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 ...

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

TYRANTS BIG AND SMALL. DYSTOPIAN UTOPIANS FORCING SOCIAL COMPACTS UPON YOU WHETHER OR NOT YOU LIKE IT

The other day on G+, someone shared this picture into his stream:


Welfare is the means to power. Power must be grabbed first.Once anyone wrests control of power, then that one can achieve one's political goals.

Unless men and women are willing to arm themselves and kill enough others to gain control by violent overthrow, the means to power is welfare doling.

Politicians can not gain power without securing enough votes. Without enough voters, any pol can not gain office and thus do as his financiers bid her or him. The way poles secure votes is through bribing voters with welfare doling. 

Politicians can not exist without your enemies. Welfare recipients are your true great enemy. Likely, your Medicare grandmother is your enemy, your SSDI cousin is your enemy. The Pell Grant recipient college student from down the street is your enemy.


And then this gem of a fellow, Chuck, chimed in:


By Chuck's words, Chuck seems to be unwilling to rob someone directly, so Chuck champions men and women with real balls to rob everyone else, merely so Chuck can get his  kickback crumbs for supporting them.

Likely, Chuck prefers sweet sounding rhetoric like welfare instead of what he seeks, kickback. So, like millions of others, Chuck shall accept the lie that a kickback is welfare.

Under the constraint of his kickback crumbs, Chuck can express his preferences dishonestly rather than making himself valuable and thus exchange worthy in a voluntary fashion, which would let him get his preferences expressed voluntarily.

I  asked Chuck why, exactly, should anyone be forced to pay income taxes or face prison merely because Chuck wants to live at their expenses? What makes Chuck so important and thus so deserving that anyone not related to him and not voluntarily wanting to give to him should be forced to give to him or become imprisoned?

I  asked Chuck where are his relatives? Where are his mommy and daddy? Why didn't Chuck forge better relationships or perhaps any at all with his relatives and neighbors? Why aren't they paying for him voluntarily? However, Chuck failed to answer. 

Ironically, it seems as if Chuck hasn't been living up to the social compact through voluntary action, action he had complete control over doing. 

All contracts are voluntary. There is no such thing in law as an involuntary contract. Imposing action upon another by force while no voluntary contract has been agreed upon has a name. We call that slavery. We call that servitude. We see that one has become the chattel and thus the property of another.

Using "society" is disingenuous to mean a people under rule, or a people living within a defended, bounded area. Yet, all too many do so when trying to justify their Dystopian visions.

Men can attest the word society to the 1530s meaning friendly association with others, entering English from the Old French societe, in turn from Latin societatem in turn from socius meaning companion.

Though he differs in degree, how does Chuck differ in kind to any tyrant in the history of humans who wanted others to use force on his behalf so that he could live without honestly producing something wanted by others and then engaging in honest exchange? 

At day's end, humans want to get their preferences expressed and met. If they can't do so voluntarily, they will seek other means.  

Few humans have bravery. Yet, some do. They will impose their will upon others.  

Most who can't get their preferences expressed and met voluntarily, shall seek the few who have bravery to help them achieve their wants. 

And there you have it. This is what is wrong the earth over with humans. This is why there is suffering as there is. 

Even if Chuck isn't seeking welfare, but merely supporting politicians who dole out welfare in exchange for gaining and locking power, then Chuck is as bad as the ones who accept welfare and thus have revealed your immorality, the same as they do.

It's only a matter of degree, but not different kind, when someone champions politician-doled welfare acquired by involuntary means or when someone champions politician-doled subsidy to bomb makers and farmers.

At least an immoral man of bravery would acknowledge reality and say something like ...but I want stuff and I don't want to earn the buying power to get that stuff through honest exchange by first packaging up my skills through time into something all would call a product, selling that product to the highest bidder, so I am going to use my muscles and willingness to murder to get what I want.

The problem with all of the Chucks of our world is their intellects are insufficient while their greed — their want to get something without giving up something else wanted in a voluntary exchange — is all too sufficient for them not to see reality. They try to justify their immorality, their  inhumane action, their  misanthropic action to get their preferences expressed and met by any means, if necessary. 

Others be dammed! As long as the Chucks get their way and gets to live their lives, free-to-them, getting their preferences expressed and met under constraint of what robbers shall dole to them for his pledge of loyalty, well screw everyone else who wants to be free, free in mind, body and soul, free in self. 

To support his push for PPACA, Obama argued that in future, a person is going to need medicine and thus a person ought to be compelled by law to buy medical bills paying insurance, now, to cover that alleged actuarial eventually.

If everyone accepts Obama's premise as true and thus his conclusion, it's then easy to apply the same template and logic to other things.


  • All persons shall need housing. Sometimes bad things happen, thus all persons should be compelled by law to buy rent / mortgage bills insurance.
  • All persons shall need food. Sometimes bad things happen, thus all persons should be compelled by law to buy food bills insurance.
  • All persons shall need electrical energy. Sometimes bad things happen, thus all persons should be compelled by law to buy electric bills paying insurance.
  • All persons shall need food. Sometimes bad things happen, thus all persons should be compelled by law to buy food paying insurance.
  • All persons shall need new work skills. Sometimes bad things happen, thus all persons should be compelled by law to buy education bills paying insurance.

So I asked Chuck, 

  • Why didn't you buy rent / mortgage bills insurance?
  • Why didn't you buy food bills insurance?
  • Why didn't you buy clothing bills insurance?
  • Why didn't you buy electrical energy bills insurance?
  • Why didn't you buy higher education, new skills acquisition bills insurance?



The irony is that Chucks fail to honor the social compact and fail at responsibility to themselves and to all others with whom you might have relationship, if any. Instead all Chucks advocate tyranny and violence, forcing and coercing others to behave and comport to their Dystopia vision, that in your vacuous, weak-intellect mind seems to be Utopia.

Read more ...

Monday, August 12, 2013

FREELOADING AT THE BUFFET OF THE LIVING

Back on September 19, 2012, the USA Today reported that about two-thirds of adults in Mississippi and several other states could be obese by 2030 if obesity rates continue to climb at current rates (see link below).

Back on September 3rd of last year, the New Scientist reported that a large body of evidence supports the belief that Alzheimer's is primarily a metabolic disease with some scientists calling it Type 3 diabetes (see link below).

In America, no one talks about how the chronically overweight and the obese effectively free ride on everyone, getting full on medical bailouts with Medicare and sometimes sooner with Medicaid. Because no one talks about this, no one talks about how the chronically overweight and obese should pay substantially higher medical bills insurance premiums including those deducted through FICA for Medicaid and Medicare.

Since Judge Roberts wrongly blessed Obamacare,  everyone must buy medical bills paying insurance, politically called health care. The way Obama and his cronies see it, the fit and the healthy should subsidize the unfit and the sickly. They have it all wrong.

There should be at least two pools of the insured. The fit and the unfit. In short, those who are unfit ought to pay substantial premiums as it is inevitable, nearly so, that the chronically overweight and the obese shall need substantive medical care for a good part of their lives. There is no reason why the fit ought to carry the heavy weight of the chronically overweight as well as the obese. 

The pool of the unfit ought to pay for unfit others. The pool of the fit ought to pay for the fit others.

Twice a year, at the expense of the insured rather than the insurer, anyone could get test for height, weight, heart rate and blood pressure. Depending upon how far from fitness anyone is ought to govern what shall be that one's premium rate.

Actuarial scientists can figure out all of this and project their true costs and thus what their realistic premiums ought to be. As it is now, though, the chronically overweight and obese are freeloading at the all-you-can-eat buffet of life at the expense of the fit.



Read more ...

Wednesday, July 10, 2013

FIXING OBAMACARE BEFORE IT STARTS; OR IF ONLY OBAMA WERE AS SMART AS I AM

Unfortunately, in the worst judicial decision since Wickard v Filburn, a decision that couldn't be more wrong, English-language challenged, USSC chief robe John Roberts decreed what any right-minded thinker knows to be a fine now as a tax. Roberts pulled a putting lipstick on a pig trick and now wants you to pork it.


Yet, Americans, we need to suck it up. ObamaCare isn't going away.

The Big Lie politicians told to gain the trust of Americans to support Obamacare is that Obamacare would cover the uninsured. Always, politicians tell the Big Lie, whenever they want to establish something that benefits their financial backers instead of the citizenry.

There was no need to create a 2,400 page law. There was no need to create new agencies to regulate and administer the law.   There was no need to hire on tens of thousands of more useless, overpaid, unionized, flunky, paper-pushing government employees.

Having done the foregoing reveals profound intellectual stupidity of our so-called leaders. Obama and the members of Congress who passed Obamacare, guys like Harry Reid and women like Nancy Pelosi are among the stupidest people ever to hold the reins of power. 

If the goal truly were universal coverage as they call it, the fix to achieve such is easy. Here is how it should be done, but first, you need to know what we have now.

Medicare exists for old people. Medicaid exists for the poor. It's what they callmeans tested, which is a fancy way of checking income and family head count, making sure income doesn't exceed an annual sum.

Already, there are payroll taxes called FICA taxes, named after the Federal Insurance Contributions Act. FICA taxes cover Social Security Old-age, survivors, and disability insurance (OASDI) and Medicare. 

And here is the fix. It would have been easy to add another payroll tax to pay for medical insurance. There should be a universal medical bills insurance tax. 

Already, Americans are used to having payroll taxes deducted from their paychecks. Those who have jobs with medical bills insurance experience what it is like to have insurance payments deducted from their paychecks.

Next, Medicaid and Medicare should have been folded into one program for those who are unemployed or who are retired living on Social Security only.

And now for the best parts. Rather than having employers broker insurance for employees, everyone working should be assigned at random to a medical bills paying insurer (wrongly called "health insurance") operating within each workers' respective state. 

Insurers wouldn't know ahead of time, anyone they would be required to insure, regardless of pre-existing condition. Likewise, workers wouldn't know who would be their insurer until assigned. At the start of each year, random assignment could happen.

Also, there should be two payroll tax rates, one for the fit and one for the unfit. The unfit should pay substantially higher taxes, since they are the ones most likely who will need medicine for their unfit bodies. Those who have the right weight for their heights and the right blood pressure and heart rates should pay much lower premiums than those who let themselves go by living slothful, gluttonous, hedonistic lives.

Having two insured pools is the right way to express the actuarial science behind insurance. The unfit would have incentive to get fit and the fit would have incentive to stay fit.

Further, those in retirement with incomes beyond Social Security should have their Social Security taxed at the appropriate rate, either for the fit or the unfit. Thus, the elderly would be treated as anyone else, with no age prejudice against them.

As it is, technically, employers don't pay for insurance for employees, ever. For employers, admin costs become tax write offs. Yet, taxpayers who cannot escape their compulsory taxes are the ones who pay for businesses to provide insurance to employees.

My proposal does what Obama couldn't do — UNIVERSAL COVERAGE FOR ALL AMERICANS. My proposal removes the admin burden from employers, which drags on the economy.

The poor get covered. The productive working class gets covered. The rich get covered. Insurers can stay in business. Richer Social Security recipients would pay their fair share as Obama likes to call it.

If only Obama were as smart as me, our lives as Americans would better by far.

To get a fast lesson on how insurance ought to work, check out  FREELOADING AT THE BUFFET OF THE LIVING.

For all of your Obamacare needs at Bizarro Theater, here you go.


Read more ...