Students in the US and the UK enroll in the Easy Degree Programs instead of Math and Science to have more Fun at University

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 8th, 2012

Week in Review

The liberal Democrats want to provide a college degree for everyone.  They want cheap student loans.  And more money spent on grants.  Anything and everything to increase the number of kids going on to college.  There is only one problem.  They are going to college.  But few are learning anything worthwhile (see We must shift science out of the geek ghetto by Liz Truss posted 9/3/2012 on The Telegraph).

Planes and trains will help deliver prosperity, but brains are the trump card…

Scientific and technical skills top the global league; maths graduates command the highest salaries, closely followed by engineers and computer scientists. But in Britain the message isn’t getting through – especially at school, where scientific expertise is seen as specialist and difficult. The vast majority of children drop any study of science at 16.

This contrasts with emerging economies such as India, where science is a mass aspiration… Young Indians don’t aspire to be pop singers or football stars, but computer engineers or technicians…

One of the underlying problems is that students in the US and UK often do not persevere in science. In the US, 40 per cent of students taking science and engineering switch their major or drop out, recognising that students achieve higher grades in arts subjects for less work. In the UK, students drop science even earlier. Evidence suggests that the level required in science and maths A-levels has been up to two grades tougher than in communication studies or sociology. Why risk doing a harder subject and getting a worse mark..?

In Japan, 85 per cent of students achieve the equivalent of maths A-level…

Indian students study maths and science for twice as long each week at high school as their British or American counterparts. It is not surprising that this hard work builds up the appetite to take science to a higher level…

Germany managed to transform its approach in 10 years…

Standards were yanked up and it was understood that teachers and students would have to work longer and harder. Instead of ending school at lunchtime, German children often stay from 7am until 4pm or 5pm. By 2009, results had improved significantly and overtaken the UK, which was ominously described by Pisa as having “stagnated at best”.

Occupy Wall Street was full of people with college degrees that couldn’t find work.  They incurred a lot of student loan debt because people told them that a college degree was a guarantee to a better and more well-paid future.  Only no one told them that it made a difference what that college degree was in.  Universities gave out a lot of expensive albeit worthless liberal arts and social science degrees.  Those easy ones with few math and science requirements.  Because it was easier to admit students for the easier degrees.  And colleges need students to pay their faculty those generous pay and benefits.  As well as all those campus workers.  So they count on large government subsidies.  And cheap student loans to bury students in debt to get a degree that few businesses will hire them for.  Because the key to those cushy jobs in our colleges is filling those classrooms.  It doesn’t matter what they learn they just have to pay to sit in those classrooms.

Of course everything people told these kids was wrong.  But do they care?  They just go after the next batch of graduating high school seniors.  Who are eager to go to college.  But often times more for the fun than the learning.  And our educators don’t care about the lives they may destroy by giving these kids the kind of debt their degrees can’t repay.  And the Left’s answer to this?  More federal jobs.  Which people joke are jobs for the unemployable.  Like those graduating with those worthless degrees.  So a lot of new government jobs help to feed the system.  When there is enough economic activity in the private sector to pay the taxes to support these bloated public sector bureaucracies, that is.

So is there a method to this madness?  Worthless jobs for worthless degrees?  Of course there is.  It helps to expand the growth of government.  When young graduates with worthless degrees get cushy federal jobs they of course vote Democrat.  Which is the ultimate goal of the federal government-public university relationship.  You scratch my back and I’ll scratch your back.  So the universities teach students about the evils of capitalism and the urgency of global warming.  And the government hires these people.  To fill the jobs of the expanding federal government.  That interferes ever further into the private sector.  The universities and the government each get what they want.  When there is enough economic activity in the private sector to pay the taxes to support these bloated public sector bureaucracies, that is.  When there isn’t they occupy Wall Street and complain about the corporations that won’t hire them.  Instead of the education system that ripped them off.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Time names Organized Protesters Masquerading as Spontaneous Democracy Person of the Year

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 17th, 2011

Week in Review

There are two sides to every issue.  Take the Occupy Wall Street movement.  Time Magazine has made these protestors their Person of the Year.  While Investors.com calls these maggot infested hippy, communist-loving, capitalist-hating pond-scum something else (See “Occupy” A Media Creation Unworthy Of Time’s Person Of The Year posted 12/16/2011 on Investors.com).

Occupy Wall Street — the unkempt campout of the same old rent-a-radicals calling for redistribution of wealth — was largely a media-generated phenomenon whose significance ends there.

Unlike the far larger and more politically potent Tea Party movement, which Time often ignored, Occupy is the thin gruel of radicalism writ large by unwarranted media attention.

It has no demands other than socialist utopia, has elected no one, has failed to draw support from middle Americans and has proven itself mainly a public nuisance. Had the media not showered Occupy with attention, it wouldn’t be news at all.

How do we know? Polls show that the public remains intensely opposed to the Occupy media circus. If that’s not clear enough, the Democratic Party did its utmost to distance itself from Occupy once it learned its support would cost them votes.

That’s why Democratic city machines in the political downstream, after weeks of kowtowing to the protesters, shut down their camps all at once. They know a political liability when they see one…

In its Man-of-the-Year edition,Time calls Occupy a mass movement as significant as those of 1848, while ignoring what the public is noticing — the disease, rape, freeloading, filth, depravity, stench and murder rampant in the camps.

Time tried to tie Occupy’s irrelevant protests in with the flash Arab protests that have fueled Islamofascism as well as the tantrums of economically illiterate youth in Spain, Greece and the U.K.

But far from being spontaneous rage, Occupy’s protests were fully planned over the summer by radical groups like MoveOn.org and Adbusters, a Canadian cabal that thrives on attention.

See?  There are two sides to every issue.  In the case of Occupy Wall Street there is the truth.  As reported by Investors.com and other news organizations.  And the propaganda spread by the mainstream media.  Spreading the lie that this political movement organized by radical groups was actually spontaneous democracy.  All to help an unpopular president win reelection.  By spreading the flames of class warfare.  So President Obama can run against the greed of Wall Street instead of his record.  Because his record is not the kind that lets presidents win reelection.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Occupy Wall Street finds Conflict not Love in Zuccotti Park

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 27th, 2011

Week in Review

I guess George, John, Paul and Ringo were wrong.  Love isn’t all you need.  You also need conflict resolution services (see Women Bring Peace to Zuccotti Park by Victoria Pynchon posted 11/26/2011 on Forbes).

Peter, Paul and Mary memorably sang “whenever two or more of you are gathered in His name, there is love.” But whenever two or more of us are gathered to build a bridge, stage a protest, or run a business, there is conflict.

Fortunately for Occupy Wall Street in Zuccotti Park, mediators and other peace workers have been providing conflict resolution services to protestors, including daily nonviolent communication training and mediation for conflicts among the occupiers.

Guess that’s what happens when you use your fellow protestors’ part of the commons as your personal toilet.

One thing for sure is that you never heard stuff like this about the Tea Party.  The Tea Party generally cleaned up after themselves.  Didn’t urinate or defecate anywhere but in a proper toilet facility.  And they didn’t want to beat the crap out of their fellow protesters.  Because they all got along.  And they got along with the community they were in.  For there was, dare I say it?  Love.

Everybody now…love, love, love….  All you need is…love, love, love…

Like in the Tea Party.  But apparently not in the Occupy Wall Street movement in Zuccotti Park.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , ,

Woman Dies from Drug Overdose at Occupy Wall Street in Vancouver

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 12th, 2011

Week in Review

Sadly, a 23-year woman died from an apparent drug overdose at an Occupy movement in Vancouver (see Death at Occupy Vancouver shouldn’t force end to encampment, protesters say by Sean Sullivan, Katie DeRosa, Jason Markusoff and Sean Myers posted 11/6/2011 on canada.com).

The woman, identified online as 23-year-old Ashlie Gough of Victoria, was found unresponsive in her tent Saturday afternoon from a rumoured drug overdose. Police said the death is not considered suspicious.

After news of the woman’s death broke, Mayor Gregor Robertson said he had asked city manager Penny Ballem to find a way to force the protesters from the makeshift tent city, calling it unsafe…

“This is the second critical incident in the last two days,” Robertson said over catcalls from occupiers, in reference to a man who overdosed on heroin on Thursday…

Protester Niko Guerra said the woman and her friends were peaceful and played music most nights.

“They enjoyed having somewhere to stay, as opposed to living on the street,” he said.

Sad.  Only 23 years old.

I guess we can stop calling these the Left’s Tea Party.  Because the Tea Party rallies weren’t just a place to score and get high.  They had a serious and consistent message.  Not just playing music all night and getting high.  Which appears to be the case with many of these protesters.  Not everyone I’m sure.  But enough to make these look more like a tailgate party before a concert than a political movement.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , ,

If Corporations are Vile and Evil why do Democrats/Feminists want Women to Run Them?

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 30th, 2011

Week in Review

The Occupy Wall Street movements linger on.  In their battle against capitalism.  Bankers.  And corporations.  The greatest scourge known to human kind.  President Obama has expressed some support for these protesters.  And the Democrats are on board with them.  To teach corporate America a lesson.  All the while trying to put more women into the CEO positions of these evil, vile corporations (see Number of female ‘Fortune’ 500 CEOs at record high by Laura Petrecca posted 10/26/2011 on USA Today).

If no women step down before the end of 2011, there will be 18 women running Fortune 500 companies in 2012. Previously, there haven’t been more than 16 female CEOs at Fortune 500 firms at the same time.

Yet, while the upcoming ascensions are notable, the gender gap between men and women in the workplace remains vast, with females struggling to get the mentors they need and the pay to equal their male counterparts.

If these are so evil and vile why is it so important to get more women running them?

The Democrats claim the feminists.  They are always fighting for the equality of the sexes.  Yet it is the Democrats throwing in with the Occupy Wall Street protesters.  Those people who hate these evil, vile corporations.  So are corporations bad?  And if so why do Democrats want women running them?

Anecdotally speaking, men are also more apt to quickly say “yes” to a career-enhancing assignment that could affect their personal life, while women tend to consider how the opportunity could affect home situations such as elder care or child care, Catalyst’s Soon says.

In turn, the next time a manager has a job to offer, he or she may remember that woman’s hesitation and consider going with another candidate, she says.

So I guess there are differences between the sexes.  One cares about children and parents.  The other doesn’t.  They’re just a bunch of selfish bastards.  So that’s why we pay men more.  Because they put career ahead of children and parents.  The selfish bastards they are.

Of course, in choosing a CEO for a corporation, being that kind of selfish bastard is definitely a plus.  Besides, corporations are vile and evil.  Better a selfish bastard run them than a selfless, good woman.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

The Occupy Wall Street People are Using Residents’ Doorsteps as Public Toilets

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 23rd, 2011

Week in Review

Here’s something you just don’t hear about at Tea Party rallies (see NYC residents complain about ‘Occupy’ protesters by KAREN MATTHEWS posted 10/21/2011 on the Associated Press).

At a two-hour meeting Thursday night, some neighbors said protesters urinated in the streets and beat drums in the middle of the night.

“They’re defecating on our doorsteps,” said…a member of the area’s community board, a representative panel that helps funnel local concerns to city officials.

But the board voted unanimously for a resolution that recognized the protesters’ First Amendment rights while calling for a crackdown on noise and public urination and defecation.

Defecating and urinating.  How nice.  And the drums.  Like I said, I don’t recall any of this from the Tea Party rallies.  Guess the Occupy Wall Street people are not quite the Tea Party people.

Perhaps these residents, too, are part of the 1%.  And their showing their displeasure with their greed as well.  While at the same time asking for donations from these very same people.  So they can continue their peaceful demonstration.  In their neighborhood.  What the Occupy Wall Street people use as a public toilet.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , ,

The Problem with the Occupy Wall Street People is that they don’t Know the Difference between Capitalism and Crony Capitalism

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 15th, 2011

Bank Tellers have a Job because they didn’t go to College to get a Philosophy or an English Degree

Another proud day for American public education and American colleges (see Protesters arrested in bank march, party in Times Square by Georgett Roberts, Jennifer Bain and Kevin Fasick posted 10/15/2011 on the New York Post).

The “Crossroads of the World” were jammed when thousands of anti-greed protesters brought their party to Times Square, capping a day of marches marred by the arrest of more than 20 who stormed a Citibank branch.

And what do they want?  A lot of free stuff.  The greedy little bastards.

Brought their ‘party’?  Yeah, that about sums up these beatniks on Wall Street.  For them life is nothing but a party.  And a protest is an even better party.  I mean, look at them.  They’re having the time of their lives.

Earlier, 24 protesters were arrested when a mob stormed a LaGuardia Place Citibank and shouted slogans as two demonstrators closed their bank accounts in protest just after 2 p.m.

I hope they find a safe place for that money.  There are a lot of desperate people out there who need money.  And it would have been a lot harder for them to get at that money if they had left it locked in a bank.

They were screaming and chanting while they were going in. Security told them to leave, but they didn’t. They stood in a group chanting things to the tellers. There were locked in, and then they were taken away.”

If I’m not mistaken bank tellers aren’t part of that superrich 1%.  No.  They’re probably a part of that 99%.  Like the protesters.  Only they have a job.  Unlike the protestors.  Because they didn’t go to college to get a philosophy or English degree.

“We went into the bank to peacefully protest,” she said. “People were standing in the bank giving testimonials, speaking about their student debt, some of which is held by Citibank and a few undercover police officers came into the bank”

These people partied for 4 years (or more) while going to college getting their worthless degrees.  And learning how to hate America.  And the man.  And now they’re bitching to complete strangers about their own bad decisions?  Taking on debt for some BS degree?  Mom and Dad probably warned them not to do that.  To get a degree in something useful instead.  Like business.  Accounting.  Chemistry.  Something that has value in the economy.  But did they listen?  Apparently not.

He said he paid $559 annually in fees to the bank, including late charges.

“I’ve been wanting to move my money for awhile. But this opened my eyes,” he said of his experiences. “I’m going to use a community-based bank for my funds.”

This is just like someone living in East Berlin at the height of the Cold War waiting for their chance to escape to West Berlin.  To scale the Berlin Wall.  Before the East Germans shot him.  Or her.  Of course, there are some subtle differences.  East Germany was an oppressive police state that killed people trying to escape.  While America is a free county.  With a free market.  Where you can move your money to any bank you wish.  Without the threat of being gunned down by the state.

We call this free market capitalism.  Businesses compete for you business by pleasing you more than their competition.  You don’t need a law to make banks please you.  If you don’t like how a bank is treating you, leave.  All you have to do is open a new account.  Withdraw your money from the old account.  And deposit it into the new account.  It’s that easy.  It sure is a hell of a lot easier than trying to
climb a barbwire wall under withering machine gun fire.

If Government Favoritism Bothers you Perhaps you should Direct your Angst at Washington D.C. at the Next Election

These protestors may hate capitalism.  Because they were taught that on our college campuses.  But they sure love some of its billionaires.  Even though they belong to that 1% (see Protesters should not target entrepreneurs like Steve Jobs by Antony Davies posted 10/12/2011 on The Morning Call).

Steve Jobs, the co-founder of Apple who died last week at age 56, left the world a better place than he found it — and not just because of the treasure trove of gadgets he shepherded into creation.

Mr. Jobs’ life is a testament to what economists have long been telling us — that wealth and plunder are not the same thing. Plunder is what you get when you take from others. Wealth is what you get when you give to others.

Due to his commercial success, Mr. Jobs accumulated $8 billion of wealth over his life. But you won’t see Occupy Wall Street protesters coming after Jobs or Apple because it is so obvious that we freely gave our money to him in exchange for his products. We don’t view Jobs’ wealth as plunder, but as one-half of a transaction. We gave him $8 billion and he gave us the world that science fiction authors promised.

We voluntarily gave our money to billionaire like Steve Jobs.  The Occupy Wall Street mob is trying to take money from others.  The Steve Jobs of the world create wealth because they please us.  People like those on Wall Street threaten us for plunder or else.  Steve Jobs good.  Plunderers bad.

The young protesters currently occupying Wall Street should be careful where they direct their ire. People like Steve Jobs who gained their wealth by providing value to others — including the protesters using iPhones to call their friends — shouldn’t be the subject of protest. The protesters should focus their ire on those who use the political process to gain plunder by forcing the rest of us to subsidize their losing business models.

Some of these pirates can be found on Wall Street. They benefited when the government forced taxpayers to underwrite Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s largesse, and they benefited when the government forced taxpayers to bail out the companies that bet on that largesse.

But they’re not just in New York City.

Let us not forget that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are Government Sponsored Enterprises.  With close ties to the government.  Executing government policy.  And being under the official oversight of the government.  In particular, at the time of the subprime mortgage crisis, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd.  Who kept saying there’s nothing wrong with Freddie or Fannie.  That they were both as sound as a pound.  All the way up to the Great Recession.  Which they caused.

Pirates can be found on Main Street, where businessmen ask the government to create an unfair licensing system that will hamstring their competitors. They can be found in the public sector, where public unions ask the government to maintain a system that forces us to use the U.S. Postal Service to send first-class mail. Some can even be found on the farm, when they fight to maintain government requirements to put ethanol in our gas tanks and pay huge tariffs on imported sugar.

Here’s my point. Pirates can be found in all cities, and in all sectors, but their power to plunder has its source in one city: Washington, D.C. The federal government and the businesses that use political ties to force their products on consumers aren’t creating value — they’re enriching themselves at our expense. If protesters want to stop the plunder, then they are protesting in the wrong place.

That’s right, it takes two to tango.  And to plunder.  Lobbyists can’t lobby politicians unless they’re for sale.  Corporations can’t plunder unless they have cronies in Washington letting them.  By restricting competition.  And this is the key difference between capitalism (such as Steve Jobs used) and crony capitalism (such as what everyone is pissed off about).  It’s is crony capitalism that gets special favors from government.  In exchange for campaign contributions.

So if this kind of government favoritism bothers you, perhaps you should direct your angst to those who make the rules.  Washington D.C.  And by that I mean at the voting booth at the next election.  The way real democracy works.

The Occupy Wall Street Protestors have no Idea about Capital, Labor, Regulatory, Distribution, Insurance or Piracy Costs

And speaking of piracy, let’s talk about that a little.  And I’m not talking about bootlegging music or movies.  I’m not about literal pirates on the high seas (see Prepare to repel boarders posted 10/13/2011 on The Economist).

SOMALI pirates can be persistent. They have attacked the Maersk Alabama, a container ship owned by an American subsidiary of Denmark’s Maersk Line, no fewer than five times, most recently in May. In the first attack, in 2009, the captain was held hostage until the US Navy rescued him. Then Maersk put private armed guards on the ship. Since then, it has successfully repelled all boarders.

Maersk says it is only arming a few ships plying the pirate-infested waters off East Africa. But the practice is spreading rapidly among shipping firms despite the cost, which can run to $100,000 per voyage for a four-man team. That is because the number of attacks, off Somalia and elsewhere, has kept growing despite the strengthening of naval patrols (see chart). The European Union’s NAVFOR task-force, NATO warships and other navies patrol the waters off Somalia, but this has only pushed the pirates out into the open ocean, extending their attack zone towards India’s coast and as far south as Mozambique’s. This has forced the shipping industry, its insurers, and the national and international authorities that oversee them to accept that private armed guards are a necessity.

American ships plying these waters are bringing American-made goods to overseas markets.  Which everyone agrees is vital to our economy.  A positive balance of trade.  More exports.  Less imports.  And here we are trying to deliver our exports.  And having our ships hijacked by pirates.

Protestors hate corporations.  Because that’s where rich people sit back with their feet up on their desk puffing away on their fat cigars.  While counting their money.  At least, that’s what the protestors think.  They have no idea about the capital costs for plant and equipment.  Labor costs.  Regulatory costs.  Distribution (container ships ain’t cheap).  Insurance.  And, of course, piracy on the high seas and ransom demands.

Protestors are no fans of military spending, either.  They think the military is used just to invade other countries so we can steal their oil.  Well, they can’t blame this Somali piracy on America.  For the Somalis are stealing from anyone.  And nations everywhere have banded together to try and protect their trade routes.  But can’t.  Which is pretty sad.  Because during World War II we eventually defeated the U-Boat menace in the North Atlantic.  Of course, back then, we spent what was necessary on the military to win.  Unlike today.  Where the military budget is just a source of funds the Wall Street protestors want to plunder.

The Occupy Wall Street protestors are Acting like Spoiled Children, Like a Bunch of Eric Cartmans

The Occupy Wall Street protestors hate banks.  Capital formation.  Corporations.  That is, capitalism.  How do we know this?  Because they have told us.  Via Twitter.  Blogs.  YouTube.  Which they wrote and/or recorded on their Apple products.  And uploaded it to the Internet.  That we then downloaded on our Apple products.  Or other devices.  All of which made possible by banks, capital formation and corporations.  That is, capitalism.

These kids love capitalism.  They love the toys capitalism offers.  They just hate not being born into privilege.  Where they can afford to satisfy every want and urge as soon as they have it.  Without having to work hard or wait until they can afford to pay for these things.  They’re acting like spoiled children.  Like a bunch of Eric Cartmans.  Except for that part about being a bunch of filthy, stinking hippies.  For everyone knows that hippies are the bane of Cartman’s existence.  But apart from that one difference, these protestors are Eric Cartman.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Capitalism vs. Communism, Socialism, Occupy Wall Street and President Obama

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 14th, 2011

The Corporation was Created to Raise Capital and Manage Risk so they can Build the Stuff we Want

No wonder the Occupy Wall Street people have their heads filled with nonsense.  Here’s an Ivy League publication that doesn’t even understand what a stakeholder in a corporation is.  They have a stake, i.e., a share.  They own stock.  They’ve risked their capital.  And if you don’t risk capital, then you’re just not a stakeholder (see Occupy Wall Street: What Businesses Need to Know by Hari Bapuji and Suhaib Riaz posted 10/14/2011 on the Harvard Business Review).

The demonstrators are asserting that they are stakeholders in American business, and they’re correct — they are stakeholders, as consumers, as employees, and as citizens affected by the financial system in general.

No they’re not.  Unless they bought stock in these corporations.  Which I doubt, because people typically don’t protest against companies they invest in.  Unless they’re idiots.

The corporation was created to raise large amounts of capital.  And manage risk.  By selling stocks to shareholders.  So they can raise the money to build the stuff we want.  Things that hopefully would make a profit one day.  A profit that the shareholders would share in.  As they are the ones taking the BIGGEST risk.  The corporate officers of these corporations have a fiduciary responsibility with the shareholders.  To make a profit.  It’s their company.  They paid for it.  And these shareholders owe nothing to that mob on Wall Street.  Unless any of them own stock.

You’d think those writing for a business school would understand basic business 101.

Businesses should look at whether existing models of compensation are contributing to this inequality. They need to find ways to reward performance without increasing pay disparities. Developing new models of compensation and governance is not easy and can only be possible through a long-term and sincere engagement with a wide set of stakeholders, such as regulators, academics, and representatives of workers.

They want to do away with merit.  And introduce something more akin to communism.  Where everyone is equal.  No matter the value of their work.  People have tried this.  In North KoreaCuba.  And the former Soviet Union.  Note the word ‘former’ in that last one.  There’s a reason why it’s former.  No one wanted to do the harder jobs if they didn’t get paid any more for the additional brain power or risk.  And those stuck carrying the weight of their comrades?  They just didn’t bust their ass in the process.  And that’s why the Soviet Union is a ‘former’ union.

But this is what the Occupy Wall Street people want.  Force people to do those harder jobs.  But pay these wealth creators no more than them.  Even if they only work at a Starbucks.  Or collect government assistance.

The Egalitarian Polices of the Great Society Destroyed the Economy in the Seventies

So an Ivy League publication doesn’t understand business.  But you know who does?  Al Jazeera.  Their conclusions are all wrong but at least they get a lot of stuff right along the way (see The instability of inequality by Nouriel Roubini posted 10/14/2011 on Al Jazeera).

While these protests have no unified theme, they express in different ways the serious concerns of the world’s working and middle classes about their prospects in the face of the growing concentration of power among economic, financial, and political elites. The causes of their concern are clear enough: high unemployment and underemployment in advanced and emerging economies; inadequate skills and education for young people and workers to compete in a globalised world; resentment against corruption, including legalised forms like lobbying; and a sharp rise in income and wealth inequality in advanced and fast-growing emerging-market economies.

Of course, the malaise that so many people feel cannot be reduced to one factor. For example, the rise in inequality has many causes: the addition of 2.3 billion Chinese and Indians to the global labour force, which is reducing the jobs and wages of unskilled blue-collar and off-shorable white-collar workers in advanced economies; skill-biased technological change; winner-take-all effects; early emergence of income and wealth disparities in rapidly growing, previously low-income economies; and less progressive taxation.

American industry is uncompetitive.  That appears to be the problem.  That’s why there are fewer jobs.  So people who earn income via their labor are being priced out of the market by their generous pay and benefit packages.  But people who earn their income via capital always have a place to invest capital.  Capital is capital.  It is always competitive.  That’s why more wealth is accumulating to the rich.  Because they haven’t killed their golden goose.  Like unions have killed unskilled American manufacturing.

This doesn’t explain those kids on Wall Street, though.  The ones with college degrees.  Their problem is their degrees.  Many of them are worthless.  Probably a lot of English majors out there.  Or have degrees in sociology.  Anthropology.  Philosophy.  Women studies.  Etc.  But there just aren’t a lot of stores out there selling this stuff.

The increase in private- and public-sector leverage and the related asset and credit bubbles are partly the result of inequality. Mediocre income growth for everyone but the rich in the last few decades opened a gap between incomes and spending aspirations. In Anglo-Saxon countries, the response was to democratise credit – via financial liberalisation – thereby fuelling a rise in private debt as households borrowed to make up the difference. In Europe, the gap was filled by public services – free education, health care, etc. – that were not fully financed by taxes, fuelling public deficits and debt. In both cases, debt levels eventually became unsustainable.

Too much debt is never a good thing.  But those bubbles weren’t the result of inequality.  They were the result of trying to make everyone equal.  Extending credit to the credit unworthyPutting people into houses who had no business owning a house.  That was the fault of irresponsible government policy.  Not inequality.  Just like the free education, health care, etc.  We didn’t have these problems when those things weren’t free.  And when only people who could qualify for a mortgage were getting mortgages.

The problem is not new. Karl Marx oversold socialism, but he was right in claiming that globalisation, unfettered financial capitalism, and redistribution of income and wealth from labour to capital could lead capitalism to self-destruct. As he argued, unregulated capitalism can lead to regular bouts of over-capacity, under-consumption, and the recurrence of destructive financial crises, fuelled by credit bubbles and asset-price booms and busts.

Karl Marx was wrong.  At least, he hasn’t been proven right yet.  And many have tried.  The Soviets.  The Chinese.  The North Koreans.  The Cubans.  Marxism has been an abject failure.  And those busts were made worse by monetary policy trying to eliminate them.  If credit wasn’t so cheap and mortgage standards weren’t so low there would have been no housing bubble.  It was government policy that encouraged people to accumulate debt.  Not inequality.  Government is just bad at running things.  Which is why Marxism has been an abject failure.

Thus, the rise of the social-welfare state was a response (often of market-oriented liberal democracies) to the threat of popular revolutions, socialism, and communism as the frequency and severity of economic and financial crises increased. Three decades of relative social and economic stability then ensued, from the late 1940’s until the mid-1970’s, a period when inequality fell sharply and median incomes grew rapidly.

Some of the lessons about the need for prudential regulation of the financial system were lost in the Reagan-Thatcher era, when the appetite for massive deregulation was created in part by the flaws in Europe’s social-welfare model. Those flaws were reflected in yawning fiscal deficits, regulatory overkill, and a lack of economic dynamism that led to sclerotic growth then and the eurozone’s sovereign-debt crisis now.

Government spending exploded during the Sixties.  They printed so much money in the Seventies to pay for the obligations of the Sixties that Nixon decoupled the dollar from gold.  So he could print more money.  Giving us record high interest rates.  And record high inflation.  Weak GDP.  And high unemployment.  This was all because of the egalitarian polices of the Great Society.  They destroyed the economy in the Seventies.  Reagan and Thatcher brought back prosperity.  By stopping the insanity.  They cut taxes.  Cut regulation.  And the economy took off.  It’s the reversal of the Reagan-Thatcher policies that are returning the economy to the malaise of the Seventies.  Both in the UK.  And the USA.

In the Soviet Union all of the Good Stuff came from the Decadent, Capitalist West via the Black Market

But this socialist/communist claptrap is what they’re teaching in American universities.  These protestors don’t understand the role of capital in the modern economy.  The entrepreneurial spirit.  Risk management.  They don’t understand anything other than that they weren’t born into privilege.  And this just pisses them off (see OWS’ Program? Distract From Dems’ Failures by Charles Krauthammer posted 10/14/2011 on Investors.com).

To the villainy-of-the-rich theme emanating from Washington, a child is born: Occupy Wall Street. Starbucks-sipping, Levi’s-clad, iPhone-clutching protesters denounce corporate America even as they weep for Steve Jobs, corporate titan, billionaire eight times over.

These indignant indolents saddled with their $50,000 student loans and English degrees have decided that their lack of gainful employment is rooted in the malice of the millionaires on whose homes they are now marching — to the applause of Democrats suffering acute Tea Party envy and now salivating at the energy these big-government anarchists will presumably give their cause.

Except that the real Tea Party actually had a program — less government, less regulation, less taxation, less debt.

What’s the Occupy Wall Street program? Eat the rich. Then? Haven’t gotten that far. No postprandial plans.

It’s ironic that that they hate corporate America but love to indulge in their products.

During the Cold War.  When there was full employment behind the Iron Curtain.  In the tractor factories.  People stood in line all day to buy soap and toilet paper at reasonable prices.  But they bought Levi’s on the black market.  And anything else they wanted that wasn’t dreary and drab.  Or scratchy and caustic.  Whatever the price.  Why?  Because all of the good stuff came from the decadent, capitalist West.

These protestors need to read a little history of what it was like when there was true egalitarianism.  It sucked.  That’s why Soviets defected to the U.S.  And Americans didn’t defect to the U.S.S.R.  Because capitalism was better.  People lived better under capitalism than they did under communism.

The President of the United States should not use the Risk of Civil War as a Reelection Strategy

As Krauthammer says in his column, this Occupy Wall Street movement has political motives.  Obama is following in the shoes of Jimmy Carter.  The economy is in the toilet.  His policies have all failed.  And he has no chance of reelection based on his record.  So he is using the class warfare card.  Which is irresponsible.  And dangerous.

Obama is opening a Pandora’s box. Popular resentment, easily stoked, is less easily controlled, especially when the basest of instincts are granted legitimacy by the nation’s leader.

Mobs are easy to create.  But they take on a life of their own.  Are dangerous.  And unpredictable.  The president of the United States should not use the risk of civil war as a reelection strategy.  Because it’s not exactly constitutional.  Or in keeping with the oath of office he swore.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

The Wall Street Protesters’ Pain is a Joke to those Truly Suffering around the World

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 10th, 2011

Cuba is Imploding.  Like all Communist Countries Have.  Are.  Or Will.

Wall Street is bad.  Capitalism is bad.  Because they put profits ahead of people.  Instead of putting people before profits.  Like they do in Cuba (see A Troubling Sign that Economic ‘Reform’ in Cuba Isn’t Working by Juan Carlos Hidalgo posted 10/10/2011 on Cato@Liberty).

The number of Cubans intercepted at sea trying to reach the coast of Florida more than doubled in the last fiscal year according to figures released by the Department of Homeland Security…

This is yet another sign that the much heralded economic “reforms” announced by Havana aren’t working. The massive layoffs of hundreds of thousands of public employees undertaken by the government of Raúl Castro were meant to be absorbed by Cuba’s almost non-existent private sector…

Earlier this year I talked to an official from the U.S. Interest Section in Havana who told me that we shouldn’t be surprised if we see a steady increase of Cubans trying to escape the island towards the United States. Faced with a dilapidated economy, hundreds of thousands of unemployed, and growing social unrest, the Castro regime wouldn’t hesitate in letting more Cubans use the “escape valve” of emigration. We might be seeing the first signs of this.

The Castro brothers (Fidel and Raúl) are no fans of America.  Or capitalism.  No.  Cuba is a hardcore communist country.  Because the communist way guaranteed the best of everything for everyone.  Without corporate greed or the pursuit of profit getting in the way.  But Cuba is imploding.  Like all communist countries have.  Are.  Or will.  As they always will.  Whenever you have the government put people before profits.  Because when states do that somehow the people always take it on the chin.

So the solution to save their people?  Get rid of their people.  Let them swim to America.  Because if they’re no longer in Cuba they no longer have to feed them.  House them.  Or fight them in the inevitable revolution.

Life is Truly Difficult in Syria with some 400 People Dying on Average each Month

Castro would rather these people flee his communist utopia than fight them.  Because this kind of thing has been going on in North Africa.  The Middle East.  And he wants none of that (see Syria violence: EU poised to announce fresh sanctions in wake of latest killings by Adrian Blomfield posted 10/10/2011 on The Telegraph).

More than 30 people were killed in the latest wave of violence after security forces opened fire on a funeral in the city of Homs and the army clashed with deserters from its ranks who have defected to the opposition. The battle underscored the growing shift in the uprising from the peaceful demonstrations of its early days to an armed insurrection that is gaining strength on the periphery of what is still an overwhelmingly civilian revolt.

The latest fatalities took the overall death toll since the uprising began to just under 3,000, according to UN calculations.

Makes you scratch your head about the Libyan War.  For we launched that war to prevent these things from happening in Libya.  And here they are.  Happening in Syria.  And yet we have a different policy.  Why is that?  But that’s another story.

This brutal oppression has been going on for some 7 months.  And it’s only gotten worse.  After living under such an oppressive regime these people won’t give up.  And neither will Assad.  Making life truly difficult in Syria.  And claiming some 400 lives on average each month.  For now.

Why is Europe the go-to Continent during Humanitarian Crises?  Because they are Richer and More Capitalistic.

Some of these Syrians are fleeing their country.  A lot of them are trapped for the duration.  Not really knowing what their nation’s fate is.  Or their own.  As millions of others face turmoil throughout the world.  And millions of these are fleeing their countries.  And for their lives (see Multiplying crises create 43 million refugees by D. Parvaz posted 10/10/2011 on Al Jazeera).

Regional conflicts and the potential for violence have complicated aid efforts aimed at the nearly 12 million affected by the drought in Africa. The unrest rose to such a level that people were crossing over from Libya to Tunisia, from which people were also fleeing to France and Italy due to mass unrest.

According to the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), as of September 30, more than 700,000 people have left Libya, with the bulk of that migration, 304,127, heading to Tunisia…

Livio Zilli, the international secretariat of Amnesty International’s Refugees’ and Migrants’ Rights Team, points out that many of the people leaving Libya aren’t Libyan nationals, but likely were already among transient populations who were forcibly displaced due to security or economic issues. These people are refugees twice over…

This, said Zilli, makes the current situation: “A refugee crisis on the doorsteps of Europe.”

And Europe might not want to deal with it, he said.

Like Europe doesn’t have enough problems to deal with.  What with that whole sovereign debt crisis crippling Europe.  They’re going broke.  And spending more and more tax dollars to try and save the Euro.  Which is in danger of going the way of the dodo because of excessive government spending.  That caused excessive government debt.  And the last thing they need are tens of millions of refugees being fed and housed on the taxpayers’ dime.

Yes, this is a humanitarian crisis.  But Africa was here before Europe.  So why is it that Europe is the go-to continent during humanitarian crises?  Because they are richer than most of these countries in crisis.  And more capitalistic.  Where the Rule of Law keeps the peace.  And puts no one above the law.  Setting the stage for a prosperous free market economy.  That can provide for all a nation’s needs.  Or trade for them during times of crisis.  All handy things for a safe, healthy, prosperous nation.

No Doubt some of the Egyptian Protestors from 8 Months back are having Buyer’s Remorse

Egypt had a lot of these things.  By Middle East standards it was a pretty prosperous nation.  People had more freedom than others.  A bustling tourism industry thanks to a rich and glorious past.  Peace and stability with its neighbors.  And within the country.  Even Muslims and Christians lived together in relative peace.  For all its corruption, oppression and faults, it was one of the most benign of Middle East dictatorships.  But the Egyptian people threw out the tyrant during the Arab SpringHosni Mubarak.  And it hasn’t been as peaceful since (see Coptics Criticize Egypt Government Over Killings by David D. Kirkpatrick posted 10/10/2011 on The New York Times).

Egypt’s Coptic Christian church harshly criticized the government on Monday over its actions in crushing a bloody protest in Cairo the night before that left at least 24 people dead, mostly Christians, as grieving families began to bury their dead, some of them mangled by tanks, bullets and beating wounds.

The protest on Sunday was the most violent in Egypt since the revolution that toppled Hosni Mubarak from the presidency eight months ago and raised new questions about the country’s ability to move forward toward a pluralistic and tolerant democracy…

The violence on Sunday began after a demonstration by Christians angry about a recent attack on a church. By day’s end it had morphed into a raging riot directed against the military council that has ruled Egypt since Mr. Mubarak was ousted in February. The violence seemed to be aggravated by the public’s widespread distrust of the military’s authority because of repeated delays in turning power over to Egyptian civilians.

After some 8 months of ‘freedom’ from the tyrant the country still bleeds.  And burns.

If you’re a Christian in Egypt you no longer have the peace and security you had under Mubarak.  And if you’re a Muslim that just wants to live in peace with everyone.  As you did before the Arab Spring.  You now risk being caught in the crossfire.  Eight months and still no democracy.  Still military rule.  And growing violence.  No doubt some of the protestors from 8 months back are having buyer’s remorse.  And probably believe perhaps Mubarak with some reforms might have been better than near-anarchy they’re seeing the occasional glimpse of.

The Protesters are Asking the People to Use the Power of Capitalism to Redress the Abuses of Capitalism

We finally have a demand from the Occupy Wall Street people.  Well, not so much of a demand.  But a request.  Not for the oppressive bankers and corporate thugs.  But for the people (see Wall Street Protests Get Specific: Could ‘Bank Transfer Day’ Pit Americans Against Their Big Banks? by Martha C. White posted 10/10/2011 Time Moneyland).

The growing anger directed at U.S. banks (especially the big ones that took federal bailout funds) over recent fee increases coalesced this weekend into a Facebook-driven campaign urging Americans to close their accounts at large banks and move their money to credit unions by Nov. 5.

Remarkable.  They’ll march on Wall Street because Bank of America imposed a monthly debit card fee.  But they could care less about the out of control government spending and regulation that takes more out of their pockets every hour of every day.  But I digress.

These protesters aren’t all that original.  I’ve heard of this request before.  They’re asking the people to use the power of capitalism.  If one business becomes less attractive to your needs let your wallet voice your displeasure.  They act as if we aren’t free to be able to do this already.  But we are.  And we have a myriad of choice available.  Because that’s what capitalism is.  Businesses compete against each other to see who can please us the most.

People Truly Suffering Around the World must be Thinking if Only they Had it so Bad as the Wall Street Protesters

There is real suffering around the world.  And these Occupy Wall Street people are whining about high bank fees.  They want government to intervene.  When they already have the power to cause change themselves.  We call it free market capitalism.  We have it.  A lot of people don’t.  People in Cuba.  Syria.  Libya.   Somalia.  Kenya.  Ethiopia.  And everywhere else where capitalism is constrained and maligned.

Can you imagine these people truly suffering around the world seeing these Wall Street protesters?  Playing their drums?  Tweeting their whiny tweets to family and friends?  Wearing face paint?  Women dancing topless?  While they starve.  Get run over by tanks.  And shot.  They must be thinking if only they had it so bad.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

The Occupy Wall Street Protesters don’t want Fairness, They want Privilege

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 9th, 2011

People who hate Capitalism hate America

Those on the Left keep trying to paint these Wall Street protesters as the Left’s version of the Tea Party.  Only better because they are standing up to corporate greed.  But when you step back and look at the broader picture you see some interesting things.  For one, our enemies abroad hate the Tea Party.  And love these Wall Street protestors (see Iran calls Wall Street protests ‘American Spring’ posted 10/9/2011 on The Associated Press).

An Iranian military commander said Sunday that the protests spreading from New York’s Wall Street to other U.S. cities are the beginning of an “American Spring,” likening them to the uprisings that toppled Arab autocrats in the Middle East.

Gen. Masoud Jazayeri of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard said the protests against corporate greed and the gap between rich and poor are a revolution in the making that will topple what he called the Western capitalist system.

So the Occupy Wall Street people have the support of Nancy Pelosi, Hugo Chavez and this guy.  This Iranian general.  Who hates America.  And would love nothing better than to see its collapse.  There’s a lesson here.  People who hate capitalism hate America.

What strange bedfellows.  Pelosi.  Chavez.  And this Iranian general.

Class Warfare Works because Gullible People are Fed with Misinformation to Produce a Withering, Festering Hate

But they don’t see that.  These Occupy Wall Street people.  All they keep hearing is how the rich are screwing them.  And business owners are getting rich by underpaying them.  Because many of them think gross sales are also net profits.  They’re not.  And have no idea of what it costs to run a business (see Small Business, Occupy Wall Street Is Aimed at You! by T. Scott Gross posted 10/9/2011 on Forbes).

Small business owners, this protest is about money—yours. And if you want to bring a semblance of sanity to the discussion, you had better start showing the money…

So I say you had better show them the money. Gather your employees. Take a handful of coins that add up to a dollar. Swipe away your cost of goods. Take out payroll and then payroll taxes. Follow with utilities, cost of capital, training, advertising, maintenance, insurance, and the rest until you have accounted for all the overhead, leaving those few lonesome pennies of profit that you have risked everything to make.

Been there.  Done that.  The problem is they won’t believe you.  Because they’ve been so brainwashed to believe you are lying when it comes to the money.  Say all you want but someone is telling them, “Sure, they say that, but look at the car your boss drives.  The house your boss lives in.  Are they better than yours?  You bet they are.  And you know why?  Because they’re screwing you.  That’s why.”

This is why class warfare works so well.  You have people who don’t know any better.  Being fed with misinformation to produce a withering, festering hate.  Which is how people like Nancy Pelosi, Hugo Chavez and this Iranian general rise to power.  By exploiting the gullible masses.

The Obama Administration wants us to Hate People Making $250,000 or More

This kind of hate makes it easy to tax the rich.  Which is a very popular sentiment these days.  Because everyone hates the rich.  Especially those who don’t make the rich cut (see Democrats aim to tax the rich — but who are they? by Kathleen Hennessey posted 10/8/2011 on the Los Angeles Times).

President Obama and Democrats in Congress have aligned on a populist, “tax the rich” strategy for the 2012 campaign. Now they have to figure out exactly who that is…

Obama and his fellow Democrats for years have described the wealthy as couples making more than $250,000 and individuals making more than $200,000 — 3% of U.S. households. By shifting away from that number in hopes of benefiting from the sound-bite punch of a millionaires tax, the administration may find it difficult to return to casting the broader net…

Obama’s threshold was based on broad principles, including the desire to leave the middle class untouched by higher taxes while collecting “enough” tax revenue, Bernstein said, although even he quibbles with the president’s cutoff and suggests that a broader tax increase may be needed in the future.

Going in the other direction — aiming for incomes of $1-million-plus — would yield far too little revenue to fund “a recognizable government,” Bernstein said. While the Democrats’ surtax proposal may make sense to pay for a jobs bill, “it’s actually quite important that $1 million does not become the new $250,000 when it comes to the permanent tax base,” he added.

Well, that complicates things.  Who’s rich?  People earning $1 million or more?  Or people making more $250,000 or more?  Who exactly are we to hate?

The Obama administration wants us to hate people making $250,000 or more.  Because there are a lot more of them than millionaires.  So that’s a lot more money they can spend.  But it’s also a lot of people to piss off by raising their taxes.  And with an election year coming up that’s the last thing those up for reelection in Congress want to do.

But if they only settle for $1 million now will that mean it will be harder to hate those making between $250,000 and $1 million later?  Oh me oh my.  Just who to hate?  As you can see this is quite the quandary for the hate monger.

Stimulus is Temporary whereas Tax Cuts and Deregulation are Forever

But there is a bigger issue at play.  You see, the problem with hating those earning between $250,000 and $1 million is that this income range includes our small business owners.  The job creators.  Who tend to not create jobs when things bother them.  Such as people waving their pitchforks at them crying, “Tax!  Tax!  Tax!” (see Poor Sales by Russ Roberts posted 10/9/2011 on Cafe Hayek).

Finally, I would note that while the survey that Invictus cites does indeed list “Poor Sales” as the single most important problem (25% in the September survey (scroll down to “Single Most Important Problem), taxes are listed as the single most important problem by 18% and government regulations and red tape is listed by 19%. So the two combine to 37%. They also happen to be two factors that government can actually control.

The Keynesians look at this and say we need more stimulus.   But if they’re saying this after that $800 billion stimulus in 2009 you can have but one conclusion.  Stimulus doesn’t work.  A big reason for this is that stimulus is temporary.  Like pain.  Whereas tax cuts and deregulation are like pride.  They’re forever.

Sales are complicated.  A lot of things influence people before they depart with their hard-earned money.  And there’s not a lot government can do about that.  But there’s a lot they can do about taxes and regulations.  And they do.  Unfortunately, they always choose to do the wrong thing.

The Occupy Wall Street People are Angry at Capitalism because they weren’t Born into Privilege

There are a few kinds of people in the world.  The informed.  Such as Tea Party People.  Who cite law and tradition in at their Tea Party events.  And the uninformed.  Such as the Occupy Wall Street People.  Who are an angry mob.  Angry at capitalism because they weren’t born into privilege.

And then you have people who love America.  And those who hate America.  Such as Iran.  And Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.  Enemies of freedom.  And democracy.  Who have come out to support the Wall Street protestors.  There’s another lesson here.   Actually, it’s the same lesson as before.  People who hate capitalism hate America.

Here’s a solution to solve their unhappiness.  Let’s ask these protesters which country is better than America.  Whatever nation that is we’ll generously pay for their one way airfare there.  Problem solved.  Everyone happy.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

« Previous Entries