of other industrial giants. A mass movement to fund academics who would "prove" global warming became a government tool to push the agenda. The movement took on a life of its own fueled by billions in grants. Universities made disagreement by academics punishable by firing. Government agencies sprang up to support the movement...and then to simply support their own funding.
Human beings, the psychologist in the group reminded us, have a strong penchant for controlling their lives through controlling their environment. Since the beginnings of the species, people have fallen for shamans and charlatans who promised to help them do so. Everything from throwing virgins into volcanoes (which he reminded us was a terrible waste of virgins...the Bourbon was kicking in by now) to selling us "carbon credits" could be pawned off on folks afraid of change. You just had to package the change as a "crisis."
As a result of such packaging, by numerous special interests and radical groups, the US has suspended a great number of industries and manufacturers. We have ended, or curtailed, most energy exploration and production, and spent billions upon billions of taxpayer dollars on wasteful studies and academic exercises. This orgy of "environmentalism" is largely traceable to an ongoing effort to crush the evils of modernity, take us back to the Malthusian dream of a pre-industrial society, "bring down" capitalism, and more recently to make a profit thru fear-mongering. The special interest groups pushing "Cap and Trade" and carbon credits are set up to make billions of dollars without actually doing or providing anything except paperwork...a scam of absolute brilliance.
I recounted to the group a speech given at a climate change conference. The speaker, a radical environmentalist, told the audience the best solution would be to reduce the world's population to 2 million "care takers" who would monitor and care for the planet. He received a standing ovation from half the folks in the hall...mainly college students.
These enthusiastic "idiots" obviously assumed they, and their families, would magically be among the 2 million superior humans who would be chosen to live while euthanizing the other 6 billion of us. I hated to tell them the 2 million survivors would be the best-armed, most psychotic and anti-social SOB's on the planet...and that neither they nor the speaker qualified. They also, quite obviously, weren't thinking about who would supply them with ipods and tennis shoes when productive folks were gone. It was a display of total, abject, stupidity.
So we have two histories to observe in accounting for the phenomenon known as the global warming movement; the geophysical history of the planet, and the political history of the movement and the associated movements that use it. Combined they give us a bottom line from which we can determine whether climate change is an issue we should concern ourselves with.
Things we now know:
1) The planet is constantly changing...will always change..and there is no "normal" condition.
2) Humans have a tendency to panic over matters of which they are completely ignorant...and then do foolish things like wasting virgins.
3) The planet could possibly warm, or cool, by a degree or two over the next hundred years. The average temperature at the south pole will remain about 70 degrees F below zero. Our great-great-great-great grandchildren will figure out how to deal with this "change" the same way we have dealt with it over the last 11,600 years.
4) If you want to lose sleep over something...worry about your job...worry about being one of the 6 billion who get euthanized...worry about the crust breaking up and getting vaporized by lava.
5) Good Bourbon is proof that God exists and loves us.
6) The global warming movement is made up of opportunists, anti-social radicals, and absolute nut-cases, all of whom use it to advance their whacked agendas...and that is why it really exists.
That should clear it up...let's have another shot of that Bourbon.
The Joys of Redistribution
Why, some of my students have asked me, is the idea of "redistribution of wealth" looked down on by economists as a whole? Isn't "justice" and "fairness" important? What could be wrong with that?
To get them to start thinking, rather than to simply quote economic laws, I tell a story...set up a scenario so to speak...using the village model.
Imagine a village of 100 families. Years back they began to come together, perhaps around a water source, and created their community. Every family produces something of value which they can trade with their neighbors, allowing a degree of specialization and efficiency.
Some of them are farmers...one family makes shoes...some weave clothing, and some make tools and farm implements. The village is in balance as long as each family creates enough product to trade for the amount of product they need from others.
Now we come to an important concept: the wealth of the village is the total of accrued production. In other words; every family is making "stuff" and growing "stuff" and a year's worth of that "stuff" is the annual gross domestic product of the village. Some of that stuff is consumed over the year, such as food, but some of it lasts for years or even decades. As long as everyone is producing as much, or more, than they consume, the wealth of the village grows. This growth in wealth benefits everyone in the village...it keeps prices down, and creates surpluses which are likely to be distributed to those who fall on hard times.
Now suppose we have two families whose chosen work is to grow chickens and eggs. There is a demand for both. Eggs are more quickly and more cheaply produced, as they don't have to be fed, matured, and slaughtered to be eaten. But they don't provide as much food value as a chicken either. Therefore, both families must calculate the best balance for production...how many eggs do they allow to hatch and grow into fryers? What mix would give them optimum profit?
This is a very normal business decision made every day by business owners world wide. Let's suppose family "A" elects to buy extra chicken feed and to allow 1000 eggs each year to be hatched and grown into chickens. They are taking a risk, and spending additional funds, on the gamble that they will make profit on the chickens despite the additional costs and the loss of income from the eggs.
Now let's suppose family "B" decides to concentrate on eggs and raise only 100 chickens. As it turns out, at year's end, family "A" has made the optimum decision and they are able to trade their combination of chickens and eggs for three times what family "B" is able to make on their chickens and eggs. So family "A" is suddenly more wealthy than family "B" as they have contributed more protein and more value to the village.
Members of family "B" are not happy...they are in the same business as family "A" but have made one-third the income. Grumblers in the village begin to promote the idea of "redistribution"...it's unfair, they say, that family "B" has worked in the same business as "A" but made so little comparative income. Eventually the grumblers convince the majority of people in the village to call for a new rule...and they force family "A" to give up some of their income to family "B" in a gesture of "redistributive justice."
So why is that wrong? It's not an ethical question...it's an economic one. Family "A" now has the same choice to make as they made the prior year. Do they spend extra money on feed...spend extra time for chickens to hatch and mature...slaughter the chickens...and take on all of that risk and expense if their profits are going to be taken from them?
Here's where Marxist style theories always fall apart...at the point where human nature steps in. People do not adhere to theories written in books...they act in their own self interest. Family "A" decides the risk isn't worth it...so they elect to grow only 100 chickens the next year. The result...they will make less income, but it won't be taken away from them so they'll break even. The village will not have the 900 chickens as a food source. They will have more eggs instead, but the market proved that the chickens provided more value and protein than eggs alone.
So the village is poorer...it loses wealth. An economist, or any experienced business owner, would not be surprised...but many neophytes are shocked by the news. "But why?" they ask. "The only thing that happened was some wealth was transferred from one family to another. How could that possibly result in everyone being worse off?"
The simple village model explains the "why" clearly and simply. The real world is more complex of course, but human nature, and the willingness to balance risk with possible reward, will always win out...in any culture...any time...any place. That's why the rules of economics are in place. And not just models, but history, proves them to be true.
To get them to start thinking, rather than to simply quote economic laws, I tell a story...set up a scenario so to speak...using the village model.
Imagine a village of 100 families. Years back they began to come together, perhaps around a water source, and created their community. Every family produces something of value which they can trade with their neighbors, allowing a degree of specialization and efficiency.
Some of them are farmers...one family makes shoes...some weave clothing, and some make tools and farm implements. The village is in balance as long as each family creates enough product to trade for the amount of product they need from others.
Now we come to an important concept: the wealth of the village is the total of accrued production. In other words; every family is making "stuff" and growing "stuff" and a year's worth of that "stuff" is the annual gross domestic product of the village. Some of that stuff is consumed over the year, such as food, but some of it lasts for years or even decades. As long as everyone is producing as much, or more, than they consume, the wealth of the village grows. This growth in wealth benefits everyone in the village...it keeps prices down, and creates surpluses which are likely to be distributed to those who fall on hard times.
Now suppose we have two families whose chosen work is to grow chickens and eggs. There is a demand for both. Eggs are more quickly and more cheaply produced, as they don't have to be fed, matured, and slaughtered to be eaten. But they don't provide as much food value as a chicken either. Therefore, both families must calculate the best balance for production...how many eggs do they allow to hatch and grow into fryers? What mix would give them optimum profit?
This is a very normal business decision made every day by business owners world wide. Let's suppose family "A" elects to buy extra chicken feed and to allow 1000 eggs each year to be hatched and grown into chickens. They are taking a risk, and spending additional funds, on the gamble that they will make profit on the chickens despite the additional costs and the loss of income from the eggs.
Now let's suppose family "B" decides to concentrate on eggs and raise only 100 chickens. As it turns out, at year's end, family "A" has made the optimum decision and they are able to trade their combination of chickens and eggs for three times what family "B" is able to make on their chickens and eggs. So family "A" is suddenly more wealthy than family "B" as they have contributed more protein and more value to the village.
Members of family "B" are not happy...they are in the same business as family "A" but have made one-third the income. Grumblers in the village begin to promote the idea of "redistribution"...it's unfair, they say, that family "B" has worked in the same business as "A" but made so little comparative income. Eventually the grumblers convince the majority of people in the village to call for a new rule...and they force family "A" to give up some of their income to family "B" in a gesture of "redistributive justice."
So why is that wrong? It's not an ethical question...it's an economic one. Family "A" now has the same choice to make as they made the prior year. Do they spend extra money on feed...spend extra time for chickens to hatch and mature...slaughter the chickens...and take on all of that risk and expense if their profits are going to be taken from them?
Here's where Marxist style theories always fall apart...at the point where human nature steps in. People do not adhere to theories written in books...they act in their own self interest. Family "A" decides the risk isn't worth it...so they elect to grow only 100 chickens the next year. The result...they will make less income, but it won't be taken away from them so they'll break even. The village will not have the 900 chickens as a food source. They will have more eggs instead, but the market proved that the chickens provided more value and protein than eggs alone.
So the village is poorer...it loses wealth. An economist, or any experienced business owner, would not be surprised...but many neophytes are shocked by the news. "But why?" they ask. "The only thing that happened was some wealth was transferred from one family to another. How could that possibly result in everyone being worse off?"
The simple village model explains the "why" clearly and simply. The real world is more complex of course, but human nature, and the willingness to balance risk with possible reward, will always win out...in any culture...any time...any place. That's why the rules of economics are in place. And not just models, but history, proves them to be true.
Making Sense of "Trillions"
I can remember when Presidents asked Congress to raise the national debt level by "millions of dollars"....and we all gasped, gulped, and swallowed the bitter pill. Little did we know we would look back at those times in envy.
Now we have the different branches of our federal government arguing over trillions of dollars. We've become so accustomed to the new magnitude that when someone mentions cutting a few billion dollars in waste, we tend to wonder why the bother...it's only a few billion.
It's all rather impossible to grasp actually, and so like frogs in a slowly warming pot we don't see disaster coming as the temperature of our debt gets hotter and hotter. To get a grasp on what all of the budget arguments actually mean let's break it all down into something we can understand and connect to...dollars per individual head of household.
Based on the US Census, we can make a nice round estimate of about 100,000,000 head of household working folk in the US for the next decade. That's easy to work with....a trillion dollars means $10,000 per taxpayer. It's much easier to picture what "trillion" means when it's broken down to our individual share.
Let's start by looking at current debt: long term debt first...it's the scariest...it's like your mortgage so to speak. At this time it's over 120 trillion dollars...or 1.2 million dollars for each wage earner. Of course you have an entire lifetime to pay this debt off...so what the heck. You can rest easy...unless of course you realize that this long-term debt is bound to grow. Your share is going to end up to be a lot more.
Short term debt, much like a credit card debt, is now over 15 trillion dollars. Oh good...that's only about $150,000 for your share....of course that's due this year...and it's on top of your annual payment on the long-term debt. Starting to get queasy yet?
Well breathe easy...the Republicans in congress are fighting for a reduction in expenses that will cut your share of the annual short-term debt...by nearly $1,000. That means your payment will only be $149,000. Oh hurrah, hurrah...
But wait...the Dems are furious and want to "compromise" with their more fiscally conservative bretheren. They are reminding us their compromise also cuts expenses...but after taking into account the differences in accounting jargon...their "cuts" come to only about $100.
Just so you keep this straight: your "mortgage" debt is $1,200,000....your "credit card" debt is $150,000...and congress is offering to reduce your overall debt by $100. Goodness sakes, joy almighty, and hallelujah...where do I sign up?
Obviously...we'd rather have our debt cut by $1,000...but would that save your family from bankruptcy and ruin? Not hardly! Remember...these numbers are not imaginary...this is not simply an exercise to help comprehend what the national debt argument is all about. This is money you ACTUALLY OWE! Of course you can pretend it's not real....
I've tried...doesn't seem to be helping.
Now we have the different branches of our federal government arguing over trillions of dollars. We've become so accustomed to the new magnitude that when someone mentions cutting a few billion dollars in waste, we tend to wonder why the bother...it's only a few billion.
It's all rather impossible to grasp actually, and so like frogs in a slowly warming pot we don't see disaster coming as the temperature of our debt gets hotter and hotter. To get a grasp on what all of the budget arguments actually mean let's break it all down into something we can understand and connect to...dollars per individual head of household.
Based on the US Census, we can make a nice round estimate of about 100,000,000 head of household working folk in the US for the next decade. That's easy to work with....a trillion dollars means $10,000 per taxpayer. It's much easier to picture what "trillion" means when it's broken down to our individual share.
Let's start by looking at current debt: long term debt first...it's the scariest...it's like your mortgage so to speak. At this time it's over 120 trillion dollars...or 1.2 million dollars for each wage earner. Of course you have an entire lifetime to pay this debt off...so what the heck. You can rest easy...unless of course you realize that this long-term debt is bound to grow. Your share is going to end up to be a lot more.
Short term debt, much like a credit card debt, is now over 15 trillion dollars. Oh good...that's only about $150,000 for your share....of course that's due this year...and it's on top of your annual payment on the long-term debt. Starting to get queasy yet?
Well breathe easy...the Republicans in congress are fighting for a reduction in expenses that will cut your share of the annual short-term debt...by nearly $1,000. That means your payment will only be $149,000. Oh hurrah, hurrah...
But wait...the Dems are furious and want to "compromise" with their more fiscally conservative bretheren. They are reminding us their compromise also cuts expenses...but after taking into account the differences in accounting jargon...their "cuts" come to only about $100.
Just so you keep this straight: your "mortgage" debt is $1,200,000....your "credit card" debt is $150,000...and congress is offering to reduce your overall debt by $100. Goodness sakes, joy almighty, and hallelujah...where do I sign up?
Obviously...we'd rather have our debt cut by $1,000...but would that save your family from bankruptcy and ruin? Not hardly! Remember...these numbers are not imaginary...this is not simply an exercise to help comprehend what the national debt argument is all about. This is money you ACTUALLY OWE! Of course you can pretend it's not real....
I've tried...doesn't seem to be helping.
Ignoring the Fundamentals
Production equals Wealth....Wealth equals Production.
Probably the most basic law of economics is the definition of wealth; that the combined production, investment, and savings of a nation is defined as being that nation's wealth.
Production begins with taking raw materials; by drilling, mining, or harvesting; then transporting, processing, distributing, and using in manufacturing those materials until they become products for consumption.
A simple example; someone pulls minerals out of the earth, someone moves them, someone extracts and purifies them, someone combines them to make a metal, then someone uses that metal to make something useful. Bingo...wealth has been created!
Every worker contributes something to the overall wealth of the nation. In early times a person could create wealth by, say, raising chickens. Then they could trade eggs or chickens to someone else for shoes or some other good. When it becomes awkward to trade a cow, for example, for a basket of eggs, the concept of money comes into being. Money is simply an artificial means of representing production in a handy to carry around and easy to spend manner.
As long as money represented chickens, cows, shoes, and other production...all was good. A person could earn more money by being more productive. As everyone became more productive, usually with the help of technology, more and more stuff became available and prices stabilized or dropped...with more stuff to share, everyone enjoyed growing prosperity and a higher standard of living. Such a deal!
But there's always a catch. As societies grow, production becomes stalled without a proper legal system to adjudicate disputes, or a system of transportation to move goods, or organized security against outside threats. The organizing of community solutions to these issues is called "government" and at basic levels this actually increases overall production. Thus the costs of government are absorbed by the increased productivity. The people who work in government can be paid by productive workers, what we call the private sector, because the money actually represents productive capacity. Therefore, all is still in balance.
This evolutionary process, however, always goes awry. Never in history has government stopped growing and leveled out at a point where added value equals increased productivity...never! It simply seems to fly in the face of human nature to stop growing government, no matter how obvious it is that it is a foolish thing to do.
So what happens....the amount of "money" has to change to meet the demands of the growing number of non-producing workers who want to purchase goods. Productivity increases as technology continues to increase capacity to produce, and a growing population increases the labor pool available for production, and so begins a balancing act. As long as money supply and productivity stay in balance everything appears to be okay to most folks. But this only encourages more government growth.
Eventually it all turns downhill...prices begin to go up as more purchasers with more money begin to bid for a constantly dwindling supply of goods. The people, and their leaders, have learned to ignore the fundamentals.
"Well heck," says some soothsayer..."we'll just become an information economy...we don't have to produce as much as we want to consume." But pretty soon folks realize they can't eat information, wear information, or live in information. Someone has to produce food, clothing, and housing.
So the next step...sell the information to some nation that will grow food and make stuff. For a short time, as long as that information has some value, this seems to work. At least it covers up the truth to those not paying attention.
Then, when the value of the information drops, the nation asks productive nations to accept "notes"...in affect they buy products on credit. If acceptable to the productive nation, the one with the too large government finds itself creating and growing an ever increasing debt cycle. The issue could be resolved of course...the borrower could simply stop borrowing and begin to push production...partly through pulling out all the stops, so to speak, and getting people to stop trading in information and start producing stuff. Partly through reducing the government work force and having those people get into production. If things go well, and spending discipline holds, the nation could work its way out of debt and begin growing wealth once again.
Unfortunately...this scenario hasn't happened as often as logic might lead one to believe. In fact, once nations reach a certain level of wealth some strange things begin to happen. Some of these strange happenings are universal, as documented by the historian Sir John Glubb in his paper "Fate of Empires." Whether the Greek empire, the Persian Empire, the Ancient Egyptians, or the Roman Empire...all successful civilizations eventually become self-loathing, self-absorbed, soft, spoiled, and end up committing cultural suicide. They are not brought down by invading barbarians...at least not until they have destroyed themselves from within.
There are key milestones each fading nation goes through; a loss of will to commit to warfare to protect themselves being one. The population reaches a point where they delude themselves into believing they are "superior" and "intellectual" and therefore morally above the making of war and taking of lives. This delusion defies logic and historical precedent...but it continues to take place. It is reminscent of the man who refuses to have anything to do with weaponry...even though he knows full well his family could helplessly fall victim to marauding criminals. He would "morally" prefer his family be slaughtered than to take up arms...seems unimaginable, but it is quite common in decaying societies.
Another delusion is the concept of cultural "guilt" for being successful. This drives populations to demand an end to productive activities...often times in the guise of protecting nature. Farm land goes fallow, mines close, oil wells are sealed...the spigot of all wealth production is turned off in a macabre acceptance of self destruction. Again, the delusion of being morally superior plays an important part.
The same moral delusion forms the basis of "group benevolence"...the concept that everyone must be cared for to the full extent of a nation's wealth. This leads to people choosing to become unproductive, then the treasury of the nation is drained until no one can be taken care of, including those who produce.
The end result; the people refuse to draw natural resources from around them, and refuse to produce the goods and services necessary to thrive. At the same time, they enrich politicians who promise to "share the wealth" with the people...even though there is no longer wealth to share. Eventually the people take to the streets...violence ensues...and the nation falls into tyranny. It is now inevitable that the nation will become easy pickings for an outside force.
Not that we should worry here in our warm, safe homes in our cozy western countries. All of that bad stuff only happens to civilizations past; that expanded government too much, who spend themselves into debt, and whose people become enamored of movie stars, phony politicians, and pop singers in place of military heroes, economists, and business leaders.
Certainly couldn't happen here...not in America!
Hey...I promise to keep my eyes and ears open and let you know if it does.
Probably the most basic law of economics is the definition of wealth; that the combined production, investment, and savings of a nation is defined as being that nation's wealth.
Production begins with taking raw materials; by drilling, mining, or harvesting; then transporting, processing, distributing, and using in manufacturing those materials until they become products for consumption.
A simple example; someone pulls minerals out of the earth, someone moves them, someone extracts and purifies them, someone combines them to make a metal, then someone uses that metal to make something useful. Bingo...wealth has been created!
Every worker contributes something to the overall wealth of the nation. In early times a person could create wealth by, say, raising chickens. Then they could trade eggs or chickens to someone else for shoes or some other good. When it becomes awkward to trade a cow, for example, for a basket of eggs, the concept of money comes into being. Money is simply an artificial means of representing production in a handy to carry around and easy to spend manner.
As long as money represented chickens, cows, shoes, and other production...all was good. A person could earn more money by being more productive. As everyone became more productive, usually with the help of technology, more and more stuff became available and prices stabilized or dropped...with more stuff to share, everyone enjoyed growing prosperity and a higher standard of living. Such a deal!
But there's always a catch. As societies grow, production becomes stalled without a proper legal system to adjudicate disputes, or a system of transportation to move goods, or organized security against outside threats. The organizing of community solutions to these issues is called "government" and at basic levels this actually increases overall production. Thus the costs of government are absorbed by the increased productivity. The people who work in government can be paid by productive workers, what we call the private sector, because the money actually represents productive capacity. Therefore, all is still in balance.
This evolutionary process, however, always goes awry. Never in history has government stopped growing and leveled out at a point where added value equals increased productivity...never! It simply seems to fly in the face of human nature to stop growing government, no matter how obvious it is that it is a foolish thing to do.
So what happens....the amount of "money" has to change to meet the demands of the growing number of non-producing workers who want to purchase goods. Productivity increases as technology continues to increase capacity to produce, and a growing population increases the labor pool available for production, and so begins a balancing act. As long as money supply and productivity stay in balance everything appears to be okay to most folks. But this only encourages more government growth.
Eventually it all turns downhill...prices begin to go up as more purchasers with more money begin to bid for a constantly dwindling supply of goods. The people, and their leaders, have learned to ignore the fundamentals.
"Well heck," says some soothsayer..."we'll just become an information economy...we don't have to produce as much as we want to consume." But pretty soon folks realize they can't eat information, wear information, or live in information. Someone has to produce food, clothing, and housing.
So the next step...sell the information to some nation that will grow food and make stuff. For a short time, as long as that information has some value, this seems to work. At least it covers up the truth to those not paying attention.
Then, when the value of the information drops, the nation asks productive nations to accept "notes"...in affect they buy products on credit. If acceptable to the productive nation, the one with the too large government finds itself creating and growing an ever increasing debt cycle. The issue could be resolved of course...the borrower could simply stop borrowing and begin to push production...partly through pulling out all the stops, so to speak, and getting people to stop trading in information and start producing stuff. Partly through reducing the government work force and having those people get into production. If things go well, and spending discipline holds, the nation could work its way out of debt and begin growing wealth once again.
Unfortunately...this scenario hasn't happened as often as logic might lead one to believe. In fact, once nations reach a certain level of wealth some strange things begin to happen. Some of these strange happenings are universal, as documented by the historian Sir John Glubb in his paper "Fate of Empires." Whether the Greek empire, the Persian Empire, the Ancient Egyptians, or the Roman Empire...all successful civilizations eventually become self-loathing, self-absorbed, soft, spoiled, and end up committing cultural suicide. They are not brought down by invading barbarians...at least not until they have destroyed themselves from within.
There are key milestones each fading nation goes through; a loss of will to commit to warfare to protect themselves being one. The population reaches a point where they delude themselves into believing they are "superior" and "intellectual" and therefore morally above the making of war and taking of lives. This delusion defies logic and historical precedent...but it continues to take place. It is reminscent of the man who refuses to have anything to do with weaponry...even though he knows full well his family could helplessly fall victim to marauding criminals. He would "morally" prefer his family be slaughtered than to take up arms...seems unimaginable, but it is quite common in decaying societies.
Another delusion is the concept of cultural "guilt" for being successful. This drives populations to demand an end to productive activities...often times in the guise of protecting nature. Farm land goes fallow, mines close, oil wells are sealed...the spigot of all wealth production is turned off in a macabre acceptance of self destruction. Again, the delusion of being morally superior plays an important part.
The same moral delusion forms the basis of "group benevolence"...the concept that everyone must be cared for to the full extent of a nation's wealth. This leads to people choosing to become unproductive, then the treasury of the nation is drained until no one can be taken care of, including those who produce.
The end result; the people refuse to draw natural resources from around them, and refuse to produce the goods and services necessary to thrive. At the same time, they enrich politicians who promise to "share the wealth" with the people...even though there is no longer wealth to share. Eventually the people take to the streets...violence ensues...and the nation falls into tyranny. It is now inevitable that the nation will become easy pickings for an outside force.
Not that we should worry here in our warm, safe homes in our cozy western countries. All of that bad stuff only happens to civilizations past; that expanded government too much, who spend themselves into debt, and whose people become enamored of movie stars, phony politicians, and pop singers in place of military heroes, economists, and business leaders.
Certainly couldn't happen here...not in America!
Hey...I promise to keep my eyes and ears open and let you know if it does.
Some Scary Numbers for the New Year
An interesting collection of statistics, indicators of future inflation, have been collected and printed below; along with the sources of those statistics.
Why, one may ask, are we concerned with forecasting the possibility of an inflationary cycle? There are a number of sound reasons. From a personal standpoint, we should consider how we invest our savings when inflationary or deflationary cycles are on the horizon. Inflation is simply a devaluation of currency, so normal savings, basically consisting of currency, will lose value...perhaps rapidly. On the other hand, investing in commodities, instead of currency, can pay off big.
Our business institutions must be able to plan and budget for the future; inflationary pressure will force them to adjust payroll, prices, and expenses. The very survival of the business may depend on how accurately they forecast and how quickly they adjust.
In extreme instances, such as what happened in Zimbabwe in recent years, currency becomes totally valueless and society returns to the barter system to survive. In more "normal" inflationary periods, the middle class simply loses its wealth slowly and steadily while lower income earners are completely crushed and forced into abject poverty. Wealth is no longer available for investment and production, so unemployment skyrockets and products become scarce, which quickly adds to the inflationary pressure (lack of goods increases price).
One might then ask, viewing the statistics below, why we are not yet seeing significant inflation already? We see that commodities are becoming more expensive rapidly...so why is it not obviously reflected in the retail markets?
Mainly we are currently being "saved" by businesses willing to liquidate inventory at past prices, and to hold down new pricing by laying off workers and increasing the work load of remaining workers without additional compensation. They are struggling to survive, and whether they make it or not, they end up dumping product onto the market at prices reflecting the costs of production from the past. If they do survive, however, and have to regenerate inventory at some point to keep surviving, they will discover that the price of materials is going up. No one in the supply chain can stay in business long by charging less than the cost of replacement...they have been trying to do so, but the end of such frugality is growing nigh.
Along with the pressures of rising commodities prices, we can see from the chart that employment in the public sector is growing and government spending is going up. These are both highly inflationary moves, both flood the market with currency while producing no goods to balance out the increase in money. The necessary increase in taxes takes additional currency from producers, which again reduces production and again increases the number of dollars chasing after a reduced volume of goods and services. This artificial increase in money supply, and reduction in products, drives costs up the demand curve...result...inflation.
So, not to sound alarmist, but all the science of economics tells us that without some dramatic changes in the market place, inflation is on the way. Take some time to consider your personal situation and plan ahead.
Why, one may ask, are we concerned with forecasting the possibility of an inflationary cycle? There are a number of sound reasons. From a personal standpoint, we should consider how we invest our savings when inflationary or deflationary cycles are on the horizon. Inflation is simply a devaluation of currency, so normal savings, basically consisting of currency, will lose value...perhaps rapidly. On the other hand, investing in commodities, instead of currency, can pay off big.
Our business institutions must be able to plan and budget for the future; inflationary pressure will force them to adjust payroll, prices, and expenses. The very survival of the business may depend on how accurately they forecast and how quickly they adjust.
In extreme instances, such as what happened in Zimbabwe in recent years, currency becomes totally valueless and society returns to the barter system to survive. In more "normal" inflationary periods, the middle class simply loses its wealth slowly and steadily while lower income earners are completely crushed and forced into abject poverty. Wealth is no longer available for investment and production, so unemployment skyrockets and products become scarce, which quickly adds to the inflationary pressure (lack of goods increases price).
One might then ask, viewing the statistics below, why we are not yet seeing significant inflation already? We see that commodities are becoming more expensive rapidly...so why is it not obviously reflected in the retail markets?
Mainly we are currently being "saved" by businesses willing to liquidate inventory at past prices, and to hold down new pricing by laying off workers and increasing the work load of remaining workers without additional compensation. They are struggling to survive, and whether they make it or not, they end up dumping product onto the market at prices reflecting the costs of production from the past. If they do survive, however, and have to regenerate inventory at some point to keep surviving, they will discover that the price of materials is going up. No one in the supply chain can stay in business long by charging less than the cost of replacement...they have been trying to do so, but the end of such frugality is growing nigh.
Along with the pressures of rising commodities prices, we can see from the chart that employment in the public sector is growing and government spending is going up. These are both highly inflationary moves, both flood the market with currency while producing no goods to balance out the increase in money. The necessary increase in taxes takes additional currency from producers, which again reduces production and again increases the number of dollars chasing after a reduced volume of goods and services. This artificial increase in money supply, and reduction in products, drives costs up the demand curve...result...inflation.
So, not to sound alarmist, but all the science of economics tells us that without some dramatic changes in the market place, inflation is on the way. Take some time to consider your personal situation and plan ahead.
Sources:
(1) U.S. Energy Information Administration; (2) Wall Street Journal; (3) Bureau of Labor Statistics; (4) Census Bureau; (5) USDA; (6) U.S. Dept. of Labor; (7) FHFA; (8) Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller; (9) RealtyTrac; (10) Heritage Foundation and WSJ; (11) The Conference Board; (12) FDIC; (13) Federal Reserve; (14) U.S. TreasuryJanuary 2009 | January 2010 | % chg | Source | |
Avg. retail price/gallon gas in U.S. | $1.83 | $3.104 | 69.6% | 1 |
Crude oil, European Brent (barrel) | $43.48 | $99.02 | 127.7% | 2 |
Crude oil, West TX Inter. (barrel) | $38.74 | $91.38 | 135.9% | 2 |
Gold: London (per troy oz.) | $853.25 | $1,369.50 | 60.5% | 2 |
Corn, No.2 yellow, Central IL | $3.56 | $6.33 | 78.1% | 2 |
Soybeans, No. 1 yellow, IL | $9.66 | $13.75 | 42.3% | 2 |
Sugar, cane, raw, world, lb. fob | $13.37 | $35.39 | 164.7% | 2 |
Unemployment rate, non-farm, overall | 7.6% | 9.4% | 23.7% | 3 |
Unemployment rate, blacks | 12.6% | 15.8% | 25.4% | 3 |
Number of unemployed | 11,616,000 | 14,485,000 | 24.7% | 3 |
Number of fed. employees, ex. military (curr = 12/10 prelim) | 2,779,000 | 2,840,000 | 2.2% | 3 |
Real median household income (2008 v 2009) | $50,112 | $49,777 | -0.7% | 4 |
Number of food stamp recipients (curr = 10/10) | 31,983,716 | 43,200,878 | 35.1% | 5 |
Number of unemployment benefit recipients (curr = 12/10) | 7,526,598 | 9,193,838 | 22.2% | 6 |
Number of long-term unemployed | 2,600,000 | 6,400,000 | 146.2% | 3 |
Poverty rate, individuals (2008 v 2009) | 13.2% | 14.3% | 8.3% | 4 |
People in poverty in U.S. (2008 v 2009) | 39,800,000 | 43,600,000 | 9.5% | 4 |
U.S. rank in Economic Freedom World Rankings | 5 | 9 | n/a | 10 |
Present Situation Index (curr = 12/10) | 29.9 | 23.5 | -21.4% | 11 |
Failed banks (curr = 2010 + 2011 to date) | 140 | 164 | 17.1% | 12 |
U.S. dollar versus Japanese yen exchange rate | 89.76 | 82.03 | -8.6% | 2 |
U.S. money supply, M1, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) | 1,575.1 | 1,865.7 | 18.4% | 13 |
U.S. money supply, M2, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) | 8,310.9 | 8,852.3 | 6.5% | 13 |
National debt, in trillions | $10.627 | $14.052 | 32.2% | 14 |
Where is Obviousman when you need him?
I once had a favorite comic strip featuring "Obviousman" a super-hero who told off relatively stupid people when they did and said stupid things. I miss him...and we really do need such a super-hero today. We're surrounded by opportunities for him to share his wisdom.
Let's list some of the more blatant current examples:
1) Alvin Greene, a complete political unknown who didn't even actually run for the office, just won the democratic primary in the South Carolina senate race. The democratic party is going berserk, partially because they know he can't possibly win in the general election, but mainly because they can't understand how he won the primary. The guy answers interview questions as if in a complete daze, is facing felony charges, and has no support or financial backing.
Crackpot theories range from "he is a Republican plant" to "mass hypnosis" to computer hackers "rigging the votes." The reality is far too obvious for these clowns: their voters are ignorant and don't care who they vote for as long as the letter D appears by their names.
These folks were made ignorant by intent. For decades the hacks have done everything in their power to dumb down the electorate. They push massive tax bills through congress with labels like the "Childrens' Health Protection Act" or the "Economic Stimulus and Jobs Act" and get away with it thanks to their ignorant and complacent voting base. They give themselves and their friends millions of taxpayer dollars and tell the electorate the other party is the party of corruption. They destroy business and jobs so that they can become relatively more wealthy and satisfy their lust for power. Then they go to rallies and tell the mob they are "one with the working man."
Why did Alvin Greene win the election? Obviousman answer to the dense politicos: your voters are stupid...just like you have encouraged and trained them to be. It's finally come back to bite you...but don't worry, most of the time it works in your favor.
2) While some 80% of the population supports Arizona's right to defend its citizens by enforcing federal anti-immigration laws, the loonier groups on the left are going crazy. They will not believe that few support their view and can only imagine the public support for Arizona as "racism."
In the last few weeks, drug cartel militants with soviet bloc automatic weapons have been in firefights with police officers in central Arizona. Families have been murdered or beaten by cartel thugs wanting to use their property for drug storage. Ranchers have been murdered, police officers killed or wounded, and squads of black-hooded men with fully automatic weapons are becoming common place. Captured weapons are being traced back to FARC...the communist insurgency army in Colombia...and to the ex-governments of Nicaragua and defunct communist insurgents in El Salvador.
Uhhhhhh...why does anyone wonder why the citizens of Arizona are a bit on edge and want to defend themselves and their families? Does Obviousman really have to jump to the rescue here??? Well...okay!
Obviousman answer: Arizona is being invaded by an army of hardcore criminals and psychotic killers. The people of Arizona have figured out this is not a desirable situation! It's embarrassing this question is even being asked.
3) Pundits say the US is having an "energy crisis" and must spend trillions of dollars and put an estimated 20 million people out of work while turning the US into a third world, impoverished nation, to solve the problem. They point out that solar and wind power now generate only about the same energy as a single productive oil well...therefore we must gut the economy for the next decade or two in order to reach the point where they supply as much energy as 4 or 5 oil wells.
Huh? What?
The US has over 2 TRILLION barrels of oil reserves, nearly 3 times that of the middle east, which can be reached via drilling on land (no oil spills in the ocean). Our oil shale deposits could power our needs for the next 200 years. We're sitting on trillions of cubic feet of natural gas.
So here's the question: how could anyone believe the pundits and government hacks who tell us we're on the brink of disaster and have to regress to the great depression in order to "save" ourselves?
Obviousman answer: See question 1) above...same answer. Sorry...it simply doesn't get any more obvious.
Let's list some of the more blatant current examples:
1) Alvin Greene, a complete political unknown who didn't even actually run for the office, just won the democratic primary in the South Carolina senate race. The democratic party is going berserk, partially because they know he can't possibly win in the general election, but mainly because they can't understand how he won the primary. The guy answers interview questions as if in a complete daze, is facing felony charges, and has no support or financial backing.
Crackpot theories range from "he is a Republican plant" to "mass hypnosis" to computer hackers "rigging the votes." The reality is far too obvious for these clowns: their voters are ignorant and don't care who they vote for as long as the letter D appears by their names.
These folks were made ignorant by intent. For decades the hacks have done everything in their power to dumb down the electorate. They push massive tax bills through congress with labels like the "Childrens' Health Protection Act" or the "Economic Stimulus and Jobs Act" and get away with it thanks to their ignorant and complacent voting base. They give themselves and their friends millions of taxpayer dollars and tell the electorate the other party is the party of corruption. They destroy business and jobs so that they can become relatively more wealthy and satisfy their lust for power. Then they go to rallies and tell the mob they are "one with the working man."
Why did Alvin Greene win the election? Obviousman answer to the dense politicos: your voters are stupid...just like you have encouraged and trained them to be. It's finally come back to bite you...but don't worry, most of the time it works in your favor.
2) While some 80% of the population supports Arizona's right to defend its citizens by enforcing federal anti-immigration laws, the loonier groups on the left are going crazy. They will not believe that few support their view and can only imagine the public support for Arizona as "racism."
In the last few weeks, drug cartel militants with soviet bloc automatic weapons have been in firefights with police officers in central Arizona. Families have been murdered or beaten by cartel thugs wanting to use their property for drug storage. Ranchers have been murdered, police officers killed or wounded, and squads of black-hooded men with fully automatic weapons are becoming common place. Captured weapons are being traced back to FARC...the communist insurgency army in Colombia...and to the ex-governments of Nicaragua and defunct communist insurgents in El Salvador.
Uhhhhhh...why does anyone wonder why the citizens of Arizona are a bit on edge and want to defend themselves and their families? Does Obviousman really have to jump to the rescue here??? Well...okay!
Obviousman answer: Arizona is being invaded by an army of hardcore criminals and psychotic killers. The people of Arizona have figured out this is not a desirable situation! It's embarrassing this question is even being asked.
3) Pundits say the US is having an "energy crisis" and must spend trillions of dollars and put an estimated 20 million people out of work while turning the US into a third world, impoverished nation, to solve the problem. They point out that solar and wind power now generate only about the same energy as a single productive oil well...therefore we must gut the economy for the next decade or two in order to reach the point where they supply as much energy as 4 or 5 oil wells.
Huh? What?
The US has over 2 TRILLION barrels of oil reserves, nearly 3 times that of the middle east, which can be reached via drilling on land (no oil spills in the ocean). Our oil shale deposits could power our needs for the next 200 years. We're sitting on trillions of cubic feet of natural gas.
So here's the question: how could anyone believe the pundits and government hacks who tell us we're on the brink of disaster and have to regress to the great depression in order to "save" ourselves?
Obviousman answer: See question 1) above...same answer. Sorry...it simply doesn't get any more obvious.
Another Memorial Day
Growing up in a military family, Memorial Day weekend was always a time for reflection and remembrance, for attending services and ceremonies, and not a weekend for a trip to the beach or a mini-vacation. As I've gotten older, I've settled into habits that reflect the ideals of my upbringing.
Over the last few Memorial Day weekends, my habit has been to watch the exemplary Band of Brothers video set from beginning to end. This ten-hour film highlights some of the more important events in the history of E Company, 506th Regiment, of the 101st Airborne as they fought in Europe. It is a wonderful adaptation of the Stephen Ambrose history of the unit and should be watched by every American at least once.
Understanding the historical perspective of what these men went through is important, probably more so than the focus on the military history itself. They were raised during the great depression, and from childhood heard politicians drone on about the progressive wonders coming about in Europe thanks to the Fascists in Italy and the Socialists in Germany. Movie stars, celebrities, media people, and the progressive political machine in the US adored and parroted these "sophisticated and progressive" Europeans. They went so far as to identify with them with statements like "we are the American Fascists, and they are the European Progressives."
Not surprisingly, this morsel of history has been erased from our public school textbooks...and from our national memory for the great part.
In the years of training and bitter fighting, these men had become hardened to the soft psychosis of such nonsense. They had seen the truth behind the facade of populist propaganda. They understood the ugly reality. They had suffered, been wounded, watched friends die, and been forced to kill human beings all in order to save the "sophisticated and progressive" Europeans from...themselves!
Their frustration and anger changed them forever, and it changed the America they returned to. There was a moment, when the handful of men still left in Easy were on a deuce-and-a-half driving by a long column of surrendered German troops, that comes to mind. A private who had been with the company from the beginning stands and screams at a German General.
After getting the General's attention, with a list of expletives, he shouts "you son-of-a bitch...you've forced us to interrupt our lives and travel half way around the world. You ignorant, servile, scum."
He had been forced to come to grips with a great and brutally frank truth that historians often ignore, and are far too politically correct...or polite...to come right out and say. The German people were servile...they were ignorant...they did what they were told. Tens of millions openly embraced it. There were myriad reasons of course...a certain amount of brainwashing was involved...but they were susceptible to it...as were the Italian people, and the populace of Japan. Not all of them, of course. There was resistance, some questioned, but doubts and doubters were brushed aside by the popularity of the political moment.
After the destruction of their societies, some awoke with the realization they had indeed been "ignorant, servile, scum." Many of those became evangelical in their desire to make certain it never happened again. I have met some of them, and they are sincerely tortured human beings seeking redemption in their own ways. But so many never "got it" and never understood how they had been used. Some insisted they were right for the rest of their lives.
It's all about human nature. It's not a result of race or nationality...it's about what makes us tick. History is a looped track...it keeps repeating itself over and over again because human nature never changes. Socialism and Fascism are just labels. Hitler, Mussolini, and other dictators were little more than figureheads. They were evil...and their ideas were evil...but they were just points in time on the ever-repeating loop. There are more names to replace them...more labels on the same movements to lure the foolish, the greedy, and the weak.
That "greatest generation" of Americans who sacrificed so much, halted an immediate threat...but only that threat. Sadly such threats never go away...and never will. There is no "war to end all wars." There is no "lasting peace"...only constant diligence and the willingness to sacrifice again and again and again. Thank God we find, in every generation, men and women carrying greatness within them. Thank God they stand up and put on the uniform and serve.
But the endless loop goes on. Today we see the mindless mob mentality supporting "causes" that are simply new faces of tyranny. We see a global movement to destroy free markets and personal freedoms in the guise of "saving the planet." The movement is headed by obvious demagogues, and yet millions believe they are worthy of worship and adoration. These same fools completely buy into the inane mindset of the global warming religion (don't remind them Hitler was a fanatical environmentalist who preached the same blather about CO2 and social engineering in Mein Kampf).
Millions more take to the streets in "sophisticated" European nations, demanding government bend to their personal wills in matters of religion, or welfare, or shorter work weeks, extravagant pensions, and other socialist inspired give-away programs. In the US the same mind set drives hordes of fools who want their way...free health care, free college, free food and housing, instant citizenship for aliens...now!...despite the destruction of prosperity and the price to be paid by the majority; who want only to be left alone to live their lives.
The same human foibles which drove the socialists to power in Germany are driving the new movements of "social justice" and "fairness" and "saving the planet" and all the other hackneyed propaganda terms now popular in the culture of the "ignorant, servile, scum" and those who wish to manipulate them.
Yep...I've said it. History tells us the truth...no matter how much the teacher's unions or the progressive media propagandists try to hide it from us. Those who riot in the streets today are really no different than those who rioted in the streets in the 20's and 30's. The only reason we don't yet use the labels the frustrated private in Easy Company used is that we haven't yet had to face the harsh reality of what these naive fools truly represent.
So we politely point out that they "simply have a different point of view" and that "everyone has a right to their opinion." True...they do. But remember what happened to those who tried to voice their opinions against such tyranny in the past. When someone screams you are a "racist" because you believe in border security, or that you are a "denier" because you prefer scientific discussion over global warming fanaticism, they are doing exactly what was done to "deniers" of "change" and "social justice" in Germany in the 1930's.
Since I too apparently have a right to my opinion...at least for the time being...I'll choose to not "go along" with the pop culture ideologies that would empower a small number of "elites" to decide the future of humanity. They had their chance...many times...in the past, and hundreds of millions suffered and died as a result. These people are evil...simply and bluntly put...and want what they want and are willing to take it by guile or by force.
That they are on the move again...and gaining strength...does not mean the sacrifices made by the men of Easy Company, and all of the heroes of our past and present, were made in vain. It simply proves that struggle is eternal, and eternal vigilance is required of free people if they wish to remain free. Today, on Memorial Day 2010, we take the time to honor those who have fought the battles of the past, and are still fighting today, and to dedicate ourselves to the belief that "government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
By doing so, we truly honor the meaning of the day.
Over the last few Memorial Day weekends, my habit has been to watch the exemplary Band of Brothers video set from beginning to end. This ten-hour film highlights some of the more important events in the history of E Company, 506th Regiment, of the 101st Airborne as they fought in Europe. It is a wonderful adaptation of the Stephen Ambrose history of the unit and should be watched by every American at least once.
Understanding the historical perspective of what these men went through is important, probably more so than the focus on the military history itself. They were raised during the great depression, and from childhood heard politicians drone on about the progressive wonders coming about in Europe thanks to the Fascists in Italy and the Socialists in Germany. Movie stars, celebrities, media people, and the progressive political machine in the US adored and parroted these "sophisticated and progressive" Europeans. They went so far as to identify with them with statements like "we are the American Fascists, and they are the European Progressives."
Not surprisingly, this morsel of history has been erased from our public school textbooks...and from our national memory for the great part.
In the years of training and bitter fighting, these men had become hardened to the soft psychosis of such nonsense. They had seen the truth behind the facade of populist propaganda. They understood the ugly reality. They had suffered, been wounded, watched friends die, and been forced to kill human beings all in order to save the "sophisticated and progressive" Europeans from...themselves!
Their frustration and anger changed them forever, and it changed the America they returned to. There was a moment, when the handful of men still left in Easy were on a deuce-and-a-half driving by a long column of surrendered German troops, that comes to mind. A private who had been with the company from the beginning stands and screams at a German General.
After getting the General's attention, with a list of expletives, he shouts "you son-of-a bitch...you've forced us to interrupt our lives and travel half way around the world. You ignorant, servile, scum."
He had been forced to come to grips with a great and brutally frank truth that historians often ignore, and are far too politically correct...or polite...to come right out and say. The German people were servile...they were ignorant...they did what they were told. Tens of millions openly embraced it. There were myriad reasons of course...a certain amount of brainwashing was involved...but they were susceptible to it...as were the Italian people, and the populace of Japan. Not all of them, of course. There was resistance, some questioned, but doubts and doubters were brushed aside by the popularity of the political moment.
After the destruction of their societies, some awoke with the realization they had indeed been "ignorant, servile, scum." Many of those became evangelical in their desire to make certain it never happened again. I have met some of them, and they are sincerely tortured human beings seeking redemption in their own ways. But so many never "got it" and never understood how they had been used. Some insisted they were right for the rest of their lives.
It's all about human nature. It's not a result of race or nationality...it's about what makes us tick. History is a looped track...it keeps repeating itself over and over again because human nature never changes. Socialism and Fascism are just labels. Hitler, Mussolini, and other dictators were little more than figureheads. They were evil...and their ideas were evil...but they were just points in time on the ever-repeating loop. There are more names to replace them...more labels on the same movements to lure the foolish, the greedy, and the weak.
That "greatest generation" of Americans who sacrificed so much, halted an immediate threat...but only that threat. Sadly such threats never go away...and never will. There is no "war to end all wars." There is no "lasting peace"...only constant diligence and the willingness to sacrifice again and again and again. Thank God we find, in every generation, men and women carrying greatness within them. Thank God they stand up and put on the uniform and serve.
But the endless loop goes on. Today we see the mindless mob mentality supporting "causes" that are simply new faces of tyranny. We see a global movement to destroy free markets and personal freedoms in the guise of "saving the planet." The movement is headed by obvious demagogues, and yet millions believe they are worthy of worship and adoration. These same fools completely buy into the inane mindset of the global warming religion (don't remind them Hitler was a fanatical environmentalist who preached the same blather about CO2 and social engineering in Mein Kampf).
Millions more take to the streets in "sophisticated" European nations, demanding government bend to their personal wills in matters of religion, or welfare, or shorter work weeks, extravagant pensions, and other socialist inspired give-away programs. In the US the same mind set drives hordes of fools who want their way...free health care, free college, free food and housing, instant citizenship for aliens...now!...despite the destruction of prosperity and the price to be paid by the majority; who want only to be left alone to live their lives.
The same human foibles which drove the socialists to power in Germany are driving the new movements of "social justice" and "fairness" and "saving the planet" and all the other hackneyed propaganda terms now popular in the culture of the "ignorant, servile, scum" and those who wish to manipulate them.
Yep...I've said it. History tells us the truth...no matter how much the teacher's unions or the progressive media propagandists try to hide it from us. Those who riot in the streets today are really no different than those who rioted in the streets in the 20's and 30's. The only reason we don't yet use the labels the frustrated private in Easy Company used is that we haven't yet had to face the harsh reality of what these naive fools truly represent.
So we politely point out that they "simply have a different point of view" and that "everyone has a right to their opinion." True...they do. But remember what happened to those who tried to voice their opinions against such tyranny in the past. When someone screams you are a "racist" because you believe in border security, or that you are a "denier" because you prefer scientific discussion over global warming fanaticism, they are doing exactly what was done to "deniers" of "change" and "social justice" in Germany in the 1930's.
Since I too apparently have a right to my opinion...at least for the time being...I'll choose to not "go along" with the pop culture ideologies that would empower a small number of "elites" to decide the future of humanity. They had their chance...many times...in the past, and hundreds of millions suffered and died as a result. These people are evil...simply and bluntly put...and want what they want and are willing to take it by guile or by force.
That they are on the move again...and gaining strength...does not mean the sacrifices made by the men of Easy Company, and all of the heroes of our past and present, were made in vain. It simply proves that struggle is eternal, and eternal vigilance is required of free people if they wish to remain free. Today, on Memorial Day 2010, we take the time to honor those who have fought the battles of the past, and are still fighting today, and to dedicate ourselves to the belief that "government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
By doing so, we truly honor the meaning of the day.
When Stupid Becomes an Epidemic
There will always be foolish people...but there can come a time when society itself begins to encourage, train, protect, and even import truly stupid people because someone in society benefits from their presence. Unfortunately, this happens regularly in democracies, as elected officials can benefit greatly from a voting block of people who are easily persuaded into complacence.
Politicians learn to not only depend on such folks to stay elected, they can even use them as "muscle" or to create crisis situations which call out for "martial law" or other misuses of government power. We have seen this in countries all over the globe over the last century or so. It's become standard practice for demagogues and would-be tyrants.
The process begins with the practice of alleviating risk...a degree of which is actually good for society in general, but it does slowly start to erode the ability of people to think fast, make decisions, and see the world realistically.
My most important education as a child was to live for some years in the wilderness. I had to learn, very quickly, that there was no 9-1-1 number to call...no one to help me if I screwed up...and that I could die if I made even one simple mistake. Once you come near death a couple of times...and escape by pure luck more than skill...you learn to focus rather intently on your current surroundings and situation. You learn to be realistic, to be centered, and to eliminate stupid ideas from your inventory.
Our public education system, unfortunately, has managed to erase a lot of risk from life...even to the extent of removing the risk of being a "loser" in a sporting event. Everyone's a winner after all. They reward the simple act of staying in school as an accomplishment, and stress image and self-love over substance in most every subject.
When I was young, one of my acquaintances left a candy bar in his sleeping bag with him one night...and was killed by a black bear intent on getting to it. In the wilderness you either win or lose...for real...and a teacher telling you you're special isn't going to save you from a stupid mistake.
My father, who had grown up living off the land during the depression, often times alone in the wilderness, once told me, "there is no such thing as an accident in the woods...there is only stupid, because accidents are the result of mistakes, and making mistakes is simply stupid."
There is no real excuse for perfectly normal, average, folks like myself to be stupid. Everyone makes mistakes...some dumber than others...but being stupid is on a whole different level. Politicians create laws and institutions which encourage stupidity, and discourage discourse or discussion, being the enemies of stupidity, in order to create permanent voting blocks.
To maintain these voting blocks, they must keep the people within ignorant. It also helps to keep them angry, paranoid, and desperate. The use of emotions is the bedrock of managing stupidity.
It's important to make sure people have the basic needs of life, but not too much as they would then begin to think "outside the box" of obedience. They have to be paranoid...they should believe they can't succeed outside of the box because "the man will just keep me down" or some other rationale. They remain desperate as they are constantly living from paycheck to paycheck, or welfare check to welfare check. Angry, because they are told by the politicians that "rich, white republicans/democrats are pulling the strings" and keeping you from the life "you deserve."
There's a key phrase...does any intelligent person actually believe they "deserve" anything? Or do they believe they can "earn" things? Do they demand respect, because a teacher told them they "deserve" it, or do they work hard in order to earn respect?
Obviously these strategies work...sometimes it takes decades to really bear the fruit of these stupification programs...but they do eventually create increasingly stupid blocks of voters and supporters of "causes." This is invaluable for the politician who needs to increase their political power, or to rob society of its wealth for their own benefit, or to create a support base for permanent re-election.
So when a politician says you "deserve" something...they believe you are among the stupid. When they tell you that "it won't cost you a penny as long as you don't make $250,000 a year or more"...they think you are stupid.
When a politician explains you have a "right" to other people's labor or property...such as "giving" you health care paid for by others...they are assuming you are too stupid to think about that statement before cheering.
And when you find yourself marching in protests...waving signs like the one in the photo...you can be sure the politician was right. The guy in the photo is amazingly stupid...almost beyond description stupid...but like most truly stupid people, he is incapable of knowing it. He is desperate, paranoid, and arrogantly angry at those who refuse to be stupid along with him.
The Professor
Management Styles that don't work...and why government uses them.
____________________________________________
My last article exposed some of the completely unnecessary micro-management functions, by as yet non-existent government agencies, written into the health care "reform" bill. Now I'll give some insight into why such things matter.
After the many decades I've spent working with and consulting to hundreds of business firms, I have seen just about every management "style" that probably exists. One style, which is apparent in a surprising number of small firms, is something I call the Delusional/Paranoid (D/P) style.
This management style is a direct reflection of the business owner's psychological state of mind...and it comes in many degrees, from the moderate to the extreme. The key elements are based first in the delusion that the manager is simply smarter than others, and that others must be monitored constantly or they will not be able to function at an acceptable level.
This is not surprising, or shocking, as the business owner is the one who has put everything at risk in starting a business. It's natural they worry about things "going right." Most managers are concerned with quality control, what their employees are doing when at work, and other issues of work quality...but the D/P manager just takes it a bit further than most.
I have seen situations where employees are grossly underutilized. As soon as they finish a project, they have to wait for the boss to approve it before moving onto another project. They may spend 15 minutes making a part...then wait an hour for approval...then spend another 15 minutes on the next part, and the cycle continues.
There was one example, a boss unable to trust anyone else to inspect parts...even though he had a nearly 0% rejection rate, that he worked as a full-time parts inspector rather than running the business. He did that work after the plant closed every evening...literally putting in 14 to 16 hour days.
The problem was that his micro-management was a "cost item" and not a revenue item. The time he spent on the floor inspecting parts did not contribute to the value of the product, and he could not charge for it, so there was no offsetting revenue to balance the expense. In essence, he worked all day for free.
The second element is the degree of paranoia the owner has in regards to employees and others. In extreme cases, the manager is certain employees are stealing, though there is no proof, or that they are conspiring to ruin the business, to steal ideas and technology, or to break out and start a competitive firm.
Now, of course, all of those things have happened and are possible. But the D/P manager, again, takes these fears to the extreme. Once again, oversight and micro-management is the response. And again the time and effort put into this oversight is an expense not balanced by added value.
Obviously every business will expend some degree of effort on monitoring employees and managing the work place. But these functions are direct expenses, and do not directly add to the value of the product so cannot be charged against the customer. The bottom line, for a business firm to grow beyond a certain very base level managers need to learn to train, trust, and to delegate or they will simply not be able to handle more than a few employees. Those who learn these skills can grow their firms into larger firms and eventually into public corporations.
So there is a direct relationship: the more time and effort spent on micro-management, the more the costs go up without increasing product, and the more expensive the product becomes per unit. Eventually the company languishes or goes broke.
I have seen similar styles in small divisions of large firms, where a local manager overdoes management of a sales force...leading to high turnover in the ranks due to frustration and loss of profit as costs go up without contributing to value. On the other hand, I've seen award-winning sales crews where managers watch from a distance, giving sales people "permission to excel" and guidance only when asked. Those sales managers grow value instead of expense.
Here's the bottom line: all management function comes at a cost. A certain degree of management is a necessary cost, but a management heavy firm loses money and the over-abundance of management is an expense that does not contribute to production. Therefore, the product costs more...there's less of it...and the customers pay more and make do with less. Unless, of course, there is competition...then the firm closes its doors as the customers move on.
This simple rule is true for a small business, a large firm, or an entire industry. The health care "industry" in the US, for example, is actually a term for the conglomeration of hundreds of thousands of small and large firms...from huge corporations to private practices. All of these firms put out a product, for which they have to charge us, the consumer, to cover their costs. One of those costs is management.
The health care bill is absolutely flooded with new micro-management requirements...not by the owners of these firms...but by government bureaucrats who will contribute nothing to the value of the products and services being delivered. This is simply a laundry list of new expense items...and the government will not be paying them.
These new expenses will run into the trillions of dollars...literally...and they will be passed on to the consumer, until the consumer is simply unable to pay. Then, services and products will simply become scarce, prices will rise dramatically, and the consumer will learn to live without...because there will be no competition. Every health care provider will have to expense the micro-management from government...no one will be exempt, so, as in a monopoly market, the prices will skyrocket as products become scarce.
When politicians tell you that health care is "unaffordable" now...or that the bill will "make it more affordable" or "balance the budget" they are either flat out lying to you or they are incredibly foolish individuals. Anyone who has ever run a business, or done a household budget for that matter, can look at the reality of the situation and understand that.
Of course, many elected officials are Delusional/Paranoids. Looking at it from their viewpoint...we're way too stupid to figure out what's happening to us and they don't dare tell us the truth...as we couldn't handle it...and they certainly can't give us choices. That might confuse us and screw up everything.
Maybe it's time for a little turnover in employees...and guess what...we're the employers. This coming November seems a good time to start!
The Professor
My last article exposed some of the completely unnecessary micro-management functions, by as yet non-existent government agencies, written into the health care "reform" bill. Now I'll give some insight into why such things matter.
After the many decades I've spent working with and consulting to hundreds of business firms, I have seen just about every management "style" that probably exists. One style, which is apparent in a surprising number of small firms, is something I call the Delusional/Paranoid (D/P) style.
This management style is a direct reflection of the business owner's psychological state of mind...and it comes in many degrees, from the moderate to the extreme. The key elements are based first in the delusion that the manager is simply smarter than others, and that others must be monitored constantly or they will not be able to function at an acceptable level.
This is not surprising, or shocking, as the business owner is the one who has put everything at risk in starting a business. It's natural they worry about things "going right." Most managers are concerned with quality control, what their employees are doing when at work, and other issues of work quality...but the D/P manager just takes it a bit further than most.
I have seen situations where employees are grossly underutilized. As soon as they finish a project, they have to wait for the boss to approve it before moving onto another project. They may spend 15 minutes making a part...then wait an hour for approval...then spend another 15 minutes on the next part, and the cycle continues.
There was one example, a boss unable to trust anyone else to inspect parts...even though he had a nearly 0% rejection rate, that he worked as a full-time parts inspector rather than running the business. He did that work after the plant closed every evening...literally putting in 14 to 16 hour days.
The problem was that his micro-management was a "cost item" and not a revenue item. The time he spent on the floor inspecting parts did not contribute to the value of the product, and he could not charge for it, so there was no offsetting revenue to balance the expense. In essence, he worked all day for free.
The second element is the degree of paranoia the owner has in regards to employees and others. In extreme cases, the manager is certain employees are stealing, though there is no proof, or that they are conspiring to ruin the business, to steal ideas and technology, or to break out and start a competitive firm.
Now, of course, all of those things have happened and are possible. But the D/P manager, again, takes these fears to the extreme. Once again, oversight and micro-management is the response. And again the time and effort put into this oversight is an expense not balanced by added value.
Obviously every business will expend some degree of effort on monitoring employees and managing the work place. But these functions are direct expenses, and do not directly add to the value of the product so cannot be charged against the customer. The bottom line, for a business firm to grow beyond a certain very base level managers need to learn to train, trust, and to delegate or they will simply not be able to handle more than a few employees. Those who learn these skills can grow their firms into larger firms and eventually into public corporations.
So there is a direct relationship: the more time and effort spent on micro-management, the more the costs go up without increasing product, and the more expensive the product becomes per unit. Eventually the company languishes or goes broke.
I have seen similar styles in small divisions of large firms, where a local manager overdoes management of a sales force...leading to high turnover in the ranks due to frustration and loss of profit as costs go up without contributing to value. On the other hand, I've seen award-winning sales crews where managers watch from a distance, giving sales people "permission to excel" and guidance only when asked. Those sales managers grow value instead of expense.
Here's the bottom line: all management function comes at a cost. A certain degree of management is a necessary cost, but a management heavy firm loses money and the over-abundance of management is an expense that does not contribute to production. Therefore, the product costs more...there's less of it...and the customers pay more and make do with less. Unless, of course, there is competition...then the firm closes its doors as the customers move on.
This simple rule is true for a small business, a large firm, or an entire industry. The health care "industry" in the US, for example, is actually a term for the conglomeration of hundreds of thousands of small and large firms...from huge corporations to private practices. All of these firms put out a product, for which they have to charge us, the consumer, to cover their costs. One of those costs is management.
The health care bill is absolutely flooded with new micro-management requirements...not by the owners of these firms...but by government bureaucrats who will contribute nothing to the value of the products and services being delivered. This is simply a laundry list of new expense items...and the government will not be paying them.
These new expenses will run into the trillions of dollars...literally...and they will be passed on to the consumer, until the consumer is simply unable to pay. Then, services and products will simply become scarce, prices will rise dramatically, and the consumer will learn to live without...because there will be no competition. Every health care provider will have to expense the micro-management from government...no one will be exempt, so, as in a monopoly market, the prices will skyrocket as products become scarce.
When politicians tell you that health care is "unaffordable" now...or that the bill will "make it more affordable" or "balance the budget" they are either flat out lying to you or they are incredibly foolish individuals. Anyone who has ever run a business, or done a household budget for that matter, can look at the reality of the situation and understand that.
Of course, many elected officials are Delusional/Paranoids. Looking at it from their viewpoint...we're way too stupid to figure out what's happening to us and they don't dare tell us the truth...as we couldn't handle it...and they certainly can't give us choices. That might confuse us and screw up everything.
Maybe it's time for a little turnover in employees...and guess what...we're the employers. This coming November seems a good time to start!
The Professor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
