ad1

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Can Wealth Be Created Without Printing More Money?

It is a simple question with it seems very complex answers.

Many Libertarian and Conservative economic views hinge on the assumption that wealth can be created. It is said as one simple proof that since wealth can indeed be destroyed, that it can also be created. Here is one article on this viewpoint.

Many Socialist and Liberal economic views hinge on the assumption that wealth is a limited pie that cannot be made bigger. It is said that economics is a zero-sum game, when one gains wealth others must necessarily loose wealth. Here is one article on this viewpoint.


It is plain that land IS a limited resource. Natural resources are used up but new natural resources are also discovered however it is plain that over all time natural resources ARE limited simply because the earth is a physical thing and it does not make more of itself.

But other things of value are all around us that are created and destroyed. Value or wealth is added to the economy or created. However if we add value or create wealth we are essentially increasing the supply of value or valuable things and services. If those additions represent a net gain and if we hold the supply of money, cash etc., constant then it seems logical that the value of money would gradually decrease as the supply of valuable commodities increased unless we increase the supply of money with the supply of value.

Conversely if we simply increase the money supply without increasing the supply of value in the economy then we should see inflation and it should take more money to buy less such that money is worth less.

Therefore, IMHO wealth CANNOT be created without a corresponding creation of more money without causing deflation.

So to summarize,

If wealth is created by individuals or companies and therefore the total value of the economy is increased but the money supply is kept the same or decreased then you will have deflation, more things are competing for the same or less of an amount of currency.

If wealth is created by individuals or companies and therefore the total value of the economy is increased and the money supply is increased proportionally then you will have neither inflation nor deflation but more things and more money.

If wealth is held constant and the money supply is decreased then you will have deflation.

If wealth is held constant and the money supply is increased then you will have inflation.

If wealth is destroyed by individuals or companies and therefore the total value of the economy is decreased but the money supply is kept the same or increased then you will have inflation, less things are competing for the same or more of an amount of currency.

If wealth is destroyed by individuals or companies and therefore the total value of the economy is decreased and the money supply is decreased proportionally then you will have neither inflation nor deflation but less things and less money.

The question then is what is required to create wealth? Who has the means, abilities, initiative and opportunity to create wealth?

And who controls the money supply?

And do the answers to those questions equate to a "fair" system for all?

What are your thoughts?



Friday, December 05, 2014

Live Where The Food Is! World Hunger, Logistics, and Politics

An article in the latest National Geographic on Food states that the worlds farmers produce enough food to feed every human being on earth roughly 2868 calories per day, 768 calories more than the recommended 2100 calories per day by the World Food Programme. So why is there still hunger in the world? Why do approximately 40 Million people per year die of hunger and close to 1 Billion suffer some adverse effects from nutritional shortcomings?

We know why:
  • War 
  • Lack of infrastructure 
  • Weather 
  • Natural disasters 
  • Government corruption 
  • Lack of leadership 

Besides these reasons there is one more. In the areas of the world where we have more than enough we keep some people out. We maintain what we have by limiting the numbers of people and types of people we allow into our lands. We take care of our own. Nothing wrong with that in terms of survival. It is a fact. But most of us probably believe in more than just survival of the fittest. So we try to help by giving to those nations that have less. Problem is the problems listed above.

Comedian Sam Kinison had a famous rant about hunger:

"You want to help world hunger? Stop sending them food. Don't send them another bite, send them U-Hauls. Send them a guy that says, "You know, we've been coming here giving you food for about 35 years now and we were driving through the desert, and we realized there wouldn't BE world hunger if you people would live where the FOOD IS! YOU LIVE IN A DESERT!! UNDERSTAND THAT? YOU LIVE IN A FUCKING DESERT!! NOTHING GROWS HERE! NOTHING'S GONNA GROW HERE! Come here, you see this? This is sand. You know what it's gonna be 100 years from now? IT'S GONNA BE SAND!! YOU LIVE IN A FUCKING DESERT! We have deserts in America, we just don't LIVE in them, assholes!" The video of this can be viewed here


Monday, December 01, 2014

Hyperpower: The shot heard round the world

The shot heard round the world during the beginning of the American War for Independence was indeed heard in every country that has since rebelled against dictatorship and monarchy and chosen liberty and democracy. First throughout Europe and the rest of the Americas, then India, then through the old Soviet Block nations, the Arab Spring as a spurt at least, now undercurrents in China as well as other nations. Even if those revolutions may point to other inspirations, ever since America became an independent democracy, no matter the realities or debates about "how" democratic it is, people around the globe have known and been able to point to one place on earth where people stood up and declared their freedom and still declare it.

The American experiment has continued with setbacks and struggles. The American culture has grown into a distinct one through the first two centuries of its existence. That culture permeates the entire world through its television, movies, books, magazines, news, fashion, music, and other forms of art. Governments and religious institutions try to slow it or stop it but it can't be stopped because it consists of ideas, especially of ideas about freedoms that all should enjoy.


And what makes those ideas about freedom so irresistible is their nature as indicated by Thomas Jefferson, they are self-evident. Just as knowing that wind is real even though you can't see it or that gravity is real because you can sense it and feel it or that time is real because its passing leaves its marks, freedom of speech, of thought, of religion, of expression, and all of the other freedoms we hold dear and that our laws maintain, seem naturally right, correct, hard to argue against, true.

Even though America may win some military battles and wars and loose others, the power of its culture ceaselessly marches forward into every other culture in the world winning victory after victory, reshaping the world to at least grab hold of the freedoms at its core. Instead of a superpower, this cultural hegemony suggest what has been called hyperpower, an influence above and beyond military, political, and economic supremacy.