January 15, 2015

Capitalism, a moral construct and why they must destroy it...

   Yesterday I happened to reach my hand into the preverbal bucket of ells over at cmblake6's porch
discussing the interest in both political parties on raising gas taxes because the cost of fossil fuels is down at the moment,  sparking some fundamental thinking and specifically  asking myself why? (This is en edited and expanded version/of my comments on his page)

On energy:

 Fundamentally keeping energy costs down is the most critical aspect to the function of a society. The lower the cost, the greater we all benefit and inversely, the higher the cost of energy the less efficient any activity costs with no benefit being realized. Lower the cost of energy and all of a sudden, new mines become profitable, farmers can run pumps and till the soil for less $$ and it costs less to run the beer cooler at the local mini-mart. The result is more stuff, cheaper for everyone and yep , that’s a simplification but true, everyone wins.

  "But my friend Joe works in the oilfield and he is afraid of being laid off"

We can always find a case of individual hardship if we look close enough, but the reality is the entire
society benefits from lower energy costs.  This is what the left does, uses emotion to get their way, to ratchet up the rhetoric.  We don't do that here if we wish to be intellectually honest and maintain integrity.

So why would any Republican party member want to increase taxes on energy? Well I will answer that, that is because these progressive Republicans do not have, recognize, or have compromised the moral value of capitalism. And YES!  Capitalism is a moral construct, it is an ideal.

"Capitalism is a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in which all property is privately owned.

The recognition of individual rights entails the banishment of physical force from human
relationships: basically, rights can be violated only by means of force. In a capitalist society, no man or group may initiate the use of physical force against others. The only function of the government, in such a society, is the task of protecting man’s rights, i.e., the task of protecting him from physical force; the government acts as the agent of man’s right of self-defense, and may use force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use; thus the government is the means of placing the retaliatory use of force under objective control."

And the very ideal must be destroyed by the progressives, socialist, tribal chieftain or any other oligarchies for that matter.

   "When I say “capitalism,” I mean a full, pure, uncontrolled, unregulated laissez-faire capitalism—with a separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church."--A.Rand

Why? Because Capitalism, proves them all wrong. With true capitalism, not this phony semi
socialistic cronyism we have now, there is no such thing as a poor oppressed working class that is so needed in our favorite socialistic societies. Class privilege is non existent as are monopolies in true capitalism. Economic mobility, freedom of expression abound. Capitalism thrives in a limited government setting, while socialism can only exist with the heavy fist of the state, and well, the state is not going to willingly cede power.

Increasing the cost of energy through taxation is like adding abrasive to the oil of an engine, the engine has to work harder due to the added friction; the same is true for an economy, and if I were asked on the best and quickest way to damage the ideal of capitalism, I would increase the cost of energy at every level and blame capitalism for its own failure at every turn. Sound familiar ?  

So why are these guys in office? WTF? Time to get some real challengers lined up for the next primary….. I an so tired of the immoral/unprincipled/chameleon claiming they are leading us….. 

“Only fundamental principles, rationally validated, clearly understood and voluntarily accepted, can create a desirable kind of unity among men.”—A. Rand

I dare any politician to answerer  the following question:    (Oh how I would love to moderate a live primary debate!)

Does man need values at all—and why?

Recommended reading:  Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

1 comment:

  1. >> "Does man need values at all—and why?"

    Values are the basis for making evaluations. Everyone has values (just as everyone has opinions) but not all values and opinions are worth equally much. Desires also arise from values - we want what we attach value to. King Midas had values, although they were of little practical use and were ultimately destructive to life. I like the 1952 poem 'Desiderata' as it outlines a useable vision for life; I am ambivalent about the 1968 version recorded by Lenoard Nimoy on his 'Spock Thoughts' album ... the words are the same, but Nimoy's inflection impart different meaning.