Death of the Nation — Part II

The idea of a nation died or became obsolete when the few embedded in the financial and big business sector lobbied for deregulation and globalization and successfully took over control of mankind’s self-created circulatory system — money and debt.


Just as huge multi-national corporations are used as a shell game to make those at the top millions and billions through stock options and bonuses, so now nations are used as shell games to make a few well-connected and networked individuals billions and trillions.  The few that are well-connected have managed to obtain positions and control in key national organs — the government, the media, the Federal Reserve, the lobbyist machine, the banks, the investment banks, the legal framework, and the huge multi-national business conglomerates.  Money, debt, labor, innovation, all flow fluidly across borders with the single simple-minded objective to increase profits that in turn primarily increase the wealth and power of the few.  And they have at their disposal the military should that card need to be thrown down.  The nation is dead and obsolete — an empty shell gutted and sold by a few legalized criminals.

But there is an important  difference between the free-flowing laws of nature and that which mankind has defined as his laws of free-flowing capital and markets.  The clouds, winds, and oceans derive their free-flowing nature from the powerful sun.  The massive chunks of continents break free to create ocean expanses and collide to form towering mountains because of the Earth’s internal heat dynamo.   The Earth, our solar system, our galaxy, all galaxies, fly effortlessly through infinite space at incredible speeds because of a uncomprehendable release of energy from the distant past.

In contrast, mankind has made the erroneous assumption that a piece of paper, an electronic bit, a coin, a piece of yellow metal, equates perfectly to energy created or expensed.  Mankind further “compounds” his aforementioned erroneous assumption with the idea that energy created or expensed can be borrowed to use now and repay later using incremental energy as a payment for the opportunity to use more energy now.  These erroneous assumptions are the reason a few have been able to siphon away power and wealth from the masses.  But, if you look to the true power behind the free-flowing forces of nature, you will see and understand that the power and wealth in the hands of the few is really an illusion and a myth perpetuated by our own erroneous assumptions.  These few don’t have power and wealth — all they have is paper, electronic bits, and gold-colored rocks.

How to Solve Unemployment in the United States

There is a common bullshit phrase you will often hear from high-priced consultants and “touchy-feely” human resources specialists — treat your employees like assets.  Well, I think if we took this idea literally we could solve not only unemployment, but also underemployment and a whole host of other issues like company and employee loyalty.

Companies currently classify employee salaries and wages as expenses on the profit and loss statement.  Despite what the consultants and human resource professionals say, as long as employees are classified as expenses they will be viewed by management, Wall Street, and investors as just that — expenses.  And expenses are something to be minimized so as to increase profits and cash flows.

My idea, which of course would be laughed at by accountants and the finance community, would be to actually classify employees as assets.  We currently classify products in inventory, buildings, technology, and many other “things” as assets, but people are treated as expenses or expendable.  The current tax code is written to encourage businesses to invest in assets as the depreciation on those assets serve as a tax shield on the profit and loss statement.  I argue that human beings should also be classified as assets on the financial statements.  The salary and wages are investments in those assets and will be depreciated like other assets enabling the company to enjoy a tax shield from its employees.  I realize there would be many arguments about how to calculate depreciation on human assets or appreciation, but I leave the details for the accountants.

This crazy idea would give upper management, Wall Street, and the investment community a reason to support companies that hire people, train them, keep them, and further improve them like other assets.  They will like the idea of a tax shield in that taxes will be reduced and therefore profits increase as well as cash flow.  They won’t care that the idea is philosophically correct.  If we want to be American-centric (given unfair trade), we could even say that only American citizen employees will be considered assets and all foreign employees will simply be expenses.  Wouldn’t that be interesting?

By the way here is a nice picture I took today with my cheap cell phone while thinking about this crap.

Do WE Control Economics or does it Control US?

I walked into a local grocery store the other day and realized it had been completely reorganized and remodeled.  The biggest change was the checkout stations.  There used to be about six checkout stations manned with people — now there are only two “manned” stations and the rest were replaced with computers.

Replacing people with machines and technology to do work has been going on for quite some time in manufacturing, science, technology, military, and customer service, at gas stations, toll booths, airports, and retailers (including on-line purchasing).  Indeed, these machines are more efficient and less expensive than people, but I have to ask the question — if our population keeps growing or stabilizes at the current level and if our education system doesn’t pick up the pace, how we will keep employment up?    

Alternatively, could we in fact use machines to do a large percentage of the work for us?  If machines can do most of the work what could we do with more spare time?     

The big question is — does economics serve the human being or does the human being serve economics? Why can’t we find jobs for people?  Why aren’t companies hiring?  Why are companies laying people off?  Why do we have under-employment?   

If we indeed serve economics, then we better start ramping up the “quality” of education or we are going to experience huge unemployment and social unrest – and we know where that leads.