 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Anyone,
Before watching the whole Real News Report linked above I am commenting on the first part because my comments are based upon a different viewpoint.
"...a Crisis...unemployment..."
That is a premise. That is a theory. That is a viewpoint. Why is that viewpoint taken as fact?
To me, the crisis, if there is one, is a crisis of power-less-ness, not "unemployment".
Power flows to criminals, criminals then use that power to increase the flow of power to criminals, and what is the result of that situation, that crisis?
1. Massive torture, where many people are tortured, and many people are tortured to death (see 2)
2. Massive murder, where many people are murdered, and many people are tortured to death (see 1)
3. Threats of extinction of life on Earth.
4. Other consequences including unemployment.
What is the result of a situation whereby the power produced by the people who produce power send less power to the criminals who steal it and abuse it?
1. Less torture
2. Less murder
3. Less threats of extinction of life on Earth
4. Other consequences including people who want jobs get jobs because they now have the power needed to get jobs when they want jobs.
When power is more, and more, concentrated into the exclusive control of criminals: the criminals use that power to exclude power from other people, or, in other words, the criminals use the power they steal in the work of eliminating competition.
Competition is the stuff that moves quality up and cost down.
When the torturing, and mass murdering, legal criminals use the power they steal in the work of eliminating competition, what is the result?
A.
Less competition
B.
Quality goes down
C.
Cost (price) goes up
Another angle of the same thing:
Life moves from a state of abundance into a state of scarcity, when power flows from those who create power to those who steal it, as the power-full employ that power in the work of eliminating competition, as quality goes down, and as cost (price) goes up, supplies dwindle, and abundance is turned into scarcity.
In a state of scarcity the weak die, and the weaker die faster.
In a state of abundance the weak thrive, as best they can, compared to a state of scarcity, where the weak die, and the weaker die faster.
Unemployment becomes a "concern" when a state of abundance turns into a state of scarcity.
Why does a state of abundance turn into a state of scarcity?
That is an easy question to answer.
A state of abundance turns into a state of scarcity as part of a thing called The Business Cycle, whereby the people who steal power use that stolen power in the work of eliminating competition, by adding and then subtracting to the money supply, the power to purchase, and once "the economy" is on The Business Cycle, the legal criminals know when to buy (at the bottom of the cycle) and when to sell (at the top of the cycle) and with that plan working the flow of power flows continuously from those who create power to those who steal power.
A state of scarcity is enforced upon the weak, the less powerful, by the strong, the more powerful, so as to perpetuate the business cycle, because the business cycle is the ultimate Pyramid Scheme, the ultimate con-job, the ultimate fraud, and so long as it is enforced, so long will power flow from those who create it, to those who steal it by that method.
Why does "The Economy" turn from a state of scarcity, where the weak die, and the weaker die faster, into a state of abundance?
Another easy question, with the same answer, along with some other considerations.
The legal criminals can't keep the state of scarcity at that miserable state too long, too many weak people die, strong people become weak, then they die, and the people who create power can no longer create power, so the legal criminals know that their power source, "The Host" will die, so that reason, added to the Business Cycle perpetuation reason, reinforces the need to move from a state of scarcity back into a state of abundance.
The victims may revolt if the state of scarcity lasts too long - too.
Who are the victims?
Easy:
The people who create power, the ones that the criminals target, the only ones that can create a state of abundance, no one else can, the weak can't, not while the weak are weak, only the strong can, only the ones who can create power can create power, how can that ever be misunderstood?
Certainly the legal criminals do not misunderstand the source of their power - certainly not - a fool may misunderstand that fact.
Is "unemployment" a problem once the legal criminals return "The Economy" back to a state of abundance, from a state of scarcity?
Easy.
No
Not for those who want to work, since a state of abundance includes a move from high unemployment to low unemployment, for those who want to work.
For those who don't want to work, unemployment isn't a problem, it is a goal, not a crisis.
Back to the Real News Report for me.
I see an opportunity to reinforce the validity of my perspective relative to the perspective presented in the Real News Report linked above.
I heard:
...not since the Great Depression...
It is vital that the victims, and potential victims, learn the true facts of history. In this case the victims (those who produce the power of wealth today), and the potential victims (those who will produce the power of wealth in the future), may gain the power of knowledge, the wealth of knowledge, concerning the true case of The Great Depression.
The Federal Reserve System operators, legal criminals, caused an economic boom that became known as The Roaring Twenties, as those legal criminals doubled the supply of money (roughly) and then that same "System" was used, by some of the same legal criminals, or new legal criminals gaining the legal license required to change the legal supply of money, then subtracted roughly half of the money supply, thus turning the state of abundance into a state of scarcity, torturing millions, killing millions, where the weak die, and the weaker die faster.
Then the legal criminals boomed again, and the new boom was called World War II.
The same system is being used by new legal criminals to boom World War III.
Unemployment isn't a crisis compared to World War III. Legal criminals are not employed, they are criminals, so unemployment isn't a crisis for them, their goal is their goal, and they do what they have the power to do, including the goal of World War III, their goal, if that is their goal, and if you think that they will tell the truth when asked, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you, or better yet, how much will you pay for The Business Cycle, consumed by you at the price you are paying for it.
Two links, for you, if you question the truth about how the legal criminals caused WWII, as part of their work, as they move power from those who create it, to them, with their power over money, and their operation of The Business Cycle:
Read it and weep - if you still have the power of morality working for you (if you don't you don't):
Boom side A
Boom side B
That is also called: Hegelian-ism, or, in other words, thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis, or, simply put, in other words, finance both sides of a war, and jack up the prices for bombs and boots, and stuff, sell to both sides, make a profit, then get the no bid contracts to clean up and rebuild after the "conflict", and make a profit during that part of that cycle too.
Note: Many people know these things, not just me, and it isn't a coincidence that "Obama" or whoever "The President" is at the moment, is financed by "Wall Street" or whichever word labels the move of power from B to C.
A. People who create wealth
B. People who steal it through "The System"
C. People who spend it (on "investments")
What is purchased with the power to purchase?
or
Do you really want to follow the money?
I did, you can too.
Victims will remain victims so long as they remain ignorant.
Back to the Real News report for me.
I heard this:
...the other land mine is oil prices...
I offer Joe's Law:
Power produced into abundance (over-supply) reduces the price of power, while purchasing power increases, because power reduces the cost of production.
In other words:
When power (oil, money, electricity, food, oxygen, etc.) becomes scarce (enforced by nature or enforced by criminals) the price goes up and then the price of everything goes up and then, because the price of everything goes up, money is less powerful, it takes more money to get the same thing.
Mathematically:
Power now > Power past = higher standard of living for everyone so long as the few don't steal from the many
Power now < power past = lower standard of living for everyone except for those few who steal from the people who produce power
The power supply is draining in two ways right now - in America:
1. Less money
2. Less food/oil/electricity/better roads/better cars/better sources of electricity/better sources of transportation fuel/etc.
What happens if the people who have the power to add more money add more money?
The answer is as complicated as the following question must be answered in order to answer the proceeding question.
What does the new money buy?
The people who operate The FED, the legal criminals, have doubled the supply of dollars in 2008, alone, and who knows what they have done since, and there can be no answer to the question of what happens to "The Economy" without knowing what that money buys, even if it buys nothing.
If that money flows to China, then the Chinese economy may BOOM, but not unless that money is used to create more power. If that money is used to oppress, throttle down, cut down, or otherwise limit the power to create power, a power that is embodied by those people who can create power, and only them, then the Chinese economy will not BOOM, no matter how much money is used to purchase things that throttle down the power to create more power.
If that money begins to flow back into the American "economy", then the American economy may BOOM, but only if that power to purchase purchases more power, only if that power flows to the people who can, and will, and do, use that power to create more power - such as:
1. More electric cars.
2. More solar panels
3. Better roads.
4. Better hospitals
5. Better farms
6. Better power plants
7. Better learning systems
8. Better political systems
9. Better economic systems
10. Etc.
If that money is used in the work of accelerating the flow of power from those who create it, to those who steal it, what happens?
The same things that have been happening happen, on schedule, business as usual, liars are "elected" into "office" and legal crime perpetuates, the weak die, on schedule, and the weaker die faster.
Back the the Real News Report for me.
...they say that we are in a normal recovery...
"They" are, obviously, either lying (and hired to lie) or "they" are ignorant.
All evidence reinforces the understanding that "they" (legal criminals) are working toward WWIII, or some word that accurately identifies the willful construction of a future new world wide conflict between China (new money monopoly power) and America (old money monopoly power) and when the conflict is over, on schedule, the legal criminals (the ones who are privy to the schedule) will move operations, move capital, to that new power.
Out with the old, in with the new, brighter, future - if life on earth survives.
If not, then not.
The premise that "they" are stupid, and they are making mistake after mistake, forever, perpetually, making the same mistakes, over and over again, is a sure sign of stupidity, certainly, but it may be time to look in the mirror, rather than point fingers at "they", saying that "they" are stupid, as "they" fly their private jets to their limousines on their way to one of their summer mansions.
Or not, you are the judge, and no one else can take that from you, or if someone has taken that from you, then you are what?
A victim?
Back to the Real News report for me.
...the neo-liberal view is...
I have some great news for someone who may not yet know anything about political economy as told by anyone. You know.
That is the good news.
You know.
You know that stealing is stealing, and I can help you with that knowledge as that knowledge, that certain knowledge, applies to the subject of political economy.
A politician who lies is one who lies so as to steal, and the same thing applies to someone who is operating a business.
The purpose of government, if there is one, is to protect the innocent from the liars who steal, or liars who torture, or the liars who mass murder, or the liars who are ending life on earth, or the criminals who tell the truth.
If the first law enforced by the operators of the government is an idea followed by an action that is no different than stealing, then law is crime.
As such:
1. Voluntary government (anything done that results in the effective avoidance of crime whereby the innocent are no longer victimized by criminals)
2. Crime (even if the politicians, or the licensed business people running a licensed business, say that it is not crime)
3. Involuntary government
If you are not looking through a brainwashed mind, you will see that Crime is involuntary government.
When the power flows from those who create it, earn it, and it flows to those who use that power in the necessary work to keep that power flowing, what is it?
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, even if the duck says it isn't a duck, what is it?
I know how the brainwashing works, I ran for congress, I can still remember the old lady worried about criminals and the fear associated with the concept of NOT forcing other people to pay into a fund that is supposed to protect people from having someone forcing someone to transfer power to them from a victim.
Brainwashing is a point at which a person believes false things. Once you believe, there exists a power-less-ness; a lack of power, an inability to undo the brainwashing.
The bottom line with the argument for involuntary government is the same argument employed by every dictator and every criminal that ever polluted the human gene pool.
Human beings are bad.
That is the same argument used by criminals.
The victim deserve what I take from them, they are bad, they are weak, I am teaching them a lesson they need to learn, etc.
Human beings are bad, they must have me to protect them, etc.
Abundance, of jobs, of power, of wealth, of liberty, of freedom, of survival past today, past tomorrow, even past the life span of the Solar System, is earned through cooperative effort, division of labor, specialization, and the employment of power in the work of making power abundant.
When power is taken from you, against your will, you have less power, not more, and you are now less able to survive, not more able to survive, unless that power taken does, in fact, purchase more power, by some means, and despite your objection, that power is invested wisely, and that power stolen from you is used, by the people who take it, by the people who steal it from you, for the production of more power, and now, after that wise investment, by that benevolent dictator, that Robin Hood, you realize a higher quality life, at a lower cost.
A. Increased abundance by way of legal crime
B. Increased abundance by way of competition; whereby the producers of power, the only ones who can increase power, and the only ones who can create abundance, are forced to produce higher quality, and are forced to produce lower costs, or someone else will, because no one is using the power that is available, in physical power storage areas, in the work of eliminating competition.
C. Decreased abundance, followed by increased abundance, followed by decreased abundance, on a schedule called: The Business Cycle.
The first option above, the option many people are born into belief of it, is the third option, one and the same thing. The overall net result, after each cycle, and each cycle, is greater abundance, so long as the species human survives.
What could happen if B was the choice instead of A and C?
Do you want higher quality?
Do you want lower cost?
What are you willing to do to get higher quality, and lower cost?
The liberal view, before it became the neo-liberal view, is B, voluntary association, or the liberal view is whatever someone says it is, and if they say something untrue, once, twice, three times, then they can be trusted.
Do you want to know the liberal view, or do you prefer not to know, or do you prefer the neo-fill in the blank?
...if you want to stoop that low....
The argument appears to be such that bad things happen when tax payer money (taken by force and threat of punishment for failure to pay) is not taken and then used to enforce minimum wage.
Got that?
A.
Steal
First it is OK to take money from people who know better than to send money to torturing, mass murdering liars.
Now that that is out of the way. It is OK to steal. That is a given, so now "we" can proceed to item B.
B.
Use that stolen power to finance the enforcement of payments between "employers" and "employees", or else suffer punishment, if employers don't pay the enforced payment to employees.
If it is OK to steal, then, it is OK to steal more, and that is that in a nutshell.
Do they really want abundance. When there is abundance who needs to steal anything? Who needs to be forced to pay someone more than someone is willing to pay someone when there is abundance?
When power is abundant, who cries about minimum wages? When there is abundance, there is an abundance of cars to drive, so many cars that the price of a car is very low. How can it be any different?
What about the quality of the cars in abundance, when there is abundance? Do people still build cars after cars reach a state of abundance? No, unless the older cars are much lower in quality, or unless stolen money forces someone to keep building an obsolete, low quality, useless, less-power-full, car.
Do you want abundance, or do you want scarcity?
What is the "advice" offered to people in Unions?
Stop working, refuse to work, enforce a higher pay rate, and how can that ever work without someone enforcing a monopoly, without someone enforcing an end to competition?
It can't.
Abundance isn't created with the enforced ending of work, that is bad advice, that is what happens when power is stolen, for your "own good", and then power is abused in the work of eliminating competition, just like all criminals must do, and the better advice manages to work toward abundance instead of working against abundance.
A. Enforce a monopoly, eliminate competition, steal, and use that stolen power in that work, to steal, and perpetuate crime.
B. Refuse to steal, work at ways that avoid stealing, work toward agreement, invent new ways of making more power out of less power, and in the case of a Union, of specialized workers, work toward the creation of a competitive product if the "employer" isn't competitive. In other words, instead of threatening to stop working, work toward building a better, a voluntary association, somewhere else, if the "employer" isn't supplying a competitive work place - make one - make a competitive one, to compete with the one that is low quality, and high cost.
A. Make laws that force employers to increase payments from employers to employees or else suffer punishment for failing to do so.
B. Make laws that do not limit the power of workers to allow workers to combine their power and to allow workers to make their own factories, companies, work places, where workers are allowed to compete in the process of producing the highest quality products at the lowest possible price, when employers fail to make higher quality products at the lowest possible price.
When workers are tricked into playing the game by the rules that are enforced by the people who use law to eliminate competition, what do you think will be the result?
A. Honest working people, who are the only ones capable of producing wealth, are tricked into playing the legal crime game, and are then swimming with the sharks, in the water, where the professional liars, the professional legal criminals, the specialized people who are specialized at taking, stealing, abusing, and using the force of law to move wealth from those who create it to those who steal it, and honest working people are tricked into thinking they can win this game.
B. Honest working people decide to use the power they have (after taxes?), to run their own production facilities, pay themselves whatever they can afford to pay, and use their power to offer the highest quality product, at the lowest cost, or find a vocation where they can produce the highest quality product, at the lowest cost, if the current product is less than competitive.
How is a worker, regardless of the quality of the work performed by the worker, forcing higher pay, any different than an employer, regardless of the quality of the employment, forcing a lower pay, any different in principle?
If there is abundance, rather than scarcity, the employer can pick the highest quality worker at the lowest cost, among many willing workers, and the worker can pick the highest quality employment, at the lowest cost, because there is an abundance of employment options - including workers organizing and starting their own companies.
Law is used to punish workers that organize and law is used to make sure that workers can't get financing to start their own company - during the down cycle part of the business cycle, certainly, and during the up cycle the same suppliers of the one money get to pick and choose who that power flows to, when, and how much that power costs to the receiver of that power.
If that power flows to the people who make bombs, it doesn't flow to the people who make bombs by accident.
If that power flows to the people who make electric cars in California, Tesla Motors for example, it doesn't flow there by accident. People move that power to where it goes on purpose, and that power to move that power, to where that power goes, is The Crisis.
That power is held by the worst examples of human pollution that has ever weakened the human gene pool - they are now able to end life on Earth, and they may yet do so.
My critics want to ask: Who are "they"?
Follow the money. A good start would be following the trail back to the person or persons who doubled the money supply in 2008. Who has that power?
You don't have that power. I don't have that power. That much power is enough power to cause an economic boom somewhere. That much power is enough power to cause an economic bust somewhere. That much power is enough power to destroy the American economy, or strengthen the Chinese economy, or cause World War III.
Ignoring the fact that some one, some group, an uncountable group, or person, has that power, is the crisis, the crisis is a state of ignorance, the crisis is a scarcity of the power of knowledge.
There is no unemployment crisis by comparison. One is a symptom. One is a disease.
1. Unemployment
2. Legal power so concentrated as to license one person or a few people with the power to double the entire supply of dollar purchasing power at will, without consequence.
Am I crazy?
Back to the Real News report:
...in fact the objective is to not have full employment...
Who?
An honest working employer (I'm not the one who says that there is any difference between an employer or a worker, both sell something, both buy something) wants a high quality employee at the lowest cost, as does an honest working employee - wanting a high quality job, at the lowest cost.
A. Employer sells money in exchange for work.
B. Employee buys money in exchange for work.
If the medium of exchange is money, then the fact that the employer is taxed and the fact that the employee is taxed more is an obvious problem, if that is a problem.
Employers who pay no taxes, General Electric perhaps, can now eliminate competition. Now workers seeking high quality jobs, at lost costs to the worker (high wages), face a monopoly supply of jobs, and face a situation where competition is against the law, and face a situation where the monopoly power grows more powerful, and face a situation where less and less power is available to start competing, to offer competition, and therefore less force is working toward higher quality jobs, at lower prices (to the worker a high paying job is a lower cost/price to the worker).
What happens if the medium of exchange is no longer dollars? No more power flows to the monopoly power. Power from the worker flowing to the monopoly power where that power is used to perpetuate the monopoly ceases. Using the workers power (collecting power from all the workers and having that power flow to the monopoly power) currently ends competition and ends the force that would otherwise force employers to compete against other employers in the work of offering the higher quality jobs at the lower price (to the worker the higher wage is the higher quality job that is, to the worker, the lower cost to the worker, lower price to the worker, the worker spends less in exchange for the wage flowing to the worker).
If the medium of exchange is the thing produced by the combined efforts of the employers and the employees, the result is a separation of powers, whereby the power of the monopoly money power is no longer combined with the power of the employer and the employee.
Suppose that the employer and the employees make Solar Panels, or electric cars, or electricity, or food, or something powerful, gasoline, oil, houses, clothes, something that increases wealth, something that invests the available power supply toward an increase in the available power supply, and now suppose that the workers, and the employers both, get paid in Solar Panels, or electric cars, or electricity, instead of dollars.
If the employer is paid enough to afford the thing produced by the employer and the employees efforts but the employees are not paid enough to afford the thing produced by the employer and the employees efforts, then there must be a reason for that fact.
One possible reason:
The employer uses the power paid to the employer in the work of eliminating competition whereby the employer is the only one hiring people to make that powerful product, and therefore the employer has no need to increase the quality of that product and that employer has no need to lower the price of that product and so long as that product remains scarce, so long as the employer doesn't make too many of those products, so long will that employer be in a position to dictate the price of that product, and the wage paid to the workers, and the wage kept and accumulated by the employer, so long as the power being spent to produce the product is less than the power flowing to the employer.
As soon as a competitor is competing with the monopoly power is as soon as the monopoly employer is forced to increase quality and lower cost. If one employer decides to lower the pay of the workers before lowering other costs by other means is as soon as the best employees move to the better employer, and that "competitive" decision works against the quality of the product.
If the workers are allowed to build their own competitive production facility, each being paid an equitable division of total profits, by mutual agreement, and if the highest quality workers all walk away from the monopoly, low wage (high price from the workers viewpoint), low quality (low wage is low quality from the workers viewpoint), and all the workers hire on to the Equitable Union Workers Employee run production facility, then what can the monopoly power do to get the best workers back to work at his production facility?
Which production facility makes the highest quality product at the lowest cost?
If there is only one product, then that one product is the highest quality, and that price is the lowest price. That one product is the lowest quality, and that one product is the highest price.
There is only one product, here in the U.S.A., that is such a product.
The dollar.
The quality of the dollar is the power to purchase. The price of the dollar is the interest rate. The fact that it is a monopoly power is the crisis, not the fact that the abuse of that power causes unemployment during planned down cycles.
I may be approaching broken record status, with an oversupply of the same song.
Back to the Real News report:
...I am not interested in full employment...
Ignoring the fact that taxes are taken, stolen, and stolen from the people who produce wealth, produce power, is a serious error.
Power flow from the victims to the criminals and then once that flow begins the criminals gain more and more power; ultimately resulting in absolute power, such as the power to double the money supply at will, without consequence.
That same power can include an abuse whereby a few people are given money, negative tax, and many people are heavily taxes, thus creating powerful people, and power less people, and the powerful people will work toward perpetuating that flow of power.
The power can only come from the people who create it. The power flows to people whose work is the work that is focuses on accumulating power. If the people whose work is focus is both accumulating and spending that power in the work of making more power then the net result is more power - abundance - higher standard of living.
Now, if the tax rate, the rate at which power is stolen, is more for group A (a group that does create more power), and less, or negative (subsidy), for group B, then competition is thereby reduced, or even eliminated.
Group A can be known as employers
Group B can be known as employees
The stolen money can't go to everyone, the stolen money must, by obvious limitations in physical reality, go to a few. From many, to a few, obviously.
Taking from many and giving back to many is akin to employing a person to dig a hole, and then employing another person to fill in the hole, and calling that "full employment".
If the stolen money is given to the people who will use that power to make the most power in the shortest amount of time, costing no one any injury in the process, then total power increases soonest, abundance is reached soonest, the highest standard of living is reached soonest, at the lowest cost.
If the stolen money is given to the people who then use that money to make sure that no one else can make the thing being made by the receiver of the stolen money, then the soonest state of abundance is not achieved, the stolen power is actually used in such a way as to enforce lower quality of life, at a higher cost, and the bill, the cost, is paid for my the producers of wealth, the only ones who can be taxed, and therefore the only ones that can pay the bill.
If the subsidized group is called Employers, then it is a very poor thing to accuse all employers of this crime of receiving subsidy, failing to pay tax (share in victimization), and this poor thing done, is double poor for wealth producing employers and twice a bonanza for the criminal subsidized thieves, because the wealth producing (sharing in victimization = heavily taxed) employers are blamed for the same wrongs done by the subsidized groups, and the subsidized groups can take credit for any increased wealth resulting from the work done by the non-subsidized group.
That is called prejudice.
A. Group A does bad things.
B. Group B doesn't do those bad things.
Group A and Group B are similar in one or more characteristic so both Group A and Group B are in the same Group I.
Group I (employees, workers, republicans, democrats, liberals, conservatives, women, men, Caucasian, Asian, etc.)
Group I: Men
Subgroup A: Men having extramarital affiars
Subgroup B: Men who do not have extramarital affairs
When someone says that all men are bad, because some men have extramarital affairs, there is a prejudice against men who don't have extramarital affairs, and those men who have extramarital affairs look better when placed within the group where some men don't have extramarital affairs. Look at me, I'm not so bad, men don't always have extramarital affairs, don't worry, I won't do it again, see there we aren't all bad, all the time. Men who don't have extramarital affairs look worse, see, of course you should be suspicious, men have extramarital affairs all the time.
And worse.
Look at that guy cheating over there, now look at that guy cheating over there, now look there, there, and there, all those guys cheating, always they cheat, me, don't look at me, look there, over there, they are cheating.
Confusing one with the other works in favor of the guilty, not the innocent.
Confusing one with the other works to the detriment of the innocent, not the guilty.
Twice a debt for the innocent, double a credit for the guilty.
Like this:
Common Sense
Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.
...the Swedish Model...
Power flowing to workers, people who work, makes workers powerful. Power flowing to employees, people who work, makes employees powerful.
Where does the power come from?
The power comes from the people who create power, and these people can only crate power if they cooperate, agree, specialize, divide labor, and access the power of scale, or numbers, whereby the cost of something is divided by more people (the reason why home computers fell in price - for a recent example).
Before cooperation, specialization, and economies of scale, there is little or no surplus wealth stored anywhere in physical storage places.
After cooperation, specialization, and economies of scale, there is a state of abundance, large and very large stores of surplus wealth in many, many, many physical places.
Political power is the power by which control over thought is focused toward gaining control over surplus wealth.
Economic power is the power by which control over surplus wealth is either used to increase or decrease the total supply of surplus wealth.
Democratic politics (which can include republican, and federated politics), whereby law is universal, each person has the same political power as each other person, no exceptions, justice is blind, the scale is balanced equitably, removes, or works to remove, political power that flows from the many to the few, as a goal.
Non-democratic politics (which can include communism, fascism, and dictatorships), works to focus political power from the man to the few, on purpose, for the profit of the few, at the expense of the many.
Non-democratic politics cannot increase the supply of surplus wealth; it is therefore not an economic power. Non-democratic politics consumes economic power by any measure except one.
In the face of a situation whereby failure to resort to non-democratic power results in the destruction of the people who produce surplus wealth (economic power) is the one exception and only an exception because a greater power threatens the democratic-political-economic power.
Example 1:
A political crime group gain more and more power by invading more and more democratic-political-economic smaller, less powerful economic groups, enslaving those groups, combining the stolen surplus wealth, and consuming that wealth on more, and more, and more invasions, usurpation, enforced regime changes, unification, and then that powerful engine of mass destruction turns its criminal might upon the next victims, us, for example. That crime group will destroy us, unless we do something, somehow, and some way.
Example 2:
A meteor is found, in time, in space, and soon that meteor will contact the earth, and if something is not done, Earth, and everything on Earth, is gone forever, unless something is done, somehow, and some way.
We are apt to jump to the conclusion that each one of us must be forced by each other of us to pay whatever price is necessary at that time - without exception.
I think, and you can consider, that we are apt to jump to the wrong conclusion.
Why can't there be exceptions?
Please think about it.
I have to go help create surplus wealth, or else.
Later