Posted by: graemebird | July 9, 2009

Big Business Must Come From Small Business Success-No Exceptions: Homesteading And Resource Allocation.

Right. I’ll think about it. What we want to avoid is the ghastly consultants view of things. The consultants have only bigshot corporations as one wing of their client base. The other wing being blood-sucker-central. Hence our consultants have developed a concept of privatisation manifestly unfair and against the interests of the public. Although in many cases they could argue a slight utilitarian points decision over the former socialist run industry. They will call you a socialist if you question the particular FORM the privatisation takes.

One day I heard an extreme version of the consultants consensus on privatisation. This was with regards to Iraq in the early days of the war. One of the consultants was talking about what he reckoned was “best practice” with regards to privatising the oil. He reckoned you bundle it all together and have this almighty auction. Like a trillion dollar auction.

Note what this achieves. It leaves the government awash with cash which they will promptly waste. And since the auction bundles together so many resources it is only open to the deepest of pockets and therefore:

1. The price will be too low.

2. The winning bidder will now be up to his eyeballs in debt.

3. The government will fritter the money away in an almighty splurge of vote-buying, cronyism, corruption and in all likelihood violence.

4. Since the winning bidder will be in massive amounts of debt value will tend to gravitate to the deepest pockets around which is at the moment the Chinese communists.

This is what our neoclassical economists have arrived at as a result of all their thinking being skewed by their paymasters.

Note it was this sort of advice that really screwed around Russia after the fall of communism. Most of her large-scale industry wound up being auctioned off to a few Jewish blokes who were former black-marketeers. The pull of stolen money finance is a strong one. And so despite the manifest failure of this sort of resource allocation our consultants have not changed their minds one inch.

They always do things in such a way as to:

1. Get a massive lump sum for the politicians of the day to vote-buy, waste, and to defer the reality that the only right thing for these politicians to do is to close down a host of government departments.

2. Cut out small and middle sized businesses from the opportunities and just line the pockets of bigshots.

3. Leave a tangled mess of a market afterwards. A frankenstein market full of poorly stiched-together zombie-like companies. This is a market where ongoing consulting work can be virtually guaranteed.

See in this regard the absolute hash of how they handled the telstra privatisation. Now telstra has to be eternally arm-twisted into letting her competitors sub-let her network under reasonable arrangements. Only consultants could create such a tangled mess as to guide things to the impasse where your supplier is also your competitor.

And you know they hire their mates and build these Frankenstein companies. And then they wonder why the companies so built are not dynamic. After all they set up more than 3 competitors right? Several indeed. Enough numbers so we don’t have to call it names like “oligopoly”. Surely thats in accordance with the Frank Knight models right?

So not seeing that competitiveness must be in the DNA of the company……. Not seeing that big business ought to come out of small business success they then say GO FRANKY. Go franky. Get out there franky and compete.

And all franky does is sit there bleeding into his bandages and occasionally lifting up some pot or other and showering gold over himself.

This sort of problem is all over the world so much is the group-think of the consultants.

Its become so bad that Amy Chua, probably without knowing it, wrote a book that to my mind is really about the consequences of this sort of hobgoblin-skewed privatisation. This sort of privatisation just leads to a few elites taking over rigged markets, and sometimes they do so getting up to their eyeballs in so much debt that value is basically transferred to overseas interests.

Now I believe in privatisation. I think we ought to privatise a lot more. But we have to go for a sort of privatisation that is just a little bit more righteous. A little bit smarter. And one that leads to a functioning market…. A functioning market being one which creates noticeably better value-for-money each year thereafter.

And I believe in big business. But its gotsta-come from small business success and no exceptions.

So sea-steading and the like has to be done with this better thinking in mind. No vast auctions of large sea territory. Upfront trying to minimise usage of the sea bed and particularly the sea surface. Intensive improvement of a small area is what ought to give one ownership rights to be recorded, legally recognised, bought, sold, and borrowed against.

And we don’t have to have every last centimetre in private hands. Let the speedboats be free. Let the feral fish swim by in peace.

But we DO NEED to get started with this. Because one thing builds on another and you would want a lot of small business out at sea to more cheaply develop the vast resources that the oceans contain.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. It’s not that hard to understand, Graeme. There’s been a Right-wing rift between genuine supporters of liberty and self-determination on one hand, and crony capitalists, corporatists and globalists on the other.

    A section of the Right – the New World Order crowd – love big business, big government cartels and global cronyism. This leads them to support Communist China, Mexico, the UN, the World Bank and so on.

    Now many of the non-NWO Right have fallen into some bad habits, I agree. However, even so, they are still more likely to preserve liberty in the long run because at least under the nationalist scenario there won’t be Chinese agents roaming around and assassinating political dissidents, or UN “peacekeepers” patrolling the streets giving a veneer of legitimacy to the Han hegemon.

    If we can avert this scenario (which both the Left and the NWO Right support), we’ll still retain the ability to make some policy adjustments later on, within the context of a limited government, to brush up on the minor flaws of the initial Buchananist transition.

  2. The other point worth making is that both the Left and the Right have colluded in falsely labelling the NWO crony set as “free enterprise” or even “neo-liberal”, and the latter have been happy to acquiesce in that gross mislabelling.

  3. “A section of the Right – the New World Order crowd – love big business, big government cartels and global cronyism. This leads them to support Communist China, Mexico, the UN, the World Bank and so on.”

    Its just astonishing isn’t it. Sinclair and SOON are so in love with cronyism and big business alone, they reckon the Chinese communists ought to be able to nationalise all our gear.

    I think its pretty sick actually. I cannot understand where it comes from.

  4. It’s a love of globalisation for the sake of it. They don’t care who will be buying out who, be it public or private, just so long as there is internationalism involved. They would never have supported Ben Chifley’s banking bill, but if a subsidiary of a Chinese state bank wanted to take over our Big Four, the Catallaxy crowd would fall in line quick smart.

  5. Maybe they like the idea of a career path that goes from consulting to being a bigshot international captain of industry, without having to learn anything about business in the meantime.

  6. logged moderated posts:

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    This is a problem when we let these people get away with lying. Yesterday Cambria was lying and he was claiming that Lindzen disagreed with me about CO2-release being a positive externality.

    So having gotten away with this lie he’s now claiming that I am implying we ought to go to war on China, whereas all I said is that we ought not let the communists nationalise our resources.

    So one lot of lies rolls into the next. And somehow this nondescript wanker rog has decided to pile on. Better to come down on the lying up front.

    Chodorov
    13 Jul 09 at 2:53 am
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “Birdy, do the right thing, the man thing, and fuck off.”

    What would you know about doing the man thing. You are not a man mate. You are a bumsucking homo.

    Chodorov
    13 Jul 09 at 2:55 am
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Fucking hell. Whats going on here. Rog and Cambria being a couple of idiotic twats and you restricting my ability to hit back.

  7. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Well I’m afraid the two of you haven’t made a powerful argument for communist nationalisation of our gear. Let me know when you dummies figure something out. Let me know when Cambria figures out where this war-with-China mental explosion came from.

  8. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “Oh okay, Bird, so what should we do, go to war with China?”

    Is that your suggestion? It wasn’t my suggestion. Is it yours? My suggestion is that you learn to read. When you learn to read you will find out that my suggestion was:

    DON’T…. LET …… THE COMMUNISTS….. NATIONALISE ….. OUR ….. GEAR ….

    Do you or rog have a problem with that?

  9. Unbelievable. Cambrias stupidity just doesn’t bottom out. Here Cambria alleges that Obama ISN’T trashing the USD. Check his reasoning:

    “But you guys can see someone wrecking the USD,

    Is he?

    It would be a good thing if you applied facts instead of that fervid imagination of yours, Bird, you nimbus.

    The US/Dollar index which is a basket of numerous currencies against the US Dollar reached a low of 71.58 on March 14 2008.

    It’s now at this moment trading at 80.05 a full 12% higher. The low was made almost one year before he took office.

    So which dollar is he trashing, Bird, you Homernong.”

    People you just have to understand that Cambria really is a moron. You ought not be taking him seriously.

  10. Bird.

    You made a silly statement you can’t support and now you’re just lying in an attempt to back out. Fess up and man up, Bird, you homernong.

  11. What are you lying about now you dumb cunt? Shit. Can you not take a holiday from this bullshit? What particular idiocy of yours are you referring to this time.

    The idiocy where you reckon Obama ISN’T trashing the dollar since they are just getting through a financial contraction and its still doing alright?

    Or was it the lie where you press-ganged Lindzen into the picture having him claim that CO2 is a negative-externality when he’s never implied such a thing?

  12. I didn’t say that he’d ALREADY SUCCEEDED you stupid wog cunt. If thats what I was trying to communicate thats what I would have communicated. The environment was contractionary, or so it seemed, really quite recently.

    Why don’t you just attempt not to be an idiot? You used to be able to do that. Sometimes.

  13. Supposing I had wanted to say… “Hey look the USD seems to have taken a dive since Obama left office…..”

    Don’t you think I would have SAID THAT you stupid wog cunt, if that had been what I intended to say?

    No. Thats not what I wanted to say and so thats not what I said.

    I said he was trashing the dollar you fucking idiot. And he is most certainly trashing the USD.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: