PDA

View Full Version : Maybe Big Is The Problem



Mainecoons
07-24-2014, 07:04 AM
This makes a lot of sense to me.


The Future Is Smaller - That's The Only Way This Works
https://ci4.googleusercontent.com/proxy/JgL52OUnCd1i6PW1a8IJ5KezXT8v4JNVbkx4dPy_CYRtt8C3vH 7xnZROHn48MwPXZJbUBBQGvqiI9_QhZzxe670G7Y7QO7RNYB9X ZEGiQa0eRcjUdXIVzbM=s0-d-e1-ft#http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/pictures/picture-5.jpg (http://www.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden)
Submitted by Tyler Durden (http://www.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden) on 07/23/2014 13:00 -0400


Corruption (http://www.zerohedge.com/taxonomy_vtn/term/10021)
ETC (http://www.zerohedge.com/taxonomy_vtn/term/10405)
Hong Kong (http://www.zerohedge.com/taxonomy_vtn/term/10856)
Kohn (http://www.zerohedge.com/taxonomy_vtn/term/12016)
Personal Income (http://www.zerohedge.com/taxonomy_vtn/term/9582)
SPY (http://www.zerohedge.com/taxonomy_vtn/term/148)










inShare4



Submitted by Simon Black of Sovereign Man blog (http://www.sovereignman.com/trends/the-future-is-smaller-thats-the-only-way-this-works-14717/),
Leopold Kohr was a rather obscure Austrian economist from the early 20th century who spent the better part of his career railing against the ‘cult of bigness’.
Kohr’s fundamental premise was simple: Big doesn’t work. Big corporations. Big governments. Big countries. There are just too many problems from size.
Think about ancient Rome. As the empire expanded, Rome’s imperial government had to create layers and layers of bureaucracies. Municipal levels, provincial levels, regional levels, etc.
They had to maintain a massive standing army to secure their constantly-growing borders. Tax collection was a nightmare. Infrastructure constantly needed expansion and maintenance.
It was all so costly, and absolutely required that Rome run an unwieldy, behemoth government.
History tells us that large governments almost invariably lead to waste, corruption, and overextension of power. It’s the large governments that rattle the sabers and constantly threaten warfare.
It’s large governments that maintain police states, that spy on their citizens, and commandeer nearly every personal choice imaginable with regulatory agencies that tell us how to educate our children and what we can/cannot put in our own bodies.
As Kohr theorized, bigness often leads to tyranny.
Moreover, it all ends up costing far more than a nation can afford… which is why big governments historically rack up even bigger debts.
Most of today’s big, established ‘rich’ countries are in exactly the same boat that Kohn predicted: heavily in debt. Militant. Aggressive. Tyrannical.
If you look at the more financially successful nations today, i.e. those with solvent governments who do not indebt future generations to drop bombs by remote control drones, they’re nearly all small.
Hong Kong has some of the lowest tax rates in the world. And yet the local government is awash with so much cash that they frequently send tax refunds back to local residents.
Singapore is in a similar position; the city-state has zero net debt, a strong defense force, incredibly low tax rates… yet they still manage to funnel excess tax revenues back into the economy, often as tax breaks or business incentives.
Here in Andorra is another example.
The personal income tax hasn’t even been implemented yet, but it technically only goes as high as 10%. Local property taxes are a joke– a friend was telling me she pays 70 euros a year to the local municipality.
Corporate income tax tops out at 10%. There are no estate or inheritance taxes. No wealth tax. No capital gains tax.
Yet this place remains one of the most civilized counties on the planet, and is tremendously affordable to boot.
(It doesn’t hurt that Andorra is gorgeous– postcard perfect. And it gets about 300 days of sunshine per year with some of the best skiing a human being could possibly ask for.)
Smallness is one of the key reasons why these places thrive.
The Andorran government would never be able to afford some massive police state or wage wars in foreign lands. They can’t afford bureaucratic regulatory agencies or obscene surveillance programs.
And the place is way too small for politicians to be able to hide. If the Prime Minister does something stupid, he’ll have 20 neighbors standing in his front yard the next morning taking him to task for his incompetence.
Large countries lack this sense of community and accountability. Everything gets lost in the bureaucracy and size.
It’s this very size now that is causing many of the largest economies in the world to collapse under their own weight.
In fact, all over Europe we’re seeing independence movements, from Scotland to Catalonia. There’s even been serious discussion raised about breaking California apart into six separate states.
This seems radical to most people. But when you look at the evidence objectively, smaller is about the only way an organized state can really work.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 07:24 AM
That is what is neat about federalism. If a big nation actually follows it.

Mainecoons
07-24-2014, 07:34 AM
I really think we should be looking at breaking the U.S. up into smaller countries. Canada should also consider splitting itself down the middle.

It has already been shown that the Federal model with its central government sitting in some east coast city isn't going to work. Time to go beyond that level.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 07:40 AM
No need to split the country up. Just apply federalism. The real thing. Not what we have now.

Mainecoons
07-24-2014, 07:46 AM
Tried and failed. Next.

Common Sense
07-24-2014, 07:59 AM
If you apply that theory to international and regional conflicts, it makes sense as well. Iraq, a collection of states became one country under British mandate (also sort of under the Turks) thus creating tensions between different cultural groups forces into being one country. The same thing in Africa. Africa was a collection of small tribal areas until colonization. Forcing them into larger nations led to conflict. Smaller regional governments serve the interests of smaller homogeneous cultural groups.

Chris
07-24-2014, 08:00 AM
I agree with his theory. Big is simply unmanageable. US government, Microsoft, Catholic Church.


Break up the US, hell yea, heck they're even looking at breaking up California.

Captain Obvious
07-24-2014, 08:14 AM
No need to split the country up. Just apply federalism. The real thing. Not what we have now.

Good luck with that.

donttread
07-24-2014, 08:19 AM
This makes a lot of sense to me.

[/B][/U]

[/FONT]

The closer to home the choices are made and money spent the better. Don't globalize, localize

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 08:20 AM
Good luck with that.

I don't think that we will do that. Anymore than the US will voluntarily break apart.

But federalism (real) is a logical and easy fix.

Chris
07-24-2014, 08:23 AM
The closer to home the choices are made and money spent the better. Don't globalize, localize

You also avoid one size fits all solutions a majority imposes on minority dissenters. In a small group you're more likely to argue it out and come to some agreement, and if not you leave to find a group better suits you.

del
07-24-2014, 08:23 AM
http://www.amazon.com/Small-Beautiful-Economics-People-Mattered/dp/0061997765/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1406208133&sr=1-1&keywords=small+is+beautiful

Captain Obvious
07-24-2014, 08:25 AM
I don't think that we will do that. Anymore than the US will voluntarily break apart.

But federalism (real) is a logical and easy fix.

Agreed with the former, the latter yeah, on paper though. The current system (like the Borg) has a way of self-preservation and ordinary people are too fat and happy and not motivated to get involved.

We had a saying in the YMCA Indian Guides (like Cub Scouts) for people who organize camping and other events - "it's always the same 10% of people who do 100% of the work".

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 08:26 AM
OK.

Chris
07-24-2014, 08:27 AM
http://www.amazon.com/Small-Beautiful-Economics-People-Mattered/dp/0061997765/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1406208133&sr=1-1&keywords=small+is+beautiful

Looks like interesting book.

del
07-24-2014, 08:32 AM
Looks like interesting book.

i read it when it first came out in '75 (i think)

i need to reread it

zelmo1234
07-24-2014, 09:03 AM
Tried and failed. Next.

When your failure still has you with the largest economy, one of the highest standards of living in the world and one of the only places in the world that you can rise form the bottom to the top?

Seems kind of foolish to toss the baby out with the bath water

zelmo1234
07-24-2014, 09:05 AM
I agree with his theory. Big is simply unmanageable. US government, Microsoft, Catholic Church.


Break up the US, hell yea, heck they're even looking at breaking up California.

Sure then we can all have nice little wars, as the planes states horde food the Midwest water the south energy resources, tolls between the countries it would be great

zelmo1234
07-24-2014, 09:07 AM
Good luck with that.

He does not need luck. The Federal government is about to become insolvent, Broke.

The power will automatically go back to the states.

People wonder why conservatives would rather see a Democrat than a RINO, the faster we hit the wall the sooner federalism comes back into play

Chris
07-24-2014, 09:14 AM
Sure then we can all have nice little wars, as the planes states horde food the Midwest water the south energy resources, tolls between the countries it would be great

What makes you think all the wars we see now would continue with smaller states who couldn't afford it?

Chris
07-24-2014, 09:15 AM
When your failure still has you with the largest economy, one of the highest standards of living in the world and one of the only places in the world that you can rise form the bottom to the top?

Seems kind of foolish to toss the baby out with the bath water


And holder of one of the highest debt.

Captain Obvious
07-24-2014, 09:15 AM
OK.

A big misconception is that we are "by the people, for the people" when in reality the design was (and still is) "by the wealthy landowner, for the wealthy landowner - and make sure the common citizen gets a bone tossed their way every now and then".

There is a reason why we like most other civilizations are governed by the wealthy and powerful minority and I don't see that changing anytime soon. A big part of that reason is that the average citizen isn't smart, interested, skilled or whatever enough and in the bell curve of humanity we're really no different than any other country, age, etc.

Winston Churchill is right to a large degree.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 09:17 AM
What makes you think all the wars we see now would continue with smaller states who couldn't afford it?

If the area in northern Cali blocked the flow of water south, those in the south won't look at their account balance. They will go to war or die.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 09:19 AM
With the caveat that the system as designed protects the little guy. Of course we have deviated from the expectation. I think the Founders were a lot like that old dead Roman dude who said "I never pretended to be a man of the people. But I like to think that I am a man for the people." Except he said it in Latin.


A big misconception is that we are "by the people, for the people" when in reality the design was (and still is) "by the wealthy landowner, for the wealthy landowner - and make sure the common citizen gets a bone tossed their way every now and then".

There is a reason why we like most other civilizations are governed by the wealthy and powerful minority and I don't see that changing anytime soon. A big part of that reason is that the average citizen isn't smart, interested, skilled or whatever enough and in the bell curve of humanity we're really no different than any other country, age, etc.

Winston Churchill is right to a large degree.

Chris
07-24-2014, 09:30 AM
If the area in northern Cali blocked the flow of water south, those in the south won't look at their account balance. They will go to war or die.

Or Northern California would exchange water for some other goods and services. Or Southern California would find other sources. War for small states is too expensive.

Chris
07-24-2014, 09:31 AM
With the caveat that the system as designed protects the little guy. Of course we have deviated from the expectation. I think the Founders were a lot like that old dead Roman dude who said "I never pretended to be a man of the people. But I like to think that I am a man for the people." Except he said it in Latin.

The system as designed on paper.

Mainecoons
07-24-2014, 09:33 AM
The system has been completely subverted by the Federal government and the governing elite and bureaucracy of D.C. If you don't break that setup down in the process, they'll just take over again.

D.C. needs to be turned into a reservation and museum town. The country should be broken up into a confederation of independent smaller states that cooperate on things like defense, commerce and free passage between borders.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 09:39 AM
Or Northern California would exchange water for some other goods and services. Or Southern California would find other sources. War for small states is too expensive. That is why there are 1763 wars in recorded history. See, the Encyclopedia of Wars (http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Volume-Library-History/dp/0816028516). It is only $285 now. It used to be listed at over $500.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 09:40 AM
The system has been completely subverted by the Federal government and the governing elite and bureaucracy of D.C. If you don't break that setup down in the process, they'll just take over again.

D.C. needs to be turned into a reservation and museum town. The country should be broken up into a confederation of independent smaller states that cooperate on things like defense, commerce and free passage between borders.

Almost identical to true federalism. Either is fine with me. You plan might even be better, because the local governments would have more power to prevent the "federal" government from a power grab.

Chris
07-24-2014, 09:49 AM
That is why there are 1763 wars in recorded history. See, the Encyclopedia of Wars (http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Volume-Library-History/dp/0816028516). It is only $285 now. It used to be listed at over $500.

What was does not define what will be, except under historicism.

Small state wars wouldn't affect so many others.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 09:56 AM
I don't recall anyone saying that.


What was does not define what will be, except under historicism.

Small state wars wouldn't affect so many others.

Ransom
07-24-2014, 10:00 AM
A large military is the government's only responsibility, how big a corporation or church becomes....is none of gov't business. Smaller government...means smaller scope, trying to manage the size of corporations or other organizations isn't within their scope. We all may feel like smaller is better....but we should have no rights to inhibit any corporation or organization from sky is the limit capabilities.

Ransom
07-24-2014, 10:00 AM
I don't recall anyone saying that.

Maybe it was John Bolton.:biglaugh:

Chris
07-24-2014, 10:07 AM
I don't recall anyone saying that.

You pointed to history as a predictor of the future in defense of your point. Here:


That is why there are 1763 wars in recorded history. See, the Encyclopedia of Wars (http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Volume-Library-History/dp/0816028516). It is only $285 now. It used to be listed at over $500.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 10:07 AM
Maybe it was John Bolton.:biglaugh:

The sentence I referred too (which I helpfully bolded) is something that would not cross John Bolton's mind. He is too busy looking for new wars.

But as I said, I would make him the permanent US Ambassador to the UN. That would be awesome. You could fill in for him if he wanted a break. You two are peas in a pod.

lynn
07-24-2014, 10:15 AM
The state, local, and federal government combined has the highest employee count in the U.S. and this sector does not produce anything but makes laws making it difficult for anyone else to produce and export. Greed and antisocial personality political leaders who really do not care about its people will always lead to collapse.

Our system worked in the past because they needed us to be educated enough to create innovation which has produced all we have today. Currently they do not need us anymore as this country is capitalizing off of foreign labor and technology that does not require human labor. This is why so many college graduates cannot find work today and this trend will continue until people realize its no longer worth getting an education anymore.

Now the masses could at any time stop the government from continuing this destruction of this country. The problem is people are sheep and are waiting on someone else to do it for them. People have to put their petty differences and labeling others aside and unite for the fight for what country used to stand for and follow it.

Of course, history and human behavior will not do anything in preventing the total collapse of our system. We all have to suffer a great deal on a massive level before the masses to fight back but by then it will too late.

Ethereal
07-24-2014, 10:19 AM
If the area in northern Cali blocked the flow of water south, those in the south won't look at their account balance. They will go to war or die.

Or they will move to somewhere more sustainable.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 10:20 AM
I agree, except I think things would improve faster than most think after a collapse. At least in large parts of this country. Those addicted to government cradle to grave programs are pretty much doomed.


The state, local, and federal government combined has the highest employee count in the U.S. and this sector does not produce anything but makes laws making it difficult for anyone else to produce and export. Greed and antisocial personality political leaders who really do not care about its people will always lead to collapse.

Our system worked in the past because they needed us to be educated enough to create innovation which has produced all we have today. Currently they do not need us anymore as this country is capitalizing off of foreign labor and technology that does not require human labor. This is why so many college graduates cannot find work today and this trend will continue until people realize its no longer worth getting an education anymore.

Now the masses could at any time stop the government from continuing this destruction of this country. The problem is people are sheep and are waiting on someone else to do it for them. People have to put their petty differences and labeling others aside and unite for the fight for what country used to stand for and follow it.

Of course, history and human behavior will not do anything in preventing the total collapse of our system. We all have to suffer a great deal on a massive level before the masses to fight back but by then it will too late.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 10:21 AM
Or they will move to somewhere more sustainable.

They might do that. Those sorts of migrations also cause war.

Chris
07-24-2014, 10:21 AM
The state, local, and federal government combined has the highest employee count in the U.S. and this sector does not produce anything but makes laws making it difficult for anyone else to produce and export. Greed and antisocial personality political leaders who really do not care about its people will always lead to collapse.

Our system worked in the past because they needed us to be educated enough to create innovation which has produced all we have today. Currently they do not need us anymore as this country is capitalizing off of foreign labor and technology that does not require human labor. This is why so many college graduates cannot find work today and this trend will continue until people realize its no longer worth getting an education anymore.

Now the masses could at any time stop the government from continuing this destruction of this country. The problem is people are sheep and are waiting on someone else to do it for them. People have to put their petty differences and labeling others aside and unite for the fight for what country used to stand for and follow it.

Of course, history and human behavior will not do anything in preventing the total collapse of our system. We all have to suffer a great deal on a massive level before the masses to fight back but by then it will too late.

Agree. Though I'd say the purpose of all the regulation and taxation is to redistribute wealth by political means circumventing its creation by economic means. And because the people are complacent, it will grow ever bigger and eventually fail.

lynn
07-24-2014, 10:21 AM
The system has been completely subverted by the Federal government and the governing elite and bureaucracy of D.C. If you don't break that setup down in the process, they'll just take over again.

D.C. needs to be turned into a reservation and museum town. The country should be broken up into a confederation of independent smaller states that cooperate on things like defense, commerce and free passage between borders.


That actually would be easy to do since all you have to do is cut off all federal funding to all state governments.

Ethereal
07-24-2014, 10:22 AM
A large military is the government's only responsibility, how big a corporation or church becomes....is none of gov't business. Smaller government...means smaller scope, trying to manage the size of corporations or other organizations isn't within their scope. We all may feel like smaller is better....but we should have no rights to inhibit any corporation or organization from sky is the limit capabilities.

Big corporations are a consequence of big government favoritism and protectionism.

Chris
07-24-2014, 10:24 AM
Big corporations are a consequence of big government favoritism and protectionism.

Indeed, the central planning of big government tends to be anti-competitive, leading to big corporation monopolies.

lynn
07-24-2014, 10:25 AM
I agree, except I think things would improve faster than most think after a collapse. At least in large parts of this country. Those addicted to government cradle to grave programs are pretty much doomed.


I think those social programs will collapse well before the whole system collapses.

lynn
07-24-2014, 10:26 AM
Big corporations are a consequence of big government favoritism and protectionism.


And this is why big corporations should not be taxed anymore as this will remove the incentive and relationship with the federal government.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 10:29 AM
I think those social programs will collapse well before the whole system collapses.

I don't think so. The entitlement programs are looking at the 2030s for collapse. Without major changes the USD likely won't last that long. Interest rates returning to historic averages would devastate us.

Peter1469
07-24-2014, 10:30 AM
And this is why big corporations should not be taxed anymore as this will remove the incentive and relationship with the federal government.

Except with regards to regulations- made to kill competition.

donttread
07-24-2014, 11:54 AM
Big corporations are a consequence of big government favoritism and protectionism.

That used to be the way it was but I think we've gone so far that now : "Big government is a consequence of the megacorps favoritism and protection." That's the last step before the corporate sci-fi scape where they own the food, water and air not to mention their own military happens.

Chris
07-24-2014, 12:09 PM
Big corporations are a consequence of big government favoritism and protectionism.


That used to be the way it was but I think we've gone so far that now : "Big government is a consequence of the megacorps favoritism and protection." That's the last step before the corporate sci-fi scape where they own the food, water and air not to mention their own military happens.


Nah, Ethereal is correct. Before the 16th amendment it was, as you say, "Big government is a consequence of the megacorps favoritism and protection." With the 16th and government's direct access to the wealth of the nation, big corporations are forced to rent seek those favors and protections. "Big corporations are a consequence of big government favoritism and protectionism."

But let's not quibble, if big is bad then both big governments and big corporations must be reduced. And the best way to do that is certainly not to increase he size of the regulatory and taxing state.

Bob
07-24-2014, 12:16 PM
I agree with his theory. Big is simply unmanageable. US government, Microsoft, Catholic Church.


Break up the US, hell yea, heck they're even looking at breaking up California.

That deal in CA is a petition.

To prove a point, a reporter for a news channel circulated a petition to remove the city sewer system from the ground and put all pipes above ground. He found it easy to collect signatures.

I believe the left understood for decades that if you have a dumb population they will not resist the left wing ideas so took charge of education.

Green Arrow
07-24-2014, 12:29 PM
Smaller is always better. That's just common sense. I also agree with "Localize, don't globalize."