Dear Mr. Haryana,
My boss saw a number of items in your Jaipur showroom recently that she would like to order for our shop. She is particularly interested in ordering 50 of the yellow and green 12" vases that you retail for 1,000 rupees. What is the wholesale cost to us? She would also like to order 50 of the 6" turquoise candlestick holders which retail for 759 rupees. Please also include in our shipment 25 of the brown monkey tiles and 25 of the blue elephant tiles. Finally, my boss would like you to send 50 of the 5" yellow-flower soap dishes that retail for 300 rupees.
We are interested in having these items charged to our credit card. The more quickly you turn this order around the better, as our busiest season of the year strats in a month.
Sincerely,
Bobbi Smith
I am a owner of 'Swank', which is a home decor shop in Toronto.
I have to this letter to,
Mr. Ajit Haryana
President
Blue Pottery Industries
Friends Colony
303904
Jaipur, India
Can you help me make this letter more professional?"?
Dear Mr. Haryana
My name is Bobbi Smith and I am the owner of "Swank" a home decor shop in Toronto.
We are considering the purchase of a number of items from your Jaipur showroom and require additional information before proceeding. The specifics include a wholesale price quote, availability, shipping time, and payment options for the following:
50 yellow and green 12" vases (retail price1,000 rupees)
50 turquoise 6" candlestick holders (retail price 759 rupees)
50 yellow-flower 5" soap dishes (retail price 300 rupees)
25 brown monkey tiles
25 blue elephant tiles
We need deliver of the items within thirty days and our preferred payment method is major credit card.
We look forward to your timely response and the opportunity of doing business with you.
Sincerely
Bobbi Smith
Swank
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Need new van but what is the best (uk)?
I'm looking to buy a small van. As I own a flower/ gift shop, a balloon art business and a cafe/ takeaway I will need it for a lot of deliverys, wholesale runs etc. It needs to be good on the motorway, comfortable, quick but most of all reliable. I don't particularly like french vehicles as they have really bad reliability issues, but if you have had alternative experiances let me know. I was also thinking of a transit connect, what do you think? Fiat doblo is really ugly but is it any good?
Need new van but what is the best (uk)?
The Sprinter van by Mercedes Benz.
Here is a link for you to find out more including purchase and lease pricing. We have these vans sold in the United States but they are sold under the Dodge brand here. A extremely reliable vehicle.
http://www2.mercedes-benz.co.uk/content/...
Good luck!
riding boots
Need new van but what is the best (uk)?
The Sprinter van by Mercedes Benz.
Here is a link for you to find out more including purchase and lease pricing. We have these vans sold in the United States but they are sold under the Dodge brand here. A extremely reliable vehicle.
http://www2.mercedes-benz.co.uk/content/...
Good luck!
riding boots
Should I trim the top of the branches of my new rosebush plants?
I picked up a couple inexpensive rosebush plants at the wholesale club a few wks ago; they were actually planted last Saturday. The instructions on the box were vauge. The ends of the "branches" appear to have been dipped into some wax by the manufacturer. Should I trim these now that I've transplanted or just let them be? These are just rootballs w/ branches, no actual foliage yet. I live in the southeast, so I'm sure we're past the last frost by now. Sorry, can't tell you the variety.. but I'd call them your "garden variety" rose bushes. 2 yellow, 1 red, %26amp; 1 is a pale lavender hue.. they should produce full size flowers.
Should I trim the top of the branches of my new rosebush plants?
These packaged roses were dipped in wax to delay drying out.
You do not need to prune new roses very drastically. If you see anything dead, diseased, or damaged; trim it. Otherwise, leave your new rose intact. Prune roses in the dormant season, which is winter. You don't really have to do it the first year, either.
Cut those waxed parts off, but not a lot; just trim them once planted, and leave them alone. Do not fertilize now either; give them a month or so in the ground and when they leaf out, you may give a bit of half-strength rose food after watering well. Actually the wax usually falls off; but if you have hot weather it can melt and cause some smothering to new, tender growth.
Reply:Pruning roses is not as complicated as some like to make out. Roses are very tough and a bit of hard pruning only makes them better. The idea is to keep the plant 'open' ie remove branches that are touching each other, or even very close together. If you look at your branches you will see small bumps/nodes. Cut just above the nodes, angling the cut AWAY from it (this makes water run off the other side preventing rot) If your entering your spring - don't prune too much now - but definately take off the wax. Water well before and after. Prune again in winter when the rose is dormant.
Reply:yes
Reply:No, it is too late to trim roses. They should be already starting to produce foliage. The wax will fall off as the growth begins. Next February trim them back so that only 3 stalks remain. Trim them into a v-shape. Good luck with them.
Reply:trim the branches so that the individual branches are about 6" long,
make sure that you trim them so that the topmost buds are pointing out from the center, trim any branches that have damage or cracks. remove branches that cross each other.
removing excess branches now will make for a stronger plant. what you are trying to achieve is a rose bush that branches relatively close to the ground . you want to end up with a relatively open center because this will make it possible to have some air flow through the inner part of the plant when it is fully leafed out----you will have less disease issues in the long run.
I have a rose bush with a 3" diameter trunk so believe me it may look sparse now but in the long run you don't need anything that looks weak.
if you didn't trim it at all -----a lot of the growth would not be beefy enough to support a healthy crop of roses.
Should I trim the top of the branches of my new rosebush plants?
These packaged roses were dipped in wax to delay drying out.
You do not need to prune new roses very drastically. If you see anything dead, diseased, or damaged; trim it. Otherwise, leave your new rose intact. Prune roses in the dormant season, which is winter. You don't really have to do it the first year, either.
Cut those waxed parts off, but not a lot; just trim them once planted, and leave them alone. Do not fertilize now either; give them a month or so in the ground and when they leaf out, you may give a bit of half-strength rose food after watering well. Actually the wax usually falls off; but if you have hot weather it can melt and cause some smothering to new, tender growth.
Reply:Pruning roses is not as complicated as some like to make out. Roses are very tough and a bit of hard pruning only makes them better. The idea is to keep the plant 'open' ie remove branches that are touching each other, or even very close together. If you look at your branches you will see small bumps/nodes. Cut just above the nodes, angling the cut AWAY from it (this makes water run off the other side preventing rot) If your entering your spring - don't prune too much now - but definately take off the wax. Water well before and after. Prune again in winter when the rose is dormant.
Reply:yes
Reply:No, it is too late to trim roses. They should be already starting to produce foliage. The wax will fall off as the growth begins. Next February trim them back so that only 3 stalks remain. Trim them into a v-shape. Good luck with them.
Reply:trim the branches so that the individual branches are about 6" long,
make sure that you trim them so that the topmost buds are pointing out from the center, trim any branches that have damage or cracks. remove branches that cross each other.
removing excess branches now will make for a stronger plant. what you are trying to achieve is a rose bush that branches relatively close to the ground . you want to end up with a relatively open center because this will make it possible to have some air flow through the inner part of the plant when it is fully leafed out----you will have less disease issues in the long run.
I have a rose bush with a 3" diameter trunk so believe me it may look sparse now but in the long run you don't need anything that looks weak.
if you didn't trim it at all -----a lot of the growth would not be beefy enough to support a healthy crop of roses.
Favors/place cards?
I am trying to stick to a budget, but still want things nice. My wedding is in December, and so I picked dark green and white for my colors.
I am thinking about combining the placecards/favors. My idea was to purchase small white poinsettias (I have a family member who will be getting the for me wholesale), and print out the place cards at home. I would use those clear card holders florists use to put the place cards in the flowers. Everyone will take their plant to the table with them.
I will have large white candles in the center of the table (The table cloths are dark green), and I thought that the flowers would be a nice way to make the tables prettier without spending a fortune on fancy centerpieces, and then everyone could take the plant with them.
What do you think?
Favors/place cards?
It sounds lovely, as long as they aren't too big, or you aren't expecting guests to place them in the center to act as a centerpiece.
Since not everyone is probably going to want a plant, you could perhaps donate the extras to a nursing home or a womens shelter.
(My wedding is in January, and I am planning on having pointettias, too! I wasn't sure if it was a good idea...I'm glad someone else is doing that!)
Reply:I think it's a good idea, but only as long as the flowers don't get to be too big in the middle of the table. (And as long as they're the right height so that the candles don't light the flowers on fire!) It's one thing for the table to look pretty and another for it to be a big garden that forces the plates off the table and keeps everyone from seeing the person across from them.
If you can avoid that, I think it's a perfect idea!
Reply:I think it's a great idea. The colors sound great for a December wedding.
The only issues I'd have is are the candles going to be lit around the plants? Because it could be a fire hazard... or will many kids be there? It could get knocked over and spread dirty all over the table.
So basically, keep the lit candles apart from the plant and make sure the tables are sturdy so they don't get knocked over. :-)
Best Wishes!
Reply:they sound ok, I am not a huge fan of favors in general, i think you can save money by leaving them out altogether. Not everyone will take their plant home
Reply:I think it sounds really pretty. I would love to see poinsettias used at a wedding!
Just one idea, you could also cluster them in the middle of the table so they ARE the actual centrepiece. If the candles are in the middle, the flowers are going to end up to the sides of their plates.
Reply:It sounds like it will be very pretty, just make sure there is enough room on the table for each person's plant along with the dishes, glasses, etc. People like to have space during the reception meal. Good luck to you, please wish me some too, I'm still trying to plan my reception for August!!!
Reply:It sounds beautiful.. Just make sure that the plants aren't so large or that you have a fairly large table.. if you have a large plant at every place setting then the guests may not be able to see each other to be able to talk with the other guests at their table.. Just a thought. :o) Good luck!
Reply:I think it would be very pretty, as long as you really will be saving money. I think there are many cheaper ways. But if you want them to double as centerpieces and favors, that's a great options. You may want to have the plant already sitting at the places when the guests arrive at the reception. Otherwise, guests may not place the plants to where they function as a centerpiece.
Reply:I think that's a great idea. But the plants should already be placed at the tables since that's the point behind having place cards, so your guests know where they are seated.
But I like the idea a lot. I'm not entirely crazy about the clear plastic floral picks though. What about attaching the card to a nicer flat stick (in between two pieces of cardstock) and tying a color coordinated ribbon around the base of the stick?
Also, I was thinking instead of poinsettia's, you could use a different type of winter hardy potted flower. It's just that it seems a little too Christmas Holiday to me. Just because it falls in December doesn't mean you need poinsettias. There are plenty of beautiful Winter themes.
Reply:i think its a pretty idea and very economical as you pointed out the poinsettias will be pretty up the table beautifully and it solves the favour issue. also with their being white they won't be associated quite so much with Christmas as if you chose red ones!
but i do agree with anna about having the flowers at the tables already with the place cards, otherwise you may have folks placing the flowers willy-nilly and it won't be as perfect as you want it!
have you checked with your venue about candles? more and more places are vetoing the use of real candles due to fire hazards and insurance issues! perhaps flameless candles?
all in all i think your idea is a stroke of genius and your man is getting a pretty darn smart wife! happy wedding sweetie!
Reply:It is perfect. You are being economical, thrifty and still staying within your theme. BRAVO!
Make sure there will be enough room on the tables for the 6-10 plants + everything else.
Good Luck and Happy Planning!
Reply:i think that sounds great. Props to you for not using the ever boring Hershey kisses as a favor! I like the idea of getting a poinsetta at Christmas! very nice!
Reply:i think it sounds very nice
I am thinking about combining the placecards/favors. My idea was to purchase small white poinsettias (I have a family member who will be getting the for me wholesale), and print out the place cards at home. I would use those clear card holders florists use to put the place cards in the flowers. Everyone will take their plant to the table with them.
I will have large white candles in the center of the table (The table cloths are dark green), and I thought that the flowers would be a nice way to make the tables prettier without spending a fortune on fancy centerpieces, and then everyone could take the plant with them.
What do you think?
Favors/place cards?
It sounds lovely, as long as they aren't too big, or you aren't expecting guests to place them in the center to act as a centerpiece.
Since not everyone is probably going to want a plant, you could perhaps donate the extras to a nursing home or a womens shelter.
(My wedding is in January, and I am planning on having pointettias, too! I wasn't sure if it was a good idea...I'm glad someone else is doing that!)
Reply:I think it's a good idea, but only as long as the flowers don't get to be too big in the middle of the table. (And as long as they're the right height so that the candles don't light the flowers on fire!) It's one thing for the table to look pretty and another for it to be a big garden that forces the plates off the table and keeps everyone from seeing the person across from them.
If you can avoid that, I think it's a perfect idea!
Reply:I think it's a great idea. The colors sound great for a December wedding.
The only issues I'd have is are the candles going to be lit around the plants? Because it could be a fire hazard... or will many kids be there? It could get knocked over and spread dirty all over the table.
So basically, keep the lit candles apart from the plant and make sure the tables are sturdy so they don't get knocked over. :-)
Best Wishes!
Reply:they sound ok, I am not a huge fan of favors in general, i think you can save money by leaving them out altogether. Not everyone will take their plant home
Reply:I think it sounds really pretty. I would love to see poinsettias used at a wedding!
Just one idea, you could also cluster them in the middle of the table so they ARE the actual centrepiece. If the candles are in the middle, the flowers are going to end up to the sides of their plates.
Reply:It sounds like it will be very pretty, just make sure there is enough room on the table for each person's plant along with the dishes, glasses, etc. People like to have space during the reception meal. Good luck to you, please wish me some too, I'm still trying to plan my reception for August!!!
Reply:It sounds beautiful.. Just make sure that the plants aren't so large or that you have a fairly large table.. if you have a large plant at every place setting then the guests may not be able to see each other to be able to talk with the other guests at their table.. Just a thought. :o) Good luck!
Reply:I think it would be very pretty, as long as you really will be saving money. I think there are many cheaper ways. But if you want them to double as centerpieces and favors, that's a great options. You may want to have the plant already sitting at the places when the guests arrive at the reception. Otherwise, guests may not place the plants to where they function as a centerpiece.
Reply:I think that's a great idea. But the plants should already be placed at the tables since that's the point behind having place cards, so your guests know where they are seated.
But I like the idea a lot. I'm not entirely crazy about the clear plastic floral picks though. What about attaching the card to a nicer flat stick (in between two pieces of cardstock) and tying a color coordinated ribbon around the base of the stick?
Also, I was thinking instead of poinsettia's, you could use a different type of winter hardy potted flower. It's just that it seems a little too Christmas Holiday to me. Just because it falls in December doesn't mean you need poinsettias. There are plenty of beautiful Winter themes.
Reply:i think its a pretty idea and very economical as you pointed out the poinsettias will be pretty up the table beautifully and it solves the favour issue. also with their being white they won't be associated quite so much with Christmas as if you chose red ones!
but i do agree with anna about having the flowers at the tables already with the place cards, otherwise you may have folks placing the flowers willy-nilly and it won't be as perfect as you want it!
have you checked with your venue about candles? more and more places are vetoing the use of real candles due to fire hazards and insurance issues! perhaps flameless candles?
all in all i think your idea is a stroke of genius and your man is getting a pretty darn smart wife! happy wedding sweetie!
Reply:It is perfect. You are being economical, thrifty and still staying within your theme. BRAVO!
Make sure there will be enough room on the tables for the 6-10 plants + everything else.
Good Luck and Happy Planning!
Reply:i think that sounds great. Props to you for not using the ever boring Hershey kisses as a favor! I like the idea of getting a poinsetta at Christmas! very nice!
Reply:i think it sounds very nice
Wedding Flowers?
I am getting married in April and am searching for my flowers. I have gone to Los Angeles (the flower district) and have found a place called "Daisy's Garden" This place doesn't have a website and they speak Spanish (some English, but not very well)....I went with my friend and the florist showed me beautiful flowers and arrangements for much less than what I would pay at a typical...non-wholesale florist....i was wondering if anyone has been to "Daisy's Garden" before...or any florist in the LA flower district...and, if so, what was your experience with them? (please only tell me if you have used them for a large event...not just for a bouquet or something)
my second question is....do you think i should trust the great deal in LA...or pay more for peace of mind??? Thanks!
Wedding Flowers?
consider the hidden costs and stress of delivering and setting up the flowers on your big day
also the built in guarantee that goes with a reputable florist actually coming through with the exact flowers arranged the way you are wanting at a time when you won't be having time to mess with it.
set your preferred budget for flowers total.
Rather than a wholesaler please check into a smaller florist they can give you the attention you need to have at this important event and they can help you not break the bank at the same time.
Reply:the best way to do this is to get 3 estimates. then go with the middle one...unless they are way different. in that case get 3 more.
i have a feeling the mexican woman is being fair with you though. find a fried that speaks spanish, take them, and go back for another visit.
hope this helps. :)
Reply:i would want to pay more for peace of mind
my second question is....do you think i should trust the great deal in LA...or pay more for peace of mind??? Thanks!
Wedding Flowers?
consider the hidden costs and stress of delivering and setting up the flowers on your big day
also the built in guarantee that goes with a reputable florist actually coming through with the exact flowers arranged the way you are wanting at a time when you won't be having time to mess with it.
set your preferred budget for flowers total.
Rather than a wholesaler please check into a smaller florist they can give you the attention you need to have at this important event and they can help you not break the bank at the same time.
Reply:the best way to do this is to get 3 estimates. then go with the middle one...unless they are way different. in that case get 3 more.
i have a feeling the mexican woman is being fair with you though. find a fried that speaks spanish, take them, and go back for another visit.
hope this helps. :)
Reply:i would want to pay more for peace of mind
Is thye political leadership a Myth ?? more cost than benefit ?? Elections?
In this dreadful election season, many politicians have promised to "lead us into the future." I can hardly think of a worse fate for any society than to be led into the future by the political class of gangsters, marauders, looters, and liars. Even the most honest and well-intended among them are powerless to improve the world in any way except by diminishing rather than increasing their power.
Politicians haven't the capacity to lead whole societies anywhere. They are outclassed and outrun by trends in the world economy that are beyond the ability of the political class to control or direct. The market economy—globalized, enormously powerful, breathtaking in scope and breadth—is remaking the world in ways that far surpass any existing political development in the US, from the crafted blather of Congressional hearings on this or that to the mad rush to grab the presidential brass rings.
We are living through changes that may appear slow if observed from the point of view of the daily headlines, but which are momentously fast and completely transforming when looked at globally and from the point of view of years and decades into the future.
These developments are going to bring about surprising political shifts, profound upsets in rooted cultural assumptions, and an eventual and merciful end to the US imperium. These changes will touch everyone in ways that will be both stunning and glorious for average Americans, and deeply disturbing for the American regime that aspires to unchallenged global hegemony.
What is the underlying cause? The unleashing of human energies in nations that have been isolated, regimented, and closed for centuries. China, Malaysia, India, the countries of Latin America, and the new economies of Eastern Europe, among many others, are expanding at as much as twice the rate of American and European markets.
This is not only remaking their nations, but the way we perceive the geographical distribution of wealth and power. Over time, and extended far into the future, this trend is going to mean dramatic upheavals in the way Americans perceive their role in the world.
Within the institution of trade—whether on the most local level or the global level—we find the key to peace, prosperity, and human flourishing.
The people in these emerging countries, confronted with new economic opportunities, are making the fruits of their labors, assisted by investments by US firms, available to American consumers, driving down prices and driving up the quality of everyday goods and services consumed by Americans. This phenomenon has been the saving grace of the US economy for a decade, and, in the future, it will become integral to our very lives.
To get a glimpse of the change, take a tour of the local Wal-Mart, the largest company in the world, and take note of the stunning availability of a huge range of consumer goods at very low prices. Note too that such an array would be inconceivable without the work of international trade. From bicycles and electronics to foodstuffs and flowers, we find the shelves dominated by goods that were produced, in part or in whole, by countries outside US borders, and to this we owe the low prices and the quality that accords with US consumer preferences.
Now, Wal-Mart isn't on some campaign to become the leading importer; it is only looking to make available to consumers all the things they want at the lowest possible prices. Where they find these goods is outside the US, where we find ever more comparative advantages.
Every retailer in the world is taking notice of this fact, studying the case of Wal-Mart to see how and why it so quickly became the dominant player in the world economy. Its example of seeing both the wholesale and retail market as global in scope—all in the interest of consumer service—has taught the entire business class that nationalism and parochialism are losing propositions. The left may continue to rail against this company, and the right may continue to warn of its dangers to local culture and life, but the example is there for all to see. Average people love this company. It is all old-fashioned consumer service combined with a global reach to bring to average people things that improve their lot in life.
Wal-Mart may eventually go the way of so many companies, displaced by some other firm that knows how to do it even better. The point is the model from which it is working. It is a global model focused on the individual buyer, and it works its wonders by depending on the voluntary decisions of average people. The nation state as such plays no part in its calculus, and this has proven to be the winning ticket. So it will continue to be.
What about the economic impact? Is marketing all these wares to the world a danger? One might be initially alarmed by this, until one considers the savings to the consumer. For every dime saved in consumer prices, one more dime is made available for other pursuits, whether savings, consumption, or investment. It is this fact which is subsidizing American prosperity right now. Far from being a sign that America has lost its edge, it constitutes the world's gift to American consumers. The trade is mutually beneficial, producing winners on all sides, with the only losers being those American producers who can't seem to drive their costs down low enough to compete in the world marketplace. It is because of this, and despite the constant attempts by central banks to inflate the currency, that prices are continuing to fall for consumer goods.
People who have noted these trends say that we should panic that there won't be any jobs left for Americans to do. What this forgets is the reality of scarcity in the world, which implies that there are always and everywhere jobs to do because there are always and everywhere unmet needs. Specialization and the division of labor permits Americans to produce most efficiently in a way that is integral to world demand and not waste time and resources in jobs that can be done more cheaply elsewhere. This does indeed mean a change in world patterns of production, but the market will manage the change with minimum disruption, as it has for the last several hundred years.
For the developing world, it means something far more dramatic: a nearly complete abandonment of traditional economic pursuits that were imposed on them by virtue of their previous isolation from the capitalist West. The point is not that their economies are free or have been completely unleashed from the chains of the state. The US and Western Europe, in many respects, remain the most free economies. What matters here is the direction of change. Whereas the US and Europe are increasingly controlled, countries such as China, India, Romania, Poland, Thailand, and many others, are far less controlled than they once were.
This has unleashed pent-up human energies and made a fantastic difference in the ability of these people to integrate themselves into the worldwide division of labor. This has meant rising incomes, better diets, less starvation, less disease, better sanitation, falling infant mortality, much longer lifespans, and ever more economic opportunities for work and investment. The fate of these economies has two major links to that of American citizens: in their capacity as consumers, they have a strong interest in seeing it continue, and, as investors, many portfolios of US investors are heavily invested in these emerging economies.
The quality of life in these distant lands is increasing in ways that would have been unimaginable even a decade ago, with information technologies made available by the private sector coming into the hands of a new generation that relies on cell phones and high-speed web access, where their parents struggled barely to survive. The lifespan in China alone has risen from 25 years to 65 years in the course of a century. It also means more revenue for the governments of these countries, which, if driven to build up militaries to fend off US political influence, could eventually challenge the supremacy of the US in world public affairs.
Again, this is nothing to regret. A world dominated by a single superpower is a gravely dangerous place, especially when that power is irresponsibly managed (and, some would say, is managed by maniacs). A decline in the power, might, and influence of the US is not the same thing as a decline in America; quite the opposite. The only real downside is the transition: the US government may increasingly behave like a dying and rabid animal, posing a danger to its random victims. But once you hear the "thud" of the final fall, the world will be more peaceful and prosperous than ever before.
In the meantime, political trends in the US will become increasingly irrelevant, despite appearances. Until recently, Americans thought of themselves as a self-contained people with a nationally bound culture and economy that can be conceptualized and managed in the way that civics texts describe. This is on the verge of being impossible. The managerial class of the regime will continue to pose as experts and top-flight managers, but old assumptions about government are being shredded. Trends on this scale reduce the bellowing of politicians for protection to mere peeps.
There is a tendency on the part of everyone to judge a historical moment by our own daily affairs and in relation only to the headlines that dominate the news. Economic analysis takes a much broader view to consider the overall impact of billions of people in many lands over a long period of time. It is through examining these trends that we can see that we are entering into a new world of global economic expansion that will rout any attempt to keep it at bay. Now, clearly, this will not occur without periods of crisis, particularly so long as the world is on a dollar standard and governments are still at work bringing calamity wherever they can.
Take a look at where and how the products you use every day are made. Therein lies a remarkable story of the genius of entrepreneurship, the capacity for the world economy to manage itself and overcome ten thousand barriers, and the direction we are headed. It is a world in which consumers and producers from all nations can join hands in praise of the networks that draw them together, and against their common enemy: governments that would stand in the way.
To understand the world being recreated before us, we must constantly keep this principle in our mind: trade based on ownership is always and everywhere mutually beneficial. Within the institution of trade—whether on the most local level or the global level—we find the key to peace, prosperity, and human flourishing. If we understand this, we have no reason to fear our fate except to the extent that anyone anywhere dares to interfere. If we understand this, we can see why being led into the future by the political class is something we should neither desire nor expect.
Is thye political leadership a Myth ?? more cost than benefit ?? Elections?
All of this is a question of yours? Oye ve!!
Reply:Without the past, there is no today. Without today, there is no tomorrow. Where I am now, today I saw some mobile toilets. These are just recent introduction here. I have seen them before 10 years ago in Europe. After 10 years, somebody introduce these gadgets in our local area. People who have the means to go anywhere in the world are the ones with the ideas. Most people do not have the money to travel. So these few powerful and rich people whether or not they have ties with gangsterism, are the ones who have been to elsewhere, bring these ideas home. Slowly but surely, the society will change. There is such a thing as a political leadership; may be short of your expectation of what you want them to be. What sort of future do you want ? Who are the leaders whom you think will bring such a future for you ? Elect them then.
Reply:Go to www.mises.org. They'll enlighten you more.
family nanny
Politicians haven't the capacity to lead whole societies anywhere. They are outclassed and outrun by trends in the world economy that are beyond the ability of the political class to control or direct. The market economy—globalized, enormously powerful, breathtaking in scope and breadth—is remaking the world in ways that far surpass any existing political development in the US, from the crafted blather of Congressional hearings on this or that to the mad rush to grab the presidential brass rings.
We are living through changes that may appear slow if observed from the point of view of the daily headlines, but which are momentously fast and completely transforming when looked at globally and from the point of view of years and decades into the future.
These developments are going to bring about surprising political shifts, profound upsets in rooted cultural assumptions, and an eventual and merciful end to the US imperium. These changes will touch everyone in ways that will be both stunning and glorious for average Americans, and deeply disturbing for the American regime that aspires to unchallenged global hegemony.
What is the underlying cause? The unleashing of human energies in nations that have been isolated, regimented, and closed for centuries. China, Malaysia, India, the countries of Latin America, and the new economies of Eastern Europe, among many others, are expanding at as much as twice the rate of American and European markets.
This is not only remaking their nations, but the way we perceive the geographical distribution of wealth and power. Over time, and extended far into the future, this trend is going to mean dramatic upheavals in the way Americans perceive their role in the world.
Within the institution of trade—whether on the most local level or the global level—we find the key to peace, prosperity, and human flourishing.
The people in these emerging countries, confronted with new economic opportunities, are making the fruits of their labors, assisted by investments by US firms, available to American consumers, driving down prices and driving up the quality of everyday goods and services consumed by Americans. This phenomenon has been the saving grace of the US economy for a decade, and, in the future, it will become integral to our very lives.
To get a glimpse of the change, take a tour of the local Wal-Mart, the largest company in the world, and take note of the stunning availability of a huge range of consumer goods at very low prices. Note too that such an array would be inconceivable without the work of international trade. From bicycles and electronics to foodstuffs and flowers, we find the shelves dominated by goods that were produced, in part or in whole, by countries outside US borders, and to this we owe the low prices and the quality that accords with US consumer preferences.
Now, Wal-Mart isn't on some campaign to become the leading importer; it is only looking to make available to consumers all the things they want at the lowest possible prices. Where they find these goods is outside the US, where we find ever more comparative advantages.
Every retailer in the world is taking notice of this fact, studying the case of Wal-Mart to see how and why it so quickly became the dominant player in the world economy. Its example of seeing both the wholesale and retail market as global in scope—all in the interest of consumer service—has taught the entire business class that nationalism and parochialism are losing propositions. The left may continue to rail against this company, and the right may continue to warn of its dangers to local culture and life, but the example is there for all to see. Average people love this company. It is all old-fashioned consumer service combined with a global reach to bring to average people things that improve their lot in life.
Wal-Mart may eventually go the way of so many companies, displaced by some other firm that knows how to do it even better. The point is the model from which it is working. It is a global model focused on the individual buyer, and it works its wonders by depending on the voluntary decisions of average people. The nation state as such plays no part in its calculus, and this has proven to be the winning ticket. So it will continue to be.
What about the economic impact? Is marketing all these wares to the world a danger? One might be initially alarmed by this, until one considers the savings to the consumer. For every dime saved in consumer prices, one more dime is made available for other pursuits, whether savings, consumption, or investment. It is this fact which is subsidizing American prosperity right now. Far from being a sign that America has lost its edge, it constitutes the world's gift to American consumers. The trade is mutually beneficial, producing winners on all sides, with the only losers being those American producers who can't seem to drive their costs down low enough to compete in the world marketplace. It is because of this, and despite the constant attempts by central banks to inflate the currency, that prices are continuing to fall for consumer goods.
People who have noted these trends say that we should panic that there won't be any jobs left for Americans to do. What this forgets is the reality of scarcity in the world, which implies that there are always and everywhere jobs to do because there are always and everywhere unmet needs. Specialization and the division of labor permits Americans to produce most efficiently in a way that is integral to world demand and not waste time and resources in jobs that can be done more cheaply elsewhere. This does indeed mean a change in world patterns of production, but the market will manage the change with minimum disruption, as it has for the last several hundred years.
For the developing world, it means something far more dramatic: a nearly complete abandonment of traditional economic pursuits that were imposed on them by virtue of their previous isolation from the capitalist West. The point is not that their economies are free or have been completely unleashed from the chains of the state. The US and Western Europe, in many respects, remain the most free economies. What matters here is the direction of change. Whereas the US and Europe are increasingly controlled, countries such as China, India, Romania, Poland, Thailand, and many others, are far less controlled than they once were.
This has unleashed pent-up human energies and made a fantastic difference in the ability of these people to integrate themselves into the worldwide division of labor. This has meant rising incomes, better diets, less starvation, less disease, better sanitation, falling infant mortality, much longer lifespans, and ever more economic opportunities for work and investment. The fate of these economies has two major links to that of American citizens: in their capacity as consumers, they have a strong interest in seeing it continue, and, as investors, many portfolios of US investors are heavily invested in these emerging economies.
The quality of life in these distant lands is increasing in ways that would have been unimaginable even a decade ago, with information technologies made available by the private sector coming into the hands of a new generation that relies on cell phones and high-speed web access, where their parents struggled barely to survive. The lifespan in China alone has risen from 25 years to 65 years in the course of a century. It also means more revenue for the governments of these countries, which, if driven to build up militaries to fend off US political influence, could eventually challenge the supremacy of the US in world public affairs.
Again, this is nothing to regret. A world dominated by a single superpower is a gravely dangerous place, especially when that power is irresponsibly managed (and, some would say, is managed by maniacs). A decline in the power, might, and influence of the US is not the same thing as a decline in America; quite the opposite. The only real downside is the transition: the US government may increasingly behave like a dying and rabid animal, posing a danger to its random victims. But once you hear the "thud" of the final fall, the world will be more peaceful and prosperous than ever before.
In the meantime, political trends in the US will become increasingly irrelevant, despite appearances. Until recently, Americans thought of themselves as a self-contained people with a nationally bound culture and economy that can be conceptualized and managed in the way that civics texts describe. This is on the verge of being impossible. The managerial class of the regime will continue to pose as experts and top-flight managers, but old assumptions about government are being shredded. Trends on this scale reduce the bellowing of politicians for protection to mere peeps.
There is a tendency on the part of everyone to judge a historical moment by our own daily affairs and in relation only to the headlines that dominate the news. Economic analysis takes a much broader view to consider the overall impact of billions of people in many lands over a long period of time. It is through examining these trends that we can see that we are entering into a new world of global economic expansion that will rout any attempt to keep it at bay. Now, clearly, this will not occur without periods of crisis, particularly so long as the world is on a dollar standard and governments are still at work bringing calamity wherever they can.
Take a look at where and how the products you use every day are made. Therein lies a remarkable story of the genius of entrepreneurship, the capacity for the world economy to manage itself and overcome ten thousand barriers, and the direction we are headed. It is a world in which consumers and producers from all nations can join hands in praise of the networks that draw them together, and against their common enemy: governments that would stand in the way.
To understand the world being recreated before us, we must constantly keep this principle in our mind: trade based on ownership is always and everywhere mutually beneficial. Within the institution of trade—whether on the most local level or the global level—we find the key to peace, prosperity, and human flourishing. If we understand this, we have no reason to fear our fate except to the extent that anyone anywhere dares to interfere. If we understand this, we can see why being led into the future by the political class is something we should neither desire nor expect.
Is thye political leadership a Myth ?? more cost than benefit ?? Elections?
All of this is a question of yours? Oye ve!!
Reply:Without the past, there is no today. Without today, there is no tomorrow. Where I am now, today I saw some mobile toilets. These are just recent introduction here. I have seen them before 10 years ago in Europe. After 10 years, somebody introduce these gadgets in our local area. People who have the means to go anywhere in the world are the ones with the ideas. Most people do not have the money to travel. So these few powerful and rich people whether or not they have ties with gangsterism, are the ones who have been to elsewhere, bring these ideas home. Slowly but surely, the society will change. There is such a thing as a political leadership; may be short of your expectation of what you want them to be. What sort of future do you want ? Who are the leaders whom you think will bring such a future for you ? Elect them then.
Reply:Go to www.mises.org. They'll enlighten you more.
family nanny
Is political Leadership a Myth ?
In this dreadful election season, many politicians have promised to "lead us into the future." I can hardly think of a worse fate for any society than to be led into the future by the political class of gangsters, marauders, looters, and liars. Even the most honest and well-intended among them are powerless to improve the world in any way except by diminishing rather than increasing their power.
Politicians haven't the capacity to lead whole societies anywhere. They are outclassed and outrun by trends in the world economy that are beyond the ability of the political class to control or direct. The market economy—globalized, enormously powerful, breathtaking in scope and breadth—is remaking the world in ways that far surpass any existing political development in the US, from the crafted blather of Congressional hearings on this or that to the mad rush to grab the presidential brass rings.
We are living through changes that may appear slow if observed from the point of view of the daily headlines, but which are momentously fast and completely transforming when looked at globally and from the point of view of years and decades into the future.
These developments are going to bring about surprising political shifts, profound upsets in rooted cultural assumptions, and an eventual and merciful end to the US imperium. These changes will touch everyone in ways that will be both stunning and glorious for average Americans, and deeply disturbing for the American regime that aspires to unchallenged global hegemony.
What is the underlying cause? The unleashing of human energies in nations that have been isolated, regimented, and closed for centuries. China, Malaysia, India, the countries of Latin America, and the new economies of Eastern Europe, among many others, are expanding at as much as twice the rate of American and European markets.
This is not only remaking their nations, but the way we perceive the geographical distribution of wealth and power. Over time, and extended far into the future, this trend is going to mean dramatic upheavals in the way Americans perceive their role in the world.
Within the institution of trade—whether on the most local level or the global level—we find the key to peace, prosperity, and human flourishing.
The people in these emerging countries, confronted with new economic opportunities, are making the fruits of their labors, assisted by investments by US firms, available to American consumers, driving down prices and driving up the quality of everyday goods and services consumed by Americans. This phenomenon has been the saving grace of the US economy for a decade, and, in the future, it will become integral to our very lives.
To get a glimpse of the change, take a tour of the local Wal-Mart, the largest company in the world, and take note of the stunning availability of a huge range of consumer goods at very low prices. Note too that such an array would be inconceivable without the work of international trade. From bicycles and electronics to foodstuffs and flowers, we find the shelves dominated by goods that were produced, in part or in whole, by countries outside US borders, and to this we owe the low prices and the quality that accords with US consumer preferences.
Now, Wal-Mart isn't on some campaign to become the leading importer; it is only looking to make available to consumers all the things they want at the lowest possible prices. Where they find these goods is outside the US, where we find ever more comparative advantages.
Every retailer in the world is taking notice of this fact, studying the case of Wal-Mart to see how and why it so quickly became the dominant player in the world economy. Its example of seeing both the wholesale and retail market as global in scope—all in the interest of consumer service—has taught the entire business class that nationalism and parochialism are losing propositions. The left may continue to rail against this company, and the right may continue to warn of its dangers to local culture and life, but the example is there for all to see. Average people love this company. It is all old-fashioned consumer service combined with a global reach to bring to average people things that improve their lot in life.
Wal-Mart may eventually go the way of so many companies, displaced by some other firm that knows how to do it even better. The point is the model from which it is working. It is a global model focused on the individual buyer, and it works its wonders by depending on the voluntary decisions of average people. The nation state as such plays no part in its calculus, and this has proven to be the winning ticket. So it will continue to be.
What about the economic impact? Is marketing all these wares to the world a danger? One might be initially alarmed by this, until one considers the savings to the consumer. For every dime saved in consumer prices, one more dime is made available for other pursuits, whether savings, consumption, or investment. It is this fact which is subsidizing American prosperity right now. Far from being a sign that America has lost its edge, it constitutes the world's gift to American consumers. The trade is mutually beneficial, producing winners on all sides, with the only losers being those American producers who can't seem to drive their costs down low enough to compete in the world marketplace. It is because of this, and despite the constant attempts by central banks to inflate the currency, that prices are continuing to fall for consumer goods.
People who have noted these trends say that we should panic that there won't be any jobs left for Americans to do. What this forgets is the reality of scarcity in the world, which implies that there are always and everywhere jobs to do because there are always and everywhere unmet needs. Specialization and the division of labor permits Americans to produce most efficiently in a way that is integral to world demand and not waste time and resources in jobs that can be done more cheaply elsewhere. This does indeed mean a change in world patterns of production, but the market will manage the change with minimum disruption, as it has for the last several hundred years.
For the developing world, it means something far more dramatic: a nearly complete abandonment of traditional economic pursuits that were imposed on them by virtue of their previous isolation from the capitalist West. The point is not that their economies are free or have been completely unleashed from the chains of the state. The US and Western Europe, in many respects, remain the most free economies. What matters here is the direction of change. Whereas the US and Europe are increasingly controlled, countries such as China, India, Romania, Poland, Thailand, and many others, are far less controlled than they once were.
This has unleashed pent-up human energies and made a fantastic difference in the ability of these people to integrate themselves into the worldwide division of labor. This has meant rising incomes, better diets, less starvation, less disease, better sanitation, falling infant mortality, much longer lifespans, and ever more economic opportunities for work and investment. The fate of these economies has two major links to that of American citizens: in their capacity as consumers, they have a strong interest in seeing it continue, and, as investors, many portfolios of US investors are heavily invested in these emerging economies.
The quality of life in these distant lands is increasing in ways that would have been unimaginable even a decade ago, with information technologies made available by the private sector coming into the hands of a new generation that relies on cell phones and high-speed web access, where their parents struggled barely to survive. The lifespan in China alone has risen from 25 years to 65 years in the course of a century. It also means more revenue for the governments of these countries, which, if driven to build up militaries to fend off US political influence, could eventually challenge the supremacy of the US in world public affairs.
Again, this is nothing to regret. A world dominated by a single superpower is a gravely dangerous place, especially when that power is irresponsibly managed (and, some would say, is managed by maniacs). A decline in the power, might, and influence of the US is not the same thing as a decline in America; quite the opposite. The only real downside is the transition: the US government may increasingly behave like a dying and rabid animal, posing a danger to its random victims. But once you hear the "thud" of the final fall, the world will be more peaceful and prosperous than ever before.
In the meantime, political trends in the US will become increasingly irrelevant, despite appearances. Until recently, Americans thought of themselves as a self-contained people with a nationally bound culture and economy that can be conceptualized and managed in the way that civics texts describe. This is on the verge of being impossible. The managerial class of the regime will continue to pose as experts and top-flight managers, but old assumptions about government are being shredded. Trends on this scale reduce the bellowing of politicians for protection to mere peeps.
There is a tendency on the part of everyone to judge a historical moment by our own daily affairs and in relation only to the headlines that dominate the news. Economic analysis takes a much broader view to consider the overall impact of billions of people in many lands over a long period of time. It is through examining these trends that we can see that we are entering into a new world of global economic expansion that will rout any attempt to keep it at bay. Now, clearly, this will not occur without periods of crisis, particularly so long as the world is on a dollar standard and governments are still at work bringing calamity wherever they can.
Take a look at where and how the products you use every day are made. Therein lies a remarkable story of the genius of entrepreneurship, the capacity for the world economy to manage itself and overcome ten thousand barriers, and the direction we are headed. It is a world in which consumers and producers from all nations can join hands in praise of the networks that draw them together, and against their common enemy: governments that would stand in the way.
To understand the world being recreated before us, we must constantly keep this principle in our mind: trade based on ownership is always and everywhere mutually beneficial. Within the institution of trade—whether on the most local level or the global level—we find the key to peace, prosperity, and human flourishing. If we understand this, we have no reason to fear our fate except to the extent that anyone anywhere dares to interfere. If we understand this, we can see why being led into the future by the political class is something we should neither desire nor expect.
_______________________________
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr
Is political Leadership a Myth ?
No. It is an oxymoron. Just like a quick question is in your world.
Reply:WOW. Nice little treatsie on government there.
Remember when Wal-mart only sold American Made items? Those were the good old days eh?
Reply:Rockwell, you really rock! Though I didn't have the patience and time to read your entire article (so how can I call this then?).
Even your existence is a myth, my dear friend. Am not getting philosophical. All that you describe in detail, just use it to analyze yourself as one of those leaders.
It is just like that oft quoted, zen allegories (However, there are controversies as to whether it really was a ZEN in origin). "A zen master saw a beautiful butterfly and thought how nice it would be if I were that butterfly. In a few moments, actually, he got transformed in to a butterfly. Then the fly thought which one is real, whether the fly was the master or the master the fly".
Is our existence a myth or myth the existence?
Reply:Your ideas are good and clear. I mostly agree about your economical ideas and others. Good job.
Reply:We've no one to blame for this situation but ourselves, as a society. In today's culture of "question authority," we not only see our elected officials as human, but blow even their smallest character flaws into monumental proportion. This applies to both sides of the aisle, but also extends well out of grasp.
We hear hundreds of stories about the parents of reprimanded kids raising a stink about how the teacher or coach treated their child, irregardless of the kid's actions? Teachers, it seems, are always to blame.
This constant berating of authority figures comes at a time when, alarmingly, many Americans are growing increasingly dependent on the government. A modern-day example is New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina. Not only did many residents feel the government owed them something, anything done to the contrary was corrupt, evil, etc.
What America needs is another Ronald Reagan. All his policies aside, Reagan was a take-no-prisoners leader who not only rekindled Americans' faith in themselves, but always stood by his decisions. Today's "leaders" seem more concerned with covering their butts and worrying about the next election.
When you're in the forest, being chased by a wolf, which would you want: a guide that wavers on which way to get out of the forest, or one who'll blaze a straight trail?
Politicians haven't the capacity to lead whole societies anywhere. They are outclassed and outrun by trends in the world economy that are beyond the ability of the political class to control or direct. The market economy—globalized, enormously powerful, breathtaking in scope and breadth—is remaking the world in ways that far surpass any existing political development in the US, from the crafted blather of Congressional hearings on this or that to the mad rush to grab the presidential brass rings.
We are living through changes that may appear slow if observed from the point of view of the daily headlines, but which are momentously fast and completely transforming when looked at globally and from the point of view of years and decades into the future.
These developments are going to bring about surprising political shifts, profound upsets in rooted cultural assumptions, and an eventual and merciful end to the US imperium. These changes will touch everyone in ways that will be both stunning and glorious for average Americans, and deeply disturbing for the American regime that aspires to unchallenged global hegemony.
What is the underlying cause? The unleashing of human energies in nations that have been isolated, regimented, and closed for centuries. China, Malaysia, India, the countries of Latin America, and the new economies of Eastern Europe, among many others, are expanding at as much as twice the rate of American and European markets.
This is not only remaking their nations, but the way we perceive the geographical distribution of wealth and power. Over time, and extended far into the future, this trend is going to mean dramatic upheavals in the way Americans perceive their role in the world.
Within the institution of trade—whether on the most local level or the global level—we find the key to peace, prosperity, and human flourishing.
The people in these emerging countries, confronted with new economic opportunities, are making the fruits of their labors, assisted by investments by US firms, available to American consumers, driving down prices and driving up the quality of everyday goods and services consumed by Americans. This phenomenon has been the saving grace of the US economy for a decade, and, in the future, it will become integral to our very lives.
To get a glimpse of the change, take a tour of the local Wal-Mart, the largest company in the world, and take note of the stunning availability of a huge range of consumer goods at very low prices. Note too that such an array would be inconceivable without the work of international trade. From bicycles and electronics to foodstuffs and flowers, we find the shelves dominated by goods that were produced, in part or in whole, by countries outside US borders, and to this we owe the low prices and the quality that accords with US consumer preferences.
Now, Wal-Mart isn't on some campaign to become the leading importer; it is only looking to make available to consumers all the things they want at the lowest possible prices. Where they find these goods is outside the US, where we find ever more comparative advantages.
Every retailer in the world is taking notice of this fact, studying the case of Wal-Mart to see how and why it so quickly became the dominant player in the world economy. Its example of seeing both the wholesale and retail market as global in scope—all in the interest of consumer service—has taught the entire business class that nationalism and parochialism are losing propositions. The left may continue to rail against this company, and the right may continue to warn of its dangers to local culture and life, but the example is there for all to see. Average people love this company. It is all old-fashioned consumer service combined with a global reach to bring to average people things that improve their lot in life.
Wal-Mart may eventually go the way of so many companies, displaced by some other firm that knows how to do it even better. The point is the model from which it is working. It is a global model focused on the individual buyer, and it works its wonders by depending on the voluntary decisions of average people. The nation state as such plays no part in its calculus, and this has proven to be the winning ticket. So it will continue to be.
What about the economic impact? Is marketing all these wares to the world a danger? One might be initially alarmed by this, until one considers the savings to the consumer. For every dime saved in consumer prices, one more dime is made available for other pursuits, whether savings, consumption, or investment. It is this fact which is subsidizing American prosperity right now. Far from being a sign that America has lost its edge, it constitutes the world's gift to American consumers. The trade is mutually beneficial, producing winners on all sides, with the only losers being those American producers who can't seem to drive their costs down low enough to compete in the world marketplace. It is because of this, and despite the constant attempts by central banks to inflate the currency, that prices are continuing to fall for consumer goods.
People who have noted these trends say that we should panic that there won't be any jobs left for Americans to do. What this forgets is the reality of scarcity in the world, which implies that there are always and everywhere jobs to do because there are always and everywhere unmet needs. Specialization and the division of labor permits Americans to produce most efficiently in a way that is integral to world demand and not waste time and resources in jobs that can be done more cheaply elsewhere. This does indeed mean a change in world patterns of production, but the market will manage the change with minimum disruption, as it has for the last several hundred years.
For the developing world, it means something far more dramatic: a nearly complete abandonment of traditional economic pursuits that were imposed on them by virtue of their previous isolation from the capitalist West. The point is not that their economies are free or have been completely unleashed from the chains of the state. The US and Western Europe, in many respects, remain the most free economies. What matters here is the direction of change. Whereas the US and Europe are increasingly controlled, countries such as China, India, Romania, Poland, Thailand, and many others, are far less controlled than they once were.
This has unleashed pent-up human energies and made a fantastic difference in the ability of these people to integrate themselves into the worldwide division of labor. This has meant rising incomes, better diets, less starvation, less disease, better sanitation, falling infant mortality, much longer lifespans, and ever more economic opportunities for work and investment. The fate of these economies has two major links to that of American citizens: in their capacity as consumers, they have a strong interest in seeing it continue, and, as investors, many portfolios of US investors are heavily invested in these emerging economies.
The quality of life in these distant lands is increasing in ways that would have been unimaginable even a decade ago, with information technologies made available by the private sector coming into the hands of a new generation that relies on cell phones and high-speed web access, where their parents struggled barely to survive. The lifespan in China alone has risen from 25 years to 65 years in the course of a century. It also means more revenue for the governments of these countries, which, if driven to build up militaries to fend off US political influence, could eventually challenge the supremacy of the US in world public affairs.
Again, this is nothing to regret. A world dominated by a single superpower is a gravely dangerous place, especially when that power is irresponsibly managed (and, some would say, is managed by maniacs). A decline in the power, might, and influence of the US is not the same thing as a decline in America; quite the opposite. The only real downside is the transition: the US government may increasingly behave like a dying and rabid animal, posing a danger to its random victims. But once you hear the "thud" of the final fall, the world will be more peaceful and prosperous than ever before.
In the meantime, political trends in the US will become increasingly irrelevant, despite appearances. Until recently, Americans thought of themselves as a self-contained people with a nationally bound culture and economy that can be conceptualized and managed in the way that civics texts describe. This is on the verge of being impossible. The managerial class of the regime will continue to pose as experts and top-flight managers, but old assumptions about government are being shredded. Trends on this scale reduce the bellowing of politicians for protection to mere peeps.
There is a tendency on the part of everyone to judge a historical moment by our own daily affairs and in relation only to the headlines that dominate the news. Economic analysis takes a much broader view to consider the overall impact of billions of people in many lands over a long period of time. It is through examining these trends that we can see that we are entering into a new world of global economic expansion that will rout any attempt to keep it at bay. Now, clearly, this will not occur without periods of crisis, particularly so long as the world is on a dollar standard and governments are still at work bringing calamity wherever they can.
Take a look at where and how the products you use every day are made. Therein lies a remarkable story of the genius of entrepreneurship, the capacity for the world economy to manage itself and overcome ten thousand barriers, and the direction we are headed. It is a world in which consumers and producers from all nations can join hands in praise of the networks that draw them together, and against their common enemy: governments that would stand in the way.
To understand the world being recreated before us, we must constantly keep this principle in our mind: trade based on ownership is always and everywhere mutually beneficial. Within the institution of trade—whether on the most local level or the global level—we find the key to peace, prosperity, and human flourishing. If we understand this, we have no reason to fear our fate except to the extent that anyone anywhere dares to interfere. If we understand this, we can see why being led into the future by the political class is something we should neither desire nor expect.
_______________________________
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr
Is political Leadership a Myth ?
No. It is an oxymoron. Just like a quick question is in your world.
Reply:WOW. Nice little treatsie on government there.
Remember when Wal-mart only sold American Made items? Those were the good old days eh?
Reply:Rockwell, you really rock! Though I didn't have the patience and time to read your entire article (so how can I call this then?).
Even your existence is a myth, my dear friend. Am not getting philosophical. All that you describe in detail, just use it to analyze yourself as one of those leaders.
It is just like that oft quoted, zen allegories (However, there are controversies as to whether it really was a ZEN in origin). "A zen master saw a beautiful butterfly and thought how nice it would be if I were that butterfly. In a few moments, actually, he got transformed in to a butterfly. Then the fly thought which one is real, whether the fly was the master or the master the fly".
Is our existence a myth or myth the existence?
Reply:Your ideas are good and clear. I mostly agree about your economical ideas and others. Good job.
Reply:We've no one to blame for this situation but ourselves, as a society. In today's culture of "question authority," we not only see our elected officials as human, but blow even their smallest character flaws into monumental proportion. This applies to both sides of the aisle, but also extends well out of grasp.
We hear hundreds of stories about the parents of reprimanded kids raising a stink about how the teacher or coach treated their child, irregardless of the kid's actions? Teachers, it seems, are always to blame.
This constant berating of authority figures comes at a time when, alarmingly, many Americans are growing increasingly dependent on the government. A modern-day example is New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina. Not only did many residents feel the government owed them something, anything done to the contrary was corrupt, evil, etc.
What America needs is another Ronald Reagan. All his policies aside, Reagan was a take-no-prisoners leader who not only rekindled Americans' faith in themselves, but always stood by his decisions. Today's "leaders" seem more concerned with covering their butts and worrying about the next election.
When you're in the forest, being chased by a wolf, which would you want: a guide that wavers on which way to get out of the forest, or one who'll blaze a straight trail?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)