Fundamental Concepts: Features and Benefits: Part 1

flag-united-states-industrial-power-national-america-american-industry-57691837Let’s get right into this, even divided into two posts, today and tomorrow it’s fairly long. But it really is fundamental, and why I support Ted Cruz, as well.

When people have a product or service that they want to sell you, they will spend an inordinate amount of time telling you about all the features that they offer. They think that this is a good thing, and it is; but what is important to the listener is not what features are offered, it’s how each of these features would benefit the user. […]

[…] I’d like to turn to something that Ted Cruz is doing in this campaign, and analyze how he needs to do it better. Cruz speaks about recreating the “Reagan coalition”, which is mostly code for getting the votes of blue collar workers. He needs their votes, because these people have been hammered by globalization and they are flocking to the pablum that Donald trump is peddling in droves. Cruz is in the ballpark, but he’s still out in left field talking about features (a very lawyerly thing to do). Reagan’s gift was that he was able to bring it home for voters by showing them the benefits of the policies he proposed. Ted needs to figure out how to do that. It might look something like this:

“I talk to Americans every day as I travel across this country trying to earn your vote for President, and I have to tell you that there is a common theme I hear coming from almost all of them: Economic uncertainty. America’s working men and women and women have been hammered by the last 7 years of Obama’s no-recovery recovery, and they’re nervous. Nervous that they might wake up one morning and find that the jobs they’ve been doing for decades are moving overseas. Nervous that they might not be able to feed their families and raise their kids in the environment that they aspire to. Nervous that even if their job doesn’t go overseas, they might be given to lower skilled workers with lower salaries. Nervous that they might even be forced to endure the indignity and insult of being required to train their replacements! You know what? Under the current administration, and under a Hillary administration, they’re right to be nervous; in fact, they should be downright terrified.

“So what will a Ted Cruz administration do differently? Well, first of all, of all of the candidates in the race, I’m the only one who is absolutely committed to building the wall and enforcing our existing immigration laws. You know, Donald Trump likes to tell you that he’s going to build the wall, the biggest, most luxurious wall the world has ever seen. Every time someone challenges him for details, he just roars “The wall just got higher!”. I think in Donald’s mind the wall reaches to Mars by now. What Donald also says, something that the media has taken great pains to hide, is that his wall also has a great big door in it, the biggest, most luxurious door you’ve ever seen. This is called ‘touchback’ amnesty and it’s about as stupid as it sounds. Would you build a dam with a great big hole in the middle of it? Of course you wouldn’t. Touchback amnesty makes about as much sense.

There’s more there, but that makes perfect sense, doesn’t it? And that is how you ethically sell something. You talk about the benefits to the purchaser. I can talk all day about how a $5 light switch is better than a 50¢ one is, but I’ll never sell one. But how about if I tell you (truthfully) that it will lower your light bill by $x per month and last your lifetime. Depending on which $5 switch we’re talking about, that’s entirely possible. That’s enough immigration, I think, but how about jobs moving overseas:

[…] American labor is expensive, and why shouldn’t it be? American workers produce the highest quality goods in the world. There is a reason that “Made in America” means something around the world. If you want quality work, you have to pay for it, and honestly, would we want it any other way? The dream of America has always been that this is a place where you can work hard and make a good living, leaving your kids better off than you were when you started. My father came to this country and worked washing dishes for $.50 an hour, and now his son is running for president. Is this a great country or what? We have to preserve the American Dream for ourselves and ensure that it will still be there for our children.

“What you’re missing, however, is that labor is only part of the picture. There are many reasons for a company to decide to locate itself in any given location, but there are five big ones: Stability, infrastructure, energy cost, labor and regulatory expense. The United States of America has an unquestioned advantage over the rest of the world in the first three categories.

“Stability: Ask any businessman what the foundation of running a successful business is, and he’ll tell you it’s the ability to reasonably project what the future will bring. The United States has been a free market republic, based upon rule of law, for 240 years. If you were starting a business, would you do it in Venezuela? Labor costs are dirt cheep down there, nobody has a job, but anyone who tries to build something immediately has it taken away from them by the government. I’d stay here if I were you.

I highly recommend that you read it all™ at Fundamental Concepts: Features and Benefits [Weirddave].

Emphasis mine.

Here is the reason, why first Britain and then America became and continue as economic superpowers, especially the rule of law. That means that your company will not be seized by the government (unless you break the law). When did Britain start to slide into mediocrity as an industrial power? After World War Two when the Labor Government began and continued nationalizing whole industries, like steel, railroads, and health care. When did it start recovering? When  Maggie Thatcher privatized industries. The market is always, always more efficient than the government. More honest too, when it is let alone.

That’s likely enough for today, we’ll continue tomorrow.

Government Flutters Its Wings – and Destroying the Nation, One City at a Time.

Portrait of Sir John Sinclair

Portrait of Sir John Sinclair (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Over at RedState yesterday, Seton Motley has an article about how the Democrats are using chaos theory to destroy industry after industry, and I’ll add that they are doing so with at the least Republican acquiescence. It’s a sad story of the corruption (and weakening) of the Republic, but it is not a new one, it goes back to Teddy Roosevelt and Wilson, but picked up a lot of speed with Franklin Roosevelt, and even more with Johnson. Now it is getting to the end game, and either we do something about it or the dream ends, I think. Here’s a bit.

Government Flutters Its Wings – and Industries Nationwide Are Blown Away

A Leftist governmental principle is the Butterfly Effect: “A property of chaotic systems…by which small changes in initial conditions can lead to large-scale and unpredictable variation in the future state of the system.”

The Butterfly Effect is also known as Chaos Theory: “The field of study in mathematics that studies the behavior and condition of dynamical systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions.”

In layman’s terms: “It has been said that something as small as the flutter of a butterfly’s wing can ultimately cause a typhoon halfway around the world.”

Leftists use government – to create private sector chaos. Even the tiniest of new laws or regulations send huge shockwaves throughout the economy. Leftists increasingly flap government’s wings – to further amp up the private sector typhoon.

No administration has marshaled more winged creatures – than has the Barack Obama Administration. And don’t think butterflies – think dragons. The resulting, ramped up economic typhoon has been devastating. Sector after sector has been consumed by the storm.

For instance, pre-President Obama said “If someone wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can – it’s just that it’ll bankrupt them.” Mission being accomplished: “Obama’s policies have ‘helped spur the closing of dozens of coal plants across the country,’ according to Politico. The November 2015 report states: ‘More than one in five coal-related jobs have disappeared during Obama’s presidency, and several major U.S. coal mining companies have announced this year that they would or may soon seek bankruptcy protection.’”

And believe me – you do not want to be a farmer in the Age of Obama.

It was already awful four years ago. EPA Regulations Suffocating U.S. Agriculture: “The Environmental Protection Agency has set in motion a significant number of new regulations that will significantly change the face of agriculture.

via Government Flutters Its Wings – and Industries Nationwide Are Blown Away | RedState.

Yep, and don’t think it’s limited to business, which farming is, it has repercussions in many people’s lives, especially the poor, and downtrodden amongst us. Bill Whittle covered that better than I can here, in his Death by Democrats:

Adam Smith did indeed write to Sir John Sinclair with regard to the news of Burgoyne’s surrender at Saratoga that:

“There is a great deal of ruin in a nation”

And that may save us yet if we put our shoulders to the wheel, but the hour grows later and later.

America’s Ruling Class vs. All

Mad as hellThis is the absolute truth, and not only at the Washington level. Whenever you see a man (or woman) who has grown fat and prosperous in a government (or elective) job, you have found corruption. If we do not roll it back, it will be the cause of the end of the Republic.

Sitting back and observing the current civil war happening within the Republican party should come as no surprise to anyone who resides outside the beltway of Washington, D.C. Pundits, thinkers, writers, and radio hosts who I once admired, have now lost credibility as they have bestowed upon themselves the bastion of what is and isn’t “true conservatism”. Yet, while the civil war wages within the party, the party itself does a disservice to this nation for fighting the wrong battle at the wrong time as the war for the heart of this country wages on.

To myself, this has always been the main issue in regards to the Republicans. For far too long they’ve fought for the soul of conservatism as they’d like it to be, but not for the soul of the nation as it truly is. I highly doubt that the very pundits, thinkers, writers, and hosts whom I’ve come to follow are malevolent in their intent for overlooking this point but I have come to realize that they’ve overlooked it completely. I find it flat out astounding that they fail to recognize the zeitgeist of the times as America has reached a point in which the majority of the voters not only couldn’t give a damn about what is and isn’t conservatism, but have no idea what the word even means. Why? Because year after year, representative after representative, and election after election the elites within the Republican establishment repeatedly betray their constituency as they immediately capitulate on their promises.

Each time a Republican, supporting conservative principles, promising to fight once elected into office, gets elected and then turns on those very principles, it damages the cause of conservatism. […]

The latter, those so covetous of power that they’ve abandoned all principle for the sake of power is what I’d define as America’s ruling class. Our ruling class’s agenda is power for itself.

via America’s Ruling Class vs. All – Politically Short.

And you know, Americans are not really that stupid. Even the ones that don’t really understand what is going on, know that something has changed, and they no longer have the upward path their parents did. I have friends that are ready to jump ship to places like the Philippines that are corrupt, but honestly corrupt. I’m too old to start over yet again, and I’m stubborn, so I’m staying, but I’m increasingly understanding what they are saying, and yes, I’m sympathetic.

I think it is what also drives the “Let it Burn” meme that we hear so much. It’s time to turn it around, not just manage the decline.

Are Low Oil Prices Good or Bad? Yes

0621_WTIC_Crude_Oil_Prices_Per_Barrel_HistoryIt seems that oil prices, like climate temperatures, are an all-purpose villain, when they go up they hurt the economy, and when they go down, they hurt the economy, and when they stay put, they are a drag on the economy. Steven Hayward had something to say about it yesterday.

There’s just no pleasing some people.

When oil and gasoline prices at the pump are high, liberals (and Bill O’Reilly) complain that the oil companies are gouging us, even though certified enlightened opinion among environmentalists is that cheap oil and fuel prices are bad because it encourages consumption and makes it harder for their (subsidized) renewable energy unicorns to compete in the marketplace. I still have somewhere the New York Times headline from 1991, the second-to-last time oil prices were this low, that read “Low Oil Prices Are Bad, Some U.S. Experts Say.”

“Experts” would say that. That’s why they’re experts. (Or “top men,” as they’re rightly called in Raiders of the Lost Ark.)

But there is a bit more to the story, that you likely haven’t heard.

Six Years Later, 93% of U.S. Counties Haven’t Recovered From Recession, Study Finds

More than six years after the economic expansion began, 93% of counties in the U.S. have failed to fully recover from the blow they suffered during the recession.

Nationwide, 214 counties, or 7% of 3,069, had recovered last year to prerecession levels on four indicators: total employment, the unemployment rate, size of the economy and home values, a study from the National Association of Counties released Tuesday found. . .

via Are Low Oil Prices Good or Bad? Yes | Power Line.

As Steve noted, it’s remarkable that Obama hasn’t told us about that, isn’t it?

Save the planet…from Barack Obama

w704 (4)Well, Obama is back from wasting, however much energy he could in his jaunt to Paris and back, to make an interminable, wasted, and wrong speech on something that no one in the world care about much, unless one is a crony-green-capitalist.

Have you noticed, as I have, that nearly every one of those bleating on (and on, and on) about global cooling global warming climate change. That’s right they stand to benefit, in money or power (and don’t kid yourself, money and power can easily be turned into each other) from the money that government steals from its citizens to fund these boondoggles.

And don’t kid yourself, they don’t give even a smidgen of a damn about anybody but themselves. Because who these policies will hurt more than anyone is the poor, in unaffordable energy, lack of jobs, lack of opportunity, and, yes, loss of liberty, as well.

If they have not taken it already, Obama’s actions and inactions portend an enormous human toll with adverse environmental consequences thrown in for good measure. Yet Obama is in Cloud Cuckooland (White House transcript here, video below) talking about imaginary catastrophes in a far-off future:

The reason is because [sic] this one trend — climate change — affects all trends. If we let the world keep warming as fast as it is, and sea levels rising as fast as they are, and weather patterns keep shifting in more unexpected ways — then before long, we are going to have to devote more and more and more of our economic and military resources not to growing opportunity for our people, but to adapting to the various consequences of a changing planet. This is an economic and security imperative that we have to tackle now. And great nations can handle a lot at once.

Obama takes his cue from Book 3 of Gulliver’s Travels, devoting himself to undoing what the scientists of Laputa sought to do. The scientist of Laputa sought to extract sunbeams from cucumbers. Obama would force sunbeams back into the cucumber — to mitigate the phenomenon formerly known as global warming. Swift! thou shouldst be living at this hour. But this might be beyond the powers of the greatest satirist ever to write in English:

You go down to Miami, and when it’s flooding at high tide on a sunny day fish are swimming through the middle of the streets.

Source: Save the planet…from Barack Obama | Power Line

Matt Ridley writing in The Spectator adds this:

The next generation is watching, Barack Obama told the Paris climate conference this week: ‘Our grandchildren, when they look back and see what we did in Paris, they can take pride in what we did.’ And that, surely, is the trouble with the entire climate-change agenda: putting the interests of rich people’s grandchildren ahead of those of poor people today.

Unfair? Not really, when you look at the policies enacted in the name of mitigating climate change. We’ve diverted 40 per cent of America’s maize crop to feeding cars instead of people, thus driving up the price of food worldwide, a move which according to one study killed about 192,000 poor people in 2010 alone, and continues to affect nutrition worldwide. We’ve restricted aid funding for fossil-fuelled power stations in developing countries, leaving many people who would otherwise have had access to electricity mired in darkness and cooking over wood-fires — the biggest environmental cause of ill health, responsible for more than three million deaths every year.

Closer to home, by pushing up energy prices with climate policies, we’ve contributed to the loss of jobs of steelworkers in Redcar and Scunthorpe, and of aluminium workers in Northumberland (where I live and where coal from under my land has supplied the now-closed Lynemouth smelter — whose power station announced this week that it will reopen as a ‘biomass’ plant, that is to say burning wood from American forests, producing more carbon dioxide per unit of energy and at twice the price of coal). We’ve also worsened fuel poverty among the poor and elderly and we’ve damaged air quality in cities. These human costs are not imaginary or theoretical: they are real.

Source: The green blob: who will protect the victims of environmentalism?

The thing is, if we are worried about people going hungry, we could run American cars without burning forty percent of our corn crop in the fuel, gasoline would be cheaper as well, although I grant that Iowa farmers might get a bit less welfare.

On the other hand, Allen Brooks, writing on www.masterresource.org reminds us:

“The earth is greener. Terrestrial ecosystems’ productivity is up 14% since 1982. Even the IPCC has acknowledged that productivity is 5% greater than that experienced during pre-industrial times. What this has meant is a significant increase in human well-being.”

“Until the movement shifts away from its witch-hunting approach to debate, the climate change believers look increasingly like the mobs that over-ran the Bastille during the French Revolution. I’m sure some of the climate change believers would be happy to see the guillotine resurrected in the Place de la Concorde (formerly Place Louis XV and then Place de la Revolution) and used against deniers and doubters. Maybe it is fitting that COP21 is being held in Paris.”

In the face of the impending COP21 conference, a new report authored by Indur Goklany for the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), CARBON DIOXIDE The good news, was published. It reminds one and all that carbon dioxide (CO2), the major manmade greenhouse gas, is not a pollutant but a positive part of the biosphere.

After reading (a lot) about it, and applying my common sense, I have reached my conclusion

It’s a Scam; and nothing else.

Many people have (and will) get rich of off government largesse, and the people (the ones who have to work for a living) will, as always, be the losers.

Even Piers Corbyn (Jeremy’s brother) has figured that out.

God bless fracking! and Teaching our History

Look at this – Hard.

The environmentalists and the left and the Democrats1 would have us believe that fracking is evil, evil, evil! but I, as a working man, sure have seen the benefits. The chart shows what I had to pay for heating oil last winter, in Jim Thorpe, Pennsylvania, compared with what I paid for a delivery on Wednesday.

The great increase in domestic oil production, coupled with OPEC’s decisions to not cut production, has driven the price of oil down, and that’s a real benefit to working families in the northeast.

Source: God bless fracking! | The First Street Journal.

Now tell me again why you oppose this safe method of obtaining oil, which is even environmentally friendly!


 

We talk a good bit here about education, and we try to do more than ‘scream and shout’ but look at things that don’t work, or might, or do. Well, you all know how much I love history, and how horribly it’s taught these days. Suzannah Lipscomb talks about it a fair amount as well, and with a far better grounding than I have. Here’s a bit of her latest.

On the eve of the invasion of Iraq, in July 2003, Tony Blair told the US Congress: ‘There has never been a time when … a study of history provides so little instruction for our present day.’ The aftermath proved how wrong this hubristic judgment was and it is a sentiment that few in the public eye would dare to voice today.

[…]

Much of the concern about the curriculum hinged on a perceived choice: that versions of history must either tell a traditional story of the great and the good, a national narrative of Whiggish heroes, or, by incorporating the histories of women and racial, religious and ethnic diversity, they will tell a politically motivated history that fragments our treatment of the past. My colleague, Oliver Ayers, reminds me that much the same discussion was had in the US in the 1990s, resulting in an all-out cultural war.

Both in the US and the UK it is and was a false dichotomy. First, there need not be anything intrinsically wrong with telling a nation’s history as part of the curriculum. As Simon Schama pointed out in 2013, there is value in preserving a national memory of our ‘imagined community’, but the narrative cannot be uncritical. Second, it is ahistorical to suggest that these two stories can be extricated from each other. Any intellectually robust tour of British history requires consideration of the ongoing interactions between Britain and the world and must incorporate local histories that will bring those global communications home.

Source: An adult education

That’s important, I think. We need some kind of balance, both in how we present our history (especially to our kids), we aren’t, and never were, perfect, but you know, we were and are pretty damn good at that. And it’s inexcusable to me to leave out other things, or exclude whole groups of people.

%d bloggers like this: