The Right Path for the Nation

Leading up to the Civil War the country was deeply divided over slavery. The political parties began to be divided largely based on their stance on slavery. The Republican party was born during this time made up of former Whigs, a group that had been labeled “know-nothings” and disenchanted Democrats, and it was the home of the abolitionists. The Democrat party was strongly on the pro-slavery side. Despite this great divide in the nation the Republicans would back down and placate the democrats for years rather than stand for the principles that they believed in. It was thought that these efforts to compromise would keep the country together as one, but it always included the continuation and expansion of slavery. When Lincoln was elected president as a Republican that was known to oppose slavery, the South went into a frenzy and immediately started the ball rolling for succession. They did this despite the pledges prior to and after the election by Lincoln that he would not interfere with the Souths current “legal” slavery. Lincoln quickly realized that military action was the only hope to save the country. When the war started the Emancipation Proclamation had not even been drafted, because initially the thought was that they would bring the erring Southern States back into the fold as they were. Eventually Lincoln saw that the time was now to stand for what was right and he issued the proclamation. The price and pain caused by the civil war was extreme. It cost more than 700,000 casualties and the pain of families literally torn apart and turned against each other. This was the price to be paid to eliminate the blight of slavery.

Thomas Jefferson had worked throughout his life to put policies and laws in place that would peacefully phase out slavery, but he was never able to get those policies to pass. He had stated that if we do not put these policies into place to phase out slavery it will require bloodshed for it to end. He was very prophetic.

What does this have to do with today? The principles of what happened then can be applied to our current situation in America. We are a nation deeply divided over the social and economic direction of the country. The Democrat party has, for many years, pushed us toward European style socialism, and the Republicans for far too long have placated the Democrats in the name of compromise. The problem is that compromise has become known as a continuing march towards socialism (sometimes the pace is faster or slower, but it keeps moving). We are in a state today where many want to deny that there is a problem and keep the quickening pace to socialism on course, despite the glaring financial realities and the European examples in Greece and Italy (with more to come) of the financial disaster awaiting us if we continue on this self destructive path. There is nothing good down this path, and it is a crossroads time not unlike Lincoln's day when it is time to stand for the right and move in that direction with alacrity. Can we do this without pain? No. The hard corrections needed, will cause a lot of financial pain to those who have depended on the government for their jobs and well being. The other path, however, ends with a much worse scenario. Consider how life in North America would be different today if the North had just let the South walk away and the country was forever splintered in two… Consider what life will be like if the dollar loses its status as the world's reserve currency; if taxes are raised significantly in a seriously floundering economy; and if our debt is allowed to continue on its path of growth. If the country would have adopted Thomas Jefferson's policy and law proposals we could have eliminated slavery without the extreme pain of the Civil War. If “we the people” would have held our elected officials to the standards in the declaration and constitution over the last many decades, we would not be in the economic, social, and political mess that we are in today.

It is time to stand firm on correct principles. It is time to emphatically turn down any “compromise” that is defined by continuing to tread down the same wrong path. It is time to make the hard and sometimes painful decisions to preserve our nation as the example to the world of individual life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Independance Day

On the back of our dollar bill we see both “In God We Trust” and above the all seeing eye and unfinished pyramid “Annuit Coeptis” (with God's favor or God is with us)- not just nice phrases, but slogans that held deep meaning to the Founding Fathers-

As summer of 1776 approached the nation was already at war with Briton. Washington’s troops had suffered large losses at Boston.

Thomas Jefferson showed up in Philadelphia as a delegate to Congress on May 14^th. He didn't really want to be there- His mother and one of his daughters had recently died; his wife was also very ill. On top of this, back home in Virginia, the state was working on a constitution, and Jefferson desperately wanted to help write it. He sent a letter requesting a leave from the Continental Congress, but his request was denied.

Jefferson had another divinely appointed role to play!

In early June a committee was chosen to write a document declaring their independence from the crown consisting of (Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Roger Sherman, Robert Livingston, and Thomas Jefferson). Rather than try to write the declaration by committee, they selected Jefferson to write it.

Thomas Jefferson was more prepared than any other of the Founders for the task at hand. He was relentless from a young age in the pursuit of knowledge. He started studying Greek and French at age nine; entered the College of William and Mary at age 16, graduated at age 19; immediately started five years of intensive study with George Wythe becoming a talented lawyer. During this time, he was known to spend 12 to 14 hours a day studying. He became proficient in five languages, studied Greek and Roman classics; European and English history; and the Old and New Testaments. He studied law, languages, physics, agriculture, mathematics, philosophy, chemistry, anatomy, zoology, botany, religion, politics, history, literature, rhetoric, and on and on.

Jefferson spent 17 days drafting the declaration. A large portion of it is the reciting of the abuses of the King which were mostly copied from other things that he had already written and would have only taken him maybe a day to put together. He spent the majority of time writing and re-writing the first two paragraphs. In these two short paragraphs he captured at least eight of what he called “ancient principles” on the proper role of government and the rights of man. He accomplished an amazing feat of packing the guiding principles of our new nation so clearly and briefly.

On July 4^th the Congress as a whole approved the declaration. It was read in public a few days later and celebrations followed. People cheered, bells rang, and many celebrated all night (The Making of America).

Trust in God is evident in the first paragraph when Jefferson wrote that they had the right to “…assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them…”

The start of the next paragraph was an eye opener to many who did not think this way…

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men…”

These were amazing words to a new nation looking for guiding principles regarding liberty and freedom. They set the founding principles that would guide the direction of the constitutional convention later.

Word of the Declaration got to Washington and his solders. It lifted their spirits and caused celebrations. It gave them clear purpose for why they were fighting…

Washington, that summer, was preparing to protect New York from invasion of a large British force that took place in August. He made a couple critical mistakes. First, he was afraid that the likely target of Long Island would be a ruse and that the British might attack first New York itself, so he split his army in half between the two. Second a road called Jamaica Pass leading into Long Island had largely been left ignored.

The British did attack on Long Island. When the battle started the Americans thought for a few minutes that they were winning, but did not realize that 10,000 solders that had marched down Jamaica Pass were about to attack their flank. The Americans retreated in chaos back through a swamp. They lost many men and were driven back to the East River. They joined a fort there where Washington was waiting. The army had nowhere to go. The British general ordered a stop to the attack and had to repeat it several times because the solders could tell they were about to crush the Americans.

How could Washington possible save these men? Loosing this much of his army would mean almost certain failure in the war. If the British fleet was able to sail up river there would be no possible path of retreat. A storm came up with a strong wind that made it impossible for the British fleet to sail up river. A plan to bring Washington's army across the river in small row boats was hatched. As they got started they found it impossible to row boats across the river against the strong winds and waves, but shortly the wind died down and switched allowing a quick row across the river. They were making progress, but morning was coming and still much of the army was on Long Island. They were sure to be seen now. As the sun started coming up a thick and dense fog rose all around the river. Men and trees were hard to see at 5 feet and completely disappeared at 10 feet. Washington was in the last boat to leave. The fog shortly lifted shortly after the last boat and within two hours, the British stormed the front lines and fort finding it deserted.

Impossibly out numbered and out maneuvered Washington and his army was saved by divine Providence and despite being demoralized and loosing many men, he still had an army which would be able to eventually secure the freedom of the new nation.

“In God we trust” and “Annuit Coeptis” from the Continental Congress to the battle fields culminating with victory at Yorktown God’s hand was certainly with these men as they set out to bring individual freedom and liberty back to the earth. Today as we remember the founding of The United States of America and the Declaration of Independence let us also remember and take note of the true source of our freedom and liberty and that they are granted by God and not by man or by governments. Let us put our “firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence” and “pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.” Happy Independence Day!

Obama Supporters

When will the remainder of people that still support Obama and give him passing marks wake up?

I think it safe to say that most everyone understands the negative impacts of nearly $4 a gallon gas has on the economy, prices, and on individuals, but Obama supporters apparently don’t take seriously the fact that prior to the election he said himself that “under my plan energy prices will necessarily skyrocket.” Do people think he was kidding or is it just the idea that “well this isn’t really his plan; the gas prices have gone up drastically because of demand and all the unrest in the Middle East?” If things can happen to help him implement his plan without putting all of his policies into place, certainly he will take advantage of that. He used the gulf oil leak as a reason to stop granting drilling permits and even revoked some on-land permits in Colorado. It was his own chief of staff that said “never let a crisis go to waste.” Now the CEO of GM has come out saying he wants to see an increase in gas tax… Why? To push people towards more economical cars (I guess since no one wants to buy the Chevy Volt he wants the government to put more price pressure on us to “encourage” us to make the purchase that he would like us to make.). We could go on here, but the purpose of this writing is not to discuss only oil prices…

Obama has held up Spain as the standard by which we should model our new “green” economy. I could understand from the “environmentalist” standpoint if he had made such a claim a decade or more ago before the realities of what Spain has done are there for everyone to see. For every green job that Spain created two jobs were lost. The unemployment rate in Spain for 2010 was ~20%. Obama supporters should have been freaking out that their guy would hold up a miserably failing country as some kind of standard.

The selling points that Obama gave his healthcare plan was to cut and control costs, and to get more people covered, but the government's own budget office has reported again and again that the healthcare plan will cause significantly increased government spending, and it will be ineffective at controlling any costs. It also encourages employers to drop people that are already covered. In the end there is no way that this will work without significantly increased tax rates and rationing of care given. It is rationed everywhere in the world that healthcare has been nationalized, so what possible rational can supporters put forward that we will somehow be different? What it does do regardless of anything else is gives government control of a significant portion of everyone's life.

What about the impact of increased regulations? We could go on and on about increase regulations within healthcare; the burden is enough that over 1400 companies and unions have received waivers for parts of the law…, but let’s bring up a few others. The EPA is being used to implement their own version of cap and trade for carbon emissions even though this had failed to pass through the legislative process (an energy company just announced that it will close five coal plants in order to conform to these new regulations). These are the policies that Obama was referring to when he said that energy prices would skyrocket. The FCC has started issuing internet regulations even though both congress and the courts have said that this is outside the authority of the FCC (they did it anyway). The new financial industry regulations (these passed by the legislative process), which are supposedly to protect us from greedy unscrupulous Wall Street executives causing another financial meltdown (that is the topic of another blog), add lots of costs to doing business along with setting up a permanent “bail-out” fund for continued government meddling and intervention and ongoing costs to the taxpayer.

So what? How do all these things tie together? The thing to consider is what impact all this has on individuals. Everything we are talking about here makes living more expensive. What impact does that have on the poor and middle class? This makes it much harder for the lower and middle classes to travel, go on vacations, or do much more than stay in their own home town. The current White House administration has put forward their vision for communities of the future many times. This vision is about “livable communities” where people can go to work, go out to eat, go to a grocery store, and go to a movie without ever having to drive or own a car. Here is the big problem- this administration and others in power know that we would not choose to live this way, because we like the freedom to travel, go to the beach, and see the sites across this country, so how do you force “the masses” to do what “ruling class” thinks best? You gain control of large segments of the economy, make the cost of living very high, and increase the dependence on the government. At that point the government can control the lives and movements of “the masses” at the whim of whoever is in power.

Is this just crazy talk? You be the judge…

Did Greedy Execs Really Cause the Problem?

All the events with the economic meltdown in the housing finance industry made me think about reality and rational behavior... We are told (over and over) that the whole problem came from greedy wall-street executives, that they were purposely giving out loans to people who could not afford them, and that we need more regulation to stop it from happening again! But does that make any sense? Let's first ask some basic questions.

Pretend that you are a business owner- What is the basic reason that you are in business, or the reason why you engage in any business transaction? To earn a profit. If you thought of something else, then you may want to think about the question some more. If your first motivation isn't first to make a profit, then you can't really ever accomplish any of your other desires like providing meaningful employment or other worthwhile goals. Say that you are a banker- For what purpose would you give a person a loan? To earn a profit! There can't be any other reason otherwise you will not stay in business long. How would you determine who to give a mortgage to? Would it be based on the person's need, based on whether or not they deserved a house, or would it be based on an analysis of whether the person will likely be able to pay the payments? Clearly you would look at the applicant and weigh the risk of giving that person a mortgage, and if the risk was high that he or she would default, you would not make the loan.

If these banks executives were driven solely by greed in pursuit of profit, then does it make any sense that they would give loans to people who they knew could not afford them? No. People defaulting on the loans that you give them is not a way to gain profit. So, if it doesn't make sense that greed was driving the lending behavior, something else must have motivated such industry wide behaviors...

"I'll give you a hint. Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think that you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong." Francisco d'Anconia to Dagny Taggart in Atlas Shrugged

The behavior was going on, however, my purpose is not to answer the question of why the behavior was going on, but to point out that the reason we have been told doesn't make sense. It has contradictions. There are lots more questions to ask about this episode in our history. Keep asking them, and you will likely find that lack of regulation was not even a small factor... You may even find that those calling for more regulations were a large part of the problem to begin with.

There is a new book out (I have not read it but plan to) that addresses the behaviors that were going on. The book is- Reckless Endangerment: How Outsized Ambition, Greed, and Corruption Led to Economic Armageddon
By: Gretchen Morgenson, Joshua Rosner

Gretchen is a business writer for the New York Times

Do Boot-Camp Workouts "Work"- A Case Study

I am a casual mountain bike rider (casual because when the weather turns cold, my bike goes into hibernation, and during the “good” weather season my rides can often get put off for other priorities). For the last 15 or more years, each year, I have mountain biked up the quarry trail in Boise up to the table-rock cross, so I have a pretty long standing baseline to judge my fitness level. On the first ride of the year this is my typical baseline- About half way up the trail my heart is pounding well into the anaerobic phase, and my breathing is fast with heavy gasps for oxygen. Some years I do not make it to the top on my first ride of the season, but in years when my fitness is a little better I have to stop once or twice to rest before I make it to the top. When I get to the top I am typically moments away from collapse, and I must get off and spend several minutes recuperating and getting my breathing under control before I can start the ride down. As the riding season continues I can ride to the top without stopping but typically with still a couple minutes of recuperation time at the top.

This year on New Year’s Day I started doing boot-camp workouts three times a week for 45 minutes at FitMania. After a cold wet spring, finally on Saturday May 21st, I got my new mountain bike out (Christmas present) for its first ride in the dirt. I was a bit concerned about my energy level as I started my ride towards the quarry trail, because I had spent Friday night camping with some boy scouts who kept me up well past 1:00AM… I got to the trail, about a 5 mile ride from my house, and started up. I got through the first section with relative ease and was feeling pretty good. At about the half-way point I was breathing comfortably, but my legs were feeling a bit fatigued. On this trail, the last three sections are the worst- one climb straight toward the hill-top, then a left turn and steep climb up to an outcropping of rocks, followed by a right turn and the last long climb up to the top. As I headed into these last three sections I started entertaining thoughts about where would be a good place to stop and go back, but I finished the first climb and turned left heading up to the rocks and I was feeling OK. My legs, again, were feeling the fatigue, but I was still moving at a reasonable pace. When I made the right turn for the final climb to the top, I realized that I was going to make it all the way without stopping. As I reached the top I slowed my bike, popped my feet out of the clips and got off the bike. As I stood there, I realized that I did not need to rest before heading back down and that I was ready to go! The ride down and back to my house was much stronger than I was expecting it to be. In my 15+ years of riding this trail, I have never had this good of a ride on my first ride of the season!

Thanks Boot-Camp workouts and thanks FitMania!

Econ. Bottom up or Top Down

Top down vs. bottom up-

Many economists today teach that Keynesian (top down) economics has failed. This is also the learning that I was lead to understand in my MBA economics classes, so for this writing we are going to assume that this is true.

This leads to the question- if top-down economics has failed then why do we continue to see government intervention, stimulus packages, increased regulations, and favorite industry subsidies? If all these actions have negative impact on the economy, then what is the motivation behind our government's actions? Some possible answers-

Our leaders-

1) are simply incompetent.

2) don't believe what the data is telling them.

3) believe they can plan and spend your money better than you can.

4) are power hungry, seek to control the lives of others, and see themselves as a ruling class who are above the "masses."

Sadly for many of our leaders all four of these exist to some extent or another. You don't have to look very far to see the evidence of incompetence- when a high ranking official calls extending unemployment benefits one of the best job creation stimulus methods not much more needs to be said.

What about those who don't believe what the data is telling them? Many fall into this trap republicans and democrats. Before he left office President Bush started with the first stimulus and started pushing for bailouts of the auto industry. President Obama came into office to fire off a huge 2nd stimulus and bailouts of the auto and financial industries. This was followed by a jobs bill and more. Surely at least one of these presidents saw economic data that showed that this kind of market intervention is ineffective at best and destructive at worst, but clearly they did not believe it. You can get away with ignorance by claiming "just think how bad it would have been if we would not have acted." Regardless of such silly claims, just consider where our economy now stands. A rational mind will say that we probably did no good with these measures and certainly made things worse for the long run.

The "do gooders" as Reagan called them believe, regardless of what reality and data says, that if they are in charge of spending, job creation and all economic planning that they can create a utopian society. It doesn't matter that no one has ever succeeded in creating such a utopia with these methods, because surely it has not succeeded because "they" were not the ones to implement the scheme. Not believing actual life data makes this group no better than the ignorant and possibly much more dangerous.

Finally the power hungry- Many of us average folks have a hard time believing that we have any leaders who view themselves as being in the ruling class and above the "masses" seeking for power over others, but let's not fall for the same fail mode of not believing the data. When our leader says "with my plan [energy] rates will necessarily skyrocket" how can this possibly be justified as a reasonable policy. We could review the "reasons" stated by leaders and in the media why we would want such policies, but let's not... Instead consider the effects of these kinds of policies. What is the best way to control the behavior of all the "masses" in a country of people who love liberty? Make the costs of living high enough that the lower and middle classes can no longer afford to travel and move about the country. Add to those costs government controlling more and more areas of our life (health-care) and "their" power over the "masses" grows quickly. Before I get accused of being crazy and seeing conspiracies where none exist, can you really believe that we have wonderful benevolent leaders and government who exist solely to do what is best for every one of us? Who is the crazy one? Washington knew what he was talking about when he said-

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

"Plans by the many not by the few" is the fundamental aspect of economic liberty and freedom. Not only do we loose that liberty with Keynesian type policies it is also destructive to the economic health of the country.

Dad... Fix It

I guess it is nice to realize that kids sometimes think that dad can fix anything...

My daughter just expects it. I got a phone call one morning after she had gotten to school to tell me that she could not get the keys out of the car. I said "did you put it in park?" She said "of course!" but I told her to try it again and she said "OK they came out..."

A few days later I got a call while I was at work and the first thing I hear is "Dad I'm trying to get gas, but I cant get the gas cap off." We went over how to take it off several times (this is just a screw off- no key or anything), but she still couldn't get it off. Her friend tried, but could not do it either. I told her that I could not leave work right then to help her take the gas cap off. She got mad and hung up on me. When I got home and asked her if she was able to get it off she said "no, but some guy was watching us and laughing and then he came over and took it off for us."

About a month ago I got a call and she said "Dad I'm in the Hasting's parking lot and the car won't start." I first asked her if it was in park (remembering our previous issue with the keys). She assured me that it was, so I said "when you turn the key does it turn over?" "I don't know what that means" she replied. I was kind of speechless after that thinking "why do you have a car?" I said that I would be there in a few minutes to help her and she said "I won't be here, my friends and I have someplace to go." Sigh... Turned out to be a dead battery. I couldn't find my jumper cables and found a cheap pair that had been in a little tool box some old neighbors had given me. I can understand selling cheap items, but what I don't understand is having a product that doesn't actually do what they are supposed to do. The wire in these cables could not carry enough current to jump a car...? Those went in the trash. After getting some new ones it was too late and I had a meeting to go to. Made my day when I got home to hear that my oldest son came home and helped my wife jump the car and bring it home (but I digress).

My daughter is going out of town for college soon, and I am very nervous about her having a car out of town from where I am.

I've saved the best for last though- A year ago she went to France with a high school class where she had a great time. One night (in the middle of the night- which was morning in France) my cell phone rang. The middle of the night phone ringing is always a concern. I jumped out of bed and said "hello." I heard "Hey dad... my hair straightener won't work..." I said "do you have any idea what time it is here?" She didn't respond to that- just back to the hair straightener. "Well are you using the adapter that we sent with you." "Yes dad, but it still won't turn on." She told me that her cousin's was working, and when I suggested that she just use hers, she was mad at me and told me she had to go or she was going to be late." Sigh. I went back to bed.

The Lord's Economic Plan

What is the Lord's economic and social plan?

Let's take a look at the parable of the talents in Matthew 25:14-30- What can we learn from it? First the Lord says that “the kingdom of heaven is…” like the parable of the talents. Just this tells us that socialism is contrary to the law of the Lord. The master did not give to the servants equally nor did he give to them according to their need, but he gave to them their stewardship according to their ability “unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability…” Notice they were not treated equally nor were their needs considered- only their abilities.

Next what did the master expect of these servants (to get gain). The servant that gained 5 and the servant that gained 2 additional talents were told- "Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord." Notice that it did not matter that one earned 5 and the other earned 2, they both got to enter into the joy of Lord, so it isn't important that one earned more than the other- only that they were both productive and gained an increase with their stewardship.

Finally the unprofitable servant was the one who had been given one talent and instead of working to gain more, "...he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money." He did not work to get gain and as a result did not get to enter into the joy of the Lord. His talent was taken from and given to him that had the most, and the unprofitable servant was "cast ... into outer darkness: [where] there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

Where does a person's needs and other's compassion come in with the Lord's economic order? Before we review that, let's first look at how salvation is obtained- One works out his individual salvation between himself and the Lord. Salvation is not a communal activity. You can't save a family member, friend or neighbor. In Paul's letter to the Philippian saints he said "...work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." (Philippians 2:12). In the end it is about each individual's personal righteousness, repentance, and relationship with the Lord.

But what about when people are struggling and NEED help? This is not a contradiction to the Lord's economic plan or plan of salvation. Again in Mathew 25:35-36 "For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me." That is what ministering to the needy is about, but as vitally important these things are (note that those who do not do these things are sent to everlasting punishment Mathew 25:46) these ministrations do not save the person in need, but helps them get through challenging times so that they can stand again on their own to work out their own salvation spiritually and financially.

The Rule of Law

We are supposed to be a nation where the rule of law is supreme based on the Constitution and on laws passed by our legislature. Well today the idea of the rule of law is more lip service than actual substance. Take the following examples-

Obamacare has been ruled unconstitutional and yet the administration ignores the ruling and continues to implement it.

DOMA (defense of marriage act)- This is a federal law that is being challenged in courts. The administration is refusing to represent the government in the court cases. This is a fundamental responsibility for an administration to defend existing laws.

Oil drilling ban- A federal judge twice ruled that the administrations ban was “arbitrary and capricious” and that it should be lifted immediately. The administration ignored the rulings and was held in contempt of court (someone should have gone to jail). Finally the administration “technically” lifted the ban in that they came out and said the ban is lifted, but it took them a very long time to award any permits at all- in fact some previously existing permits have been revoked.

Voter intimidation case against the new black panthers- Despite compelling evidence of voter intimidation the administration has stated that it will not prosecute minorities who are guilty of civil rights violations.

Cap and trade- While this has been rejected by our legislature (while democrats controlled both houses and the presidency) the EPA has started putting regulations in place to implement it on their own.

Internet regulations- both congress and federal courts said that Internet regulations are outside the authority of the FCC. This has been ignored and the FCC issued their “net neutrality” regulations anyway.

Czars- The legions of Czars who are nothing more than bureaucrats and operate outside the oversight of the Congress or Senate are a law unto themselves. Their power and authority can not be found in the rule of law, but only in the power of tyranny.

Getting Ahead Today

You get ahead now days through favors, kick-backs, and political connections more than ever. Sure we have been heading towards where we are now for quite some time, but it is now reaching critical mass...

In the book Atlas Shrugged we see that the businesses that survive are the ones that seek favors and special treatment from the government as all others are driven out of business through regulations, penalties, and political collusion. This is really where we are now. There are many stark examples today- Obamacare is a huge one. Over 1000 waivers have been given to protect politically connected companies and unions from the negative financial impacts of this legislation. There is no clear process to how the waivers are granted, and one has to ask the question- If it is the right thing to do for some, why is it not the right thing to do for all?

"Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society's virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion-when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing-when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors-when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you-when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice-you may know that your society is doomed." (Atlas Shrugged)

Thoughts on Socialism

After watching a video of Christine O’Donnell (when she was running for the senate in Delaware) talk about the reaction she has gotten by many people when she told them that we are now a socialist economy and they answered with “what is the problem with that,” I had to put together some of my thoughts on the subject…

From a broad view- socialism is inherently wrong or immoral because it indiscriminately takes (by force) the property from some and uses that property at the whim of whatever current government leaders view as appropriate. It is most often termed re-distribution of wealth to try and reach the feelings of people and their idea of fairness. The following paragraph is a story paraphrased from a speech by Ezra Taft Benson.

There are a group of early pioneers in the west who spend a lot of time protecting their families and property from theft and destruction which they have every right to do, however, they cannot be very productive when they spend so much of their time protecting their property. As a result they get together and hire a sheriff to provide that protection of life and property, and government is born. These pioneers only have the right to delegate to the sheriff those things that they have a right to do themselves. Now if pioneer A wants another horse, but does not have the money to buy one, he cannot look to pioneer B who has an extra horse and demand that pioneer B give him that horse. Pioneer A also does not have the right to take the horse by force, nor can he expect the sheriff to take the horse for him (we can only delegate powers to the government that we have a right to do ourselves). Even if everyone in the community thinks that pioneer B should give pioneer A his extra horse, they have no right to demand it.The idea that it is OK to take pioneer B’s horse to give to someone else is socialism.

It is the idea that the government will take property from some by force to be re-distributed to others under the guise of fairness. In such a system, all freedom and liberty is lost because the government can, at any time, choose to take some or even all of your property. Your property then is never really yours…

Regan once said “some can’t look at a fat man standing next to a thin man without thinking that the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin man.” This is a central theme to liberal socialism- that there is only so much wealth to go around, so those who are wealthy only got that way by taking advantage of the poor. This is a silly supposition, but it gets a lot of support because it is so easy for liberals to use it to try and create animosity between wealthy people and everyone else. If the liberals are successful in their attempts at class warfare then they can get a large group of the poor and middle class demanding that the government make the wealthy pay (…or hand over their horses). Regardless of how a person “feels” about the wealthy or any other group of people, remember, we can only delegate to the government what we have the right to do ourselves. Anything else is tyranny. We have no right to take by force the money or property from one group to give to another.

When living in a free market system it is not a zero sum game. There is not a pre-determined amount of wealth where the only way one person can have more is if another person has less. Under free market enterprise, everyone can rise, improve, and prosper according to each person’s ability.

The next step for socialism is the idea that just taking and re-distributing is not enough. Now we must work that “fairness” more by having the government own or run the major industries (think healthcare, auto, energy, and financial industries). The reasoning is that by the government running the majority of the economy we will be able to achieve more “fairness” or economic equality. This centralized type of economy is hugely inefficient and ineffective. Under a free market system, producers determine what products and services to produce based on what the consumers want, and when consumers want a lot of a certain product or service, producers will work hard to meet that demand. Under the centralized socialist economy, however, products and services are produced that bureaucrats determine are what is best for the people with very little to no regard for what people want (for example the government might push electric cars and windmills regardless whether anyone wants them or not). It quickly gets very condescending as the government expects the people or “the masses” to accept that the “benevolent” government somehow knows what is best for them and that “the masses” are not capable of determining what is best for themselves.

The examples of the failures of centralized economies abound. The early settlers of the United States provide a stark example. The settlers at Jamestown were to live in an economic system where the land that would be used to provide food for the survival of the community was centrally owned and all people were expected to take their turn working in the fields to provide for the community. The community would be a little utopia where everyone worked for the common good. The problem is that it was an utter disaster! Hundreds died from disease and starvation. The starvation was not because the crops failed, but because they did not get planted or that they did not get tended to once they were planted. It is nothing short of a miracle that Jamestown did not completely fail. When the Puritans came later, they tried to live the same economic system that was tried in Jamestown. If anyone in the world could be successful at living such an economic system it should be the Puritans who were very religious and believed sincerely that they should love and care for each other. They still suffered from starvation. While not the major catastrophe that was seen at Jamestown the conditions didn’t improve greatly until both communities decided to give people private property that they were free to do with as they pleased and anything that they grew on that land was theirs to use or trade as they saw fit. After they changed and allowed private property both communities started to prosper.

While all the preceding are my thoughts on socialism, here are some quotes from Ezra Taft Benson-

“The government itself has no innate power or privilege to do anything. Its only source of authority and power is from the people who created it.”

“Any attempt through governmental intervention to re-distribute the material rewards of labor can only result in the eventual destruction of the productive base of society without which real abundance and security for more than the ruling elite is quite impossible.”

“The growth of the welfare state is difficult to check before it comes to its full flower of dictatorship, but let us hope that this time around the trend can be reversed.”

(And not a quote, but paraphrased) Three things needed to reverse this trend-
1. Historical knowledge of socialism’s failures in contrast with the benefits of free enterprise
2. Modern means of communication to transmit this knowledge to a large literate population
3. A growing number of dedicated men and women working to promote these concepts