Posts Tagged ‘the goose that laid golden eggs’

Economists Argue For “Growth Through Cost”

Friday, July 14th, 2017

Almost all Leftist theory is highly convoluted and articulated, but when you drill down into it, you find fundamentally mistakes about how the world works incorporated at its core as assumptions.

For example, economists fundamentally misunderstand the nature of economies when they argue that open borders will provide us with a $78 trillion windfall:

“Open borders would make foreigners trillions of dollars richer,” observes Mr Caplan. A thoughtful voter, even if he does not care about the welfare of foreigners, “should not say…‘So what?’ Instead, he should say, ‘Trillions of dollars of wealth are on the table. How can my countrymen get a hefty piece of the action?’ Modern governments routinely use taxes and transfers to redistribute from young to old and rich to poor. Why not use the same policy tools to redistribute from foreign to native?” If a world of free movement would be $78trn richer, should not liberals be prepared to make big political compromises to bring it about?

…Workers become far more productive when they move from a poor country to a rich one. Suddenly, they can join a labour market with ample capital, efficient firms and a predictable legal system. Those who used to scrape a living from the soil with a wooden hoe start driving tractors. Those who once made mud bricks by hand start working with cranes and mechanical diggers. Those who cut hair find richer clients who tip better.

I admit to some sleight-of-hand editing here in that I placed the conclusion of the article first, and then stuck the actual argument after it. The argument is this: poor people move to rich countries, and earn more money, so those rich countries are now richer.

Spotting the flaw in this logic is not hard, if you are not relying on the idea of one-dimensional categories. Each of those newcomers displaces a native worker and incurs a cost through the wages they must be paid. Even if the native workers move up a level, like from ditch-digger to clerk, this does not change, and in fact gets worse because they also must be paid higher salaries.

Economics is not a zero-sum game but it is not an infinite blank check either. To make new wealth, you must introduce new productivity and a new market. Creating an artificial market for labor, as these economists propose, simply takes from what is existing, recycles it through a scheme, and then claims to have created wealth because the money is in motion.

We might call this “economic growth through cost”: if new workers show up, and you need to pay them, then this constitutes economic “growth” but the economists do not mention the secondary and tertiary effects which obliterate that growth and send the society into a downturn, nor that the growth was only on paper in the first place.

Their thinking resembles another bad economic theory, broken window theory:

The broken window theory states that a broken window adds value to the economy because a replacement must be purchased and that puts money into the economy. Under this type of theory, politicians “create jobs” with regulation and welfare money grows the economy. It is the basis of our new hybrid of socialism and capitalism that relies on re-financialized debt, or the selling of obligations as if they were of positive value.

In other words, if you need more money, just break something and then someone will have to be paid to work on it. This is crypto-socialism at its most obscure, in that the idea is that externalities of socialized cost — a broken window — somehow produce wealth instead of seeing them as what they are, which is a loss of wealth through obligation to pay for something that does not generate future income.

The same is true of immigration. It does not generate future income at any significant level, and instead, simply takes from the existing society and then forces that society to pay its underqualified people even more money, which creates an internal circular Ponzi scheme that guts the society by building a consumer economy on an underclass, at which point quality descends and the middle class is destroyed by taxes that pay for this increasingly-needy underclass as it collapses.

Societies destroy themselves this way. In order to avoid class warfare, which always arises from lower castes against higher, they bribe the lower castes with subsidies. This simply delays and worsens the problem by making the underclasses swell, and this group does not understand things like the government running out of money. “Just print more!” they will say and consider themselves wise for doing so.

Economists are like scientists: they have no special magic; they are simply people who went through degree programs. At that point, their only obligation is to sell themselves, which means coming up with a theory that tells people what they want to believe. Some try to balance this with reality, but the vast majority, as in all human groups, do not.

In advancing theories like the above, they engage in something we might call “the fundamental fallacy,” which is the belief by human beings that they can do whatever they want and it will not have any negative side-effects (unintended effects) on the world; the world will remain as it was when they were children.

That mentality allows them to make the mistake of cutting open the goose that laid golden eggs. Their goose is the Western European population of America, which by not doing the same stupid stuff every other group was doing, made a prosperous nation and staffed it with intelligent, moral and capable people.

Economists of the “let’s get famous” variety ignore that the source of America’s wealth, like Europe’s wealth, is its people, and not just any people, but those with the grit and foresight to make this place out of wilderness populated by uncivilized third world people. America’s wealth came from its human raw material, and this is not an infinite resource, because as it is diluted, it loses its power.

When you read between the lies, this fawning article about the “free” $78 trillion that economists just found lying on the sidewalk — the article literally begins with that metaphor — starts to become clear as not free money, but free costs, while removing the source of your wealth. They have hoodwinked people for generations with this type of shell game theory, but maybe not for forever.

Leftists Formally Declare War, Genocide Against White People

Friday, April 14th, 2017

In any group, there are some who do well and some who do less well. Like a teenage movie — say, Napoleon Dynamite or Revenge Of The Nerds — all of those who are not doing so well make excuses for their failures, then bond together to form a group that can through superior numbers overthrow the people doing well.

Leftists come from the group that does less well. Even when materially successful, they are enraged at their inability to control reality to fit the vision in their minds, which is not so much about that vision but the sense of power it conveys. Something has made them insatiable and powerless, and so anything good, beautiful or realistic must be destroyed to make way for their egotism.

Unfortunately for them, they steadily gained power last century, and when National Socialism collapsed they shifted the world Left, and were able to shift it further when Communism collapsed and removed barriers to going farther Left. Once their dreams were realized in the 1980s, they laid the seeds of disaster. Those seeds are now sturdy samplings of misery.

The Left demanded globalism; this destroyed the economic independence of nations worldwide. They wanted sexual liberation, which destroyed the family. They screamed for universal education, which removed the value of education. They wanted socialized medicine, and radically increased costs and decreased quality. And they demanded diversity, which has ended in a flurry of Bataclans and Fergusons.

For many years, those on the Right have pointed out that diversity does not work, and that those who desire diversity want a servile beige race to make into perfect Leftist voters, and then to erase the majority group through outbreeding by convenience. In other words, diversity is genocide and the destruction of the nation, but this excites the Left.

Now, finally, they have formalized this by demanding white disenfranchisement:

If white men no longer had the vote, the progressive cause would be strengthened. It would not be necessary to deny white men indefinitely – the denial of the vote to white men for 20 years (just less than a generation) would go some way to seeing a decline in the influence of reactionary and neo-liberal ideology in the world. The influence of reckless white males were one of the primary reasons that led to the Great Recession which began in 2008. This would also strike a blow against toxic white masculinity, one that is long needed.

At the same time, a denial of the franchise to white men, could see a redistribution of global assets to their rightful owners. After all, white men have used the imposition of Western legal systems around the world to reinforce modern capitalism. A period of twenty years without white men in the world’s parliaments and voting booths will allow legislation to be passed which could see the world’s wealth far more equitably shared. The violence of white male wealth and income inequality will be a thing of the past.

A familiar trope with the Left is the idea that capitalism is the enemy or that somehow capitalism destroyed our world. This is offered because capitalism is inherently unequal, and its success contradicts the ideology of the Left, so they wish it destroyed even if they do not have a working substitute. Competition must be beaten, no matter what the cost.

In the article above, they reveal their strategy as being what they accuse white men of doing. The Left wants to “use the imposition of Western legal systems around the world” to “allow legislation to be passed which could see the world’s wealth far more equitably shared.” In other words, white males are the last barrier to world Communism and must be destroyed. Remember, the Soviets loved diversity, too.

Leftists do not want to tell you that they are living out a fairy tale and it is not one that will end well for them. It is “The Goose That Laid Golden Eggs,” and it goes like this:

A man and his wife had the good fortune to possess a goose which laid a golden egg every day. Lucky though they were, they soon began to think they were not getting rich fast enough, and, imagining the bird must be made of gold inside, they decided to kill it in order to secure the whole store of precious metal at once. But when they cut it open they found it was just like any other goose. Thus, they neither got rich all at once, as they had hoped, nor enjoyed any longer the daily addition to their wealth.

Much wants more and loses all.

Gold is not the source of itself. A goose that lays golden eggs is not full of gold, but of what causes that gold, and this is beyond the control of humans. The same is true of civilization: there are known ways to make civilization work, but these require sacrifice from individuals mainly through committing themselves to acting morally, all of the time. They want civilization without that burden.

And so, they cut civilization open. They rip out market competition and replace it with subsidies; they tear apart social order and replace it with conformity; they destroy heritage and religion and replace them with ideology; finally, they obliterate the family and individuality and replace them with coarse self-interest. Then, civilization collapses because its functions are demolished.

Contrary to what egalitarians will tell you, the distribution of wealth across the world reflects the fact that humanity is unequal. Groups are not equal, castes are not equal, sexes are not equal, and individuals are not equal. Some deserve more because they will put it to a better use, and in sane times, they have it.

What the Left has done for the past centuries is, in the name of redistributing wealth and power, grant those to people who are not good and do not use them wisely. When that causes a crisis, the Left demands redistribution again. They are pathological, unable to see that their actions do not produce the results they desire. But all they really want is to win by destroying those with more than themselves.

Witness the foaming hatred of a Leftist celebrating the self-harm and death of white males:

What charming people, these Leftists! They claim to bring us peace and love, and instead they bring thinly-concealed hatred, envy and anger.

As one commenter pointed out, this may be because Leftist mentation resembles that of people with Cluster B personality disorders:

Cluster B personality disorders

Cluster B personality disorders are characterized by dramatic, overly emotional or unpredictable thinking or behavior. They include antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, histrionic personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder.

Antisocial personality disorder

  • Disregard for others’ needs or feelings
  • Persistent lying, stealing, using aliases, conning others
  • Recurring problems with the law
  • Repeated violation of the rights of others
  • Aggressive, often violent behavior
  • Disregard for the safety of self or others
  • Impulsive behavior
  • Consistently irresponsible
  • Lack of remorse for behavior

Borderline personality disorder

  • Impulsive and risky behavior, such as having unsafe sex, gambling or binge eating
  • Unstable or fragile self-image
  • Unstable and intense relationships
  • Up and down moods, often as a reaction to interpersonal stress
  • Suicidal behavior or threats of self-injury
  • Intense fear of being alone or abandoned
  • Ongoing feelings of emptiness
  • Frequent, intense displays of anger
  • Stress-related paranoia that comes and goes

Histrionic personality disorder

  • Constantly seeking attention
  • Excessively emotional, dramatic or sexually provocative to gain attention
  • Speaks dramatically with strong opinions, but few facts or details to back them up
  • Easily influenced by others
  • Shallow, rapidly changing emotions
  • Excessive concern with physical appearance
  • Thinks relationships with others are closer than they really are

Narcissistic personality disorder

  • Belief that you’re special and more important than others
  • Fantasies about power, success and attractiveness
  • Failure to recognize others’ needs and feelings
  • Exaggeration of achievements or talents
  • Expectation of constant praise and admiration
  • Arrogance
  • Unreasonable expectations of favors and advantages, often taking advantage of others
  • Envy of others or belief that others envy you

The root of Leftism is an inner discontent that is not quelled by material needs, so they attempt to salve it with material needs (of course). Like greedy people or drug addicts, they think that having more will raise the quality of their experience, when the real problem is that they have no purpose.

Much as the people in the tale of the goose that laid golden eggs had enough, Leftists today have enough. They have comfortable apartments, cars, entertainment and perhaps a lot more. But for them, like Captain Ahab chasing his white whale, it is never enough. They want to be “in Control” and they will destroy anything in their way — which is everything else — to achieve that sensation.

What we should do now is to pass these ideas onto Leftists: yes, whites are your enemies. Yes, you want to destroy religion, culture, heritage, caste, sex roles and the family. Go ahead and embrace your inner demons, degeneracy and decay. Force everyone else to obey. You are victims, and now it is your age to destroy.

Then we can finally get this quiet war — a thousand-year sitzkrieg — to kick off and shortly after that, we can get it resolved.

Recommended Reading