The Communists in Japan are targeting Young People to help them Transform Japan into an Oppressive Communist State

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 10th, 2013

Week in Review

The former Soviet Union, the People’s Republic of China (back in the days of Mao), North Vietnam, North Korea and Cuba all have great police states.  Not to keep people out of their countries.  But to prevent the people inside their countries from escaping to the capitalist West. Why?  Life was better in the capitalist West than in the communist East.  Where nations in the capitalist West didn’t need a secret police to keep their people from escaping.  But needed strong immigration controls to keep their countries from being overwhelmed by refugees trying to escape to their lands.  Yet despite this history of communist failures there are still communist parties in countries trying to attract voters.  Preferably the ones who don’t know about that history of failure (see Communist Party makes a comeback … in Japan by Gavin Blair, The Christian Science Monitor, posted 8/5/2013 on Yahoo! News).

Founded in 1922, the JCP is the oldest political party in Japan, and has enjoyed constant representation in parliament for longer than any other. But until recently, its image was one of older activists and it struggled to attract younger voters.

July’s elections were the first in Japan where online campaigning was permitted, and it was the JCP that is widely seen as having made best use of it. As well as savvy leveraging of social networks and video streaming platforms, the party created a series of online mascot characters that addressed individual issues such as the planned consumption tax hike, shady business practices, the heavy US military presence on Okinawa, and constitutional change.

“We were able to use the Net to reach out to younger people, many of whom don’t read newspapers or watch TV much. Through the characters, we could communicate issues simply and appeal to young voters,” says party spokesperson Toshio Ueki, who reports that the characters’ webpages got 1.5 million hits in the weeks before the poll.

Sound familiar?  That’s how President Obama won election twice.  By reaching out to younger people.  The people who probably know the least about economics.  And history.  That’s how people who want to change a country do it.  By getting people who don’t have the foggiest idea about what happened in the world in the last century or so.  Who simply don’t know of what people tried.  And what has failed.  With communism pretty much at the top of the list of things NOT to do based on past history.

If we did take power, the JCP wouldn’t try to implement a Communist economy immediately. It would require huge changes and we would seek the support of the people for each step,” Kira says. “And we would want to use the best parts of the current economic system, too.”

Japan is pretty close geographically to some of the great communist failures.  The former Soviet Union.  The People’s Republic of China (PRC) back in the days of Mao.  Vietnam.  And, of course, North Korea.  Places that have all gotten better with a move away from communism and towards capitalism.  Except North Korea.  Which is pretty much unchanged.  And the former Soviet Union.  Which is no more.  But the biggest part of the Soviet Union lives on.  Russia.  Which had moved towards capitalism.  But now is drifting back a bit.

History has shown where there is unfettered free markets life is better.  For this is the direction of all immigration.  From countries with highly fettered markets to countries with less fettered markets.  Older people know this.  People who read history know this.  Or lived it.  People who understand classical economics know this.  But young people?  They haven’t a clue.  Which is why all candidates who want to expand the power of the state over the people target young people.  For with them all they have to do is to promise more stuff and more freedom.  Even if they promise to deliver these with policies that have throughout history done anything but.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Keynesian Economics and Job Creation just don’t go Together

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 12th, 2011

It’s Competition between Intel and AMD pushing Chip Technology to New Heights, not Government Investment

With Solyndra going belly up after that half billion dollar government investment people have been asking questions.  One of which is how government should invest into the private economy.  Well, here’s one example (see AMD’s Bulldozer Fails To Meet Expectations by Devin Coldewey posted 10/12/2011 on TechCrunch).

The Intel-AMD war has been going on a long time, and I hope it will be going on longer. The last few years have been hard on the underdog, however, with huge growth by Intel in both the low-power and high-performance sectors. The Core 2 Duos excelled, as did the Core i* series, and its most recent consumer series, the Sandy Bridge update to the i*s, is a monster. AMD has consistently lagged behind, though from the other side of the table you might say they’ve been nipping at Intel’s heels quite effectively for years…

Unfortunately, despite the new architecture and insane transistor count (the 8-core 8150 has around 2 billion), performance and efficiency per core just plain isn’t that good. There are a few tests on which Bulldozer takes on Sandy Bridge well, such as those truly optimized for high core counts, but on single-core tasks it gets destroyed.

In other words, government shouldn’t invest in the private economy.  Because, when they don’t, the private economy does very well.

Does any of that techno-speak make sense to you?  If you’re not in the hi-tech industry, or a kid, the answer is probably ‘no’.  But the beautiful thing is that we can enjoy the end product of putting 2 billion transistors on a chip.  That we can understand.  And that it is competition between Intel and AMD pushing chip technology to incredible new heights.  Not government investments.

Obama wants to Raise Taxes on Small Business Owners, the Number One Job Creators in the Country

The most successful companies out there making the things we all want and must have need help from government.  The kind of help only government can give.  That thing only government can do.  Cut tax rates (see Business groups push for business-friendly tax reform by Bernie Becker posted 10/12/2011 on The Hill).

The National Federation of Independent Business, the Independent Community Bankers of America and more than 40 other groups are calling on key policymakers to tackle both the individual and the corporate tax codes together and to end double taxation on corporations.

“By embracing these broad concepts, Congress can move the taxation of business income in a direction that helps ensure that all employers, regardless of how they are organized, continue to invest and create jobs here in America,” the groups wrote to the top Democrat and Republican on both the Senate Finance and House Ways and Means panels.

The Left keep saying businesses don’t object to high taxes and costly regulations.  The Keynesian economists like to cite poll after poll that business owners’ only concern is the lack of demand.  And then interpreting that as meaning that they want government to invest and stimulate the private economy.  But these businesses are saying otherwise.  They’re saying it is the high taxes.

The Obama administration also has, so far at least, spent more time pushing for corporate tax reform, while Republicans like Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, want a more comprehensive approach.

Camp has taken that stance in large part because many small businesses, called pass-through entities, pay their taxes through the individual code and would be left behind in any corporate-only reform.

And it’s worse than that.  Obama wants to raise taxes on these ‘pass-through’ entities.  To make them pay their ‘fair share’.  Those so called rich people earning $250,000 or more.  These small business owners whose business incomes ‘pass through’ to their private tax returns.  These same people that have risked everything they own to create a business.  And create jobs.  Who are, in fact, the number one job creators in the country.  But many fail.  And lose everything.  These are the rich people that Obama wants to raise the tax rates on.

Public School Education is Bad because Dumbing Down of our Kids is Necessary to Fool our Young Voters

Which calls into question the bedrock of all their policy.  Tax and spend Keynesian economics (see SCHOLAR COMMENTARY by Matthew Mitchell posted 10/10/2011 on Mercatus Center).

Sargent and Sims’s work is particularly relevant today as it explains the way that peoples’ expectations of the future can impact their current behavior. This is reflected in every economics story today that uses the phrase “policy uncertainty.”

Their work came along at a time when Keynesian economic models were facing challenges: There were theoretical challenges by economists like Milton Friedman and Robert Lucas, both of whom have previously won Nobel Prizes, but there were also empirical challenges. Keynesian economics didn’t seem to make much sense of the 1970s when the economy experienced high unemployment and high inflation, whereas it had worked pretty well in explaining macroeconomic trends in the 1960s.

The problem with the faux science Keynesian economics (a social science not a real science) is that it tries to quantify human behavior.  Which is something many people believe we can’t do.  Those in the Austrian school of economics.  Ronald ReaganMargaret Thatcher.  And most economists not wedded to their governments.

The 1970s were the heyday of Keynesian economics.  Even Republican Richard Nixon adopted Keynesian policy and declared he was a Keynesian, too.  Then Jimmy Carter continued many of these same policies.  And how did that work?  You can ask Jimmy Carter.  Who lost to Ronald Reagan in a landslide.  By asking a simple question during a presidential debate.  Are you better off than you were four years ago?

Part of these failures had to do with the fact that these earlier Keynesian models relied on people’s naiveté. They worked so long as people could be fooled by government. For example, government-induced inflation might boost the economy if enough producers are fooled into thinking that higher prices are the result of increased demand for their products. Sargent’s work explains how people’s beliefs about the future impact their behavior. He found that if you make modest assumptions about peoples’ ability to understand how policy will affect their future, Keynesian policy prescriptions like short-term fiscal or monetary stimulus don’t work very well.

And there’s your answer to why the quality of our public school education is lagging other countries.  It’s not the money.  It’s the curriculum.  And the dumbing down of our kids.  So government can fool them.  To make them believe bad economic policies are good.  So these young voters keep voting for them.  Which is important to them.  Because once people wise up, they lose their votes.

As Long as there is a Democrat Politician Somewhere there will be a Vote to Buy

The best government policy for investing in the private sector is no policy.  Successful companies don’t need help.  They just need to be left alone.  So they can do what they do best.  Create great things.  And jobs.

Higher taxes do not create jobs.  They destroys jobs.  At least according to those who create jobs.

And the tax and spend Keynesian myth of active government participation has been debunked once again.  By real economists.  This time by the Nobel in Economics winners.  Sargent and Sims.  Thus proving once again that you can’t quantify human behavior.  And that people consider more than the interest rate before spending their money.

So you’d think this would put an end to any further stimulus spending.  But no.  Because stimulus spending isn’t about stimulus.  It’s about getting votes.  And as long as there is a Democrat politician somewhere there will be a vote to buy.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

FUNDAMENTAL TRUTH #69: “Democrats bank on the youth vote because they’ve lost the wise vote.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 7th, 2011

Republicans are Greedy, Stuffy Old Farts

The perception is that the Democrats are for the working man.  Or woman.  And the Republicans are for the rich.  Which isn’t exactly true.  For there are a lot of wealthy who vote Democrat.  And a lot of working men and women who vote Republican.  But in politics perception is key.  Like it is in real estate.  I’m sure you’ve heard the one about the small agent who people perceived as the biggest agent in town.  Of the few properties listed, the agent had one on the road into town.  And one on the road out of town.  The agent owned two signs.  Each property got one.  And everyone saw these signs as they drove in and out of that town.  And thought, “I see these signs everywhere.  That agent must be the biggest agent in town.”  The agent isn’t.  But people perceive this because of the signs.

And there is a perception in politics.  It starts out when we are young.  In school.  And see our favorite teachers go on strike.  We love them so much we want to help them.  So we stand in picket lines with them.  Hold signs.  Blissfully ignorant of the underlying issues.  But teachers are good.  They’re not rich corporate types.  Some even have to buy their own school supplies because the school is so impoverished.  They deserve better.  Even though they get the summer off.  And don’t pay a dime for their health care or retirement.  If your parents had the same deal when you were a kid, they would have given you a lot more presents on your birthday and at Christmas.  Gone to Disney World a few more times.  And bought you that bike you always wanted.  But kids don’t understand this.  And the perception is that people are greedy because they don’t want to pay more in taxes to help their favorite teachers.

As these kids grow people hammer this message into them again and again.  On television.  In the movies.  In books.  In college.  Republicans are greedy.  Democrats care for the little people.  They don’t explain how.  It is just an article of faith.  Which the kids accept.  Without question.  Especially when they start getting politically aware.  And they feel special when people start initiating them into the political process.  They don’t understand anything yet.  They’re still self-centered kids.  But they like the attention.  It makes them feel good.  And when they learn that the Democrats are for fun, why, that’s even better.  For it is the Republicans that are against fun.  They disapprove of sexual promiscuity.  Drugs.  Birth control.  Abortion.  The greedy, stuffy old farts that they are.

Democrats are Enlightened and Care about People

It’s all part of the generation gap.  The kids against their parents.  Who don’t know anything.  In the sitcom Happy Days, ‘enlightened’ high school kids campaign for the Democrat candidate Adlai Stevenson while the parents support Dwight Eisenhower.  In the sitcom All in the Family, the ‘enlightened’ Meathead supports George McGovern while the bigoted Archie Bunker supports Richard Nixon.  In the sitcom Family Ties, the parents are caring liberals while Alex Keaton is a greedy, unfeeling young Republican who worships money, Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon. 

Since the Seventies the message has been clear for kids watching television.  Bigoted, greedy, unfeeling, dishonest, out-of-touch people are Republicans.  Enlightened people who care about other people are Democrats.  That’s a powerful perception.  And it works.  The majority of young people typically vote Democrat.  Mostly for the social issues.  Which they believe are enlightened on the Democrat side.  Which is all they really care about at their age.  When their hormones are raging out of control.  They’re not thinking about economic or foreign policy.  They’re thinking about the weekend. 

I mean, let’s face it.  Kids aren’t that smart.  They’re young.  Have little experience.  Which is why they do a lot of stupid things.  Smoke.  Work on deep sun tans.  Drive recklessly.  Drink before they’re of legal age.  Do drugs.  Drive under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs.  Have unprotected sex.  Catch a sexually transmitted disease.  Give a sexually transmitted disease.  Accidentally get pregnant.  And the list goes on.  Their concerns are not long term.  Their interests are not long term.  It’s all about having fun now.  So despite this poor judgment we need to get out the vote and get these kids into the voting booth.   Why?  Simply because they will vote Democrat.

The Problem with Young Voters is that they Grow Up

So who votes Democrat these days?  Besides ignorant kids?  Mostly people who benefit from a large and growing government.  The poor who want more welfare benefits.  The elderly who want more Social Security and Medicare benefits.  Unions who get favorable legislation restricting lower-cost competition.  Public sector unions who we pay directly with our taxes.  And the smattering of single-issue people.  Environmentalists.  The anti-nuke crowd.  Gays and lesbians (rejected by some religious groups).  Feminists.  The pro-choice people.  Etc.

It’s a lot of people.  But America is still a center-right country.  Which leans conservative.  Which makes the youth vote so critical.  That’s why they get them while they’re young.  It’s the whole point of public education.  To make good Democrat voters.  That’s why they focus on things like environmentalism.  The theory of evolution.  Multiculturalism.  Sex education.  Birth control.  Things that will drive wedges between kids and their parents.  Should their parents be Republicans.  So after graduation they understand some fundamental truths of life.  Republicans bad.  Democrats good.  Until they start working and raising a family of their own.  At which time they will start complaining about the school curriculum at their own kids’ school.

Again, this is why the youth vote is so important.  For the youth have one fatal flaw.  They grow up.  A large part of that center-right America was once far left.  Kids who voted Democrat.  For the social issues.  Who then grew.  And stopped being ignorant.  Stopped thinking about short term fun.  And started thinking about long term consequences.  About their kids.  And their kids’ future.  A lot of these people changed their views on the social issues.  And started paying attention to economic and foreign policy issues.  Even went back to church.  Because they wanted their kids to go to church.  And they didn’t do these things because they became a bunch of greedy, stuffy old farts.  It’s called being responsible.  Which is what happens when kids grow up.  And have kids of their own. 

Indoctrinating and Dumbing Down

Once they do grow up the Democrats have to replace them with the next batch of kids coming of age.  And they take this seriously.  First it was 12 years of public school.  Then they added kindergarten.  And now there’s been talk about state-paid pre-school.  So the state can get to these kids sooner to start driving that wedge between them and their parents.  And they’re virulently opposed to school vouchers.  The ability to use your school tax dollars on the school of your choice.  For a couple of reason.  It thins the classes at the public schools.  Worst, private and charter schools often make smarter kids.  Who may think for themselves instead of just becoming good Democrat voters.

This attacks the primary mission of public education.  Indoctrinating kids into the Democratic Party.  And dumbing them down.  Teaching them things like global warming and multiculturalism.  While the Chinese and Indians are teaching their kids science and engineering.  So is it any surprise that the Chinese may soon surpass the United States as the world’s largest economy?

This is another reason why America is a center-right country.  Jobs in the private sector are important.  And pay for all those state benefits people vote Democrat for.  The costs of these programs are huge.  Too huge.  And we can’t sustain this kind of government spending anymore.  Grownups with jobs understand this.  Kids don’t.  So they may lose more of the grownup vote if they cut these benefits.  Which makes the youth vote even more important.  Because they are losing more and more of the wise vote.  The responsible ones with jobs.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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