Tag Archive for Romney

Competition by Itself Is Out of Balance

June 25, 2012 Economics, Evolution, Politics, Republicans, Values, Wealth One comment

The odds against human beings existing in the universe are astronomically large. An unbelievable number of factors had to remain in balance in order for humans to have evolved. The planet had to be in exactly the right position around the exact right size star. The right chemicals had to come together in the exact right amounts, at the exact right temperature to start the process of life.

The point is that there is a very narrow zone of equilibrium where all of the necessary forces and chemicals and sources of energy are balanced. Balance and equilibrium are key to the development of life and the continuance of ecological systems. Humans have evolved not just by outcompeting other species, but by cooperating with each other. Competition and cooperation need to be balanced.

This analogy also holds true for societies and politics. Currently, the Republicans represent a value system cannot produce the equilibrium required for societal stability and growth. They, along with free-market libertarians, believe that competition is sufficient; that each individual selfishly pursuing his or her own self-interest will produce a balanced and fair society. They seem to believe that wealth is synonymous with merit and that those who do not have a job or enough money to feed themselves, educate their children or pay for healthcare have only themselves to blame.

This sort of belief system is based a model of reality that acknowledges competition but doesn’t acknowledge the need for us all to cooperate. Therefore cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and programs that aid the poor is just because the cost of these losers is being borne by the meritorious winners. Why should they share? They work hard, they deserve. The poor do not.

That is why government should be small. Those that drive the economy don’t need the government. Just let these hard workers compete and let the winners win. The winners will employ others to help them. This is how society works—how the winners produce value for everyone. We need to compete to keep the wealthy corporations happy—giving them incentives to hire people in this state or that state. This is the expressed belief system of conservatives and it’s out of balance. Competition is all that is required.

But it is clear that competition by itself does not produce good results for society. It has led to very few very big winners and huge multitudes of losers. That is what the facts on the ground prove.

In this election we have one candidate who believes that the winners need more incentives to win and that the benefits the non-winners currently receive are a drag on the economy. We can’t afford cooperation and compassion. Cutting benefits for the non-winners will balance the budget and a balanced budget will free up capital up so winners will be able to compete even more successfully. This has not and will not work because it is profoundly out of balance. It will only create more wealth disparity. Romney must be defeated.

I suggest this simple slogan for Obama. Romney is only for the rich. I’m for everybody.

Water, Energy, Money, Blood

April 23, 2012 Economics, Energy, Politics, Values, Wealth No comments

Bless me my conscience; it has been seven months since my last post. In that time, we have witnessed the Republican presidential primary process deliver Mitt Romney—as clear an example of the top 1% as you can get.

We need to think about his success and the success of the 1% in general in a different way than Romney would like, or can even get his mind around. In the conservative worldview, which most of us accept without question, Romney is a winner. He played the game of wealth creation well, and is exactly what we all want to be like: rich (not stiff and awkward). Who doesn’t want to be rich?

In this prevailing worldview the accumulation of vast wealth is what all individuals seek. Along the way jobs will be created, investments will be made, and society will benefit. And this is true to a degree. But jobs are only a once-in-while by-product of wealth accumulation; many times the loss of jobs creates wealth for owners.

The unbounded creation of wealth for the top 1% is also sequestering resources that the rest of us need to be healthy. Imagine if one rich farmer had hundreds or thousands of times more water than the other farmers and there was a drought. This farmer sold the water, but if you couldn’t pay, oh well. I hope you don’t starve.

One person controlling all the precious water is a big problem. What would happen? Would the other farmers attack the rich farmer? Would they be justified in doing so? Would the government back the majority of desperate people and send troops to free the water, or be bought off by the rich farmer and send troops to keep the thirsty, starving mob at bay?

In this metaphor, water equals money. But both actually equal energy. No water, no energy for the growth of a crop. No money, no energy for the growth of the economy. By playing the game of individual wealth creation, which we all do, the winner’s jackpot is now detrimental to everyone else. The irrigation system of the economy is dry, not because there isn’t enough money, but because the flow is being restricted and tightly controlled. Money is flowing not to dehydrated everyday people but into the endless reservoirs of the 1%.

Never mind that people are dying or becoming homeless because they can’t pay their medical bills. In the system we’ve bought into Romney wins and we all lose. It’s perfectly fair that he get as much as he can. Concern for the losers is not part of the equation. But since money is the energy needed for growth, look for higher costs in blood when that energy is not forthcoming.