The nation is still digesting the election results from last week. Followers of The Mint already know that nobody won the election. 43.9% of those eligible to vote chose not to endorse the shenanigans in Washington DC and, when the entire voting age population is considered, 48.9% of adults will have abstained from actively choosing the next Commander-in-Chief.
Given that those who voted for the candidate that took second garnered 26.9% to the victor’s 28.4%, there were bound to be some hard feelings.
Those feelings are now manifesting themselves in the form of what have been billed “Secession Petitions” which generally request that the White House “Peacefully grant the State of Texas, South Carolina, Florida, etc. to withdraw from the United States of American and create its own government.”
A sample from Idaho, which is representative of many such petitions, can be seen here:
The American people certainly have a sense of humor. Amongst the best retorts we have seen are comments along the lines of “The answer is no. See US History 1861 – 64,” and this counter petition from the City of Austin, Texas:
The Idaho petition, like many, cites the Patriot Act and NDAA as examples of the Federal Government’s restriction of Freedom. It also eloquently quotes the part of the Declaration of Independence which states that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving from their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute a new Government…”
At The Mint, we advise our fellow taxpayers to sit back and enjoy the irony that the founding document for the United States is now being used as proof that it is time to dissolve it. It must be said here, once and for all, that the idea of America is that all men and women are created equal, born free, and possess certain unalienable rights (amongst which social security, health care, and a common defense are nowhere to be found). By definition, the idea of America means not being subject to an earthly sovereign.
The Government of the United States of America, circa 2012, must be understood as something completely different.
Despite the fact that the current Government seems curiously obsessed with restricting individual freedom, it is, for the most part, impotent. For those of us who, either by virtue of proper upbringing or by attendance at the school of hard knocks, have learned to respect the freedom and property of others, there is little to fear. Government at the Federal level has no reason to bother us, unless one deals in its currency or desires to travel, in which case it becomes a tolerable nuisance.
However, as the “sovereign” states which attempted secession 150 years ago paid a high price to teach the world, a Government that is petitioned or provoked can become deadly. The reason for this is that the above mentioned shenanigans in Washington DC are largely a result of the over representation in the current Government and its accompanying bureaucracies of individuals who never quite learned that stealing and killing are wrong, rather, they learned that by calling them by names such as taxation and war, they could get otherwise peaceful people to go along with creating their unilateral vision of what constitutes a better world.
Fortunately for humanity, this state of affairs is quickly righting itself, as the debt laden beast in Washington appears on the verge of collapsing under the weight of its own obligations.
At The Mint, rather than sign a petition to ask something of an impotent Government which at best is incapable of granting it and at worst will see the signer as an existential threat, we advocate what we call “Individual secession,” which we define as peaceful non-resistance of the Government by choosing daily to live in the Kingdom of God.
God tried to warn the Israelites, who at the time were dealing with scandals involving their appointed judges, what would happen should they demand an earthly king:
“10 Samuel told all YHWH’s words to the people who asked him for a king. 11 He said, “This will be the way of the king who shall reign over you: he will take your sons, and appoint them as his servants, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and they will run before his chariots. 12 He will appoint them to him for captains of thousands, and captains of fifties; and he will assign some to plow his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and the instruments of his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers, to be cooks, and to be bakers. 14 He will take your fields, your vineyards, and your olive groves, even their best, and give them to his servants. 15 He will take one tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give it to his officers, and to his servants. 16 He will take your male servants, your female servants, your best young men, and your donkeys, and assign them to his own work. 17 He will take one tenth of your flocks; and you will be his servants. 18 You will cry out in that day because of your king whom you will have chosen for yourselves; and YHWH will not answer you in that day.”
The Israelites didn’t care, they wanted a king, no matter what the cost. Are you desperate enough to accept the conditions laid out above? For they haven’t changed in 3061 years.
The alternative, living in the Kingdom of God, requires recognizing the one who was crowned on a cross, forgives, and enforces the Golden Rule.
George Friedman of Stratfor touches on our Non voter theme from a different perspective in his interesting pre election piece.
Rather than being a sign of discontent, as we have speculated, Friedman speculates that the non voters are either simply busy, enlightened enough to understand that it matters very little who occupies the White House (although the election of an incumbent certainly cuts down on remodeling costs), or both.
You can read Mr. Friedman’s flattering piece on non voters in US elections, which touches on the same data set on voter participation that we employed, at Stratfor:
The 2012 US Presidential election is over, and the only thing that remains to be seen is whether or not the No vote will maintain its absolute majority. At last count it was 50.2% and will go down to the wire.
For our part, we finally got around to burning our mail-in ballot last night. For those who will lament that we did not perform our civic duty, we report that we did give it a cursory check to make sure there were not City or County measures which required our input.
If you are joining us late in the game, we presented our personal reasons for not voting a few weeks ago. To be fair, we have never been much for voting, mostly attributable to our inner laziness. However, this time was different. We made a conscious decision not to participate. We decided not to to meddle in the affairs of others. We took the position that the largest sphere of influence which we could, in good conscious, cast our vote over others was at the County level.
Our County generally fulfills its commitments and is solvent. As such, it meets our criteria for an operating Socialist system. The State and Federal level do not. We did not reach this conclusion through logical contemplation, rather, we had a minor breaking point with regards to the political systems at the higher levels as we read to our son about the Trail of Tears, which moved us to tears and, as a consequence, this form of peaceful resistance.
The rest, including what you, fellow taxpayer, are reading, is a slow digestion and reflection upon our weeping over the Trail of Tears.
For the record, we do not buy into conspiracy theories (although trading on them can be very profitable) nor are we cynical enough to say, along with Emma Goldman, “If voting changed anything, it would be illegal.” What we do know is that we can no longer endorse the killing and robbing of people with whom we have no quarrel and who pose us no existential threat.
In a sense, we are peacefully surrendering our “right” to participate. Were the government to suddenly stop taxing our wages, income, gasoline purchases, telecommunications, and capital gains, we may go as far as to relinquish the “right” to Social security, roads, and such. On this point, however, we will not hold our breath. Nor will we actively avoid taxes or reject monetary benefits which come to us. This is a broader question which we will not delve deeper into today.
Speaking of taxes, the election seems to have ignited what may be the blow off phase in the precious metals markets. Please read on…
The new Gold Rush, The triple Fiscal Cliff, and logical consequences
The market selloff continues today, as the logical consequence of the expectation of higher taxes manifests itself. While we believed that higher taxes were coming, no matter who was elected, it is nonetheless fascinating to watch what is unfolding in the equity markets.
For a bit of background, the Federal Reserve, ECB, Bank of Japan, England, and all entities in the Central Banking industry are putting the throttle down and printing money at a breathtaking pace. This has been enough to keep equity prices “afloat” with relatively minor nominal price drops.
However, the drop in value, commonly known as purchasing power, has truly been staggering over the past several years. If you track such things, look at your grocery or utility bills for proof. You are probably either paying more, getting less, or some combination of these double whammies.
The election results appear to have triggered a decoupling of the commodity and equity markets for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, while bonds are rallying as those who hold large unrecognized gains in equity positions choose to recognize them before December 31, when the clock strikes midnight and any gains left on the table will be taxed out of existence {Editor’s note: this is figurative language and speculation, of course}.
This is the logical consequence of the fiscal cliff. When the election was called for Obama and control of the Senate and House looked to remain the same, equity holders saw the writing on the wall. The stalemate at the Federal level will remain in place and the probability of the US plummeting off of the dreaded Fiscal Cliff (which, we remind you, is purely a government construction) greatly increased.
While some window dressing will no doubt be presented as the solution, those holding large equity positions will be seen as “new meat for the grinder” and likely will be the next lamb sacrificed on the alter of fiscal irresponsibility.
But it is not just the US looking over a fiscal cliff. The anticipation of the US Presidential outcome distracted attention from the dire situation in Greece, where in 8 short days, the government will be out of funds and the once vaunted “Troika” now stands by, unwilling to throw more money at them.
Then there are the Spaniards. Having lived three years in Barcelona, we have a special affinity for the Spanish in general and specifically for the Catalans. While the Greeks may be coerced into having more conditions shoved down their throat, the Spanish situation is a bit more complex.
The Spaniards are smart, and the Catalans are even smarter. Catalunya knows that they are indispensible to Spain. They have also spent the past 30+ years building systems to ensure that they can operate perfectly well without the Spanish Feds in Madrid.
Those in Madrid know this, and are holding the threat of Catalan secession as their Ace in the hole which, at this point, has allowed them to extract concessions from the ECB, all the while avoiding surrendering what is left of their Sovereignty to Brussels as the Greeks, Irish, Portuguese, and Italians have.
Will the can which has been kicked down the road in Europe finally get kicked off the Euro Cliff? Even if it doesn’t, the Spanish firecracker inside of the can will go off at some point and blow up the proverbial can, at which point all bets are off.
With the two largest, debt based financial currencies in the world facing unprecedented uncertainty and the prospect of higher taxes on the horizon, one has to question the wisdom of holding anything but physical gold and silver in place of financial assets.
This, along with the ongoing tension in the Middle East and that crazy Mayan prophecy, is why we believe that the final blow off in the gold and silver markets is at hand. There is still time to get in and these quasi currencies have plenty of room to run. While the physical production fundamentals are less compelling than they were 10 years ago (a 440% rise in price will tend to encourage production), the financial backdrop has never been more favourable, and its about to get even better.
Just remember, buy and hold the physical metals, as ETFs and futures will likely not catch all of the upside of this monumental move.
During our college days, the Counting Crows put out an album called August and Everything After. This refrain became popular once again back in August of 2007, which is now seen as the beginning of the continuing Financial debacle which just passed its 5th anniversary.
August 2007 was when the game changed permanently. The Federal Reserve had unwittingly sent Fixed Income markets off a cliff. In a panic to correct its error (blind 25 basis point increases in the target rate month after month for over two years) it overcorrected and basically did an end run around its primary dealers, offering to buy mortgage backed securities from all comers. This miscalculation blew up modern finance as most knew it.
By late 2007, the public began to acknowledge the fundamental changes which were taking place in the financial markets. Ever since then, the Western Governments and their associated Central Banks have thrown caution to the wind in an effort to maintain what they see as the status quo.
Today, we shamelessly borrow the Crows refrain and apply it to the United States political scene. Despite a plethora of No votes, which we like to speculate are an indication of the American public’s display of displeasure with the ruling class and a rejection of the corrupted political system, another President elect has been declared.
Our basis for this speculation is nothing more than heresy, mind you. Low voter turnout is a fact of the American landscape. Early on, it was a byproduct of the exclusion of large classes of people from the voting rolls. Women, native, and african americans were barred from voting, while those in rural districts and those too busy clinging to day to day subsistence to be bothered to vote were excluded by default.
After the Women’s suffrage and the Civil rights movements remedied some of these democratic oversights, voter turnout in America enjoyed a golden period where it could be said that the land enjoyed a legitmately elected government.
Voter turnout began to wane again as the Richard Nixon train wreck occupied the White House and the modern era of voter disenchantment began. While the paid swarms of voter registrars have made some headway in increasing voter turnout, 2012 is set to see another decline, with the high estimate of 60% of the VAP casting a ballot.
A brief update for those of you following the results of the Silent Majority, we are now projecting that they have “won” the election by an even larger margin than previously thought, with a whopping 45.3% of those eligible to vote choosing not to endorse the Government and claiming a solid majority when the overall Voting age population is considered, a staggering 50.2%.
We can only surmise that the past four years have confirmed to the American public what many have suspected all along: That the government does not have the solutions, rather, be it red or blue, it is a big part of the problem.
As the public woke up to the financial debacle in early 2008, we foresee that sometime in early 2013, the general public will wake up to the debacle of federal governance.
Welcome to the Divided States of America, where 25% of the populace has thrust a leader onto the other 75%, and 50% have thrust a Government which is unwanted or unrecognized by the other 50%.
No matter how you look at it, there are bound to be hard feelings all around. As Mr. Obama heads back to a government as divided as the country, the stock market took its cue and sold off in defiance. According to Marc Faber, it will fall at least another 20% within the next six to nine months.
We leave you, fellow taxpayer, with a bit of friendly advice. If you have any unrealized tax gains to recognize, recognize them this year, before the clock strikes midnight. After that, the divided government will begin to cannibalize its citizens wealth in earnest. It is inevitable. As a second assignment, work on becoming resilient. John Robb over at Resilient Communities has a wealth of information to help anyone. Even if a miracle occurs and the US can grow its way out of this mess despite a fractured government, resilient living is just plain fun.
Carta abierta dirigida a Su Excelencia Evo Morales Ayma, Presidente del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia,
Evo Morales – President of Bolivia, photo taken December 17, 2007 in Brazil by Marcello Casal Jr. of Agencia Brasil http://www.agenciabrasil.gov.br/media/imagens/2007/12/17/1840MC44.jpg
Permítame expresar mi más sincero saludo a Usted, señor Presidente, y a las honorables autoridades de la gran República Andina de Bolivia. Que puedan vivir y prosperar en la tierra bendita que habitan en la que goberna hábilmente como su humilde servidor.
He observado, tanto de cerca como de lejos, su pasión por liberar y elevar a los pueblos que habitan en las tierras que hoy conocemos como el Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia. He observado con admiración la valentía y determinación que usted ha demonstrado al llegar a su posición actual y al continuar con el trabajo diario por la liberación y la dignidad de aquellos que, durante demasiado tiempo, han sido víctimas de la opresión injusta.
Le escribo hoy por dos razones. En primer lugar, para animarlo en su lucha noble. Todos los grandes líderes, como usted sabe muy bien, enfrenten la adversidad, la crítica y la oposición de los que se ven amenazados por lo que representan. Estas fuerzas sólo han aumentado en intensidad a medida que tome medidas para reparar siglos de injusticia.
Sepa que a pesar de el ruido que hacen algunos quienes le insultan por tomar acción mientras ellos se sientan con los brazos cruzados, hay muchos, aunque sus voces sean suaves, que piden a Dios por su salud, fortaleza y sabiduría.
El segundo motivo para escribirle a usted es para ofrecerle tres principios que, a la medida que están permitidos a operar, permitan que los pueblos de la tierra conocida como Bolivia podrán sobresalir económicamente. Bolivia ya es una tierra rica. En las manos de la gente, se hará mas rica.
Junto con usted, rechazamos los principios neoliberales que han causado la destrucción de los pueblos que las han ciegamente implementado. Nuestro objetivo es brindarle las herramientas con las que no sólo Bolivia, sino todos los habitantes de la tierra, puedan lograr observar los diez mandamientos para salvar el planeta que usted ha contribuido generosamente al mundo.
Mientras que los títulos de estos principios pueden aparecer en conflicto con el primero y sexto mandamiento, le pedimos que lea atentamente las explicaciones ya que vera que el funcionamiento de estos tres principios permitirá la realización de sus diez mandamientos para salvar la tierra de la explotación.
Una palabra de precaución, es extremadamente importante que estos principios económicos operen juntos, sino, no funcionaran en absoluto:
Libertad: Mucho se ha escrito y hablado sobre el tema de la Libertad. Pues, es el precursor de la dignidad y la piedra angular de todas las sociedades civilizadas. La Libertad, desde la perspectiva de la política económica, significa que los pueblos prosperarán a la medida en que las restricciones artificiales sobre su capacidad de trabajar, producir, e intercambiar esten eliminadas. La correlación entre la libertad económica y la sociedad civilizada es tan fuerte, que el coro del himno boliviano resuena con gran significanza:
“Morir antes que esclavos vivir”
El concepto de la libertad no debe limitarse sólo a la libre expresión y movimiento, situación en la que se encuentran la mayoría de las sociedades que pretenden que sus habitantes son libres, sino extenderse a la capacidad de una persona de participar en tanto el comercio como otras actividades sin restricciones artificiales, siempre y cuando el hecho de participar en la actividad no impide la libertad o dañe la propiedad de otros. Esta es la clave de la libertad, ya que mantiene la tierra en equilibrio. Desequilibrios peligrosos se producen cuando las Libertades de un grupo están subordinados a los de otra. Nuestro tercer principio, la igualdad ante la ley, se ocupa de que esto no suceda.
Quizás lo más importante hoy en día, la libertad debe extenderse a la esfera bancaria y a la moneda, dejando la decisión del medio mas aceptable y métodos de comercio más expedientes en manos de la gente.
Propiedad Privada: Para todas las virtudes que el principio de la libertad otorga a un pueblo, el principio no es más que una idea intangible a menos que su consecuencia natural, el principio de la propiedad privada, es respetada por igual por todos los miembros de la sociedad. El concepto de la propiedad privada es la base de cualquier actividad productiva que se desarrolla en la tierra, desde la siembra de un campo a la construcción de pozos para proveer un acceso al agua potable.
Más allá de la propia persona, una persona o grupo de personas deben tener el derecho de poseer propiedad, tanto real como personal, de la que pueden trabajar y compartir de la manera que más le plazca, con la expectativa de que van a tener la capacidad para emplear y disfrutar de los frutos de sus labores.
De la misma manera, el principio de la propiedad privada viene con la obligación de cuidar y mantener la propiedad que uno tiene a su cargo. El principio mismo es el incentivo para que las personas se animen a mantener la propiedad bajo su control, ya que la misma tiene el derecho de disfrutar o preparar para su venta a otro individuo libre dicha propiedad.
Con el fin de ser a la vez productivo y bien mantenido, la propiedad privada debe realizarse a nivel individual, familiar o comunitario. Si la propiedad se encuentra en manos del gobierno u otra entidad grande, será explotada de la misma manera que la propiedades están hoy explotadas por las grandes corporaciones, que no tienen incentivo para cuidar de él después de haber extraído la riqueza de la misma.
Igualdad ante la Ley: Los principios de la libertad y la propiedad privada deben ser asegurada para todos por medio del funcionamiento del principio de igualdad ante la ley. Para que las personas puedan prosperar económicamente, deben saber no sólo cuales acciones están permitidas, sino tambien que las leyes que hayan aplican de la misma forma a todos los miembros de la sociedad, independientemente de su nivel economico, raza, sexo, color, u origen. Sólo si existe la percepción de una igualdad ante la ley pueden las personas planificar y llevar a cabo sus actividades diarias.
La igualdad ante la ley es la base de una sociedad justa en la que las personas pueden prosperar de acuerdo con sus esfuerzos en atender a las necesidades más intensamente sentidas por su prójimo. Por lo tanto, todas las leyes en una sociedad debe centrarse en la protección tanto de la vida como en la propiedad legítima de la persona o grupo. Cualquier ley que extiende más allá de estos dos campos necesariamente sirve para limitar tanto el derecho como la libertad y la propiedad privada que deben ser considerado sagrados y permitidos a operar sin obstáculos para que el máximo de bien material pueda ser extendida a todos.
Le ofrecemos estos tres principios, sabiendo que en su sabiduría y benevolencia, los pueblos que se encuentran bajo su cuidado se beneficiarán por ellos y convertirse en la envidia de las naciones de la tierra, no por la riqueza natural que cuidan y producen, mas en la nobleza de sus convicciones.
Su dedicación y servicio al pueblo boliviano es una inspiración para toda la humanidad. Nuestro deseo es ver a todo el pueblo boliviano, y los pueblos del mundo, vivir en equilibrio y libertad con Dios, la naturaleza y entre sí.
As we watch the US Presidential election unfold from the sidelines, the outcome which we predicted recently here at The Mint appears to be playing out nicely. So, who will win?
To answer this question, we have updated our October 23rd predictions based on what we presume to be better data, courtesy of Dr. Michael McDonald at George Mason University, with regards to anticipated voter turnout.
According to the data, we may assume a voter turnout of up to 65.49% of the total voting age population (VAP) in the US. Further, we assume that the presumed winner in our analysis musters an astonishing 58.8% of the popular vote, which by all measures would be considered such a resounding endorsement, one would think that the entire populace had spoken with one voice as to who should be our leader.
2012 – Another defeat to the Land of the Free
They would be wrong. Even with these generous assumptions, the Silent Majority still garners 39.6% of the vote versus the winner’s 35%. {Editor’s Note: We will provide a final update on this data set once the dust settles.} In a silent contrast to what will most certainly be a rousing victory speech by the winning candidate, the Silent Majority appears set to trample the President elect in a landslide victory of its own.
Unfortunately for those of us who count ourselves a part of the Silent Majority, our victory will be ignored, as it has been for the past 14 Presidential elections and for every election before 1952, when Dwight Eisenhower was triumphant.
Given that the Silent Majority will once again be ignored, we offer a bold prediction of what the next four years will hold:
1. An expansion of the US Military and police state.
2. An expansion of the US Government’s intrusion into the lives of its supposed subjects via a continued barrage of new rules and regulations.
3. The Federal deficit will continue to spiral out of control. Despite an onslaught of propaganda as to who should pay taxes, Federal tax revenue has remained in a tight range, between 14.4% and 20.6% of GDP ever since World War II. Even at the high end, tax revenues will not fund the $2.479 trillion worth of mandatory spending on entitlements and interest on existing debt for the coming year.
Once the confetti settles and cabinet appointments have been made and confirmed, Washington DC will quickly return to business as usual. We offer today’s stock market rally, which is largely a function of the US dollar being sent to the woodshed in the currency markets, as proof of this.
The financial markets care not who wins the election, they care that there is an election, and that the status quo be maintained. Unfortunately, the status quo is unsustainable, and events far beyond the control of the US President elect will determine America’s fate.
If you are a disgruntled voter whose candidate lost, or who, despite casting a vote for the winning candidate, is wearied by voting for change every four years and getting more of the same or worse, we welcome you into the Silent Majority. While we have no say in what happens in Washington DC, we deem this a happy state of affairs, for it is a land far away with concerns far different than our own.
Now, if we can only convince them to observe the Golden Rule…
We’ve heard it said that the most heavily armed force on the planet is the American citizenry. Not the American military, its citizenry. Those who doubt the effectiveness of the 2nd amendment must look beyond urban crime statistics and consider its usefulness as a matter of National security.
Were only the 1% of the population associated with the military or police forces allowed to bear arms, America would lose its largest deterrent to foreign invasion, and the Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto may have chosen a different strategy. The question then becomes, why should the standing military be such a drain on the National budget when the private sector, the citizenry, has both the rights and responsibility to provide for both National and Civil defense? We look forward to your comments!
Margaret Thatcher is truly one of a kind. This brief clip, besides depicting a session of British Parliament at its best, shows Thatcher rebutting the Socialist leanings for her ideological adversaries with classic lines such as, “by lowering the income gap you mean to say that you wish the poor to be poorer, if only the rich would be poorer as well,” and, “I condemn your Socialist policies along with the millions in Eastern Europe who have suffered under them.”
What is perhaps most striking about this discourse, which took place in 1990, is the final part of the clip where Thatcher saw clearly that the Euro currency would mean the end of democracy and Parliamentary sovereignty for the countries who adopted it, a prophecy which has begun to play out in Greece, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, and even the economic juggernaut Germany, where all branches of government are at the mercy of the whims of the ECB.
While we have taken the decision, along with a silent majority of Americans, not to vote in the upcoming national elections, this does not mean that we have given up hope for change, quite the contrary.
Here at The Mint, for better or worse, we have opinions that cannot be confined to a dot on a pre printed scantron form. They require words and dialogue.
Enter the open letter. If one is to effect change in this world, it is important to correspond with those who are in the seats of power and therefore have the ability to effect positive change in this world. If we can change their mind, they can change the world.
When writing world leaders, it is important to both acknowledge their authority and use terminology which we understand to be important to them. We must recognize them as an ally for we share a common aim, the good of themselves and their people. Finally, as people who are derided daily for serving their populace, they need encouragement.
The following is a copy of our open letter to Evo Morales, the President of Bolivia. A proper Spanish translation will be forthcoming. Enjoy!
Evo Morales – President of Bolivia, photo taken December 17, 2007 in Brazil by Marcello Casal Jr. of Agencia Brasil http://www.agenciabrasil.gov.br/media/imagens/2007/12/17/1840MC44.jpg
October 29, 2012
An open letter addressed to His Excellency Evo Morales Ayma, President of the Plurinational State of Bolivia,
Allow me to extend my warmest greetings to you, Mr. President, and to the honorable people of the great Andean Republic of Bolivia. May they live long and prosper in the blessed land that they inhabit which you capably govern as their humble servant.
I have watched, both from near and far, your passion to liberate and elevate the Peoples which inhabit the land known today as the Plurinational State of Bolivia. I have watched with admiration your courage and determination as you have risen to your current position and as you continue to labor daily for the liberation and dignity of those who have, for too long, been victims of unjust oppression.
I write you today for two reasons. First, to encourage you in your noble struggle. All great leaders, as you know all too well, face adversity, criticism, and opposition from those who are threatened by what they represent. These forces have only increased in intensity as you take steps to repair centuries of injustices. Know that though there may be some with loud voices who heap insults upon you for taking action while they sit idly by, there are many, though their voices be soft, who pray for your health, strength, and wisdom.
Our second motive for writing to you is to humbly offer you three principles which, to the extent they are followed, will allow the Peoples of the land known as Bolivia to excel economically. Bolivia is already a rich land. In the hands of the people, it will be made richer.
Together with you, we reject the Neo-Liberal principles which have wrought destruction on those Peoples who have blindly employed them. Our aim is to provide you with the tools with which not only Bolivia, but all of the inhabitants of the earth, can strive to observe the ten commandments to save the planet which you have generously contributed to the world.
While the titles of these principles may appear in conflict with your first and sixth commandments, we ask that you carefully read the explanations and see that the operation of these three principles will allow for the accomplishment of your ten commandments which to save the earth from exploitation.
A word of caution, it is exceedingly important that these economic principles operate together, or they will not operate at all:
Liberty: Much has been written on the subject of Liberty. Truly, it is the precursor to dignity and the cornerstone of all civilized human societies. As it applies to economic policy, liberty means that Peoples will prosper to the extent that artificial restrictions on their ability to work, produce, and trade are removed. The correlation between Liberty and civilized society is so great, that the chorus of the Bolivian anthem rings especially true:
“Morir antes que esclavos vivir!” {For those reading this in English, it translates as: “We will die before living as slaves.”}
The concept of Liberty, to be productive in society, must not be limited merely to speech and movement, as it is today in most societies which pretend that their inhabitants are free, but rather extended to the ability for a person to engage in trade and other activities at will to the extent that engaging in the activity does not infringe upon the Liberty or property of another. This is the key to Liberty, as it keeps the earth in balance. Dangerous imbalances occur when the Liberties of one group are subordinated to those of another. Our third principle, Equality before the law, deals with this.
Perhaps most importantly today, Liberty must be extended into the banking and currency realm, leaving the decision of the most acceptable medium and methods of trade in the hands of the people.
Private Property: For all of the virtues that the principle of Liberty bestows upon a people, the principle is nothing more than an intangible idea unless its natural byproduct, the principle of Private Property, is respected equally by all members of society. The concept of Private Property is the basis for any and all productive activity which takes place on the earth, from sowing a field to building a wells to provide access to clean water.
Beyond the ownership of one’s person, which should go without saying, a person or group of persons must be able to lawfully possess property, which they may choose to work and share as they please, with the expectation that they will be able to both employ and enjoy the fruits of their labors.
In the same way, the principle of Private Property comes with the obligation to care for and maintain the property that one is entrusted with. The principle itself provides the incentive for the property to be maintained as persons will naturally care for something that they will either enjoy themselves or prepare for sale to another free individual.
In order to be both productive and well maintained, Private property must be held at the individual, family, or community level. If property is held by the government or another large entity, it will be exploited in the same way that property is today exploited by large corporations, who have no direct incentive to care for it after they have extracted the wealth from it.
Equality before the Law: The principles of Liberty and Private Property must be secured for all by the concurrent operation of the principle of Equality before the Law. For people to prosper economically, they must know not only which actions are permitted, but that the laws which are enforced are administered in the same manner to all members of society, regardless of perceived wealth or lack of wealth, race, sex, color, or origin. Only if there is a perceived equality before the law can persons plan and carry out their daily activities.
Equality before the law is the basis for a just society in which people may prosper in accordance with their efforts to help their fellow-man by serving their most intensely felt needs. As such, all laws in a society should focus on protecting both the life and rightful property of the individual or group, any law extending beyond these two realms necessarily serves to limit both the right to Liberty and Private Property which must be held sacred allowed to operate unhindered so that the greatest possible amount of material good can come to the greatest possible number of persons in a society.
We offer you these three principles, knowing that in your wisdom and benevolence, the Peoples who find themselves under your care will benefit greatly and become the envy of the nations of the earth, not for the natural wealth they care for and produce, but for the nobility of their convictions.
Your dedication and service to the people of Bolivia is an inspiration to all of humanity. Our desire is to see all of the Bolivian people, and the Peoples of the world, live in balance and freedom with God, nature, and each other.
Be encouraged and may God bless you and all Bolivia.
A few days ago, we laid out three seemingly absurd reasons why we have decided not to vote in the upcoming elections, with the exception of city and county referendums. If you missed it, you can read our rant here:
In the spirit of full disclosure of our voting record, we have voted in just two of the five Presidential elections that we have been eligible to cast a vote in. Namely, in 2004, we voted for the incumbent on the indefensible reasoning of choosing the “Lesser of two evils,” for though it be the lesser, one has still chosen evil. In 2008, we wrote in Ron Paul, albeit with an overwhelming feeling of powerlessness, as write in votes are, if anything, a symbolic gesture.
In the meantime, we have dutifully filled out countless circles on scantron sheets and scanned countless pages of voter’s guides in a fruitless effort to understand, to loosely quote Joe DiMaggio as he came upon his then wife, Marilyn Monroe, striking her now famous pose as she stood over a steam grate in Times Square, “what the hell is going on around here.”
By the time the most recent ballot arrived in the mail, along with a voter’s guide which rivaled the yellow pages in size, our disillusionment for what today passes as democracy was complete. We resolved, then and there, to stop tacitly endorsing the enslavement and slaughter of persons with which we have no quarrel. We would withhold our vote.
Given our history and our most recent resolution, it can be said that we have not exactly been the model of someone fulfilling their civic duty. Yet strangely, since coming to grips with our non-voter status, we have never slept better.
Are we alone in our disillusionment? Or is our shunning of civic responsibility something native to the American landscape? We have taken it upon ourselves, fellow taxpayer, to provide you with the shocking answer to these questions.
We began by analyzing a data set of the total US voter turnout against the corresponding voting age population (VAP) at the time. We chose the Presidential election years in the US as they are generally the election cycles which elicit the highest voter turnout. Fortunately for us, the voter turnout for the Presidential elections held from 1828 – 2008 is accessible on Wikipedia.
To arrive at the VAP totals, which were provided for the election years 1960 and later, for the prior elections (1828 – 1956), we did the simple inverse math of dividing the number of votes by the stated voter turnout percentage. This gave us a “theoretical” VAP with which to perform our analysis. We then pulled census data for each year which coincided with an election year to satisfy ourselves that our methods were sound.
Within the data set, we then broke the number of popular votes cast in each election, which is also available on Wikipedia, down three ways. Those for the candidate with the majority of votes, those cast for the one who came in second, and the combined votes for all other candidates which were counted. The counts are presented in the order of the highest number of popular votes received, not those cast by the electoral college. It is interesting to note that in four times in US History (three of which, 1876, 1888, and 2000, appear in our data set) the candidate with the highest tally of popular votes was not elected to the Presidency.
We then took the number of popular votes by category and divided it against the VAP for those deemed eligible to vote to arrive at our final data point, the percentage of the VAP which cast a vote for the candidate. As we did this, we added a fourth category which we call the “No vote,” to capture, for comparison purposes, the percentage of the VAP who simply did not cast a ballot.
We then took the four resulting percentages by election year, from 1828 – 2012* (*We extrapolated the findings based on 2008 turnout and today’s Intrade market for the election) and asked two questions:
1) In each election analyzed, was the President elected by a simple majority of the total VAP?
2) In each election analyzed, did the percentage of No votes represent an absolute majority of the VAP?
While we wouldn’t stretch this analysis to question the legitimacy of a Presidential election, the findings are nonetheless fascinating with regards to the presence of non-voters in America. You can see a graphic of the percentages for each candidate juxtaposed against the “No vote” candidate by election year, on the plot below.
On the plot, the highest mark is the winner. The “X” on the plot represents where the “No vote” candidate, if you will, would have finished. The colors of the other markers, despite their blue, red, and green tones, do not indicate which party won that year, only the percentage of votes received by the first, second, and all other candidates for whom votes were cast:
In summary, when taken against eligible voters, the No vote majority began to emerge in 1916 after a 75 year hiatus, and took firm command of the polls in 1968. However, 2012 is shaping up to be an exception, and, if current trends hold, it can be said that, come November 7th, there will be a President actively selected by a majority of the eligible VAP in the US for the first time since Lyndon B. Johnson.
Now, most voters in the US are aware that women were not allowed to participate in elections as voters until 1920. Don’t worry ladies, nor the rest of those who were/are part of the disenfranchised, we have not forgotten you. In fact, when the analysis is expanded to include all of the presumed VAP over 18, regardless of their technical eligibility to vote, (which is the number used to arrive at the voter turnout percentages) the results are even more dramatic:
What we see in this analysis is that, since 1828, there has been only one President who was elected by a simple majority of the VAP, Dwight Eisenhower in 1952. In fact, those who did not vote consistently represented an absolute majority until 1928, which means, depending upon how one interprets the No-votes, there may not have been a President who was elected to office in the purest democratic sense until Eisenhower. While we admit it is a bit far fetched, it is nonetheless fascinating to ponder.
Voter frustration/apathy, after taking a break through a good portion of the 20th century, returned to America in 1996, as Bill Clinton defied the indifferent masses, which again represented an absolute majority of Americans as it had in all pre 1928 elections, and extended his stay on Pennsylvania Avenue for four more glorious years.
Blanco o Nulo? The question of interpretation of the Non-votes.
Blank or Null? The answer to this question determines how one will ultimately interpret the data which we have gathered. Are we to take the “No votes” as “votes in Blanco,” meaning that the lack of a countable vote signifies tacit assent to the selection of the voting majority? This is the generally accepted analysis of the absence of votes in America, where voting is not obligatory.
Or shall we take them, or at least a portion of them, as “Nulo,” meaning that the absence of a countable vote signifies a disillusionment with the democratic process so deep that one simply refuses to go through the motions to lend even a shred of legitimacy to the process?
In Bolivia, it is obligatory to vote, if you cannot provide proof that you have voted, you can face a fine, or worse. This legal obligation has also given rise to an explicit form of voting, “in Nulo,” which can be cast if one chooses not to select one of the candidates or decide on a measure which has been presented.
It is the formalization of a conscientious objection. The likes of which have only been officially tallied in US in the bizarre election of the year 2000, when a Washington DC resident filed a vote as an “abstention” in protest of Washington DC’s lack of representation in Congress.
So which is it, blanco or nulo? It is an important question, and one that, unlike Bolivia, the United States voting regimen currently has no tool to answer.
We have provided a link to the data sheet used to create the above graphics so that you can check our work as well as expand and hopefully improve upon it. Please feel free to download it and use it as you wish.
As November 6, 2012 approaches, the votes are tallied, and a President of the United States is declared, stay tuned long enough to catch the data on voter turnout. With the latest measure of voter apathy in hand, go to a quiet place and ask yourself the following question:
Did the American people win the election? If our predictions are correct, the answer will be the same as it has been with regards to every election before and since everybody liked Ike:
In the realm of economic thought, there are two extremes. On one end of the spectrum sits the economic equivalent of Karl Marx’s workers’ paradise, known as Socialism. On the other end sits the economic expression of Ayn Rand’s rugged individualism, known as Capitalism. As anyone who has studied these philosophical extremes can tell you, the operation of real world seems to constantly fall somewhere in the space between the two, making strict adherence to either an indefensible position.
While apologists for these extreme positions do a wonderful job of explaining why complete adherence to their ideals by all would lead to an utopia on earth, a careful examination of the arguments, along with a quick glance at how things operate in the real world, lead one to conclude thatevidence of both Socialist and Capitalist ideals can be found in nearly any system.
How can this be? If the extremes are both correct in their reasoning, they msut be mutually exclusive of each other. However, we look around at the world around us, as well as into the depths of our own souls, and we invariabley find an uncomfortable coexistence of ideals that is difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile.
That is, until today.
Our aim today is to reconcile this age old dilemna. Fret no more, fellow taxpayer, for the answer is simple: Socialism works for local systems, while large scale systems are best served by embracing Capitalist ideals.
How can this be? The answer is simple.
Socialism, with its embrace of community property and centralized decision making, is a superior policy for systems until they reach a critical mass. Socialism unwittingly provides the framework in which society cares for its economically weaker members. It is a system which is entered into with the understanding that at least a portion of one’s actions will take the form of altruism, that is, they will work for the benefit of others without the expectation of material compensation. In fact, socialism is the basis for the family unit into which a great deal of humanity enters the world.
Karl Marx
Given the barbarities which are justified in the name of profit, it can be said that the basis for morality and human decency most frequently occurs in a Socialist setting. Given the inherent requirement of altruism, Socialism is the system which asks the individual to look beyond themselves. However, as we touch on later, Socialism on a large scale tends to bring out the worst in human beings, as the inevitable onset of poverty quickly diminishes any moral advantage that small scale Socialism may enjoy.
We digress on the question of morality for a moment and instead submit to you an insightwith regards to the corporate structure. It is the revelation that Corporations, entities which are held out as the champions of Capitalism, are, in fact, Socialist institutions (the stunned silence is deafening, please do read on, fellow taxpayer, it will make sense, trust us.)
It is for this reason that wages do not fit well into free market pricing mechanism and instead lend themselves to the “Labour theory of value” which is a base concept of Socialist philosophy.
The logical proof is the following: The employer, employee relationship is based on a set rate per time period of work. Once it has been agreed upon, the wage rate ceases to adhere to free market theory and bcomes a component of the Labour theory of value. The top level managers in corporations that employ persons in an employee capacity become the centralized authorities in what is a socialist realm.
Another proof of this can be found in that property, which is held in the name of the Corporation, is cared for and used by employees. As such, corporate property, as its name would imply, is held in common by subjects who themselves have no property rights in said property. They may be offered shares in the corporation themselves, but this does not directly effect their day to day use of the Corporation’s (their employer’s) real and personal property.
A majority of human beings today find themselves as part of a Socialist entity of some sort, be it a family, household, corporation, or governmental employer (which, for purposes of analysis, behaves in a similar fashion to a corporation). It is within these systems that we have most of our day to day interactions. It is understandable, then, that most people would see a form of Socialism as the basis for a utopian ideal.
However, the members of these same Socialist organizations, the heads of household, CEOs, heads of government, members of Boards of Directors, salespeople, security personnel, customer service agents, and a host of others, well know that the “esprit de corps” which may exist in their organization is thrown aside in their dealings with the outside world. The outside world, where individual corporations collide, is marked by brutal self interest and the protection of private property rights which are the hallmarks of Capitalism.
What gives?
Capitalism, the system which honors private property rights and glorifies the pursuit of self interest, must be embraced and allowed to operate in an unhindered state as the basis for the interactions between the small scale Socialist systems (families, corporations with employees, and those brave individuals who choose to face the Anarchic system of the world alone.)
Ayn Rand
The reason that Capitalism must be embraced by the smaller systems is that its principles, namely the laws of supply and demand and the Golden Rule, must be allowed dictate their day to day activities so that the smaller systems can better adapt and survive in a harsh, unforgiving environment. To put it another way, Capitalism is a superior response to the Anarchy in which we all find ourselves, whether we are willing to admit it or not.
However, apart from its invaluable contributions to understanding the material world, even hard core Capitalists would agree that blind adherence to the Capitalist creed would not only lead to a trampling of those less fortunate in society, but the potential isolation of the individual from human warmth, feeling, and dare we say, loss of the ability to love.
For all of the virtues of Capitalism, its potential frigidness at the individual level and lack of a clear moral compass make it unpalatable to the majority as an absolute ideal.
So the answer is simple. Socialism operates on a small scale, Capitalism on a large scale. Marx asks Rand to dance, she accepts, and the world makes sense. As the theory of biologos attempts to bring harmony to the polarization of two views of the world’s origins, our theory of economic system fluidity allows the economist and politician to embrace both the virtues of the Socialist ideal as well as the Capitalist economic imperative.
The final question which begs to be asked is the following: In terms of size, at what point is it appropriate for a system to stop being guided by Socialist principles and to break up into units better able to cope with the Anarchic surroundings, meaning a leap to the Capitalist model, which naturally defines the size limitation of what may be called a functional Socialist system?
While there is no firm answer, it is clear that a Socialist system has reached its limit when it is corporately bankrupt and unable to fulfill its commitments, either morally or financially, to its members.
In the case of the corporation, it must adjust its productive activities and/or release either property or employees into the capitalist system until it finds equilibrium. The released Employees then find themselves, albeit for a moment, in what may be called the free market for labor. In it, they will either learn to compete perpetually in the capitalist environment and form their own small scale socialist entity, or link up quickly with another socialist entity, be it another corporation, state welfare, or the generosity of a family unit.
The fact that both families and corporations can accumulate wealth are proof that socialist entities can and do compete and thrive in a world where capitalist thinking and political structures are an imperative. It is the ability of each unit to adapt to changes and to seize opportunities which makes the difference.
There is much more to say about this but it will have to wait for another day. We leave you with what should now be obvious. When Socialism is employed on large scales, it looses both its ability to compete as well as any moral superiority which it may have enjoyed. When persons are thrust headlong into poverty, which is the logical economic end of large scale Socialism, what were once moral imperatives are tossed aside in pursuit of purely Capitalistic aims in a desperate attempt to eat.
Anyone who has lived such an event will attest that it is in these unfortunate circumstances that the rotten core of humanity is laid bare for all to see. While unbridled Capitalism has its own faults, which are daily brought to light in the media as a reminder of when it has been allowed to run too far. It is this consciousness, and the human desire for mercy, which work to keep the evils of Capitalism in check.
The beauty of the theory is that the normal operation of each system keeps the proliferation other in check, any attempts by government or sovereigns to impose or preserve one system over the other will end in disaster.
Rushing to extremes is for fools, for the Kingdom of God is one of perfect balance.
As we watched the Presidential debate Tuesday night, along with the rest of the huddled American masses, we were hoping to hear something that would sway us from our current non-voter status. We hardly listened to what was said, although our radar went up as one attendee asked about inflation, which happens to fall into our realm of interests. The periscope of our consciousness went down, however, as each candidate responded in turn with a stream of words which registered as a vague reference to a non-entity referred to as “the economy.”
They just don’t get it. And unless someone at the top “gets” the concept of inflation and its root causes very soon, the current form of the United States government may not exist by the time the next Presidential term is completed.
With the exception of the inflation bit, we hardly listened to what was said. Politics, as most politicians will attest, has nothing to do with the keeping or breaking of promises. In the end, these expensive popularity contests boil down to the intangible of charisma.
As such, we were more interested in the demeanor of the candidates. Both, while giving the appearance of physically fit, well dressed, and well informed men, seemed to lack something we call the spark of life, that thing that makes you want to be around somebody. The intangible of charisma, so hard to define, yet so apparent when present, did not make an appearance last night.
We decided to retain our current policy regarding democratic elections.
At The Mint, our current policy is to refrain from voting on all matters which ask us to reach beyond our own city and county. Even then, we inform ourselves and vote, not on individuals seeking election to sinecures, but on specific referendums, generally with the dual aim of obtaining personal benefit and minimizing both our tax bill and governmental interference in our personal affairs.
How did we arrive at such an unreasonable stance with regards to voting? How can we consciously fail to perform our “civic duty” year in and year out and still live with ourselves?
The conscious decision not to vote, at its base, is our way of peacefully resisting what has become a shameless power grab at the highest levels of government. A series of well intentioned actions at the Federal level has lead to a number of unintended consequences which are about to cause a great deal of suffering.
Beyond this philosophical objection, there are practical matters to consider, which we submit for your examination and comment:
1. Mind-boggling complexity
From time to time, a ballot measure will be presented which will be stated in a manner so clearly that one can place a vote and know exactly what a yay or nay will mean in terms of real world consequences. As for the rest of the ballot issues, along with the selection of lawmakers and judges as our proxies, one can’t be expected to keep up with the chaos that passes as national and state governments, and for the most part, we feel that participating in elections or the political process on at these levels is at best a waste of precious time and, at worst, encouraging an enterprise which long ago overstepped any reasonable boundaries, both in its authority and its ability to manage its finances. At this point, the best one can hope for is to stay clear of the amoeba.
Large scale democracy has a nasty habit of imposing the will of a few on all via the ignorance or indifference of many. Circa 2012, voters are rarely asked straightforward questions like “Is it ok to steal and kill?” They are instead asked questions like “Do you prefer a fellow named Obama or Romney to serve as President?” We will ignore the fact that politicians on the State and National level are thrust immediately into situations where keeping promises depends upon factors far beyond their control, and simply recognize that the choosing the President of the United States does little or nothing to change the underlying bureaucracies and interests which have turned the Government of the United States into a strange form of benevolent mafia.
2. The question of taxes.
By our calculations, we give up roughly 16 hours per year just compiling data for and filing the required tax declarations at the State and Federal levels. Not to mention the time spent generating the money to pay said taxes. On the county level, this seems reasonable. The county even has the courtesy to calculate the tax bill for us and simply request payment. As for compliance, it is simple, you either pay the bill or you don’t.
Further, if you think that your tax bill is too high, you can leave the City or County and find a City or County with a more reasonable tax regimen, or no regimen at all.
While leaving the City or County may be a costly step, it may be feasible for those who desire to move. Relocating geographically from a State or a Country is quite another matter, which makes their manner of taxation both understandable and sinister.
The Federal and State governments, as opposed to most county governments, have a much different take on both taxation, as well as the rest of the authorities which they have granted themselves over their subjects. We use the term “grant themselves” because, as anyone who has tried to vote their conscience on a ballot measure can attest, many measures are written in a way that simply makes the voter a tool in the hand of those who crafted the legislation.
{Editor’s note: We will refrain from going into the argument that somehow, the illusion of democracy, the Western embodiment of the “Might makes right” mentality, creates a government with legitimacy on the scale the the State and Federal Governments circa 2012 claim. It is sufficient to say that there are an abundance of examples which would argue to the contrary.}
Returning to taxation with regards to the State and Federal regimens, it is up to the individual to file a declaration each year at their own expense. Naturally, the governments reserve the right to audit said declaration, again, at the taxpayers expense. If any inconsistencies are encountered, the taxpayer faces a myriad of penalties from the payment of additional taxes and penalties up to and including serving time in prison.
Even this tack could be considered reasonable were the tax codes written in a straightforward manner. As things are, the income tax code serves as nothing more than a spider’s web, designed to entangle all who tread it. We are all caught in it, it is just a matter of time until the spider makes its way over to devour us.
The saving grace, if there is one with regards to the State and Federal tax regimen is this.They can’t take us all. While it is likely that every single American has failed to fully comply with the 73,608 page tax code, it is extremely unlikely that the spiders of the various Government or State tax authorities will ever get around to eating all of those who are caught in their web. As with any predator, they tend to go after the larger prey first.
In this sense, adopting the Franciscan/Marxian belief that poverty is a virtue may keep one safely off of the spider’s radar.
3. The Trail of Tears
While both complexity and having to pay for something are generally good enough reasons to abstain from any activity, the most compelling reason not to vote is one that is best understood by examining one of the most shameful examples of the modus operandi of the Federal Government: Their well documented dealings with the Cherokee people, whose world collided with the Feds in the early 19th century in the Southeastern part of North America.
The Trail of Tears, a painful chapter in US History – courtesy of http://katta1f.wikispaces.com/
We refrain from making value judgments and will simply examine the highlights of the interaction as we understand them. A much more detailed account can be found, as always, in the Wikipedia.
The Cherokee found themselves generally prospering as a people and inhabiting lands in the Southeastern US in the 1700 and early 1800’s after presumably relocating there from the Great Lakes region. During this time, they increasingly came into contact with European settlers and engaged them in trade.
As time went on, the increasingly organized and well armed colonies began to covet the lands of the various Indian groups in North America. Once the revolution against the British and subsequent conflict known as the War of 1812 had been won, the States of the newly formed United States of America began to dispossess the various Indian peoples of their lands.
{Editors Note: Sensitive readers are asked to excuse, for the moment, the use of the term “Indian” (Columbus most likely died believing that he had landed in India en route to China, hence the mistaken identity attached to Native Americans peoples), instead of the appropriate “Native American”. The choice to change terms at this point in the essay was made consciously so that the reader may understand which groups were impacted by the barbarous Indian Removal Act. No disrespect is implied or intended.}
While their tactics changed according to what was politically expedient at the time, the general policy of the State and Federal Governments was to ultimately expel the Indian populations and force them West, so that the vested interests of the States could take advantage of the lands which were occupied by the Indians.
What is most troubling about the treatment of the Cherokee people is that, from what we can tell, they had adapted to life amongst the new colonists and generally worked to comply with what were ultimately unreasonable demands of the governments. As a case in point, the Cherokee allied themselves with and fought alongside the US against the pro-British factions during the War of 1812. They served the US’s interests in the war alongside none other than Andrew Jackson.
Jackson later returned the favor by signing the Indian Removal Act in 1830 which sealed the Cherokee’s fate and began the final chain of events which would lead many of them to an early grave along the now infamous “Trail of Tears.”
While the the Indian Removal Act was passed on the assumption that the Cherokee and other Indian groups faced certain extinction were they to be forced to live alongside the increasingly numerous white settlers, it is generally acknowledged today that the real motivation for the Act’s passage was the discovery of gold in Georgia.
We have read about and watched similar scenarios of deceptions preceded and followed by apologetics play out too many times by centralized governments over the ages to believe that a group of persons who do not know our name and are so far removed from us that they would not recognize our moccasins if they took the time to walk a mile in them, have our best interests at heart.
Even if they did, we have observed that their best efforts to effect change on a large scale end up causing more harm than good. While the economic damage done by such unilateral actions can be repaired or forgiven, the damage to the moral character of a society of embracing this might makes right mentality will ultimately destroy it.
The desire not to participate in the choosing of the next person to be called “Commander in Chief,” or any of their collaborators or subordinates, is the primary reason why we will not be walking around with a sticker on our chest or an ink stained hand on election day.
For The Trail of Tears has been tread for too long. It is time to live in the Kingdom of God.
With the election cycle in full swing, we turn our attention not to the national scene, where two people we will refer to only as BO and MR are bombarding the nation with empty promises in hopes that the dangling chads in November will fall their way, but to more pressing local matters.
Here at The Mint, we recognize that the natural operation of anarchy renders much of what happens at the highest levels of government, which in the US means those seated at the State and Federal levels increasingly irrelevant. While they have the potential to do great harm, government on a large-scale generally suffers from a form of paralysis which makes their decisions increasingly meaningless to the average Joe. They have grown to the point where they are nothing more than an amoeba, which at best should be ignored and at worst, actively avoided.
As such, we consider it a great waste of time to obsess over them.
Government at the local level, meaning the City and, more importantly, the County level, has a much greater direct impact on the lives of its constituents. As such, we see government at the City and County level as absolutely necessary to the smooth functioning of society. We also present, for your consideration, that participation in government at a local level is not only time well spent, it can be profitable.
A great opportunity to guide public policy at a local level is presented frequently at events that are generally referred to as requests for public comment. While in some cases, these events are held to give an air of legitimacy to an already planned action, some of them present a grand opportunity to sway local policy and public resource investment decisions. Given this grand opportunity, it may come as a surprise that these events are often overlooked, even by those who would be directly affected by the action being considered.
For your perusal and enjoyment, we present the following example of yours truly taking advantage of such an opportunity presented by our County’s Minor Betterment Project Committee.
Each year, the committee is presented with a list of potential minor public works projects which have been vetted by overpaid consultants and assigned a ranking based on a point system which is theoretically designed by the consultant to capture potential public benefit of a project in a tidy little number.
This is like the BCS for your tax dollars, and, as any NCAA coach knows, it never hurts to lobby your case, especially when the voting is tight.
We recently found out that a much-needed improvement project, one that could modestly increase our property value, had made the “Top 20” of the latest version of the public works BCS.
The ancients had sidewalks, why can’t we? photo of sidewalks in Pompeii by Paul Vlaar
Like any good coach, we picked up our digital writing implement and began to lobby for our own, local, pet project. The result of this activity is what we call “A Passionate Appeal for a Sidewalk,” a transcript of which follows:
As both a property owner and frequent pedestrian of this stretch of Madison Road, I can attest to the large-scale safety hazard that the lack of a pedestrian walkway on this stretch of road presents daily. Not only to the school children who wait for the bus on the thoroughfare during the morning, but all manner of pedestrians, bicyclists, school bus drivers, and vehicle operators who daily traverse it. Were it not for the vigilance of the drivers on this stretch of road, this perilous route would no doubt be the site of a lamentable tally of traffic fatalities.
For those who have not seen it, Madison road is narrow and increasingly relied upon by all manner of commuters (pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists) during rush hours. During these peak times, it is commonplace to see cars nearly miss a head on collision with each other as they make a noble attempt to give way for pedestrians (a majority of which are school children) who literally have no choice but to walk along the 12 inch border of the existing roadway alloted to them. Alternative routes for this pedestrian trail are far enough away to that they are not viable options, and, as we mentioned before, pedestrian traffic on this stretch of road continues to increase.
While the sidewalk project proposed to remedy this dangerous situation is the most expensive on the list, and can hardly be considered minor, the money spent will likely spare a tragedy involving the dangerous mix of vehicles and school children which is present every day of the school year. If the goal of these projects is to increase the safety of the community, this project has perhaps the greatest potential to do just that. In a sense, it is long overdue.
We, your neighbors along this deceptively dangerous stretch of Madison road, appreciate the committee’s attention to this matter.
What do you think, will our impassioned plea sway the committee to divert funds into our pet project? We should know by late October whether or not ours comes out on top. Either way, civic involvement, on a local level, is necessary given the proximity of the governing body. While the body and budget itself is small, its potential to wreak havoc on your everyday life is too big to ignore, just ask anyone who has found themselves on the wrong end of a dispute with an activist home owners association board.
As for the State and Federal versions of Government, in their late, degenerate, bankrupt form they can do little more than create the illusion of watching your every move and controlling the details of your life. Despite their large-scale propaganda and their presence at the airport gate, they are mostly harmless. Your impassioned pleas and time spent informing yourself on issues are best spent at the local level.
Who knows? You may even save a life or make the world a better place, all while increasing your property value at the government’s expense.
It is the closest thing to Nirvana that the governed can experience.
10/15/2012 – Portland, Oregon – Pop in your mints…
In today’s Mint, we offer, for your enjoyment, an event which transpired during our time of service on the democratically elected dorm council as secretary at Weyer Hall, circa 1993. While the narrative touches upon many themes that will no doubt evoke strong emotions, we humbly offer it as an example of the shortcomings of governance by democratically elected bodies.
It is recounted here, with certain liberties, in loving memory of Ma Tinder, long time dorm Mother at Weyer Hall. Enjoy!
The Stampede.
During our short, but eventful time as a student at Hastings College, we resided in Weyer Hall, an all male dormitory which housed 70 residents. While we assume that the College Administration had ultimate responsibility for campus governance, each dormitory was governed by a small group of democratically elected peers who sat on what was known as the dorm council.
During the Fall semester of our sophomore year, it fell to us to serve on the council as Dorm Secretary. We say fell, because we did not exert much effort in our campaign, nor did we crush an inferior opponent in a moderated debate. For all we know, we may have raised our hand at the wrong time, an innocent mistake which caused our name to land on the ballot.
Nonetheless, we were determined to serve our fellow residents to the best of our abilities. As Secretary, our responsibilities included taking notes of the decisions of the dorm council, which invariably included the details of certain disciplinary actions taken against those who did not follow the rules and were foolish enough to get caught, publicly recognizing noteworthy accomplishments of the residents, if any, and informing them of upcoming events.
Our diligent dispatches reached the desk of the College President as well as the backs of every bathroom stall in the dorm, where they were most likely to be read. For a time we created toned down, official version of the dispatches for the President. However, our inner laziness finally demanded that we produce just one dispatch, complete with all of the juicy tidbits and unsolicited commentary fit to print.
The President seemed to love it.
The dorm council meetings were held in the quarters of the Dorm Mother, affectionately known as Ma Tinder. Ma Tinder’s quarters were located at the center of the first floor of the three story structure. She resided there, along with her dachshund “Peanut” as a source of calm in what was otherwise a cross between “Revenge of the Nerds” and “Animal House.”
The dorm council’s business, which it faithfully discharged at its monthly meetings, was to decide trivial matters, such as the design of the dorm t-shirt (which is fodder for another day), as well as to enforce the rules of the dorm. Violations of the law of the dorm included residents found to have invited a female to the premises without signing them in at the desk, excessive noise, possession of alcohol and other illegal substances, and in one infamous case, the unlawful operation of a charcoal grill…indoors.
The tranquility of Weyer Hall was about to be transformed Photo Courtesy of Hastings.edu
The dorm council, as with any governing body, was divided into unspoken but acknowledged factions. Those who were there to enforce the rules, and those who were there to ensure that the rules, if enforced, were loosely interpreted and administered with clemency.
You can imagine which camp the younger Mint fell into.
So it happened that on a Sunday afternoon, as winter descended upon Central Nebraska, the dorm council assembled in Ma Tinder’s quarters during mandatory “quiet time,” as was the custom. As we were discussing matters of relatively trivial importance, a pounding noise, distant at first, then increasingly loud and frequent, arose from somewhere in the interior of the building until it passed, as would a locomotive, directly above Ma Tinder’s isle of tranquility.
It was the Stampede.
Those members of the council who were firmly in the rules enforcement camp immediately sprang to their feet in pursuit of the perpetrators of what was obviously a direct affront to the authority of the council. To flagrantly violate “quiet time” by running in boxers and boots, as heavily as one could, through the hallway directly above the meeting place of the council was not simply a minor violation of the rules, it was mutiny.
Those of us who found ourselves in the “loose interpretation/clemency” camp slowly arose, fighting off a chuckle, and give the appearance of chase as doors all over Weyer Hall immediately shut as the Stampede ended just as suddenly as it had begun.
For not only did we see the Stampede as an artful form of both coordinated self expression and protest, we had helped instigate it.
In the end, while the entire dorm was given a stern warning to respect the the rules, there were no individual indictments. Like history makers throughout the ages, the Weyer Stampeders had proved their point,
Today we came across one of the most insightful pieces on education that we have read in quite a while. Perhaps we are biased because it we written by a member of our comparatively small generation, or perhaps it is something more. Virginia Heffernan, the national correspondent for Yahoo! News posted an article today entitled:
With what appears to be the benefit of hindsight and a sober look at her own educational experience, she eloquently voices a viewpoint which, almost out of necessity, is quickly moving from the fringe to mainstream thought. A traditional college education, circa 2012, not only fails to offer a competitive advantage in the workforce to those who can set aside four to six otherwise productive years and the untold thousands spent during that time period, it places undue financial and social pressure on both parents and their children from the time of admission to graduation day.
The College Education: A ticket to a rewarding career or four years of indoctrination followed by a trip to debtors prison? There must be a better way. Photo of Harvard Yard in 2009 by chensiyuan
This undue stress is generally attributable to the fact that parents and students alike who find themselves in the middle of a financial commitment which equates to more than a few years worth of wages are collectively questioning the wisdom of throwing money at an investment whose return has turned unacceptably negative in recent years.
The reason for this, as most current economics students may struggle to tell you, is that the college education, like any other economic good, is succumbing to the workings of to the law of diminishing marginal returns. This law is one of the beautiful, immutable natural laws which states that economic activity, if carried on long enough, will reach a point where each additional dollar of capital invested will render a lower return on investment than the previous dollars invested.
This phenomenon is attributable to changes in the underlying supply and demand dynamics which take place as the natural tendency to chase outsized returns drives more people to engage in high margin activities, which increases the supply of that activity’s output. This supply, as it satiates demand, then serves to lower the price of the product until the producers with higher cost structures are driven out of business while producers with lower-cost structures continue producing profitably at lower price points.
The application of the Law of diminishing marginal returns when applied to College degrees in the US
For a period of time, beginning in the 1940’s in the US, it was relatively rare for an individual to obtain a four-year college degree. In economic parlance, there was a scarcity of college educated individuals relative to demand. Those individuals who did obtain a degree received a higher return on their investment in education in the form of higher wages for the rest of their working lives.
{Editor’s Note: We recognize that this analysis ignores the dynamics in the US economy during that time period leading to the demand for college educated individuals in the workforce. For purposes of this example, we submit it as a given to avoid further divergence from our theme.}
As time went on, more and more individuals saw the wisdom in investing in a college education, colleges and universities increased their capacity and course offerings to satisfy this demand. As the workforce continued to demand college educated individuals, this created a virtuous feedback loop in the higher education industry.
This virtuous feedback loop became so normal, as did rising stock prices in the 80’s and rising home values in the 00’s, that seeking to attend a four-year college has become the goal for a great majority of teens.
Circa 2009, the supply of college educated individuals began to overwhelm the demand for their services. At this point, the marginal return on investment for attending a four-year college for many has decreased to the point where it no longer has a positive net present value, the financial criteria most often used by rational individuals when determining whether or not to undertake an action.
Against this dismal backdrop for education entered a phenomenon which is poised to deliver the knockout blow, the widespread adoption of the internet.
While the net productivity gains realized by the advent of the Internet are seen in many spheres, the Internet is maturing to the point that it is now fundamentally changing the structure of education.
Our mother wisely told us, during those difficult years we spent at the University in the 90’s, that the only thing college will teach you is how to access the information you need when you need it.
The advice has served us well, as has Google.
Unlike Heffernan, we do not feel that our college degree is obsolete. In our epoch, it was necessary to attend a four-year school to learn the disciplines of accounting, finance, and treasury which support us today.
However, the internet has fundamentally changed not the disciplines, but the delivery methods of said education. Now, an individual desiring to learn a discipline such as accounting or economics no longer needs to pack their bags to party with others for four years while fitting in class between video games and other shenanigans.
That individual can peruse The Mint, for example, form the comfort of their living room. Then, after leaving the site. thoroughly confused (for which we wish to be held harmless, mind you), they can access any one of thousands of free online tutorials and videos created by capable individuals who will provide an education on a specific subject on demand in a fraction of the time that it takes to obtain a degree.
Gary North has written recently on the YouTube educational phenomenon as well. If one has something to teach the world, it is a small task to obtain a microphone, video camera (think webcam or smart phone), and a YouTube account. Simply teach the class once to a camera, post it, and your done, saving countless hours needlessly spent drooling on yourself as you sleep through class in a lecture hall. This is how a majority of education will be served over the next millennia.
The internet is fundamentally changing the education industry in the same way it has changed communication, and many of our alma maters will soon resemble the US Postal Service, which has struggled in vain to maintain its current state and sinecure structure as the world it grew up in has changed forever.
This analysis does not even address the fact that many four-year colleges have struggled to keep up with the ability to teach the skills demanded by the modern workforce. The net result of this change in delivery methods and competative disadvantage will be the loss of a number of sinecures in the hallowed halls of Liberal Arts colleges across the land.
While the liberal arts and art itself will always find ways to flourish, paying to be forced to read literature that one is not interested is quickly becoming a luxury that college students cannot afford.
A quick note to share a smattering of links and thoughts related to the Catalan Independence movement and the latest wave of anti-austerity protests in the Club Med region:
The people of the Mediterranean states are no fools, they realize that they have been made the scapegoats and guarantors for years of mismanagement by their parasitic central governments and banking sectors. In a reasonable world, where the government respected its citizens, a region like Catalunya would have the right to shrug off the debts of the central government and make a go of providing basic services on its own.
The Catalans deserve better
Something, that most Catalans will point out, it is capable of doing very well.
However, when it comes to sovereign debt, it appears that there is no escape for the capable. Rather, the noose is generally tightened as the central government becomes increasingly desperate for revenue.
All reasonable dialogue is thrown out the window, and the central government makes a nationalist appeal and orders subservience at the point of a gun, as evidenced by the statement issued by the Spanish Military Association to Artur Mas.
The statement comes in response to protests calling for Catalan independence that included one in five Catalans (1.5 Million of 7.5 Million).
We must note, however, that the Catalans are an unusually peaceful people, and the chances of widespread violence are nil.
We were attending grad school in Barcelona when the tragic Madrid train bombing occurred on March 12, 2004. Apalled by the violence, we participated in a protest of similar size.
It was beautiful.
We took the Metro to Passeig de Gracia and slowly streamed down Barcelona’s grandest boulevard. As we came together with the main march, it was apparent that this was a large event which was hell-bent on rejecting the violence with an overwhelming show of peace.
No al terrorisme, No a la Guerra by Kippeboy via wikimedia commons
As we marched down the Paseo, from time to time the procession of millions would stop, clap our hands, slap our legs, and then hold our hands, palms out, in front of us in silence in a grand gesture that shouted through the silence:
Enough of terrorism, enough of war. This message came to the world in stark contrast to the regular reaction of an eye for an eye that had been pursued up to this point with predictable results.
We pray that this latest round of protests in our beloved Catalunya and Spain end in a similar fashion, with a firm and peaceful rejection of austerity, and a show of solidarity and goodwill towards men.
You must be logged in to post a comment.