Immigration-Push Deflation

Economists believe in a thing called “wage-push inflation” where an expanding economy creates more jobs than workers. Instead of being “a dime a dozen” workers are now 12 cents a dozen, and thus, the economy suffers from an alarming 20% inflation rate. Not inflation of the money supply mind you, but inflation of paychecks; something that cannot be tolerated.

Under such dire circumstances, the only sensible thing to do is crush the economy via egregious, Paul-Volcker style interest-rate hikes by the Fed. Otherwise, the workers might get uppity and whatnot.

But have you noticed that there is virtually no discussion of the opposite circumstance? And does it not stand to reason that if millions of workers are brought into the country, wages might be suppressed? And if wages are suppressed, our consumer-driven economy might run out of fuel?

So, I have coined the new phrase: Immigration-Push Deflation.

It’s pretty simple: you flood the country with superfluous workers, the excess supply drives down the market price for labor, everybody gets a pay-cut, and suddenly economists are baffled by the mysterious deflation that emerges. Do you think it was a coincidence that both the Great Depression and the Great Recession were preceded by vast waves of mass immigration that led to mass unemployment?

Without a high-spending middle-class, the U.S. economy will look a lot different than it has since World War II, and persistent deflationary pressures are likely to be the primary feature of such an economy.

I Am Against Ebola

Let the record show that I am against the importation of Ebola carriers into the USA.

If you told me a month ago that I would have to take a stand against Ebola, I would have thought that you were crazy. But with the incomprehensible emergence of a pro-Ebola political faction, here we are. To see an example of an Ebola-booster, tune into The Daily Show with knucklehead Jon Stewart.

One of the things the pro-Ebola faction tells us is that “science” says that we have nothing to worry about. Really? Note to idiots: the science is not complete until we have a vaccine and a cure! Ebola was discovered thirty-eight years ago, and your alleged science is still totally helpless against it.

Some science that is.

And what if Vladimir Putin were sending 150 potential Ebola-carriers into our airports each day? Would we just shrug it off? Or would we declare it a bio-warfare attack and launch nuclear missiles at Russia?

The Impossibility of Capitalism

The Capitalist decides to build a new factory. He calls a real estate agent and buys a parcel of farm land. He whistles for his chauffeur and rides out to the site in his limo. He walks to the center of his land, raises his cane to the sky and lets out a mighty bellow: “Let there be construction!” And…


Nothing happens. And thus, Capitalism is refuted.

In order for a factory to appear on the site, somebody has to do some labor. Maybe the capitalist will take off his top hat and monocle, roll up his sleeves, and dig the foundation himself. Plenty of capitalists are more than willing to labor. For example, Mark Zuckerberg shoveled tons of bits before he became a robber baron trying to flood the nation with cheap labor. But without labor, nothing happens. Ever.

Now, what are the Capitalist’s options?

Plan A – He could knock on doors, and after negotiations, hire some of the local population to come work for him.

Plan B – If his neighbors want too much money for their trouble, the Capitalist can bring in foreign workers from some downtrodden nation like Bangladesh whose citizens are desperate to work for peanuts.

Plan C – The Capitalist can get laws passed that destroy the local economy in order to make the locals more pliable. That’s how they did it in Britain when they repealed the Corn Laws.

Plan D – The Capitalist can offer very generous compensation to a few of the locals, arm them with weapons, and frog-march the rest of the people onto the work site.

Throughout history, Plan D, slavery, has been the most common, and most profitable option. In recent decades, the USA has been following Plan B, and that too has been enormously profitable for the capitalists.

Plan A is the ideal, of course, but it is impossible under a regime of mass immigration, and free-trade with low-wage nations. The capitalists have stacked the deck in their favor for negotiating with workers.

The moral of the story is that Capitalism is not an economic system, but only the notion that the capitalist should hold the upper hand over the worker. And Socialism is the notion that the worker should hold the upper hand over the capitalist. Both are foolish notions that lead to disaster.

My preferred way of solving this social problem is to create a slight, artificial scarcity of workers such that capitalists would have to bid against each other for their services. When workers are scarce, they will automatically be well paid, and well treated. No regulation necessary. That’s what happened during World War II. While all the men were away, women like my mother had plenty of job opportunities to work for grateful and generous managers.

So, curtail mass immigration, curtail trade with low-wage nations like China, and problem solved. Nobody needs to be enslaved, and no capitalists need to be marched into ovens, Tom Perkins style. Income inequality narrows and everybody lives happily ever after.

The problem, of course, is that the capitalists have control of both immigration policy and trade policy. So, don’t expect any improvements until that control is broken. The people of Switzerland recently voted to put an end to mass immigration. Perhaps such sentiment will spread to the voters of other Western countries. After all, it is painfully obvious that mass immigration only increases income inequality.

Spare the Gom Jabbar, Spoil the Politician

In my book, Dark Arts of the American Oligarchy, I called for the screening of psychopaths in order to prevent such people from attaining positions of power. However, science-fiction writer Frank Herbert was way ahead of me. In his 1965 classic Dune, the superman who can see the future, Paul Atreides, is given a psychopath test by his creators, the Bene Gesserit Sisterhood.

If he failed the test, Paul would have gotten the death penalty via a poison-tipped needle called the Gom Jabbar. The Sisterhood’s breeding program was producing very gifted men, but if one of them was an “animal” the Sisterhood wouldn’t hesitate to put him down.

Recently, we saw Chris Christie use innocent people as pawns to advance his career by creating traffic jams in “enemy” territory. The man is very likely a psychopath, and should be given the death penalty. And he shouldn’t be able to pardon himself either. But seriously, I hope the incident ends his chances of becoming president. God only knows how he might torture innocent people in Democratic states if he were in the White House.

Of course, I’m sure that there are plenty of Democratic, Libertarian, and Tea Party psychopaths out there who just haven’t been caught out like Christie yet.

We know that psychopaths are dangerous, and we have the technology to detect them, so why aren’t we doing so? Banks are given “stress tests” but why aren’t their CEOs given the PCL-R test? I mean, they almost destroyed the world in 2008; surely some screening is order, no?

Why has this issue been tossed down the memory hole after a flurry of attention a couple of years ago? Could it be that there are so many psychopaths among the powers-that-be that they have stifled all discussion of psychopath screening?

Yes, that could be, and it doesn’t bode well for the future. Any political reformer who doesn’t have psychopath screening on their agenda is either a charlatan or a psychopath themself.

Note: Herbert said that his Bene Gesserit Sisterhood is a female version of the Catholic Jesuit order, which is interesting now that we have the first-ever Jesuit Pope.

Is Diane Reidy Crazy?

The news media has uniformly described Diane Reidy’s address to Congress as a “bizarre” outburst. But while it was unusual, what she said isn’t terribly bizarre at all. Okay, she is a Pentecostal and speaks in a biblical style, but the USA has a long history of resisting Masonic influence.

In fact, an entire political party was founded to do just that in 1828; the Anti-Masonic Party counted John Quincy Adams as a member. So Reidy is in distinguished company. Here is what she said:

“He will not be mocked. He will not be mocked. (Don’t touch me.) He will not be mocked. The greatest deception here is that this is not one nation under God. It never was. Had it been…it would not have been…no. It would not have been…the Constitution would not have been written by Freemasons, and go against God. You cannot serve two masters. You cannot serve two masters. Praise be to God, Lord Jesus Christ.”