First law of property rights

Everything doesn't have to be owned.

Which leads to egalitarian principles:
Things that are made naturally should not be owned.
Water, land, subterranean resources
there is something to be said about the effort that goes into procuring subterranean resources and creating potable water from unhealthy sources.

If you make it, you own it.
If it is gifted to you by someone who made it, you own it.
Property is yours during the time you are actively using it; this is temporary.

Does power corrupt or do the corrupt want power

I'm weary of anyone who thinks they can/should control other people's lives (especially people they don't know/have never met).
Politics isn't about deriving power from the consent of the governed like it's supposed to be
It's about making decisions for others, whether they like it or not
It's about doing the bidding of those who control resources and capital.

I don't like the idea of giving anyone that kind of power and I don't trust anyone who wants that kind of power
The constitution talks of representatives
A representative must get consent from a client when making decisions for them
They must let the client know the decisions they are making and allow them to accept or deny
Politicians consider themselves leaders
They are not.
Their duty is to secure our rights
Not lead us or make decisions for us

*update from April 2013

Enslavement

I've seen people who want to highlight the fact that white people in America were enslaved too. As if people didn't know that. As if this fact invalidates racism. I want people to look further and ask some questions.
Throughout history, what was the common denominator of the people who enslaved others? Or rather, What traits did slave owners share? What method did they use to enslave people? Who allowed them to enslave people?
Who were the first people who were enslaved after America was 'discovered'? Why did they choose to kidnap people from another country and use them as labor? What was their justification? What methods did they use to enslave their fellow Europeans? Why did they stop using Europeans as slaves in the antebellum South? What did free citizens do in regards to the enslavement of other human beings?
What happened when slaves rebelled or escaped?
Hopefully those questions will spark other questions...

Slavery isn't about race.
Race is about dividing people so you can control them.

Then I want you to realize that slavery is still being practiced in the world, including in America. It never stopped. Many people of different origins are being forced into labor, beaten, being sexually assaulted/raped, and murdered. This includes children.
American citizens (including children) are being kidnapped from their homes and are being used as prostitutes.

I can't say that history will repeat itself because it's just being perpetuated. They call it human trafficking now.

*updated from February 2012

Deep thought

If economics must be governed by politics

Politics must be governed by the people 

Shared Inheritance

ENCYCLICAL LETTER
LAUDATO SI’
OF THE HOLY FATHER
FRANCIS
ON CARE FOR OUR COMMON HOME

CHAPTER TWO

THE GOSPEL OF CREATION
VI. THE COMMON DESTINATION OF GOODS

93. Whether believers or not, we are agreed today that the earth is essentially a shared inheritance, whose fruits are meant to benefit everyone.

For believers, this becomes a question of fidelity to the Creator, since God created the world for everyone. Hence every ecological approach needs to incorporate a social perspective which takes into account the fundamental rights of the poor and the underprivileged.

The principle of the subordination of private property to the universal destination of goods, and thus the right of everyone to their use, is a golden rule of social conduct and “the first principle of the whole ethical and social order”.
[71 JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), 19: AAS 73 (1981), 626.]

The Christian tradition has never recognized the right to private property as absolute or inviolable, and has stressed the social purpose of all forms of private property.

Saint John Paul II forcefully reaffirmed this teaching, stating that “God gave the earth to the whole human race for the sustenance of all its members, without excluding or favouring anyone”.
[72 Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), 31: AAS 83 (1991), 831.] These are strong words.
He noted that “a type of development which did not respect and promote human rights – personal and social, economic and political, including the rights of nations and of peoples – would not be really worthy of man”.
[73 Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), 33: AAS 80 (1988), 557.]

He clearly explained that “the Church does indeed defend the legitimate right to private property, but she also teaches no less clearly that there is always a social mortgage on all private property, in order that goods may serve the general purpose that God gave them”.
[74 Address to Indigenous and Rural People, Cuilapán, Mexico (29 January 1979), 6: AAS 71 (1979), 209.]
Consequently, he maintained, “it is not in accord with God’s plan that this gift be used in such a way that its benefits favour only a few”.
[75 Homily at Mass for Farmers, Recife, Brazil (7 July 1980): AAS 72 (1980): AAS 72 (1980), 926.]

This calls into serious question the unjust habits of a part of humanity.
[76 Cf. Message for the 1990 World Day of Peace, 8: AAS 82 (1990), 152.]

95. The natural environment is a collective good, the patrimony of all humanity and the responsibility of everyone.

If we make something our own, it is only to administer it for the good of all.
If we do not, we burden our consciences with the weight of having denied the existence of others.

That is why the New Zealand bishops asked what the commandment “Thou shall not kill” means when “twenty percent of the world’s population consumes resources at a rate that robs the poor nations and future generations of what they need to survive”.
[78 NEW ZEALAND CATHOLIC BISHOPS CONFERENCE, Statement on Environmental Issues (1 September 2006).]

Laudato si'

Exploitation questions

Are you doing this because you want to?

Is there something else you'd rather be doing?

What are the perceived barriers to you doing what you really want?

Are you doing this for someone else?

Is someone else forcing you to do this?

If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.

There is no free market

The market does not want to be free

The market seeks an enforcer. It seeks regulation. It seeks protection from liability. 

Three actors war for law in their favor

Worker. Consumer. Company

Each law used to control the other. 

Even in the black market there are mafias, gangs, lords 

The Real Job Creators

Supply and demand (S&D) is said to be a fundamental concept of economics
Who sets the standards for S&D?
I have a product and I create 100 units. I sell 10. Do I create 100 more to increase demand? No. I decrease my output or change my product.
If I create 100 units and sell out in a day, I create more. What if I can't do it by myself? I lose money. So, I have to hire someone else to help me make it. The goal is to profit off of their labor. I will not pay them more than what I would make from the sells of the items they create. That would be stupid.

Let's go back to the first scenario of loss. Would I hire someone else to help me make the extra units even if I only sold 10 of the first? No, that would be a waste of money.

Two labor rules
Employers don't hire anyone unless they have to.
The only reason they would have to is if the labor would stand to make a profit.
A person will only hire you if they can make a profit off of you.

An employer is not going to make a profit if no one is buying their product.

Some say an investor is a job creator. Not so. They provide capital for the work you need. If there is no need for more labor, that investment will not go to labor costs.

So, back to the question of setting standards for S&D.
It is the demand that sets the standards. Who creates the demand?

Consumers.

If there is no demand, there is no need for a supply. There is no need for more labor if there is no need for a supply because there is no demand.

Consumers are the real job creators.

Purpose of School

Learn skills to support yourself

Or learn skills to get others to support you  

I'm not going to say if looks determine what category you belong in, but I'll imply it 

The real first law of economics

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

https://www.marxists.org/subject/utopian/morelly/code-nature.htm

Morelly 1755

Code of Nature

Another perspective

Commission based economy

What if everyone was paid commission if their labor resulted in the sale of a product?

Even minimum wage workers 

What if everyone got a percentage of the company's profits based on their contribution to the profit?

Profit sharing for all

Take the first step

Kind of tired of U.S. citizens demanding that the government take care of problems.
Especially military intervention in foreign countries.
But it also goes for protection in your own home.  Or assistance for housing and food.
Any able bodied American can raise money and procure transportation to fight the fights they want to.
We are able to change our economic structure by supporting ourselves.  Refuse to work for and buy from corporations that disrespect us as workers and consumers
Any community is able to support it's people.

All without the government.

To Answer The Proposal

“No matter how disastrously some policy has turned out, anyone who criticizes it can expect to hear: "But what would you replace it with?" When you put out a fire, what do you replace it with”
Thomas Sowell

Intentional misunderstanding of question.
A policy is created to address a valid issue.
Policy is not synonymous with a fire.
A disastrous policy is using gasoline to put out fire. The replacement is water.

To address the question,
It would behoove all of us to ensure that everyone in this nation is healthy and can make informed decisions.
We have to decide what 'healthy' entails and how we have to decide how we can guarantee that.
The same goes for informed decision making.

The government has proven that it is ill informed about all of the above.
The alternative is for the people to decide what they need.
The alternative is empowerment and community

take money out of science

accept the fact that everything you see/hear/read is shrouded in bullshit of some kind, to some degree

I would say to do your own experiments, but people have been known to bullshit themselves.

The pure scientific method works
But it's like the free market.
Ideally, it's great;
in reality, It doesn't work as well as you think it does.

When you add the human factor, things get screwed up

The best thing you can do is know what the bullshit filters are and try your best to remove them
Go straight to the source of the data and know how to interpret it. Don't let someone else interpret it for you.

And lastly, admit that you are going to believe what you want to believe, regardless.

There will never be a free market.

The realistic point is that capitalism as you want it, will never exist.
The 'free market' will never exist

Certain People will always have the means to use force to subjugate others
Certain People will always want to use force to subjugate others
Power, control, and Profit will always come before humanity.

This has been proven all throughout history and to the present.

It is true that America has never had a free market because private enterprise would never allow it.
Private enterprise took the minimal government we had and changed it into the USA. They increased the power of government in order to increase the force they could exact over workers and citizens.

If you think those who have power over the government are just going to lose all power because you get rid of the government, you are mistaken.

There will never be any such thing as a minimalist government because that does not serve the people who are in power.
IF you tear down the means for people to control others, they will create other means.

Again, look at the USA. Economic powers controlled America through the British government. They kept power even after British lost it's hold on America.
They turned the articles of confederation into the constitution. And they are the reason we are where we are now.

Realize that any freedom you want, you will have to fight for it daily.

Deep Thought

Race is an economic construct

BOOM!

wage math

So people are balking at minimum wage increases
Stating that people are asking to be paid more than they are worth

Let's look at worth on the other side

What is a no-skill worker worth compared to the owner of a company (assuming they are the highest paid person)?

Let's look at it in raw hours
Say a part time employee works 20 hours a week
A motivated owner works 140 hours a week
That means that motivated owner is putting 7 times more effort in.
Let's double it for skill
14 times more

Hell, let's triple it,
I can deal with an owner making 21 times more than the people who actually produce and sell the product.
I can even deal with 70 times more

But that's not reality is it?
McDonalds decided that their CEO's 'Fair Share' was 1,196 time what their workers make. Without ever flipping a burger, or taking an order, or cleaning a floor, or fixing a fry machine

Do you want to talk about stock? Well, new CEOs usually don't buy stock with their own money. The company gives it to them. So the stock is a part of their earnings.
It's not anything they sacrificed for.
They didn't risk any of their own money.

And I wonder what would happen if a CEO would actually give their workers more of the fruits of their labor?
Oh, the CEO would quit. Well, good ridden. There are others that can take their place.
And if no one takes their place?
Fine. I don't eat McDonalds anyway. The companies that do shaft their workers don't make anything that betters anyone.


Or you want to talk about raising prices?
So you want me to back off because someone making 1000 times more than their workers would rather screw customers than make maybe 500 times more than their workers instead?
You'd rather get mad at me for wanting better wages for workers. Or wanting more people employed at better wages.

But you ignore or even praise the person who could actually make a difference yet chooses not to for their own gain.
You make excuses for the people who can give better wages and jobs so people don't need government assistance.

you want to talk about small business?
Small business isn't the problem
Small business pay their people much better in terms of what they make compared to their workers.
Small business doesn't pull in the capital or profits that these big companies do.
These companies are the reason small business has it so hard. Yet you want to blame it on workers who actually want to be able to live off of what they earn.

You can scoff at people for judging the person who makes 500 to 1000 times more than the people actually producing the product and selling it. But when someone tries to fight for the people who actually make the profits, you say they are not worth it.

People are arguing about a person asking for a higher minimum wage when owners are the ones increasing their wages at the expense of the workers.
The other argument is that the higher minimum wages would increase prices
Like this is an automatic force of the economy and not a consequence of greed
When a company makes a billion in profit (And still complains that the market is 'challenging'), and thinks they have to raise prices in order to raise their worker wages,
fuck them.


You ask people to justify a minimum wage increase
Justify a person making 200 to 300 times more than their workers


talk about worth

Taxation is NOT Theft

Taxation is extortion

When you are hired for a job, you sign a w-4.
That form allows your employer to withhold taxes from your paycheck.

Who has refused to sign a w-4?

Taxation is not slavery either. The comparison is ignorant.

From student to worker

I agree that financial institutions are making money off of college students. I agree that the cost of higher education in America is stupid.
Ever since the government reduced subsidies to colleges, prices have skyrocketed.

People rarely talk to children about credit and it's affect on their lives. Which is why they're ripe when they move away from home and have to make financial decisions by themselves.
People rarely promote community college has a cheaper and valid alternative to a four year expensive school.

Now I'm going to be that guy. When I was deciding to go to college, the one thing that scared me more than anything was student loans. For whatever reason, I thought that this was the worse idea. I ended up joining the Navy. I know a lot of people won't respect that decision, and I really don't care. But, I got an education and money to further my education.

Higher education is a big deal. It's still a good investment if you do it right. Much better to have a viable degree than just a high school diploma.
A big problem in today's job market is that people aren't qualified for the jobs that are out there.
I like the idea of businesses working with colleges to help students get the education they need.

The best advice I could give is this,
Start volunteering early during K-12. Get a summer job as soon as you can. Start earning your own money and learn about managing that money.
I'd encourage kids to apply for every grant and scholarship they can, even if they don't think they qualify.
Go to a cheap community college or take cheap online courses and get the core classes and drunken sex out of the way.

Take a little time to look at the job market and see what interests them first. Volunteer in industries that catch their eye.
Once they find something that pulls them, go to the HR department of a couple of businesses and find out what education background they're looking for. Find out what education benefits they give their employees.
Tailor your education to the career you wish to pursue.
Check in at least every quarter to keep up with changes in the industry.
Seek out companies that provide tuition assistance or pay for certificates and licenses.

If you can't figure out what you want to do, postpone college.
Learn a trade, get a license or certificate in a field that interests you.

Realize that you will have to start from the bottom and work your way up.
You will not be making the money you want to make when you first enter the workforce.
Time and Hard work is the key to increased pay. The only way around that is knowing the right people.
Remember to network when you volunteer/intern or work part time jobs.

As for those who already have student debt. sucks.
I can't get down with loan forgiveness or defaulting on loans.
I would like to see Work-Study programs completely replace loan programs.
If we had to keep some loan programs, I'd like to see a zero interest rate for government loans.
I'd like to see a Tuition reimbursement for community service program for people who already have student debt.
Tuition would be reimbursed for every year of community service

Libertarian slogan

Businesses should be able to do whatever they want to without restriction
Workers and consumers, fuck you