Friday, January 31, 2014

AND NOW I GIVE YOU THE REAL REASON FOR OBAMACARE

Conspiracy theorist nutters have claimed Obamacare would lead to single payer. But Obamacare isn't an evil plot to get to single payer, Obamacare is little more than a crisis of their own making

And now i give you the real reason for Obamacare. It's not single payer. It's to condition Americans, B.F. Skinner and J.B. Watson-style for a future without healthcare (Congressional outlays for Medicare and Medicaid) so that Americans today get conditioned to buy bills paying insurance for their later years.



Check out Reason mag for more of the story.

Read more ...

Thursday, January 30, 2014

BUT I SPENT 150 HOURS HANDCRAFTING THAT OIL ON CANVAS! OR THE LABORER'S SILLY THEORY OF VALUE.



The story shown in the picture below is typical of most who, though, constrained by reality, fail to see reality. Thus, they suffer. Their faces emote their anguish much like the old woman painted by the Dutch master, Rembrandt.




Though the story is touching, it's fallacy. The fallacy is Ricardo's labor causes value theory, which foolish socialists like Marx took up. The fallacy was put to bed more than 160 years ago.

Labor has nothing to do with prices. Prices get set by winning bidders. 

Take two people. One can spend one million dollars buying equipment and mining rights to mine for gold and after all that effort only find an ounce of gold. Another could find gold while walking spending exactly nothing. 

Is the ounce of gold worth a million because that is what the miner paid, what it cost him to get? No!

Right now, both the miner and the finder could get $1242.80 (as of 2014.Jan.30) for selling that ounce and that much alone. Why? The price gets set by winning bidders against all gold on offer for sale right now.

The miner put in time, effort, dedication, smarts, training, and much more. The finder put in nothing.

Or say someone has inherited purported fine-crafted gold jewelry from a dear lost relative and melted that jewelry down to support a meth habit, the gold in that jewelry would fetch at the same rate of all gold, $1242.80 an ounce. Once again, no outlay was made for that gold coming into the methhead's possession as property.

All prices adhere to the one and only true law of trade, the Law of Price the winning bids of purchase and sale in the face of what is on offer sets the price. Prices get set by winning bidders who possess the means — these days legal tender cash or credit — in the face of what is on offer.

If no one bids for anything made, no matter how skillfully done, it's worthless. If bids are below cost, oh well. That is an signal that most everyone in a society of property deem the work worthless and a waste of resources. The artist should find other work.

Labor is the poor man's capital. The expression of skills through time, which is called work, is a product.  Labor is the outlay to turn something into property and nothing more. Only things of property can be bought and sold in purchase and sale for cash or credit.

Trade is predicated on property and profits and not effort and skill. Anyone must gain property, which is the right of ownership and never the thing owned, before enjoying or possessing a thing. If anyone fails to buy something to gain property in it, but instead takes it, that is called stealing. 

Anyone can buy stuff because that one has produced profit (earnings) in past and has been rewarded or others expect another shall produce profit in future, which we call confidence, and thus give credit to another. 

Profit arises because of property others want to possess under the constraint of the great Axiom of Profit —  the sum of sales must at least equal the cost of production, otherwise the producer goes to ruin. And of course, the sum of sales arises from the quantity of things sold times price. And price gets set by winning bidders of purchase and sale in the face of what is on offer.

So the whole trick of producing property in pursuit of profits is to produce what others want, to be in service to others. And that is what being in society of property is all about,  the only society in which strangers can live, even when government has grown to take control of that society and has distorted all relationships of man with man in society of property.

If labor were what caused price, then why can Apple earn a premium on iPhones relative to all other touch screen phones? Why aren't Apple execs accepting bids ( charging ) for what it cost them to get the phones made? 

If labor set prices because cost were to be the cause of price, then why does anyone go out of business? Labor has nothing to with price. Prices get set by winning bidders who must first gain property in something before they can use it.

No one works at a loss (Wages - Living Expenses or Sales - Outlay) unless politicians swoop in and subsidize that one with Section 8, SNAP and the like. When politicians give  workers welfare to subsidize their living, in effect, politicians subsidize firms that can pay wages precisely because of welfare given to workers (see: GREEDY CAPITALIST COMPLAINS ABOUT UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE EXPENSE AND QUITS HIS BUSINESS and Wile E. Coyote, Campground Businessman Super Genius).

Any worker gets paid to produce. His or her wage arises against the lack of willingness of another slightly better and smarter, who absent what she or he is doing, could bid lower than the worker being more efficient at living or could bid higher than the worker being able to produce more in any time span.

All the same, prices get set by those willing to cough up the cash or credit to buy. Sellers must accept those bids to get sales. Would-be sellers can refuse those bids and earn nothing. They can hold back inventory in hopes of future bidders bidding up prices.

People fail to appreciate the role of marketers and those in advertising who help to present products to those who most willingly can appreciate how a product can fit within their lives.

Marketers are quite like commodities speculators in the respect of pushing prices along to keep prices high enough so that manufacturers, be that automated or hand-crafted, can live to make another day, and yet against each other, low enough so that many can enjoy the fruits of others.

It's too bad that many perceive, wrongly, that marketers are "middlemen" who are little more than tricksters and knaves. Marketers keep people in business.

The successful stick to their knitting as it were and hire marketers to get them the best price possible. The reward for doing so is a share of the increase.

To savages, a Rembrandt likely would be worthless compared to spears. The savage wouldn't know he could sell the Rembrandt to someone who would esteem it and buy thousands of spears.

Yet, where art gets esteemed by others, it is the winning bidder who sets the price for a Rembrandt as nothing in trade ever can violate the Law of Price, the same as nothing can violate the Laws of Thermodynamics or the Law of Gravity. So even a one-off like a famous artwork sells, not because of purported scarcity, but because someone else has property (right of ownership) in it.

The price of a Rembrandt arises not because it is rare (scarce), but because of rivalry of bidders, only one of whom can win with the highest bid precisely because that one has the most cash or credit, which he is willing to sell in a purchase and sale, to buy a Rembrandt. 

Egghead Ph.D. academicians, who call themselves economists, long ago realized the error of Ricardo. Rightly, they came to see that labor is not the source of value (price). Yet, the next round of economists decided to commit their own fallacy and from which they base their entire myth of economics, that of scarcity and utility cause value (price). See my work WHY IS THE ECONOMY SO HORRIBLE? BECAUSE ACADEMIA ECONOMICS IS FAKE to discover in less than 3 minutes, why economics is bogus, a myth, a b.s. story.

Utility as a source of price (value) is quite false as it imbues into things intrinsic value. Scarcity as a source of price also is quite false. 

The earth is awash in water, but men are successful sellers of bottled water right next to giant lakes and rivers. Why can do they do so? Bottling creates property. 

Many would believe that a Rembrandt is worth much because he is dead and thus can not make any more. So any Rembrandt is a one-off. Yet, millions have watched and learn to paint from Bob Ross, each creating their own one-offs. Each one being unique makes each one scarce. Each Joe Blow also is a one-off. 


Yet, no one trawls garage sales bidding outrageous sums for the one-offs of the Joe Blows of our world. 

And so, because economists believe from false premises, their conclusions are false, necessarily so, even when remaining logically consistent from false premises to false conclusions. It doesn't matter if that neoclassical school is the Keynesian school or the Austrian school. 

There is no escaping reality. Anyone can only deny reality. 

Enjoy some Rembrandt!


Read more ...

Tuesday, January 28, 2014

BUT IT IS FOR INEQUALITY! AT WHAT POINT DO PEOPLE STOP EXPONENTIALLY DOUBLING DOWN ON STUPIDITY?



CLUELESS KENNY

Instead of taxing the rich to help the poor put there by the rich, we should do something different. Raise minimum wages to match inflation, ban tax rebates while employees are on welfare, the list goes on. We must have equal power to negotiate or we will lose every time.

Here is an argument for raising minimum wage that does not involve bleeding heart rhetoric.

People on minimum wage spend everything they earn to survive. They cannot thrive because the opportunities to improve their lot take capital they don't possess and never will at their wage level.

We want the economy to improve. Raising wages will accomplish this goal on a macro economic level. After all, if the majority of your employees don't earn enough to buy your own products you have limited your consumer base. If this wage level is industry standard, then most other companies pay their employees insufficiently to buy your products as well. Pay them enough and they will have the choice to buy your products, go to school for an education, earn even more and buy yet more products. Do it for the economy.


ME

A tad more than 5% of all hourly-paid workers get paid an hourly wage at or below the minimum wage. That is a scant 1% of the total U.S. population!

You would have us believe that raising the wages of 1% of all Americans who have the lowest incomes is going to do anything?

Do you not see the absurdity of your beliefs, how silly-minded your beliefs are?

The Federal Minimum Wage is $7.25. One percent of the U.S. population is 3.139 million (2012).  Full-time work amounts to 2,080 hours a year. The 2012 U.S. GDP was $15,680 billion ($15.68 trillion). So if all 1% of Americans who minimum wage earners worked full-time, they would have earned a scant 0.30% of GDP, that is ZERO POINT THREE PERCENT. Said another way, that is three-tenths of one percent.

If Congress doubled the minimum wage to $14.50 an hour and all minimum wage earners worked full-time for a whole year, they would only have earned six-tenths of one percent of GDP! If Congress tripled the minimum wage to a whopping $21.75 an hour, the do-you-want-fries-with-that workers would only have earned about 1% of GDP (0.996%)!

So rather than calling for minimum wages to rise, people who barely buy anything, why don't you call for the pay of CEOs to be increased one-hundred fold? After all, rich people buy the most stuff.

Why are you calling for wages to rise for people who have limited wants rather than calling for wages to rise for those with insatiable wants, those accustomed to spending much and often?

By your thinking, giving people more to spend causes more trade and thus creates growth in what most call the economy. So why anoint those least capable of knowing how to spend to do the task?

Either way, merely injecting more cash and consumer credit does little more but to raise prices. Scholarly men have known this since the late 1690s at least (John Locke, Sir Dudley North). Why don't you know this?

Giving people more cash does not increase production. With a few extra dollars each week, the poor suddenly are not going to call for new Cadillacs and Lincolns to get manufactured.

The poor won't eat more pasta nor more bread nor will the poor drink more milk merely because they have a few extra dollars each week to spend. Giving the poor a few more dollars will do nothing but raise prices. More cash chasing the same output results in RAISING PRICES ONLY.

All prices conform to the one, true , infrangible law of trade — the Law of Prices, which holds the winning bids of purchase and sale in the face of what is on offer sets the price.

If minimum wage were the answer, why hasn't it ever been the answer? In the United States, statutory minimum wages were first introduced nationally in 1938.

In a whopping 76-year trial run, minimum wage never has alleviated poverty. SEVENTY SIX YEARS OF MINIMUM WAGE LAWS have done nothing.

Aid to Dependent Children (ADC), later renamed AFDC and later still TANF has been around since 1935! In a 79-year trial run, welfare never has alleviated poverty.

So, why should 77 and 80 years suddenly be the turning point years for those failed programs, the expression of failed thoughts and false beliefs?


CLUELESS KENNY

But, but, but ... What about the children?!


ME

If you want to see a righteous rise in wages, you should call for an end to minimum wage as well as an end to specific welfare. The combination of minimum wage and welfare amounts to a subsidy to employers whose capital structure gets predicated on using minimum wage workers on the whole.

No one would work at a loss (wages - living expenses). It is only because of subsidy of welfare that many choose to be workers at minimum wage.

The right move is the end minimum wage laws and all political interference in trade. That idea frightens more businessmen to a greater degree than it does the people as too many businessmen fear authentic, manly competition.

Another right move would be to restrict immigration for the next 10 years and perhaps longer as all net population increase in the USA since 1980 or so has come from immigrants and their descendants. In conjunction, if the Congress could evict the 20 million or so illegal aliens residing in the USA, a significant chuck  of the pool of low wage bidders would be erased. That would go far to pressure wages upward for no-skill workers.

Read more ...

SUCCESS! AT LAST!

Hubby and wife eggheads at Yale have penned a work together, The Triple Package: How Three Unlikely Traits Explain the Rise and Fall of Cultural Groups in America in which they claim three traits of individuals somehow translates into collective successes. These eggheads do not seem to know what success means. 




Success means getting what you want, when you want it and in the way you want it. That is all it means. Success isn't relegated to the measure of money.

Success is the end point, the effect from a string of other causes to effects that we call action. You get to success through focusing your action (causal chain efforts).

Having a driving, idealized purpose, focusing on that purpose to the exclusion of all else, having expectation of achievement, seeing oneself as a leader, catching glimpses in the mind's eye of what are intermediate steps contribute to success and experiencing those steps. 

Success is mostly about independence, the combo of  self-assertion and self-expression, being the one who does not succumb to peer pressure, who ignores the call of being one of many and instead rises above the peer group.

To outsiders, this drive to an idealized purpose, this self-assertion and this self-expression gets wrapped up in one word, ambition. 
Read more ...

Friday, January 17, 2014

HOW IS THAT HIGH-PAYING WELFARE GIG WORKING OUT FOR YOU, GOVERNMENT "WORKER"?

Government jobs pay more than private sector jobs for comparable work. It is convenient mythology owing to clever rhetoric that government work pays less than private sector work. See here, here, here and here




Government work is fake-work, make-work for the most part. Outside of ports, roads, bridges, border defense, contract enforcement and property assurance as to weights, measures ingredients and the like — you know, general welfare, the only kind of welfare authorized by the Constitution — government work is super high-paying welfare and nothing more.

People who work for government in any capacity other than the general welfare suffer from significant self-delusion as to their actual livelihood and worth to those in society of property.

All should be sure that private sector workers engage in work that produces property that might be wanted. That stuff is called wealth. Government work produces nothing and most often exists to inhibit the production of property and hence wealth.

Often, government work is stealth competition, paid for by taxpayers, but worked at the behest of those who engage in regulatory capture. 
Read more ...

GUNS, DISEASE AND THE WIZARD OF OZ. WHY ARE AMERICANS WASTING TIME AND MONEY WITH OBAMACARE AND CRIME?




Ask anyone at random how many deaths happen in America each year and even what is the head count of Americans. Likely, you will fail to hear numbers that come close to the ballpark.

It's rare when a legal gun owner uses a legal firearm in the commission of a crime. It's so rare, that it isn't even worth mentioning statistically.

As well, murder by any kind of gun is so small relative to deaths in America that talking about guns and death isn't even worthy of discourse (6/10 of 1%)

Yet, 24% of all Americans who die each year die of cancer and another 24% die of heart disease. 30% die of heart disease or strokes.

It's safe to claim that about 32% of all deaths each year have habitual cigarette smoking, lack of exercise and poor diet as causal factors.

Using 2012 figures, with  313.9 million Americans producing a GDP of $15,680 BILLION, Americans spend $2,728.3 BILLION on medicine, of which politicians tax and spend $1,705.18 BILLION by force of law. With the number of deaths near 2,309,212 Americans, Americans spend $1,181,493 PER DISEASE DEATH!

This number alone shocks, considering that life expectancy improved a scant 4% over time in 22 years! What a waste of money.

It gets even worse when looking at spending on policing and justice relative to crime deaths. Using 2006 spending of $214.5 billion, a whopping $14,292,600 has been spent PER CRIME DEATH!

Killing rival drug dealers is competition by other means. It is owing to prohibition of recreational drug use that many murders happen each year in America. Simply, decriminalizing the sale of drugs would cut down an already insignificant number of crime deaths. Yet, many Americans working conjured jobs — cops, judges, jailers — would find themselves clueless as how to earn an honest, real living.

The most expensive medicine comes about because persons are trying to stave off the inevitable, their own deaths. Except, most expect taxpayers pay for their gluttonous, slothful sins by giving them a moral hazard bailout later in life, which all know as Medicare.

As well, Obamacare violates everything about insurance, turning insurance into a credit card for persons who fail to live healthy. Insurance exists to payout on losses. 

Real insurance works like car insurance, people who put themselves at greater risk of loss pay more than people who play at living safely. Mandating the young and fit pay high premiums for the obese, the chronically overweight, the lazy, those who habitually smoke cigarettes, well, that turns insurance into credit cards for people who want to live longer at the expense of everyone else.

Almost all lack valid beliefs about reality on every topic imaginable. For almost all, their beliefs are not their own. Their beliefs come from the idiot box, the boob tube, the great OZ of opinion making.
Read more ...

Thursday, January 16, 2014

IT'S BECAUSE I AM BLACK, ISN'T IT?

Obama's entire political career is predicated on him being black.

First, he won office in Illinois from a district of black voters who only put blacks into office. Next, he lost a race for the U.S. House of Reps against a black man in a district that only votes for blacks. After that, Obama won his race for the U.S. Senate against, you guessed it, a black man.

Without the foregoing, Obama never could have ran seriously for the presidency of the U.S.

Obama is president precisely because he is black and no other reason, except the money of backers who funded him against a crazy, war-mongering, wrinkly old white guy and his side-kick milf for whom every married guy had the hots that women, the majority of voters were angry about.

Had Obama been white, running in a district that puts into office, anyone, regardless of skin color, few would have taken his craziness seriously and thus, his political career never would have taken off.





And for those who shall cry racist

Men can first attest the word racism to 1932, attributable to use by NAZIs, modeled on the words racialism used in context of South African law, first appearing in 1871.

Racism requires the use of law to inhibit or advance any group that organizes itself along biological lines. Racism is a horrible political doctrine. It devalues every individual and turns persons into monsters as they join groups.

The biggest racists in America today are those organized groups such as the NAACP, NOW, Act Up!, and La Raza, each pushing for privileged spoils from income taxation, privileges like quotas and subsidies.

The biggest promoters of racism in exchange for power are politicians. Racism is a political doctrine. Racism is not bigotry. Bigotry is an anthropological phenomenon. 


A racist act would be organized blacks pushing to get an easing of SAT scores to gain admission into law school. A racist act would be forcing persons to pay taxes and earmarking those taxes to subsidize the hiring of women after an organized group of women have lobbied successfully for such legislation.




Read more ...

Wednesday, January 15, 2014

WHY GOVERNMENT AT ALL YOU ASK?


Read more ...

Monday, January 13, 2014

WHY IS THE ECONOMY SO HORRIBLE? BECAUSE ACADEMIA ECONOMICS IS FAKE.

FIRST, THE REAL

Trade, or Commerce, or Buying and Selling, or Real Economics, which is what I teach, is all relevant matters of mankind regarding the purchase and sale of property. Said another way, it's the theory of trading property for profit. 




The entirety of trade, or commerce, or real economics ties up with two words — property and profit. Without profit from effort, anyone would lack buying power to buy anything else. Without property, no one can trade. 

At less than break even, anyone would stop trying to produce property. No one works at a loss.

In trade, or commerce, or real economics, there is but one law and one axiom, the Law of Prices and the Axiom of Profit. The Law of Prices holds the winning bids of purchase and sale in the face of what is on offer sets the price. The Axiom of Profit holds the sum of sales must at least equal the cost of production otherwise a producer goes to ruin.


Though most think of property as things possessed, property always has meant the right of ownership and never the thing owned. Only when property gets created, can trade arise between two persons. 

The name for property put to making stuff is called capital. The name for property put to purchase and sale for cash and credit is wealth. The name for property that can be sold to satisfy debts is asset. The name for property pledged against a debt is collateral.

Profit is the name of sales at prices set by winning bidders less the outlay spent to acquire property for those sales. Profit signals potential return to increasing capitalization to gain efficiency and thus higher profit, lest competitors come to the party with better capitalization.

Trade, or commerce, or real economics is about acquisition of rights to own stuff. No one can derive satisfaction until that one owns. All talk about pleasure, pain, satiation, utility and the like is irrelevant until acquisition.

A trade is a purchase and sale for cash or credit, which can be settled by cash. Today, because of the legal tender designation for cash, cash lets anyone settle contracts straightaway. 

Cash is printed, circulating bank credits. Cash consists of banknotes issued by a centralized authority. Cash represents deposits circulating in perpetuity. 

Anyone who possesses cash has bearer negotiability, also said as currency. Bearer negotiability means the right of ownership in a thing gets passed along with honest possession in every sale or every exchange. The property and the possession are inseparable.

Cash stands as a money substitute. Cash exists as a money substitute precisely because politicians have decreed legal tender status for cash. Gresham's Law reveals why cash has crowded out money.

Money is coined metal by weight and fineness. Each coin by weight gets a unique name called denomination.

Money does not exist anymore and hasn't for decades. In the days of money, money extinguished both cash and credit.

Today, Americans, Canadians, Australians, Europeans, Japanese, and all others have cash and token coins. Any token coin has denomination higher than the sum of street prices of the metals which constitute it.

In spite of shopworn fallacies, never was money "a medium of exchange" or "a store of value"Instruments of banking are the media of exchange. It is bankers who do the exchanging, today, buying cash and debt through discount and selling credit, transmuting property of lesser saleability into property with more saleability.


Without doubt, doing the work of money does not make something money. Credit does the work of money and no one would ever say credit is money.

Price is an objective ratio that expresses a rate of trade of an economic quantity for cash or credit denominated in cash. Value is an objective ratio of exchange in swap, which most know as barter. Price and value arise from the same concept, except one has cash as one economic quantity for another. Both are rates of trade, of exchange.

By objective, we mean that someone not a party to a trade can observe the swap. There isn't anything subjective about it. 

Prices get set by double auctions. In most job markets, inter-employer competition has employers engage in English auctions (highest bidder wins) for workers, while inter-worker competition has workers engage in Dutch auctions (lowest bidder wins) for jobs.

Where the winning bidders of employers and winning bidders of work seekers intersect, that is the clearing price, which, when it involves work, we call it a wage.

In credit-as-capital markets, inter-lender competition has lenders engage in Dutch auctions (lowest bidder wins) for borrowers, while inter-borrower competition has borrowers engage in English auctions (highest bidder wins) for jobs.

Where the winning bidders of lending and winning bidders of borrowing intersect, that is the clearing price, which, when it involves credit, we call it a interest.

Labor absent capital is living at bare subsistence. It is to capital that profit can arise owing to efficiency of surplus output. 

Both rent and interest to the capitalist are shares of profit paid in parts as a hedge against loss. 

Trade, or commerce, or real economics has correspondence with both practical and theoretical civil jurisprudence as well as accounting.

Occam's razor is on my side. 


AND NOW, THE FAKE

Academia economics is wrong, thoroughly wrong. Neo-classical economics is fraught with fallacy. It's a sham. It doesn't matter if it is preaching from the Austrian School or the Keynesian School. Being logically consistent against wrong premises still leads to wrong conclusions. 


Everyone who lives in the real world knows this. If academic economics were correct, the political policies based upon it wouldn't lead to banking, and credit crises and high unemployment.

Academicians preach a false dogma surrounding scarcity and utility (usefulness), often calling economics the science of scarcity. 

Academicians cite examples to justify their false beliefs. They say that though useful, air is abundant and thus can't be an economic good. They say that though useful, water is abundant and thus can't be an economic good. They say that in the desert though, where it is scarce, water becomes an economic good. 

Yet, anyone who puts air into cans turns abundant air into potential wealth and thus an economic good. Anyone who puts water into bottles, turns abundant water into potential wealth and thus an economic good, whether in a desert or in a big city surrounded by aquifers. Putting air into cans and water into bottles creates property. 

And what of monopoly patents, seemingly which are useful and scarce to have the right to be exclusive producer? Many firms buy monopoly patent not to produce, making such not useful, but to exclude competitors from doing the same. 

The firm which buys monopoly patents gains property in those patents and restricts trade by control of property. Such action reveals that property, or right of ownership, is what counts.

Thus, neither scarcity nor utility gives rise to economic goods. It's property. Until one gains property, one can't do anything, including experience satisfaction.

Since neo-classical economics is predicated on scarcity and utility rather than property, academia economics begins with false premises. Thus, all conclusions arising from the alleged faux science must be rejected as false.

Neoclassical clowns preach that value arises from utility. Value is not a quality, that is, it is not an aspect of a thing residing absolutely within it. Nor does value arise from utility, nor the cost of production, nor any other claimed intrinsic quality, nor scarcity.

It's a specious claim that utility stands as the cause of value. Holding that utility makes the cause of value forces the belief in intrinsic, absolute value owing to some quality inherent in a thing. While the qualities of a thing remain the same, such a thing can be useful during some times and yet not during others. 

Contemporary economists believe that the amount of utility derived from consumption of a good declines with each additional unit; and thus, a person maximizes his utility when he distributes his income among various goods so that he obtains the same amount of satisfaction from the last unit of each good.

The idea of marginal utility is the pseudo-scientific claim that one derives 100% satisfaction from the first unit of a thing and less than 100% satisfaction from each subsequent unit.  It is from the foregoing that economists claim what gives rise to value and hence prices.

Academia economists would have the world believe that if someone sold a house for $400,000 but only spent $300,000 from the proceeds and never touched the $100,000, then the buyer overspent by that $100,000 and the seller should have sold for only $300,000. Yet, never in the real world would find the seller years later sending back to the buyer $100,000.

Marginalism is a crock, bunk, hokum. Utility does not impute value. Marginalism is pseudo-scientific psychology. Academician economists have assumed marginal utility as true without any proof, taking it as axiom and have built sandcastles of mischievous theory upon it. 

The bogus concept of marginal utility deals with satisfaction, and specifically with satiation. Marginal utility is pseudo-science satiation psychology never proven through the scientific method in psychology much less for economics. Academicians enter the realm of conjectural, pseudo-scientific psychology when they attribute motives and cognitive processes to prices. 



Cournot was right when he said: 

"... accessory ideas of utility, scarcity, and suitability to the needs and enjoyments of mankind ... are variable and by nature indeterminate, and consequently ill suited for the foundation of a scientific theory." 

There can not be a "Law of Supply and Demand" because exceptions need elasticity to explain why such exceptions exist. A law of science governs the relation of phenomena, of all facts. If exception must be made, there can't be a law. 

Academicians preach the fallacy that producers sit on supply, offering up supply only through an imaginary supply schedule. They spin an alike bogus story about a demand schedule.

Yet, in the real world, inventory gets to the shelves once produced and gets put on offer. It's winning bidders who set the price, regardless of cost of production. If some producers sell at loss, those producers either get forced into efficiency, reducing costs or those producers must exit. Winning bidders must bid higher to gain the remaining inventory of sellers who can at least break even on costs. 



While guys like Paul Krugman might understand academic economics, be expert even, they do not get trade, or commerce, or buying and selling, or real economics, you know, the actual economics that exists from manifest phenomena of the real world.

Krugman's brand of academia economics is built on all of the fallacies of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Thomas Malthus, J.S. Mill and Jeremy Bentham, while rejecting the few lucid thoughts those foregoing had. And then their brand doubles down with more jokers like Stanley Jevons, Leon Walras, Francis Edgeworth, Alfred Marshall, all of whom accepted pseudo-scientific psychology never proven and totally unneeded. Jevons was so crazy that he claimed that sun spot activity created the cycles from boom to bust, from depression to prosperity.

Inauthentic, false, academia economics continues the parade of errors by adding erroneous thought of Throstein Veblen, Irving Fisher, John Maynard Keynes, John Kenneth Galbraith, Paul Sameulson, Kenneth Arrow, Robert Solow and Robert Mundell.

Economic theory espoused by all of the major universities suffers from significant flaws, even though there are kernels of truth is some thought here and there. Like all academicians, academic economists join a priesthood, receiving Ph.Ds, and became anointed to sermon on academic economics. Every Ph.D conferred in economics has been given to someone who has learned a false doctrine.

Even the Nobel Prize in Economics is little more than back slapping to the guy or gal who can remain logically consistent with the illogical house of cards that is academic economics.



Academic economics exists to justify political action of one kind or another, which means action against individuals and their respective property. Scarcity and utility are chimera faux concepts to justify political action of confiscation of output and redistribution to those of favored groups. Those who parrot the false belief that economics has anything to do with scarcity and utility have accepted rhetoric and have become indoctrinated.

 Every law crafted from economic theories of academia is a bad law. Every law that interferes with profits and impairs someone's property is a bad law. 


Full Disclosure

I earned a degree in economics from what was once a highly selective university. All my profs who taught me their false doctrine earned their Ph.Ds from Harvard, Yale, UC Berkeley and the like. 

For More

For those seeking a slightly more formal treatise, enjoy The Theory Of Trading Property For Profit.


Read more ...

CAN YOU BELIEVE THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE?

Almost all Americans are ill-equipped in mind to vote. Without knowing theoretical civil jurisprudence, history and trade, no one can decide right about anything dealing with human relations.

The purpose of government is justice for a society of property. Politicians craft law in support of justice.

To understand both justice and property requires thoroughgoing knowledge of theoretical civil jurisprudence.


The purpose of learning history is to learn the struggle for power over the control of property, moving from primitive communism to modern individualism.

Schools fail to teach right history — Anglo-American history emphasizing the English Civil War, Colonial America through the Progressive Era.

Commerce is the theory of trading for property for profit, that is, all relevant matters to mankind regarding the purchase and sale of property.


Without learning that wages are prices, that profits provide surplus buying power to buy anything else, that provide signals for potential return to increasing capitalization to gain efficiency and higher profit, that capital is the property of production and that wealth is the property of purchase and sale.

Without economics, no one can know about money and credit and how central bank action affects the measure of their contracts as well as their saved buying power. Without economics and theoretical civil jurisprudence, no one can know how taxation-provided welfare violates the social compact. Without economics and history, no one can can know how welfare is the source of power, which lets politicians wage foreign wars of weapons and domestic wars of law against citizens.

Read more ...

Saturday, January 11, 2014

LAW VS JUSTICE. GOVERNMENT VS SOCIETY. POLITICS VS YOU.

The only legit reasons for government are to protect the individual and his property from a mob and to certify claims about property when in a society of property so that men can engage in trade, which is the purchase and sale of property, rather than war among each other. 


As always, the reason behind a society of strangers, which is what we have, is a society in property. Society of strangers arises because of one thing — property, which  means right of ownership and never the thing owned. The purpose of strangers banding together in society of property is to trade freely their right of ownership, their property, for money, which is the measure of contract, of human relations, in pursuit of profit.

All too often, too many believe the reason for government is to define laws. Yet, legit government does not exist for enforcement of law,  good or otherwise. Legit government is about the administration of justice. Justice arises in maintaining right and redressing wrongs.

Laws are unneeded for justice. Law is secondary and unessential. Customs are fine enough for justice. Custom is to society what law is to government. Each expresses the measure of men's insight of the principle of right and justice. 

Law helps to impart uniformity and certainty to the administration of justice. Law helps to protect the administration of justice from disturbing influence of improper motives of those entrusted to impart justice. Law helps to protect the administration of justice from errors of impartial judgment. However, the existence of law is optional and not obligatory.

Government evolves from society. Never does society evolve from government. Before government there is society. Before society there are only individuals. 

Society isn't built. Society is merely individuals as strangers who form association through property for mutual benefit of trade, self-interest and self-expression. The only society in which strangers can live is a society of property. Government springs forth to enlarge the circle of strangers.

The necessity of government arises because of rogues who feign willing participation in society, a society of property. Government must exist only to protect the individual from a mob who seek to dispossess him from his property. Government must exist to ensure truth claims about property. 


Illegitimate government usurps power and starts shuffling people's property against their wants for the sole purpose of maintaining power over all. So in all forms of illegitimate government you see socialistic, bureaucratic welfare, which, immorally retards man's progress as it inhibits individuals who receive such welfare from discovering who they are and what are their talents. 

All problems arise when some usurp power through government to advance themselves by stealing or impairing the property of others, rendering government no better than rogues.

The moving away from bare subsistence, which is poverty, is progress. All progress of humans through all time has been advanced by property put to use as capital to produce property traded as wealth along with the mitigation of risk in the production of ever more property, which means right of ownership and never the thing owned. 

The reward for overcoming loss with property at-risk is profit. It is a way for a people to ensure resources are being used properly and products being made that those who are efficient want.


Politics is the art of using rhetoric to steal property. Politicians and bureaucrats get their property by confiscating it from others. Politicians and their Agent Smiths who inject themselves into the process cause dislocation in resources  and products creation. Retrogression happens under illegitimate government. 

Mankind advances through individuals, property and the drive to hedge against prices and that alone. Mankind falls into retrogression when reverting to neo-tribalism in whatever form, such as self-conceit, pseudo-scientific socialism or totalitarian socialism, which all know as communism.


Americans live in society of property as the basis for a society of strangers is a society of property. The purpose of government is to protect the individual and his or her property from the mob and rogues. When government becomes the mob and rogues, it's over. 

The true debate is individualism and property or power and dictate. When confronting  the true debate, in short, reality — individualism and property or power and dictate — all get forced to see that those on the right are on the same spectrum as those on the left.

All political doctrines are doctrines of control. The spectrum of political doctrine looks like this, from Left to Right:


Communism ↔ Socialism  Syndicalism  Oligopolism  Fascism

The debate of political doctrines is debate about which property should be impaired or stolen, who must suffer the consequences and who gets to do the the stealing and impairing  There is no room for individualism on that spectrum. The winning move, of course, is to jump off that spectrum.

In the USA, governments at all levels have become mob and rogues. Americans have fallen into serious retrogression over the last 153 years, with the majority of it coming in the last 85 or so.

Specific welfare — paying for food and medicine for individuals by impairing property of others — rather than general welfare — ports, roads, bridges — is what has done it, along with legal tender cash.

Through the power of specific welfare Crony Politics, Crony Governance and Crony Regulatory Capture arise. Yet, through rhetorical appeals of envy and jealousy, capitalism gets blamed being misspoken as crony capitalism. Parroting the misguided phrase spoken from ignorance — crony capitalism — fails to do service to anyone. The horrible, wrong label — crony capitalism — implies there is something wrong with capitalism, when never there is. 

Capitalism is the doctrine of property (right of ownership) used to create wealth (things that have buying power in trade). Capitalism means living by using property to produce a surplus of more property and hoping to sell that surplus for a price such that the sum of sales exceeds the cost to gain those sales.

Without capitalism, there isn't an economy. It's impossible to have an economy without capitalism. Capitalism has nothing to do with politics. 






Read more ...

Friday, January 10, 2014

LIVING IN THE AGE OF IDIOCRACY

From the fallout raged against me by others in the comments of A Milestone to Celebrate: I Have Closed All My Businesses in Ventura County, California, it is clear that we have entered Mike Judge's Idiocracy. We're living in retrogression times. 


Those who have piped up in the comments have expressed, ordinary, parroted opinion, one formed of indoctrination, devoid of thought. 

The toadies of the Coyote herald him as some kind of free-markets capitalist-entrepreneur. One would be hard pressed to find further from reality than such belief.

The self-styled Coyote is a guy who blogs from the irreality of his mind about trying to operate businesses in various states of the USA. What the Coyote fails to mention is that all of his businesses arise because politicians have given him a monopoly license to use taxpayers' land.

Which such a monopoly grant, the Coyote has entered into business by risking the taxpayers' parkland capital risk-free to himself. As well as, since he terminates his employees off-season, the Coyote gets his payroll heavily subsidized by fettered taxpayers.

The Coyote isn't a free-markets capitalist nor a free-markets entrepreneur. The Coyote seems to be a fan of big government when it works in his favor, but all too stupid to know how to leverage it his favor. The Coyote seems to favor effeminate competition by having a monopoly license granted to himself rather than manly competition whereby he would buy land, set up shop and pay market wage rates.


The crazed fans of the Coyote, like so many hopeless ones, should learn the art of commerce and its science, that which some call trade, while others call economics. For if they did, they would know that only the one who has capital bears the risk. The parkland is the capital. The laborer risks nothing. 

An entrepreneur is a smart laborer. If the entrepreneur fails, it is the capital lent to him that gets lost. The entrepreneur fails to lose anything economic. He has staked nothing.

They would learn that Rent is a share of the profits. For where there is no profit, there can be no rent. 

They would learn that land the Coyote uses by grant of monopoly license is the land of legislators. As all risk is borne by capital alone in any venture, it is legislators who shoulder the risk at their expense. However, legislators can maintain their property in such land only by imposing taxes upon Americans. 

Since the Coyote doesn't pay market rate for that capital, legislators subsidize him there as well. Again, legislators can subsidize him only because first they can impose taxes upon Americans for their various schemes.

First, the Coyote fails to get his own parkland as capital. Second, without legislators bleeding Americans as taxpayers, legislators could not subsidize the labor costs of the Coyote.

If his fans would would learn that a wage is a price and that no one can work below break even for long unless subsidized, they would see the Coyote pays less than full wages for workers to break even. Legislators who force Americans to to pay UI who don't collect or cause others to collect UI, in effect, force these Americans to subsidize the Coyote's seasonal payroll.

If the Coyote wants to buy the land to make a go of it, so be it. Yet, taxpayers shouldn't be forced to own land upon which he profits. The Coyote is free-riding, using the capital of others (taxpayers), risk-free.

Socialists believe in community ownership of things managed by the government. Those who side with the Coyote, embrace the socialist concept of no property and community ownership.

As well, those who support Coyote, support the fascist concept of public-private partnership. 

The Coyote is a picture-perfect example of what is wrong with America and Americans today. The Coyote is whiny and greedy, wanting something — unearned profits — without having to give up anything in exchange to gain such — investing in capital, paying market prices that reflect true costs.

In the Age of Idiocracy, most don't get trade (commerce), nor capitalism, nor entrepreneurialism, nor business, nor property, nor society, nor the proper role of government, nor freedom.

Not until  faux capitalists like the Coyote disappear and all socialists disappear will once again Americans advance.

The libertarian approach to living is the right one — the non-aggression principle. Unfettered capitalism is the right approach to production. Protection of property of the individual from the mob is the right approach for progress, equity and freedom.

Idiocracy has become reality.






To read more about the Coyote:

Wile E. Coyote, Campground Businessman Super Genius
GREEDY CAPITALIST COMPLAINS ABOUT UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE EXPENSE AND QUITS HIS BUSINESS
Read more ...

DIRTY, OH SO DIRTY SEX. EW OR AH?


ME

Sex isn't immoral. Making babies out of licensed-wedlock isn't immoral.


ANOTHER GUY

Sex isn't immoral?  By whose standard? 
If it's your standard, then it's just your opinion. There needs to be a absolute standard!


ME

What do you mean by whose standard?

Anyone who thinks by observation of the now can reason through what life was like before society, government and religion.

Regardless of all theories relative to creation of man and of later formation of society, religion and government, we can suppose of a man on earth formed before society, religion and government. We can suppose that once created, that man became conscious of his existence to see, to hear, to smell, to taste, to feel, to think, to act.

Thus, such a man created was (and still is an independent agent). As a free agent, a man would be right to exercise all or any of his powers or not as he willed. Such a man would have been right to live, to kill himself if wanted, to go wherever his powers could carry him, to use as much of the earth, to enjoy the full product of his work and the full experience of his living.

And what would be true of that man would be true of a woman also living in his time. And as free agents, being right to exercise all of their powers as willed, sex would be one of those powers.

The standard is the inherent design of each of us, as humans. The standard about sex doesn't come from the mind of any man who claims authority and to whom others grovel like spineless worms.

St. Thomas Aquinas and the other Scholastics would have said it to be of the lex æterna, the eternal law, that is, the law from God.

Yet no one need to appeal to medieval Scholastics to see that sex is not immoral. Sex is integral to what being means to the natural free agency of mankind.

To believe sex is immoral is to believe mankind is immoral. For what is moral versus immoral but good acts versus bad acts undertaken by anyone within the crucible of nature.

That guy couldn't be here without the good, moral act of sex undertaken by his mom and dad, likely more than once and enjoyed.




Read more ...

Tuesday, January 7, 2014

CAPITALISM. BECAUSE WITHOUT IT, YOU WOULD BE LIVING AS A BARE SUBSISTENCE SAVAGE

Capitalism means living by using property that yield goods during production to produce a surplus of another product and hoping to sell that surplus for a price such that the sum of sales exceeds the cost to gain those sales.

Said another way, Capitalism means living by using capital in pursuit of ongoing exchange of buying power.

Property means ownership, a bundle of rights —  right of possession (Jus Possidendi), right of using (Jus Utendi), right of destroying, alienating (Jus Abutendi), right of recovery when found in the wrongful possession of another (Jus Vindicandi).

Bare subsistence means consuming as fast as producing. This is what toilers do when not enabled to be efficient and profitable by those with superior intelligence.

Competitive commercialism has raised all of mankind through all time above bare subsistence. 

This is done through invention that innovates under self-interest. We have words for these concepts: CAPITALISM, FREE MARKETS, ENTERPRISE, THRIFT, INGENUITY.



Poverty is the default starting status for all humans. It is through efficiency that leads to surplus and surplus that creates credit that leads to exchange, lifting others to specialize and become efficient, which sows the seed for forever ongoing prosperity.

Laborers would toil with brute force barely producing anything but bare subsistence if not for the geniuses who devices means of efficiency. It is the originality of the few, the shrewd thinkers, who bring efficiency to the toiling laborer and in so doing, raises up the laborer from being merely a bare subsistence savage.

Humans are insatiable in their wants. No sooner that one want gets met that a newer one takes its place.  It is through efficiency of production that achieves new things of wealth, which can get exchanged for these wants. New wants require workers to take up the call.


Tribalists the earth over, whether in history or in contemporary times live by bare subsistence precisely because they believe in communal ownership and reject property. If nature blesses them in any year, providing surplus, they swap through barter. 

Without property, the bundle of rights that include possession, use, destruction, transfer and recovery from wrongful possession, there cannot can not be liberty.

Because they don't have property, money fails to arise in their lives in any meaningful way and thus credit fails to materialize. Without property and trade reckoned by money, tribalists never shall escape bare subsistence living, or what all recognize as poverty.

People escape poverty and enter into authentic prosperity through efficiency of wanted production. When the day comes that all others rid themselves of politicians is the day that mankind shall enter into Utopia.

It is most natural for any of mankind to better herself or better himself rather than remaining stagnant for all of one's days in poverty. Those who remain stagnant for their days, who stick out their hands or who rely upon the violence of others for their existence are but caricatures of humans, gargoyles, grotesque, distorted.

Never in the history of humans have politicians lifted people from poverty. Politicians can only take by implied force from the efficient and dole to the inefficient.

Activist governance, the kind whereby politicians can dictate what one can do with property, reduces property to mere privilege. At bedrock, activist governance is what is wrong with American life today.

Defensive governance, the kind whereby men come into harmony to protect property and thus echo the goodness of nature, is the only justification for governance of any kind.



Men can first attest the word capital into English from the early 1200s, from the Old French capital, in turn from the Latin capitalis meaning of the head and thus that which is chief, first.

By the 1610s, English speakers began saying capital in its financial meaning taking such from the medieval Latin word capitale meaning stock, that which gets sold, that which one has property to sell.

The coinage of the word capitalism arises from 1854, meaning state of having capital, of having that which can be sold in exchange.

Speakers can give precise meaning with words. Not knowing what these words mean causes mischief in the minds.


Read more ...