What’s troubling you?
I have a pretty good idea but you can’t solve a problem if you are unwilling to look at it realistically.
On one hand we have people who work very hard (definitely you!) but nothing much seems to come from it...worse, it seems like the harder you work the worse things get.
On the other hand we have the somewhat rare (but not as rare as is generally believed) situation where people are making money hand over fist, that these ARE the ‘good times’ but we (a relatively small ‘we’ at that) fear they aren’t going to last...
[If we had three hands we could add those who can’t find work at all...but this makes one too many hands!]
So it has always been, good times for some are bad or ‘hard times’ for others.
Since fairness has nothing to do with this bipolar set of circumstances we often dismiss our personal situations as ‘luck’, good or bad, dependent on your current state of affairs.
Which brings us back to the original problem of not looking at the situation realistically.
Ironically both of these issues, the fear you’re sinking to the bottom of the economic scrap heap as well as the fear that the ‘gravy train’ is about to derail, have their roots in a common problem...the definition of the word ‘profit’.
The word ‘profit’ is a synonym for the word ‘benefit’.
This is straightforward enough but the problem lies in who, exactly, benefits.
The law does not compel commerce to ‘benefit’ society, it compels commerce to ‘benefit’ its shareowners.
While we’re on the subject I have another little morsel for you to chew on.
In principle the government rules by consent of the people...so theoretically all ‘rights and privileges’ flow from said government...are you with me so far?
What this means is the very ability to conduct commerce is a ‘privilege’ granted by the government and that ‘privilege’ is conditional...meaning accepting this privilege carries with it acceptance of the fact that the government has the power/ability to regulate or control said business.
Or even remove this privilege if it sees fit.
Now, since governments are established to ‘protect’ society...it certainly seems to me as though ‘someone’ is falling down on the job as there seems to be a degree of ‘confusion’ about protecting whom from what...with tax dollars.
What I’m saying is why does a government ‘of the people’ allow commerce to prosper at the expense of the people they’re supposed to be protecting? (Low wages, high prices, record corporate profits.)
Why aren’t businesses that don’t pay fair wages ordered to shutdown?
The ability to do business (at all) in this country is a PRIVILEGE that flows from THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.
But you knew that. You also knew the government was established to ‘protect’ us...not shoot at us if we go on strike or arrest us if we protest...um ‘bad’ governance.
That’s the ‘theory’ anyway...just saying, ya know?
I don’t think I need to explain reality to you because if you don’t know by now chances are good you never will.
Here’s another little tidbit that I’ll bet you already knew...or at least suspected. Every one of the world’s great fortunes was both established by and has the protection of government.
First kings, now this...
The governments of men have been and always will be abysmal failures.
For whosoever controls the law controls you!
There’s wisdom here if you can see it. This wisdom also holds within it the key to a fair and equitable society.
Rothschild got it wrong. What is and is not money and how money is used are both controlled by...the law!
Giving even one person control of the law gives them ABSOLUTE POWER over everyone and everything!
For the laws to be just and fair the laws must stand alone.
This is where anarchists are ahead of the curve. It’s perfectly possible to have rules without rulers but once you have rulers, the rules become ‘flexible’...and justice goes out the window.
Let me back up a step because the unscrupulous Baron was right in the respect that with enough money you can make the law read any way you want it to...so long as that lawmaking body is one in the hands of a few people.
If those people are greedy, so much the better! If they’re not, they can be coerced...or killed, it doesn’t matter.
Give me a better reason why the law should not become the sole domain of all that live under them?
It’s all too easy to bribe (or kill) a few people but quite another to take on a whole nation.
Which brings us full circle to the beginning of this diary. If you are suffering...or prospering, the laws (and those who control the laws) are directly responsible.
More succinctly, who do you trust more with your rights, your liberty, your freedom, your prosperity and future wellbeing...some stranger you’ve never met or yourself?
The laws dictate not only how you are treated but how you will live. If you have no control over the law then you have no control over your life.
This situation, to me, is untenable, as it should be to all rational beings.
Legislators = bad. Direct Democracy = good.
Think about it.
Thanks for letting me inside your head,
Gegner