 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
To recap:
Politics and economy are objective disciplines based upon a moral principle. Morality is based upon a simple relationship between that which exists and the end of that which exists. In other words the concept of morality is based upon a perception of life compared to a perception of the absence of life. Life exists. That which promotes life promotes life. That which destroys life destroys life. That is the objective scenario. The subjective or judgmental aspect of morality merely places life above or more valuable than the destruction of life.
Politics, from this objective viewpoint (life can be sustained by acting in a pre-meditated manner that intends to and follows through with an effective method of sustaining life), exists after (or during) the incorporation of economic thought and action. Politics, again from the objective viewpoint, intends to make use of an oversupply of economic production if an oversupply of economic production is produced though objective economic activity.
Economy, from this objective viewpoint, pre-meditates present and future activity intending to expend less power to create more power. This may appear to be far fetched if the reader is indoctrinated with subjective value judgments concerning false and misleading economic dogma. Economy intends to utilize available economic power to produce a greater supply of economic power. Crime intends to utilize destructive power (falsehood and violence) to take economic power from victims who utilize available economic power to produce a greater supply of economic power.
An example of politics, possibly the only free market example, is a concept called insurance. When economic power is utilized to produce a greater supply of economic power and an excess of economic power (above consumption) is realized: the excess can be invested toward the creation of even more economic power or the excess can be stored (saved?) for ‘a rainy day’. Politics intends to decide which investment will utilize the available power in the most economical manner to create a greater supply of economic power. Politics intends to decide the best investment. Insurance exemplifies this goal in a most economical manner because insurance gathers the most relevant information required in predicting the most economic investment of excess production.
A step back to pre-insurance may suffice to illustrate an important relationship. Pre-insurance will be a condition whereby economic power is scarce and insufficient to ensure economic survival. All economic power is consumed during the economic life of the people lacking sufficient economic power. There is no excess economic power left over to store, save, or invest. As soon as economic power moves from the red and into the black an economic decision is made. Excess production, once it exists, is excess production. What happens to excess production once excess production exists?
Who decides what to do with excess production once excess production exists? What possible uses exist once excess production exists? How is excess production utilized once excess production exists? These are the economic paths that only exist when economic production reaches a level of power in excess of consumption. Once these paths exist a path must be chosen and the excess economic power will flow along the path chosen by whatever method that is possible.
Politics is the label describing the human activity inspired by the creation of economic abundance. Who decides how to spend the excess? How is the excess spent?
Economic abundance can inspire people to spend economic power toward the creation of falsehood and violence for obvious reasons. One example of the expenditure of economic power toward the creation of falsehood is the creation of the idea that saving economic power can produce a greater supply of economic power. I am speaking of the falsehood known as ‘interest’. Rather than concentrate on that lie, that fraud, it is more economically viable to invest time and energy figuring out how to utilize economic power to create more economic power.
That is the dilemma or problem that politics intends to solve. Which path creates the most economic power and uses up the least economic power in the process. That problem becomes a greater problem when falsehood and violence threatens to consume economic power on offense (criminal) and defense (avoidance of crime).
This should be easy to see from a utopian perspective and a little imagination. Suppose, for example, a new device existed where a person could be impervious to harm by violence or fraud where the individual has a device that shields the person from violent attack and the device has an automatic bullshit detector. The utopian dream seen from this view may or may not require the dreamer to include a device that removes the possibility of having stuff stolen from the individual. I think the lack of physical harm caused by criminals and the lack of being harmed with bullshit produced by criminals would end the power that is necessary to get away with theft. People spending their time stealing might as well spend their time producing. The idea here is to look at the costs that are wasted on committing crimes and defending against crime. Add all that cost up and subtract it from the total available power. Now imagine using that lost power doing the work of creating more power.
Note too how the whole scarcity price power transfer scheme vanishes when economic power is produced into a state of over-abundance. Costs reach zero while purchasing power remains high. Labor may become scarce and then fetch a higher price. Who would argue with that scenario? You guessed it – the criminals. Perhaps I am alone with that guess.
I may yet get to Blackwater.