Posted on

A Review of: The United States of Work

By Hunter Lee

A Review of New Republic article:  The United States of Work

Most of these articles start out with “Income has remained stagnant since the 1970s.” But then never offer up an explanation. It’s not a coincidence. Nixon ended Bretton Woods 1971.

As far as college, the more aggressively you increase the demand for something, the more aggressively the price for that product is going to increase if the supply remains relatively stagnant. The U.S. government has began massively subsidizing and guaranteeing student loans for decades which has caused this massive price inflation. The Department of Education now relies on income from student loan debt, so the bubble will keep going. It is exactly like the housing bubble. “We just want everyone to have a good home/ education.”

The author seems to think that unions are the reason people don’t have to work 12-hours a day. As if people all the sudden didn’t want to do that. Or as if people all the sudden didn’t want to shove their children in coal mines. This would imply that the reason places like the Congo have so much child labor is because of a lack of child labor laws, or if they simply implemented a 40-hour work week, or $15 higher minimum wage, they would all be rich. Obviously, this would simply cause more desperation poverty. The reality is technological advances (almost exclusively created by free markets) are how overall work hours are decreased. This has been the case since the beginning of time.

Not long ago, the majority of households were able to live with only one income earner. Now with the combination of the excessive taxes, most notably the income tax, as well as inflation, dual income households are the majority.

“Unlike the state, these private governments are able to wield power with little oversight, because the executives and boards of directors that rule them are accountable to no one but themselves.” This is just laughable. The state is god. If you boycott the military, men with guns will come to your house and murder you. At this point, to claim that the government operates with any oversight just shows you were the author is coming from. It’s just Marxism. Meanwhile, the Uber CEO single-handled solved drinking and driving and yells at an employee and people boycott. If they don’t, they have the ability to.

“Yet because employment contracts create the illusion that workers and companies have arrived at a mutually satisfying agreement..” This is a logical imperative when people voluntarily interact. “I am doing this because I prefer to do it/ I believe it will be in my best interest. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t.” Any unfair advantage other than that is always caused by the state, and therefore that is the enemy. It’s not Apple and Samsung who will come to your house with guns if you don’t work for them.

These articles are always written by people who have little or no entrepreneurial experience. The reason for this is that when you go down that route, you realize you have no real control as business owner. The customer decides everything. Unless, of course, you partner with the state via regulations that prohibit competitors from entering the market, or you receive funding from tax dollars. Then, you are no longer to the customers demand and they are now your subjects.

“Lecturer of art history at the University of Melbourne. Author of Do What You Love. And Other Lies about Success and Happiness.”

Posted on

My Take on Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond

By Michael of Evolution of Economics

Jared Diamond outlines in his book Guns, Germs, and Steel various possible determinants for civilizations growth in various parts of the world. A great variable brought up by Diamond is that geographic proximity is a determining factor in the success or failure of a civilization. Diamond uses geographical anthropology to show historical factors of animal and plant domestication along similar environmental conditions. Since societies who share commonality along latitude and on the same land mass more than likely to have similar crops, animals and seasonal living, they are more than likely going to have overlapping developments in their societal growth.

I personally agree with Diamond that geography has much to do with a society’s success or failure. The concept of which mammals and not only their availability but ability to be domesticated was very persuasive to me, with the major five being the cow, sheep, goat, pig and horse (Diamond, 1997, p. 159). These animals were not only utilized as beasts of burden, food sources, war instruments and other pure survival intents, but freed up humans from some basic hunter-gatherer endeavors which allowed for more innovation and specialization in other capital appropriations (these areas not addressed by Diamond very well).

Another great point was that “indigenous crops from different parts of the globe were not equally productive” (Diamond, 1997, p. 147). When looking at specific places like New Guinea, we can see that being absent of different crops can lead to protein deficiencies, while a society in the Fertile Crescent would have more species to choose from which provide a better nutritional base. Again, when the basics of survival are systemized due to these resources, than other human advancements can occur.

This leads us to the portion of Diamond’s arguments of population density. Diamond proposes that a societies population density is determined largely by it being based on a hunter gather society or a farming/”root based” society. I believe Diamond is on to something, and while he does point out the problem with disease in higher populated societies, apparently much of the world was and is willing to deal with the tradeoff of “crowd diseases” regardless of past historical events (Diamond, 1997, p. 205).

These factors shape human action in all geographic land masses and saying that “geographic determinism” is or is not what lead to a downfall/success of a society is an over simplification (Diamond, “Geographic Determinism”). I believe many of Diamonds detractors often use “geographic determinism” as a pejorative term against his work, because Diamond does at times have incongruent application of rationality to his theory. As an example, in Collapse, Diamond uses the examples of the Vikings setting up winter settlements on targeted coasts so they can begin raiding more efficiently the next season (Diamond, 2005, p. 184). This is a perfect example of human beings acting in contrast to geography through the technology the society has amassed. While geography may have played a part in the capital stocks (grain, animals, natural resources, etc) that helped shape a society, geography being the only factor which determines societal action is a theory left wanting.

Human beings innovating ways in which to survive or achieve goals is often overlooked by Diamond, even when he mentions them specifically. I feel this is because he is metaphorically holding a hammer and looking for nails when screws, hooks, wires, connectors, holes and plugs are also in the mix. Diamond is not looking at these as a possible variable to be incorporated into his “law” or overarching theory of societal growth/collapse because they cannot be so simply squeezed into “nice to measure” parameters as his scientific background. Diamond even writes how “purposeful experiments” cannot be carried out in the social sciences, even if he wishes this were not so (Diamond, 1997, p. 55).

The geography of a society provides a stimulus of individuals to action, provides the means of achieving that which those stimulus have provoked and can be a limiting factor in achieving those ends by restraining means. A society which can work together in order to take of basic survival of small groups can progress into larger societies though the accumulation of capital. This capital saving of individuals in the community is largely determined by the geographic limitations Diamond explores, but more often than not Diamond shows how even the worst off society (in terms of natural resources) finds innovative ways for survival. This innovation alone can in some ways be the evolutionary next step to the survival of the society, or its supposed “mastery” over another natural obstacle of man’s survival.

Diamond’s theories from both Guns, Germs and Steel as well as Collapse seem to me great starting points for investigation into the formation and fall of societies, but I would not be bold enough to say they are a complete treatment on the subjects as I believe that could be an intellectual fatal conceit of his proposed massive undertaking.

References
Diamond, J. M. (1997). Apples or Indians. In Guns, Germs, and Steel: The fates of human societies (p. 147). New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.

Diamond, J. (n.d.). Geographic Determinism. Retrieved September 25, 2016, from
http://www.jareddiamond.org/…/Geographic_determinism.htm

Diamond, J. M. (1997). Lethal Gift of Livestock. In Guns, Germs, and Steel: The fates of human societies (p. 204). New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.

Diamond, J. M. (1997). Up to the Starting Line. In Guns, Germs, and Steel: The fates of human societies (p. 55). New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.

Diamond, J. M. (1997). Zebras, Unhappy Marriages and the Anna Karenina Principle. In Guns, Germs, and Steel: The fates of human societies (p. 159). New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.

Diamond, J. M. (2005). The Viking Prelude and Fugues. In Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed (p. 184). New York: Viking.

Posted on

Disney’s The Lion King – A Review

Ahh, The Lion King. I have to be honest, I’ve probably seen the film several times over the years, and each time it seemed perfectly well made, with a well structured story and compelling, if somewhat shallow, characters. It was only on my most recent viewing that I was struck by the level of propaganda and statist subtext that seems so glaringly obvious now.

So first, a little history, as this movie is a bit long in the erm, tooth. In 1994 Disney released their 32nd animated feature film to nearly universal acclaim. Drawing on influences from Disney Chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg’s personal life in politics, as well as Shakespeare’s King Lear, the film tells the story of a young lion named Simba who ultimately triumphs over his evil uncle Scar to become king of the pridelands. As critic Glenn M. so succinctly put it, “This is the greatest Disney film of all time and possibly the most greatest cultural achievement of the the 20th century.”

Oh what a time 1994 was. A simpler time, where you couldn’t just get propagandized through the internet, you either had to turn on your tv, or go out and pay money at a theater to get properly propagandized, dammit. The average cost of a gallon of gas in the U.S. was $1.09, Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were murdered by some unknown assailant, Kurt Cobain joined the 27 club, the whitewater scandal began, ice skaters were hiring thugs to knee-cap other ice skaters, and the world was content. Oh, and The Lion King was the highest grossing film of the year.

And before you say it, yes, it is called the Lion KING, so any prospective viewer should expect a certain level of authoritarian worship and statist bed-wetting about freedom, but this movie, upon repeat viewing, is absolutely drenched with it. I mean, they actually soaked the bed on this one. This mattress is positively dripping. Continue reading “Disney’s The Lion King – A Review”