Hi,
In the eighteen century POLITIES was the study of the economies of governments that led to political economists who proposed the theory that labor and not land was the real source of value. It was first identified as political economy then became Economics with an attempt to replace the study with a mathematical basis. It has not really worked so graphs, statistics, comparisons and charts have added an illusion of mathematics.
I really wanted to give clear definitions of the two Economic systems at war today. The problem is that there is so much BS included that it becomes less than clear. The only defining answers seem to lie in the fact that one system of trade is based on elective freedom and corporate management and the other system is based on Socialist Government control and management. Both are about POWER and MONEY AND WHO CONTROLS THEM.
Make no mistake it is a real war!!!!!!!!! Russia was defeated economically. No guns, no bombs but a war of economic ideas that began in the eighteenth century and fostered the basic theories used today. Wars have grown out of the Economic theories (World War 2 is a good example) but Economists today prefer not to waste money on shooting wars when they can defeat the opposition other ways. The ECONOMISTS have become more important than most country's leaders and harder to control because they act behind the scenes. Their theories are based on many and varied assumptions as I have pointed out in other posts.
Our economic system just received a big defeat in the Economists' war when the health care bill was passed because it turns economic control completely over to the system of Socialism which the Marxist Lenin said was the road to Communism. It puts the essential decisions about health care in the government's hands only and places the burden on the electorate.
If our country becomes a debtor nation permanently from the major expenses of this bill, we lose much of our power in the world. Only power and money insures our system of government and the freedom of the individual.
The current moves for global trade and conservation are moves to unite the world in efforts that can lead to World communism and eventually a one world congress with leaders that supersede individual-nation governments. The nation-governments will answer to the one central world government.
Seems like the fictions of the 1960-80s but it is not. The Marxist system is based on solidarity. The "rule of the Proletariat" which judges actions that are inconsistent with their determination of the people's needs as punishable. No individuality in other words and no freedom of choice. One-Worldism will be open to the same repressions for the individual that our forefathers came to America to escape.
From what I have explored in ECONOMICS, its philosophers and philosophies, and their potential for ERROR, that scares the Hell out of me! One gigantic error and we are back in the dark ages of poverty and starvation and ignorance. Not a very cheering thought!
And you thought Economics was dull and unimportant!!!??????
Cheers, Connie
In the eighteen century POLITIES was the study of the economies of governments that led to political economists who proposed the theory that labor and not land was the real source of value. It was first identified as political economy then became Economics with an attempt to replace the study with a mathematical basis. It has not really worked so graphs, statistics, comparisons and charts have added an illusion of mathematics.
I really wanted to give clear definitions of the two Economic systems at war today. The problem is that there is so much BS included that it becomes less than clear. The only defining answers seem to lie in the fact that one system of trade is based on elective freedom and corporate management and the other system is based on Socialist Government control and management. Both are about POWER and MONEY AND WHO CONTROLS THEM.
Make no mistake it is a real war!!!!!!!!! Russia was defeated economically. No guns, no bombs but a war of economic ideas that began in the eighteenth century and fostered the basic theories used today. Wars have grown out of the Economic theories (World War 2 is a good example) but Economists today prefer not to waste money on shooting wars when they can defeat the opposition other ways. The ECONOMISTS have become more important than most country's leaders and harder to control because they act behind the scenes. Their theories are based on many and varied assumptions as I have pointed out in other posts.
Our economic system just received a big defeat in the Economists' war when the health care bill was passed because it turns economic control completely over to the system of Socialism which the Marxist Lenin said was the road to Communism. It puts the essential decisions about health care in the government's hands only and places the burden on the electorate.
If our country becomes a debtor nation permanently from the major expenses of this bill, we lose much of our power in the world. Only power and money insures our system of government and the freedom of the individual.
The current moves for global trade and conservation are moves to unite the world in efforts that can lead to World communism and eventually a one world congress with leaders that supersede individual-nation governments. The nation-governments will answer to the one central world government.
Seems like the fictions of the 1960-80s but it is not. The Marxist system is based on solidarity. The "rule of the Proletariat" which judges actions that are inconsistent with their determination of the people's needs as punishable. No individuality in other words and no freedom of choice. One-Worldism will be open to the same repressions for the individual that our forefathers came to America to escape.
From what I have explored in ECONOMICS, its philosophers and philosophies, and their potential for ERROR, that scares the Hell out of me! One gigantic error and we are back in the dark ages of poverty and starvation and ignorance. Not a very cheering thought!
And you thought Economics was dull and unimportant!!!??????
Cheers, Connie
No comments:
Post a Comment