Go to college, get good grades, graduate, get a good
job. That’s been the “Middle Class
Mantra” for more than half a century.
The rising cost of education, grade inflation, low graduation rates, and
lack of employment opportunities are, consequently, blamed for the decline of
the “Middle Class.” As a result, there
are increasing demands that “the government do
something.”
 |
| Only one class: Plain Old Americans |
Let’s take the easy one first. “Middle Class”? This suggests that society is divided into
three “classes” generally known as “the poor,” “whatshisnames,” and “the
rich.” Economically, this translates
into “slaves of the government” (the poor owned by the State), “slaves of
private employers” (the whatshisnames owned by the private sector), and
“owners” (rich possessors of capital and controllers of the State).
The “decline of the Middle Class” therefore translates into
more people becoming slaves of the government instead of slaves of some rich
capitalist. This has its pluses and
minuses, of course. The capitalists
don’t have to take care of the government’s slaves directly, but they do have
to pay taxes (sometimes) and can’t control the whatshisnames.
 |
| Dan'l Webster: "Power follows property." |
Of course, since “power naturally and necessarily follows
property,” the rich can take advantage of the hidden tax of inflation that
shifts purchasing power from consumers to producers (i.e., from the slaves to the masters) when the government finances
by emitting bills of credit (issuing debt) instead of taxing directly, and
control the government, so it all works out in the end.
The bottom line? What’s
all this “class” jazz? We’re all human
beings. Admittedly, there are an
increasing number like school in summer — no class — but members of a
class? That’s imposing an abstraction on
actual human beings, and we’ve had enough of that already, no thank you. Abstractions are human intellectual
generalized constructs to assist us in grasping an idea, not empirical
facts. People are facts, they’re real,
not abstract concepts, folks.
Going to college to get a job? What happened to going to college to become
educated and thereby develop more fully as a person?
Okay, let’s not waste any more time, but get straight to
“the Jobs Market.” “Okay, Midge, gimme
two factory positions, a dozen clerical spots, and throw in a physician and an
attorney slot. I can sell that many at
the Job Fair on Saturday. Lemme have
some catalogs, too, just in case I run out.”
“Jobs Market”? Are
you serious? People can actually go and
buy a job or two, and jobs are a commodity that people transfer in commerce?
 |
| The best officers money can buy. |
Well . . . they can
be. The British Army used to sell
officers’ commissions, and in many countries you have to bribe someone to get a
government or even private sector job — and then collect enough graft yourself
to cover the cost of getting the job and keep on making payoffs. Now, that’s
a “Jobs Market.” Free enterprise at its
finest.
Okay, if you have to pay for it, it’s not free in that
sense, and if having a job depends on being able to come up with the bucks to
pay for it, it’s not free in any sense.
And, believe it or not, that includes spending money to “create jobs,”
whether done by the government or by private interests.
And just what the heck does “job creation” mean? If you need to eat, you figure out how to
produce something to eat, or produce something you can trade for something to
eat. That’s real Economics In a Nutshell. “Doing your job” in real economics means
producing a marketable good or service that you either consume yourself, or
trade to others for something you consume.
Modern economics, however, has taken this “Economics In a Nutshell,”
and transformed it into “Economics In a Nut’s Hell.” Believing that only labor produces marketable
goods and services, the Nut’s Hell of modern economics ignores the trillions of
dollars worth of capital instruments and declares that to have income, you
don’t need to produce anything. No, you
just need a “job” that provides you with an income so you can consume without
necessarily producing anything for consumption.
In fact, in Keynesian economics, it’s better if you produce
something completely useless, like (in Keynes’s opinion) a pyramid or cathedral. After all, who needs to show respect for the
dead or worship a deity when there is no afterlife and God doesn’t exist . . .
according to Keynes.
 |
| G.F. Knapp: Chartalism |
Ideally, of course, in Krazy Keynes Kountry, the government
would just create money and hand it out (a variation on Georg Friedrich Knapp’s
Chartalism), but people need to “feel” productive, especially when they
aren’t. That’s why the politicians (who,
in the Keynesian world, run every aspect of life) have to “create jobs”
producing nothing useful in order to give the illusion that people have
dignity. (For an example of where this
kind of Nut’s Hell thinking leads you, see “Justice
without Rights?” that was just published on Tuesday.) This, of course, screws up the entire system,
and runs up trillions of dollars worth of debt that can never be repaid, at
least under Nut’s Hell Economics assumptions.
What happens when the government inflates the currency to
the point that it becomes worthless, and it can no longer “create jobs” to keep
the non-productive consumption economy running?
If you’re Greece, you make all kinds of promises that you can’t possibly
keep to get bailed out. If you’re the
United States. . . .
According to Nut’s Hell Economics, this couldn’t possibly
happen. According to the pie plate
wearers, superior alien beings are going to come to Earth and save us.
In other words, we can ignore the fact that a problem
exists, or hope for a miracle. Neither
is a viable solution.
We’ll end this soap opera on Monday, and leave you with that
cliffhanger until then. There is a
solution, however, if a leader with vision (i.e.,
who can see beyond the end of his or her nose) can be identified and word
gotten to him or her.