Beyond the Cusp

July 18, 2018

Problems the Leftists Refuses to Accept

Filed under: Israel — qwertster @ 1:54 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Leftists have another name which they have finally proclaimed loudly and proudly, socialists. The far left in the Democrat Party have finally flat out stated that they desire to install as much socialist programs as possible once they return to power. Bernie Sanders was just the introduction to socialism with his free medical care, free college, and a guaranteed wage for everybody and raising the minimum wage to fifteen dollars per hour. Had he won the Democrat Party primaries, we very likely would not have President Trump and instead had President Bernie. But why is it that these leftist policies have been such a disaster wherever they have been attempted such as Venezuela has become currently after a decade of socialism. How can governance which guarantees so much to every individual end up with shortages in food, medicine, toilet paper and virtually everything else including jobs?

 

The problem with the views of these leftists is they have a basic misconception about human beings. If you ask the average leftist the simple question, “Do you think people are intrinsically good?” Their answer will be in the affirmative comfortably over the 90% level. In one sample we read about, a mere 4% answered that people were either neutral or not intrinsically good. If you ask a conservative the same question, they have great difficulty answering and will often claim that people are good if they are trusted with responsibility for their actions and have basic guidance, but otherwise; people are basically greedy and will act to get away with that which they are able. This is the basic difference and why conservatives believe that capitalism is a better system. They do not claim that capitalism is perfect, but they claim that as it depends on people’s greed to power their work ethic as being the central reason that it will work better. They point to the fact that if you desire more toys, then you need to get a better job or simply work harder. Advancement is on merit, not simply time put in as in unions, thus people have to perform in order to gain a higher salary and promotions. They point to the central problem for socialism is that you are given what you desire without any linking the goods to your productivity. They postulate that if you will receive raises or bonuses simply by belonging to the right group whether you produce or not, then one will join the union, belong to the prevailing party that grants the goodies or whatever while not bothering to work and produce.

 

The socialists and leftists will often claim that people will be assigned jobs because if you are being paid the guaranteed wage, then the government has to guarantee that you have a job to justify that wage. But such a job would more than likely be busy work and not anything which would add to the productivity of the society. China under Mao Zedong had a guaranteed wage and guaranteed job. One of these busy work jobs had some hundreds of people given small scissors and a ruler and had to measure each blade of grass and cut them at exactly five millimeters in height. These teams would be given a stretch of grass that they were responsible to perform this job and once they reached the far end of their assigned field, it was time to start again at the other end because it took almost half a month to cut all the blades starting at one end and working to the other end. The problem they soon found was after these teams had cut their length of field four or five times, they were slowing down and now taking three weeks and after a year, they were taking over a month to finish the field. The workers did not care because they were to receive the same pay no matter how slowly they worked. The way that this lowering of the worker efficiency was addressed was frightening. Mid-ranking Party officials were assigned to oversee the workers with instructions to simply shoot those who appeared not to be working fast enough. The result to this new system was simple, many workers fled into the countryside and never returned to their government provided job. This led to other problems for the Chinese and eventually they decided to permit some degree of capitalism to operate within their formerly socialist utopia.

 

Bernie Sanders Defines the Perfect Socialist Society

Bernie Sanders Defines the Perfect Socialist Society

 

Candidate Bernie Sanders promised a perfect socialist society. He even defined how he would pay for all his free programs, simply tax the top wage earners. This is the one item we have always often discussed and found the main problem with this concept. When a politician claims they will tax the top 1% or there abouts, who are the people you think they refer to? We are willing to bet that most of you are getting their target totally wrong. They are not going to be taxing the billionaires and those who hold over three-quarters, if not more, of the wealth. To tax these billionaires one would be required to pass a wealth tax, not an income tax. All they are doing by taxing the top earners is making sure that people who work unbelievably hard will never enter the billionaires club because they will be taxed sufficiently to prevent them accruing such wealth. The billionaires do not make salaries, they invest and as long as they continue to reinvest their billions, then they will never pay any tax. When they do finally take some of their profits from their investments, they can often write paying capital gains tax off by taking a sum equal to a loss they took in an investment, thus these people rarely pay any tax. They are all but immune from income tax as if they have a paid position, they make sure to be paid in stock options and other perks which are not taxable.

 

To pay for socialism one would be required to have a new form of tax, a wealth tax which would basically be put in place to take the cash the truly wealthy have which is beyond income taxes. There have been leaders of nations who actually used a warped version of a wealth tax, they simply took control of the country, stole the wealth from the most wealthy people and simply shot them as being evil capitalists who were criminals for hoarding their disproportional wealth. This was done by the Castro brothers in Cuba which was the position which Che Guevara claimed he enjoyed beyond description, lining people against the wall and shooting them. One quote from Che reads as follows, “To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary. These procedures are an archaic bourgeois detail. This is a revolution! And a revolutionary must become a cold killing machine motivated by pure hate. We must create the pedagogy of the paredón [execution wall].” This man had a medical degree and was actually a physician but rather than save lives, he chose to take lives. Why were the murders necessary for the revolution in Cuba, because they required the wealth that the land owners held and also desired to take their land. This was similar in many of the communist and socialist revolutions where they promised the masses they would give them the farms, as that was often the wealth of the nation. One can guess what happens when you shoot the farmers and give your revolutionary soldiers the farms as a reward. Very soon, you find that soldiers do not make the greatest farmers and without the farmers, hunger is soon to follow and that was part of the collapse of the economy as well in many of the socialist revolutions.

 

Finally, we would like to disabuse people of a misconception we have heard a few too many times. This is that Robin Hood was a socialist. This is not true as the concept that he stole from the rich and gave to the poor, the rallying cry of far too many socialists, not in these exact words, it is usually stated as universal healthcare, guaranteed minimum wage, guaranteed employment, free college education and free computers, cell phones and anything else which is considered required to be part of the modern age. Robin Hood stole from the Sheriff of Nottingham and returned the funds from the governing body, the Sheriff of Nottingham, to the over taxed people. Robin Hood was giving the peasants and workers, mostly farmers and herdsmen, a tax refund, a sorely needed tax refund. When people came and took refuge with Robin Hood they were assigned tasks they were required to perform, a job to earn their keep. Robin Hood was attempting financial stimulus through a tax refund so the farmers and herdsmen could return to actually working with proper funds to sustain their farms and herds such that they could make a living and earn their way. Finally, believe it or not, Robin Hood was and still remains a fictional character. If only socialism had become a social construct which has been proven repeatedly to result in failure and misery and this relegated to the ash-bin of history, but there are those who still believe that this time it will work because they are the people who can perform a socialist society the right way. The Chinese figured out the right way to run a socialist society, by introducing a sizable capitalist segment within the society which is freed up enough to thrive and thus pay for the socialist projects of the governance. But as soon as you start a little capitalism, you will eventually end with a whole lot of capitalism as you will soon realize that greed is a great motivator and when you allow people to better their position in life, you can have an amount of socialism on the side paid for by your burgeoning capitalist economic engine.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

October 9, 2017

The Saving of America

 

After the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama years it appeared that the schism reputed to exist between the Republicans and Democrats had narrowed to a small step-over rather than a seismic event. With Hillary Clinton appearing in the polls to be about to steamroll Donald Trump, any chance of widening that difference appeared dead. But sometimes the political world takes a lunging alteration of course and nothing could have made such more apparent than the election of President Trump, well, almost. People are painting the Alabama Special Election Primary as a Trump loss as he, in a likely peace offering to try and gain at least a modicum of support from the Republican mainstream in the Congress, backed former Alabama State Attorney General Luther Strange over the former Alabama State Supreme Court Judge and eternal misfit, Roy Moore. Well, the Alabama Republicans sent the Republican Party another message and selected, actually elected, Roy Moore to run in this fall’s election to replace Senator Sessions in the United States Senate. This was a step which may prove even more exasperating and frustrating for the Republican Party than was the election of President Trump.

 

Let us explain. President Trump came from a background of business dealings where you give and take and adjust to reach the closest you are able to your goal. This means you compromise to get something and you give something. Roy Moore is a staunch and opinionated proponent of absolute principles. He stands on his principles no matter the cost and compromises with nobody. He believes in these truths he holds and brandishes them as weapons to smash convention and tradition in the face if they dare disagree. He is not going to quietly fit into the groove with the Republican mainstream in the Senate and he fully supports President Trump’s drain the swamp agenda and the correcting of the glutton-like foolishness where the Congress simply bought votes with other people’s monies wasting taxpayer funds and running up enormous debts. Roy Moore will demand responsibility and stand as the adult in the play pen under the Capital Dome, well, actually to one side. The mainstays and Republican big-shots are more than a little put out especially when the first meeting Roy Moore attended upon hitting the slimy streets of Washington D.C. was Steve Bannon, the man the Republican elites took special interest in forcing from the Administration.

 

Mr. Bannon has a view and a plan to go with it, he wants to back more people like Donald Trump and Roy Moore who do not fit the mold we have been forced to accept for politicians, the go-along-to-get-along group. He wants rabble-rousers who will take great pleasure in upturning all of the existing apple carts. Moore is seeking people who are of a similar political set of views and the intestinal fortitude to stand firm on those principles they believe deeply about against all adversity and opposition. He is seeking conservatives, true conservatives, who have preferably no political experience and have either been standout, principled, steadfast, absolutist, honorable conservatives. Steve Bannon has a very high view of himself seeing his mission for the remainder of his life as saving the United States from the barnacled infestation created by the power creep in Washington D.C. and which has issued an ever-rising debt which will destroy the future of the United States, the Western World and any possibility of advancing freedom for our children and all posterity. Bannon, despite what his detractors’ claim, actually does love the United States and the principles upon which it was founded. He is some form of a purist, an absolutist, a Foundationalist, one who believes in the exact wording of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence (in particular) and the numerous principles and theories from the political philosophers of the era leading up to the revolution which formed the United States. He sees Washington’s establishment as a large part of the problem, and places the blame on the politicians for dereliction of their duty to the people of the United States. His belief is that the Congress has a primary duty to fight for the people by preserving their nation and protecting it and especially the Constitution, from all threats foreign and domestic. And yes, that is a piece directly from the oath that every member of Congress, the Military, the President, the Federal Judges and many of the ranking members of the Administration and within the government.

 

Singing of the Declaration of Independence representative as the majority were present at the date considered to be the official signing but some had returned home and would sign it before it was delivered and there were several copies such that one could be delivered to King George III in London and others delivered to the spate State Committees and other copies stored separately for their collective safety

Singing of the Declaration of Independence representative as the majority were present at the date considered to be the official signing but some had returned home and would sign it before it was delivered and there were several copies such that one could be delivered to King George III in London and others delivered to the spate State Committees and other copies stored separately for their collective safety

 

How will Steve Bannon bring about his marvelous revolution of his? Well, he will have to fight a good fight, as there is a man who desires nothing less than the entire destruction and downfall of the United States. This man believes the opposite of everything which Steve Bannon holds dear and desires the complete failure and crumbling of these United States which Steve Bannon desires to save. Everything which Steve Bannon desires to bring about would only make the United States a greater abomination to this individual. This person has made it his life’s work, amongst numerous other equally perverse aims, to bring down the United States by any means necessary, and this is an individual of means. His name is George Soros and in his book,

The Age of Fallibility: The Consequences of the War on Terror, Soros said, “The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States. This is a harsh — indeed, for me, painful — thing to say, but unfortunately I am convinced it is true.

One of these men will succeed, and only one, as their aims for the future are diametrically opposed. What is more probable is one of these men’s aims will have their cause win out, but it may not be due to their efforts actually succeeding. Obviously one of these views must come about, as the United States will either survive to the end of time or crumble at some point in the future to either its own rust or the cruel cudgel of invasion. What is the only consequential reality is the immediate future where the efforts of these two adversaries will play out. What is the sad part is that people such as many members of Congress and the political swamp which sustains their careers and everything which contribute to the ooze and the slime, all of this is aiding George Soros and may be partially why he feels as he does and is the more likely victor. The money and the momentum are behind this direction and the eventual drowning of the United States in its own debt and futility.

 

The battle Steve Bannon is fighting is one that we here at BTC are very familiar and may have indirectly assisted in its birth. We reacted to the idiocy of our Congress woman who when we wrote telling her we opposed the addition of a special tax on Internet providers use of telephone lines, way back in the time of modem-phone Internet interface, because we did not desire paying even more for access to the Internet. This was a big issue back then and we were quite animated over the issue. She replied, and this is a paraphrasing, ‘Your rates are not affected by the tax as this tax is on the phone use by the provider and not the end user.’ Like any tax goes no further than the people, the corporations, upon whom the tax is levied. These corporations and industries would never pass along the additional cost along to their customers who use their goods and services, that would never happen. Well, in our Congress woman’s world, that is how it would work. We were incensed enough with the disrespect, the assumption of the public’s ignorance, and the belief that we would accept such a preposterous answer that we ran for office against her and everything else. Our communicating of our idea and ideals that the government required being brought back to serving the people and not itself or the mega-corporations and that the basics which founded the United States were being threatened and trod asunder and only required the people realizing the dangers and standing up to bring their desires to the fore. We were able to speak to maybe close to one thousand people but received many times that many votes. Our strongest support, despite being rebuffed by the NRA as too inconsequential for their consideration, were gun owners who arrived in numbers Election Day requesting posters and pamphlets as they struck out to the polls and even donated a final contribution to our campaign in the maximum amount permitted by law. Here we are a decade and a half later and we have had the Tea Party and now a simply we are fed up revolt by voters; if only we had waited we might have had more financial backing.

 

The problem for Steve Bannon is he will have great difficulty finding people who believe and are willing to stand against the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. There will be many who will believe in his cause and still choose when challenged not to do while a very courageous few will be willing to do. So, to be or not to be, that is the question, and whether to stand against the moneyed interests and their character assassination will be what those who consider the challenge will and must answer. To ignore the coming hardships and potential threats would be foolish. We write this from experience. How many of us actually have the fortitude to stand toe-to-toe in a debate with people whose livelihood depends on their debating skills. People who can twist words into a pretzel, still sell them as a pretzel stick, and then tell people they enjoyed it even if they used hot peppers instead of salt. Our best memory other than the support from the gun rights supporters on Election Day morning was when we were in a debate at a predominantly minority church. The question was about support or opposition of the death penalty and we went last. Both the Democrat and sitting Republican stood directly and completely opposed to the death penalty, an expected response. We stood and stated that we were not in favor of the liberal or common use of the death penalty, but that there were a certain class of criminals who were beyond the ability of our systems, medical and criminal, to repair their damaged lives and personalities. Such people are psychopaths, sociopaths, psychotics and other simply evil people who were beyond any chance for being permitted return into society. As no prison is absolutely inescapable and some of these individuals have a devious brilliance which would make them the perfect candidate to escape even the highest security prisons, and thus the only means would be the death penalty or a form of solitary confinement with limitations to their ability to move such that they were not even permitted the movement to feed themselves or any other such normative functions such that execution would actually be more merciful, for people, and we listed a half dozens or so mass murderers, are the types who the death penalty would be appropriate. The two main party candidates in their rebuttal both agreed with everything I stated in thirty seconds and it was remarkably uplifting knowing we had bested them on at least one question. Mostly we held our own sufficiently well that they formed a bi-partisan committee with members of the staff from both campaigns to work and keep me from appearing anywhere in public. That included debates before religious groups, public groups, political clubs and the televised debate sponsored by the League of Women Voters. They even had lawyers from the State’s Attorney’s Office witness against us in a court to prevent a judge from allowing us into the debate as we sued. They even had the judge refuse to allow a member of my campaign to represent me in court and demand that I defend my need to be represented in the debate with almost thirty seconds of meeting with the person who had done all of the research. We managed to lose this one, remarkable, right?

 

This is what anybody attempting to break the political class’s hold on absolute power will face, this and far worse, because the political class has figured out that the people are mad as, well, you know. Will the American people arise and remain aroused long enough to actuate the changes necessary? Six years is the minimum to be able to change the entire Senate once and we may require three times through to manage the changes we require. Senators John McCain, Lisa Murkowski, Richard Shelby, Marco Rubio, Chuck Grassley, Jerry Moran, Roy Blunt, Rob Portman, Pat Toomey, John Thune, Mike Lee and Ron Johnson were just reelected so we are stuck with them for the next six years. These were just some of the Republicans and we saw no reason for adding Democrats who disregard the limitations of the Constitution as they promise to do that while the Republicans claim they are the protectors of the Constitution. Most of them could not even tell you most of the particulars included in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Ask your representatives for the Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate, to simply state the Tenth Amendment (see image below) and then explain what they believe it means. Then ask them if it matters at all to them. Then, if you really want to have some fun, ask them what in the Constitution was behind, and then list any number of votes they made which can be looked up on the Internet at their own sites very often. Do this when other people are listening and watch them squirm before they start to lie to you.

 

Tenth Amendment

 

Will the United States survive into the distant future? The first question is what will the United States look like in about ten, twenty, fifty years or even a century or more? We will have a simple measuring meter, the debt. Every trillion of growth in the debt is probably an additional decade of the United States as a debtor nation. Being a debtor nation is not a good thing. There will be so many, especially in the political class, who will argue that as measured against the GDP, the debt is not as terrible as it may first appear. They will tell you that you cannot even think about numbers like the level of the debt and even the GDP. One has to wonder, if we cannot even understand such numbers, what makes these supra-geniuses we vote into office have such ability, as they appear to talk about such things with a complete cavalier attitude. That should be a stumper which will leave them sputtering and attempting to backtrack before they do additional damage. The United States no longer requires a Balanced Budget Amendment, as even with such a law, the Congress would find means around such by using continuing resolution with built in increases in spending to continue the same-old-same-old. The United States requires responsible stewardship leading to budget surpluses which are required to be applied to reduction of the principle of the debt. This need be required until the entirety of the debt is reduced to nothing.

 

From that point forward, the budget must be balanced and should any year run into debt, then the next year must place repaying that debt at the top of the budget which must also remain as a balanced budget. There should not be any leeway allowing any debt to build up and every yearly budget should be corralled such that they not exceed some set percentage of all funds collected by the Federal Government the previous year. Should any yearly debt be incurred, then that would immediately bite into the funds for the next year, as it is required to be placed at the head of the next year’s budget in order that it be paid and not increased, as is the current habit. Should the United States continue in the current direction, then very soon the United States will no longer be capable of fielding the strongest military in the world, and will have reached the point where having a large Navy, Air Force, Army, Marines or any other military organizations beyond that required for border patrol, if that. We have watched as the European nations have almost to a nation degraded their militaries to the point that they are not meeting their obligations under treaties and are no longer capable of exerting force projection. The Europeans had a secret weapon, the United States. Whom will the United States offload their defense onto? Answer that question and you will have permitted the United States to become just another European socialist nightmare. Well, the next five elections will tell much of the story and we will continue to watch and hope along with the rest of the world. We just pray we will not need to write an article titled, “What Will the World Without America Be?”

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

March 22, 2017

What Should be Included as the New Western Ethic?

 

There is an obvious pushback against President Trump throughout the Western World. Many areas of Europe, Canada, Australia and especially the United States in complete authentic meltdown over the prospect that Trump might succeed. This criticism of anything outside of the new ethic being modeled for the past seventy years or so has reached the point where accepting a speaking engagement could cost you your health if not your life should anyone start a rumor that your beliefs are unacceptably conservative or old fashioned. Take the reception Charles Murray received as he was almost lynched at the liberal college of Middlebury College in the state whose motto is “Live Free or Die,” Vermont. What was his crime? Well, he wrote the controversial book “The Bell Curve” which made claims that some people were more gifted than others and that there was a distribution of intelligence with a large median area and a slope downward from there in both directions. How absolutely horrid and insulting not recognizing that we are all equally gifted, just each of us differently. Nobody is smarter or faster or better at anything and we all deserve a trophy because we were there whether we engaged or just sat in the corner dreaming, we get a trophy. Our new age does not believe in competition, keeping score, recognizing winners or shaming losers to try harder, we just accept everybody and whatever efforts they feel they need to contribute today.

 

That is the one set of ideas which must be thoroughly erased from society, the work ethic, the idea that there are winners and losers, competition as a way of improving, striving to better oneself, making money, capitalism, actually defining words and having accepted correct spelling, standards, and the belief that some ideas and societies are superior to others and that freedom is something which is not only worth defending but requires defending because there are those who would subjugate the world forcing it to be ruled under their autocratic thumb. Wait, one of those groups are the elitists who are so against the ideals and ideas of Western culture and believe that Western ethics and culture is oppressive and evil. They find it based on violence because it has defended its freedoms and ideals from those who would have subjugated and destroyed their world. They claim that Western culture and society was responsible for World War II and the Cold War and that had they simply not fought to keep their culture everything would have been so much better. Sure the Nazis were not exactly friendly but did the world really need be turned into a shooting gallery just to defeat the Nazis and the equally disturbing Imperial Japan? Of course not as the Western nations should have negotiated with them. Those claiming such forget that there was this little thing called the Munich Agreement which Neville Chamberlin signed with Adolph Hitler as well as Georges Bonnet of France and Joachim von Ribbentrop for Germany, Benito Mussolini for Italy and declared as “Peace in our time.” The main detractor was Winston Churchill who was called the crazy old man and was ostracized by the leftist pacifists of that day who just like the modern leftists saw nothing to be gained by war and saw little need to defend against the Nazi threat because a treaty had put an end to the menace and Hitler was appeased. Well, not quite as Hitler next demanded Poland and divided it with the Soviets under the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. That act finally was more than the French or British were willing to permit and they went to war. Unfortunately, with the time given to the Nazis they had built a formidable war machine with which they came within a razors edge of winning World War II before the United States entered the war. Had they defeated the British and then turned against Russia successfully, the world would likely be speaking German today and there would be no Western culture to speak of and the modern leftists would have their dream, a socialist fantasyland where under the heel of dictators all would be perfect. Venezuela is one of the modern examples of where such thinking eventually leads.

 

Moneyed USA

 

Let’s imagine the United States after it has adopted the most easily recognized ideas which are favorites of the college educated elitists, not the professors, even though they are the purveyors of these concepts. We’ll use what the protesting students do, the ones who decide who is permitted to speak and what any speaker may present on their campuses. They proclaim that government must provide free education to all at all levels for as long as or at any point in time or point in their lives which people may desire, not require, simply desire. Further, all people, regardless of quality of their health, preexisting conditions, level of exercise, diet, weight or other physical, mental and psychological conditions should be granted equal coverage. The government must provide all citizens with a livable wage. Further, anybody within the borders should be granted citizenship. Everyone who desires to come to the United States should be granted entrance and citizenship because all people are equal and must be respected and given equal rights and treatment despite place of birth. The wealthy must be made to provide to pay sufficient taxes even if it means taking part of their wealth to provide government services which the people are entitled to as citizens. The people should be educated to understand and accept these concepts and the rest of the ideals of proper governance which includes freedom of gender identification, equal treatment of all sexual preferences, equal treatment of all people regardless of gender, identity, race, sexual preferences, nation of origin and a lengthy list of other identifiers as identifiers are evil and must be erased. When asked exactly how the society, actually the government, is supposed to afford these benefits and their reply will always be the same mantra, tax the rich, the wealthy will pay for it. What they refuse to understand is that in such a society there would be no wealthy as they would either leave for someplace where sanity ruled instead of feel good leftists or would have lost their wealth and joined the poor. Such a social arrangement for building a nation would result in a failed state where the average norm would be people taking courses, even if they had to take basket weaving, or simply party or enjoy long walks on the beach or through the park and collect their living wage as anything else would be punished with an unaffordable tax.

 

In order to collect sufficient funds to provide these benefits, the government would have to tax any income over the livable wage at near, if not above, 99%. Simply defined, if the living wage was set at thirty-thousand dollars a year, then with the above mention 99% tax on any income earned above that rate would have somebody earning thirty-five-thousand dollars a year would end up having a mere fifty dollars additional over those who settled for the livable wage. That begs the question, why bother working for a nominal wage when you would only receive a penny per dollar above the livable wage earned. Well, perhaps if you earned enough it would be different. What if you earned $250,000.oo? Well you would end up with $2,200.oo more than the livable wage. Now realize how much you would need to work as most people making a quarter of a million dollars put in over sixty hours a week at the office and another thirty at home and spend much of their free time thinking work. Then ask if a life of near constant working is really worth just over two thousand dollars or would the idea of taking courses or simply chilling with friends and take the livable wage be better. How bad could the livable wage life be compared to working your guts out for an additional two thousand dollars? The pull to avoid a punishing taxation and simply go with the majority would eventually result in the end of wealth as we know it. Additionally, if the livable wage proved not to provide sufficient life enjoyment and with likely the majority of the society collecting the livable wage, then it is likely that within a relatively short period of time they would vote to increase the livable wage. Politicians would place their jobs on that promise as they would not care as their salaries would either be tax exempt or sufficiently high such that their lives would be very comfortable, after all, they simply need to vote to increase the livable wage and also to raise their own salary.

 

Once again, look to Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela and the Soviet Union and the same thing becomes obvious to any discerning observer, they all have failed miserably. What makes this even more distressing is that Venezuela was a profitable nation with a capitalist economy until they elected a feel good socialist who decided that elections needed adjusting. He basically became President for life and he kept enacting more and more social safety net programs until Venezuela became a socialist utopia until the oil revenue could no longer support the social spending when the price of oil dropped as the United States discovered the means of retrieving shale oil through fracking. This led to Saudi Arabia to open up their spigots forcing the price of oil to the point where fracking was no longer profitable. This also placed pressure on Iran whose oil is of a lesser degree as it is very thick and needs more processing thus requiring more expense to process thus making their profit margin require a higher price than the result from the Saudi Arabian price pressure to a low level. Russia also has run into problems with the lowered price of oil which has proven that heavy social spending or other considerations can make a lower price for crude oil economically ruinous which has been the weapon used by the Saudis for years. The problem for Venezuela was more spending than lowered oil price; the oil price simple exacerbated their situation.

 

There is a reason why socialism will always fail while capitalism will usually work provided government spending is kept in check. The founding fathers chose an entrepreneurial based society for a reason, human instincts. There is one disposition in human behavior which can be counted upon in near all situations regardless of the governance, greed. Yes, being greedy is considered a negative personality trait but if we are honest, we will almost all admit that given no punishment for acting greedy, we will be greedy. Given a choice between a regular hamburger or a double hamburger for the same price, face it; we will most likely take the double burger. Make that three scoops of ice cream versus four scoops of ice cream for the same price? Four scoops, right? Let’s make it even easier, you are offered two jobs, both requiring you to clean up a football field which are across the street from one another with the one on the north side paying twenty dollars an hour and the one on the south side paying fifteen dollars an hour and both allowing you five hours of payment no matter how long you take, which job would you take and you can only do one or the other. Obvious, you take the north for the extra twenty-five dollars. Why these seemingly stupid questions, you ask? Well, capitalism counts on people being greedy, well, not exactly greedy but willing to work harder to gain additional wealth. Sure there are those who like me prefer a job which was interesting but when I worked on commission I worked far more diligently and faster than when I was paid simply by the hour. Perhaps that is why when department stores paid their salespeople by commission the service was so good and when they switched to hourly rate the service disappeared and, if you were fortunate, you could find a cashier to take your money. When my team of roofers were paid by the hour it took half a day to roof one townhouse but when our job paid by the length of roof we completed we managed to finish three townhomes by lunchtime, remarkable, right? That is called the capitalism effect.

 

Now let’s look at a socialist utopia where you are guaranteed a livable wage which would be relatively generous. Additionally, healthcare is free so you do not need a job to be covered. Housing is fixed at an affordable rate and there are price controls on food, vehicles, and other niceties. Entertainment is inexpensive or free. Education is free for all levels and you can remain in school taking courses all your life and even the dorm room is free as is the cafeteria. Most jobs are likely to be employing people from foreign countries as they would be willing to work for a wage as other costs in such a society make doing so easier to send money home to their families but these people work for a few years, make what their needs were back home and leave. Most of the citizens simply take the livable wage, stay in school and live a carefree life. Now let’s add one last item to the mix; anybody is permitted to enter the country and become a citizen simply by requesting such. Now how long will such a nation survive? Decades, years, months, weeks, until the first million people arrive? Face it, such a nation is doomed from the onset and there is no way around it even if there are oil wells as far as the eye can see. Even the oil sheikdoms limit their wealth and generosity to the indigenous peoples and guard citizenship for the precious fortune it is for their people who never need toil if they choose not to and foreign workers are brought in to do everything. Imagine if they allowed for open citizenship for just a week. Their ability to afford to continue their generosity would vanish and the goose that was laying the golden oil eggs would no longer be capable of supporting the expanded population as everyone who could get there, would get there and take the free income for life or for as long as it lasted. There can be no open border socialist utopia and even with a closed border it eventually will collapse, even Kuwait which has the luxury of an oil well for every ten people or something ridiculously close. Without near endless supply of wealth, the sole means of running a nation successfully is to take as much advantage of the one constant, greed. Using greed to power the country is far more successful than using the country to satisfy greed.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

« Previous PageNext Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: