My personal opinion regarding economics is that there is absolutely no ideal way to go about regulating resources because economists just think about money. Go figure. I think Americans somehow equate money with happiness, especially my ever miserable overbearing Jewish side with the millions of dollars in the bank and dollar store bargain excitement.

Like you, Alex, I believe that most countries would benefit from ensuring their citizens the unalienable rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”However, happiness, we must recognize, can never be guaranteed. Ever disheartening Harvard psychologist Daniel Gilbert believes humans tend to consistently overestimate the fulfillment we might get from the future. In a similar vein, policy analyst Will Wilkinson argues that although nations with higher GDP’s tend to be happier than extreme cases of poverty stricken nations, average family income in a particular country does not seem to correlate with average happiness of the people in the nation.

Isn’t it happiness we’re really talking about here? Some people believe that selling kidney’s on the black market will apparently do that for them. Unfortunately, I am pretty sure that backfired and someone’s going to require a lot of extra bread this Yom Kippur. This is the reason I think Marxism fails- because people assume that even slices of pie are equal opportunities for smiles. Nor are smiles even remotely related to having that whole pie to yourself. In fact, maybe smiles aren’t so vested in the pie at all?

However happiness might have something to do with the Jello. Jello pudding, specifically. I am definitely willing to test this theory.

My personal opinion regarding economics is that there is absolutely no ideal way to go about regulating resources because economists just think about money. Go figure. I think Americans somehow equate money with happiness, especially my ever miserable overbearing Jewish side with the millions of dollars in the bank and dollar store bargain excitement.

Like you, Alex, I believe that most countries would benefit from ensuring their citizens the unalienable rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”However, happiness, we must recognize, can never be guaranteed. Ever disheartening Harvard psychologist Daniel Gilbert believes humans tend to consistently overestimate the fulfillment we might get from the future. In a similar vein, policy analyst Will Wilkinson argues that although nations with higher GDP’s tend to be happier than extreme cases of poverty stricken nations, average family income in a particular country does not seem to correlate with average happiness of the people in the nation.

Isn’t it happiness we’re really talking about here? Some people believe that selling kidney’s on the black market will apparently do that for them. Unfortunately, I am pretty sure that backfired and someone’s going to require a lot of extra bread this Yom Kippur. This is the reason I think Marxism fails- because people assume that even slices of pie are equal opportunities for smiles. Nor are smiles even remotely related to having that whole pie to yourself. In fact, maybe smiles aren’t so vested in the pie at all?

However happiness might have something to do with the Jello. Jello pudding, specifically. I am definitely willing to test this theory.

Also in The Johnsonville Press, is this enlightening article:

http://johnsonvillepress.com/2009/03/the-popular-capitalist-view-carl-peter-klapper-2/

In it I describe the political parties as the unions for career politicians and what that means for campaign finances. The implications for Jersey corruption come down to this:

1. New Jersey is a state controlled by the career politician unions aka the Democratic and Republican parties.

2. Thus New Jersey office holders, as a class, require huge amounts of funds to buy absentee campaigning in the most expensive television advertising market. This far exceeds the ability of state and local parties to finance.

3. New Jersey office holders do not have access to the multi-trillion dollar grand larceny committed by the Democratic Senatorial Committee under Jon Corzine and his allies on Wall Street. Relief for Corzine and his New Jersey bailiwick, by the way, was supposed to come from the Democratic Senators, whom he got elected and beholden to the Street, NOT from the President.

4. New Jersey office holders, however, have traditionally had access to bribes from developers serving NYC and Philadelphia interests.

5. Ergo, New Jersey office holders, specifically career politicians in one of the political parties with upcoming contested elections and insufficient or no real source of income, i.e. outside of elected office and patronage sinecures, will be desperate enough to accept campaign funds via the traditional NJ source: bribery.

6. That desperation is accentuated by their desire to reach the tenured, emeritus political nirvana offered by the State of New Jersey: a hefty pension paid by the taxpayers. Such can be scuttled by losing an election as well as by a corruption charge, so they really have nothing to lose but their integrity. If one does not have integrity to begin with, then one has absolutely nothing to lose.

The solution is therefore to overthrow the political parties. This would be accomplished by the following:

1. Ordinary New Jerseyans need to take back their government at every level WITHOUT RECOURSE OR SUPPORT FROM ANY POLITICAL PARTY and certainly not from the Democratic or Republican parties. That is, people need to not just vote but RUN FOR OFFICE.

2. Since local elections for offices in small jurisdictions are the most accessible to the people, we need to reject the Governor’s prescription of eliminating those jurisdictions and thus cementing party control as it exists in the larger cities.

3. We need to enter a ballot referendum for eliminating the party line and funding for primary elections.

You said, “Among those arrested in the NJ-FBI sting were some Rabbis, at least one of whom had been using the black market sale of organs to facilitate the money laundering ring.”

The “organ matchmaker,” Levy Izhak Rosenbaum, 58, of Borough Park, Brooklyn, is a member of the Orthodox Jewish community but not himself a rabbi. He also has no alleged connection to N.J. politics or the rabbis in Deal, N.J. who ran the money laundering operation.

Rosenbaum was in black market organ sales, not money laundering. The FBI probe into his criminal activities included using a snitch to catch him on tape setting up a deal for a black market kidney. The snitch, one Solomon Dwek, happened to be the same crooked developer who wore a wire while working for the F.B.I. as part of a plea agreement in order to catch the rabbis in Deal and the N.J. politicians, none of whom are accused of involvement in the organ-trafficking.

Now, the whole scenario sounds rather….Marxist?….to me. But in truth, I believe that this, the essential progress of the nation, can provide an elegant model for us to strive for, one in which every man is equalized by the incredible power technology places at his fingertips. (Just think of Mike’s new Blackberry–he immediately sees whats in his mailbox, and that’s just the beginning. Our nation needs to come to terms with a new kind of business model, one that strives to make reasonable profits making use of the worker-run corporate model, which provides for a more sustainable source of income. I believe these will become a hot ticket in the future, as the fear of socialism wears off, and we begin to find that the only people still trying to do business in America after Obama’s Presidency are Americans.

Of course, the use of technology is a race against the depletion of the earths fossil fuels. We’ll see how quickly alternatives are developed.

I will say this; there is nothing wrong with a leaner America in some ways, provided the SUFFERING is kept to a minimum. I see the financial crisis as a bank run of sorts, an exodus of capital from the USA. Hopefully, the American people are willing to pick up the slack. There is going to be a lot of slack to pick up…we neeeeed savings.

I’m not sure by what you mean “but the slower the capital class can motivate the economic gears to turn”. Do you mean that increased political activism is inversely proportional to economic growth? I think that would only hold true if government actions/interventions are always bad. While legislation and regulations may impede the ability of business to act with impunity, it should not be accepted as a blanket statement that government intervention is necessarily bad.

I also feel that it would be very impossible to get to a point where “capital investment is encumbered to the point where it is not worth it to invest”. This is akin to the argument that if taxes increase, people will simply stop working. There will always be an incentive to work or invest excess savings; the return on the investment may simply be less than before. People always want to be rich and always want to own things. I would like to add that capital investment is a necessary part of the equation but has often been elevated to a mythical status. As you have correctly pointed out, technological advancement has been the engine driving economic growth. The increase in real standards of living is a recent phenomenon, dating back to the origins of the industrial revolution in England. It should be noted, however, that the end goal of any economic system should be increased consumption by the population. Any system will be judged by its ability to deliver increased standards of living to the working class.

That the so-called capitalist class may become obsolete is contingent upon common sense. Through the financial system, especially banks, savers and borrowers are matched. If the vast majority of the working-class (and everyone really) simply lived within their means and saved at a reasonable rate (3%-10%), there would be excess savings which could be channeled into worthy capital investments. There is no real need for an “owner’s class”, if that is what you mean.

Seriously though, after some thought, I’ve decided to reevaluate my former statement, for the sake of accuracy. The original was this:

“Among those arrested in the NJ-FBI sting were some Rabbis who had been using the black market sale of organs to facilitate their money laundering ring.”

I withdraw that statement, to be replaced with this:

“Among those arrested in the NJ-FBI sting were some Rabbis, at least one of whom had been using the black market sale of organs to facilitate the money laundering ring.”

I hope this clears up any confusion regarding the original article.

On the limiting of political campaigns to public funding, I’ve always been atracted to the idea. But a question: how would that work for third, fourth, and fifth parties? What kind of distribution would you get? one based on the percentage of supporters you have? Or perfectly equitably? I worry that the latter would give undue advantage to the third and fourth party…Rather, I like a system where the funding you get is all public, but based upon the percentage of voters registered as members of your party. This might give more impetus for third parties to go looking for voters, rather than sitting on donated funds. Another consequence would hopefully be a greater diversity of politicians, particularly local politicians.

One thing I expect of the technologies of the near future is the increased capacity for personal interaction on a massive scale. Political interaction and activism will surge. Of course, all incumbent upon the continued rate of technological improvement.

These thoughts got me thinking on a bit of a tangent:

The more accountable our politicians become, the more empowered their constituents become…but the slower the capital class can motivate the economic gears to turn. One of the more interesting aspects of the economic upheaval we are currently experiencing is the increased presence of all things politics. What we end up seeing is what we never cared to see when the system was working for us.

Production, another word for economic progress, is the force by which the living standards of the masses are improved. It is made possible by investments of capital. If capital investment is encumbered to the point where it is not worth it to invest, then production does not take place, and the living standards of the masses plateau, or drop. This has been true through out our country’s history.

However, we can notice now two things. One, the standard of living in this country is extremely high; why should we be afraid to maintain it or let it drop a bit (not to much, but just a healthy diet). Two, technology is so ubiquitous, and so much more powerful than it need be; the result is that only a negligable part of the population will be without it in the very near future. Thus, groups of individuals, not necessarily of the capitalist (investing) class, can still get together and produce a product or service for a fee. As a consequence of these facts, the capitalist class will, eventually, become no longer necessary to the sustenance of civilization or even the improvement of the population as a whole.

This is a goal I would aspire to reach as a nation, one capable of maintaining its independence and freedoms, our rights and liberties, our economic and environmental sustainability, our global dominance over standard of living. All this CAN be attained and with it the complete obsolescence of aggressive military force. The human race is at a very interesting time in its life.

Thoughts?

Seriously though, the vast majority of politicians may be considered corrupt. They are beholden to donors for getting them elected; donors want some return on their investment, so to speak. The only solution to this problem, as I see it, is to mandate that candidates running for public office may only use publicly appropriated dollars. If each candidate were given the same lump sum of cash, it would be an interesting exercise to see how resourceful they can be and to see how they would pull the levers of power if they were not already in somebody’s pocket.

I find the whole Jewish aspect of this hilarious. They probably should’ve just called their mothers more often…