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

One of the things that continually intrigues me about the Tea Party is that the group lacks any unifying anthem. Sounds ridiculous but let me explain.

Music in my opinion is the ultimate form of media that binds mankind. If you really think about it, aside primitive cave paint, a good set of bongos could be fashioned out of almost anything and then made into a harmony for the tribe. Music has been with us as a unifier for a long time.

When I was in boot camp we sung (shouted) cadences that were hilarious. Usually about romping and stomping on some rival platoon. But they were always energetic and generally amused me.

Anthems were there for the royal courts of Europe, for the Churches, and more recently anthems have been there to symbolize countries as a whole. Star Spangled Banner get anyone's attention?

But above all; music has been there for political movements. And this is why I suggest this for the Tea Party. People are generally moved by passion and emotion, and without a good anthem for the Tea Partiers to shout, there just won't be any sort of rallying cry for them. The French Revolutionaries had La Marsaillaise. And just recently, god help me, I listened to the first version of Internationale, the first anthem of the Soviet Union. What impressed me about that song was its tone of optimism, like all possibilities were open. Of course the irony was that history proved this to not be the case. But negatives and positives aside, if the Tea Party had an original, moving, passionate anthem of its own, I believe they could and would succeed in attracting people to their cause.

I've included some long forgotten anthems here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L-WuPy8l_0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4h5M78YVN8M&feature=related

So where are the singing Tea Partiers?

If any of you reading this are Tea Partiers, feel free to message me and maybe we can knock up some tunes and lyrics. I think an enterprise like this will be good for America because, with the outstanding success of American Idol, we've turned a nation of singers and dancers,thus we have a large talent pool for this project. Imagine a good 21st century anthem! It would create jobs because it would encourage people to start writing lyrics, and that in turn might spawn an industry. And maybe it could be featured on American Idol. Or we could start American Tunes. Or something like that, I think its all worth a shot. Something like this could provide a huge stimulus in the form of positive attitudes.

Lastly, I've stumbled upon a very interesting document written in the 18th century. I read this a few times and wanted to share it with you all. It speaks volumes because a lot of what they talked about in this document seems to be a reoccurring theme today:

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

Hello all,

This article has been a long time in coming. But I say you all knew this was coming sooner or later, so I cast the first stone.

Whatever happened to the Aristocracy in the Red vs Blue political blood bath in America these days? We have Tea Parties, Coffee Parties, Christian Militias, even Socialists are back on college campuses. I have only two surprises in all of this: to date there has been no cheap knock off of a "Stamp Act Party 2.0." And disappointingly- nothing to symbolize the political will of the Aristocracy of the United States.

At the risk of making myself a target for political hacks, poli-sci professors, and the polarized, I will make a leap of faith in saying this about American Revolutionary history: it was also a revolution to do away with the feudalistic order of society. It was a revolution to liberate the possibilities of man. An ossified, stratified order of society where kings and aristocracy are the only ones with the opportunities to live life with possibilities is just NOT a society where non-aristocratic individuals have chances to make themselves the way they wish. Either you are born an aristocrat, or you aren't, and if you aren't, it means you get no sort of political privileges at all while a handful of aristocrats get tax breaks, control of government, and utterly no worries about their source of income and substance. But if you AREN'T that- part of the privileged class -well good luck buddy you're on your own.

Napoleon once said: There will always be kings, even if we don't call them that.

So now lets flash forward to the 21st century. Arguably, the United States, born of the first 'modern' political revolution: a revolution to free the possibilities of mankind, not a seizure of power to bottle up possibilities- has clearly lost its way. A digression is needed here: a good doctor listens to his patient. If the patient continually complains of the same malady, such as heart pains or pain in the kidneys, or so on, it might be a sign something is wrong.

Lets be good doctors. What is our patient complaining of today: loss of liberty or fear of loss of liberty, freedom is disappearing or nonexistent. 'You gotta know people to get jobs (whatever happen to simple merit?). Here is my favorite gripe I've heard countlessly: A political clique in Washington utterly disconnected with the sufferings of its own people. More big government spending as the people themselves don't trust government as much as they use to: what a paradox that is! They don't trust government yet the government goes on spending more. Slow and pathetic government response to hurricane Katrina- I believe Karl Rove himself said that this broke the 'bond' between Bush and the People. America is increasingly becoming a two-tiered society of haves or have nots. Either you are part of the politically connected or you aren't. Best of all: continual calls to 'get back to the essence of the Constitution'!

Alright people when are we going to start taking the complaints seriously. Gripes like this are age old. They are the gripes of people living in an aristocratic society. And if you need further proof of this, Frederick von Hayek's book The Road to Serfdom illuminates all. This is bar none one of the best books on what life in an aristocratic way of life is. Because Hayek makes it plain: aristocracy IS socialism. Aristocracy is Socialism for the rich. Get it? Aristocracy = Socialism for the rich. Welfare for the rich. Aristocracy is an order of society where the aristocrats can make the mistakes and not pay for them by equal justice under the law; while you and I, the commoner, pays for it. Hayek's book is not just about soviet socialism, or Nazi socialism, although the book was written during World War 2. The book is about socialism period. And Aristocracy IS socialism.

How did it come to this? How did it come that we fight each other and go nowhere while a narrow class of people still continues to prosper while we don't? Its called Aristocracy.

Aristocracy is at its heart all about perverting Equal Justice under the Law. You can be sure of this: when the laws are enforced by government, and government is co-opted by the Aristocrats, you will NOT get Equal laws under equal justice. You get a perversion of it.

So how does this apply today?

Here's how: millions of people losing their jobs and slipping into destitution, forgotten by the nobles of the land, while the same dolts go on T.V. and tell us how things are good and getting better. The media spinning optimistic tales of economic recovery even as the economy still hangs on a thread. The best yet: more regulation is needed. More watchdogs. I love this argument. So basically put the march of freedom into the hands of a few Wise Men. Men in the SEC that ALWAYS seem to be behind the beat. Come on. Wake up. If government is for the rich and by the rich in the name of Justice for a few and Injustice for the many then you can be sure more watchdogs will just MAKE IT EASIER for same sorts of people to slip by.

Yesterday I had a late night conversation with a recent friend and intellectual, and she was telling me- she being successful in business - that even SHE sees the paradoxes at work: either you are politically connected or you aren't and if you aren't god help you. So I state this for a reason, Aristocracy is not about money. Its not about profits earned fairly in the market. Its about hoodwinking people into serfdom under a delusion all will be well. That economic recoveries are just a few months away! Just keep waiting.

How did it come to this? I will tackle this in my next article in this series.

More big government spending as the people grow more distrustful of government? Accusations of the political clique being cut off from the sufferings of the masses? People not filling out census forms? How much longer does this need to go on before someone just plain says it. Aristocracy. Aristocracy. Aristocracy. Aristocracy. Aristocracy. Aristocracy. Aristocracy. Aristocracy. Aristocracy. Aristocracy.

I have at least broached this subject here. This is me doing my part. I am broaching this subject because I can rest assured the major media outlets won't. So, if you are reading this, talk about it with your friends, with your family, with your neighbors. Its our country too.

Please see this link:
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

Good morning.

In less than an hour, aircraft from here will join others from around the world. And you will be launching the largest aerial battle in the history of mankind. "Mankind." That word should have new meaning for all of us today. We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps it's fate that today is the Fourth of July, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom... Not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution... but from annihilation. We are fighting for our right to live. To exist. And should we win the day, the Fourth of July will no longer be known as an American holiday, but as the day the world declared in one voice: "We will not go quietly into the night!" We will not vanish without a fight! We're going to live on! We're going to survive! Today we celebrate our Independence Day!




http://www.scribd.com/doc/6674234/Citigroup-Oct-16-2005-Plutonomy-Report-Part-1
http://www.scribd.com/doc/6674234/Citigroup-Oct-16-2005-Plutonomy-Report-Part-1

The changing nature of change.


Sometimes I really love being alive in the 21st century. When I was a kid back in the 80s and 90s I would get dropped off at my aunt's, and we would watch Back to the Future, Terminator, and other movies that had something to say about 'The Future.' All the flying cars and self-drying clothes, human-intelligent machines, in addition to Star Trek: TNG pumped me with so much enthusiasm for the future that I actually threw nasty tantrums at the fact the future couldn't come fast enough.

At the dawn of 2010, not only has my enthusiasm been fulfilled several times over, I am experiencing what could only be called 'Future Shock.' I am living in an age where I can enjoy the fruits of a Harvard education without having to pay for it, by downloading Harvard Idea Cast onto my iPod touch. Listening to these podcasts not only has me feeling good about myself- I have a Harvard podcast in my pocket, fancy fancy - I am filled with renewed confidence in the intellectual caste of the USA.

Here why I like listening to these podcasts. They explain in great ways how change keeps on changing faster. If I had a dime for as many times as I've heard this from older management guru's I'd be able to pay their bonuses. What does this mean, change keeps changing faster? Or: We live in an age of great change. Heck, even Alan Greenspan titled his recent book "Age of Turbulence."

Let me see if I get this right. How exactly is change changing faster? I would assume, basic physics being what it is, that we would need some reference point to judge the acceleration of change, right? Hmmm. So change is changing faster in an economy that calls itself capitalist. Invariably I have found that the reference points they use to judge change is that which does not change- the past. Judging movement into the future by cross-referencing it with something that moves at absolute ZERO boggles my mind. Why should this age of iPods be anymore turbulent than the day Nero watched Rome burn while playing his fiddle?

Don't kid yourself. If you are reading this and you are between 18-100 at least ONCE in your life you have heard what a 'rapid age' of change we are living in. Think about how silly this sounds coming from people with salaries in the 6 figures, if not more. What exactly changed? Did iPods disrupt my life in the freemarket? Or even computers? Well here's why I think nothing's has changed.

-Anyone that has read a history book will find this commonality: people are always baffled by the future because they are too busy looking into the past. So no wonder change hits you like a brick wall if you are driving forward looking into the reverse mirror.
-Anyone that has read old books will also find this in common: nearly always the Elders and the people that aren't Elders (but want to be Elders)always say that 'things were simpler' in the past, there were more certainties to life, and its all gone now.
-If things were so great in the past where did Bolsheviks come from?
-If the baby boomers did things so well how come their children and grand children get poo-pooed so often as being morally lost?
-If the greatest generation was so great, why the rush to intern Japanese, shove indians on reservations, and so on? I would think that if things came to such a head that pure evils like Nazi Germany under Hitler that something went wrong in the leadership caste of the age to allow Hitler's stormtroopers to rise in the first place.

And no finger pointing please. Finger pointing can go on all day long. If we were to finger point each other for the problems of our age and past ages, we might as well just make it easier on ourselves and blame Adam and Eve for being gullible enough to eat fruit from a tree. It would be too much to ask for us as a civilization to "get over it, and move on," because someone somewhere has to make a quick buck either from book sales or a speech on a college campus wherein it is Thus Spake: Change is changing faster and the new generation is not up to the task.

Don't kid yourself, no matter how old or young you are, you've heard this before, things were better in the past and we've lost our way and the change we are living in is baffling. Better hold on tight or else the Earth will spin faster.

Change is not changing faster, the only thing that is going on is what we call experts, patriarchs, elders, however you want to call them because nearly every society has them, have completely lost touch with common sense. Thats it. Of course its easy to point to the immovable past and say it was better then than it is now and that for whatever reason the younger generation has lost its way morally. Plato's Republic said as much.

I would think we wouldn't be so anxious about the future if we stopped to consider that 100 years from now they'll say we had a simpler way of life that was easier to understand. What does that say, other than that NOTHING really changes with mankind except its institutions?

I am really disappointed that we have people in charge of positions of such critical importance, like Deans of Universities, top management consultants, CEOs, and so on, people with positions of the utmost importance, going around saying they are baffled by change.

If you are not one of these people I would be scared. Because what this says is that the people that are driving the bus of society have no idea where they are going because clearly they have no idea where they came from. And they cover up that insecurity by banking on the quick fix of pointing to change, like its some golden goose, to cover up simple incompetence and the fact they don't know history any better than the young they degrade over and over again.

If change is changing faster I can rationalize any sort of action or inaction without a shred common sense. People, be scared. The elites of this country do not have a shred of wisdom and we will pay for it.