YOU NEED EXPERIENCE FOR THE JOB...

Remember that movie scene from Titanic? Ironic, a man sails to a country founded in a revolt against a king spouting "I'm the king of the world." Surprisingly though the irony of that situation says a lot about the politics of the era that shaped what we are today. If you need visual proof please watch the scene.


James Cameron has a deep sense of irony alright.

While I was walking to the gym today, I thought long and hard about the differences between a successful entrepreneur and businessman, and the making of a good aristocrat. There is a difference between the two. Contrary to widely accepted conventional wisdom, I don't think all rich, successful business types out there can be called aristocratic. Conversely, it follows not every aristocrat is filthy rich- although we must make a concession that as a general rule they are almost never poor.

I think defining who or what they are, however arbitrarily, will be essential for this article. Aristocrats are people that generally do not have to pay for their mistakes, be it monetarily or legally. People that are just rich somehow or another do pay for their mistakes, monetarily or legally. An Aristocrat wouldn't go to jail because an Aristocrat might also be friends with the judge, and thus earn a chair above the law. A rich man that commits a scandal and is not an aristocrat goes to jail still. These are the differences. One pays for his mistake, the other gets commoners to pay for his mistakes.

So it also follows, because Aristocrats tend to be rich, they tend to grow their ranks from the successful business class. All things being equal, its easier to make the leap to Aristocracy if you are rich than if you are born poor. But we all know people born poor that made it into the Aristocracy.

How does this apply today to large persistent unemployment? The fact of employment is that someone has to HIRE you for you to get the JOB. But if no one hires you, you can't get the job. The fact of employment is that in bad times the power is one way. The fact is in good times the power dynamic is still one way. The employer has the initiative to hire you. But you can't force your potential employer to do that. Let's be realistic here then.

However, what employers are beholden to: they need employed labor like a car needs wheels so they can pump money from the public. Employers are tied to labor in a more general sense. But the greater numbers of employers over the smaller numbers of labor means in power politics one tends to win.

What does have to do with aristocracy. An aristocrat in society is not tied to this dynamic, because the aristocrat has a fall back option: the law. An aristocrat does not have to worry about economic ups and downs because an aristocrat is backed by institutions that generally don't fail. For as long as an aristocrat buys out a government and sticks puppets there, nothing else matters. Then any sort of economic turbulence wouldn't matter at all.

This is how unemployment can be persistently high year after year and yet the people with the money and the power don't seem to care. You can rest assured a Mom and Pop employer or even a mid-sized company would care about large unemployment and bad economic events: if they fail they fail, and so would their fortunes too. These people have a stake in making sure America is healthy economically. But an aristocrat that sees his chosen enterprise as the goldmine needed to maintain a lifestyle of luxury would not care one bit, the mansions and cars will always be there no matter how many mistakes are made at the helm of the aristocrat's company.

You know I hear alot of economists talk about incentives. Dare I say a country that's become too aristocratic for its own good creates bad economic incentives? That they do not have to worry about business cycles or trade deficits or anything else? I might be speaking too much.

Anything that stands out as social commentary might be treason.

But I think putting leaders at the helm of the ship that drives the US who are not held to the same rules of success or failure is asking for disaster. They will destroy jobs or warp the labor market however much they feel like and get away with it, too. Aristocrats kill jobs. Period.

So why are we trying them in the court of law if the verdict was already made?

.... :(


Lastly, I've come across this neat article I found. Just wondering if anyone has read this before. Looks rather old. I've included the link here:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html


:) It has nothing to say about royals other than how nefarious they are to liberty and freedom. >:D