Appalachian Mountains, Great Lakes, Northwest Territory, Louisiana Territory and the Erie Canal

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 29th, 2014

History 101

(Originally published July 30th, 2013)

Everything grown on the West Side of the Appalachian Mountains eventually ended up on the Mississippi River

At the time of the Founding the American population was clustered around the East Coast.  And on major rivers that flowed into the Atlantic Ocean.  On land east of the Appalachian Mountains.  Not by choice.  But because of geography.  The Founding Fathers knew what great land lay west.  But getting there was another story.

The Great Lakes are huge.  The largest group of freshwater lakes in the world.  If you walked all the coastlines you’d walk so long and so far that you could have walked halfway around the world.  Getting on the lakes opened up the Northwest Territory.  Western New York.  Western Pennsylvania.  Ohio.  Michigan.  Indiana.  Illinois.  Wisconsin.  Minnesota.  And with some portaging, the great interior rivers.  Including the Mississippi River.  Opening up the Great Plains to the West.  And the rich fertile farmland of the interior.  But there was one great obstacle between all of this and the east coast.  Niagara Falls.  Which portaging around was a bitch.

The United States would become an agricultural superpower.  But until they had a way to transport food grown on the land west of the Appalachians that land was not as valuable as it could be.  There were some land routes.  George Washington crossed many times into the Ohio Country from Virginia.  And Daniel Boone blazed the Wilderness Road through the Cumberland Gap into Kentucky and Tennessee.  Opening the Northwest Territory to settlement.  All the way up to the Mississippi River.  And its tributaries.  Including the Ohio River.  But none of these water routes offered a way back east.  Which is why everything grown on the west side of the Appalachian Mountains eventually ended up on the Mississippi River.  And traveled south.  To the Port of New Orleans.  But there was one major problem with that.  The Port of New Orleans belonged to the Spanish.

Thomas Jefferson fought Tirelessly against the Constitution to Restrict the Powers of the Executive Branch

At the time of the Founding there were four European nations jockeying for a piece of the New World.  Who all wanted to keep the Americans east of the Appalachians.  The French had lost New France to the British.  Which they hoped to get back.  And the farther the Americans moved west the harder that would be.  The British were in Canada.  With outposts still in the Northwest Territory.  Despite ceding that land to the Americans.  While the British were pressing in from the north the Spanish were pressing in from the south and the west.  Coming up from Mexico they were in New Orleans.  Texas.  The trans-Mississippi region (the land west of the Mississippi River.  And California and the West Coast.  Making navigation rights on the Mississippi River and the Port of New Orleans a hotly contested issue.

Time would solve that problem in America’s favor.  Napoleon would get the Louisiana Territory for France from the Spanish.  And was intent on rebuilding New France in the New World.  But with the slave rebellion in Saint-Domingue—present day Haiti—Napoleon’s plans changed.  Instead of building New France he was focusing on saving Old France.  As the world war he launched wasn’t going all that well.  So he sold the Louisiana Territory to Thomas Jefferson, then president of the United States.  Making the navigation rights of the Mississippi River a moot point.  For it now belonged to the United States.  Which was great for Thomas Jefferson.  For, he, too, looked west.  And believed the young nation’s future was on the west side of the Appalachian Mountains.  Where yeoman farmers would work their land.  Forming the backbone of the new republic.  Honest men doing honest labor.  Not merchants, bankers and stockjobbers that were trying to destroy the new nation in the east.  The detestable moneyed men that Jefferson hated so.  No.  The winds of the Revolutionary spirit blew west.

This is why Jefferson jumped on the Louisiana Purchase.  In direct violation of the Constitution.  A document he hated because it gave way too much power to the president.  Making the president little different from a king.  Which was the whole point of the American Revolution.  To do away with king-like power.  Throughout his active political life he fought tirelessly against the Constitution.  Fighting to restrict the powers of the executive branch wherever he could.  But the Louisiana Territory?  President Jefferson suddenly had an epiphany.  It was good to be king.

The Erie Canal connected the Eastern Seaboard with the Great Lakes without any Portages

Jefferson would resort to his anti-government positions following the Louisiana Purchase.  He may have violated everything he stood for but even the most stalwart limited government proponent no doubt approves of Jefferson’s actions.  Jefferson was happy.  As was everyone west of the Appalachians.  But it didn’t solve one problem.  The Great Lakes region upstream of Niagara Falls was still cutoff from the East Coast.  And the Port of New Orleans.  There were some routes to these destinations.  But they included some portaging between navigable waterways.  Which made it difficult to transport bulk goods into the region.  And out of the region.

As Jefferson’s vision of limited government faded government grew.  As did government spending.  Especially on internal improvements.  For they had great political dividends.  They created a lot of jobs.  And brought a lot of federal money to communities with those internal improvements.  Which helped politicians win elections.  And back around the 1800s the big internal improvements were canals.  Such as the Erie Canal.  Connecting the Eastern Seaboard with the Great Lakes.  Providing a waterway without any portages from the Hudson River that flows into the Atlantic Ocean at New York City.  All the way to the Great Lakes.  Near Buffalo.  Just above Niagara Falls.  Opening the Great Lakes regions to settlement.  And the Northwest Territory.  (Something George Washington wanted to do.  Who wanted to extend a canal into the West from the Potomac River.)  Creating a trade super highway between the Great Lakes region and the East Coast.  Through the Port of New York.  And on to the rest of the world.

The U.S. population moved west.  But still clung to rivers and coastlines.  Until another internal improvement came along.  The railroad.  Which did for the country’s interior what the Erie Canal did for the Great Lakes region.  With cities growing up along these rail lines.  Away from rivers and coastlines.  Then came the interstate highway system.  Which allowed cities to grow away from the rail lines.  There is now a road, rail or waterway that will take you pretty much anywhere in the United States.  And now we have the airplane.  Which can fly over the Appalachians.  Or the Niagara escarpment.  Allowing us today to move anyone or anything anywhere today.  Something George Washington and Thomas Jefferson desperately wanted.  But could only dream of.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

American Education is so Poor only 7% in Survey can Name the First Four Presidents in Order

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 13th, 2014

Week in Review

All you hear from Democrats is that we need to spend more on education.  They call it investing in our future.  Which is a lie.  For ‘investing in our future’ is code for shoring up teachers’ pensions.  And keeping higher education doing what those in control of higher education want it to do.  Produce Democrat voters.  Which actually starts in our public schools.  Where they teach our kids to come home and tell their parents that they are ashamed of them.  For all the global warming they’ve caused.  And bringing them into the world in the evil, rotten United States.

These are the things our kids seem to know about.  Global warming.  Slavery.  Stealing land from the Native Americans.  American imperialism.  But ask them to name the first four presidents of the United States?  Four of the greatest Americans ever to live?  Those in control of our public education don’t think knowing anything about them is important.  Apparently (see Rolling Stone, Groupon Show The Viral Benefits of Historical Inaccuracy by Nathan Raab posted 4/11/2014 on Forbes).

In 2007, a US Mint poll showed that only 7 percent of those surveyed could name the first four Presidents in order. A later poll by Marist was not more encouraging.

George Washington (#1) kept the Continental Army together for 8 years under circumstances few could imagine today.  Near the end of the Revolutionary War his character alone put down a mutiny in the officer corps.  He turned down the offer to make him king.  An unprecedented act at the time.  King George of Britain had said if he turned down absolute power “he will be the greatest man in the world.”  And Washington did.  Twice.  His presence was the only thing that got the states to ratify the Constitution.  And his two terms in office was the only thing that gave the United States of America a chance of succeeding.  This is why there is only one man we call the Father of his Country.  And only one man we call the Indispensible Man.  George Washington.

John Adams (#2) was a driving force for American independence.  So much so that King George could not forgive him.  Had they reconciled with the mother country the king would have pardoned many patriots.  But not Adams.  He would hang.  Adams nominated George Washington to command the Continental Army.  He chose Thomas Jefferson to write the Declaration of Independence.  He worked with Benjamin Franklin to negotiate the peace treaty that ended the Revolutionary War.  And negotiated America’s first loan from Amsterdam bankers.  The first nation to recognize and do business with the new nation (other than France).  And he averted war with France following the French Revolution.  Giving the fledgling nation a chance to survive.

Thomas Jefferson (#3) was the author of Declaration of Independence.  The author of the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom.  And the Father of the University of Virginia.  The three things Jefferson was most proud of and appear on his tombstone.  As president his administration bought the Louisiana Territory from the French.  More than doubling the size of the United States.  And sent out Lewis and Clark to explore these vast new territories.  And he slashed government spending wherever he could.  A true believer in limited government.

James Madison (#4) is the Father of the Constitution.  He wrote the Federalist Papers with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay to encourage ratification of the Constitution.  The Federalist Papers are still referenced today in Constitutional law.  He also helped the effort to ratify the Constitution in Virginia where he battled the great patriot Patrick Henry.  Who feared a large central government.  Madison served in the first Congress.  Where he championed the Bill of Rights.  And, later, supervised the Louisiana Purchase as President Jefferson’s Secretary of State.

It is indeed a sad commentary on our educational system that only 7% of those questioned could identify these great Americans.  And it’s not a lack of money causing this.  It’s a lacking in the curriculum.  Choosing global warming, slavery, stealing land from the Native Americans, American imperialism, etc.  Instead of teaching our kids why the United States is the greatest country in the world.  Because of men like these.  Who put the individual before the state.  Who made freedom and liberty things we take for granted.  Instead of things people can only dream of.  Which is the case in much of the world today.  And has been the norm throughout history.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Some in Canada consider a Parallel Private Health Care System to reduce Wait Times

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 29th, 2014

Week in Review

People don’t want Obamacare.  And they are getting angry.  Making the Democrats very nervous.  Especially those up for election this fall.  Which is why there is yet another delay in implementing the Affordable Care Act.  To make voters less angry this fall.

This law was never popular.  The American people never wanted it.  The only reason why we have it is because the Democrats pushed it through when they had control of the House, Senate and White House.  And bought off a few recalcitrant Democrat senators (the Louisiana Purchase, Cornhusker Kickback, Gator Aid, etc.) to garner the 60 votes necessary to force this unpopular law onto the American people.  So the Democrats could put us on a path towards single-payer.  Which President Obama is on the record preferring.  Single-payer.  But accepted the Affordable Care Act as a means to that end.  So we can one day have a health care system like they have in Canada.  Because things are so much better in Canada (see Waiting times cost B.C. patients $155.5 million last year: Fraser Institute study by Bethany Lindsay posted 3/25/2014 on The Vancouver Sun).

Waiting for medically necessary surgeries cost British Columbian patients about $155.5 million in lost time last year, a Fraser Institute economist claims in a new study.

It estimates that the total cost to Canadian patients of waiting for treatment after seeing a specialist was $1.1 billion in 2013, up from $982 million in 2012. Quebec had the highest cost at $267.7 million.

Author Nadeem Esmail said the report explores a consequence of waiting for care that Canadians don’t often consider…

Esmail said that in order to address the problem of long waiting times, he’d like to see Canada allow more private sector participation in the provision of health care, including the development of a parallel private system…

Overall, British Columbians waited a median 10.4 weeks for treatment after their first appointment with a specialist last year, compared to 9.6 weeks across Canada, according to the study.

Imagine that.  The Republicans were right.  A single-payer health care system leads to rationing of health care resources.  And sick people waiting for their turn for fewer, rationed health care resources leads to, of course, longer wait times.  This is what the Democrats want to force on the American people.  Even when some in Canada are suggesting a parallel private health care system to reduce wait times down from 10 weeks or so.  Which is why the Democrats had to be as devious as possible to pass Obamacare into law.  With shady backroom deals like the Louisiana Purchase, Cornhusker Kickback and Gator Aid.  And then lying through their teeth about being able to keep the health insurance and doctors you liked and wanted to keep.  A lie so bold it earned President Obama the Lie of the Year from PolitiFact.

Will this anger boil over this November at the 2014 midterm elections?  Will voters remember how the Democrats lied and made backroom deals to change a health care system we liked and wanted to keep?  Apparently President Obama thinks so.  Which is why he violated the law once again and extended the enrollment period for Obamacare.  Without having Congress rewrite the law.  To make this latest change in the Affordable Care Act (and the 30 or so that preceded it) legal.  But then again, when the media keeps giving the president a pass on his law-breaking activities what incentive does the administration have to act lawful?  It’s kind of like Vladimir Putin taking Crimea.  The way Putin sees it no one is going to do anything when he breaks the law so what incentive does he have to abide by international law?  If anything he’s probably puzzled why President Obama is saying anything at all.  For what’s a little law-breaking between two law breakers?

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Appalachian Mountains, Great Lakes, Northwest Territory, Louisiana Territory and the Erie Canal

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 30th, 2013

History 101

Everything grown on the West Side of the Appalachian Mountains eventually ended up on the Mississippi River

At the time of the Founding the American population was clustered around the East Coast.  And on major rivers that flowed into the Atlantic Ocean.  On land east of the Appalachian Mountains.  Not by choice.  But because of geography.  The Founding Fathers knew what great land lay west.  But getting there was another story.

The Great Lakes are huge.  The largest group of freshwater lakes in the world.  If you walked all the coastlines you’d walk so long and so far that you could have walked halfway around the world.  Getting on the lakes opened up the Northwest Territory.  Western New York.  Western Pennsylvania.  Ohio.  Michigan.  Indiana.  Illinois.  Wisconsin.  Minnesota.  And with some portaging, the great interior rivers.  Including the Mississippi River.  Opening up the Great Plains to the West.  And the rich fertile farmland of the interior.  But there was one great obstacle between all of this and the east coast.  Niagara Falls.  Which portaging around was a bitch.

The United States would become an agricultural superpower.  But until they had a way to transport food grown on the land west of the Appalachians that land was not as valuable as it could be.  There were some land routes.  George Washington crossed many times into the Ohio Country from Virginia.  And Daniel Boone blazed the Wilderness Road through the Cumberland Gap into Kentucky and Tennessee.  Opening the Northwest Territory to settlement.  All the way up to the Mississippi River.  And its tributaries.  Including the Ohio River.  But none of these water routes offered a way back east.  Which is why everything grown on the west side of the Appalachian Mountains eventually ended up on the Mississippi River.  And traveled south.  To the Port of New Orleans.  But there was one major problem with that.  The Port of New Orleans belonged to the Spanish.

Thomas Jefferson fought Tirelessly against the Constitution to Restrict the Powers of the Executive Branch

At the time of the Founding there were four European nations jockeying for a piece of the New World.  Who all wanted to keep the Americans east of the Appalachians.  The French had lost New France to the British.  Which they hoped to get back.  And the farther the Americans moved west the harder that would be.  The British were in Canada.  With outposts still in the Northwest Territory.  Despite ceding that land to the Americans.  While the British were pressing in from the north the Spanish were pressing in from the south and the west.  Coming up from Mexico they were in New Orleans.  Texas.  The trans-Mississippi region (the land west of the Mississippi River.  And California and the West Coast.  Making navigation rights on the Mississippi River and the Port of New Orleans a hotly contested issue.

Time would solve that problem in America’s favor.  Napoleon would get the Louisiana Territory for France from the Spanish.  And was intent on rebuilding New France in the New World.  But with the slave rebellion in Saint-Domingue—present day Haiti—Napoleon’s plans changed.  Instead of building New France he was focusing on saving Old France.  As the world war he launched wasn’t going all that well.  So he sold the Louisiana Territory to Thomas Jefferson, then president of the United States.  Making the navigation rights of the Mississippi River a moot point.  For it now belonged to the United States.  Which was great for Thomas Jefferson.  For, he, too, looked west.  And believed the young nation’s future was on the west side of the Appalachian Mountains.  Where yeoman farmers would work their land.  Forming the backbone of the new republic.  Honest men doing honest labor.  Not merchants, bankers and stockjobbers that were trying to destroy the new nation in the east.  The detestable moneyed men that Jefferson hated so.  No.  The winds of the Revolutionary spirit blew west.

This is why Jefferson jumped on the Louisiana Purchase.  In direct violation of the Constitution.  A document he hated because it gave way too much power to the president.  Making the president little different from a king.  Which was the whole point of the American Revolution.  To do away with king-like power.  Throughout his active political life he fought tirelessly against the Constitution.  Fighting to restrict the powers of the executive branch wherever he could.  But the Louisiana Territory?  President Jefferson suddenly had an epiphany.  It was good to be king.

The Erie Canal connected the Eastern Seaboard with the Great Lakes without any Portages

Jefferson would resort to his anti-government positions following the Louisiana Purchase.  He may have violated everything he stood for but even the most stalwart limited government proponent no doubt approves of Jefferson’s actions.  Jefferson was happy.  As was everyone west of the Appalachians.  But it didn’t solve one problem.  The Great Lakes region upstream of Niagara Falls was still cutoff from the East Coast.  And the Port of New Orleans.  There were some routes to these destinations.  But they included some portaging between navigable waterways.  Which made it difficult to transport bulk goods into the region.  And out of the region.

As Jefferson’s vision of limited government faded government grew.  As did government spending.  Especially on internal improvements.  For they had great political dividends.  They created a lot of jobs.  And brought a lot of federal money to communities with those internal improvements.  Which helped politicians win elections.  And back around the 1800s the big internal improvements were canals.  Such as the Erie Canal.  Connecting the Eastern Seaboard with the Great Lakes.  Providing a waterway without any portages from the Hudson River that flows into the Atlantic Ocean at New York City.  All the way to the Great Lakes.  Near Buffalo.  Just above Niagara Falls.  Opening the Great Lakes regions to settlement.  And the Northwest Territory.  (Something George Washington wanted to do.  Who wanted to extend a canal into the West from the Potomac River.)  Creating a trade super highway between the Great Lakes region and the East Coast.  Through the Port of New York.  And on to the rest of the world.

The U.S. population moved west.  But still clung to rivers and coastlines.  Until another internal improvement came along.  The railroad.  Which did for the country’s interior what the Erie Canal did for the Great Lakes region.  With cities growing up along these rail lines.  Away from rivers and coastlines.  Then came the interstate highway system.  Which allowed cities to grow away from the rail lines.  There is now a road, rail or waterway that will take you pretty much anywhere in the United States.  And now we have the airplane.  Which can fly over the Appalachians.  Or the Niagara escarpment.  Allowing us today to move anyone or anything anywhere today.  Something George Washington and Thomas Jefferson desperately wanted.  But could only dream of.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Fiscal Policy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - February 6th, 2012

Economics 101

The Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia (1787) was about Money and Unity at the National Level 

Once upon a time in America federal taxes were small.  As was federal spending.  The Constitution called for little.  The only big ticket items being an army and a navy.  To protect the new nation.  But Americans didn’t like paying taxes then any more than they do now.  There wasn’t even a federal income tax until the 16th Amendment (1913).  So even maintaining an army and a navy was difficult.  Which led to a lot of problems.  For a nation that couldn’t protect herself got pushed around in the rough and tumble world.  And the U.S. took its share of swirlies and wedgies in her infancy.  Figuratively, of course.

Just as kings needed money to maintain their kingdoms, the Americans needed money to maintain their new nation.  Which was the point of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia (1787).  It was about the money.  And unity.  Which the new nation (that just gained its independence from Britain) had little of.  So we got a new constitution.  And a new nation.  And the federal taxing and spending began.  Which was small at first.  Too small for Alexander Hamilton.  But far too much for Thomas Jefferson.  In fact, Jefferson thought any federal spending above zero was too much.  And when he was president he slashed government spending.  To the point that it hurt the safety of the United States.  But he also bought the Louisiana Territory.  And used the Navy and the Marine Corps to protect American interests abroad.  These two items alone required enormous amounts of federal spending.  And borrowing.  Another thing Jefferson was dead set against.  And we’re talking sums of money that not even Alexander Hamilton had proposed.  Yet here was Jefferson, the limited-government president, spending and borrowing unlimited funds. Being more Hamilton than Hamilton himself.

Of course, things change.  Even for Jefferson.  The Louisiana Purchase was a deal that no president should have passed up.  Thankfully, Jefferson took that opportunity to more than double the size of the United States.  Without a war.  Unlike Napoleon who was conquering Europe.   But he was burning through money.  And he needed money more than he needed the Louisiana Territory.  Hence the Louisiana Purchase.  Which turned out to be quite the bargain in the long run for the U.S.  And the antimilitary Jefferson flexed America’s might by teaching the Barbary pirates a lesson.  By deploying the U.S. Navy and Marines to the Shores of Tripoli.  The first U.S. victory on foreign soil.  Giving the U.S. respect.  And a cessation of those swirlies and wedgies.

Keynesian Stimulus Spending may lessen the Severity of Economic Recessions

These things cost money.  And the lion’s share of the federal budget was defense spending.  Per the Constitution.  For that was one of the main things the several states could not do well.  Maintain an army and a navy.  Because they needed unity.  One army.  And one navy.  To protect one nation.  So the states and their people could pursue happiness without foreign aggressors molesting them.  So this is how federal spending began.  But you wouldn’t know it by looking at fiscal policy today.

Fiscal policy is the collection of policies that government uses to tax and spend.  But it’s more than just defense spending these days.  Federal spending had grown to include things from business subsidies to Social Security to Medicare to food stamps to welfare to income redistribution to farm subsidies.  And everything else you can possibly imagine under the sun.  None of which was included in the Constitution.  Because neither Jefferson nor Hamilton would have agreed to these expenditures.  But it doesn’t end with this spending.

Fiscal policy also ‘manages’ the economy.  Or tries to.  By trying to maintain ‘full employment’.  Which means they adjust tax and spend policies so that anyone who wants a full time job can have one.  Based on Keynesian economics.  And the business cycle.  The business cycle is the cyclic economic transitions between economic expansions and contractions.  The inflationary and recessionary boom-bust cycles.  No one likes recessions.  Because people lose their jobs.  And have to get by on less money.  So Keynesian economists say to lessen the severity of recessions the government can take action to stimulate economic activity.  They can cut taxes.  Because when people pay less in taxes they have more disposable income to spend on economic activity.  Which they say will keep people from losing their jobs.  And create new jobs.  Or the government can spend money.  Picking up the slack from consumers who aren’t spending money.  Thus saving and/or creating jobs.  Which stimulus depends on the political party in office.  In general, Republicans favor tax cuts.  And Democrats favor spending.

All Keynesian Stimulus Spending is Deficit Spending

But it’s not as simple as that.  Because during recessions tax revenues fall.  When people earn less they pay less in taxes.  Far less.  Especially if an interruption in their income puts them into a lower tax bracket.  And if you run through all of your unemployment benefits, it will.  So there’s more to economic stimulus than meets the eye.  For to stimulate a government must borrow money.  Or print money.  Because all stimulus spending is deficit spending.

Keynesians say this deficit spending is not a problem.  Because once the stimulus turns the economy around there will be plenty of new tax revenues to pay back the money they borrowed.  But that rarely happens with a tax and spend government.  Because they like to spend.  As is evident by the ever increasing federal debt.  And when they get more tax revenue they spend that tax revenue.  On anything and everything you can possibly imagine under the sun.  Often times cutting defense spending to help pay for all that other spending.  Despite defense spending being one of the few things enumerated in the Constitution.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Does Obama Know Who Kept the Slaves Enslaved?

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 2nd, 2010

Your People Did Not Free the Slaves, Mr. President

From Mark Knoller, White House Correspondent, Radio, CBS News:

Obama says people are impatient but “now’s not the time to quit…it took time to free the slaves…ultimately we’ll make progress.”

We would have freed the slaves a whole lot sooner if it weren’t for people like him.  Democrats.

The Southern States and Slavery – A Packaged Deal

Democrats descend from the southern planter elite.  These slaveholders formed a small minority of the population.  But they held the majority of political power.  There was a north-south divide at the founding over slavery.  Franklin, Adams, Hamilton and Washington were against slavery.  Jefferson and Madison were for it.  Rather, they were for the southern states.  And that meant the planter elite (which they were part of).  Which was for slavery.

Slavery was a taboo subject.  You won’t find it in our founding documents.  The North wanted to abolish slavery.  But any discussion of the taboo subject and the South would walk.  So they tabled the subject.  To get the South to join the Union.  And they didn’t speak about it to keep the South in the Union.  (When I say the ‘South’, think the planter elite, the ruling minority power in the South.  This elite few had the majority of slaves.  Most southerners couldn’t afford slaves and worked their own small farms.  The yeoman farmers Jefferson would wax philosophical about.)

The majority of slaves were in the south.  They also were the majority of the southern population.  This was a sticking point at the Constitutional Convention.  The South wanted to count slaves in determining congressional representation.  But you count citizens to determine your number of representatives.  Not property.  The northerners did not get to count their cattle in determining their number of representatives.  So the South shouldn’t count their slaves.  The South, of course, disagreed.  For if they were to be a part of the Union, not simply a region ruled by the North, it was necessary to count their slaves.  And if they couldn’t?  No union.  So they compromised.  With the Three-Fifths Compromise.  They would count a slave as 3/5 a citizen.  It gave the South a greater representation in Congress than their citizenry allowed.  But it ‘balanced’ the political power between the North and the South.  And brought the southern states into the Union.

When the Democrats Did Not Like Immigration

After winning our independence, we got the Northwest Territories (the land north of the Ohio River) from the British.  The northerners got their way with this northern land.  The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 forbade slavery in this territory.

Then came the Louisiana Purchase.  The North wanted to exclude slavery from all of this land.  The South didn’t.  That would tip the balance of power in favor of the North.  So they compromised.  With the Missouri Compromise of 1820.  There would be some slavery in the new territory.  But not above the bottom border of Missouri (the 36th parallel).  Except in Missouri (a slave-state).  Which they added at the same time with Maine (a free-state).  To maintained the balance of power.

But the population continued to grow in the North.  Those in the South could see the writing on the wall.  The immigration into the northern states would tip the balance of power in the House to the North.  So they focused on controlling the judiciary.  The president (who nominated).  And the Senate (which confirmed).  What they couldn’t win by popular vote they’d simply legislate from the bench.  And dirty, filthy party politics was born.  The party machine.  And the Democratic Party.

It Takes a Republican

Martin Van Buren created it.  And, at the time, he had but one goal.  To keep the issue of slavery from ever being an issue again.  Which the Democrats did until the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861.  The North wanted to abolish slavery from the founding.  But the planter elite, then the Democrats, fought them every step of the way.  So they could maintain their power. 

But it was more than just power.  It was that elite status.  That they were superior.  It had gone beyond King Cotton.  The south had manufacturing.  Some of which was even more profitable than cotton.  But manufacturing couldn’t give you what cotton could.  An aristocratic planter elite that was so elite that it could own human life.  This was Old World aristocracy alive and well in the New World.

Anyway, all the legislation and court cases that led up to the Civil War had one thing in common.  All people trying to maintain the institution of slavery were Democrats.  The big ones, the Compromise of 1850, the Kansas-Nebraskan Act of 1854 and the Dred Scott ruling of 1854 were all pushed/won by Democrats.  The new Republican Party finally denied the Democrats.  A Republican president (Abraham Lincoln) made slavery a moral issue in the Civil War with his Emancipation Proclamation (which didn’t free a single slave but it made it politically impossible for France or Great Britain to recognize the Confederacy or enter the war on her behalf).  Four years of war and some 600,000 dead later, the North prevailed and the Union sounded the death knell for slavery in America.  Then the Republican Congress passed and the states ratified the Thirteenth Amendment in 1865.  The Republicans had, finally, abolished slavery.

Ignorance or Arrogance?

The Democrats can talk about Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Well, a little.  More Democrats voted against it than did Republicans.  And a Democrat, segregationist and KKK Exalted Cyclops, Robert Byrd, filibustered for 14 hours during an 83-day Democrat filibuster.  But a lot of Democrats did vote for the Civil Rights Act.  So, yeah, they can talk about that.  But they had absolutely nothing to do with the freeing of the slaves.  They call slavery America’s original sin.  But that’s not fair.  It was only the planter elite and then the Democrat Party that practiced that sin.  And they fought hard to keep their sinful ways.

A Democrat should not invoke the struggle to end slavery to help his cause.  Especially a black Democrat.  For to do so marks the height of ignorance.  Or arrogance.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LESSONS LEARNED #23: “Those who seek a third party cede the election to the opposition.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 22nd, 2010

SLAVERY WAS ALWAYS a complicated issue.  Many of the Founding Fathers saw the contradiction with the ideals embodied in the Declaration of Independence.  And there were the economic costs.  George Washington wanted to transition to paid laborers as the generations of slaves he inherited were consuming an ever growing share of his harvest.  (You only pay paid-laborers; you didn’t have to house and feed them and their families.)  He had whole families that included babies and the elderly long past their working prime.  People would buy slaves in their working prime but wouldn’t take their parents and grandparents, too.  He didn’t want to break up the families.  And he couldn’t free them.  Someone had to take care of those who could no longer work.  So he would.  Even after death.  He freed his slaves in his will and directed his heirs to train and help them so they could integrate into the workforce.  (Not every slave-owner, though, was as caring as Washington).

So Washington, John Adams and some of the other Founding Fathers saw slavery as an institution that would eventually wither and die.  They saw it as immoral.  As well as an inefficient economic system.   It would just have to die out one day.  So they tabled the discussion to get the southern states to join the union.  But they did put an end date on the slave trade.  Twenty years should be enough time they thought.  And in those 20 years, the South would figure out what to do with the slaves they had.  Because no one in the north could figure that one out.  Who would compensate the slave owners for their emancipated ‘property’?  And there were no biracial societies at that time.  No one could imagine that a formerly enslaved majority will become peaceful neighbors with their former minority masters.  Especially in the South.

But the cotton gin changed all of that.  The one thing that slave labor was good for was big single-crop plantations.  And there was none better than King Cotton.  Separating the seed from the cotton was the one bottleneck in the cotton industry.  Ely Whitney changed that in 1791.  Cotton production exploded.  As did slavery.  The southern economy changed.  As did the political debate.  The southern economy was a cotton economy.  And cotton needed slaves.  The South, therefore, needed slavery.

CARVED OUT OF the new Louisiana Territory were territories that would organize into states and request admittance into the union.  But would they be free or slave?  The first test was resolved with the Missouri Compromise (1820).  Henry Clay (the Great Compromiser) kept the peace.  Saved the union.  For awhile.  The compromise forbade slavery north of Missouri’s southern border (approximately the 36th parallel) in the Louisiana Territory (except in Missouri, of course).  Martin Van Buren saw this as a temporary fix at best.  Any further discussion on the slavery issue could lead to secession.  Or war.  So he created the modern Democratic Party with but one goal.  To get power and to keep power.  With power he could control what they debated.  And, once he had power, they wouldn’t debate slavery again.

During the 1844 presidential campaign, the annexation of the Republic of Texas was an issue.  The secretary of state, Daniel Webster, opposed it.  It would expand slavery and likely give the Senate two new democratic senators.  Which was what John C. Calhoun wanted.  He succeeded Webster as secretary of state.  The new northern Whigs were antislavery.  The southern Whigs were pro-cotton.  The Whig presidential candidate in 1844 was Henry Clay (the Great Compromiser).  He wasn’t for it or against it.  Neither was Martin Van Buren, the Democrat frontrunner.  They wished to compromise and avoid this hot issue all together.

Well, Clay wasn’t ‘anti’ enough for the antislavery Whigs.  So they left and formed the Liberty Party and nominated James. G. Birney as their candidate.  Meanwhile, the Democrats weren’t all that happy with Van Buren.  Enter James Knox Polk.  He didn’t vacillate.  He pledged to annex Texas.  And the Oregon territory.  The Democrats nominated him and said goodbye to Van Buren.

The Whig and Liberty parties shared the northern antislavery votes, no doubt costing Clay the election.  A fait accompli, President Tyler signed off on the annexation of Texas before Polk took the oath of office.

BUT ALL WAS not well.  Those sectional differences continued to simmer just below the boiling point.  The Fugitive Slave Law now made the ‘southern’ problem a northern one, too.  Federal law now required that they help return this southern ‘property’.  It got ugly.  And costly.  Harriet Ward Beecher’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin only inflamed the abolitionist fires in the North.  And then Stephen Douglas saw a proposed transcontinental railroad that could take him to the Whitehouse. 

The railroad would go through the unorganized Nebraskan territory (the northern part of the Louisiana Purchase).   As Washington discussed organizing this territory, the South noted that all of this territory was above 36th parallel.  Thus, any state organized would be, by the terms of the Missouri Compromise, free.  With no state below the 36th parallel added, the balance of power would tip to the North.  The South objected.  Douglas assuaged them.  With the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854.  Which replaced the Missouri Compromise (the 36th parallel) with popular sovereignty.  And Kansas bled.

The idea of popular sovereignty said that the people of the new organized state would determine if they were free or slave.  So the free and slave people raced to populate the territory.  It was a mini civil war.  A precursor of what was to come.  It split up the Whig and Democratic parties.  Southern Whigs and Northern Democrats quit their parties.  The Whig Party would wither and die.  The new Republican Party would rise from the Whig’s ashes.  They would address the cause, not the symptoms.  And at the heart of all the sectional divides was the issue of slavery itself.  It had to be addressed.  As Abraham Lincoln would say in 1858, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

ZACHARY TAYLOR CHOSE Whig Millard Fillmore as his vice president to appeal to northern Whigs.  When Taylor died some 2 years into his first term, Fillmore became president.  His support of the Compromise of 1850 (admit California as a free state, settle Texas border, grant territorial status to New Mexico, end the slave trade in the District of Columbia and beef up the Fugitive Slave Law) alienated him from the Whig base.

In the 1856 presidential contest, the Republicans nominated John C. Frémont.  The Democrats nominated James Buchanan.  And Millard Fillmore (compromiser and one time Whig) ran on the American Party ticket.  There was talk of secession should Frémont win.  It was a 3-way race.  Buchanan battled with the ‘compromiser’ in the South.  And with the ‘abolitionist’ in the North.  The race was close.  Buchanan won with only 45% of the vote.  But Frémont lost by only 2 states.  He had won all but 5 of the free states.  Had Fillmore not run, it is unlikely that these free states would have voted for the slavery candidate.  So Fillmore no doubt denied Frémont the election.

AMERICA’S ORIGINAL TRUST buster, Teddy Roosevelt (TR), said he wouldn’t run for reelection.  And he didn’t.  He picked Howard Taft as his ‘successor’.  TR was a progressive frontier man.  He had that smile.  This made him a popular and formidable candidate.  Taft just wasn’t as much of a TR as TR was.  So some asked TR to run again.  Against his own, hand-picked ‘successor’.  Which he did.

Taft won the Republican Nomination, though.  Undeterred (and having a really big ego), TR formed a third party, the Progressive Party.  He moved to the left of Taft.  So far left that it made Woodward Wilson, the Democrat candidate, look moderate. 

The 1912 presidential election turned into a 3-man race.  Between 3 progressives.  Taft ‘busted’ more trusts than did TR.  But he just wasn’t TR.  Woodward Wilson was probably the most progressive and idealist of the three.  But in the mix, he looked like the sensible candidate.  Roosevelt beat Taft.  But Wilson beat Roosevelt.  Wilson won with only 45% of the vote.  And gave us the income tax and the Federal Reserve System.  Big Government had come.

IN THE 1992 presidential campaign, George Herbert Walker Bush (read my lips, no new taxes) ran in a 3-way race between Democrat Bill Clinton and Ross Perot.  Perot bashed both parties for their high deficits.  He was a populist candidate against the status quo.  He went on TV with charts and graphs.  He called Reaganomics ‘voodoo’ economics.  While Bush fought these attacks on his 12 years in the executive office (8 as vice president and on 4 as president), Clinton got by with relative ease on his one big weakness.  Character. 

Exit polling showed that Perot took voters from both candidates.  More people voted that year.  But the increase was roughly equal to the Perot vote (who took 19%).  If anyone energized the election that year, it wasn’t Clinton.  He won with only 43% of the vote.  The majority of Americans did not vote for Clinton.  Had the focus not been on Reaganomics and the deficit (where Perot took it), Clinton’s character flaws would have been a bigger issue.  And if it came down to character, Bush probably would have won.  Despite his broken ‘read my lips’ pledge.

HISTORY HAS SHOWN that third party candidates don’t typically win elections.  In fact, when a party splinters into two, it usually benefits the common opposition.  That thing that is so important to bring a third party into existence is often its own demise.  It splits a larger voting bloc into two smaller voting blocs.  Guaranteeing the opposition’s victory. 

Politics can be idealistic.  But not at the expense of pragmatism.  When voting for a candidate that cannot in all probability win, it is a wasted vote.  If you’re making a ‘statement’ with your vote by voting for a third party candidate, that statement is but one thing.  You want to lose.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LESSONS LEARNED #19: “Philosophical debates can be effective but character assassination is more expedient, especially when no one agrees with your philosophy.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 24th, 2010

THOMAS JEFFERSON HATED Alexander Hamilton.  So much so he hired Philip Freneau as a translator in his State Department in George Washington’s administration.  You see, Jefferson did not like confrontation.  So he needed a way to slander Hamilton, his policies and the Washington administration without getting his own hands dirty.  And that was what Freneau was supposed to do with the money he earned while working in the State Department.  Publish a newspaper (National Gazette) and attack Hamilton, his policies and the Washington administration.  Papers then were partisan.  More so than today.  Then, lies and libel were tools of the trade.  And they knew how to dig up the dirt.  Or make it up. 

Another scandalmonger, James Callender, was slinging dirt for Jefferson.  And he hit pay dirt.  Mr. and Mrs. Reynolds of Philadelphia had a lucrative business.  They were blackmailing Alexander Hamilton.  Mr. Reynolds had his wife seduce Hamilton.  Which she did.  And did well.  They had an affair.  And Mr. Reynolds then blackmailed him.  Jefferson pounced.  Or, rather, Callender did.  To keep Jefferson’s hands clean.  Hamilton, Callender said, was using his position at the Treasury Department for personal gain.  He was using public funds to pay the blackmailer.  They found no proof of this.  And they did look for it.  Hard.  But when they came up empty, Jefferson said that it just proved what a good thief Hamilton was.  He was so good that he didn’t leave any traces of his treachery behind.

Of course, when you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.  And Jefferson’s association with Callender would come back and bite him in the ass.  In a big way.  Upset because Jefferson didn’t appropriately compensate him for all his loyal dirt slinging (he wanted the postmaster’s job in Richmond), he publicized the Sally Hemings rumors.  And after breaking the true story of the Hamilton affair, many would believe this scoop.  That Jefferson was having an affair with one of his slaves.  It was a dark cloud that would forever hang over Jefferson.  And his legacy.

Hamilton admitted to his affair.  Jefferson admitted to no affair.  Hamilton would never hold public office again and would later die in a duel with Jefferson’s one-time toady, Aaron Burr.  This duel resulted because Hamilton was doing whatever he could to keep the amoral and unscrupulous Burr from public office (in this case, it was the governorship of New York).  When the election of 1800 resulted in a tie between Jefferson and Burr, Hamilton urged the House to vote for Jefferson, his archenemy.   Despite what had appeared in the press, Hamilton did have morals and scruples.  Unlike some.  Speaking of which, Jefferson would go on to serve 2 terms as president.  And all of that angst about Hamiltonian policies?  They all went out the window with the Louisiana Purchase (which was unconstitutional, Big Government and Big Finance).

RONALD REAGAN WAS routinely called old, senile and out of touch by the entertainment community, the media and his political foes.  But he bested Mikhail Gorbachev and the Soviet Union, something Jimmy Carter never did.  He said ‘no’ at Reykjavik because he told the American people that he wouldn’t give up the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).  He knew the Soviet Union was bleeding.  Communism was a farce.  It inhibited human capital.  And impoverished her people.  SDI may have been science fiction in the 1980s, but capitalism wasn’t.  It could do it all.  Including SDI.  The Soviet Union was on the ropes and Reagan would give no quarter.  The days of living in fear of the mushroom cloud were over.  And capitalism would deliver the knockout punch.

Reaganomics, of course, made this all possible.  Supply-side economics.  Which follows the Austrian school.  Say’s Law.  ‘Supply creates demand’.  You don’t stimulate the economy by taxing one group of people so another group can spend.  You stimulate it by creating incentives for risk takers to take risks.  And when they do, they create jobs.  And wealth.

Tax and spend is a failed Keynesian, zero-sum economic policy.  When you take from the earners and give to the non-earners, we just transfer purchasing power.  We don’t create it.  For some to spend more, others must spend less.  Hence, zero-sum.  The net some of goods and services people are purchasing remains the same.  Different people are just doing the purchasing.

When Apple invented the Macintosh personal computer (PC), few were demanding a PC with a graphical user interface (GUI).  But Apple was innovative.  They created something they thought the people would want.  And they did.  They took a risk.  And the Macintosh with its mouse and GUI took off.  Apple manufacturing increased and added jobs.  Retail outlets for the Macintosh expanded and created jobs.  Software firms hired more engineers to write code.  And other firms hired more people to engineer and manufacture PC accessories.  There was a net increase in jobs and wealth.  Just as Say’s Law predicts.  Supply-side economics works.

Of course, the Left hates Reagan and attacked Reaganomics with a vengeance.  They attacked Reagan for being pro-rich.  For not caring about the poor.  And they revised history.  They say the only thing the Reagan tax cuts gave us were record deficits.  Of course, what those tax cuts gave us were record tax receipts.  The government never collected more money.  The House of Representatives (who spends the money), awash in cash, just spent that money faster than the treasury collected it.  The record shows Reaganomics worked.  Lower tax rates spurred economic activity.  More activity generated more jobs and more personal wealth.  Which resulted in more people paying more taxes.  More people paying taxes at a lower rate equaled more tax revenue in the aggregate.  It works.  And it works every time people try it. 

Because Reaganomics worked and showed the Left’s policies were failures, they had to attack Reagan.  To discredit him.  They had to destroy the man.  Except when they’re running for elected office.  Then they strive to show how much more Reagan-like they are than their conservative opponents.  Because they know Reaganomics worked.  And they know that we know Reaganomics worked.

GEORGE W. BUSH was routinely called an ‘idiot’ by the entertainment community, the media and his political foes.  Yet this ‘idiot’ seems to have outwitted the elite of the liberal Left time and time again.  I mean, if their policies were winning, they would be no reason to have attacked Bush in the first place.  The Left hated him with such vitriol that they said he blew up the Twin Towers on 9/11 as a justification for invading Iraq for her oil.  It was Big Oil’s lust for profit, after all, that was driving this Texan’s Big Oil policies.  And taking Iraq’s oil would increase Big Oil’s sales and give her even more obscene profits.

If Bush was an idiot, he must have been an idiot genius to come up with a plan like that.  Then again, gasoline prices crept to $4/gallon following the Iraq War.  Had all that oil gone on the market according to plan, that wouldn’t have happened.  Unless the plan was to keep that oil OFF of the market, thus, by rules of supply and demand, the price of oil (and the gasoline we make from it) would go up thus enriching Big Oil through higher prices resulting from a lower sales volume.  My god, what evil genius.  For an idiot.  Of course, gas taxes, numerous summer gas blends (required by the government’s environmental policies), an aging and over-taxed pipeline infrastructure and insufficient refinery capacity (the government’s environmental policies make it too punishing even to consider building a new refinery) to meet increasing demand (soaring in India and China) had nothing to do with the rise in gas prices.

IS THE POLITICAL Left evil?  Probably not.  Just amoral.  They have an agenda.  They survive on political spoils and patronage.  Old time politics.  Enrich themselves through cronyism.  If tribute is paid they’ll extend favorable treatment.  If tribute is not paid, they will release their wrath via hostile regulation, litigation, Congressional investigation and punitive taxation.  Just like they did to Big Tobacco (and, no, it wasn’t about our health.  They could have just made tobacco illegal.  But they didn’t.  Why?  It just brings in way too much money to the government.  Via sin taxes.  And federal lawsuits.  And with it being addictive, it’s a frickin cash piñata for them.)

They know few agree with their philosophy.  But they don’t care.  It’s not about national prosperity.  It’s about power.  And they want it.  That’s why they can’t debate the issues.  They know they can’t win.  So they attack the messenger.  Not the message.  If you don’t believe that, you can ask Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and just about any other Republican.  Well, you can’t ask Lincoln or Reagan.  But you can guess what they would say.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LESSONS LEARNED #11: “Before you condemn capitalism, imagine a world without professional sports, movies, cell phones and tampons.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 29th, 2010

AT THE END of the American Revolution the world said, “Okay.  Now what?”  We were a joke.  We were broke.  We were weak.  And now that the common enemy was no more, we weren’t very united any more.  Most assumed we would end up back with Great Britain.  And because of that many thought there was no sense rushing in to make treaties that will just have to be unmade.

It was complicated dealing with us.  In a confederacy of strong states, it was not easy making trade or treaties.  Multiple currencies, tariffs, laws, etc.  To enter the world of the European powers, America needed to put on her big boy pants and speak with one voice.  Some Founding Fathers saw this.  That’s why they met in Philadelphia and drafted the Constitution.  And with ratification, we had one voice.

ALEXANDER HAMILTON WAS a capitalist.  Thomas Jefferson was not.  Hamilton understood money and finance.  Jefferson did not.  Hamilton liked manufacturing and commerce.  Jefferson did not.  He thought everyone should be a simple farmer.  Everyone, that is, but him.

When elected president, people hailed Jefferson as the people’s president.  Simple, unassuming, the epitome of egalitarian republicanism.  Only thing was, there wasn’t anything simple, unassuming or egalitarian about him.  He attacked the nobility, the corruption of big cities and the evils of commerce and the ‘money’ men.  Yet he indulged in the good life like no other American.  He always lived beyond his means.  He lavished himself in the finest luxuries of the time.  And he absolutely loved Paris though it was everything he said he hated.

Hamilton put America’s financial house in order.  He helped give the new nation legitimacy.  He opened European credit to us.  Problem was that, in Jefferson’s eyes, America was becoming too much like Great Britain.  And worse, it was becoming less Virginian.  So they squared off and fought each other.  Tooth and nail.  They gave birth to America’s first political parties (Federalists and Republicans).  They viciously attacked each other in the press.  Yes, politics were nasty right from the beginning.

Then something happened that caused Jefferson to embrace much of what Hamilton did.  He fell ass-backwards into the Louisiana Purchase.

THERE WERE DREAMS of a French empire in North America.  But the slave uprising in Saint-Domingue (present day Haiti) put the kibosh on that.  With Saint-Domingue lost, there was no point in France keeping New Orleans or the Louisiana territory beyond.  And Napoleon needed money.  He was at war.  And that war was about to expand to include Great Britain.  So he offered it all to the Americans for about 15 million dollars.  Though a steal, 15 million was still a lot of money.  And then Jefferson embraced what that capitalistic bastard (we can call him that for Hamilton was the fruit of unmarried loins) created. 

(This sale was also strategic.  By expanding America’s western border, it kept that land from falling to the British.  America would grow and, in time, a stronger America would challenge Great Britain for all that sea-going commerce in the Atlantic.  If it couldn’t go to the French, better it go to the Americans.  And, in the process, it would really piss off the British.  Like I said, strategic.)

The deal included gold, bonds and some debt assumption.  Jefferson was adamantly opposed to Hamilton’s assumption of states’ debt back in Washington’s administration for it only aggrandized the central government.  And Jefferson absolutely hated banking (probably because he was forever in debt).  And though he was brilliant, he was not so brilliant when you put dollar signs in front of things.  Jefferson made the purchase, but the bond deal put together was pure Hamiltonian. 

France wanted cash.  We didn’t have it.  But we now had established credit in Europe.  We could issue bonds.  Because of our credit worthiness, the Dutch were willing to buy those bonds from France at a discount and give France the cash Napoleon wanted.  And, voilà, Hamilton’s capitalism allowed Jefferson to double the size of the United States while reducing the threat in North America from the competing European powers (Great Britain, France and Spain).  It also enabled Napoleon to cause further mischief in Europe (an unfortunate side affect).  Sorry about that, Europe.  It was an unintended consequence.

THE FREE FLOW of ideas and capital can define capitalism.  Some people have great ideas.  Others have lots of money and are willing to take a risk.  Separately, these two don’t do much to make life better.  But bring them together, though, and let the good times roll.

Venture capitalists are rich.  And they’re looking to get richer.  It’s what they’re good at.  They look for talent.  New start-up companies with a good idea.  An idea that may change the world.  They may not have that creative spark to create something new, but they can recognize that spark when they see it.  And when they see it, they want to finance it.  If they pick a winner, we may get that something that changes the world.  And they may make a dump truck full of money.  Everyone wins.

Venture capitalists bring in money.  And talent.  The entrepreneur spends his or her time creating.  The venture capitalist helps build the business.  Kind of like a mentor.  They can be demanding, though.  And impatient.  They expect a big profit on their investment.  And they don’t want to wait around forever to get it.  When things work, they can work well.  Very well.  The entrepreneurs create something new and remarkable that everyone must have.  They then take their company public.  Their initial public offering brings in gazillions.  And those initial investors (the entrepreneurs and the venture capitalists) get incredibly rich.

IN 1976, THREE guys had an idea.  They made an electronic device in a garage that they thought people would want to buy.  It was crude and ‘some’ assembly was required.  And by ‘some’ I mean a lot.  Initial financing was limited.  A car and a scientific calculator just didn’t sell for a lot.  Two of them (one had since left the company) approached a couple of venture capitalists who introduced them to a man by the name of Armas Clifford (Mike) Markkula Jr.  He, too, was a venture capitalist.  And an engineer to boot.

Markkula joined the company.  He was one of the driving forces behind a new product introduced in 1984.  Their Super Bowl ad was, is, a classic.  That product was the Macintosh computer.  Those two men introduced to Markkula were Steve Jobs and Stephen Wozniak.  That company is, of course, Apple.  Today, Apple’s iPhone dominates the market.  And they’re still innovating.  Thanks to a venture capitalist willing to take a risk.

CAPITALISM CAN DO remarkable things.  It can build a nation.  Or change a world.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,