There is a difference between an immigrant (bad) and a migrant (good). Migrant labor works the harvest season then returns home with the cash. This means lower cost consumption goods for americans. However, immigrants impose extraordinary direct and indirect costs on the country…
Source date (UTC): 2024-05-22 03:22:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1793120202344808508
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1793083644527153194
It’s a huge country with some of the best farmland in europe, and a port on the black sea. Assuming their population will hover around 30M vs the 50+ prior to the fall of the soviet union, there is no reason why it won’t recover. IMO the ‘price’ of reconstruction money will be…
Source date (UTC): 2024-05-17 20:35:01 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1791568126833815701
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1791561899206656164
“The Uninvested Surplus Capital of the Civilization”
1. People may produce a surplus of capital.
2. The people’s can spend a surplus (consumption) or invest a surplus.
3. So surplus capital is that which is neither needed for consumption, use, or investment in production producing useful returns – at the sale and time frame that individuals, organizations, and industries and the private finance sector can organize capital to pursue.
3. Political Institutions seek to appropriate this surplus before it is consumed or invested by seduction (false promise), coercive behavior(incentive), interest, fees, taxation and debt expansion(material costs).
4. Institutions either consume this appropriated capital for themselves and their clientele, invest in commons that produce for the commons and clientele, or spend or invest ostensively for the commons and clientele.
5. Individuals and some groups, seek social status, meaning the capacity to attract opportunities for one’s benefit, and clientele who one can serve in exchange for this status and influence over opportunities, by attempting to appropriate and if feasible seek to maximize appropriated capital for their status and clientele, and if at all possible, obtain a monopoly over that appropriated capital.
ie: For social status, clientele, and personal benefit, it’s better to be the monopolist of a system even if tit causes the system to shrink.
CONSEQUENCE
The consequences of institutions appropriating and monopolizing the surplus capital, include: reduced economic growth, increased inequality, loss of trust in the institutions “Failure of Confidence in the Public Sector” or social unrest, or civil war, and transfer of confidence to institutions organizations and people that different factions in this social unrest DO trust.
Via Dr Bradley, re: Carroll Quigley.
Source date (UTC): 2024-05-16 21:38:23 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1791221684650885120
In economics we jokingly refer to competition as “coopera-tition”. After all , what is the difference between market competition and non-market conflcit?
Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 19:49:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790469612431106533
Reply addressees: @radiofreenw
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790468587263508725
NO TAXES? WHAT ABOUT THE COMMONS!?!?
—“Taxes are just the price for a commons.”—
No, that’s not the point. It’s that taxes instead of fees produce a moral hazard that disconnects the revenue from the services, and provides opportunity for the special interests, rent seeking, and corruption that evolve into the pervasive in any government of any size over some period of time.
The commons are important, and must be paid for. But the purpose of a legislature on behalf of a people, is to determine if they are, and those they represent, are willing to pay that fee for that commons whether material, service, or informational.
However, there will always be people seeking to take advantage of membership in a polity, and from the commons that a polity produces by its mere existence, by free riding on the commons produced by others.
As such people unwilling to contribute to the commons of course can be evicted from the polity for not doing so. That’s what criminals do. That’s what rent seeking and corruption do. That’s what free riders do.
The difficulty is in distributing those costs, and doing so by some means of proportionality that recognizes both the contributions and burdens of participation in a polity.
No free lunches. Sorry marxists and libertarians. 😉
Cheers
CD
Reply addressees: @platypoo7 @CatcusBlack
Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 01:12:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790188479168524288
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790184550011908281
ELECTRIC VEHICLES FROM CHINA AND USE OF TARIFFS TO DEFEND DOMESTIC INDUSTRIES?
(RE: https://t.co/KkONn9ltoF @firstpost )
Why The Tariffs?
1) No one will trust the Chinese supply chain. Chinese strategy is ‘delay and deceive’. They use moral language to hid immoral ambitions. This strategy is as old as Sun Tzu. The Chinese NEVER have a moral ambition any more than the Russians or the Mullahs of Iran
2) EV’s are a strategic industry and EV’s produce external strategic industries.
3) But most importantly if the price of a good is lower because of lower labor costs (china) and government subsidy (china) then you are:
… a) Exporting your labor and their income to another country;
… b) Exporting capital to another country and not creating capital internally;
… c) And/or depriving your population of skills both in the industry and in tangent industries.
So when England sold it’s looms to Spain, and Spain to East Asia, this made sense. But the same is not true of technical skills, scientific research, and a skilled work force.
So when the USA wanted to avoid another world war and create a world of free trade, it made sense to export the American economic advantages to developing countries and countries that needed reconstruction from the wars.
However, the moment a group seeks to impose authoritarianism, to undermine the world order of free trade, and to seditiously undermine economies, there is no longer an advantage in importing cheaper goods for the population. (In economics this is called ‘accounting for both the seen and unseen costs’).
This disadvantage to export of capital, income, labor, skill, technology, and scientific research is especially true in a place like America where the problem is more one of extraordinary wealth resulting in the vast majority of the country rising to exceed the level of their personal, financial, economic, and political incompetency (whole country peter principle), and then putting that wealth into poor choices in a population rolling in hyper-consumptive hedonism at the cost of their physical and mental health, and their social and political cohesion as a people.
Cheers
CD
Source date (UTC): 2024-05-13 22:23:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790145748014600192
ELECTRIC VEHICLES FROM CHINA AND USE OF TARIFFS TO DEFEND DOMESTIC INDUSTRIES?
(RE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54hl57_M7vs @firstpost )
Why The Tariffs?
1) No one will trust the Chinese supply chain. Chinese strategy is ‘delay and deceive’. They use moral language to hid immoral ambitions.…
Source date (UTC): 2024-05-13 22:23:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790145748270530593
That’s simply not true. yes there are 100M too many people in the USA for the coming future economy, but that does not mean that health insurance, medicare, social security, and the military can be funded with a smaller population. So a transition would (will) be extremely painful and cause unrest and possible revolt. If instead we were to ‘exit’ the costly unwanted then yes it might still be possible.
Reply addressees: @Slfdstrctshield
Source date (UTC): 2024-05-13 05:15:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1789887195135848448
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1789886127047905780
@SRCHicks, all;
The USA (other than some tech sectors of CCP’s China) is the only place in the world entrepreneurs find institutions, finance, culture, law, heroic encouragement, tolerance forgiving failure, and a market that if penetrated expands to the world.
Even trying to raise capital in Europe or Canada is almost impossible. Even so, it’s dependent on your plan to gain access to US markets, capital, and even moving to the USA.
Our US institutions were designed for the middle class. The rest of the world is still in that natural state of the caretaker state for the bottom at the expense of the middles, or in the interest of the top at the expense of the rest, or in the worst case, the low trust that prohibits any organization of any scale for the common good, and everything other than tribalism, familism and corruption. Though we are succeeding more than expected in dragging mankind into relative prosperity – at the cost of our own civilization.
Heroism, High Trust, and rule of law (favors the middle class), and a population with an IQ as close to 115 matter. And the combination is rare. Mostly because of that last property.
Cheers
CD
Reply addressees: @SRCHicks
Source date (UTC): 2024-05-10 22:23:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1789058721076690944
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1789054203098259578
RT @curtdoolittle: @spaceangelvoice The child support can never be paid when you turn a single household cost into two household costs with…
Source date (UTC): 2024-05-06 21:03:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787588950854373783