Shell of Economics – Ch12 – Humanity’s Forgotten Reflection

available on Amazon

Humanity’s Forgotten Reflection

By S. A. Ward

Chapter Twelve – Shell of Economics

If there is no financial incentive, investment and quality of that product will drastically diminish. Thomas Sowell in his book Basics of Economics, mentions in depth how price control can be a grave hindrance to innovation and the need to produce a quality product. History of faulty products or services will with certainty ruin a company’s reputation and reduce the demand for their products or services. The competition of the free-market forces innovation and the necessity to consistently produce quality, reliable products or services. Competition is one of life’s main catalysts for growth. There were instances where the government implemented price control or regulations on something which resulted in there no longer being any financial benefit from producing it. Not many companies are going to continue making a high-grade product for something that holds no reward from producing it. Those sectors often will become static for progression and product improvement. There does need to be some level of regulation on sectors that could have a potentially negative impact on the environment, or else people will just be blindly chasing after more wealth. However, it shouldn’t be to the point that it suffocates those sectors. If there are crippling regulations on something which makes it not ideal in terms of being financially beneficial, then that will stifle quality, innovation, safety and can drastically reduce the number of jobs that sector can bring into the workforce.  

Countless have pursued college degrees that hold no practical or economic benefit towards society, something there is absolutely no demand for, which supply, and demand is a fundamental principle in economics. Then these individuals have become resentful after they obtained said degree that isn’t valued in the workforce. This is related to a previous statement about them not being able to obtain the power they sought-after which leads to resentment. There are fields that have dormant innovative potential, but it is crucial to take into consideration the risks that come from delving into undeveloped fields. There have been countless pioneers in various fields who didn’t get the credit they deserved until late into their life. For some it wasn’t until after they had died. A lot of these resentful individuals strongly believe that success should be handed to them directly after they receive a useless degree. Now they are spiteful due to them being coddled by instant gratification all their lives. They desire to abolish capitalism as they spew their social justice warrior word vomit on social media from a smartphone which isn’t even two decades old yet. Forced innovation, brought about from competition is what propelled us to the point where we have been gifted with pocket computers. A capitalist-based system with essential social policies poses to be the most prosperous economic system to come into fruition. Capitalism is still very young, a lot of people shame it over the abject poverty of early capitalism, but little do they take into consideration the horrendous circumstances that capitalism came out of, which was feudalism. It was borderline primitive, and its composition was of three distinct classes: the lords who had major power; the church, who were mitigation and held a decent amount of authority; and then the serfs, who were basically peasants. Many of them are delusional and ignorant of history, blind to the progress that capitalism has carried forth. Capitalism isn’t perfect by no means, and those who tend to shame it are just being exploited from their inner turmoil that has become manipulated into resentment. A lot of individuals aren’t happy with the current state of affairs, but there has been some profound progress made and many seek to erase it out of spite. It has become quite apparent that a lot of people want socialism or communism for hopes that those historically flawed systems, which they are often ignorant of, will provide them with basic human necessities, so they don’t have to work to contribute back into the system that they desire to leech from. A lot of them just simply don’t want to work and think these systems are their ticket to an existence where they can piggyback off the rest who do make strides to contribute. They don’t pay much in taxes, so taxes going up from the social welfare system they want to implement will not affect them all too much financially. They may pay a little bit more, but they are the ones who will benefit the most. Everyone will have to pay more money so these individuals can sit around and do nothing all day. They don’t care that the actual workers, who already have great benefits from their employers and will just be losing more of their hard-earned labor, ultimately their financial freedom. In respect of innovation, if there isn’t any significant benefit for an individual’s work, labor and ideas, then they will most likely see no point in taking those innovative routes that require immense work and risk. No one is entitled to anybody’s time or labor. Just because someone created something doesn’t mean we should just take it from them or give it away free of charge for virtue points. Such a practice will likely not even last a year. Those who are backing socialism and communism have taken on a sloth mentality. Who needs new and more efficient stuff when what we have can still somewhat get the job done?  

Our politicians are the literal epitome of dysfunctional and relatively corrupt. Those who want to hand them more facets of our lives are ludicrous. We need to hold our politicians to greater accountability. If they don’t want to do their job, we should cut their pay and actually flush them out. It’s time we did a hemorrhoid check as a country. We should look to other countries for insights to improve our systems and implement them. In the US, we are absolutely not number one and have an unfathomable amount to learn.  

Subsection: Chains of the Minimum Wage. Regulations like the minimum wage may have good intentions but are directly obstructing natural wage growth that would further stimulate the economy and, if removed, employers will still be apt to provide desirable wages for potential employees. The economic potential in today’s day in age is monolithic and one can easily live comfortably with learning a trade, climbing a company ladder or engaging in the investment world. Natural competition of the free market actually negates employers from implementing extremely low wages and the jobs. Work without a minimum wage in place would be financially calibrated to the competence level required to perform it, like it already is in about all sectors of the workforce. Like recently stated, if a company provides a bad service or faulty product, people will often seek other outlets and cease to use those products. We have the freedom in the free market to decide where we want to shop and hold people accountable for their work. The same principle is applied to employers offering less than desirable employment. Employers would be apt to improve the benefits that come with working for them, because they’d be competing for employees to stay and come work for them. If there’s a better option available for employment, we tend to seek out that employment, the minimum wage, constraints wage potential, causing entry level and low-level competence jobs to be compensated more than they’re worth in the workforce. McDonald’s isn’t an occupation someone should devote their life to, and those that do are doing a downright disservice to their skill set as an individual in the workforce. An entry level job that doesn’t even require common-sense shouldn’t be rewarded for something it isn’t worth. It is entry level and allows for an individual to gain beginner level experience in the workforce, jobs like fast food are occupations intended as a first job, those who are still in high school and students in college who need a little cash to get through their education process. It is actually a good thing those jobs don’t pay a living wage. The vast majority that worked at those establishments claim it sucked, and that is a good thing, because the workers should be left wanting more for an occupation than a job like Mcdonalds. There are those struggling to search for other occupations, fast food and, along with other related jobs, is how they are making a living. These individuals should negotiate a wage with their employer, but the wage shouldn’t be a living wage, nor a starvation wage. It should be just enough to get by and push them to keep finding a more desirable job. Raising such an occupation, like Mcdonalds, to have a living wage would actually be counterintuitive to an individual’s growth as a person and the development of their skill set. Minimum skills equal minimum contribution to the economy and society. Freeloading and leaching of society’s benefits should not be enabled, especially when they’re physically able to work. There is a significant number of people who believe they should be given a free ride simply because they were born and that they should still be able to reap society’s benefits, even without making any contributions. It is the literal epitome of entitlement. The elderly, mentally or physically disabled and overall, vulnerable members of society should be looked after and offered the help that they can’t provide for themselves. However, mental ailment policies are easily exploited and there are always those who will strive after such paths, which should not be encouraged. Here’s an analogy: think of the minimum wage as the floor of a house. It is then decided that we will raise the flooring by three feet. From a living standpoint, it will make living there uncomfortable due to being crammed into the ceiling, and from a financial standpoint it will amount to not being financially viable. Continuing to run a business like this could lead to bankruptcy if continued and being financially irresponsible. So, what happens? The ceiling ends up being raised by three feet as well. The minimum wage is artificial, and Thomas Sowell has said it’s virtually zero. An individual should want more than to devote their life to a job that does the minimum to contribute and offers no tangible skills to be applied elsewhere. The minimum wage may have good intentions, but what emerges from those intentions isn’t what’s desired. It constrains wage potential by forcibly giving artificial wages to entry level jobs and raising the minimum wage devalues other jobs in the sector, which diminishes economic stimulation. The minimum wage could be raised in a place like Walmart or Mcdonalds that hold most minimum wage jobs. Their prices will go up due to inflation and having to compensate for the increased expenses across the economic grid. The increase in the minimum wage is totally negated. It seems like it may do good, but when put into practice, it is literally chaining down healthy wage growth from competition and, when raised, raises the cost of living. An individual’s paycheck may be larger in sum quantity, but a vast amount of goods will go up as well. Employers of these jobs may have to reduce the amount of people they employ or find robotic labor to do that work, completely eliminating those jobs from the workforce. Removal of the artificial wage flooring would likely diminish the cost of living. The workforce and free market would be more able to dictate the real value of those jobs in the workforce. Hours spent at those jobs would be worth more, because the cost of goods would decrease to a more natural state. Since employers would be competing for employees, it would give greater power and choice to the workers. Another factor to consider is that it would likely increase the quality and flow of young workers to develop their skill set rather than enabling them to remain at a place of work that offers no tangible skills. Now we will discuss instant gratification in the workforce, which has made a large number of people concluding manufacturing and other similar forms of employment, are beneath them. They won’t even touch manufacturing, which has the potential to pay extremely well and opens outlets to learn tangible skills or an actual trade. Quite a few of them don’t want to do anything that requires actual work or effort and are often unemployed or have no tangible work experience that can be applied to in the field they want to engage in. Their ideal idea of what work is sitting around, writing pseudo intellectual essays and spewing their nonsense on the internet. The employment they are after has to be prestigious, revered and have this superficial desire to save or change the world. So, they’re the hero and are basked in boundless praise, put up on a pedestal of exalted admiration. They thought that after having obtained a degree, they’d get right to the cutting-edge of a specific field. Now they are saturated in resentment, because what they desired hasn’t just been handed to them out of the gates. Evoking pride over having accomplished nothing, held down by a delusional sense of how the market actually works. Time to discuss welfare. Here is a quoted statement by Walter Williams: “the welfare state has done to black Americans what slavery couldn’t do, and that is to destroy the black family.” Welfare may have good intentions, but it causes us to devolve. It should be there for those that need it when they do. However, it shouldn’t come to where we enable people to latch on to it, because it actually stifles an individual’s growth, enables absolute dependency, and those that actually do make strides to contribute to society have to pick up the slack through taxes. Welfare makes people docile, submissive and content with scraps, causing people to devolve, and promotes a criminal mindset. Being the welfare recipient’s lifeline makes it so that those politicians who implement or control such programs can easily manipulate them to vote in those politicians’ favor. This is a statement by American economist Milton Friedman. “Accepting welfare payments means accepting the rules of those that had them out.” Many black households came to realize that their family would be better off if the husband wasn’t working or not present, so they’d qualify for government handouts. Welfare has become a generational trap and negates the need for them to aspire for a better quality of life. It promotes entitlement and a highly skewed view of how our world functions. The minimum wage, no matter what it may be raised to, will always be a welfare wage. It creates wage stagnation, promotes minimal contribution and a sloth-like mindset to where they lose the drive to provide and their sense of responsibility or consequence from their rational actions. Those that do work in society have to support them for continuing to make bad life decisions, and the recipients often have no motivation to go beyond welfare, which have a lot to do with environmental and cultural factors that enable such behavior. Whether welfare was put in place with those discreet and malicious intentions is within speculation, but without doubt it has done great damage to the African American community. To try to raise the minimum wage to a “living wage,” status is impossible because the raise will always be negated by the means of the market. The term living wage is just vague, the people advocating for it don’t even know how to define it and is likely ideological leverage to advance a flawed and short-sighted agenda. Enabling people to stay in positions like Mcdonald’s for long periods of time is an absolute disservice to a community’s progress, skillset and our economy. The following is a quoted segment by Thomas Sowell on welfare. “The assumption that spending more of taxpayers’ money will make things better has survived all kinds of evidence that it has made things worse. I have never understood why it is greed to want to keep the money you have earned, but not greed to want to take somebody else’s money. The first lesson of economics is scarcity. There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics. It is amazing that people who think we cannot afford to pay for doctors, hospitals and medication somehow think that we can afford to pay for doctors, hospitals, medication and a government veracity to administer it. Despite a voluminous and often fervent literature on income distribution, the cold fact is that most income is not distributed, it is earned. The fact that the market is not doing what we wish it would do is no reason to automatically assume that the government would do better, since this is a heroine. Many people are concerned about fairness and social justice. What is your fair share of what someone else has worked for? If you have been voting for politicians who promise to give you goodies at someone else’s expense, then you have no right to complain when they take your money and give it to someone else, including themselves. The welfare state is the oldest con game in the world. First you take people’s money away quietly and then you give some of it back to them flamboyantly.” There have been pseudo intellectual and glass frame arguments that desire to do away with society as a whole because they don’t want to work or contribute completely, not taking into consideration that they’d end up having to do some repulsive daily tasks that our ancestors worked tirelessly to get away from. The basis of a society is we all work together so we can reap the world shifting benefits from working together.  End of Chains of the minimum wage, subsection.  

Countless have become resentful towards billionaires and CEOs but don’t want to do anything or even take the time to comprehend what it takes to reach and maintain that level of financial prowess. They are highly superficial in their view of financial prowess when it is at such a magnitude. Generalizing the wealthy to be all crooks, conmen and consumed by greed. It is like the romanticizing and fantasizing of heroes or superheroes. Their take on heroes from action movies are superficial and naive. Thinking that obtaining such heroism wouldn’t be difficult, but they themselves can’t obtain such power in either financial prowess, their field of study, a community or whatever their interests may be. Then come to the conclusion that those who did succeed to obtain such power must have cheated somehow. Once again, this falls back onto instant gratification. All of their achievements were basically handed to them, so they expect the same outcome out in the global stage. They desire a short cut straight to the glory and don’t want any involvement with the pain and sacrifice it takes to get there. “A man cannot understand the art he is studying if he only looks for the end result without taking the time to delve deeply into the reasoning of the study,” Said by Miyamoto Musashi. Mastery is a dark and pain ridden process. Only those who become obsessed with the process can become. The perseverance through the phase of mediocrity and mockery from others for the love of the craft. They still desire to be a champion but don’t want to deal with the pain or work that comes with it.  

There is a significant level of entitlement floating around towards the rich and their labor. “Why do they get so much when I don’t even have a fraction of that and I’m only minimally contributing to society?” Likened to the self-centered selfishness of a bratty child, “If I can’t have you, no one can.” They throw a tantrum, seeking to break whatever it is they desire and are unable to acquire ethically. At the end of the day, the wealthy probably worked immensely hard for it. Even if it is generational wealth, then that is still the family’s labor. Not many people like the idea of incompetent politicians forcibly taking their families wealth, especially in a time period like the early 21st century. Their survival prospects and power will become diminished by a varying degree. It is no secret that most politicians are snakes at heart, deceptive, dishonest and opportunistic. In regard to being passed down to the children, it is still their family’s labor. If the parents decide to spoil their child, that is on them. Spoiled children become adult infants and are often useless for any practical purpose. The whole notion of parents passing their wealth down and spoiling their offspring is another short-sighted generalization. The wealthy often make world shifting contributions that many use every day and take for granted. The magnitude of their reward is what drove them to be innovative and improve everyone’s lives. There is a highly predictable outcome of when financially inept individuals win the lottery and blow it all in a few years, or, in some circumstances, less than a year. Wealth inequality is a buzz phrase for creating an emotionally targeted response and is glass framed. Buzz phrases like this one, along with others like it, are utilized to reinforce the ideological defense mechanism which we’ve already gone over. Its significance is inflated, skewed, seems likely and important, but in actuality it is just another scapegoat to gain political support.  

It seems as though SJWs would prefer if everyone were equally poor and want to astronomically reduce the ceiling for economic potential, because that’s what really went up, economic potential and global trade that has been exponentially amplified by the internet. The internet revolutionized how everyone shops and allows for a company to invest in areas all around the world. Close to everything we desire is readily available to be browsed upon a device that comfortably fits in a pocket, which is taken for granted. There is a boundless number of services in a range and unfathomable life changing products, all within a short distance due to automotive transportation, which is taken for granted.  

Pure or early capitalism got quite grim, but the atrocities of the past often had good intentions behind them and trial and error experiments needed to be done. There is no total, complete guide to create a perfectly balanced topic. Society treating the elite with apprehension is a terrible idea because they will likely migrate to a more desirable and stable environment to contribute to. The good done by the many is often always overlooked, and the small amount of bad is hyperinflated. Stealing the entire spotlight and generalizing all wealthy people or great minds to be objectively bad.  

Another noteworthy component: prices are calibrated by several factors. A major defining factor is the target areas: demographic, the purchasing of raw materials, shipping costs, labor costs, equipment and process to make it into a finished product, protocols to ensure a quality guaranteed product, marketing and company image, legal standards and regulations, and then comes making a profit to improve the company and its products. With prices being tuned to demographics, it acts as a deterrent to prevent people from buying too much of a particular product to preserve a ready supply calibrated to the surrounding population. For those that do not know what a demographic is, it is a city or community’s financial potential. An area’s demographic is a strong indicator of the prices of goods. For example, a large supermarket chain like Walmart can afford to charge lower prices because they sell more products and more of a particular product. A local grocery market may charge 30 cents or X more for a product than Walmart. The reason being is that the local grocery market has to charge higher prices to compensate for the costs involved. For starters, their product turnover and capacity is a fraction of Walmart. They do not sell nearly as much of a particular product as Walmart, so this is compensated by a higher price. Then those local grocery markets do not purchase in bulk like Walmart, which lowers the cost of items for them and reduces Walmart’s cost even further. Another factor for local grocery markets high costs to take into account is whether there is a high number of criminal activities such as shoplifting. If individuals in that area are stealing from those stores, then the owners are forced to charge more to compensate for the loss of income which was stolen. So, in a very indirect way, the surrounding community who do not steal has to pay more out of their pockets for higher costs of products due to people stealing. To not charge a higher price would be financially irresponsible because it could amount to a loss of income and could compromise the store financially, leading to bankruptcy. It can be costly and risky to open a store or business in high crime areas amounting to prices higher than they should be calibrated to in that demographic.  

Once again price control can be a detriment to an economic sector. If the options for potential income, via providing a service or producing a product are with certainty to break-even, have a significant loss, or when there is an occasional gain, it’s only a few bucks. It wouldn’t be worth it to most and would not be financially sustainable. It would be a total waste of time, because people tend to want to invest their time that will improve their quality of life. The financial incentive and reward are what enables individuals to be innovative. Leading to the vast quantity of life improving products we have at our fingertips. People deserve to be rewarded for their world shifting ideas, implementing a wealth cap would be a direct hindrance to economic and human potential. Professionals also simply wouldn’t spend a large chunk of their resources on a product that yields no financial benefits. It could make them go bankrupt and then could lead to a scarcity of that product. Products like medications aren’t something that anyone can produce. Scarcity has terrible implications all by itself, a period could arrive where the amount they can prescribe to a patient is reduced or not be able to prescribe the medication at all. It could lead people to buying from a less desirable source like the black market. Then the drug or pharmacy stores that offer an outlet for this service may have to find a provider for these price-controlled drugs elsewhere that aren’t exactly the best quality.  

Healthcare shouldn’t be as profit driven, but it is crucial to take into consideration the economics of health care. The cost of healthcare workers education. The complex work that they have to do, which at times can be biologically repulsive and to add the diseases they can be potentially exposed to. The manufacturing of and legal aspects of the drugs used. The vast and immensely expensive equipment that is used and requires a high level of education to learn to use. There is immense push for socialized health care, which wouldn’t be free by any means. It would be paid for through taxes and everyone’s paycheck would get a hefty chunk taken out. Not many are a fan of the government making decisions for them, telling them what they can provide. It will ultimately increase the government’s already overbearing power and reach into our lives. Healthcare does have an ugly side, where those who aren’t well-rounded financially are subjected to crippling debt. They often can’t afford to pay the costs for ailments and have no control over this debt. The debt a lot of folks can’t pay is sent to debt collectors who buy it for a fraction of the total. Then they still demand immensely vulnerable people to pay the full amount. Those who neglect to pay the debt take a hit on their credit, which leads to being a massive obstacle to reaching financial stability. Debt collectors of this sort are nothing more than the weak preying upon the defenseless. Not all but various sectors of health care push highly expensive services that the majority of the time don’t resolve people’s issues.  

Once again, it is important to take into consideration the economics or practice of health care and not to generalize. This is actually left to be financially exploited by both parties. People trying to get free procedures or out of paying a service and those medical establishments have a business to run. Irresponsibly handing out resources with certainty will lead to bankruptcy.  

Psychologists and psychiatrists are rampant with misdiagnosis. They haphazardly push substances on to people who don’t need such drugs. It usually amounts to sweeping people’s issues under the rug and not actually addressing them. It leads to people becoming chemically dependent on addictive substances and all too often exchange their medical problems with minor to life threatening side-effects.  

In April of 2021, the transgender suicide rate rose to 41%. Gender transition cases and botched sexual transition surgeries are heartrending. Countless doctors enabling mutilation of mentally ill individuals’ genitals. People who are in distress mentally and desperate for solace are allowed to get completely irreversible, life shifting surgery. One could have requested for a finger to be surgically removed, and such a request would warrant an inquiry to that person’s mental wellbeing, but it is perfectly okay to get genital reassignment surgery. There are several factors, a lot of these doctors don’t want to deal with the social backlash of not carrying out such a request. Running the chance of being blasted across the internet for being a bigot and PC culture devours all. Even with the given circumstances, countless troubled young people are paying an enormous price for social trends and doctors are not trying to put a stop to it.  

The multi trillion-dollar legislation bill the Green New Deal, which would have only put more strain on the US system and bring about a massive shift in the energy sector, which is a monolithic wealth sector and at the very foundation of any civilization. It could make the US system’s structural integrity to be extremely fragile and is short-sighted. The energy sector shift and global warming will be covered a little more later, so for now we will refrain. There is already a vast array of social welfare programs that offer health services to women, children, men, elderly and disabled, such as Medicare, Medicaid, Chip, and planned parenthood to name a few. A fundamental principle in economics is that in a free market economy, competition regulates prices. When there is more competition, companies strive to offer an affordable price and come with an array of services or perks when doing business with them. It offers an incentive to be innovative for progress and strive to be the best in the field, so people will want to use your products or services. In sectors where there are regulations, like in the United States HealthCare system, the competition is immensely restricted to where people can only use health insurance within their own state.  

During 2021, in Michigan, there were a total of nine health insurance providers, with a grand total of 900 across the United States, amounting to the people of Michigan only having access to one percent of the potential health insurance market. Due to the lack of competition this made it, so few companies were much more easily able to work together to profit from manipulation of the market. Prices are regulated by demand. If there is a great demand for a product, the price will increase to counteract people from buying too much at once to ensure the supply doesn’t become depleted. A low amount of competition amongst its producers further allows them to charge more, due to the supply being few and having a substantial control of that product supply in the market. There is immense criticism of the United States healthcare system being too costly, which is brought about by regulations from those on the left that restrict competition in the health sector. They want to expand health care regulations and bring in a single payer system to make government health care the only option. Like already stated, this would have only given more power to the United States government and open a door to have greater control over their citizens’ day-to-day lives. They will be able to decide what treatment can be provided to the people. One only needs to look at the rampant corruption and incompetence of the politicians, it would likely amount to minimalism.  

Next, we’ll be covering an argument on the exploitation of labor, of the system, and the fundamental role we all play in the workforce. There is an argument that the majority of workers in the United States are being exploited for their labor, but in actuality, these workers are engaging with humane contributions and financial compensations that are linked with their current skill set. Jobs in an economic system are areas that the society deems there is a demand to be fulfilled and the members within it make contributions, both big and small, so we can reap the benefits from working together. These same individuals are advocating for communism, which is more aligned with exploitation of labor. Many communist countries throughout history dictated the needs of the workers and how they were compensated. The governments decided what those people were worth, their needs, and countless wealth classes of these systems were purged due to just being part of a particular financial bracket. The people had very little freedom to decide their occupation and their financial compensation. Resistance towards the terms were thrown aside or met with violent force. There are individuals that have the ludicrous idea of abolishing jobs because they don’t want to work.  

The social contract theory was introduced by early modern thinkers Hugo Grotius, Thomas Hobbs, Samuel Pufendorf, John Locke and Immanuel Kant. The social contracts that these individuals want to do away with, do not take into consideration that it would amount to them still working to survive and would be subjected to repulsive daily duties that humans of the past had to endure and worked to get away from. We are all stuck here for a period of time and social contracts are absolutely vital towards our collective prosperity.  

A recent and noteworthy issue that arose in 2021 was a large quantity of people were choosing to leech off unemployment and other governmental programs to get by. Many businesses were short staffed because these individuals were able to get by on this external income. There was a variance of social policies and legislation that enabled such behavior. Such behavior and dependency only gives more power to the government and the control they have in those people’s lives. This allowed for politicians to more easily manipulate them to gain their political support and votes, because they were the ones at the foundation of their livelihood. This was what many communist countries throughout history aimed to do, which was to make the population totally dependent on them. There was immense and shortsighted dialogue of wanting to implement many more social programs which were economically and financially irresponsible.  

A prime example of economic mismanagement and incompetence would be Venezuela. Here is an excerpt from history by Patrick Tiger: “How Venezuela fell from the richest country in South America into crisis: it wasn’t that long ago that Venezuela, which possesses the world’s largest crude oil reserves, was a relatively stable democracy with one of Latin America’s fastest rising economies. It was a nation so awash in petroleum revenues that the socialist government of the late former president, Hugo Chavez, spent huge amounts on social programs. But starting in 2014, the south American nation began suffering a startling collapse, with Venezuela’s gross domestic product plummeting even more than the United States during the great depression, many of its nearly 32 million inhabitants became unable to afford food and resource starved hospitals, and did not have enough soap and antibiotics.”  

Venezuela hit the economic lottery with having the world’s largest oil reserves in the 1980s but wasn’t fully utilized somewhat efficiently until the early 2000s. They flourished due to the amount of wealth being accumulated from these reserves. A common conclusion that circulated about is the government was incompetent and mismanaged this wealth. They were the governmental lottery winners that went on a massive splurging spree, thinking that the wave would never reach the shoreline. Due to the value of the Venezuelan currency becoming more costly, other sectors of the economy suffered because domestic production costs increased significantly to the point that they collapsed, and it became cheaper to import a variety of products than to produce them in their own country. Oil was their primary source of income. Even when the price of oil started to decline, the government continued on their self-destructive spending. They began borrowing money from other countries, which drove them into debt when its income diminished. They then tried to print their way out, causing hyperinflation and essentially led to their currency becoming less than worthless. What many young American Socialists or Communists think is that the US has an unlimited supply of wealth and that it will always be there. The massively unsustainable multi-trillion-dollar social welfare programs they want to implement will probably amount to the US becoming Venezuela 2.0. An added variable to this notion is that they also neglected to invest back into their oil production system. The arrogant idea that the Titanic was unsinkable comes to mind. Due to the immense number of social programs, this system became no longer sustainable without the oil exports that their country depended on in order to function.  

Now we will cover the energy sector shift and global warming. The global warming agenda is a social hysteria card that the left frequently plays every few years and gained traction in the 1980s. A fear mongering propaganda tactic to push an agenda and to create a shift in the energy sector, which is a major moneymaker. Global warming is glass framed in its arguments, has highly skewed data and inflated claims. A more prominent issue in the same ballpark would be physical pollution of the rivers, lakes, oceans and land. The unaccountable physical pollution is mind splitting in developing countries that have poor waste management systems.  

There needs to be some level of regulation upon energy sectors that could have a catastrophic environmental impact when something goes wrong, or else quite a few companies will only think about lining their pockets and not take into consideration the consequences that could befall that region. The global warming agenda is beyond inflated and the efforts that are pressed upon global warming should be redirected towards physical pollution.  

With the Texas power ordeal during 2020, renewable energy posed to be unreliable. The green New deal would most likely have amounted to being a cataclysmic catastrophe for the United States structural integrity. Had it already been implemented during the Texas energy crisis; the US would have likely been crippled and brought to its knees simply due to the elements. We should seek out alternative energy sources but not be naive about resorting to another source solely on the basis of getting away from fossil fuels, which is brought about from the redundant doomsday fear mongering, the superficial, short-sighted, and glass framed, “We’ve got to save the planet because of cultural heroism,” mentality and maintaining an ideological social status are two core factors which are environmentally forced upon their psyche.  

On a final note, many social justice warriors are resentful towards individuals hoarding their profits without taking into consideration, for starters, the state of the world or if they are accumulating wealth to later invest in something. The owners of a business are the ones who carry the risk and weight of maintaining a company. Think of all the aspects that go into creating any business management structure: networking, essential machinery, deciphering the economical demand and supply, patents, OSHA certified working conditions, improving their product, remaining innovative to stay relevant advertisement, legality, benefits, maintaining quality, moral and those are just the basics. The companies need those profits to retain investors, along with expanding and improving their company. Take into consideration previous statements regarding wealth equals power and leads to heightened survival and procreation prospects. Why would they decide to help a group that regularly said, “eat the rich.” To them those individuals are beyond reason and are a problem that is beyond them, so they don’t waste their energy. For the most part, everyone is just a little puppet trying to survive in a cosmic arena. 

Tap for Humanity’s Forgotten Reflection: Table of Contents

Tap to return to main menu

1 thought on “Shell of Economics – Ch12 – Humanity’s Forgotten Reflection

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close