Round and round we go …

The passages below were written by Carroll Quigley in a much-maligned and misinterpreted book published in 1966 about the period 1922-30, Tragedy and Hope. They could have easily been written in our post-Glass-Steagall era:

It [financial capitalism] invested capital not because it desired to increase the output of goods or services but because it desired to float issues (frequently excess issues) of securities on this productive basis. It built railroads in order to sell securities, not in order to transport goods; it constructed great steel corporations to sell securities, not in order to make steel, and so on. But, incidentally, it greatly increased the transport of goods, the output of steel, and the production of other goods. By the middle of the stage of financial capitalism, however, the organization of financial capitalism had evolved to a highly sophisticated level of security promotion and speculation which did not require any productive investment as a basis. Corporations were built upon corporations in the form of holding companies, so that securities were issued in huge quantities, bringing profitable fees and commissions to financial capitalists without any increase in economic production whatever. Indeed, these financial capitalists discovered that they could not only make killings out of the issuing of such securities, they could also make killings out of the bankruptcy of such corporations, through the fees and commissions of reorganization. A very pleasant cycle of flotation, bankruptcy, flotation, bankruptcy began to be practiced by these financial capitalists. The more excessive the flotation, the greater the profits, and the more imminent the bankruptcy. The more frequent the bankruptcy, the greater the profits of reorganization and the sooner the opportunity of another excessive flotation with its accompanying profits. This excessive stage reached its highest peak only in the United States. In Europe it was achieved only in isolated cases. (p336)

A few paragraphs later, he describes an obvious side-effect to corporate structure in an era where we need to raise huge amounts of concentrated capital to achieve large project:

The efforts of financiers to separate ownership from control were aided by the great capital demands of modern industry. Such demands for capital made necessary the corporation form of business organization. This inevitably brings together the capital owned by a large number of persons to create an enterprise controlled by a small number of persons. The financiers did all they could to make the former number as large as possible and the latter number as small as possible. The former was achieved by stock splitting, issuing securities of low par value, and by high-pressure security salesmanship. The latter was achieved by plural-voting stock, nonvoting stock, pyramiding of holding companies, election of directors by cooptation, and similar techniques. The result of this was that larger and larger aggregates of wealth fell into the control of smaller and smaller groups of men. (p337)

It stands to reason that such a structure should not be granted “personhood.” It’s an invitation to tyranny.

Alex O’Brien

Lizard, a good writer and smart man, offers up the following in a piece on treatment of homeless people and victims of natural disasters in our brave new world:

Establishing that this meme is crank terrain is standard operating procedure when it comes to any subject covered by Alex Jones and the other circus animals that populate conspiracy culture…

It’s a good piece, and I have no quarrel with him, including the small bit at the opening that I cite above. I am just using that as a gateway to the world he speaks of, as I have traveled it, and even understand it. If you have confidence in your intellectual abilities and a reserve of solid judgment to be able to examine evidence without being subject to the group mind, such a journey can be useful.

In Orwell’s 1984, Winston Smith manages to break free of the total information control system, a remarkable accomplishment. Searching for answers, looking for escape, he finds O’Brien, supposedly the leader of an organized resistance group. In the end he learns that O’Brien’s job was to monitor people like Smith and his lover Julia, and to offer them hope. He then crushed that hope, and they were reintegrated into the system. It is a most unhappy ending.

Orwell’s dystopia is set in England, and is well-known throughout the world. Here in the US it is widely circulated, even taught in schools. A casual survey of those who have read it would probably yield general notion that the book is about Stalinism. On the right, the word “Ingsoc” clues them to its real purpose: to warn of the dangers of socialism, even as Orwell bluntly stated that he was a socialist.

The book is about totalitarianism. It don’t see a hint of ideology in it, but emphasize “total.” Alex Jones is one of our many O’Brien’s, guarding the perimeters of the village. If you are smart enough to work your way out of the normal system of TV, education and movies, Jones will take you to another dead-end. “Total” means just that – escape from one prison leads to another. “Prison Planet” is highly apropos.

I find Jones unpleasant and untrustworthy. But I understand those who do like him and wish them well on their journey. Jones is but one stop on the road to freedom. His type of work is called a “limited hangout,” that is much of what he says might be true, but never enough to be truly enlightening. Any who openly associate with him are branded with his vile nature and anger, his raspy voice and instant certainty on all matters. That’s Lizard’s reaction above, and the intended effect of Alex Jones. He’s like a FEMA camp, a haven but also a place for quarantine, multi-purposed.

Please do move on. Eventually you’ll find yourself among people of your own kind. They don’t hammer you with information or try to organize you for a cause. They are the few who truly understand the meaning of “pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the spirit.” They take solace in one another, and explore life in all of its intricacy. It’s a self-guided journey. Truly public-spirited people do not tell you what to think. They only advise that you exercise your cranium.

In the meantime, our only true “mission” is to help those in our very small circles as we can – friends, family and acquaintances, and to receive their help and solace as well.

A primer on medical insurance in the new era

obama_laughing_240453Since I am so familiar with it all, I think I talk over the heads of people as they muddle their way through the insurance exchanges looking for coverage. Here are some of the basics:

Obama: “The Tea Party made me do it!”

Jester

In ancient times courts employed fools and by the Middle Ages the jester was a familiar figure. In Renaissance times, aristocratic households in Britain employed licensed fools or jesters, who sometimes dressed as other servants were dressed, but generally wore a motley (i.e. parti-coloured) coat, hood with ass’s (i.e. donkey) ears or a red-flannel coxcomb and bells. Regarded as pets or mascots, they served not simply to amuse but to criticise their master or mistress and their guests. Queen Elizabeth (reigned 1558-1603) is said to have rebuked one of her fools for being insufficiently severe with her. Excessive behaviour, however, could lead to a fool being whipped, as Lear threatens to whip his fool. (Court Jester – The Full Wiki)

American liberals think themselves very smart because they have Jon Stewart and Bill Maher on their side, not realizing that in a state-controlled media there has to pressure-release valve. Stewart takes himself very seriously (as evidenced by his idiotic “Rally for Sanity), and does not understand why he is given seeming free rein. Maher is a little more modest, which I appreciate, but his problem can be summed up with remarks from last night’s show about Obama: Continue reading “Obama: “The Tea Party made me do it!”” →

Health care reform, day two

imageSome additional points on the health care crisis and Obamacare:

  • Access to health care has never been a problem in the upper reaches of our society, but the model, private insurance, is held together by government glue at its weak points, access by seniors and the poor, who are unprofitable.
  • The free enterprise model, which only exists on chalk boards, cannot provide expensive products to poor people. In the muddled minds of its adherents, it has to be the fault of the poor, who are left to die.
  • The same for us seniors, but we are mostly financially better off and white, and so have enough clout that Medicare came into being.
  • Medicaid, the remedy for the poor, has always been under attack, and the fact that it even exists is a tribute to progressives of a bygone era.
  • For so long as the poor are visible, Medicaid will exist. Most people have consciences.
  • Obama was hired (in part) to rescue the private insurance system. He did so by the only possible means: protect it from competition (no public option), and subsidize it.

Will it work? Of course not. But more importantly, even as it does not work, will it continue to exist? For a time yes. Democrats, blinded by party politics, will see to that. And for so long as they do that, they will prevent us from solving our health care problems with the only workable solution: Single Payer.

I say “only.” Some systems, like Britain’s and the VA, are government-owned and run. They work well, though Britain’s is under unrelenting attack from it’s right wing. Only it’s mass support keeps it running. Switzerland, which uses private insurance, is workable, but only because their insurance companies are so heavily regulated that they are virtual slaves to the system. So single payer is not the only solution, but in the US, the only workable one because it can be embedded in our patchwork private care system, as are Medicare and Medicaid.

Both of those systems are strained, as they cannot control outside costs imposed by an unworkable private care system with its hundreds of cost-shifting mechanisms, everyone running around trying to dump their costs on others. (VA is exempt from that, and so is remarkably efficient.) So single payer, when it comes to the US, will not be a shining model of efficiency. It will take decades to rid this system of its internal contradictions.

But this needs to be understood: we need to build a platform on which our society can function and where families, especially our young people, have a fighting chance. That platform will guarantee everyone two things: access to health care, and access to education. That’s what they do out there in the civilized world.

Those two societal functions are being eaten alive by the scavengers of the so-called free enterprise system. Until we cage them, we are nothing but chattel. Our youth, those who have jobs, are chained to their desks by student loans and the need for health care, and so are virtual slaves to employers.

We are not a free people. But the remedies are before our eyes. If real leaders step forward, and if the CIA doesn’t murder them, we can fix these problems.

Black Tuesday

Liz Fowler headed the private industry group that wrote ACA while in working in Baucus's office. She then transferred to the White House to implement it. There was little congressional involvement other than voting on passage.
Liz Fowler headed the private industry group that wrote ACA while in working in Baucus’s office. She then transferred to the White House to implement it. There was little congressional involvement other than voting on passage.
Today, October 1st, is a sad day in our history, the day the “insurance exchanges” open, three months shy of the day that the private mandate part of “Obamacare” goes into effect. Typically, the Democrats are out there spouting its wonders, clueless as ever. Their party leaders are depending on the power of suggestion to make it seem that this AMC Pacer is a Cadillac. But Cadillac’s (in other countries called “basic health care”) will soon be illegal.

Yeah, I’m kind of bitter. It is hard to watch people get sucked into perception management games while having their pockets picked. Is anyone really paying attention to anything? Anyone?
Continue reading “Black Tuesday” →

Doubt, you silly fools. Doubt!

By fearing whom I trust I find my way
To truth; by trusting wholly I betray
The trust of wisdom; better far is doubt
Which brings the false into the light of day.
Abdallah al-Ma’arri (973-1057)

I get flack from some quarters regarding state of mind, as in “he’s a little off-center,” getting old,” “on a tangent” … and a “conspiracy theorist” as the suggestion goes. It’s a little difficult to explain, and a problem – if I were crazy, I would be the last to know it.
Continue reading “Doubt, you silly fools. Doubt!” →