Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Is The State Better At Driving Economic Growth?

"When the government is involved in business, it’s hard for private companies to compete. The Chinese government is smothering the private sector. The usurping of private enterprise has become so evident that the Chinese have given it a nickname: 'guojin mintui.' That roughly translates as 'while the state advances, the privates retreat.' If the government doesn’t interfere, these entrepreneurs would be productive.

There are a variety of reasons the Chinese government is seeking an enlarged role in the economy — including fears that wealthy entrepreneurs could begin to challenge the Communist Party. There is also an ingrained belief among leaders that the state is better at driving growth and redistributing wealth. And so state companies have been given the green light to expand their interests and move into anything that promises high returns — whether real estate, finance, technology or other fields."

Chen Zhiwu, Yale University Finance Professor

Ha! Are there some lessons here for us?

Notice some key words and phrases - we hear them all the time! Smothering the private sector... Gubment interference is negative to entrepreneurial productivity... [The gubment] is better at driving growth and redistributing wealth... The state...

So, then, why, WHY, is our gubment trying to do what the Chinese gubment is doing?

Why is our gubment so bent, or hellbent, on the same kind of control the Chinese gubment (read that Communist Party) is hellbent on?

Why does our gubment think such control is better and will work?

BECAUSE THOSE IN CHARGE OF OUR GUBMENT, CURRENTLY, HAVE NO PRIVATE SECTOR EXPERIENCE! THEY HAVE NO THOUGHTS FOR ANYTHING BUT FOR THE STATE! IT IS ALWAYS, ALWAYS, THE MOTHER STATE! WHY? BECAUSE THAT IS THE SOURCE OF THEIR POWER AND THE SOURCE OF THEIR CONTROL!

Do you think that if the Chinese people, their own entrepreneurs, could vote, they would vote for the Statists?

BUT ALAS, THEY HAVE NO VOTE!

Think carefully. And so, when you vote, vote smart. Vote smart. Vote smart.

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Do You Want The Oyster Or The Shell?

"The first man gets the oyster, the second man gets the shell."

Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919)

What does that mean?

Carnegie is the quintessential rags to riches story. Moving to Pennsylvania in 1848, he found work as a bobbin boy changing spools of thread in a cotton mill. He worked 6 days a week, for 12 hours a day and was paid $1.20 per week.

Finding a job that paid $2.50 per week (!) as a messenger boy in the Pittsburgh office of the Ohio Telegraph Company, he jumped right in.

Here is where the quote comes in. As a 16 year old messenger boy, Andrew paid attention to the sounds the telegraph made, learning to translate the sounds into letters and could repeat messages without writing the sounds down.

Impressing his superiors, he moved up from there quickly. Networking, and borrowing money from his family, he made his first investment, and then another and then another.

While working in the railroads, he invested in the things the railroad industry needed - steel, bridges and rails. Eventually settling into the steel industry, he, to quote him, "Put all [his] eggs into one basket, and then really, really nurture that basket."

The rest is history, as they say. In 2007 dollars, his worth at death was $300 billion. That is a few Gates or Buffetts. Carnegie is regarded as the second richest man in history, behind Rockefeller.

His dictum?

1. " To spend the first third of one's life getting all the education one can. "
2. " To spend the next third making all the money one can. "
3. " To spend the last third giving it all away for worthwhile causes. "

Carnegie's later years were given to writing and to philanthropy. He especially liked giving money to libraries, educational causes, to schools that were connected with religion and to the education of blacks. His philosophy about money was that it was "debasing" unless one spent his efforts in pursuits of giving it away!

He also developed into quite the writer, contributing often to magazines and newspapers. His most radical work first came out in 1886 called "Triumphant Democracy." His thesis was that American Republicanism, that of voting for political leadership, was superior to the British monarchical system. Democracy allowed people to become all they could be being subject to themselves and their individuality (seeking the oyster and not the shell) and not to the whims of a ruling family.

Later he published "Wealth," in which he argued that a man should first accumulate wealth and then work toward giving it away. Subsequent to that period, he commissioned Napoleon Hill (at no pay) to interview 500 wealthy industrialists, and publish their secrets. In this way he hoped to pick up the "common man," and then have more philanthropy available for "the masses."

Carnegie spent his life utilizing the capitalist system of developing and implementing one's abilities to seek the oyster. He never desired the shell. He never settled for the shell.

And he didn't desire the shell for himself OR others!

AND SO, MY DEAR BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF THE CONGREGATION, DON'T SETTLE FOR THE WONDERS GUBMENT WANTS TO OFFER! SEEK INSTEAD TO DEVELOP YOURSELVES IN A SYSTEM OF PERSONAL LEADERSHIP AND GROWTH, AND DO NOT, DO NOT, DO NOT ACCEPT THE EMPTY PROMISES OF SOCIALIST CRUSTS AND THE CONTROLLING OFFERS OF GUBMENT CRUMBS!

DOING SO WILL LEAVE US ONLY SHELLS. AND WE WILL END UP INSTEAD ONLY SHELLS OF OUR POTENTIAL SELVES!

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Enjoy A Part Of Mr. Henry's Speech

Patrick Henry lived his entire life in what was to become the Commonwealth of Virginia. His life spanned 1736-1799. He served as Virginia's first and sixth governor.

Elected to the House of Burgesses from rural Louisa County in Virginia, he is most famous for a speech given 23 March 1775 at the Virginia Convention held at the St. John's Episcopal Church in Richmond, Virginia.

Still there, as the oldest church in Virginia, the church is located at 2401 East Broad Street.

The church was selected as the site to house the Virginia Convention to determine if Virginia would send troops to assist in the Revolutionary War.

The speech is fiery, and features a couple of themes:

1. The past will contribute to the future, so America needed to break from the past.
2. We should not be swayed by the "illusions of hope." (presciently mentioned twice)
3. The name of God is invoked frequently. After all, they are in church!

A fierce proponent of what he called Republicanism (that leaders should be elected and not inherit public office) and Anti-Federalism (he was a main antagonist of James Madison and essentially forced the adoption of the Bill of Rights), he remained true to the cause of America, and liberty, until his death.

It only takes about three minutes to read the speech. But some pertinent parts are offered here:

" NO man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope that it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen, if entertaining, as I do, opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely, and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery. And in proportion to the magnitude of the subject, ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country and of an act of disloyalty towards the majesty of Heaven which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth - and listen to the song of the siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and to provide for it ...

In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free - if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending - if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained - we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!

Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat, but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged, their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable - and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come!

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, peace, peace - but there is no peace. The war is actually begun. The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death! "