|
Last week my computer died. It felt like having my favorite coffee, my favorite dinner, my favorite dessert was taken away, stolen, confiscated. One single desktop is my lone link to the digital age. So withdrawal was even worse than quitting tobacco cold turkey.
Now I’m breaking in a new machine. Guess what? All my bookmarks are gone. I have to search for websites which used to be a click away. Worse my credentials no longer work. Many digital vendors VERIFY customers by pinging their mobile devices. I don’t own cellphones or PDAs or Gamer handhelds, so I’m treated like a Syrian refugee in the great funky CLOUD. If you’re dull as dirt and aspire to nothing more than becoming a couch potato, you’re probably OK. For the rest of us who’ve harbored a few original thoughts over the last two years, we’re in deep dog do. The CLOUD mavens mistrust us like nobody’s business. They want to make us feel like worms under stormtrooper’s boots. I hate taking calls from robotic voices that give me lists of numbers to verify I’m a human being. The CLOUD knows everything. The CLOUD is the law. The CLOUD judges everyone. Consumers are assumed to be terrorists. We must prove ourselves otherwise. There are no courts of appeal. The CLOUD mavens are judges, juries and executioners. Welcome to the bright future on the information highway. Mind the tolls.
In the last blog we showed two Capitalist deficiencies that inflate the costs of products. Financial wizards and ad promotors escalate retail prices by 13% and 7% respectively.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
 | 
| ||
Businesses show their best faces for prospective customers. Successful businesses often earmark part of their profits toward community projects. Being a good corporate citizen wins consumer loyalty.
___Still, the marketplace doesn't necessarily reward businesses with altruistic public images. Governments allow tax write-offs for charitable donations, but nonprofitable businesses get nothing since they have no gains to write off. Capitalism rewards winners, not losers. Businesses cannot afford generosity when they're bleeding red ink.
___For neoliberal free-market capitalism, businesses are the prime engines of prosperity with winners and losers at every phase of the economic cycle. Neoliberal capitalism is a zero-sum game, and it functions like a pyramid scheme where top dwellers control the most valuable loot.
___Does this sound the death knell for the rest of us? Not necessarily.
___Technologic progress renders a trickledown effect that rewards even bottom feeders over the longrun.
___The economy can be organized in five sectors: the industrial sector, the financial sector, the retail sector, the healthcare sector and auxiliary services such as middlemen. Job growth in the 21st-century has come largely from the service sector, which includes information technologies. During prosperous years, one or more sectors will be favored over others. The same holds true for economic downturns where job losses occur in some sectors more than others.
___Free markets abandon "sunset" industries in favor of innovative enterprises that produce stuff faster, cheaper and more efficiently. Society must deal with the casualties of technologic change. Smart governments enact programs to support and retrain discarded workers who have lost jobs to technologic progress.
___Hence, businesses and governments have different aims and goals. Businesses want to make profits. To be sure, businesses (listed in stock markets) are obligated to shareholders to generate greater and greater profits. On the other hand, governments are obligated to their citizens. Governments desire more jobs so that citizens earn enough to feed their families and enjoy recreational pursuits. Moreover, governments discourage industries causing illnesses or spoiling the environment. They let businesses reap generous profits if they generate worthwhile jobs and healthful products. Lastly, governments protect citizens from foreign predators and domestic upheavals.
___Naturally governments collect taxes. For most citizens this amounts to about half of one's personal earnings, after paying user fees and sales taxes. Top-dwellers on the economic pyramid pay far less in proportion to their assets and earnings. The top-dwellers are believed to create prosperity, so they get loopholes in the free-market system. Fair or unfair, capitalist free markets are far more efficient than government bureaucracies.
___Money is a convenient tool in place of straightforward barter. Car dealerships prefer down payments in cash rather than truckloads of potatoes. However, the money supply comes from Central Banks that print bills out of thin air. Governments vouch for the new currency, but the judgments of users give money its ultimate value.
___Central Banks lend nine dollars for every dollar they have on hand. Big commercial banks are the recipients of this largess. They in turn lend out nine times their stash to big corporations. With each step down to the real economy, money becomes further diluted, and the interest demanded by the lenders increases.
___Retailers, hair stylists, truck drivers and librarians borrow at the highest interest-rates, and they get money diluted to less than 1% of that vouched for by governments. The armed thief who robs a convenience store of $300 is punished more severely than the white-collar embezzler who steals $300 million. Yet citizens show an uncanny trust in governments, despite national debts which have mushroomed to astronomic levels in recent years.
___Prices of goods & services follow the laws of supply and demand. It is very hard to predict whether new products will find loads of eager buyers. Established businesses tend to be conservative marketers. They sell "improved" copies of products that already have good track records with consumers. This is why brands have "face" value beyond the products they represent.
___To create well-known brands, businesses must spend substantial funds to develop an attractive image. After which, they flood the media with the image until it becomes a familiar topic in the public domain. Through exposure and advertising, branded products acquire a favorable niche in the collective consciousness.
___Promotional advertising adds to the costs of setting products on retail shelves, and consumers are the ones who ultimately pay the surcharge. In a competitive marketplace, vendors devote substantial funds to advertise their products, yet consumers seldom notice the higher costs, since other products are topped up as well. In extreme cases, shoppers will pay extra for glitzy adverts, deeming them worthwhile if "deluxe" products have a "perceived" reputation for reliability.
___Promotional advertising has become a hidden surcharge on the retail prices of everything from smartphones to waste baskets. And there are further surcharges.
___When businesses introduce new lines of goods, they need funds for development costs and manufacturing facilities before a single product is sold. Few corporations have enough cash on hand to pay for new product lines. They're forced to borrow from bankers or to issue bonds, either of which must be repaid with interest.
___Guess who picks up the tab for corporate expansion and debt repayment?
___Consumers pay surcharges on retail products whose prices include development costs, acquisition costs, promotional costs and bonuses for upper management who are orchestrating this financial wizardry.
___Nowadays we have a service-oriented economy where dozens of promoters, spin doctors and financial gurus manifest marketplace niches for new products. The greatest invention since the iron-rimmed wheel won't find buyers until substantial amounts of promotional hoopla has been expended. When consumers purchase branded products, they're paying the fees of stock brokers, investment bankers, advert moguls and spin doctors, all of whose cuts are added to retail prices. For some products the overhead may reach as high as 30%.
___Neoliberal free markets aren't as efficient as they're touted to be. A simple barter system would be more efficient and cheaper for many folks. That's why smart shoppers check out flea markets and garage sales.
___Suppose we take the gross earnings of the median citizen. Some of the total is clawed back right away in withholding taxes and user fees for unemployment insurance and pensions. Goods and services carry surcharges for sales taxes, advert markups and profit margins to pay back corporate debts. What's left is intrinsic worth. In other words, the basic costs in the human effort and resources that deliver the product to retail shelves. The actual percentages will vary from nation to nation. To be fair, you must balance the tax burden with government services.
___In the following diagram you receive a mere 31% in value for whatever you spend.
___We expect governments to promote social fairness and prosperity. Should this cost us 69% of our earnings? Has government and free-market capitalism taken too large a cut?
___Major corporations do business all around the globe. If a nation penalizes a multinational corporation, the company will move its operations to another nation. Business investments create jobs, and those investments go to nations where the labor costs and taxes are the lowest. In short, governments have lost leverage with multinationals which gravitate to nations that offer the sweetest deals.
___Another problem is technological change. Governments are forever playing catchup since innovative businesses find new ways to bypass existing regulations. Governments tend to enact solutions for yesterday's inequities. Their short-sighted programs hinder job creation rather than encourage it.
___It's not a matter of liberal or conservative, socialist or libertarian. Political fixes don't help because they seldom reach the heart of the problem, which is systemic overhead.
___There are sensible alternatives. Stay tuned to this blog.
___Still, the marketplace doesn't necessarily reward businesses with altruistic public images. Governments allow tax write-offs for charitable donations, but nonprofitable businesses get nothing since they have no gains to write off. Capitalism rewards winners, not losers. Businesses cannot afford generosity when they're bleeding red ink.
___For neoliberal free-market capitalism, businesses are the prime engines of prosperity with winners and losers at every phase of the economic cycle. Neoliberal capitalism is a zero-sum game, and it functions like a pyramid scheme where top dwellers control the most valuable loot.
___Does this sound the death knell for the rest of us? Not necessarily.
___Technologic progress renders a trickledown effect that rewards even bottom feeders over the longrun.
___The economy can be organized in five sectors: the industrial sector, the financial sector, the retail sector, the healthcare sector and auxiliary services such as middlemen. Job growth in the 21st-century has come largely from the service sector, which includes information technologies. During prosperous years, one or more sectors will be favored over others. The same holds true for economic downturns where job losses occur in some sectors more than others.
___Free markets abandon "sunset" industries in favor of innovative enterprises that produce stuff faster, cheaper and more efficiently. Society must deal with the casualties of technologic change. Smart governments enact programs to support and retrain discarded workers who have lost jobs to technologic progress.
___Hence, businesses and governments have different aims and goals. Businesses want to make profits. To be sure, businesses (listed in stock markets) are obligated to shareholders to generate greater and greater profits. On the other hand, governments are obligated to their citizens. Governments desire more jobs so that citizens earn enough to feed their families and enjoy recreational pursuits. Moreover, governments discourage industries causing illnesses or spoiling the environment. They let businesses reap generous profits if they generate worthwhile jobs and healthful products. Lastly, governments protect citizens from foreign predators and domestic upheavals.
___Naturally governments collect taxes. For most citizens this amounts to about half of one's personal earnings, after paying user fees and sales taxes. Top-dwellers on the economic pyramid pay far less in proportion to their assets and earnings. The top-dwellers are believed to create prosperity, so they get loopholes in the free-market system. Fair or unfair, capitalist free markets are far more efficient than government bureaucracies.
___Money is a convenient tool in place of straightforward barter. Car dealerships prefer down payments in cash rather than truckloads of potatoes. However, the money supply comes from Central Banks that print bills out of thin air. Governments vouch for the new currency, but the judgments of users give money its ultimate value.
___Central Banks lend nine dollars for every dollar they have on hand. Big commercial banks are the recipients of this largess. They in turn lend out nine times their stash to big corporations. With each step down to the real economy, money becomes further diluted, and the interest demanded by the lenders increases.
___Retailers, hair stylists, truck drivers and librarians borrow at the highest interest-rates, and they get money diluted to less than 1% of that vouched for by governments. The armed thief who robs a convenience store of $300 is punished more severely than the white-collar embezzler who steals $300 million. Yet citizens show an uncanny trust in governments, despite national debts which have mushroomed to astronomic levels in recent years.
___Prices of goods & services follow the laws of supply and demand. It is very hard to predict whether new products will find loads of eager buyers. Established businesses tend to be conservative marketers. They sell "improved" copies of products that already have good track records with consumers. This is why brands have "face" value beyond the products they represent.
___To create well-known brands, businesses must spend substantial funds to develop an attractive image. After which, they flood the media with the image until it becomes a familiar topic in the public domain. Through exposure and advertising, branded products acquire a favorable niche in the collective consciousness.
___Promotional advertising adds to the costs of setting products on retail shelves, and consumers are the ones who ultimately pay the surcharge. In a competitive marketplace, vendors devote substantial funds to advertise their products, yet consumers seldom notice the higher costs, since other products are topped up as well. In extreme cases, shoppers will pay extra for glitzy adverts, deeming them worthwhile if "deluxe" products have a "perceived" reputation for reliability.
___Promotional advertising has become a hidden surcharge on the retail prices of everything from smartphones to waste baskets. And there are further surcharges.
___When businesses introduce new lines of goods, they need funds for development costs and manufacturing facilities before a single product is sold. Few corporations have enough cash on hand to pay for new product lines. They're forced to borrow from bankers or to issue bonds, either of which must be repaid with interest.
___Guess who picks up the tab for corporate expansion and debt repayment?
___Consumers pay surcharges on retail products whose prices include development costs, acquisition costs, promotional costs and bonuses for upper management who are orchestrating this financial wizardry.
___Nowadays we have a service-oriented economy where dozens of promoters, spin doctors and financial gurus manifest marketplace niches for new products. The greatest invention since the iron-rimmed wheel won't find buyers until substantial amounts of promotional hoopla has been expended. When consumers purchase branded products, they're paying the fees of stock brokers, investment bankers, advert moguls and spin doctors, all of whose cuts are added to retail prices. For some products the overhead may reach as high as 30%.
___Neoliberal free markets aren't as efficient as they're touted to be. A simple barter system would be more efficient and cheaper for many folks. That's why smart shoppers check out flea markets and garage sales.
___Suppose we take the gross earnings of the median citizen. Some of the total is clawed back right away in withholding taxes and user fees for unemployment insurance and pensions. Goods and services carry surcharges for sales taxes, advert markups and profit margins to pay back corporate debts. What's left is intrinsic worth. In other words, the basic costs in the human effort and resources that deliver the product to retail shelves. The actual percentages will vary from nation to nation. To be fair, you must balance the tax burden with government services.
___In the following diagram you receive a mere 31% in value for whatever you spend.
___We expect governments to promote social fairness and prosperity. Should this cost us 69% of our earnings? Has government and free-market capitalism taken too large a cut?
___Major corporations do business all around the globe. If a nation penalizes a multinational corporation, the company will move its operations to another nation. Business investments create jobs, and those investments go to nations where the labor costs and taxes are the lowest. In short, governments have lost leverage with multinationals which gravitate to nations that offer the sweetest deals.
___Another problem is technological change. Governments are forever playing catchup since innovative businesses find new ways to bypass existing regulations. Governments tend to enact solutions for yesterday's inequities. Their short-sighted programs hinder job creation rather than encourage it.
___It's not a matter of liberal or conservative, socialist or libertarian. Political fixes don't help because they seldom reach the heart of the problem, which is systemic overhead.
___There are sensible alternatives. Stay tuned to this blog.
| biz_co-op.pdf |
Business corporations strive to present their best faces for wary customers. Serious businesses will earmark some profits toward community projects. Being a good corporate citizen wins consumer loyalty.
___Still, the marketplace doesn't necessarily reward businesses with faultless public images. Governments may offer tax breaks for charitable donations, but nonprofitable businesses get no love since they have no gains to write off. Capitalism rewards winners, not losers. Businesses cannot afford good will gestures when their bottom lines bleed red ink.
___In a liberal free-market version of capitalism, businesses are the prime engines of prosperity which distinguishes winners and losers in every phase of the economic cycle. If capitalism were a zero-sum game, it would be judged a criminal scam. Luckily, technologic progress renders a trickledown effect that rewards even losers over the longrun.
___The total economy consists of five sectors: the industrial sector, the financial sector, the retail sector, the healthcare sector and auxiliary services such as go-betweens. Job growth in the 21st-century has come largely from the service sector, which includes information technologies. During prosperous years, one or more sectors will be favored over others. The same holds true for economic downturns where job losses occur in some sectors more than others.
___Governments of every political stripe are stewards of the economic progress which has evolved and grown complex in current times. Governments are the regulators, and they manage the economy so that it benefits the largest portion of their citizens.
___Free markets ignore "sunset" industries in favor of innovative enterprises that produce stuff faster, cheaper and more efficiently. Democratic governments must deal with the casualties of technologic change. They enact programs to support and retrain discarded workers who have lost jobs to technologic progress.
___Hence, businesses and governments have different aims and goals. Businesses want to make profits. To be sure, businesses (listed in stock markets) are obligated to shareholders to generate greater and greater profits. On the other hand, governments are obligated to their citizens. Governments wish for more jobs so that citizens earn enough to feed their families and enjoy recreational pursuits. Moreover, governments penalize industries that cause illnesses in workers and surrounding neighborhoods. In essence, governments let businesses reap generous profits so long as those businesses generate worthwhile jobs and healthful products.
___Prices of goods & services follow the laws of supply and demand. It is very hard to predict whether new products will find loads of eager buyers. Established business tend to be conservative marketers. They sell "improved" copies of products that already have good track records with consumers. This is why brands have "face" value beyond the products they represent.
___To create well-known brands, businesses must spend substantial funds to develop an attractive image. After which, they flood the media with the image until it becomes familiar topic of the public domain. Through exposure and advertising, branded products acquire a favorable niche in the collective consciousness.
___Promotional advertising adds to the costs of setting products on retail shelves, and consumers are the ones who ultimately pay the surcharge. In a competitive marketplace, vendors will often devote substantial funds to advertise their products, yet consumers don't always notice the markups, since most vendors' prices are topped up, more or less, to the same degree. In other cases, shoppers will pay extra for glitzy adverts, deeming them worthwhile if heralded products have a "perceived" reputation for reliability.
___Promotional advertising has become a hidden surcharge on the retail prices of everything from smartphones to waste baskets. And there are further surcharges.
___When businesses introduce new lines of goods, they need funds for development costs and manufacturing facilities before a single product is sold. Few corporations have enough cash on hand to pay for the new product lines. They're forced to borrow from bankers or to issue bonds, either of which must be repaid with interest.
___Guess who ultimately picks up the tab for corporate expansion and debt repayment?
___Consumers pay surcharges on retail products whose prices include development costs, acquisition costs, promotional costs and bonuses for upper management who are orchestrating this financial wizardry.
___Economists say hidden extras, which have been added to retail price tags, are normal for competitive businesses in the free-market system. Economists will cite similar markups the go back 2,000 years to the Roman Empire and Han Dynasty.
___In ancient times merchant vessels were sometimes sunk at sea, so traders would inflate prices to cover the losses incurred during delivery. Roman aristocrats would pay an arm & leg for Chinese silk. Confucian mandarins would pay a small fortune for spices from the Indian subcontinent. But these were rational charges for services rendered, even if you include insurance premiums. In ancient times the markups from financial backers and promoters were a small percentage of the actual retail prices.
___Nowadays we have a service-oriented economy where dozens of promoters, spin doctors and financial gurus are needed to find lucrative marketplace niches for new products. The greatest invention since the iron-rimmed wheel won't find buyers until substantial amounts of promotional hoopla has been expended. When consumers purchase branded products, they're paying the fees of stock brokers, investment bankers, advert moguls and spin doctors, all of whose cuts are added to retail prices. For some products the overhead may reach as high as 40%.
___The total burden for median taxpayers in developed nations is somewhere between 45% and 55% of their disposable incomes. The tax bite includes income taxes, sales taxes, pole taxes and user fees for government services. In truth citizens only get to spend about 50% of what they earn. On top of the tax grabs, price tags have already been bloated to cover a menagerie of middlemen. In developed economies, consumers must pay double, even triple for retail purchases. In emerging economies, the majority of consumers can barely afford basic food and shelter.
___A simple barter system would be more efficient and cheaper for many folks. That's why smart shoppers check out flea markets and garage sales.
___To add salt to consumer wounds, the money itself loses value year over year. Carefully regulated economies keep the rate of depreciation at 98% year over year. The dollar you had at the beginning of a given year is worth 98¢ at year's end. After 25 years your dollar loses almost 40% of its initial value.
___Money loses value because central bankers create new money from nothing and then multiply the effect as they lend out ten times what they possess.
___The entire economic setup is bewildering for consumers. It breeds anxiety and stress because everyone slides down the ski slope of monetary depreciation. When you add on the tax grabs and implied payouts to middlemen, every good and service is priced above its intrinsic value. The only way to get a fair bargain is to attend bankruptcy auctions where you may find stuff at 80% discounts.
___Successful franchises in the capitalist milieu are expansionist franchises. That's how a few lucky dudes can turn basement hobbies into multinational corporations. It's human nature to admire and copy such amazing winners, but copycats rarely achieve the same degree of success. In practice, it's hard to become successful without a healthy chunk of seed capital.
___Capital itself has a quantitative threshold that separates winners from losers. Without truckloads of capital, you'll need partners, and your future profits will be diluted by lenders, promoters and tax collectors. However, those who have sufficient seed capital can get truckloads of more capital, and they'll almost always increase their initial outlays.
___Capital attracts more capital unless the player is a total moron. Even if businesses do poorly, lenders will bend over backwards to ensure that unprofitable businesses don't fail altogether. Likewise governments will coddle big businesses or risk angry mobs of unemployed citizens. When one of the big boys fails, it's like removing the bottom card in a house of cards.
___Needless to say, ordinary folks don't receive the same leniency. The big boys can shelter large portions of their wealth from the taxman. Meanwhile, an armed thief who robs $500 from a convenience store is punished more severely than the con artist who embezzles $500 million.
___Only governments can level the gameboard for one and all. But how?
___Governments have two functions: to regulate the economy and to protect citizens from foreign predators. In the 21st-century, the predators are mostly home grown.
___Major corporations do business all around the globe. If a nation penalizes a multinational corporation, the company will move its operations to another nation. Business investments create jobs, and those investments go to nations where the labor costs and taxes are the lowest. In short, governments have lost leverage with multinationals which gravitate to nations that offer the sweetest deals.
___Another problem is technological change. Governments are forever playing catchup since innovative businesses find new ways to bypass existing regulations. Governments tend to enact solutions for yesterday's inequities. Their short-sighted programs hinder job creation rather than encourage it.
___It's not a matter of liberal or conservative, socialist or libertarian. Political fixes don't help because they seldom reach the heart of the problem. But there are sensible alternatives. Stay tuned to this blog.
___Still, the marketplace doesn't necessarily reward businesses with faultless public images. Governments may offer tax breaks for charitable donations, but nonprofitable businesses get no love since they have no gains to write off. Capitalism rewards winners, not losers. Businesses cannot afford good will gestures when their bottom lines bleed red ink.
___In a liberal free-market version of capitalism, businesses are the prime engines of prosperity which distinguishes winners and losers in every phase of the economic cycle. If capitalism were a zero-sum game, it would be judged a criminal scam. Luckily, technologic progress renders a trickledown effect that rewards even losers over the longrun.
___The total economy consists of five sectors: the industrial sector, the financial sector, the retail sector, the healthcare sector and auxiliary services such as go-betweens. Job growth in the 21st-century has come largely from the service sector, which includes information technologies. During prosperous years, one or more sectors will be favored over others. The same holds true for economic downturns where job losses occur in some sectors more than others.
___Governments of every political stripe are stewards of the economic progress which has evolved and grown complex in current times. Governments are the regulators, and they manage the economy so that it benefits the largest portion of their citizens.
___Free markets ignore "sunset" industries in favor of innovative enterprises that produce stuff faster, cheaper and more efficiently. Democratic governments must deal with the casualties of technologic change. They enact programs to support and retrain discarded workers who have lost jobs to technologic progress.
___Hence, businesses and governments have different aims and goals. Businesses want to make profits. To be sure, businesses (listed in stock markets) are obligated to shareholders to generate greater and greater profits. On the other hand, governments are obligated to their citizens. Governments wish for more jobs so that citizens earn enough to feed their families and enjoy recreational pursuits. Moreover, governments penalize industries that cause illnesses in workers and surrounding neighborhoods. In essence, governments let businesses reap generous profits so long as those businesses generate worthwhile jobs and healthful products.
___Prices of goods & services follow the laws of supply and demand. It is very hard to predict whether new products will find loads of eager buyers. Established business tend to be conservative marketers. They sell "improved" copies of products that already have good track records with consumers. This is why brands have "face" value beyond the products they represent.
___To create well-known brands, businesses must spend substantial funds to develop an attractive image. After which, they flood the media with the image until it becomes familiar topic of the public domain. Through exposure and advertising, branded products acquire a favorable niche in the collective consciousness.
___Promotional advertising adds to the costs of setting products on retail shelves, and consumers are the ones who ultimately pay the surcharge. In a competitive marketplace, vendors will often devote substantial funds to advertise their products, yet consumers don't always notice the markups, since most vendors' prices are topped up, more or less, to the same degree. In other cases, shoppers will pay extra for glitzy adverts, deeming them worthwhile if heralded products have a "perceived" reputation for reliability.
___Promotional advertising has become a hidden surcharge on the retail prices of everything from smartphones to waste baskets. And there are further surcharges.
___When businesses introduce new lines of goods, they need funds for development costs and manufacturing facilities before a single product is sold. Few corporations have enough cash on hand to pay for the new product lines. They're forced to borrow from bankers or to issue bonds, either of which must be repaid with interest.
___Guess who ultimately picks up the tab for corporate expansion and debt repayment?
___Consumers pay surcharges on retail products whose prices include development costs, acquisition costs, promotional costs and bonuses for upper management who are orchestrating this financial wizardry.
___Economists say hidden extras, which have been added to retail price tags, are normal for competitive businesses in the free-market system. Economists will cite similar markups the go back 2,000 years to the Roman Empire and Han Dynasty.
___In ancient times merchant vessels were sometimes sunk at sea, so traders would inflate prices to cover the losses incurred during delivery. Roman aristocrats would pay an arm & leg for Chinese silk. Confucian mandarins would pay a small fortune for spices from the Indian subcontinent. But these were rational charges for services rendered, even if you include insurance premiums. In ancient times the markups from financial backers and promoters were a small percentage of the actual retail prices.
___Nowadays we have a service-oriented economy where dozens of promoters, spin doctors and financial gurus are needed to find lucrative marketplace niches for new products. The greatest invention since the iron-rimmed wheel won't find buyers until substantial amounts of promotional hoopla has been expended. When consumers purchase branded products, they're paying the fees of stock brokers, investment bankers, advert moguls and spin doctors, all of whose cuts are added to retail prices. For some products the overhead may reach as high as 40%.
___The total burden for median taxpayers in developed nations is somewhere between 45% and 55% of their disposable incomes. The tax bite includes income taxes, sales taxes, pole taxes and user fees for government services. In truth citizens only get to spend about 50% of what they earn. On top of the tax grabs, price tags have already been bloated to cover a menagerie of middlemen. In developed economies, consumers must pay double, even triple for retail purchases. In emerging economies, the majority of consumers can barely afford basic food and shelter.
___A simple barter system would be more efficient and cheaper for many folks. That's why smart shoppers check out flea markets and garage sales.
___To add salt to consumer wounds, the money itself loses value year over year. Carefully regulated economies keep the rate of depreciation at 98% year over year. The dollar you had at the beginning of a given year is worth 98¢ at year's end. After 25 years your dollar loses almost 40% of its initial value.
___Money loses value because central bankers create new money from nothing and then multiply the effect as they lend out ten times what they possess.
___The entire economic setup is bewildering for consumers. It breeds anxiety and stress because everyone slides down the ski slope of monetary depreciation. When you add on the tax grabs and implied payouts to middlemen, every good and service is priced above its intrinsic value. The only way to get a fair bargain is to attend bankruptcy auctions where you may find stuff at 80% discounts.
___Successful franchises in the capitalist milieu are expansionist franchises. That's how a few lucky dudes can turn basement hobbies into multinational corporations. It's human nature to admire and copy such amazing winners, but copycats rarely achieve the same degree of success. In practice, it's hard to become successful without a healthy chunk of seed capital.
___Capital itself has a quantitative threshold that separates winners from losers. Without truckloads of capital, you'll need partners, and your future profits will be diluted by lenders, promoters and tax collectors. However, those who have sufficient seed capital can get truckloads of more capital, and they'll almost always increase their initial outlays.
___Capital attracts more capital unless the player is a total moron. Even if businesses do poorly, lenders will bend over backwards to ensure that unprofitable businesses don't fail altogether. Likewise governments will coddle big businesses or risk angry mobs of unemployed citizens. When one of the big boys fails, it's like removing the bottom card in a house of cards.
___Needless to say, ordinary folks don't receive the same leniency. The big boys can shelter large portions of their wealth from the taxman. Meanwhile, an armed thief who robs $500 from a convenience store is punished more severely than the con artist who embezzles $500 million.
___Only governments can level the gameboard for one and all. But how?
___Governments have two functions: to regulate the economy and to protect citizens from foreign predators. In the 21st-century, the predators are mostly home grown.
___Major corporations do business all around the globe. If a nation penalizes a multinational corporation, the company will move its operations to another nation. Business investments create jobs, and those investments go to nations where the labor costs and taxes are the lowest. In short, governments have lost leverage with multinationals which gravitate to nations that offer the sweetest deals.
___Another problem is technological change. Governments are forever playing catchup since innovative businesses find new ways to bypass existing regulations. Governments tend to enact solutions for yesterday's inequities. Their short-sighted programs hinder job creation rather than encourage it.
___It's not a matter of liberal or conservative, socialist or libertarian. Political fixes don't help because they seldom reach the heart of the problem. But there are sensible alternatives. Stay tuned to this blog.
| biz_demo.pdf |
Business versus Democracy
___Business corporations strive to present their best faces for consumers and communities in which they operate. This is a smart agenda for businesses because folks will buy more products from "good guy" organizations. Businesses like to be known as "concerned corporate citizens" who will redirect some of their profits toward charitable community-oriented projects.
___However, the marketplace doesn't award businesses that do good turns simply to improve their public images. The marketplace awards profitable winners and shows no mercy for losers. Corporations cannot afford generous gestures unless they record substantial profits. CEOs must reduce charitable practices when their bottom lines show red ink.
___Democratic governments need to aid the casualties of technologic change. At any epoch, free markets will abandon "sunset" industries in favor of innovative corporations that produce goods & services faster, cheaper and more efficiently. Governments must support and retrain "sunset" workers who get shafted in the upheavals of progress.
___Businesses and governments have different aims and goals. Businesses want to make profits. To be sure, public businesses (listed in stock markets) are obligated to shareholders to generate greater and greater profits. On the other hand, governments are obligated to citizen aims. Governments want prosperous economic regimes that generate plentiful jobs. Both governments and business benefit from economic boom times. Businesses generate more jobs, and governments collect more taxes. When the economy turns sour, profits vanish, workers lose their jobs and democratic governments must pay for unemployment benefits.
___Democratic governments regulate the economy to minimize casualties from economic welfare. For instance, regulators ensure that food is healthy and nontoxic. Regulators punish corporations that sell products that don't perform as advertised or mistreat their employees. Governments hope to maintain robust economies that offer jobs and general prosperity. Poor economies encourage discontent and social unrest.
___Both governments and businesses yield to the law of supply and demand. Consumer demand will raise prices. Abundant supplies of products will lower prices. The marketplace decides if prices rise or fall. Governments can influence the economy to some degree by regulating the money supply. Businesses can influence prices by raising or lowering productive inventories.
___In boom times, everyone benefits. Governments collect enough revenues to improve the national infrastructure. Highways, bridges, railways and ocean ports facilitate trade and encourage business expansions.
___Liberal free-market economists expect governments and businesses to observe marketplace incentives. This works fine during the periods of prosperity. But when the economy falters, governments are left with the fallout. Businesses downsize their workforces, putting more citizens in need of social support. Governments must take up the slack while they receive fewer tax revenues.
___Government policies allow corporations a kind of no-fault insurance. Businesses can shave payrolls and send jobless workers to government caretakers. If worse comes to worse, businesses may seek bankruptcy protection and write off most of their debts. Governments must foot the bill for all of this. The process is called monetary inflation which means that cash loses spending power and salaries lose longterm value. Ultimately, citizens are ones that foot the bill when they forfeit income and sales taxes.
___If you think businesses are getting off Scott-free, you're absolutely right. And this is just the tip of the iceberg.
___Our current economic system requires so-called "market makers" to function efficiently. Market makers buy & sell commodities, financial IOUs and shares of public corporations. Spin doctors and advertisers influence market makers which in turn regulate the trends of supply and demand. All of the above parasites determine what retail prices consumers will pay. As much as 20% of the total economy is garnered by financial market makers, spin doctors and advertisers. The prices of everything you buy (smartphones, bus fares and tomatoes) are hiked to cover the fees of parasites.
___Financial market makers, spin doctors and advertisers produce absolutely nothing but expectations. Citizens of democratic nations would see cheaper retail prices if they got rid of the parasites that skim frosting from the cake of economic production.
___Here comes the big question: why don't we trash the parasites?
___One big reason: wealthy elites would scream bloody murder. They represent 1% of the population yet own 90% of the profitable assets. If some idealist tried to reform the current economic system, the elites would bend over backwards to discredit the reformer as a whacko anarchist.
___Another big reason: the parasites are interwoven with the money system. When you dump the parasites, you devalue your money to zero because modern currencies are worthless beyond consumer expectations and government guarantees.
___The changeover to a parasite-free economy requires a huge paradigm shift. Citizens would need to adopt an economic system where governments and corporations are far more transparent than they are today.
___Consumers as well as producers would have to live within their means. Debit cards would replace credit cards. Corporations would have to earn the right to borrow by demonstrating their new products will benefit society as a whole. Citizens would need to accept more responsibilities. They would need to be better informed and able to distinguish between truth tellers and con artists. In short, citizens would have to exercise their democratic duties and become fully involved with public policies.
___Neither governments nor businesses have crucial answers. Only citizens can take the bull by the horns and achieve the promise of democracy.
___Business corporations strive to present their best faces for consumers and communities in which they operate. This is a smart agenda for businesses because folks will buy more products from "good guy" organizations. Businesses like to be known as "concerned corporate citizens" who will redirect some of their profits toward charitable community-oriented projects.
___However, the marketplace doesn't award businesses that do good turns simply to improve their public images. The marketplace awards profitable winners and shows no mercy for losers. Corporations cannot afford generous gestures unless they record substantial profits. CEOs must reduce charitable practices when their bottom lines show red ink.
___Democratic governments need to aid the casualties of technologic change. At any epoch, free markets will abandon "sunset" industries in favor of innovative corporations that produce goods & services faster, cheaper and more efficiently. Governments must support and retrain "sunset" workers who get shafted in the upheavals of progress.
___Businesses and governments have different aims and goals. Businesses want to make profits. To be sure, public businesses (listed in stock markets) are obligated to shareholders to generate greater and greater profits. On the other hand, governments are obligated to citizen aims. Governments want prosperous economic regimes that generate plentiful jobs. Both governments and business benefit from economic boom times. Businesses generate more jobs, and governments collect more taxes. When the economy turns sour, profits vanish, workers lose their jobs and democratic governments must pay for unemployment benefits.
___Democratic governments regulate the economy to minimize casualties from economic welfare. For instance, regulators ensure that food is healthy and nontoxic. Regulators punish corporations that sell products that don't perform as advertised or mistreat their employees. Governments hope to maintain robust economies that offer jobs and general prosperity. Poor economies encourage discontent and social unrest.
___Both governments and businesses yield to the law of supply and demand. Consumer demand will raise prices. Abundant supplies of products will lower prices. The marketplace decides if prices rise or fall. Governments can influence the economy to some degree by regulating the money supply. Businesses can influence prices by raising or lowering productive inventories.
___In boom times, everyone benefits. Governments collect enough revenues to improve the national infrastructure. Highways, bridges, railways and ocean ports facilitate trade and encourage business expansions.
___Liberal free-market economists expect governments and businesses to observe marketplace incentives. This works fine during the periods of prosperity. But when the economy falters, governments are left with the fallout. Businesses downsize their workforces, putting more citizens in need of social support. Governments must take up the slack while they receive fewer tax revenues.
___Government policies allow corporations a kind of no-fault insurance. Businesses can shave payrolls and send jobless workers to government caretakers. If worse comes to worse, businesses may seek bankruptcy protection and write off most of their debts. Governments must foot the bill for all of this. The process is called monetary inflation which means that cash loses spending power and salaries lose longterm value. Ultimately, citizens are ones that foot the bill when they forfeit income and sales taxes.
___If you think businesses are getting off Scott-free, you're absolutely right. And this is just the tip of the iceberg.
___Our current economic system requires so-called "market makers" to function efficiently. Market makers buy & sell commodities, financial IOUs and shares of public corporations. Spin doctors and advertisers influence market makers which in turn regulate the trends of supply and demand. All of the above parasites determine what retail prices consumers will pay. As much as 20% of the total economy is garnered by financial market makers, spin doctors and advertisers. The prices of everything you buy (smartphones, bus fares and tomatoes) are hiked to cover the fees of parasites.
___Financial market makers, spin doctors and advertisers produce absolutely nothing but expectations. Citizens of democratic nations would see cheaper retail prices if they got rid of the parasites that skim frosting from the cake of economic production.
___Here comes the big question: why don't we trash the parasites?
___One big reason: wealthy elites would scream bloody murder. They represent 1% of the population yet own 90% of the profitable assets. If some idealist tried to reform the current economic system, the elites would bend over backwards to discredit the reformer as a whacko anarchist.
___Another big reason: the parasites are interwoven with the money system. When you dump the parasites, you devalue your money to zero because modern currencies are worthless beyond consumer expectations and government guarantees.
___The changeover to a parasite-free economy requires a huge paradigm shift. Citizens would need to adopt an economic system where governments and corporations are far more transparent than they are today.
___Consumers as well as producers would have to live within their means. Debit cards would replace credit cards. Corporations would have to earn the right to borrow by demonstrating their new products will benefit society as a whole. Citizens would need to accept more responsibilities. They would need to be better informed and able to distinguish between truth tellers and con artists. In short, citizens would have to exercise their democratic duties and become fully involved with public policies.
___Neither governments nor businesses have crucial answers. Only citizens can take the bull by the horns and achieve the promise of democracy.
| What is Trump doing? ___Trump is rolling back neoliberalism and everything connected to it. ___To understand what this means, here's a narrative of Trump's insurgency. It explains what he is doing and what he is likely to do. It starts with the rise of neoliberalism. The rise of Neoliberalism ___Neoliberalism is an ideology of extreme free market capitalism that was popularized by Thatcher, Reagan, and Pinochet. By the end of the cold war in the 90's, it became the default economic ideology of the United States when both the Republicans and the Democrats adopted it. Neoliberalism worked. ___Unfettered access to US markets (the most valuable in the world) led to twenty plus years of rapid economic globalization that lifted billions of people out of poverty and made many countries rich. However, neoliberalism came at a cost to the US. It destroyed the only engine of prosperity and political stability in the US, the US middle class. It did this through: ___Asymmetric competition. The US was the only major nation in the world to fully embrace neoliberalism. Every other country or economic bloc, from China to the EU, kept barriers in place to rig the market to create or protect good jobs at home (think: Germany, China, South Korea, Japan...). These barriers worked and incomes in these countries accelerated. ___The Neoliberal Trade (jobs out, wealth in). For decades, the US traded millions of good jobs in manufacturing and services for tens of thousands of amazing jobs on Wall Street (NY) and Silicon Valley (CA). This inflow of wealth at the topline created a sense of prosperity even though the median income and the quality of life of the middle class collapsed. ___Non-cooperative elites. It didn't take long before the power and the wealth of the elites benefiting from globalization became immense. In fact, these neoliberal elites became so powerful, they were able to completely opt out of the US system of taxation. Simply, Apple to Google to Wall Street banks/funds to most of the wealthiest Americans don't pay taxes. With almost all US wealth immune from taxation, the US government quickly became a bankruptcy in progress ($20 trillion in debt and growing fast), eliminating any chance that it would cushion the damage done by neoliberal economics through an increase in services (health care, retirement, etc.). The Neoliberal Market State ___The effects of neoliberalism put US political elites in a bind. Neoliberalism made it impossible for the US, as it had for two centuries, grow the middle class economically anymore. It couldn't provide prosperity to the middle class due to the neoliberal trade and it didn't have the funds to cushion the loss of income with services due to the tax avoidance of non-cooperative elites. ___So, it decided to double down on neoliberal ideology by applying it to US cultural identity to offer new political goods. It became what my correspondent Philip Bobbitt predicted in his epic 2002 book, The Shield of Achilles, a market state. A market state, in contrast to the nation-state's focus on broad economic prosperity and cultural integration, focuses on providing opportunity to the individual. Although Bobbitt couldn't articulate it fully at the time (none of us could), the US market state did this through: ___Open borders. Low barriers immigration. H-1B visas and green cards galore. Citizen of the world. Work and live anywhere. Borders controls should be lax. Extreme version: sanctuary cities, illegal immigrants become undocumented immigrants. ___Expanded identity. Become whoever you want to become. ___LGBT. Intersectional feminism. Affirmative action and associated efforts at compensating past discrimination. Extreme version: patriarchy, cis gender, "old white men" ___Multiculturalism. Anti-assimilation. All cultures celebrated. Expanded cultural identity revered (hyphenated). Cultural resurrection and diversity. Extreme version: traditional US culture was inferior to all other global cultures, deprecation of tradition as biased/flawed. The Crisis of the Neoliberal Market State ___As we now know, the rise of the neoliberal market-state didn't actually solve the internal contradiction of the neoliberal economics -- that barrier free trade allows a few people to take everything at the expense of everyone else. Like its economic cousin, cultural neoliberalism only benefited a minority of Americans (particularly those already benefiting from economic neoliberalism in NY and CA) while offering nothing but increasingly acrimonious identity politics to the majority. ___All of this might have continued indefinitely, but for the financial crisis of 2008. That crisis set in motion a deep unrest within the majority. An unrest that powers Trump's socially networked insurgency. An insurgency that is now actively dismantling the neoliberal market state through the following: ___Reversing economic neoliberalism by actively support job creation domestically like all other countries (from China to Germany). More mercantilist. Success measured in good jobs created instead of extreme wealth accrued. Trump to workers: "I'm fighting for you" ___Reversing cultural neoliberalism by building strong borders, controlling immigration, and demanding integration with traditional culture. Provoking identity politics to create confusion. Trump tells his insurgency: you are "the best" ___Finally, and most importantly to me, Trump isn't dismantling neoliberalism to return to the old nation-state. He's building, with the help of social networking, a new model of governance for the US. One that operates more like Russia and China does (a reactive authoritarianism). My Two Cents Worth ___By endorsing "Us versus Them" Trump is relinquishing all claims for global hegemony. USA is no longer an example of leadership. He has downgraded the USA to become a mere nation among nations. He is ushering in an era of international protectionism, the like of which triggered WW2. ___His economic policies may bring a short-term economic respite. But smart investor money isn't earmarked for job-intensive manufacturing. Smart money is going toward robotics. So in the longrun, Trump will create tons of ill-will, but it won't deliver the "promised" jobs per capita. ___Trump will make America SMALL as it was in the 19th-century. | ||
Freebie eBook, Limited-Time offer.
From 13 Jan 2017 through 17 Jan 2017
"Loose Threads" by J. O. Quantaman
From Penthouse to Doghouse, to Superspy.
Nyssa Persson gets a 2nd-chance and hits the jackpot.
Alternate History, circa 2070s
AMAZON <http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00TNOPGU8>
Canada <http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B00TNOPGU8>
UK <http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00TNOPGU8>
Australia <http://www.amazon.com.au/gp/product/B00TNOPGU8>
From 13 Jan 2017 through 17 Jan 2017
"Loose Threads" by J. O. Quantaman
From Penthouse to Doghouse, to Superspy.
Nyssa Persson gets a 2nd-chance and hits the jackpot.
Alternate History, circa 2070s
AMAZON <http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00TNOPGU8>
Canada <http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B00TNOPGU8>
UK <http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00TNOPGU8>
Australia <http://www.amazon.com.au/gp/product/B00TNOPGU8>
| manifesto.pdf |
Asgardia Constitution (version 9)
This document represents many hours of thoughtful compromise. I salute those who have devoted their time and energy.
I do have some concerns. I don't see the Constitution embracing the probable lifestyles in a space habitat.
+=+=+
(1) Personal possessions will be dramatically less than what we're used to here on earth. Our important stuff will be all contained on a laptop. Our EVA suits, repair tools, oxygen allotment will be rentals from the commons. Sure, we will have our own tooth brushes and a few changes of clothes for different occasions, but these are easily replaceable. So this insistence on "property rights" will become an oxymoron.
+=+=+
(2) We will need MONEY in its electronic form, simply because money is more convenient than are the hassles associated with physical barter. But I suggest we can earn equal "wages" or "salaries" for all members of Asgardia. The person cleaning the air filters is just as important as the mayor or chief programmer. Every task in a space habitat needs to be done, otherwise the community will suffer. So equal "spendable" incomes for all, but those overachievers can be awarded extra voting shares by their peers. We will achieve a society where social stature is based solely on merit.
+=+=+
(3) Privacy as we know it will be totally compromised. We won't have much individual privacy. Cams, audio listeners and sensors will be installed everywhere in the habitat. The Constitution doesn't seem to take this reality to account. Certainly, we will need new definitions about what is public and private.
+=+=+
(4) Nothing in the Constitution addresses the problems of childbirth in space. The dilemma becomes acute if the habitat has less than one-earth gravity. Most Sci-Fi authors anticipate a dramatic adaption of newborns to the lighter gravity of an orbiting habitat. The children will have fragile bones and underdeveloped heart-lung systems. Lower limbs may become atrophied. These children may never live comfortably on earth. Will we condemn them to living the rest of their lives in ultralight gravity?
+=+=+
+=+=+
You suggested a thought experiment. Fine. Let's go for it. But I apologize in advance since I don't own the subtle talents of Arkady & Boris Strugatsky.
Let's review the bone of contention. RESTRICTION 11: "INFLUENCE ON THE FREE MARKET. The Government of Asgardia will not act or legislate towards any artificial control of the free market, unless to protect individual freedoms and rights stated in the Constitution and/or to assure fair competition."
Let's assume Asgardia has established a habitat in high earth orbit. It relies on imported honey bees to pollinate its crops. XYZ corp offers to supply Asgardia with mechanical bees that are programmed to perform the same functions as natural bees.
The Constitution will rubberstamp this because natural bees have been known to sting agricultural workers on occasion. The mechanical bees represent an improvement and don't infringe on individual rights of citizens.
The mechanical bees replace natural bees, and everything appears fine until harvest time. The wheat and rice crops yield 90% less grain than normal. Suddenly we have an urgent crisis. Field workers checked all variable from one harvest to the next. The only difference was the introduction of mechanical bees.
XYZ had signed a 5-year contract to supply mechanical bees. But Asgardia's council stopped all payments to XYZ corp and declared a moratorium until the matter could be resolved.
XYZ went to court and sued the government. Its plea cited the Asgardia Constitution which states Asgardia cannot impose artificial restrictions on public corps. XYZ's advocates argued there was no definite proof that mechanical bees caused the depleted harvest. By Constitutional law Asgardia had to yield to XYZ corp, even though it would likely suffer massive food shortages down the road.
In this case, XYZ's guilt or innocence was never conclusively proven. The judgment came via precedent from the Constitution.
+=+=+
As a communist libertarian, I favor individual freedoms in most endeavors. The economy is a special case, and governments would be remiss if they allow markets to follow the influences of supply and demand. Without constant monitoring, you end up with ridiculous valuations. At one time a wagon load of tulips was worth the entire continent of Australia. More recently, 25-city blocks in Tokyo was worth the whole state of Oregon.
I concede these are extreme instances. But an entire class of parasites earn comfortable incomes by trading on unequal prices of similar valuations. Governments that let entrepreneurs loose without regulations will invite absurd bubble booms and subsequent depressions.
Entrepreneurs SHOULD DEFINITELY earn the right to do business. This happens today in the form of required licenses. Otherwise anyone can sell flammable toys to children. Anyone can seed toxic chemicals in bottled water. Anyone can sell you beer spiked with arsenic. Asgardia should outlaw any citizen from selling in the local market unless their goods and services can be demonstrated to be safe and beneficial.
Personally I would go further. I would require vendors to make full disclosures of their goods or services. They would be required to specify the materials in the product as well as materials used to make the product.
Karl Polyani may be considered a contrarian among current economists, but that doesn't prove his analysis is wrong. In fact, popular economists have led to our present dilemma where 1% of the citizens control 60% of the total wealth.
Until an economist proves otherwise, the maxim of Karl Marx "Capital cannot be separated from those producing that capital" is good as gold.
+=+=+
First, I want to commend you and your colleagues for the Constitution as a whole. You got off to a great start with declarations of human rights and freedoms. But with the restrictions you fell back in ten-commandment mode. In practice, constitutions should avoid negative statements. But I can swallow most of them except for Restriction 11.
I realize that Karl Marx was very naïve about applying his insights. In fact, there are no examples of pure communism on the scale of large municipalities or nation states. Sweden came the closest to social democracy in the last century. When the income tax rose above 60%, the smart money had absconded to Germany and Switzerland. In practice, the Swedish government punished the prosperous middle class, but the industrialists and tycoons ran off Scott-free.
I suspect you grew up in eastern Europe and suffered from a kind of anti-communism. The Russian revolution turned out worse than the French revolution. After brief periods of idealism, the vacuum was filled by dictators (Napoleon & Stalin). In truth, Russia and China were the worst nations for Marxism to take root, since the common folk had been oppressed for centuries by decadent Emperors and Czars. No one really knew what to do with newfound freedom, once it fell in their laps.
None of the failures in application discredit the valid analysis of Karl Marx. When capital is hoarded by a few oligarchs, the broad economy develops inefficiencies and imbalances. If governments leave these to fester, they bring suffering and gross injustices to their populations. Capital should be part and parcel of the commons.
I wouldn't trust my fellow humans to control or divvy incentive capital. I wouldn't trust myself to control or divvy incentive capital which amounts to 900% of the money needed for the day-to-day transactions, what economists call M1. Likewise, M2, M3, M4 is money that never circulates. It's funny money or monopoly money. Financiers do all kinds of mischief with monopoly money. I'd rather place the funny-incentive money under the control of a computer model.
The computer model would restrict the amount of currency to the total of natural and human resources. Thus creating zero inflation for centuries. It would force vendors to market durable products that were least harmful to the underlying ecology. This agenda would be vitally important to a self-sustaining space habitat.
Entrepreneurs who have beneficial goods and services to offer would NOT be hindered in any way. In fact, they would be encouraged, since the pretenders wouldn't obtain a license at all. Michał Klekowicki, you want to let unlicensed vendors sell junk to our citizens. I declare this attitude is a recipe for disaster.
+=+=+
Michał Klekowicki. I apologize if my arguments impinged on your character. I know your efforts to form the Asgardian Constitution stem from the purest of motives.
Where we differ is whether the government should let entrepreneurs react to the influences of supply and demand. You favor a hands-off policy, whereas I favor regulations that ensure goods and services will be healthful and beneficial to citizens.
You claim economics isn't an exact science. Why is that? Because economics is an ARTIFICIAL human construct. Profits and losses are divorced from the health and well-being of earth's ecologies. For instance, public accountants have never tried to incorporate the precepts of Vladimir Vernadsky.
By detailing human damages to the environment, I reckon we could transform economics to an exact science by tying it hand & foot to the underlying ecologies. In fact, I declare it is absolutely necessary that we do this, sooner rather than later. If we can't live in harmony with Nature on earth, how could we expect to furnish a sustainable biosphere in outer space?
If for no other reason, entrepreneurs should be judged on their ability to deliver products with the least harm to the environment. Those who want to flood the marketplace with disposable goods should be banned, disallowed or exiled to Pluto if necessary. I say this because I want to breathe air that as fresh as possible. Let the managers of Exon Mobile breathe smog if they so desire, but they shouldn't be allowed to force me to breathe their garbage.
If we refuse to regulate our entrepreneurs by ARTIFICIAL means, I dare say other nations as well as the UN will demand that we do so.
A wonderful companion to Karl Polyani's "The Great Transformation" is Sven Beckert's "The Empire of Cotton" which is an empirical case study of Polyani's thesis applied to the global market for cotton. Wheeler-dealers in cotton have been encouraged by developed nations to furnish cotton clothes at the cheapest prices. This has provoked widespread slavery on cotton plantations. It has encouraged manufacturers to hire teenagers to work 16 hour shifts in sweatshops. It has fostered militant colonialism where rich nations feast on 3rd-world poor.
Asgardia will lose out if it allows entrepreneurs to flood the marketplace with "unfair" goods and services. Asgardia will go bankrupt if allows an elite group of financiers to manipulate the real economy behind closed boardroom doors. I concede that governments have often hindered the best entrepreneurs through ignorance or misunderstandings. All the more reason to elect knowledgeable leaders through a fair and transparent democratic process. Once elected, they must ride heard on multinationals before big business overtakes all functions of government.
This document represents many hours of thoughtful compromise. I salute those who have devoted their time and energy.
I do have some concerns. I don't see the Constitution embracing the probable lifestyles in a space habitat.
+=+=+
(1) Personal possessions will be dramatically less than what we're used to here on earth. Our important stuff will be all contained on a laptop. Our EVA suits, repair tools, oxygen allotment will be rentals from the commons. Sure, we will have our own tooth brushes and a few changes of clothes for different occasions, but these are easily replaceable. So this insistence on "property rights" will become an oxymoron.
+=+=+
(2) We will need MONEY in its electronic form, simply because money is more convenient than are the hassles associated with physical barter. But I suggest we can earn equal "wages" or "salaries" for all members of Asgardia. The person cleaning the air filters is just as important as the mayor or chief programmer. Every task in a space habitat needs to be done, otherwise the community will suffer. So equal "spendable" incomes for all, but those overachievers can be awarded extra voting shares by their peers. We will achieve a society where social stature is based solely on merit.
+=+=+
(3) Privacy as we know it will be totally compromised. We won't have much individual privacy. Cams, audio listeners and sensors will be installed everywhere in the habitat. The Constitution doesn't seem to take this reality to account. Certainly, we will need new definitions about what is public and private.
+=+=+
(4) Nothing in the Constitution addresses the problems of childbirth in space. The dilemma becomes acute if the habitat has less than one-earth gravity. Most Sci-Fi authors anticipate a dramatic adaption of newborns to the lighter gravity of an orbiting habitat. The children will have fragile bones and underdeveloped heart-lung systems. Lower limbs may become atrophied. These children may never live comfortably on earth. Will we condemn them to living the rest of their lives in ultralight gravity?
+=+=+
+=+=+
You suggested a thought experiment. Fine. Let's go for it. But I apologize in advance since I don't own the subtle talents of Arkady & Boris Strugatsky.
Let's review the bone of contention. RESTRICTION 11: "INFLUENCE ON THE FREE MARKET. The Government of Asgardia will not act or legislate towards any artificial control of the free market, unless to protect individual freedoms and rights stated in the Constitution and/or to assure fair competition."
Let's assume Asgardia has established a habitat in high earth orbit. It relies on imported honey bees to pollinate its crops. XYZ corp offers to supply Asgardia with mechanical bees that are programmed to perform the same functions as natural bees.
The Constitution will rubberstamp this because natural bees have been known to sting agricultural workers on occasion. The mechanical bees represent an improvement and don't infringe on individual rights of citizens.
The mechanical bees replace natural bees, and everything appears fine until harvest time. The wheat and rice crops yield 90% less grain than normal. Suddenly we have an urgent crisis. Field workers checked all variable from one harvest to the next. The only difference was the introduction of mechanical bees.
XYZ had signed a 5-year contract to supply mechanical bees. But Asgardia's council stopped all payments to XYZ corp and declared a moratorium until the matter could be resolved.
XYZ went to court and sued the government. Its plea cited the Asgardia Constitution which states Asgardia cannot impose artificial restrictions on public corps. XYZ's advocates argued there was no definite proof that mechanical bees caused the depleted harvest. By Constitutional law Asgardia had to yield to XYZ corp, even though it would likely suffer massive food shortages down the road.
In this case, XYZ's guilt or innocence was never conclusively proven. The judgment came via precedent from the Constitution.
+=+=+
As a communist libertarian, I favor individual freedoms in most endeavors. The economy is a special case, and governments would be remiss if they allow markets to follow the influences of supply and demand. Without constant monitoring, you end up with ridiculous valuations. At one time a wagon load of tulips was worth the entire continent of Australia. More recently, 25-city blocks in Tokyo was worth the whole state of Oregon.
I concede these are extreme instances. But an entire class of parasites earn comfortable incomes by trading on unequal prices of similar valuations. Governments that let entrepreneurs loose without regulations will invite absurd bubble booms and subsequent depressions.
Entrepreneurs SHOULD DEFINITELY earn the right to do business. This happens today in the form of required licenses. Otherwise anyone can sell flammable toys to children. Anyone can seed toxic chemicals in bottled water. Anyone can sell you beer spiked with arsenic. Asgardia should outlaw any citizen from selling in the local market unless their goods and services can be demonstrated to be safe and beneficial.
Personally I would go further. I would require vendors to make full disclosures of their goods or services. They would be required to specify the materials in the product as well as materials used to make the product.
Karl Polyani may be considered a contrarian among current economists, but that doesn't prove his analysis is wrong. In fact, popular economists have led to our present dilemma where 1% of the citizens control 60% of the total wealth.
Until an economist proves otherwise, the maxim of Karl Marx "Capital cannot be separated from those producing that capital" is good as gold.
+=+=+
First, I want to commend you and your colleagues for the Constitution as a whole. You got off to a great start with declarations of human rights and freedoms. But with the restrictions you fell back in ten-commandment mode. In practice, constitutions should avoid negative statements. But I can swallow most of them except for Restriction 11.
I realize that Karl Marx was very naïve about applying his insights. In fact, there are no examples of pure communism on the scale of large municipalities or nation states. Sweden came the closest to social democracy in the last century. When the income tax rose above 60%, the smart money had absconded to Germany and Switzerland. In practice, the Swedish government punished the prosperous middle class, but the industrialists and tycoons ran off Scott-free.
I suspect you grew up in eastern Europe and suffered from a kind of anti-communism. The Russian revolution turned out worse than the French revolution. After brief periods of idealism, the vacuum was filled by dictators (Napoleon & Stalin). In truth, Russia and China were the worst nations for Marxism to take root, since the common folk had been oppressed for centuries by decadent Emperors and Czars. No one really knew what to do with newfound freedom, once it fell in their laps.
None of the failures in application discredit the valid analysis of Karl Marx. When capital is hoarded by a few oligarchs, the broad economy develops inefficiencies and imbalances. If governments leave these to fester, they bring suffering and gross injustices to their populations. Capital should be part and parcel of the commons.
I wouldn't trust my fellow humans to control or divvy incentive capital. I wouldn't trust myself to control or divvy incentive capital which amounts to 900% of the money needed for the day-to-day transactions, what economists call M1. Likewise, M2, M3, M4 is money that never circulates. It's funny money or monopoly money. Financiers do all kinds of mischief with monopoly money. I'd rather place the funny-incentive money under the control of a computer model.
The computer model would restrict the amount of currency to the total of natural and human resources. Thus creating zero inflation for centuries. It would force vendors to market durable products that were least harmful to the underlying ecology. This agenda would be vitally important to a self-sustaining space habitat.
Entrepreneurs who have beneficial goods and services to offer would NOT be hindered in any way. In fact, they would be encouraged, since the pretenders wouldn't obtain a license at all. Michał Klekowicki, you want to let unlicensed vendors sell junk to our citizens. I declare this attitude is a recipe for disaster.
+=+=+
Michał Klekowicki. I apologize if my arguments impinged on your character. I know your efforts to form the Asgardian Constitution stem from the purest of motives.
Where we differ is whether the government should let entrepreneurs react to the influences of supply and demand. You favor a hands-off policy, whereas I favor regulations that ensure goods and services will be healthful and beneficial to citizens.
You claim economics isn't an exact science. Why is that? Because economics is an ARTIFICIAL human construct. Profits and losses are divorced from the health and well-being of earth's ecologies. For instance, public accountants have never tried to incorporate the precepts of Vladimir Vernadsky.
By detailing human damages to the environment, I reckon we could transform economics to an exact science by tying it hand & foot to the underlying ecologies. In fact, I declare it is absolutely necessary that we do this, sooner rather than later. If we can't live in harmony with Nature on earth, how could we expect to furnish a sustainable biosphere in outer space?
If for no other reason, entrepreneurs should be judged on their ability to deliver products with the least harm to the environment. Those who want to flood the marketplace with disposable goods should be banned, disallowed or exiled to Pluto if necessary. I say this because I want to breathe air that as fresh as possible. Let the managers of Exon Mobile breathe smog if they so desire, but they shouldn't be allowed to force me to breathe their garbage.
If we refuse to regulate our entrepreneurs by ARTIFICIAL means, I dare say other nations as well as the UN will demand that we do so.
A wonderful companion to Karl Polyani's "The Great Transformation" is Sven Beckert's "The Empire of Cotton" which is an empirical case study of Polyani's thesis applied to the global market for cotton. Wheeler-dealers in cotton have been encouraged by developed nations to furnish cotton clothes at the cheapest prices. This has provoked widespread slavery on cotton plantations. It has encouraged manufacturers to hire teenagers to work 16 hour shifts in sweatshops. It has fostered militant colonialism where rich nations feast on 3rd-world poor.
Asgardia will lose out if it allows entrepreneurs to flood the marketplace with "unfair" goods and services. Asgardia will go bankrupt if allows an elite group of financiers to manipulate the real economy behind closed boardroom doors. I concede that governments have often hindered the best entrepreneurs through ignorance or misunderstandings. All the more reason to elect knowledgeable leaders through a fair and transparent democratic process. Once elected, they must ride heard on multinationals before big business overtakes all functions of government.
"Generation Sick" by Dr. Vic Naumov is rant against Obamacare. I sympathize with his premise that Homeopathic medicine is superior and more beneficial than Allopathic medicine. In other words, physicians who strengthen their patients' immune systems achieve better results than physicians who rely on a pharmacology endorsed by huge biotech conglomerates. Obamacare has homogenized the various therapies which have been endorsed by medical elites. Obamacare hinders, even outlaws alternative remedies of herbalists and homeopathic practitioners. Hence, Obamacare forces patients to take expensive and often toxic remedies for which there is no appeal.
# So far, so good. But after a brief intro, the author plunges into politics, ostensibly to provide background for this state of affairs. The reader is led through chapter after chapter that has nothing to do with medicine or healing. The author rants about the upcoming 2016 election in the USA. He assumes Hillary Clinton will win by a landslide. Like Obama, he fancies Clinton to be a pawn for the wealthy elite. I began to worry when the author turned to out & out character assassination. His style was like verbal vomit. It was hateful and small minded. What's worse: Where were the medical anecdotes? The author was all bluster and no rigor.
# It soon became obvious that the sickest person of the "Sick Generation" was the author himself. This eBook is way overpriced. It should be serialized in a sensationalist rag like The National Enquirer.
# So far, so good. But after a brief intro, the author plunges into politics, ostensibly to provide background for this state of affairs. The reader is led through chapter after chapter that has nothing to do with medicine or healing. The author rants about the upcoming 2016 election in the USA. He assumes Hillary Clinton will win by a landslide. Like Obama, he fancies Clinton to be a pawn for the wealthy elite. I began to worry when the author turned to out & out character assassination. His style was like verbal vomit. It was hateful and small minded. What's worse: Where were the medical anecdotes? The author was all bluster and no rigor.
# It soon became obvious that the sickest person of the "Sick Generation" was the author himself. This eBook is way overpriced. It should be serialized in a sensationalist rag like The National Enquirer.
Asgardia hopes to establish an international community in outer space. So far, it's nothing more than a virtual dry run. A forum for debate. A safety valve for society's pent-up angst, especially for the young.
# As a Baby Boomer born and raised in North America, I enjoyed vast educational and employment opportunities compared to young folks nowadays. College education has become expensive. Too often, it leaves students with massive debts.
# In 3rd-world countries, college education is rare. Only youngsters born with silver spoons are lucky enough to attend universities. In many cases, young men and women must drop out of high school because entry-level wages keep their families afloat.
# Active Asgardians tend to be young students or young professionals in-between jobs. A smaller number are older folks who have time to spare for ongoing debates. By these criteria, Asgardians are among the fortunate. They can afford to waste hours from their daily schedules to dream of worldwide peace that goes beyond national and ethnic boundaries.
# Asgardia is a virtual forum, a miniature United Nations, minus the bureaucrats and national bickering. It has more than half a-billion members, which is no small potatoes. Most members are hopeful. They want to end the senseless economic warfare that serves as global politics. They offer positive solutions for a new nation that will include everyone, regardless of religion or ethnic background. The insights of science and technologic tools form a common denominator.
# The important question isn't about faith. It's about trust. Asgardia may be just a virtual diversion, but it offers real hope for the future.
# As a Baby Boomer born and raised in North America, I enjoyed vast educational and employment opportunities compared to young folks nowadays. College education has become expensive. Too often, it leaves students with massive debts.
# In 3rd-world countries, college education is rare. Only youngsters born with silver spoons are lucky enough to attend universities. In many cases, young men and women must drop out of high school because entry-level wages keep their families afloat.
# Active Asgardians tend to be young students or young professionals in-between jobs. A smaller number are older folks who have time to spare for ongoing debates. By these criteria, Asgardians are among the fortunate. They can afford to waste hours from their daily schedules to dream of worldwide peace that goes beyond national and ethnic boundaries.
# Asgardia is a virtual forum, a miniature United Nations, minus the bureaucrats and national bickering. It has more than half a-billion members, which is no small potatoes. Most members are hopeful. They want to end the senseless economic warfare that serves as global politics. They offer positive solutions for a new nation that will include everyone, regardless of religion or ethnic background. The insights of science and technologic tools form a common denominator.
# The important question isn't about faith. It's about trust. Asgardia may be just a virtual diversion, but it offers real hope for the future.
CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK
# Conrad Black used to be a bigtime player, a financial tycoon. He was convicted of embezzlement and financial wrong doing. He served jail time. Let's put this in perspective. The crooks who instigated Mortgage-Backed Securities scam, got off relatively Scott-free. The lame-brain managers of Nortel got off relatively Scott-free. In the high-flying financial world, you have to be incredibly dishonest to be convicted of anything beyond a slapped wrist. So let's put it bluntly... Conrad Black is a rotten liar and compulsive thief.
# It's no surprise that Conrad Black has weighed in to endorse Donald Trump's surprising victory. Black says that Trump was right to sham the Democratic and Republican parties. In this, Black is correct. Both of the major parties welcome foreign financiers to fund their campaigns. Hence, the elected presidents for the last 25 years have been heavily indebted to Arab and Oriental financiers. It's refreshing for Trump to fund his campaign basically from scratch.
# However, Conrad Black goes on to applaud Trump for calling climate change a "liberal" hoax. This makes no sense unless you happen to believe in Ouija boards and crystal balls. Conrad Black should know better. His native land, Canada, is melting like crazy in the far north. It seems that Black hasn't learned a damn thing from his sojourn in jail. He's still a rotten liar and compulsive thief. He'll tell you "not to worry" as your island sinks below the sea.
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/conrad-black-donald-trumps-assault-on-both-parties-will-make-america
# Conrad Black used to be a bigtime player, a financial tycoon. He was convicted of embezzlement and financial wrong doing. He served jail time. Let's put this in perspective. The crooks who instigated Mortgage-Backed Securities scam, got off relatively Scott-free. The lame-brain managers of Nortel got off relatively Scott-free. In the high-flying financial world, you have to be incredibly dishonest to be convicted of anything beyond a slapped wrist. So let's put it bluntly... Conrad Black is a rotten liar and compulsive thief.
# It's no surprise that Conrad Black has weighed in to endorse Donald Trump's surprising victory. Black says that Trump was right to sham the Democratic and Republican parties. In this, Black is correct. Both of the major parties welcome foreign financiers to fund their campaigns. Hence, the elected presidents for the last 25 years have been heavily indebted to Arab and Oriental financiers. It's refreshing for Trump to fund his campaign basically from scratch.
# However, Conrad Black goes on to applaud Trump for calling climate change a "liberal" hoax. This makes no sense unless you happen to believe in Ouija boards and crystal balls. Conrad Black should know better. His native land, Canada, is melting like crazy in the far north. It seems that Black hasn't learned a damn thing from his sojourn in jail. He's still a rotten liar and compulsive thief. He'll tell you "not to worry" as your island sinks below the sea.
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/conrad-black-donald-trumps-assault-on-both-parties-will-make-america
Please don't buy the liberal spin-doctors. Donald Trump's victory in the election was NOT about race. He found ways to gather media attention to himself by spouting outrageous statements day after day, week after week. He declared in all honesty that he's his own man, unbeholden to Arab money baggers and oriental tycoons.
# Contrariwise, Hillary Clinton has been a pawn of those elitists. She enjoyed the endorsement of Obama who had secured victory through an almost unanimous support of African Americans. Obama was elected because of racial loyalties., but Trump was elected through the controversy he aroused by spouting ethnic and gender slurs. If you credit his apparent bigotry, you'd have to conclude he has snot for brains. I don't believe this. Trump is a very smart cookie who garnered all kinds of media coverage without paying a wooden nickel.
# After his 1st-landside victory, Obama transferred funds earmarked for inner-city poor to the clowns on Wall Street. These same investment bankers told their puppet who to appoint for his cabinet.
# US presidents for the last quarter-century have been great at talking and downright crippled when it comes to walking. These include Bill Clinton, W. Bush and Obama. Voters have finally seen through the political sham, and they voted for Trump who's truly an Independent and outsider.
# No sane person can guess how Trump will turn out as a president. His successful career proves he has a grasp of economics, which is better than presidents who have been puppets of wealthy elitists pulling strings behind the scenes.
# I worry that Trump will ignore the obvious signs of climate change. If he declares business as usual, it will threaten the health of citizens and guarantee many more catastrophes of extreme weather. It will allow sea levels to rise dramatically over the next decades. It will create greater messes for our offspring to clean up. However, if Trump scraps all the cheesy subsidies fashioned by Obama and his predecessors, we may see a shift to the European model. Who knows? Trump may even do what democrats have been afraid to do; he may enact a long-overdue carbon tax.
# Otherwise, let's wait and see. Trump will soon come face to face with many realities of government which functions by give and take. At the very worst, White House interns (of the female variety) will have to wear metal protectors for their private parts.
# Contrariwise, Hillary Clinton has been a pawn of those elitists. She enjoyed the endorsement of Obama who had secured victory through an almost unanimous support of African Americans. Obama was elected because of racial loyalties., but Trump was elected through the controversy he aroused by spouting ethnic and gender slurs. If you credit his apparent bigotry, you'd have to conclude he has snot for brains. I don't believe this. Trump is a very smart cookie who garnered all kinds of media coverage without paying a wooden nickel.
# After his 1st-landside victory, Obama transferred funds earmarked for inner-city poor to the clowns on Wall Street. These same investment bankers told their puppet who to appoint for his cabinet.
# US presidents for the last quarter-century have been great at talking and downright crippled when it comes to walking. These include Bill Clinton, W. Bush and Obama. Voters have finally seen through the political sham, and they voted for Trump who's truly an Independent and outsider.
# No sane person can guess how Trump will turn out as a president. His successful career proves he has a grasp of economics, which is better than presidents who have been puppets of wealthy elitists pulling strings behind the scenes.
# I worry that Trump will ignore the obvious signs of climate change. If he declares business as usual, it will threaten the health of citizens and guarantee many more catastrophes of extreme weather. It will allow sea levels to rise dramatically over the next decades. It will create greater messes for our offspring to clean up. However, if Trump scraps all the cheesy subsidies fashioned by Obama and his predecessors, we may see a shift to the European model. Who knows? Trump may even do what democrats have been afraid to do; he may enact a long-overdue carbon tax.
# Otherwise, let's wait and see. Trump will soon come face to face with many realities of government which functions by give and take. At the very worst, White House interns (of the female variety) will have to wear metal protectors for their private parts.
US ELECTION is a championship prizefight.
# In one corner you have Donald Trump in white trunks and weighing in 97 kilograms of white trash. Donald makes outrageous statements. He lies through his nose; he lies through his teeth; he lies through his pretty-puffed hair. But Donald is an upfront comic. There can be no doubt in your mind that he's feeding you a huge pile of manure. Another thing in his favor is that he is unaffiliated with the financial establishment. Yes, those rascals who make the real political decisions. The folks behind the scenes you have never voted for, that you have no control over. Donald is his own man. His secret wish is to build Trump towers two kilometers tall. Outside of his suspicious real estate deals, you can count on him to stay within the rules.
# In the other corner you have Hillary Clinton dressed in blinding white, like a virgin bride. Hillary has taken money from the same criminals who fund Islamic terrorists. Her foundation is as crooked as a 13-dollar bill. Her emails prove she's a two-faced liar. The evidence against her and her husband is so overwhelming that if they escape conviction it will be a travesty of justice. Hillary may be brought to court and convicted before the presidential inauguration. Do you want to vote for a candidate who may spend most of her four years inside a jail cell?
# Luckily, there is a write-in option, vote for yourself. If that isn't possible, spoil your ballot and save democracy...
# In one corner you have Donald Trump in white trunks and weighing in 97 kilograms of white trash. Donald makes outrageous statements. He lies through his nose; he lies through his teeth; he lies through his pretty-puffed hair. But Donald is an upfront comic. There can be no doubt in your mind that he's feeding you a huge pile of manure. Another thing in his favor is that he is unaffiliated with the financial establishment. Yes, those rascals who make the real political decisions. The folks behind the scenes you have never voted for, that you have no control over. Donald is his own man. His secret wish is to build Trump towers two kilometers tall. Outside of his suspicious real estate deals, you can count on him to stay within the rules.
# In the other corner you have Hillary Clinton dressed in blinding white, like a virgin bride. Hillary has taken money from the same criminals who fund Islamic terrorists. Her foundation is as crooked as a 13-dollar bill. Her emails prove she's a two-faced liar. The evidence against her and her husband is so overwhelming that if they escape conviction it will be a travesty of justice. Hillary may be brought to court and convicted before the presidential inauguration. Do you want to vote for a candidate who may spend most of her four years inside a jail cell?
# Luckily, there is a write-in option, vote for yourself. If that isn't possible, spoil your ballot and save democracy...
| kingpeso.pdf |
"King Peso" by Carmen Amato is a topnotch detective mystery. It is a stand-alone classic. By that I mean the narrative unfolds from the detective's point of view. The reader is given no more, no less information than the protagonist who is Emilia Cruz, the first female detective in Acapulco's police force.
# I can say "King Peso" is a stand-alone because I've read the 1st-three eBooks of Detective Cruz: Cliff Diver, Hat Dance, Diablo Nights. Some years ago I found "Cliff Diver" an impressive debut, both as an engaging mystery and as a biting satire of the social quagmire that exists in Mexico. I'd forgotten many details of the plot and characters, but I had no trouble catching the drift in 4th-novel. With "King Peso" Carman Amato exhibits unparalleled command of the genre. The character of Emilia Cruz has come of age. She has fought her way through a male-dominated profession to gain respect from friends and foes alike. She has remained true to her ideals in the pursuit of justice. Her personal life is becoming more stabilized. All of which leaves her more time and energy to investigate crimes and pursue criminals.
# As readers should know, Mexico has a small upper class of high rollers and masses of disenfranchised poor. The disparity harkens back to the age of discovery when Spanish conquerors became overlords to the aboriginals who provided the slave labor for silver mines and cattle ranches. More recently, the NAFTA trade deal has exasperated the income disparity as financial sharks from the north partner with Mexican aristocrats to launch factories powered by cheap labor. As well, Mexico is a convenient tourist destination for well-to-do foreigners wishing to escape frigid winters. So contemporary Acapulco is a wry mixture of hedonistic luxury and tragic poverty. You'll see resplendent resorts for wealthy tourists alongside neighborhoods without electricity or clean water.
# Couple the above with a corrupt government where image and political correctness count way more than providing basic services. The rare government officer who tries to do an honest job is targeted for assassination by the drug cartels. Emilia Cruz has to almost topple the whole house of cards before she can get the corrupt bureaucracy to function as it should.
# Emilia Cruz is an iconic character. Having grown up in poverty and having to care for an "absent minded" mother, Emilia has fought very hard to become a topnotch detective. Kurt, her boyfriend, is the manager of a five-star luxury resort. He competes at Triathlon competitions. Yet most of Emilia's friends are from the poor neighborhoods where she grew up. She is the poster face of Acapulco as well as champion of the poor and downtrodden. She keeps a personal file of missing women who are routinely ignored by the established law enforcement. She sticks her nose into areas that are bound to rouse drug lords to order her snuffed. She must keep her eyes on the rearview mirror at all times.
# "King Peso" is a 5-star mystery and a brilliant satire on the corrupt government officials. And don't think it only happens in Mexico. Government waste is endemic in both Canada and USA.
# I can say "King Peso" is a stand-alone because I've read the 1st-three eBooks of Detective Cruz: Cliff Diver, Hat Dance, Diablo Nights. Some years ago I found "Cliff Diver" an impressive debut, both as an engaging mystery and as a biting satire of the social quagmire that exists in Mexico. I'd forgotten many details of the plot and characters, but I had no trouble catching the drift in 4th-novel. With "King Peso" Carman Amato exhibits unparalleled command of the genre. The character of Emilia Cruz has come of age. She has fought her way through a male-dominated profession to gain respect from friends and foes alike. She has remained true to her ideals in the pursuit of justice. Her personal life is becoming more stabilized. All of which leaves her more time and energy to investigate crimes and pursue criminals.
# As readers should know, Mexico has a small upper class of high rollers and masses of disenfranchised poor. The disparity harkens back to the age of discovery when Spanish conquerors became overlords to the aboriginals who provided the slave labor for silver mines and cattle ranches. More recently, the NAFTA trade deal has exasperated the income disparity as financial sharks from the north partner with Mexican aristocrats to launch factories powered by cheap labor. As well, Mexico is a convenient tourist destination for well-to-do foreigners wishing to escape frigid winters. So contemporary Acapulco is a wry mixture of hedonistic luxury and tragic poverty. You'll see resplendent resorts for wealthy tourists alongside neighborhoods without electricity or clean water.
# Couple the above with a corrupt government where image and political correctness count way more than providing basic services. The rare government officer who tries to do an honest job is targeted for assassination by the drug cartels. Emilia Cruz has to almost topple the whole house of cards before she can get the corrupt bureaucracy to function as it should.
# Emilia Cruz is an iconic character. Having grown up in poverty and having to care for an "absent minded" mother, Emilia has fought very hard to become a topnotch detective. Kurt, her boyfriend, is the manager of a five-star luxury resort. He competes at Triathlon competitions. Yet most of Emilia's friends are from the poor neighborhoods where she grew up. She is the poster face of Acapulco as well as champion of the poor and downtrodden. She keeps a personal file of missing women who are routinely ignored by the established law enforcement. She sticks her nose into areas that are bound to rouse drug lords to order her snuffed. She must keep her eyes on the rearview mirror at all times.
# "King Peso" is a 5-star mystery and a brilliant satire on the corrupt government officials. And don't think it only happens in Mexico. Government waste is endemic in both Canada and USA.
"Where Angels Prey" by Ramesh S Arunachalam is a detective novel looking at social injustice. The author has chosen a subject that is very difficult to explain, and he has succeeded.
# Some readers may be familiar with microfinancing which was pioneered by Muhammad Yunus, the founder of the Grameen Bank. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for his efforts to help rural Bangladeshi women by empowering them with small loans. In the early phases, the Grameen Bank was nonprofit and underwritten by Muhammad Yunus. Even before the bank went commercial, his success in aiding the poor may have been overstated.
# To western observers, it seemed like a golden opportunity to earn profits from the rural poor who had previously been dismissed as too illiterate to bother with. Investment bankers pointed out that 100 loans of $100 would earn the same return as a $10,000 loan to one corporate client.
# SPOILER ALERT: skip the rest of this review if you like being mystified.
# Bob, one of the main characters, is a high-profile reporter for the New York Post. He's intrigued by Prasad Kamineni who has brought Wall Street investors onboard to expand his microfinancing of India's rural poor. Bob has his doubts, since the bubble has just burst on mortgage-backed securities, and bankers have grown risk shy. Meanwhile a number of rural India women are committing suicide. Bob decides to research the microfinancing phenomena and Prasad Kamineni in particular.
# Chandresh Rajan is Bob's local contact in India. Chandresh has contacts on all sides of issue, even among the Maoist anarchists. He uncovers a chain of parasites from loan collectors, to crime bosses and crooked politicians. Meanwhile, Bob tracks down the money trail through holding companies in several countries and eventually back to Wall Street. In short, microfinancing becomes revealed as a heartless exploitation of rural women that it's supposed to help. The evidence is plain as day, but government higher-ups kill the investigation before it implicates the ruling party.
# Prasad Kamineni bows out and disappears for a few years. Then he's back in business, working the same scam for a microfinancing bank with a different name. Bob wins a prestigious award for investigative journalism. Chandresh Rajan knows the real culprits have gotten off Scott-free.
# Some readers may think this scam can only happen in a 3rd-world country where the marks are country bumpkins. Think again. The global financial sector is as crooked as a three-dollar bill. The mortgage-backed fiasco was a tad more sophisticated than duping illiterate housewives in rural India, but it was just as exploitive. And the real culprits got off Scott-free. Sad but true.
# Some readers may be familiar with microfinancing which was pioneered by Muhammad Yunus, the founder of the Grameen Bank. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for his efforts to help rural Bangladeshi women by empowering them with small loans. In the early phases, the Grameen Bank was nonprofit and underwritten by Muhammad Yunus. Even before the bank went commercial, his success in aiding the poor may have been overstated.
# To western observers, it seemed like a golden opportunity to earn profits from the rural poor who had previously been dismissed as too illiterate to bother with. Investment bankers pointed out that 100 loans of $100 would earn the same return as a $10,000 loan to one corporate client.
# SPOILER ALERT: skip the rest of this review if you like being mystified.
# Bob, one of the main characters, is a high-profile reporter for the New York Post. He's intrigued by Prasad Kamineni who has brought Wall Street investors onboard to expand his microfinancing of India's rural poor. Bob has his doubts, since the bubble has just burst on mortgage-backed securities, and bankers have grown risk shy. Meanwhile a number of rural India women are committing suicide. Bob decides to research the microfinancing phenomena and Prasad Kamineni in particular.
# Chandresh Rajan is Bob's local contact in India. Chandresh has contacts on all sides of issue, even among the Maoist anarchists. He uncovers a chain of parasites from loan collectors, to crime bosses and crooked politicians. Meanwhile, Bob tracks down the money trail through holding companies in several countries and eventually back to Wall Street. In short, microfinancing becomes revealed as a heartless exploitation of rural women that it's supposed to help. The evidence is plain as day, but government higher-ups kill the investigation before it implicates the ruling party.
# Prasad Kamineni bows out and disappears for a few years. Then he's back in business, working the same scam for a microfinancing bank with a different name. Bob wins a prestigious award for investigative journalism. Chandresh Rajan knows the real culprits have gotten off Scott-free.
# Some readers may think this scam can only happen in a 3rd-world country where the marks are country bumpkins. Think again. The global financial sector is as crooked as a three-dollar bill. The mortgage-backed fiasco was a tad more sophisticated than duping illiterate housewives in rural India, but it was just as exploitive. And the real culprits got off Scott-free. Sad but true.
| freemarkets.pdf |
Free Markets
by J. O. Quantaman
Let's clear the air from the get-go. Free markets are bad news. Free markets prepare the game board for pyramid schemes. Free markets inspire exploitation of labor, since capital assets are divorced from those who create those assets. Free markets legitimize wage slavery.
Worst of all, free markets do NOT set valid prices for intrinsic values. Take the Tulip Boom, for example. At its height a wagon load of tulips could be traded straight-up for the continent of Australia. More recently, 20-square blocks of downtown Tokyo were worth the entire state of Oregon. Without strict regulations, free markets lead to fantastic lunacy.
Forensic economists are supposed to add all the inflows and outflows. But no one ever accounts for the natural losses incurred as humans gobble resources from our finite heritage. So corporate balance sheets never come close to telling the true story. They assume that oceans have an infinite supply of fish and an infinite capacity to absorb carbon dioxide. They assume the earth has infinite amounts of fossil fuels and industrial metals. They assume human garbage will by magic become beneficial over the longterm. In short, economic accountants don't even begin to apply the rigorous laws of common sense that have been laid down by Vladimir I. Vernadsky.
If free markets are bad for the environment, they are ten-times worse for most humans. Free markets encourage high-stakes competition where there are a few winners and many losers. Some competitors will flood the marketplace with unhealthy products to avoid the onus of losing.
90% of the global currency is restricted to an elite gang of investment bankers that create it out of thin air. This money is never circulated. It represents speculative markers for future earnings. It would vanish in a millisecond if governments made a genuine effort to stabilize their currencies, so money wouldn't lose value over time. For this to happen, governments would need to live within their means. By the same token corporations would have to live within their means. The money supply would NOT expand on the whims of the banks. The money supply would increase whenever the total value of goods and services increased, and not before.
Suppose some forward-thinking politician dared to enact the above reforms. Don't expect free markets to grant you FAIR MARKETS. You need regulators to outlaw corporations that produce unhealthy goods and services. You need to create an environment of transparency where folks can trust the marketplace to deliver fair values.
To effect true reforms you have to tax "get rich quick" schemes to death. That includes many scams that currently enjoy nonprofit status.
You must quadruple the minimum wage for starters. Then tax or expel products that don't meet the highest health standards. Tax investment speculators at 1,000 times the rate of average wage earners. Tax individuals and organizations that withhold information. Restrict governments from overusing "national security" to hide programs that benefit no one but governments.
FAIR MARKETS engender prosperous, democratic societies. You needn't enact every reform tomorrow. Take baby steps year by year, decade by decade. Don't be afraid to pioneer unilateral reforms to encourage other nations to follow suit.
Otherwise, free markets open the doors to a pack of starving wolves.
by J. O. Quantaman
Let's clear the air from the get-go. Free markets are bad news. Free markets prepare the game board for pyramid schemes. Free markets inspire exploitation of labor, since capital assets are divorced from those who create those assets. Free markets legitimize wage slavery.
Worst of all, free markets do NOT set valid prices for intrinsic values. Take the Tulip Boom, for example. At its height a wagon load of tulips could be traded straight-up for the continent of Australia. More recently, 20-square blocks of downtown Tokyo were worth the entire state of Oregon. Without strict regulations, free markets lead to fantastic lunacy.
Forensic economists are supposed to add all the inflows and outflows. But no one ever accounts for the natural losses incurred as humans gobble resources from our finite heritage. So corporate balance sheets never come close to telling the true story. They assume that oceans have an infinite supply of fish and an infinite capacity to absorb carbon dioxide. They assume the earth has infinite amounts of fossil fuels and industrial metals. They assume human garbage will by magic become beneficial over the longterm. In short, economic accountants don't even begin to apply the rigorous laws of common sense that have been laid down by Vladimir I. Vernadsky.
If free markets are bad for the environment, they are ten-times worse for most humans. Free markets encourage high-stakes competition where there are a few winners and many losers. Some competitors will flood the marketplace with unhealthy products to avoid the onus of losing.
90% of the global currency is restricted to an elite gang of investment bankers that create it out of thin air. This money is never circulated. It represents speculative markers for future earnings. It would vanish in a millisecond if governments made a genuine effort to stabilize their currencies, so money wouldn't lose value over time. For this to happen, governments would need to live within their means. By the same token corporations would have to live within their means. The money supply would NOT expand on the whims of the banks. The money supply would increase whenever the total value of goods and services increased, and not before.
Suppose some forward-thinking politician dared to enact the above reforms. Don't expect free markets to grant you FAIR MARKETS. You need regulators to outlaw corporations that produce unhealthy goods and services. You need to create an environment of transparency where folks can trust the marketplace to deliver fair values.
To effect true reforms you have to tax "get rich quick" schemes to death. That includes many scams that currently enjoy nonprofit status.
You must quadruple the minimum wage for starters. Then tax or expel products that don't meet the highest health standards. Tax investment speculators at 1,000 times the rate of average wage earners. Tax individuals and organizations that withhold information. Restrict governments from overusing "national security" to hide programs that benefit no one but governments.
FAIR MARKETS engender prosperous, democratic societies. You needn't enact every reform tomorrow. Take baby steps year by year, decade by decade. Don't be afraid to pioneer unilateral reforms to encourage other nations to follow suit.
Otherwise, free markets open the doors to a pack of starving wolves.
Don't set your welcome mat out for the barbarians just yet.
# The transition to renewable fuels won't take place overnight. Back in the throes of the Industrial Revolution, coal replaced wood and dung but not completely. In fact, the use of coal allowed the forests of Western Europe to regenerate, and more wood became available to burn in fireplaces and bonfires. Nowadays folks burn Presto-Logs in their fireplaces as a prestige thing. I'll bet more wood is burned in Western Europe today than in the 19th-century. Wood is renewable if it isn't overused, but it's still wasteful and contributes to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
# Oil and natural gas has replaced coal in many instances but not in others. As the 21st-century matures, we'll see a mix of renewables and fossil fuels. The percentage of renewables in the energy equation will rise but never come near 75%. And many rural folks in India will still cook by burning dung.
# Road maintenance.
# If policymakers let engineers build roads properly, you wouldn't need to raid the piggybank to make repairs. The secret is in the roadbeds. The Romans knew and understood this because roads were crucial for their rapid response to bandits and barbarian raiders. The legions had to move quickly to catch the culprits red-handed. If all the interstates in the USA and Canada laid down Roman-style roadbeds (ten yards deep), the roads wouldn't experience frost damage and wouldn't experience sinking and upheavals due to underground water saturation or lack of it.
# Moreover, road building and maintenance was accomplished by the legionaries, not slaves as Hollywood would tell us.
# Imagine a compulsory Peace Corps for domestic purposes. Young folks between 16 and 23 would be drafted to work at least one-year building and rebuilding highways. The modest salary would be saved and contribute to University education. It would diminish the high unemployment of young folks and absolve many of crippling debts that young folks pay to keep their footballs teams in the Cotton Bowl.
# Resistance to such a plan is a sign of cultural decadence. USA had everything (all the gold and undamaged economy) after WW2. You can't expect to stand still on top of the global mountain. Your ball will (and has) rolled downhill.
# Same thing happened to UK after WW1. Britain was relatively undamaged, and added more colonies to its lion's share. But UK rested on its laurels, and it never evolved from the 19th-century model that made it the dominant beneficiary of the Cotton Empire. While Britain celebrated its steam-engine heritage, Germany was designing diesel tanks and bomber aircraft. USA could exploit a wealth of natural resources from within its borders without the hassle of pulling teeth from obdurate colonials. After WW2, UK became a 2nd-tier player, a throw-in after USA and USSR.
# Australia and Southeast Asia will carry much more weight in the 21st-century. Add the Indian subcontinent, and you have way more than 50% of the potential consumers worldwide. USA will still carry the brightest global torch, but it will be one of many and no longer the lone margin of influence. Eat your hearts out, Donald The Sheik and Betsy Crocker.
# Road maintenance is continuous in urban milieus. The problem is the surfaces are fused asphalt which lasts no more than 25 years on well-traveled avenues. In the summertime the asphalt melts and deforms, especially on downhills before stop & go lights. Heavyweight vehicles such as trucks and buses dig tires in the asphalt and create waves. After 15 years the smooth roadway resembles a lake during a windstorm in these special instances. As well, the old bugaboo of frost damage takes its toll on roads with shallow beds.
# Bridge maintenance is an inexact science because structural engineering is an inexact science. It hasn't advanced in theory since the Roman arch. But wait. Help may be on the horizon. Micro sensors can be placed in critical portions of the structure. In time, hard data will emerge as to how certain materials withstand load-bearing stress. Once officials can predict with confidence how long a bridge will remain safe for travelers, they can divvy the right amount of funds for maintenance. Less guesswork, more efficiency, and the public purse will stretch further.
# It could be I'm not informed concerning bridge maintenance as well as you are, but I did notice the surprise of USA tourists when they saw a couple of the newer suspension bridges in metro Vancouver. Apparently, very few bridges have been commissioned during recent decades in the USA. Policymakers are using outdated models to forecast future costs.
# For instance, you can save a lot on materials by using rigid struts versus vertical struts hanging from a cable. I suspect twice as many new-generation bridges can be built from the same amount of iron and steel. Combine this with better forecasting of wear & tear, and you get longer-lasting infrastructure at a much lower cost.
# Developing nations are using the latest technological innovations, and they are building and refurbishing bridges at a greater rate than here in North America or Western Europe. They will soon have the next generation of infrastructure installed and running. Well ahead of old fogies like USA or UK. The new kids on the block will be using the proceeds from all the treasury bills the Fed has printed to pay off tycoons like Donald.
# Did you know Donald is a model Muslim according to the Koran? He hasn't taken no more than four trophy wives, and he has provided enough for all the them. Win or lose the election, his ulterior motives are Trump Towers in Moscow and Tehran.
# The transition to renewable fuels won't take place overnight. Back in the throes of the Industrial Revolution, coal replaced wood and dung but not completely. In fact, the use of coal allowed the forests of Western Europe to regenerate, and more wood became available to burn in fireplaces and bonfires. Nowadays folks burn Presto-Logs in their fireplaces as a prestige thing. I'll bet more wood is burned in Western Europe today than in the 19th-century. Wood is renewable if it isn't overused, but it's still wasteful and contributes to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
# Oil and natural gas has replaced coal in many instances but not in others. As the 21st-century matures, we'll see a mix of renewables and fossil fuels. The percentage of renewables in the energy equation will rise but never come near 75%. And many rural folks in India will still cook by burning dung.
# Road maintenance.
# If policymakers let engineers build roads properly, you wouldn't need to raid the piggybank to make repairs. The secret is in the roadbeds. The Romans knew and understood this because roads were crucial for their rapid response to bandits and barbarian raiders. The legions had to move quickly to catch the culprits red-handed. If all the interstates in the USA and Canada laid down Roman-style roadbeds (ten yards deep), the roads wouldn't experience frost damage and wouldn't experience sinking and upheavals due to underground water saturation or lack of it.
# Moreover, road building and maintenance was accomplished by the legionaries, not slaves as Hollywood would tell us.
# Imagine a compulsory Peace Corps for domestic purposes. Young folks between 16 and 23 would be drafted to work at least one-year building and rebuilding highways. The modest salary would be saved and contribute to University education. It would diminish the high unemployment of young folks and absolve many of crippling debts that young folks pay to keep their footballs teams in the Cotton Bowl.
# Resistance to such a plan is a sign of cultural decadence. USA had everything (all the gold and undamaged economy) after WW2. You can't expect to stand still on top of the global mountain. Your ball will (and has) rolled downhill.
# Same thing happened to UK after WW1. Britain was relatively undamaged, and added more colonies to its lion's share. But UK rested on its laurels, and it never evolved from the 19th-century model that made it the dominant beneficiary of the Cotton Empire. While Britain celebrated its steam-engine heritage, Germany was designing diesel tanks and bomber aircraft. USA could exploit a wealth of natural resources from within its borders without the hassle of pulling teeth from obdurate colonials. After WW2, UK became a 2nd-tier player, a throw-in after USA and USSR.
# Australia and Southeast Asia will carry much more weight in the 21st-century. Add the Indian subcontinent, and you have way more than 50% of the potential consumers worldwide. USA will still carry the brightest global torch, but it will be one of many and no longer the lone margin of influence. Eat your hearts out, Donald The Sheik and Betsy Crocker.
# Road maintenance is continuous in urban milieus. The problem is the surfaces are fused asphalt which lasts no more than 25 years on well-traveled avenues. In the summertime the asphalt melts and deforms, especially on downhills before stop & go lights. Heavyweight vehicles such as trucks and buses dig tires in the asphalt and create waves. After 15 years the smooth roadway resembles a lake during a windstorm in these special instances. As well, the old bugaboo of frost damage takes its toll on roads with shallow beds.
# Bridge maintenance is an inexact science because structural engineering is an inexact science. It hasn't advanced in theory since the Roman arch. But wait. Help may be on the horizon. Micro sensors can be placed in critical portions of the structure. In time, hard data will emerge as to how certain materials withstand load-bearing stress. Once officials can predict with confidence how long a bridge will remain safe for travelers, they can divvy the right amount of funds for maintenance. Less guesswork, more efficiency, and the public purse will stretch further.
# It could be I'm not informed concerning bridge maintenance as well as you are, but I did notice the surprise of USA tourists when they saw a couple of the newer suspension bridges in metro Vancouver. Apparently, very few bridges have been commissioned during recent decades in the USA. Policymakers are using outdated models to forecast future costs.
# For instance, you can save a lot on materials by using rigid struts versus vertical struts hanging from a cable. I suspect twice as many new-generation bridges can be built from the same amount of iron and steel. Combine this with better forecasting of wear & tear, and you get longer-lasting infrastructure at a much lower cost.
# Developing nations are using the latest technological innovations, and they are building and refurbishing bridges at a greater rate than here in North America or Western Europe. They will soon have the next generation of infrastructure installed and running. Well ahead of old fogies like USA or UK. The new kids on the block will be using the proceeds from all the treasury bills the Fed has printed to pay off tycoons like Donald.
# Did you know Donald is a model Muslim according to the Koran? He hasn't taken no more than four trophy wives, and he has provided enough for all the them. Win or lose the election, his ulterior motives are Trump Towers in Moscow and Tehran.
"The Great Transformation" by Karl Polanyi is a classic economic exposé. It was written during WWII and first published shortly thereafter. It doesn't contain or mention postwar economic refinements. It does explore the economic attitudes that accompanied the Industrial Revolution. Polanyi's incisive analysis is no less relevant today than it was 70 years ago.
# In short, Polanyi debunks the free-market economy. He debunks economists who call for less government interference. Whenever markets have been deregulated, bad things have happened. Financial players if left unopposed have boosted prices to fantastic levels that bear no resemblance to reality. Employers if left unopposed have dehumanized workers till they've become mere commodities or zombie machines. Landowners if left unopposed have turned thriving ecological systems into wastelands that are the remains of short-term profits.
# From the 18th-century till WWII, Polanyi gives concrete examples where governments have been forced to intervene in the market economy to prevent social catastrophes. The old saw that "supply and demand will prove beneficial for everyone" is debunked six ways to Sunday.
# The major problem for economic theorists is that they assume human industry is somehow divorced from Nature. They take no account of the capital losses to The Commons when metal ingots are extracted from the earth. New reserves of gold, copper or oil are recorded as gifts from on high. Economic ledgers make no allowance for the "consumed" oil as if it will always be there in limitless supply.
# Without a social conscience, business reverts to a destructive plague that helps no one but the elite at the top of the rock pile. Polanyi documents the countless results of deregulation from 1795 to 1940. In every case, unfettered markets dehumanized the bulk of citizens. Unfettered markets bankrupted traditional family farms. They lowered wages, created greater unemployment, promoted unhealthy lifestyles, destroyed priceless artifacts and assigned nonsensical values to everyday staples.
# At present, we live on the fragile surface of a bubble which has been stretched out of all proportion.
# Over 90% of the money that is recognized in international trade is monopoly money i.e. M2, M3, M4, etc. You or I cannot spend monopoly money. We only see the currencies issued by banks i.e. M1. Our money (M1) is taxed to the hilt since it represents transactions in the REAL economy. The elite industrialists, investment bankers and absentee landlords deal with monopoly money. Only THEY can turn monopoly money into currencies that will buy stuff in the real world. Worse, monopoly money is rarely if ever taxed. 99% of us work to support governments that give the elites a free ride.
# One day the bubble of interdependent debt will burst. Most of us will become destitute, but the elite will retain their assets because monopoly money won't be touched. It's fantasy money afterall. Only everyday currencies will disappear or become worthless as toilet paper.
# I recommend Karl Polanyi's "The Great Transformation" and please take his advice to heart before robots, controlled by the elite, herd all of us into concentration camps.
# In short, Polanyi debunks the free-market economy. He debunks economists who call for less government interference. Whenever markets have been deregulated, bad things have happened. Financial players if left unopposed have boosted prices to fantastic levels that bear no resemblance to reality. Employers if left unopposed have dehumanized workers till they've become mere commodities or zombie machines. Landowners if left unopposed have turned thriving ecological systems into wastelands that are the remains of short-term profits.
# From the 18th-century till WWII, Polanyi gives concrete examples where governments have been forced to intervene in the market economy to prevent social catastrophes. The old saw that "supply and demand will prove beneficial for everyone" is debunked six ways to Sunday.
# The major problem for economic theorists is that they assume human industry is somehow divorced from Nature. They take no account of the capital losses to The Commons when metal ingots are extracted from the earth. New reserves of gold, copper or oil are recorded as gifts from on high. Economic ledgers make no allowance for the "consumed" oil as if it will always be there in limitless supply.
# Without a social conscience, business reverts to a destructive plague that helps no one but the elite at the top of the rock pile. Polanyi documents the countless results of deregulation from 1795 to 1940. In every case, unfettered markets dehumanized the bulk of citizens. Unfettered markets bankrupted traditional family farms. They lowered wages, created greater unemployment, promoted unhealthy lifestyles, destroyed priceless artifacts and assigned nonsensical values to everyday staples.
# At present, we live on the fragile surface of a bubble which has been stretched out of all proportion.
# Over 90% of the money that is recognized in international trade is monopoly money i.e. M2, M3, M4, etc. You or I cannot spend monopoly money. We only see the currencies issued by banks i.e. M1. Our money (M1) is taxed to the hilt since it represents transactions in the REAL economy. The elite industrialists, investment bankers and absentee landlords deal with monopoly money. Only THEY can turn monopoly money into currencies that will buy stuff in the real world. Worse, monopoly money is rarely if ever taxed. 99% of us work to support governments that give the elites a free ride.
# One day the bubble of interdependent debt will burst. Most of us will become destitute, but the elite will retain their assets because monopoly money won't be touched. It's fantasy money afterall. Only everyday currencies will disappear or become worthless as toilet paper.
# I recommend Karl Polanyi's "The Great Transformation" and please take his advice to heart before robots, controlled by the elite, herd all of us into concentration camps.
Author
June 2018, "Woke" by J. O. Quantaman. Check it out at Amazon eBooks.
RSS Feed
Archives
March 2023
April 2022
April 2021
December 2020
June 2020
February 2020
April 2019
February 2019
December 2018
October 2018
August 2018
July 2018
April 2018
October 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
May 2016
March 2016
February 2016
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
April 2015
March 2015
July 2014
April 2014
December 2013
May 2013
October 2011
February 2011
September 2010
Categories
All
Cheap Energy
Democracy
Eco Tips
Occupy Wall Street
Radical Econonmics
Social Engineering
Voodoo Bankers
