1. Faint Road

1. A Faint Road

Bob Komives
:: updated 2021 ::

I found a faint road through a vast field
where genius, fool, and charlatan must ply.
As hard as the road is to follow,
harder still is to know who am I.

On The Art Of Synthesis

I am a wealthy pattern in my young, abundant biosphere. I am a thread in the net of life that threatens to encircle the universe. I seek a science to incorporate both the elusive abundance that builds what I have and the apparent scarcity that every day shows me what I have not. Through a vast field I follow a faint road along which I see landscapes that are impenetrable to traditional machinery of national and international finance. I see a distant village of mainstream economics barred from these exciting landscapes by its own walls and by the militant forces of pseudo-economics that interpose quaint, mirage-landscapes for mainstream society to fancy. In the same light that bathes the backs of those who once argued for a flat earth, I see proud, hoping, and helpless faces of those who argue for this week's popular economics —balance-the-national-budget-or-die. I see victim and perpetrator of quaint fancy. 

I also see hope in the emergent work of others more learned than I.

Perhaps one fancy can replace another. Perhaps I can point through patches of scarcity in a field of abundance to a faint road that you fancy to explore. I did most of my own exploration in the 20th Century. Since 1980, for myself and few others, I have set forth my fancy on paper and electron clouds. In the 21st century I have returned a few times to my  words to find poetry and alternate formats within my conjectures on the Economics of Abundance.

:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 1980-2021 ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

24. Property is Acknowledgement.

Property is Acknowledgement.
Bob Komives
::

I have a complaint and a confession. Complaint: when we talk about "private property rights," we show that we do not know what we talk about. Confession: I am guilty of having used this puffed up phrase. I hope I have cured myself. Let me try to cure you.

Why does the phrase, "private property rights" show ignorance? That term is twice redundant --long-winded. Property is not land, it is not a book. Property is a right to be private, to priváte, to deprive others of access and use. So, to speak of "private property," of "property rights," or of "private property rights" is to speak only of property. If we can argue without this redundancy perhaps we will be short-winded. Perhaps we will better understand property.

Ah, you may say, but what about "public property," the opposite of private property? It is no opposite, but rather an oxymoron. If you insist on using the term, its only meaning can be "non-property"--nobody has the right to restrict our access and use. A sunset is beautiful public property; better, it is a "public good" in the "public domain." Your county land fill is not public property; it is county property. The county has rights over access and use of the land fill as would an individual owner.

Are these rights absolute? Whether held by you or the county, property is within a higher domain, a pre-eminent domain, an eminent domain. "Eminent domain," as we use the term in U.S. America, includes the obligation by government to pay justly for property, but it is also a self-evident declaration that property is a guest within the higher domain of society. Complaint over!

We can discuss individual wealth because individuals can control and trade goods and services. However, this power to control and trade is always delegated by a larger group. Property is group acknowledgment that an individual can restrict access to something--a by-group-acknowledged right to be private, to priváte, to deprive others of access and use.

Acknowledgment may be given grudgingly to someone who has taken by force; property is not necessarily untainted. If the group refuses to acknowledge ownership, and the possessor must continually defend her possessions against others, she has booty--not property. She cannot freely share, trade, sell, give, or lend her booty. If the group were to choose to acknowledge her possessions as property she could take them to the marketplace or leave them at home and expect community assistance if someone tries to steal them.

The marketplace is a group sanctioned center of activity. We can say that people go there to trade property. In a marketplace, operating under rules established by the group, people trade group-acknowledged rights of restricted access. An individual restricts access to her possessions until someone else gives her the right to restrict access to items that she believes to be at least of equal value. When those rights are exchanged, property is exchanged. The exchange is complete when society acknowledges that property has changed hands.

:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 24. Property is Acknowledgement. ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

25. Back In 1978: A Myth

Back In 1978: A Myth
Bob Komives
::

Exclusive Report on the Minnehaha Conclave

As the 1980 elections approach I can't believe that I am the first to break the seal of secrecy over the events of Halloween, 1978 -the last days before the last national election. I hope that by revealing what happened that night I can save others the tragic disillusionment from which I am now almost recovered.

There were so many conservative Republican candidates,conservative Democratic candidates,
and "don't-tread-on-me" independent candidates trying to get elected and dismantle the government that I decided to seize the opportunity.

I awoke in a sweat. I was trying to get over a nightmare about having a secure government job to turn to if all else failed. It was then I decided to put out a call to a secret conclave.

I jotted down some brief but detailed instructions, telegraphed them to the politically astute friends we have left in the wake of our peregrinations across the country, and took off to make preparations at the conclave site.

Taking a hint from the College of Cardinals, I ordered up a ton of Ritz crackers and a thousand bottles of mineral water. These would serve as our only sustenance until the conclave had done its thing.

Then it began. While kids across the country were home getting sick over candy they had been collecting all evening, while voters who had taken one night off from eagerly attending political rallies were relishing the tricks they had played on the little pests in their neighborhood, while all this was happening, the disguised candidates began arriving in procession to my conclave -each with one lighted candle in hand and an attaché case filled with extras.

Anti-government candidates are to-a-man and to-a-woman punctual. Thus it was, that by 11:33 p.m. central standard time, in the freezing cold confines of the narrow canyon formed by Minnehaha Falls in Minneapolis, 315 conclavers were assembled. Like choir boys in down parkas and Lone-Ranger-type Halloween masks, they were ready to go to work.

I took 27 minutes for my opening remarks. In sum, I told them of the inevitable victory of their cause. It would soon be within the power of this esteemed group to create a utopian country that had neither government nor bureaucrats. The people of the country were speaking. These 315 men and women were the best listeners.

Only two necessary elements for the ultimate victory
were missing.

One missing element was their own combined conviction that the holy mission on which each had individually embarked could be accomplished if the conclavers were willing to march as one in a crusade. "Are you ready for the crusade?" I whispered emphatically. My question was answered by four minutes of delirious shouting, embracing, hand shaking, and the chant: Hit'em again, hit'em again, harder! harder!

After joyfully raising my arms to restore calm, I told them that the second element missing was a simple program for implementation. It could be a simple program, because all that is necessary is to ease the bureaucrats out of their offices and let private enterprise bid on the vacant facilities. A few other details in the program needed to be worked out, but it could all be planned by sunrise -in time for everyone to get back to the campaign.

After all, the program wasn't so terribly necessary in itself. We would just have to be ready with good information and public relations to head off the self-serving attacks that would be organized by the old guard and the socialists.

It was now midnight. The conclave set about its task.

Each of twelve sub-conclaves, whose members were chosen by lot, was to produce one paragraph for our program and one for our proclamation.

I passed out Ritz crackers and fielded general questions from the various sub-conclaves.
...

"Hey, our group decided to keep our armed forces and the police. Otherwise, anarchists and communists would run roughshod over us. Is that all right?"
"Sure, but figure out how to administer them without bureaucrats."

"We're not sure whether Greyhound, Brinks, or General Motors is capable of taking over the street and highway system. Does anyone have any ideas? ... O.K. We'll keep working on it."

"Some of us westerners were wondering if it would be possible to rewrite some of the history books our kids are forced to read in school. That bit about the government dividing up land, giving it to our grandfathers, and building water projects, and subsidizing our production doesn't sound too good for our cause."
"Don't worry. Group 7 is doing away with the schools. You'll be able to keep your kids at home and teach them what you want."

"We're a little worried about the possibilities of revolution if we eliminate all of the health, welfare and civil rights programs at once. Do you think it's all right to increase the army a little to keep everyone in check, or to phase programs out slowly so no demagogue can come along and incite riots?"
"Hmmm, well I'm afraid that if we did the latter, our own supporters would call us the Wishy Washy Conclave, rather than the Minnehaha Conclave."

"Hey, if anyone objects to having a cell in the basement of each home to handle convicted criminals on a rotating basis let us know. That's the way we are thinking."

The Ritz crackers were consumed by two o'clock. The questions ceased by 2:30. The rumble-rumble of their voices put me to sleep.

I awoke with the first rays of sunrise to find the whole conclave standing over me. They looked tired. They also looked a little discouraged. Yet, many seemed ready to burst into a smile. Then, one of my southern conclavers drawled,
"He'ah it is."

I was puzzled. The piece of paper he gave me in the dim light was clearly a page torn from a book. He and each of the other conclavers patted me on the back as they filed up and out of the little canyon. Each said something to me like:
"We did it," or, "That's just the first dozen lines, but you can fill in the rest."

I began to get the idea. When I glanced down at the page I was given my suspicions were confirmed. The light was now just bright enough for me to read the small printed words:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice ..."

The next thing I remember is my wife reviving me in a pleasant cell at a Minneapolis police station.They had called her in from Colorado. This Halloween goblin, who appeared to be her husband, had been found skipping merrily through Minnehaha Park singing,
Kinky Commie Copouts!
Kinky Commie Copouts!
Kinky Commie Copouts! ...

Back In 1978

:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 25. Back In 1978: A Myth ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

33. Ignorance and Confession

 
Ignorance and Confession
Bob Komives
::

A society that emphasizes marketplace will tend not to see the socialism that makes marketplace possible. A socialist society will tend not to see the adaptive potential of marketplace. I believe what I see: we can have neither a socialist nor a capitalist world.

We cannot survive without socialism; it evolved with our species. It is at the center of everything living. Theoretically, we could have a world without marketplace; it is a relatively new product of evolution.

There are alternatives to marketplace in edge economics. To organize the exchange of wealth at their edges, groups can compete through war, thievery, conquest, or isolation; they can cooperate through peace, contracts, treaties, compatible but independent traditions, or through intergroup (international) law. Contracts, treaties, traditions, and intergroup law can control interchange. Thievery can also bring in wealth (such as when an immigrant smuggled the secrets of England's looms to the American continent, or when a Native American stole from another group the first horses for his own group). Conquest can bring in all the wealth of another group. Isolation can put up real or de facto walls that prohibit interchange. However, humankind's accelerating introduction of new forms of wealth makes marketplaces almost inevitable, even if illegal in an avowed communal state. We can foster the marketplace, as we do in avowed capitalist nations, but let us remember that fostering is a communal activity.

We can neither totally delegate to individuals nor totally socialize to a group the means to produce and maintain humankind's wealth. If the Soviet Union had believed that the state should own the means of production, it should not have gone into the international marketplace to buy computers and wheat. It should have bought Nebraska and IBM -people included. If U.S. America believes that people should individually own the means of production, it should eliminate the state of Nebraska and the IBM corporation because these are strictly communal structures.

I make these absurd proposals only to point out the absurdity of labeling political and economic rivalries as a dichotomy of capitalism versus socialism. The wealth production potential of the USA suffers when it ignores the fundamental dependence of marketplace on communal control over the policies of wealth distribution. Because in the last twenty years of the twentieth century marketplace was in political ascendance, so was our ignorance of our communal center. Socialism was descendent. During these twenty years, socialist leaders tended to confess that their nations suffer when they ignore the vitality, flexibility, and healthy complexity that marketplace can bring to an economy. As times change so will the loci of ignorance and confession.

:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 33. Ignorance and Confession ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent 

 

 

 

 

https://www.indiebound.org/book/9781733884150

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

34. Sell Fish on a Cherry Table.

Sell Fish on a Cherry Table.
Bob Komives
::

Robert Reich argued that, in order to arrive at a consensus for progress, we must acknowledge that the social and economic components of our national well-being are linked powerfully together. We must search for the right mixture of socialism and marketplace. This search is basic to resolving problems of food production and distribution. Frances Moore Lappe and Joseph Collins of the Institute for Food and Development Policy have done an excellent job of pointing this out. While small, individually owned and operated farms tend to be the most productive, nations increasingly look to large, corporate farms (or in the case of some communist countries, communal farms). In poor countries with little industry, governments promote agricultural exports in exchange for foreign goods and services. In the process, self-sufficient farmers become undernourished wards of the state. In U.S. America the family farm seems endangered as more farmers go bankrupt and corporate farming expands. These are complex issues from which I will draw only a couple of points.

The socialized ethic that says everyone should have enough to eat comes in a heritage older than our own species. In our enthusiasm for marketplace, we should never forget that only more recently in the biosphere's evolution did we socialize the market into our culture. It is no more inconsistent for a nation that values the dynamics of its marketplaces to make sure that every citizen has enough to eat, than it is for a family to feed all of its members -even if some produce nothing for the marketplace.

Similarly, a nation should never forget that if it fosters either corporation or commune it fosters delegated socialism. There is nothing especially natural or inevitable about either. They exist through communal law and policy.

Where individual families produce enough food
..... (for themselves and nation)
..... and have not wrought havoc with the landscape, why substitute larger,
..... less efficient,
..... private corporations and state communes?
Since corporations are socialized creations of government,
..... there would be nothing un-American
..... in keeping them out of farming in the USA.
Since families are communes,
..... there was nothing uncommunistic
..... in reverting to family farms
..... in countries leaving the Soviet.
Of course,
..... the complement too is true.
..... Corporate,
..... communal,
..... and cooperative farms may be useful
..... where family farms cannot achieve
..... marketplace, social, and environmental goals.
There is irony in U.S. America
..... (and nations that follow its example)
..... where, in the name of free enterprise,
..... the most free of enterprises
..... (the productive family)
..... gets displaced by less efficient groups
..... that socialize risk and profit.
Communist countries displayed similar irony
..... imposing communal structure
..... that more mimics impersonal corporation
..... than traditional communism of family.

||

We can see human culture as an arena of continuously overlapping organizations, ranging from small families up to associations among nations. Each organization is itself an organ of others. Each has a communal core where it determines how to distribute its wealth internally. Our arena can also be seen as an intricate web of edges through which organizations exchange wealth. At these edges, a marketplace can facilitate interchange. Core socialism and edge marketplace complement one another. The world and its nations need not choose between them. The world and its nations cannot choose between them. Rather, they can organize themselves so that both socialism and marketplace help to capture wealth nondestructively, distribute it fairly, and recirculate it repeatedly.

I sell fish.
You sell fish.
He sell fish.

We sell fish.
She sell fish.
They sell fish.

Upon a Cherry Table

Upon a Cherry Table

:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 34. Sell Fish on a Cherry Table. ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

48. Efficacy Limits

Efficacy Limits
Bob Komives
::

There are limits to sensible, productive paper investment. They are efficacy limits. If some investment works but more investment does not work, then more is too much. At some point resources and society cannot respond efficiently to the competing demands. At that point some investments fail. They are good ideas that prove ineffective because they are poorly timed. Efficacy limits are not dollar limits. Money is sibling to unsecured loans and common stock. Like good borrowers and good corporate stock issuers, our national government will produce better budgets when it seeks to make good investments that are well timed. National government need not concern itself with the amount of money that it has on hand nor the amount expected to come in. It should rather consider what effect investment and non-investment will have on the wealth of the country and the international community of which it is a dependent.

The insidious implication of the balanced budget fantasy is that a national government would seem to never have to apologize for its expenditures if they do not exceed the amount of currency returning to its treasury:

"We ruined the country
and much of the rest of the biosphere,
but we never ran an unbalanced budget."

from: A War Rages

:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 48. Efficacy Limits ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

65. Monetary Recall: An illegitimate Tax

Monetary Recall: An illegitimate Tax
Bob Komives
::

Our Government tries, in vain,
to finance its actions
by recalling from us
--taking back from us--
a portion of the money
that it minted for us
and spent among us.

||

One government action is conspicuous for its absence from my list of legitimate taxes. The governmental action that we most often call "taxation" is an illegitimate (or pseudo) tax. I call it, monetary recall.

In ignorance, national governments recall money from their citizens, hoping to reduce the market wealth controlled by taxpayers and pass that investment power to the government. Since this pseudo taxation does not tax, it is no wonder that these national governments get confused when they try to balance their budgets. They try to balance real investments with pseudo taxes --fantasy taxes. A minting government can tax national resources by minting and spending money, but cannot get that money back --even though it believes and tries, and tries and tries again.

While few of us will kid ourselves into believing that the day we spend today is actually the day we spent yesterday, national governments continue to believe that the dollar that they recall today to spend tomorrow is the same one they issued yesterday. It is not because --in anticipation of the recall-- wages and prices have risen to null the effect of the recall. Monetary recall generates no income for the minting government, rather it inflates the currency, decreasing its value.

:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV
:: 65. Monetary Recall: An illegitimate Tax ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

66. Recall Seems To Tax, But Fails.

Recall seems to Tax, But Fails
Bob Komives
::

To an individual taxpayer, monetary recall seems to work. She can trade every dollar in her hands for a small percentage of the wealth traded in the marketplace. If the federal government recalls dollars from her --taking money out of her hands-- she can now trade for less of that wealth. Each dollar she gives to the national government seems to reduce the wealth that she has to make purchases or investments for herself.

To the government official that receives her dollar the tax seems to work. He sees the recalled dollar as revenue. He sees the dollar that comes in as an opportunity for government to buy from the marketplace. The perceptions of both taxpayer and government official are understandable, but erroneous.

First, a superficial problem: taxation has costs. To debate, to legislate, and to receive, as well as to calculate, to send, and to avoid taxes we use resources. The recalled dollar buys less of what the government wants than it does of what the individual wants because part of the dollar erodes away during recall. In what amounts to circular bucket pouring, a little drips out with each pour.

Second, the fundamental problem: within a small margin of error, taxpayers know how much they will have to pay in taxes. They discount every dollar they receive, anticipating the return of part of each dollar to the government.

Into marketplace
goes the taxpayer
and with taxpayer
begins to bargain.
"After taxes I have nothing," he says.
"After taxes I will have nothing" she says.
After exaggeration and inflation,
taxpayer and taxpayer make a deal.

||

Monetary recall is almost never a secret. It may be the biggest topic of conversation after weather and sports. People are smart enough to discount the face value of the money they receive to allow for the amount that they will have to return through the recall. Thus, it takes more discounted money to buy a refrigerator than it would take undiscounted money. Spread through the savings, lending, and investment system, the net effect of discounting is to force the economy to mint more money --to force inflation.

When a seller of chickens believes he should get the equivalent of one 75-cent cement block for each chicken, he will intuitively try to charge $1.00 if he knows 25 cents will eventually go for taxes. In turn, the cement block has a price of 75 cents because the cement block maker must charge that to get the fifty-six cents she wants from the sale of the block. The rest she sets aside in her mind for taxes.

This price-raising system is not perfect. Chicken sellers and block makers cannot raise prices without fear of loss of sales to competitors. However, the entire marketplace operates with discounted money. The value of a dollar is the value we give it. If together we discount its value in anticipation of monetary recall, together we push inflation. Buyers and sellers exchange goods and services for money in the marketplace with full knowledge that they have to pay taxes. All of the money collected by the Internal Revenue Service has already been discounted in value (prices have inflated). The value of each dollar reflects the net value that people believe they can receive from it. It incorporates a discount that reflects the average tax burden experienced by the population. If that average burden is about 25% a suit that would cost about $75 without recall taxes could cost about $100 with them.

When the price of oil went up rapidly in the early 1970's, other prices in the world's marketplaces tended to follow because petroleum users successfully raised their prices. Monetary recall has the same effect.

Income "taxes" raise the cost of my labor.
I raise the price of my labor because
I discount the value of my income
in anticipation of the taxes
I know I must pay.
When I discount the value of dollars I receive,
I, in effect, demand that more dollars be printed.
I have become inflationary pressure.

.....We thought we had severely taxed ourselves
.....when, automatically,
.....we sent back some of our national currency.
Yet, we only taxed sincerity.
.....We thought we had paid
.....for what our government spent.
Yet, we only paid for what we did not earn.
For this is the rule:
.....Our automatic tax,
.....our national income tax,
.....puts more money into circulation,
.....and then tries as best it can to take it back.
If you doubt this rule,
please search for its exception.
Search for:
.....the person,
.....the employer,
.....the employee,
.....the customer,
.....the idiot
.....who bargains and shops
.....ignoring that he knows
.....some of what comes
..........in to him
..........goes right back
.....out to his government.

||

:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV
:: 66. Recall Seems To Tax, But Fails ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

69. Yes, Inflation Is Real.

Yes, Inflation Is Real.
Bob Komives
::

No matter how we do our national accounting, inflation is real. A national budget runs a real deficit if national expenditures fail to balance themselves through income: growth in wealth caused by the communal and private reinvestment of knowledge. What is today commonly labeled "deficit," or "unbalanced national budget," is an accounting fantasy spun from unreal definitions of income. These fantasy deficits get blamed for inflation. Though I dismiss deficit spun of fanasty accounting, I do not dismiss inflation. It is a real phenomenon. It can hurt us. It can also tell us how successful has been our investment.

Inflation may indicate that communal investors made bad investments. A project that fails can cause inflation even if paid for with cash in hand. While the cash-in-hand project creates no new money, it does redistribute, use up, or alter resources. When the project fails, the old amount of money now chases after fewer available goods and services. Inflation will haunt a nation that achieves its fantasy balances year after year but fails to produce and protect wealth with the meager investments that it does make. Frugality at the expense of wisdom will decrease wealth.

Inflation may indicate that the marketplace does not accurately reflect real wealth formation and loss, that successful investments have not produced sellable goods and services fast enough to match the expanding currency circulating in the marketplace. Some benefits and costs do not reflect themselves in the markets or are slow to do so. Just as money should never be mistaken for wealth, the marketplace should never be mistaken as the only conduit for wealth, and monetary inflation should never be taken as the sole measure of successful investment. The low rate of inflation that modern marketplace countries tend to experience even in the best of times may reflect this divergence between total benefit and marketplace benefit.

While inflation never indicates that there has been too little monetary recall or too much fantasy deficit, it is an important concern for managers of money-based economies. We had best avoid inflation. We avoid inflation best when we invest well.

:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 69. Yes, Inflation Is Real ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

71. Let Us Find Balance.

Let Us Find Balance.
Bob Komives
::

There is a true rule of balance.

An organization,
biological or political,
tends to survive
if self-organized and self-taxed
to be productive and resilient.
It balances its budget
with the wealth
that productive organs return
from the energy spent
to create and maintain them.
So, yes,
a government cannot spend
what it does not have.
However, what it must have
is access to the wealth
in the organs of its economy.
It has such access
whenever it fixes a policy,
or passes a law,
or, even,
when it spends newly printed money.

Let us end monetary recall

and the fantasy that it is a tax
that balances our budgets.

Let us find balance

investing communally
in the growth of knowledge
within ourselves
within our biosphere.

Let us recycle the effort of the intelligent people

trapped in non-production
calculating
collecting
debating
and avoiding payments
under a futile system of monetary recall.

Again, let us remember

that war is the age-old medicine
to counter peacetime fantasies.

from: A War Rages

:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 71. Let Us Find Balance. ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

90. Recycle Misguided Intelligentsia.

Recycle Misguided Intelligentsia.
Bob Komives
::

Restless need for knowledge precedes development of science. There will always be voids in knowledge, unanswered questions. The more restless the people who feel a need to fill the voids, the more energy that society diverts into science. If acceptable answers do not come forth, we may divert energy from science into its sexier counterpart, pseudoscience. The struggling scientist who knows very little can feel unneeded in the shadow of pseudoscientists who profess wisdom. Do I profess pseudoscience? I am not wise enough to know. I hope to shed light and doubt I will cast a shadow. Allow me a flash of self pity as I smile at either prospect. Woe to me if I ever cast a pseudoscientific shadow.
We have educated some of our best people to do nothing of value. A significant portion of U.S. America's intelligentsia collects, calculates, or works to avoid federal recall of federal money. Many speculate on the affects of federal taxes and loans. Our leadership intelligentsia wastes much of its time debating how best to undertake the useless loans and monetary recall that are supposed to balance our federal budget and guide the economy.
This is high alchemy. Only smart people qualify. These sincere, talented people certainly outnumber our declared welfare recipients. Yet, despite being functionally unemployed and consuming large quantities of our resources, they often receive both respect and high pay. Imagine the boost to our economy if the efforts of this elite were recycled into beneficial work.

:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 90. Recycle Misguided Intelligentsia ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::