Missing The Obvious

I recently heard a very knowledgeable, influential person talking about the future. He had many insights that were helpful and valid. His economic views, however were quite disturbing. He made a comment to the effect that capitalism is immoral. He pointed to the fact that many people have been hurt by capitalism and that it is morally bankrupt. You can’t count on people doing the right thing.

This is an intelligent man, someone who is aware, who’s job it is to look behind the façade to see what is really happening. This is also a man who is a consultant, a businessman, an entrepreneur, a profiteer and , in leftist radical terms, a capitalist pig. It is difficult to imagine that he is unaware of that fact. He is, in essence, an example of what is good and moral and right about capitalism.

He offered his service and he was paid very handsomely. The participants went away with something of value. He has clients all over the world that also pay him a lot of money, and I would expect that he is very busy because he gives something worth paying for. That is the essence of free markets, another name for capitalism, people trading freely with others who are willing to deal with them.

He is a small scale capitalist, but size doesn’t matter. Whether the market is for a gallon of milk or a billion dollar manufacturing plant, as long as the parties to the transaction are free to make their own decisions and use their own resources, economic freedom gives the best result. Consistently good judges of value and of the future are the most profitable and contribute the most to society. The only exceptions are those businesses that use government coercion for their profits, rather than market competition. They are the source of injustice in the markets.

Our consultant friend was committing the error that so many people commit these days. They assume that the markets are actually free because that’s what they have been told. They assume that economic freedom is the source of the problems. The natural inclination with that frame of reference is to look for government to save the day. He refuses to see that there isn’t a single market in this country that is truly free. Further, the markets that are experiencing the most disastrous problems are the ones that are most seriously impaired by government manipulation.

When our futurist cited his sources of economic understanding, it became clear as to why he was so far from the economic truth. Economist Joseph Stiglitz was a key reference in the economic analysis. He is one of a breed of influential economists who have been trained in the discipline of central planning. As intellectual superiors, they know how things should work. For this group, the stated aim of economics is to guide government intervention to bring economic nirvana to the people. Lowly peasants don’t know what is good for themselves, so they need the experts to cram it down their throats.

These economists lead intelligent but unwitting people to believe that banking deregulation caused the credit crisis. They say that the boom-bust cycle is an inherent evil of capitalism and that free markets lead to exploitation of the masses. What they don’t say is that the entire banking system is built on a foundation of government manipulation of banks, prices and markets. The Federal Reserve Bank directly and indirectly controls interest rates and monetary policy, the sources of economic instability. Artificially low interest rates initiate and expand credit and asset bubbles. We are living through the latest Fed induced bubble and crash as I write this. The Fed is, at this moment, laying the groundwork for the next big bubble and crash in 5 or 8 or 10 years, which may be worse than what we are experiencing now.

Our world traveling consultant seems to be a brilliant man. He has the answers to many questions and has a good grasp of technological and demographic trends. When it comes to economic understanding, however, it seems that he is missing the obvious. He imputes injustice on capitalism when it is, in fact, the only road to true justice and prosperity. “Capitalist pigs” like him are the reason that all people, rich and poor, are better off in free economies. His comments only empower the enemies of freedom. Moreover, his indictment of capitalism is an indictment of himself. Neither he nor capitalism deserve such treatment.

43 comments to Missing The Obvious

  • Wingnut

    Hi

    You DO see the pyramid scheme symbol on the back of the USA one dollar bill, right? You DO see the servitude infestation in capitalism, right? And do you see the “pay up or lose your wellbeing” Chicago mob-like felony extortion widespread within capitalism? Do you see the “join or starve” felony extortion done to the 18 year olds… by this ugly competer’s church called capitalism? See how forcing competer’s religions onto 18 year olds… kills membership in the cooperator’s church (Christianity/socialism)?? Do you understand that AmWay (American Way) (New World Order) got “the exclusive” (legal tender) on the TYPE of survival coupons (money) accepted in supply depots (stores) and leverages 18 years olds into the organization via that felony activity as well? (It puts AmWay-coupon slaving requirements called price tags… on all the survival goods). Do you understand how farmyard pyramids work… from your childhood? Remember? The upper 1/3 are “heads in the clouds” while the kids on the bottom ALWAYS GET HURT from the weight of the world’s knees in their backs? Still with me? Do you see anything illegal, immoral, or just plain sick… in any of this pyramid scheme’s activities?

    Us American Christian socialists are still patiently awaiting the natural fall of the pyramid-o-servitude, or the busting of the free marketeers felony… by the USA Dept of Justice. Us Christians are VERY CLOSE to issuing a cease and desist order until the servitude and inequality goes away… which means it turns into a commune. Commune is a word we LOVE when used in the word “community”… but its one the caps HATE when used in the term “commune-ism”. Go fig. PROGRAMMED!!

    Time to level the felony pyramid scheme called capitalism. Abolish economies and ownershipism worldwide, and hurry. Economies just cause rat-racing, and rat-racing causes felony pyramiding. BUST IT, America! Look to the USA military supply/survival system… (and the USA public library system) for socialism and morals done right. Equal, owner-less, money-less, bill-less, timecard-less, and concerned with growth of value-criteria OTHER THAN money-value. Quit doing monetary discrimination immediately, and make it illegal. There are MANY measurement criteria of “value”… not just dollars. Try morals, efficiency, discrimination-levels, repairability, etc etc. Economies are cancerous tumors, and to cheer for their growth… is just insane. Profiting causes inflation, so if caps LIKE inflation, and if they LIKE a terrible time in afterlife when they meet the planet’s ORIGINAL OWNER before caps tried to squat it all with ownershipism, then keep it up with the felony pyramiding. I dare you. While us Christians are finally bulldozing that pyramid scheme back to level, lets make servitude and “join or starve” (get a job or die) illegal in the USA, and lets level the architecture seen in USA courtrooms, too. Right now, USA courtrooms are church simulators or “fear chambers”, by special design. Sick.

    Larry “Wingnut” Wendlandt
    MaStars – Mothers Against Stuff That Ain’t Right
    (anti-capitalism-ists)
    Bessemer MI USA

  • Response to Wingnut,

    Thanks for your comments. Unfortunately they were such complete incoherent Marxist drivel that it is difficult to even begin commentary.

    My best recommendation is to get your head out of Das Kapital and join the 21st century.

    I read somewhere on these pages a recommendation for Henry Hazlitt’s book, “Economics In One Lesson”. That would be a pretty good place to start onyour journey into reality.

  • Raymond

    Nuts,

    Are the American Christian socialists going to grow their own food? How will this work?

  • Wingnut

    Hi again. A big air-biscuit from the author, I see. What a shame.

    Raymond, I just got done telling you that a better system uses no ownership, and then you come out with a question like “Are the American Christian socialists going to grow their OWN food?”. “Own” would be a concept left far behind, like capitalism.

    Let’s see… when was the last time I debated this all out? Ah yes… http://www.chancelitton.com/?p=131 . I had to jump ship there for threat of controlism. But still, you can read all about my ideas for non-pyramid survival/supply systems there… if you’re open-minded to such things. This way I don’t have to type answers to the same ol’ “yay capitalism”-spurned interrogations, yet again.

    Open minds welcomed!
    Best Regards!
    Wingnut

  • Raymond

    Nuts,

    Sorry. Food production first, then talk about your ideology.

    And describe how socialists economies failed to overcome shortages for such a basic need like food. You do know?

  • Hi Wingnut,

    Your better system was successfully implemented about 90 years ago by comrade Lenin. The result was millions of deaths by starvation. That is the only possible outcome. You are describing the elimination of division of labor, comparative advantage, indirect trade and every other means of economic progress that has lifted people, including the poor, to levels of prosperity that even kings of 100 or 200 years ago could not imagine.

    The poor in America have income many times the average for the entire world. You talked about an open mind. How about you read about the devasation and death your program has caused over the last century wherever it has been tried.

    I have read Marx, Lenin and Trotsky. How about you open your mind and read Von Mises, Hayek and Menger?

  • As I read Wingnut’s responses, I am reminded of the time when I first read Michael Rothchild’s “Bionomics”-which also influenced my understanding of economics. In it, he observed that “capitalism” was not some ideological construct like Marxism, Leninism, or Socialism. It just happened-”capitalism, that is. Private ownership and the purchase and exchange of goods, property, and services all occurred as part of the natural process meant to insure human survival. These practices evolved and became more complex in order to meet the demands for efficiency in the distribution or allocation of goods and services. It isn’t necessary to develop an ideology in order to address these issues.

    By the way Wingnut, have you ever conducted an objective scientific analysis of your views and their possible consequences if these were to implemented as policy and law? As Dan pointed out, you could check out the books by the aforementioned authors (highly recommended!) or do what I did, take a college course on planned economies.

  • Wingnut

    I really would be interested how someone that calls himself a Christian can propose coerced communism?

    In my understanding, as a Christian, the single most important thing is a personal relationship with the entity whom I call god, and which is decribed in the scriptures usually refered to as the bible.

    As far as I know, coercion wasn’t really what Jesus preached, was it?

    Given you could find enough people that would voluntary commit all their property to the community and live in such a way, I would have no issue with this in any way.

    Where I see issues is that behind your request to “let’s make starvation illegal” ,beyond its implicit absurdity, lies a totally unchristian and pagan philosophy of violence against those not willing to agree to your personal ideas.

    Your version of the good samatarian seems to look like this:

    ” The samatarian finds the victim on the road, hides behind a stone and waits until two other travelers reach the scene. Than he draws his sword and forces them to take care of the victim”

    Agreed, from the victims perspective, this has, on first sight, the same outcome as the story told in the new testament:

    ” The samatarian finds the victim, takes him back (mind you he wents back the road which costs him additional time) to a resort and, now here is where the rubber hits the road, pays for the victims recovery out of his own pocket”.

    Can you see the difference?

    The socialst version of the good samatarian would be version 1. Force others to do good deeds.

    The Christian version is the version2. Help others out of your own ethical foundation.

    Another sidepoint is also interesting. How could the samatarian have ever paid for the recovery of the victim if he was living in a system where no property was allowed?

    Dan proposed you to read Mises, Menger and Hayek, which is a great proposal.

    I propose you read the scripture and ask your Lord to open your eyes to understand it better and better every time you do so.

    To be compasionate you need to give. You can only give what you own. If you do not own anything there is nothing you can give.

  • Dirk

    Dan and Wingnut,

    I really think I have the closest possible reconciliation of your viewpoints.

    1. Expand the US money supply 15% per year for 10 years, and then index it to energy (including human energy) reserves thereafter;
    2. Set the Fed funds rate at 1% for the next 5 years, then gradually increase to 4% over the next 5 years;
    3. Eliminate all US trade barriers except security inspections;
    4. Eliminate all payments to farmers or any other industry to constrain production;
    5. Go to loser pay trials and cap judgements at no more than lifetime excess expenses;

    This would lower the cost of capital, and result in more competition and job creation, while mitigating inflation. If there are plenty of jobs for the 18 year olds, then they have the opportunity to pursue the very Christian principle of working while others pursue the very Christian principle of investing.

  • Hi Dirk,

    There really is no possibility of reconciliation of the viewpoints. Collectivism and freedom are opposite ends of the spectrum. Collectivism is th immoral use of force and coercion. Freedom is the absence of force and coercion. We have been living too long in this country compromising our freeom away. It will eventually go one way or the other, freedom or totalitarian dictatorship. Freedom and collectivism cannot coexist long term.

    I submit to you that your suggestions about manipulating interest rates and the money supply are precisely the direct cause of the economic debacle we are now facing. The Fed has been manipulating the market for many decades. That is why there are regular periods of economic crisis. That is a part of the collectivist mentality, that some omnipotent wizard knows something that we, as consumers, investors, business owners, and mere peasants, do not. Interest rates are not something that a dictator decides. They are the result of people’s time preference, based on what they know and what they expect in the future. Setting caps below or floors above the rate of interest set by the market has the same effect in causing shortages and gluts in the financial markets as caps and floors in any commodiy market

    A better idea would be to do away with the direct cause of massive fluctuations, namely, the fractional reserve banking system, as well as repeal the legal tender laws. People would then tend to use the money that best met their needs. The government could still print as much money as they wanted, but eventually everyone would migrate away from it because it would soon be worthless. As it is now, the dollar is worth less than 1/20th of what it was in 1913. That is not stability by any stretch of the imagination.

  • Raymond

    Dan,

    The supply of loanable funds affects its asked price(rates).

    So therefore interest rates is a price signal that conveys consumer time preference, to spend now or spend later (save).

    Do I have this right?

    Thanks,

    Raymond

  • Wingnut

    Hi everyone. Thanks for the responses and thanks for lightening-up on the personal bashing. Raymond, the handle is “Wingnut”, not Nuts.

    Dan: Your better system was successfully implemented about 90 years ago by comrade Lenin. The result was millions of deaths by starvation.

    Wing: I guess it wasn’t “successfully” implemented, then, was it?

    Dan: That is the only possible outcome.

    Wing: No, but thanks for your open-mindedness. Did the pyramid scheme folk convince you so hard-lined… of that?

    Dan: You are describing the elimination of division of labor, comparative advantage, indirect trade and every other means of economic progress that has lifted people, including the poor, to levels of prosperity that even kings of 100 or 200 years ago could not imagine.

    Wing: Why was “lifting” needed? But either way, capitalism doesn’t lift everyone equally… as its a pyramid scheme. All men are not born equal. They are born at the pyramid layer that their parents are-at at the time of the child’s birth. They are born with the old gold, good name (bloodline gold), and cronyism contacts/opportunities… of their parents.

    Dan: How about you read about the devastation and death your program has caused over the last century wherever it has been tried.

    Wing: Has a TRUE socialism (totally economy-less and ownership-less)… ever been tried? Not that I know of. Maybe the Quakers and Amish are the closest.

    Emmanuel: It just happened-”capitalism, that is. Private ownership and the purchase and exchange of goods, property, and services all occurred as part of the natural process meant to insure human survival.

    Wing: Don’t you believe “it just happened” for a second. Economies and the availability of purchasable luxuries within said economy… causes rat-racing (cookieplate-chasing in the church playground)… and rat-racing causes pyramiding… clawing and elbowing to try to get to “set-for-life” heads-in-the-clouds layers of the pyramid. (capitalizing = getting a leg-up… standing on the backs of lessers in “order” to get high). Nope, the divisions between labor, management, and proprietor… are all very planned by the long-dead-of-old-age Illuminati inventors of the free marketeers pyramid scheme.

    Emmanuel: By the way Wingnut, have you ever conducted an objective scientific analysis of your views and their possible consequences if these were to implemented as policy and law?

    Wing: The Amish and the Quakers are living testaments. Had we all joined them long ago, we’d have one hell of a fine society by now. Some of us DID join them, at least attitude-wise. Not the capitalists, though. Now the capitalists will fight and blame each other as their stupid pyramid-of-servitude-infestation crashes to the ground… and some of us will say “toadjaso!” and giggle. You have to get rid of your pyramid scheme, one way or the other. Pyramids always collapse from getting too top-heavy (too many folks rat-racing toward set-for-life land) and capitalism is no different. See the phenomenon called “enjoyment addictions” for the causes of rat-racing.

    Norbert: I really would be interested how someone that calls himself a Christian can propose coerced communism?

    Wing: Did you read my initial post whatsoever? 18 year olds forced to “get a job or starve”? That’s forced religion, friend! That’s forced joining of the competer’s church (the free marketeers economy system). “Pay up or lose your house/wellbeing?”… that’s felony extortion, baby. “Having to” answer-up to a boss, OR ELSE? ANY “or else” and things like “fired” are extreme coercion. Notice the current forcings? Blindered to them, via “Yay America” pride and joy? Some are born set-for-life and some are born set-for-servitude to the rich. Any coercion seen there? Any forcing? Capitalism is just PACKED with “orders” and “ordering”. Go “order” a hamburger in a fast food restaurant. See the slaves jump… OR ELSE? That’s orders and ordering for you. Capitalism has “orders” and “or else” oozing out of every crack and crevice. Its truly disgusting.

    Norbert: In my understanding, as a Christian, the single most important thing is a personal relationship with the entity whom I call god, and which is described in the scriptures usually referred to as the bible.

    Wing: No, not really correct. The important thing is all of God’s creations, big and small. God is a part of all his creations and thus Christians are to treat all creations as if God. We don’t try to own God with an entitle of ownership, so why would we try to own its creations?

    Norbert: Given you could find enough people that would voluntary commit all their property to the

    Wing: They never owned it in the first place, so your use of “their” isn’t applicable to a true socialism. No for sale signs or entitles of ownership existed on Earth before capitalists tried to put them on everything. Also, no other living creature on the planet, uses trade, mercantiling, economies, price tags, ownership, or police guns backing entitiles of ownership. those things are capitalism/economies con/sham things only.

    Norbert: Where I see issues is that behind your request to “let’s make starvation illegal”

    Wing: I believe I said “lets make servitude illegal”, yes? i.e. Lets disallow anyone working FOR another, and only allow working WITH another. Thus, everyone is paid the same and treated equally, as opposed to current capitalism activities. And if everyone is paid and wellbeing’d exactly the same as each other, there’s no need for wages or economy coupons (money and other such greenstamps) at all. Your only-three-way “Samaritan” scene wasn’t completely thought-through to the barnraisings and potlucks and stone soup-fruition, so I’ll give you more time to think that whole scene to the correct conclusion. Again, think barnraisings and potlucks, and repaint your Samaritan scene using that frame of mind instead of the defeatist ways currently seen. Try it without swords. We (Christian socialists) won’t be forcing anyone to join us at “Team World”, we will be ASKING others to do so. Christians and scientists don’t force with steel, we prove wisdom and fairness, and then we ask for joiners/backers.

    Dirk: I really think I have the closest possible reconciliation of your viewpoints.

    Wing: Its impossible for anything to reconcile as long as one of us wants to continue economies, and I want them stopped and outlawed. Its impossible for us to agree on those two points and I’m glad. Otherwise we’d have nothing to try to convince each other-of… and the chances for change… would stagnate. I really don’t have to hurry-along the collapse of the capitalism pyramid-o-servitude… cuz she’s comin’ down just fine on its own(ershipism). Us Christian socialists are able to say “yay America” even in the face of America’s economy flopping on its face. We don’t place importance upon economies, we place importance upon education and heart. We Christian socialists are actually starting to giggle and celebrate… as we watch capitalism belly flop. We knew the pyramid would collapse… they all do. We learned it in the backyards and playgrounds as children. Capitalists apparently didn’t. What’s a capitalist? Anyone who condoned, promoted, or joined, the pyramid scheme called capitalism. All non-force-ins, will likely do some time in federal prison, before its all said and done. Felony forsaking (negligent homicide).

    Dan, do you see the massive amounts of force and coercion in capitalism, especially in 18 year olds being forced to join it, yet? I hope I don’t have to write it in neon on a skyscraper. At least you dropped the personal bashing… thanks for that. Now think-out capitalism! Do a Google image search for ‘pyramid of capitalist’, then flip over the dollar bill and compare the pyramid scheme symbol on the back, to the picture… and THINK IT OUT. Drop the BS and own-up to pyramiding, something done by no other dead or living creature on the entire planet. Why are YOU doing it?

    Best regards, all.
    Wingnut

  • Hi Wingnut,

    The point is that your program was very successfully applied by Lenin after the Bolshevic Revolution, if by success we mean following the prescription. The success of the implementation was the direct cause of the millions of people starving to death. If you look at the results, it was an obvious miserable failure. That result, however, was the inevitable outcome. You are talking of sending civilization back to the stone age.

    Even Lenin, the most pro-Leninist that ever lived, recognized the utter failure of the program and was forced in institute the new economic policy in the 1920’s, that is, allowing some form of markets and property ownership.

    There is a long list of attempts at instituting your policy and all of them have ended in utter failure, because there is no other possible result. Look up Charles Fourier and his failed phalanxes, and Robert Ownen with New Harmony. They used wealth accumulated under capitalism to found their utopian communities and totally squandered it. They failed because that is the only possible outcome.

    Even the early colonial American settlements were close to your description of collecivist nirvana and half of them starved to death until they instituted private property and personal responsibility.

    Your system has been tried over and over . It has failed over and over because the more successful the implementation, the more perverted the incentives are. It can never, ever work. It is anti-civilization, anti-freedom, anti-social and anti-human.

  • Hi Wingnut,

    I happen to live in a rural area surrounded by Amish. Sorry to break the news to you, but the Amish are capitalists, in every sense of the word. They own their own property, earn their own money in a very capitalist fashion, often working among and for non-Amish. They trade among themselves and with us English, as they call us, using dollars.

    They rely on markets the same as anyone else. They have barn raisings because they don’t believe that insurance is allowable under their interpretation of the bible. Their working together is their insurance. They use the division of labor very effectively. Some are farmers, some are carpenters, some are blacksmiths, some are leather workers. If everyone tried to do everything for himself, they would not even be able to support their own families.

    The Amish shun some of the things of the modern world, but if they were totally isolated from the rest of us or existed in a developing country, they wouldn’t have the opportunity of borrowing some of the success of modern capitalism and their communities would quickly fail. They would be as destitute as those in the developing country because capitalism is what the developing countries lack. They will stay destituted until their repressive governments allow economic freedom and property rights.

  • Hi again, Wingnut,

    I appreciate your devotion to a cause, but think about the logical implications of what you are saying.

    “Lets disallow anyone working FOR another, and only allow working WITH another. Thus, everyone is paid the same and treated equally”

    You are assuming that someone is doing the paying and that someone is doing the treating. Who might that someone be?

    You are assuming that workers are being paid. If not money of some type, what is the payment?

    If everyone is working for himself or herself, and everyone has different abilities and different levels of productivity, the results cannot possibly be equal pay and equal treatment. If you look at real life, you have to agree that people have vastly different skills and vastly different productive potential.

    If someone is very productive and is forced to give up some of that production to equalize pay, then that person is not working for himself or herself. They cannot keep the fruits of their labor. They are necessarily working for someone else and your system falls apart. If the more productive person’s goods are not confiscated for redistribution, than that person will acculate things, property that he or she owns.

    There is no way to reconcile people working for themselves and lack of ownership rights. The only way to attain a lack of ownership rights is through slavery. And that is exactly what we see whenever your system is attempted.

  • Hi Wingnut,

    I am a Christian. I have spent literally thousands of hours over the last few decades reading the bible, thinking and reading about it and trying to understand the gospel of Jesus. To me, the unequivocal message of Jesus is the message of freedom.

    Jesus calls us all to charity. Charity is not, however, taking stuff from someone to give to someone else. That is theft, and there isn’t even one instance in the bible where Jesus advocated that.

    In every instance, even when admonishing people for doing wrong, he gave them a choice. He never forced them to follow him, to be charitable or to do anything else. Freedom was a theme throughout the bible, the old and new testaments. Repressive, interfering governments were the sources of physical repression, whether it was Pharoah or the Pharisees of Jesus time.

    In our time, the government is also the source of repression and lack of freedom. They are our Pharisees. They are the snakes, the vipers, the hypocrites that Jesus described. In this country, or any free country, the role of government is to preserve the life, liberty and property of the people. The force and coercion that you attribute to capitalism is actually either the direct force and coercion of perverted government interfering in people’s lives, or the failure of government to prevent the force and coercion by others.

    Capitalism is nothing more than freedom. It is the freedom to own property and to use it as we see fit. The only restriction on our rights is that we don’t impinge on the rights of others. The fact that one person owns more than another is not impinging on anyone’s rights unless the one used force or fraud to attain it.

    In a free economy, everyone works for himself or herself, precisely as you said in your commentary. They trade their time and skills for money, or they use their time and skills growing food. Either way, the benefit they get from those skills is generally dependent on how productive they are. Each person has a choice of what to do with his or her life and time. You are right, some start out with great advantages. Many times those people born with advantages squander their wealth or fail. There are millions of instances where people started with nothing and made a successful life.

    My grandparents are an example. They were Irish immigrants who came here with very little and established a wonderful family. Each member of that family, children down to great-great-great grandchildren enjoy different levels of success, not because capitalism is unfair, but because they have different levels of skills and made different choices in their lives.

    That idea is in full accord with the message of Jesus. He calls people to be free from sin, but also free from the repression of the Pharoahs of all times.

    Your system absolutely requires all powerful Pharoahs to keep people equal, to keep exceptional people down to the lowest common denominator. People cannot be charitable without owning property that they can give to be charitable with.

    To me, a christian cannot advocate theft, and that is what redistribution is at its very essence.

  • American Christian Socialism really isn’t based on a solid theological foundation-if we were to simply go by scripture. I am a church-going Catholic myself, and I certainly disagree with some of the socialist leanings of certain church leaders-especially since I know that these ideas are influenced more by misguided political ideologies rather than by Christian teaching. I am aware that Christ did not institute any specific guidelines for an “equitable” distribution of wealth based on governmental coercion. He did however urge people to be charitable and generous which is not the same thing as adopting Wingnuts’ position.

    Wingnuts basically puts a “Christian” label on the same old tired Marxist/Socialist concepts as though that is suppose to bolster its legitmacy. Sorry, but that’s not how economics works.

  • Dirk

    When wingnut says he wants economies outlawed, I’m guessing he means he wants money and the use of it outlawed- that we should be able to take (and share) what we need (and have). While I would agree that Heaven may not have money (especially if the streets are paved with gold), Jesus didn’t appear opposed to it, and given the parable of the talents (and a talent was appx. $300K in todays money, so he apparently wasn’t opposed to large sums of money), he specifically endorses the idea of investment vs. hoarding of money. So I’m afraid I can’t endorse the biblical validity of his proposals.

    On the other hand, I see his core dissatisfaction with our current implementation of capitalism. There are not enough jobs. There is not enough investment capital. Instead of abundant opportunity, we have welfare- or crime. And there are gross inequities in living standards, not all of which are just.

    While private charity is commendable, investment is better- the old give a fish/ teach to fish example comes to mind. Constrictive monetary policy creates a psychology of hoarding, not investing- isn’t this obvious?

  • Hi Dirk,

    Thanks for you comments. You are very right that teaching to fish is the long term solution to too few fish. Your last sentence, however, is not nearly as obvious as you think.

    Hoarding is holding onto something you own, your wealth in its various forms. You can hoard your money or you can hoard the things you buy with the money. Either way, with no inflation, your wealth has not changed, unless what you buy is an asset that wastes away or becomes obsolete.

    Holding or not holding money doesn’t make anyone better off or worse off, in and of itself. Holding money will make someone worse off, however, if the value of the money is diluted, which is what happens with inflationary monetary policy. There will be more dollars and the same amount of goods, thus more dollars will be required for each good. Therefore, an inflationary policy takes away the wealth of anyone who holds, or hoards, any type of property that does not rise in value with inflation, whether that property is cash, a television set, a car, a home or a factory.

    One of the major problems we have with contemporary economics is that most people take a narrow view of inflation, and assume that if core inflation is under control, everything is A-ok. The more realistic and truthful view of inflation takes into account everything that money can buy, which includes homes, factories, stocks, bonds, mortgages, battleships, and even gambling and prostitution services. If every good, service and asset that money can buy was taken into consideration, nobody could possibly get the entirely false impression that inflation was low and steady for any significant period of time since 1913.

    Money itself is not wealth. The goods that it represents are the wealth. If someone makes money, whether it is printing bills or fractional reserve credit expansion, that does not create wealth. It only dilutes the money value of existing wealth. There is no other way that it can be. The new dollars compete with the dollars that someone has saved up for investment and that savings is diluted.

    People make decisions based on what they know and what they expect the future to hold. Many factors affect those views. If people decide to hoard money, it is precisely because their view of the future makes them believe that they will be better off by spending it in the future. In order to get them to invest today, a higher rate of interest must be offered. A higher rate of interest, however, puts a brake on the creation of money through the credit expansion process. That is the inherent safety valve in a free economy with a money that is free of manipulation.

    We don’t have that freedom in our money supply. We have monopoly control over money and monetary policy. The manipulation of rates and the ability to create money out of nothing defeats the inherent safety valve. Rates are artificially lowered and the money supply is increased. Bubble markets ensue and eventually burst, exactly as we are witnessing in this economic crisis, the crash of the stock market bubble in 2000 and all of the bubbles and crashes before that.

    When money is made without production, there is no increase in wealth. There is only a distortion of the relationship between money and goods. Wealth comes, always and everywhere, only from productive activities. The false signals from credit induced inflations don’t produce real wealth for society overall. They only cause dislocation and redistribution to the money makers.

  • Raymond

    Cash is always in someones possession. So that the economy as a whole cannot “hoard”

    It’s a matter of time preference.

    Business and Consumer alike chooses to increase their cash balances for various reasons, including uncertainty.

    But both abstain from current spending only to spend later.
    On investments, consumer goods, buybacks, machinery etc

  • Wingnut

    Hi Wingnut,

    Hi Dan (and others)

    Dan: You are talking of sending civilization back to the stone age.

    Wing: Do you REALLY think implementing an economy-less, all-share, all-love social and supply system… is a move “back”? Really? I suspect that you need a rethink on that.

    Dan: Even Lenin, the most pro-Leninist that ever lived, recognized the utter failure of the program and was forced in institute the new economic policy in the 1920’s, that is, allowing some form of markets and property ownership.

    Wing: Hmm, the folks in the US military don’t own or use money-for anything gotten from military supply or for any luxury checked-out from the military’s recreational services. I guess this shoots holes in your theory about needing markets and ownership.

    Dan: There is a long list of attempts at instituting your policy and all of them have ended in utter failure, because there is no other possible result.

    Wing: Except the US military survival/supply system and the USA public library. Did you read my first post at all? Is it about time Dan got unlatched from his “it can’t work” mentality, and opened his mind a bit? Its already working for SOME systems right here in the USA… once capitalism gets out of its way. But I’m no expert on designing better systems than capitalism, I just work on destroying capitalism. That’s a tough enough job by itself. There are very smart inventory managers around who know how to do supply requisition forms and luxury repositories better than I. I concentrate on busting felony pyramid schemes.

    Dan: Your system has been tried over and over . It has failed over and over because the more successful the implementation, the more perverted the incentives are. It can never, ever work. It is anti-civilization, anti-freedom, anti-social and anti-human.

    Wing: Or it can, and you are programmed to believe it can’t.

    Dan: I happen to live in a rural area surrounded by Amish. Sorry to break the news to you, but the Amish are capitalists, in every sense of the word. They own their own property, earn their own money in a very capitalist fashion, often working among and for non-Amish. They trade among themselves and with us English, as they call us, using dollars.

    Wing: Well then they’re doing it wrong, and I guess I was incorrect when I said “maybe the Amish”. Again, I don’t necessarily build military or USA library type of survival systems, I destroy illegal and immoral pyramid schemes so that experts on communes are allowed to go to work on designing non-pyramid systems.

    Dan: The Amish shun some of the things of the modern world, but if they were totally isolated from the rest of us or existed in a developing country, they wouldn’t have the opportunity of borrowing some of the success of modern capitalism and their communities would quickly fail.

    Wing: You are just SO convinced that capitalism is the only way, aren’t you? How’d you get this way? Where did you learn to condone and promote servitude and inequality so fervently? What makes you prefer slavery systems so much?

    Dan: I appreciate your devotion to a cause, but think about the logical implications of what you are saying.

    Wing: Thanks, that’s a nice thing to say. I have thought-out the implications. First, you have to trust in mankind and human nature… and learn to separate human nature from “learned behavior”. Once you do that, you will see that 99% of all “bad apple activity” that could ruin a loving commune… is “learned behavior” from parents, schools, social mores, media, seeking normal-ness (per Life Magazine instead of per-Bible), and traditions. Teach the people about communes and why not to hoard, and they’ll come around just fine. Remove the competing system called capitalism, and that will allow people’s hearts to come out and see sunshine again. Right now, everyone except the rich… are on the defensive. They are defending against the fear of holding-up against the ever attacking “cost of living” (cost of remaining alive against price-tagged survival supplies). The caps MUST get rid of their pyramid scheme. Its inevitable. Will you/they try yet another pyramid scheme and economy before you/they learn that “flat” is the only way to survive, or not? How long must we socialists wait before the caps put away “the lemonade standing game” and learn that “standing” any supply… means “standing guard”? How many times must the mercantilers flop…. before they learn about pyramiding? Can caps see the giant educational symbols (the Great Pyramids) out in the sandbox? Do they know that the pyramids were built with an all-volunteer and totally rank-less team? Should we just put the whole lot of you caps in federal prison right now, until you pull your heads out of your butts… regarding toybox tug-o-warring over greenstamps and titles of ownership? How long are the shopping addicts going to be enjoyment junkies? When will it stop? Well, it’ll stop when it flops.

    Wingnut said: “Lets disallow anyone working FOR another, and only allow working WITH another. Thus, everyone is paid the same and treated equally”

    Wing: Lets finish the quote…

    Wingnut then said: “And if everyone is paid and wellbeing’d exactly the same as each other, there’s no need for wages or economy coupons (money and other such greenstamps) at all.”

    Dan: You are assuming that someone is doing the paying and that someone is doing the treating. Who might that someone be?

    Wing: Now that the quote is complete and not out of context, no need to answer that one, right?

    Dan: If everyone is working for himself or herself, and everyone has different abilities and different levels of productivity, the results cannot possibly be equal pay and equal treatment. If you look at real life, you have to agree that people have vastly different skills and vastly different productive potential.

    Wing: If you absolutely MUST use the “working for” term, then in a better system, everyone “works for” Team World or Team Earthkind. You don’t want working for self… that’s caused the isolation and nation unto selving seen now… and that’s caused all the borders and yard fences currently seen in capitalism. Borders and nation-unto-selving (another name for self-sustaining) are Team Earth commune killers. Working for him/her-self… is what’s happening now…. except when caps have to answer-up to bosses. Then its servitude. When the slave gets off-duty is when the gouge gets used on self-stuff and family stuff too. Cronies and bloodlines are allowed within nation-unto-selving, but that’s it. If it happens outside of the yard fence, its “the thems” and nation-unto-selfers don’t help “thems”. They compete with the thems… over money and ownership entitlements. Nation-unto-selfs (capitalist families) try to “get ahead”… and that means competing with the thems… whoever they are this moment. The thems are always the blame for everything, beit the neighbors, the government, big biz, repubs, democs, greens, its ALWAYS the thems that are the blame in the competer’s church called capitalism. I don’t know how ready you are to discuss “out there” and “in here” and us/them wars. I don’t think you’re ready to open your mind enough for that, yet.

    Dan: If someone is very productive and is forced to give up

    Wing: “Give up”? You’re stuck in ownership land. Open your mind to having no such phenomenon as ownership. Just mentally “try it on” like you would a garment… for a bit. Look at all the fighting, crimes, and duress… that WOULDN’T exist, if ownership was abolished.

    Dan: some of that production to equalize pay, then that person is not working for himself or herself. They cannot keep the fruits of their labor.

    Wing: “their” labor. See, you can’t seem to shake off the concept of owning. Again, no entitles of ownership existed on ANY God-created Earth substance when mankind arrived… its been proven. Just because you mound some sand into a sandcastle (produce something), you still don’t own it. Its owned by the makers of sand… no matter how you stack it or no matter if/not you make transistors and diodes from the sand… using fire that you also can’t own. Ownership doesn’t exist. Its a made-up phenomenon backed by police guns. Its “a belief” and false idol.

    Dan: I am a Christian. I have spent literally thousands of hours over the last few decades reading the bible, thinking and reading about it and trying to understand the gospel of Jesus. To me, the unequivocal message of Jesus is the message of freedom.

    Wing: Then why do you condone the forcing seen in capitalism? That’s not freedom, that’s forcing.

    Dan: Jesus calls us all to charity. Charity is not, however, taking stuff from someone to give to someone else. That is theft, and there isn’t even one instance in the bible where Jesus advocated that.

    Wing: And we slide back into Dan’s ’stuck in ownership mentality” problem, yet again. Theft doesn’t exist when all things are owned by Earthkind (Team World). Hard to conceive, isn’t it? Go read that Chance Litton blog please… so I don’t have to answer the questions that have already been asked and answered there. http://www.chancelitton.com/?p=131

    Dirk: When wingnut says he wants economies outlawed, I’m guessing he means he wants money and the use of it outlawed- that we should be able to take (and share) what we need (and have).

    Wing: Why try to reword or guess what I’m saying. Instead, read what I said. Its just like military supply. You requisition what you need, and there’s no “take”. There’s also no money or ownership in the military supply system, other than ownership by the entire team. Why do I need to keep explaining this to you guys/gals? Its right in front of your eyes… with the USA military supply/survival system. Go research it. Go learn what the military thinks is a luxury and what it thinks is a necessity. Go see how it puts luxuries into repositories… to be shared equally by all. I’m not going to hand-maid you guys/gals into a lesson on local USA socialisms… just go see them, and learn. Capitalists, please work to escape the herd control system you’ve been conned into. PLEASE!

    Dirk: While I would agree that Heaven may not have money (especially if the streets are paved with gold), Jesus didn’t appear opposed to it,

    Wing: Read it again. You missed the part about the bankers.

    Dirk: On the other hand, I see his core dissatisfaction with our current implementation of capitalism. There are not enough jobs.

    Wing: No, there’s far too many slavery positions (jobs). Try more “set for life” instead of more jobs. Don’t listen to the programmers. Think for yourself. Happiness should be sought, not jobs. Jobs are just slavery positions. You don’t want more of them. Seek “set-for-life” for all, instead. Its the Christian way.

    Dirk: While private charity is commendable, investment is better- the old give a fish/ teach to fish example comes to mind.

    Wing: Teaching to fish is great when the objective is to feed the entire planet equally. When its to feed you only, its a terrible thing to teach. Avoid the disaster of “self sustaining” because that leads to isolating from others and nation-unto-selving. And that… leads to us/them wars. Study it out. Self-sustaining and nation-unto-selving is what got us into the current compete-o-thon mess.

    Wing: Dan continues with another post full of “all I know is ownership” after this, so I have no comments on that. Thanks for the responses, and sorry if I didn’t get them very well addressed. I’m not feeling overly well today… so maybe I’ll try again later. Best regards! Wingy

  • Hi Wingnut,

    Convince me. Point me to even one single instance in the history of the human race where something like this didn’t send people into mass starvation, destitution and slavery. Every instance of implementing your plan, and there have been many, has ended in disaster for everyone except the ruling elite.

    I have looked and I can’t find a single recorded instance. Let me know when you have something convincing.

  • Dirk

    Wingnut,

    What about the parable of the talents? What about “render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar’s”? What about all the verses in the Bible about money, and how it should be handled?

    Dan,

    Holding money is holding opportunity for someone else, true? If you put your cash under your mattress (or buy T-bills), you’re not investing it in a new company, or paying a small businessman. And who says you have to spend it later? We can all just stay at home, watch HDTV, pull a little cash out as we need and buy food, and hoard it until we die. No need to invent, to produce, or do anything else of economic value.

    This is all well and good (well, not really, since you’re robbing the market of your productive talents) for those of us with houses, HDTVs, and cash. But for those without, their opportunity to earn these for themselves is limited. If they can’t mow your lawn (hey, just let it grow), whose can they mow?

    The V in MV=PQ is tied to psychology. If those with cash are psyched out into thinking that hoarding their money (yes, Norbert, you can hoard cash just like you can hoard any other thing), V goes down. As P goes down, PQ goes down, either of which is bad for debtors counting on PQ to pay back debt. Demand for money goes down, economic activity drops, economic opportunity drops. And the poor get starved out.

    If you think we live in a world where we’re running out of oil, land, water, breathable air- well then, maybe this is OK. Fewer people, more “sustainability”, resources for all- and we can give away just enough to keep the poor from banding together and attacking (or outvoting) us.

    But I don’t see this vision anywhere in my Bible…

  • Hi Dirk,

    When anyone holds money, it is for a reason. Everybody does whatever they do for a reason. My money is one of my assets. Maybe I just like the feel of money in my hand. Maybe I am saving up for a down payment on a house I plan to buy in three years. Maybe I have dreams of starting my own business 10 years down the road and want to build up a reserve of capital. Maybe I know my child will be going to college in a few years. Maybe I …..

    There are a million reasons to hold cash but the fact is, it is my cash. I don’t owe it to anyone to dispose of it in any particular way. If I bury it in the ground, I have hurt nobody. The money represents wealth that I have earned. That is all that money is. It represents the goods that I can buy. When I am ready to use that wealth for some purpose, I will know when that time is right for me. If I hold money, it doesn’t prevent anyone else from producing value that will add to their wealth.

    If someone wants to use my money for investment or whatever, that person needs to offer me a rate of return on my money that exceeds my level of discomfort at risking the assets that I plan to start my business with or pay for college with or ….

    If I happen to be a very risk averse person, the rate of return will have to be high. If the person who is using the money is not very responsible or the project he is using it for is risky, he will have to pay a higher rate yet. If there is a great deal of uncertainty about what will happen in the future, or if I know that the economy is sinking and my money may be lost, the return will have to be very high or maybe I will feel more comfortable sitting on my own money so I know I will have it when I need it.

    The fact is, the market is made of people and people don’t fit into formulas. People act in specific ways for specific reasons. Because you can’t understand their reasons or don’t agree with their reasons, or you would act differently in their circumstances doesn’t mean that they are wrong or you are wrong. It means that they own the money and can do what they want with it.

    If people have a big dream, whether that is starting a business, taking a dream vacation, college plans, or whatever, it takes a long time to save up for it. You can call it hoarding if you like, but that term implies that they are doing something illicit or wrong.

    If everybody decided to hold onto their money at one time, what would that mean? It means that they believe that there is more risk and less return in spending or investing it today than there would be by holding it to spend or invest tomorrow or next month or next year. That happens in times of great uncertainty. People demand a higher return in times of risk because there is a higher likelihood that they will not have the money available when they need it.

    The problems we have with unstable money have nothing to do with hoarding and everything to do with the inherent instability of the fractional reserve banking system. It is like an accordion. It radically leverages the money supply so that it expands rapidly, causing dislocation in the economy. When it reaches the breaking point, it necessarily contracts rapidly, causing more dislocation. Your formula doesn’t have any way to take that into account, and because of that, it is entirely useless in describing what happens in the real world.

  • Wingnut

    Hi gang.

    Dan: “That is all that money is”

    Dan, you seem to be forgetting about what happens to desperate-to-survive folks when you wave that “purina slavechow” (money) in front of folks to get your business and house built by them. Its called servitude. When you have “your” money (even though it isn’t really yours, you just believe it is because you’ve been conned)… you have power to send servants into action, or else. Or else… they can’t have any of “your” survival coupons. You become empowered and a boss. You become an “orderer” and you can make people work FOR you instead of WITH you. So much for barnraising and potluck attitudes of equality there, eh? Do you think the personal pyramiding you do when you call these slaves under your powers… is at all sane or Christian? Hardly. I think you should take off the blinders and actually see all that money is, instead of continually trying to BS us and yourself about it. Most of us know better. Yeah, I know the comment wasn’t targeted at me, but that one comment was so distorted… that it had to have major holes shot into it…. by someone… anyone. Take care. Wingy

  • Wingnut

    Dan: Convince me. Point me to even one single instance in the history of the human race where something like this didn’t send people into mass starvation, destitution and slavery. Every instance of implementing your plan, and there have been many, has ended in disaster for everyone except the ruling elite.

    Does “my” system have ANY mention of a “ruling elite”? No. I have barking FLAT, NOT PYRAMID for HOW many posts now? Egalitarian… everything is voted upon, every single issue… via our computer networks and using software similar to NASA’s fault tree software used in the shuttle accident investigations (issue management software, everyone has a say and its always weighed and considered). As I asked before, has there ever been an economy-less (impossible to have a ruling elite without money) socialism/commune EVER TRIED?

    No. All half-baked attempts at socialism to date, have had your “ruling elite” to cause rat-racing. The rat-racing is caused by commonfolk seeking to be ruling elite… or in America’s case, seeking to be set-for-life (and thus be able to buy all the toys they ever would want to play with). And WHO makes those toys… via being desperate to obtain coupons to fend off the cost of living? Servants… doing “jobs”… so they can eat. Servants build the jetboats, Learjets, yachts, and cook the meats and sweets. Servants feed the enjoyment junkies… or… the ruling elite. And guess who put the pricetags onto the survival supplies and caused that cost-of-living? Yep, capitalism/business… invented by the ruling elite. We’ve built a system (capitalism) where we are pounding on our left hand… with a hammer in our right hand. The more you ask for raises and jack-up prices on your products, the more the cost of living goes up. Spirography. What goes around, comes around. Ask for a raise, or raise a pricetag, and it automatically makes the bills coming into your mailbox… increase. Seeing this?

    So to sum up… no, never has a non-pyramid, (non-hierarchical), moneyless, ownerless, true socialism… ever been tried… that I know of. The possible problem with half-baked socialisms is currently… the definition of “state”. As soon as “state” = “team world” (borderless and thus tradeless planet), socialisms and communes work fine. As long as “state” is a group of elite controllers, it won’t work. And what gives the elite their eliteness? Money and ownership. Remove those phenomenon, and the elite aren’t so elite anymore, are they? Bestest! Wing

  • Hi Wingnut,

    Let me get this straight. You want 6 billion people to give up everything they have, however great or meager, to let you experiment with a system that sounds suspiciously similar to systems that have caused misery and death every time they were tried, because you think you are smart enough to tweak it so it will magically work? Is that right?

    Again, I say, convince me. Don’t just give me the socialist dreamer blather. I say your system is just like Lenin’s moneyless, propertyless, economyless system. Explain Lenin’s original system to me and show me that you really understand it. Then explain in clear, understandable terms, how your system is different. Then explain how you are going to take my stuff without the force of guns, Siberian exile or death that, to me, is inevitable in your all-loving Christian commune.

    I don’t need to hear anything else until you can show me you thoroughly understand Lenin’s version. If you can show me you are serious enough to truly study it, to understand it and to describe it, I would be happy to go further. If not, then it is nothing but ignorant parroting of Marxist drivel. Are you up to the challenge?

  • Wingnut

    Dan, like I said earlier… I am no expert in designing, analyzing, or building… communes and socialisms. You know as well as I that if a commune has “lets take care of each other” policies/laws, few are going to die unfairly. If that policy is dropped, who knows what could happen. Apparently, in the violent socialisms you fear, that policy didn’t hold… and thus it was no longer a socialism when the deaths occurred.

    But again, I am a person who exposes and busts the disgustingness of pyramid schemes like capitalism, not a designer of correctly-built communes. Please, quit using “you ain’t got nothin better” as an excuse for you to condone and promote pyramid schemes seemingly without much remorse or reflection.

    Own-up to the disgustingness of capitalism. C’mon, admit to the disgusting things I’ve pointed out.

    When you do, you will know that it has to stop, and will. THEN, you will be right where I am. You will know capitalism is appalling, and maybe you will start thinking about how to get rid of the appalling areas of capitalism. And soon, you will find yourself designing some kind of commune or socialism in your head and heart.

    To be frank, I don’t know what kind of socialism is needed, I just have some loose ideas. If those ideas have some reflectional characteristics with historical disasters, too bad. Find the fixes, likely by taking the “ruling elite” out-of the category of “state”.

    So I reverse the challenge. Can you own-up to capitalism’s disgusting forcings and servitude? Can you own up to the enjoyment addictions see in the upper layers of the inequality festival? Once you own up, you too will start trying to figure out a more Christian and sane way to operate. Can you own up to the disgustingness of capitalism? Best regards! Wing

  • Hi Wingnut,

    Could you possibly point me to someone who is an expert on building socialisms and communes. You are pretty confident, so I would assume you know some experts who have been quite successful. I would hope that they have more than some loose ideas and utopian dreams. Maybe you could invite them here to our discussion. I would be very interested in how they would go about things.

    I look forward to interacting with them. It should be fun and educational.

  • Hi Wingnut,

    You are right. I need to own up to all of the evils of capitalism, and I whole heartedly do. There are some disgusting people in capitalist systems. There are some terrible things that can happen when people are free to pursue their own self interest.

    There are also many wonderful things that come with freedom, such as poor people that actually have food to eat, houses to live in, cars to drive, washing machines to ease the burden of chores, etc., etc., etc., rather than the starving and wretched masses that are witnessed all over the place outside of capitalism. I have never met a person that wouldn’t prefer the problems and difficulties of prosperity over the problems and difficulties of destitution and poverty. Nobody ever says “I sure wish I was poorer.”

    Now it is time for you to admit that there has never been a socialist system that comes close to capitalism, economic freedom, self interested individuals, personal responsibility, division of labor and comparative advantage, in providing housing, clothing and food for the poor. That is real world, hard, cold fact, not just utopian dreaming.

    You need to ‘fess up that here has never been a socialist system that was not more corrupt, more enslaving and more immoral than the worst free market system. There never has been because your ideal of forced equality requires force, theft and brutality.

    You are once again resorting to socialist rhetorical blather. Either you have something to offer or you have nothing to offer. To this point, you have offered nothing constructive, only destructive. I suppose if destruction is your goal, then it makes sense to pursue socialism, because that is all it is capable of.

    Is destruction your goal?

  • Wingnut

    Hi Dan and others. Do I talk like destruction is my goal?

    I suppose its time to step out of this one. The thread was originally talking about goings-on inside the pyramid, and I came in from the outside, blasting at the system itself (and Dan), railroading the thread to quite a degree. I gave it my best. I hope Dan and the other readers eventually join us Christian socialists in busting the capitalism slavery system. Dan keeps saying its got freedom, and I keep showing how it forces people. Its an endless loop.

    Thanks for the cordial and wisdom-filled responses, and I appreciate the honor of participating in the Wingnut-subject-railroaded debates. You can tell I’m pretty weak in my studying of historical socialisms. I admit that. Even my close kin tell me that I am expecting too much of folks… by asking for volunteer sharing of survival supplies. But just the same, the pyramid scheme called capitalism will fall, and I think we had better consider “no borders, no us/them, and no economies ever again”… as one of the emergency rescue and cleanup options… once the pyramid levels itself.

    I’ll come by and read the blog, and stay abreast… maybe even make a comment. But, I’m done with the “campaign” to convert Dan to sanity, and I’ll let you guys talk about economies. (Thank God, eh?)

    Good chattin’ with you guys/gals, and especially with you, Dan. I hope I wasn’t too annoying, and I hope you give some thought to things I’ve said. I will do the same for your brought-to-light considerations.

    Thanks for letting me “quake” the pyramid talk. :) Take care!

    Larry “Wingnut” Wendlandt
    MaStars – Mothers Against Stuff That Ain’t Right

  • Hi Wingnut,

    I really do appreciate the discussion. I don’t mind people challenging me. I will give it some more thought, but I really have thought long and hard about it for many years. I have read both sides of it, I have seen the results of both sides of it.

    I would hope that you will give it more thought also. You seem to be only looking at the bad side of capitalism and the good side of socialism. The next challenge is to be open to the possible bad side effects of what you propose and the fact that there may be at least something positive about a system where the masses have historically been better off.

    Your last post has a key point that I didn’t get from other posts. The idea of voluntary sharing. That is the very Christian concept of charity, and that is very, very acceptable to anyone who cares about people and freedom. But the simple fact is that charity or voluntary sharing can only be done if you own something to share. Countries with economic freedom and property rights are the best performers in the private voluntary sharing realm because they have the most to give.

    You are always welcome to join the discussion, but I will always remind you that destroying something without something better to take its place is just destruction. If you want to convince anyone that it is not just destruction, you need to bring positive ideas to the table.

    When you talk about leveling the pyramid scheme, abolishing economies and ownershipism and busting it, it sounds like destroying something.

    You would be much more convincing if you were an expert on building something. Then you could talk about what you would build in place of what is abolished and how you would go about the process with Christian love and greater freedom for the people.

    Thanks for sharing and best wishes,

    Dan

  • Wingnut

    Hi Dan, thanks.

    Dan: But the simple fact is that charity or voluntary sharing can only be done if you own something to share.

    Nope, you only need to possess it or be a custodian of it. Ownership not needed. Does the Eagle own the field mouse that it “produced” and is about to share with its young? Nope. Its a God made thing… that mouse. IT grew via consuming un-owned God-made things. Not a single title of ownership or store receipt is seen in the whole she-bang.

    And yes, I work to destroy capitalism, but its a felony, so it needs to be stopped. Competing, servitude, owning, and inequality… are characteristics of a religion. It is highly illegal to force that religion onto the unwilling… in my opinion. I heard of a few servitude cases that have recently been brought to court, and won by the servants. I hope that trend continues… until inequality-caused servitude… is gone. Voluntary servitude is better, and I believe most change the label to “service” when that happens. Take care! Wingy

  • When I read Wingnut’s posts, I am reminded of something that Thomas Sowell once said to the effect that the ideas of the political left are so appealing, but they just don’t apply to real people.

    The problem with Wingnut is that he envisions a utopian existence without any semblance to reality.
    The fact that he can visualize something doesn’t mean that he can make it work or that it can become real.
    I would suggest visiting other countries to get other economic and social perspectives. Or at the very least, do an objective unbiased study of different political systems and how they were applied in different countries.

    I am reminded of the following quotes by Frederich Hayek:

    (courtesy of Adamsmith.org)

    From the fact that people are very different it follows that, if we treat them equally, the result must be inequality in their actual position, and that the only way to place them in an equal position would be to treat them differently. Equality before the law and material equality are therefore not only different but are in conflict which each other; and we can achieve either one or the other, but not both at the same time.

    The rationalist whose reason is not sufficient to teach him those limitations of the powers of conscious reason, and who despises all the institutions and the customs which have not been consciously designed, would thus become the destroyer of the civilisation built upon them.

    Is there a greater tragedy imaginable than that, in our endeavour consciously to shape our future in accordance with high ideals, we should in fact unwittingly produce the very opposite of what we have been striving.

    That democratic socialism, the great utopia of the last few generations, is not only unachievable, but that to strive for it produces something so utterly different that few of those who wish it would be prepared to accept the consequences, many will not believe until the connection has been laid bare in all its aspects.

    …we must shed the illusion that we can deliberately ‘create the future of mankind’…This is the final conclusion of the forty years which I have now devoted to the study of these problems…

  • Wingnut

    Hi Emmanuel and others. E, may I point, yet again, in the direction of the USA military survival and supply system. No money needed, no ownership (or maybe owned by entire team), no wellbeing discrimination (amount of supplies) across ranks or pay grades, luxuries in repositories called “rec services” for all to share equally, has been operating well for nearly forever, and leaves very few members, if any… without basic survival supplies. With most military troops, you’ll see nearly zero FEAR of dying from not having survival supplies. In the civilian sector, there’s tons of fear, coercion, and outright extortion being done to tons of people… based upon fear for survival. I really don’t need to study other imperialisms going-on across the planet, I have studied the very best socialisms and communes going-on right here in the USA.

    And yes, people with different aptitudes and skillsets, need to be treated differently than each other… but it should NEVER affect the attaining of basic wellbeing and pursuit of happiness opportunities, no matter how different one person is from another. If there IS an inequality (difference?) between any two or more people, than that inequality (difference)… must not affect the levels of wellbeing and opportunities for pursuit of happiness. Yes, some will need to be denied driving a space shuttle due to incorrect aptitude to obtain skills to become qualified to do so. Still, that person must be loved, fed, and generally wellbeing’d exactly the same as the very best shuttle pilots. Wellbeing (money) discrimination causes classes and servitude… and thus pyramiding. And servitude… is slavery… and is illegal. Happy Holidays! Wing Chung King

  • Hi Wingnut,

    Those US military survival and supply systems were not just plucked out of the field like your field mouse. They are all, without exception, the result of cooperative efforts coordinated by free people, voluntarily selling their time and skills in the capitalist markets. People who force others to work for them involuntarily should go to jail. That is slavery. People should, however, be allowed to negotiate with anyone else over how much they should be paid for their services or their can of spaghetti sauce or anything else that they want to voluntarily offer to other people.

    As far as the military goes, you must be looking at the military from a different planet. Every military organization on earth is a strict hierarchy. The officers get the best treatment, the best food, the best and most spacious quarters, the best…. Enlisted men get what they get, and they had better like it.

    People in the military take orders or they see the inside of a prison cell. There is no pretense of equality. Inequality is built in and strictly enforced. The military comes as close as possible to involuntary servitude of any system outside of outright slavery. You need to work a little harder coming up with an analogy for your system.

    You are absolutely right, however, that everybody, without exception, has a right to basic wellbeing and happiness. They just don’t have any right to take it involuntarily from someone else, or have the state take it for them. Each person needs to be loved, fed and “well being’d” by his mom and dad, or other people important to him. The job of churches and private charities is to love and “well being” those who have had hard times, and that is a wonderful thing. When the hard times are over, it is time to move on, grow up and be responsible.

    Where are the best communes and socialisms that are thriving in the US? It would be interesting to study them. Then maybe what you are saying would make more sense.

    What they need to do, if they don’t like capitalists, is just stop interacting with them and enjoy their well being. Don’t buy any capitalist food or capitalist building products or capitalist electricity, capitalist electronic networks and equipment or capitalist military survival supplies. Then they wouldn’t have to worry about capitalists at all.

  • Wingnut

    Dan, you’ve got the chain of command system mixed up with the supply system. Command officers, field officers, enlisted, they all are issued the same amount and quality of “basic issue” from the military supply system. And in theory, and likely by-regulation, a military supply requisition request never uses rank as a determinant for justification or denial.

    As far as chain of command, I don’t know if the military has a wise one or not, but I do know that the military’s ranking system is seen to be based upon tenure and proficiency in skills. Military rank is never determined upon abilities to gouge greenbacks from consumers.

  • Wingnut

    Oh yeah.

    “move on, grow up and be responsible”

    Oh my God! :) That is a scary kind of duty-bound-ness to being good little marchers in the imperialism. Do you have children, Dan? If so, do you sometimes say “do as you’re told”, and/or “and that’s final” and/or “don’t talk back”, by chance? I smell Gestapo. Anyone else? :)

  • Ah Wingnut, that you should find a way to inject “Gestapo” into this discussion. Lest we forget that this notorious organization was but an extension of an ideology that you undoubtedly are familiar with.

    According to author Ronald Lewin, Adolf Hitler once remarked that it was “the task of the commander-in-chief to educate the army to be National Socialist.”

    Here are other interesting quotes that definitely were not made by a capitalist:

    “Gold is not neccesary. I have no interest in gold. We will build a solid state, without an ounce of gold behind it. Anyone who sells above the set prices let him be marched off to a concentration camp. That’s the bastion of money.”

    “Society’s needs come before the individual’s needs.”

    “It is thus necessary that the individual should finally come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of the nation, that the position of the individual is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole.”

    “Why nationalize industry when you can nationalize the people?”

    For the folk-community does not exist on the fictitious value of money but on the results of productive labour, which is what gives money its value.

    (source: liberty-tree.ca)

    Perhaps you have read some of these before, but at any rate. all the above quotes were also attributed to Adolf Hitler. It certainly does not surprise me one bit that he chose to describe himself as a socialist.

  • Wingnut,

    For all the times you accuse people of not listening to you, I wish you would take the time to listen to other people on occasion. Why should these gentlemen need to answer all the same questions you’ve already asked and had answered?

    As I have explained to you before, the military is simply not a viable example on which to build your new society. As Dan described, it is heavily hierarchical and controlled. “Survival” rersources are not distributed evenly. Google the military pay scale and bonus structure. You will see that the military structures its reward system based on the demands of the employment market. I receive a sizable bonus every year so that I won’t leave to work somewhere else with the nuclear engineering knowledge the Navy has provided me.

    More than that, though, (and as I have described to you before) the military is not a resource producer; it is a resource sink. The military would not exist without a producing economy behind it to feed it resources. In fact, as our current socialist system begins to contract, the military is destined for considerable downsizing. Distributing resources is the easy part of building a society. It is producing those resources that is the difficult part. That is, if it were possible to divorce the two, which it is not.

    As far as you having to leave my site due to “controlism,” I simply asked you to stop insulting me and stop accusing me of ignoring your points when I had answered them repeatedly. I wish you would spend a little more time reading and a little less time writing.

  • Wingnut

    Chance: For all the times you accuse people of not listening to you, I wish you would take the time to listen to other people on occasion. Why should these gentlemen need to answer all the same questions you’ve already asked and had answered?

    I’m looking for higher intelligence. You and your blog threatened me with censorship, and you did a “not gonna discuss this any further” pout and stomp, so… I moved on. I thought it was a reasonably good debate until your last post, and that’s why I reference people to your blog.

    Chance: As I have explained to you before, the military is simply not a viable example on which to build your new society.

    I disagree. But the main thing… is that SOME social structure be devised… that doesn’t place folks into servitude out of fear for survival. It’d also be nice if folks quit trying to gain empowerments by needing to own/control Earth-made things. The military supply system is one such system. I’m sure there’s others. Find them. Think them out.

    Chance: As Dan described, it is heavily hierarchical and controlled. “Survival” rersources are not distributed evenly. Google the military pay scale and bonus structure.

    I already answered that. The military supply system “basic issue” is the same for all members of the military no matter the rank or monetary pay-grade, and you know it. The same goes for tools and rec-services. Again, quit trying to BS yourself about the socialism you’re a member-of and see working well. Don’t confuse the chain-of-command… with the supply system. One does not affect the other. Only off-base or in money-is-used military facilities, does rank matter. Generally, only in some commissaries, mini-marts, places of luxuries. Money/ownership is not used in the GSA store or in base supply warehouses.

    Chance: You will see that the military structures its reward system based on the demands of the employment market. I receive a sizable bonus every year so that I won’t leave to work somewhere else with the nuclear engineering knowledge the Navy has provided me.

    No. Retention bonuses are based upon the cost of training (a replacement for you) in your career field.

    Chance: More than that, though, (and as I have described to you before) the military is not a resource producer; it is a resource sink.

    Correct. Its current work-purpose is not to keep its supply system stocked. We can change that, as soon as war is no longer necessary. That comes from taking down all borders and putting all living things on the same “us” team. Look to the movie “Independence Day” if you want to see how the world acts when we’re all on the same team. We’re all supposed to share the Earth, not fight over ownership/control of it. Moreover, we HAVE TO share the Earth and its given wellbeing supplies, and soon.

    Chance: The military would not exist without a producing economy behind it to feed it resources.

    Wrong. It needs no economy. It needs supplies, though. Economies are not needed… to produce supplies. Try it without servitude/slavery (forcing 18 years old to work or die). Try it in a Christian way instead. I think you’ll like it… and you’ll see happiness levels in the civilian world SKYROCKET… once the caps remove the join-or-die, and pay-up-or-die.

    Chance: In fact, as our current socialist system begins to contract, the military is destined for considerable downsizing.

    Only non-capitalists are doing socialism. Seen any? Blogged with any?

    Chance: Distributing resources is the easy part of building a society. It is producing those resources that is the difficult part. That is, if it were possible to divorce the two, which it is not.

    Hooray, you didn’t say a thing about “economy” and “own” in those sentences, so I can agree with you on this one. Yes, it will be quite challenging to ask folks to go to work WITH Team World, especially those who were born capitalism set-for-life and have done nothing but shop and do enjoyments their whole lives, so far.

    Chance: As far as you having to leave my site due to “controlism,” I simply asked you to stop insulting me and stop accusing me of ignoring your points when I had answered them repeatedly. I wish you would spend a little more time reading and a little less time writing.

    No, you said far more than that. Go back to your control-freak blog and have a good time playing gestapo and trying to be empowered. The folks here are classy and honorable. Happy Holidays! Wingthing

  • Wingnut

    Hi again, Emmanuel. Good comments. Lets see if I can address these. Its not going to be easy.

    E: Ah Wingnut, that you should find a way to inject “Gestapo” into this discussion. Lest we forget that this notorious organization was but an extension of an ideology that you undoubtedly are familiar with.

    A little bit. Mostly rumors and stuff written in grammar school history books. I’m not overly-knowledgeable in historic systems that were labeled as “socialist” but, I think you can see that MY version of socialist is a pyramid-less, potluck-ish, barnraiser, Christian/hippy love-everything, treat every living thing with the gentleness of a child, -type of socialism.

    E: According to author Ronald Lewin, Adolf Hitler once remarked that it was “the task of the commander-in-chief to educate the army to be National Socialist.”

    Are we talking about MY kind of socialism, or something that uses hierarchies and has a lack of egalitarian ops? Mine uses no money and no ownership (not “state” ownership either). Mine uses no forcing, only requesting/begging for membership.

    E: Here are other interesting quotes that definitely were not made by a capitalist:

    E: “Gold is not necessary. I have no interest in gold. We will build a solid state, without an ounce of gold behind it. Anyone who sells above the set prices let him be marched off to a concentration camp. That’s the bastion of money.”

    My preferred system using no selling or money. So, not applicable… but interesting.

    E: “Society’s needs come before the individual’s needs.”

    My preferred system has nothing coming before anything else. “Before” and “after” are the beginning words of a phenomenon called prioritization, and thus its the start of pyramids/hierarchies… a bad thing. (inequality)

    E: “It is thus necessary that the individual should finally come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of the nation, that the position of the individual is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole.”

    My preferred system works from the mind and heart, and not by forced allegiance. Everything is of importance. If the transparent and proven goals of “the team” are sound and noble, those with heart and mind will help that team because they know of its wisdom and results. There will be those who refuse to help the team, no matter how nicely we ask. Although destroying team resources will be outlawed, we will not force them to participate…. only ask them and show them (prove to them) why its a great idea.

    E: “Why nationalize industry when you can nationalize the people?”

    I’m more for “planetize” the people. Every country building their own imperialism (economy/servitude system)… so they can compete with other national imperialisms (economy/servitude system)… is just setting the planet-up for a giant war of the imperialisms… or in other words, war of the economies. Which nations get to own/control which nations? That is a recipe for world war, and should be avoided. Instead, take down the borders between nations, companies, and yards. Become transparent to each other, and inclusive to all.

    If your 7 year old is a terrorist, do you hang them? No, you restrain, then ask a billion questions, try a billion sensibility schools, try churches, try ANYTHING… but not kill them. Can we do the same for adult “terrorists” no matter which “nationalization” they are aligned-with?

    E: For the folk-community does not exist on the fictitious value of money but on the results of productive labour, which is what gives money its value.

    So money is “slavery/servitude certificates”? And price-tags are “slavehour requirements”? Yep, I agree. Pretty disgusting for us to blockade survival supplies with such immoral and AmWay-exclusive requirements/demands, eh? Making only ONE type of money (competer’s church coupons) be legal tender… is SO illegal and immoral… I can’t even describe it.

    E: Perhaps you have read some of these before, but at any rate. all the above quotes were also attributed to Adolf Hitler. It certainly does not surprise me one bit that he chose to describe himself as a socialist.

    No, I haven’t seen these before, and thanks for including them. I enjoyed reading them. I don’t doubt that Hitler had some correct thoughts about “all on the same team”, but I believe the man was into conquering, and not ASKING for members. That would make HIS form of the superwide term “socialist”… much much different from my preference, right? Try not to over-generalize and over-fear the term “socialist”. Never has a barnraising or potluck dinner… been seen to be gestapo-like… as far as I know. Forced-socialisms, and volunteer socialisms… are quite different. And my favorite kind of socialism… would also be very very transparent. Thus, any “ulterior motives” would be seen like neon… and immediately questioned for wisdom, logic, and love. All the best! Wing

  • Wingnut

    Emmanuel, I want to clarify… that when I used “prioritization”, I should have said “personal prioritization”… ie. people being wellbeing’d inequally from each other. THAT… is pyramiding… something I abhor.

    Conversely, prioritization of survival projects by “the team” is highly important and COULD and SHOULD be arranged hierarchically. Such would not affect the equal wellbeing of the people. Chain of command (tenure/experience) should be honored or not… “by choice”, if possible. I suspect that in the world of the native American tribes, elders may have been given larger amounts of wellbeing than others, via free choice OF those others. This would likely happen due to those elders being highly cherished and revered (having a good name/rep). Okay bye again.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>