I think this is going to be a new series, because I don't think that I can get my point across in just a few blogs. This series is based on a couple of observations. (1) Politics and Economics are not separate, so why don't we stop pretending. (2) There is no such thing as a "Static" system. Things are changing all the time. Here goes on chapter #1.
I am going to start out by defining three basic political/economic systems that are each divided into two parts. Here they are:
(1) Capitalism (A) Prosperous (B) Poor
(2) Monarch (A) Prosperous (B) Poor
(3) Communist (A) Prosperous (B) Poor
Isn't it interesting that the three groups seem so similar with both having a rich group and a poor group? I could have added one other thing and that would be the size of the pie for each of the three systems. If I were to have done that the spread would look like this:
(1) Capitalism-----------Big pie
(2) Monarch--------------Very small pie
(3) Communist-----------Small pie
I think that we would all agree that a system that produces a "big" pie is potentially better than one that only produces a "small" or "modest size pie".
Here is where I think that most economist and politicians go wrong. They look at these systems as fixed or in steady state of some kind where little is changing. If you have ever looked into an active honey bee hive, you will see a mass of thousand of bees moving in every direction. It looks like a mess, but those bees are very efficient. They do not waste a movement as they collect and store honey. It is the same way with our political/economic systems too.
Here is simple example. Ask yourself, if you were in one of the "6" groups that I defined above, how would you judge your individual situation? Depending on the characteristics of each individual, they may see things differently. Take the case of extremes in age or intellect of an individual. What if you were a young very smart and ambitious person? Here is my guess at your feelings if you were in one of the "poor" groups.
(1) Capitalist system You would be reasonably content because you knew that by your individual hard work that you had a very good chance of moving into the well off group on your own merit. Further, you would feel that the system was fair because you could see the most of those in the well off group were there by merit.
(2) Monarch system You would be bitter because you could see every day individuals who were clearly less qualified living the rich life only because they were born to some nobility, You would look around your group and see others who were abused just like you were. You would have contempt for those in the well off group and be ready to revolt to any system that was more fair than the one you were in. You would accept the communist system as being better than the monarch system.
(3) Communist system You would feel very much like the person who was stuck in the Monarch system, but you knew of a few individuals who were able to leave the poor group on merit while you also knew some who got there who were not qualified, but who had connections. The more you understood the different political/economic systems the more you would prefer the capitalist system.
It is human nature for one to want something better in life and it is natural that those in the poor groups above want out. The process is dynamic with individuals moving out and a few moving back in. Even with in the poor groups, there are differences and there is anxiety present all the time. Those in the poor group are not equal. Some will abuse and climb over others in the group in order that they might climb out. Sad but true.
This is a little jump ahead, but how can the powerful in the better off groups hold onto their position? The main tool that each have is to prevent individuals from the have not's to move into their group. That is the way it works. The capitalists are clearly the group that has the least power over the have nots, but they do have some and they use it. The main control to keep the well off in the capitalist system from total domination is the legal system. That is only true if it is enforced equally for all. I am not sure who said this, but I think it was Hamilton back in the 1700's. The USA has been blessed with a "Democracy by the people, if you can just hold onto it".
I should have pointed out that both the Communist and the Monarch systems are run by dictators. If you think that I forgot to mention a socialist economic system, I did not! All systems run by humans will end up as dictator systems if adequate controls are not maintained. Look at North Korea it is now a Monarchy and Venezuela is a dictatorship. It is the natural progression.
Russia went from a Monarchy to a socialist system to a dictator system in just a few years. Japan went from a Monarchy to a democracy only because it was defeated in WW11 by the USA.
That's enough. There will be more.
I am going to start out by defining three basic political/economic systems that are each divided into two parts. Here they are:
(1) Capitalism (A) Prosperous (B) Poor
(2) Monarch (A) Prosperous (B) Poor
(3) Communist (A) Prosperous (B) Poor
Isn't it interesting that the three groups seem so similar with both having a rich group and a poor group? I could have added one other thing and that would be the size of the pie for each of the three systems. If I were to have done that the spread would look like this:
(1) Capitalism-----------Big pie
(2) Monarch--------------Very small pie
(3) Communist-----------Small pie
I think that we would all agree that a system that produces a "big" pie is potentially better than one that only produces a "small" or "modest size pie".
Here is where I think that most economist and politicians go wrong. They look at these systems as fixed or in steady state of some kind where little is changing. If you have ever looked into an active honey bee hive, you will see a mass of thousand of bees moving in every direction. It looks like a mess, but those bees are very efficient. They do not waste a movement as they collect and store honey. It is the same way with our political/economic systems too.
Here is simple example. Ask yourself, if you were in one of the "6" groups that I defined above, how would you judge your individual situation? Depending on the characteristics of each individual, they may see things differently. Take the case of extremes in age or intellect of an individual. What if you were a young very smart and ambitious person? Here is my guess at your feelings if you were in one of the "poor" groups.
(1) Capitalist system You would be reasonably content because you knew that by your individual hard work that you had a very good chance of moving into the well off group on your own merit. Further, you would feel that the system was fair because you could see the most of those in the well off group were there by merit.
(2) Monarch system You would be bitter because you could see every day individuals who were clearly less qualified living the rich life only because they were born to some nobility, You would look around your group and see others who were abused just like you were. You would have contempt for those in the well off group and be ready to revolt to any system that was more fair than the one you were in. You would accept the communist system as being better than the monarch system.
(3) Communist system You would feel very much like the person who was stuck in the Monarch system, but you knew of a few individuals who were able to leave the poor group on merit while you also knew some who got there who were not qualified, but who had connections. The more you understood the different political/economic systems the more you would prefer the capitalist system.
It is human nature for one to want something better in life and it is natural that those in the poor groups above want out. The process is dynamic with individuals moving out and a few moving back in. Even with in the poor groups, there are differences and there is anxiety present all the time. Those in the poor group are not equal. Some will abuse and climb over others in the group in order that they might climb out. Sad but true.
This is a little jump ahead, but how can the powerful in the better off groups hold onto their position? The main tool that each have is to prevent individuals from the have not's to move into their group. That is the way it works. The capitalists are clearly the group that has the least power over the have nots, but they do have some and they use it. The main control to keep the well off in the capitalist system from total domination is the legal system. That is only true if it is enforced equally for all. I am not sure who said this, but I think it was Hamilton back in the 1700's. The USA has been blessed with a "Democracy by the people, if you can just hold onto it".
I should have pointed out that both the Communist and the Monarch systems are run by dictators. If you think that I forgot to mention a socialist economic system, I did not! All systems run by humans will end up as dictator systems if adequate controls are not maintained. Look at North Korea it is now a Monarchy and Venezuela is a dictatorship. It is the natural progression.
Russia went from a Monarchy to a socialist system to a dictator system in just a few years. Japan went from a Monarchy to a democracy only because it was defeated in WW11 by the USA.
That's enough. There will be more.
