Monthly Archives: August 2012

Socialism, A Scientific Economic Theory (Part II)


Foolish Thoughts?

As argued in the first part of this essay, socialists and liberals continue to have faith in the theory of socialism despite its history of failure so how can this faith be explained? One way to ascertain the explanation is to examine those societies that are either applying this theory or have tried to apply it for common attributes.

First of all Socialism is an economic system that is imposed upon a people by the enactment of laws. The socialist would argue that this was necessary in order to assure the equality of economic outcome. Fairness is the virtue that a socialist would use to declare its morality. Marx described fairness when he declared his famous quote, “From each in accordance to his ability, to each in accordance to his needs.”

1. This would imply the need of it being accepted by the people on a universal level. It is a concept that requires self-sacrifice for the needs of others in the name of fairness. Self-interest and greed would not be allowed and those who sought to satisfy their self-interest would have to be eliminated from that society for they would be seen as someone who would take unfair advantage of others. They would also identify themselves as being a greedy person.

2. This would also imply that justice be defined along these same lines. It assumes equality exists among all individuals. Therefore where inequality is seen then that proves a biased or prejudicial cause. And when this occurs an injustice has been committed and laws need to be enacted to address this injustice.

3. It is a theory of collectivism which declares that the collective is responsible for the success of the individuals of that collective. This would implicitly declare that individuals are not responsible for what they be or do. This, in turn, would implicitly declare that any individual who holds to a position of status should consider himself a privileged person because it was the collective that has the right to determine who holds that position. Thus, this makes the individual a servant of the collective by the terms of this theory.

4. It is, by the nature of the premises explicitly used, a positive sum economic theory. Its advocates would argue that any other form of economics is a zero sum type of economics theory. It is a theory that places value upon a person’s being rather than upon his abilities.

5. Since it is an altruistic theory then it must be declared that the collective can do no wrong. And any individual who holds to this theory must be looked upon as being a righteous person. For what collective could be declared as being wrong in seeking to satisfy of the needs of each and every individual within that collective? And how could you define any individual as being anything but righteous who adheres to and seeks to implement this theory?

6. It is a theory that views any collective as being a homogeneous collective. Thus, in a society of multiple collectives inequality will exist and one collective will be the dominant collective and the other/s will be the victims of that inequality.

7. Rights are an attribute of the collective not of the individual thus if an injustice is perceived as being done to one of the collective then it is assumed that same unjust act would be done to each and every other member of that collective. It is also assumed that every member of the offending collective is just as guilty of that injustice as the individual who actually did the injustice for all members of any collective are of one mindset.

So, in closing, I can only add one thing. Keep that quote of Marx in mind whenever you hear the word fairness in the political argument of a person. That word alone will declare implicitly that you are hearing the argument of socialism. It is the common thread of every form of a socialism and the economics that is used to support it.

Categories: Politics | Tags: , , , , | Leave a comment

We Have a Hostile Work Environment in Government


Categories: Humor and Sarcasm | Tags: , | 1 Comment

This is How to do a Sunday Brunch These Days!!!!!


Sunday Get together!!!

Categories: Nature at its best | Tags: , , , , | Leave a comment

Socialism, A Scientific Economic Theory


Foolish Thoughts?

This is an election year, a year where many persons seek to be elected into a political office including the President of the nation. The economy and government’s role in it is on the front burner of everyone’s mind. It is an election that, in my mind, will determine whether the people seek a socialistic form of economic system or a system of free enterprise. It will be the ultimate test of the value of the democratic system of government.

The end results may not be seen in the immediate future but never the less time will be the judge of the outcome. And there are many who are uncertain of what is to be expected of them and that uncertainty is felt throughout society right now during this recessionary period. And they are looking to government for the solutions

Economics is a strange creature. It can be measured on the individual level as well as on the collective level. It can be established in many forms also as history has shown us. But regardless of what form of economics is the dominant form at any given time there is one principle that must be applied and that principle is the law of supply and demand.

From an economic viewpoint any society can be divided up into four types of collectives, government, private business, charities, and the family (individual). The success of each is dependent on how well they deal with the relationship between revenues and expenses. In a perfect system of economics expenses would never exceed revenues. But that would only occur if both revenues and expenses can be totally controlled. Unfortunately we do not live in a perfect existence and the economy of any society cannot be controlled regardless of what anyone knows or believes.

Socialism is a form of economics where the focus is on the demands of the individual with the expectation of the collective to provide the supply to meet that demand. It is also the foundational basis of their perception of the meaning of rights. In their eyes the needs of the individual is synonymous with the right to possess the object of that need even if it is at the full expense of that collective.

For a socialistic form of economics to thrive theoretically one must believe that people are by their nature altruistic or that life is deterministic and that men can be trained to be altruistic by the application of laws. This would imply that an advocate of socialism believes that a free enterprise form of economics is the cause of greed and self-interest thus immoral and unjust.

It is the profits inherent in a free enterprise form of economics that best exemplifies the self-interest and greed of human beings. To the socialistic mindset it is the fact that within a free enterprise system that profits must come at the expense of some is seen as the crux of the immorality and the injustice of the system itself. It is a declaration that one individual must suffer so that another man may know the benefits of the system.

Socialism is an economic theory that attempts to use a scientific approach for the solutions of the problems of life. Its a viewpoint that sees the imperfections of life then tries to ascertain the cause of that imperfection for the purpose of eliminating that cause and replacing it with a man made solution. Since it is seen as being a scientific approach then in the eyes of a socialist it must be a valid solution.

If socialism is a scientifically valid solution to the problems of life then there can be no reason not to implement it in any society and this is the substance of the socialist’s argument. Even religions are strong proponents of this form of economic system. Yet when it’s fully implemented it proves out to be a failure. It is the acceptance of it being scientifically valid theory that leads a socialist and those on the left to continue to have faith in this theory.

Categories: Politics | Tags: , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

The Left Preaches Security, The Right Preaches Liberty


Security or Liberty?

The left thinks that government can provide collective security. Maybe it can but Grandpa always said that a person who is coersed into doing something can never feel secure. He said that the greatest feeling of security comes from liberty for it is only then that a man can feel secure in himself. For it is only when a man knows he can depend upon himself that he knows both liberty as well as security.

Categories: Politics | Tags: , , , , | 9 Comments

AHHHHH, Joe Biden Got His Comeuppance in Virginia


Joe Biden was told he and his Press entourage wasn’t welcomed into one man’s place of business in spite of the promised free publicity it would bring. Isn’t it nice to live in a country where you can say “No” to the Vice President of the nation?
Read the story here at Left Coast Rebel

Update:
A h/t to JD, in comments, who adds even a better part of this story

Categories: Politics | Tags: , , | 4 Comments

High Taxes Does Effect Behavior, Mr. President, and Treats People in a Punative Manner, Especially the Rich


Raising the tax rate is always argued from the point of view of increasing revenues for governments. What is very seldom heard is how high tax rates effect the behavior of people. As my regular readers know I have written many posts on some of the effects taxes has on the behavior of people. And as this story in the Wall Street Journal reveals it not only effects the behavior of people but it also has a negative effect on the revenues of the taxing governments.
Another case for self-interest over the altruistic viewpoint of a Socialized government.
———–

‘As the post-Olympics glow fades, U.K. policy makers are trying to figure out how to keep the flame of British sports burning. They could start by changing Her Majesty’s tax laws. After Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt won his third gold in London last week, reporters asked him why he doesn’t compete in the U.K. more often. “As soon as the law changes I’ll be here all the time,” he said.

Punitive tax policy had kept the world’s fastest man from competing in Blighty for the past three years. Explaining Mr. Bolt’s decision to skip a 2010 race in London, his agent told reporters: “He will earn a lot less by competing in Britain if he maintains his current endorsement level.” Mr. Bolt competed in Paris that August instead.

The lesson is that taxes influence behavior, and punitive taxation hurts everyone, not least the punitive nation.’

Categories: Politics | Tags: , , , , , | 2 Comments

Ok, Obama, Let’s Soak the Rich. In Fact, Let’s Take Every Penny They Have. What Will We End Up With?


Think about this. Europe is attempting to solve this problem now and you can see one of the consequences of it in my last post. My only question is how will the people react when the time comes that Congress gets serious enough to deal with the Debt crisis in this nation?

A h/t to The Libertarian Patriot

Categories: Economics | Tags: , , , , | 18 Comments

A Note to the Left; Here is the Change that Socialism Promised to Us. It All Falls on Your Shoulders.


A Baby Hatch in Germany

“As the euro zone debt crisis deepens and austerity measures take their toll across Europe, the number of young children and babies abandoned across the region has increased, according to local charities.

A “baby hatch” in Hamburg, Germany.The rise in the abandonment of infants across Europe is most visible in the spread of “baby hatches” or “boxes” across Europe, where unwanted infants are left anonymously.

The phenomenon was previously more prevalent among immigrants, but it is becoming more widespread among financially desperate members of the local population.

The hatches are sensor-activated so when a baby is placed, an alarm is activated and a carer comes to collect the child. Despite the practice being widely viewed as contravening the 1953 European Convention on Human Rights, of the 27 EU member countries, 11 countries still have “baby hatches” in operation, including Germany, Italy and Portugal.”
The Human Costs of Government Debt

Categories: Politics | Tags: , | 6 Comments

Society and The Power of Governments


There are a lot of differences between the Right and the Left. And a lot of these differences are not reconcilable. The biggest reason for these differences is the basic differences of the meaning and purpose of what a government is. Both sides will agree that governments are the regulatory arm of any society. The only problem lies in the amount of power that a government possesses. History teaches us that when a government is a totalitarian government it is then that the people are powerless. And when the people are powerless then abuse of power by the government is inevitable.

This would lead us to believe that if governments are a necessity of a society then it must be a government that has limited powers. This would further lead us to accept that any powers that the government does not possess belong to the people. And if a society has set up a government with limited powers then those powers need to be clearly identifiable. For if they are not clearly identifiable then there is no way for anyone to determine when and if government is acting outside of the powers given to it. This is also an inevitability. And this in itself would be considered as an abuse of power by the government.

Now, let us not get into the mindset that division of powers eliminates abuse of powers no matter how strictly one adheres to that division of powers. The only way to eliminate the abuse of power is to eliminate the cause and in this case, the possession of power itself is the cause. This is also a historical fact.

Another difference between the right and the left are the concepts of individualism vs collectivism. These concepts are a little harder to define because many who advocate for individualism have elements of collectivism within their set of beliefs without being able to differentiate between the two concepts. And they justify this by declaring it as a necessity of life when it is, in reality, a part of what they were taught to believe in regards to a society. I might also add that those on the left have a misunderstanding of the meaning of the concept of individualism.

It is from this misunderstanding that we come to a third difference between the two sides, the concept of rights and privileges. Those on the left will declare that rights are possessed by a collective. Those who are of the right will declare that rights are the possession of the individual. This is the crux of all political disagreement in every society. It is also the crux of the accusation of extremism on both sides though this accusation has no merit. Either collectives possess rights or individuals possess rights. On this there can be no compromise.

The left sees some collectives as possessing rights that other collectives do not possess thus see them as being a privileged collective. In other words, the left understands the word in terms of being an adjective. It is from this viewpoint that inequality of collectives are perceived and is the foundation of their entire understanding of society and lack of justice. Thus, for justice to ever be achieved in a society, a socialistic form of economics as well as government must be set up and abided by. Anything less than this will always lead to an unjust society in their minds.

The big problem with a socialistic form of government is the fact that it requires a totalitarian form of government. One is the necessity of the other. If we are to see a totalitarian form of government as a just government then it must be a government run by people with altruistic attributes which is to say that it is a government without any powers over the people. This, in itself, would be a self-contradiction.

The right would see privileges in terms of being a noun. Privileges would be seen as what any individual could do with the permission of government. A license is one form by which government gives its permission to individuals. Since licenses are regulatory by their very nature they also can be seen as a hindrance but not a preventative to the freedom of the individual. And this leads us to another difference between the right and the left, the freedom of the individual vs the regulation of the behavior of the individual.

While there may be a need to regulate the behavior of individuals of any society we must ask at what point does it become an over-regulated society which by its very nature would be declared as an abuse of power by the government?

What say you, my friend?

Categories: My Personal Philosophy of Life, Politics | Tags: , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Blog at WordPress.com.