REITS: How Cops Teachers Firefighter Pensions Get Robbed

The low hanging fruit to be plucked in a downturn is the pensions of the public service workers.  Here is how it goes.  First, this is paid article placement, in the Washington Post:

Maybe that’s why so many retirement plans—like those for teachers, firefighters, and more—use REITs as part of their investment strategy. In fact, you may be invested in REITs right now through your retirement plan and not even know it.
For America, REITs have helped revitalize both large and small downtowns and redeveloped old and new suburbs across the country, and helped foster innovation in communications, health care and more.

As I noted here, investment advisors flog reits to the public service workers.

Now, when all that ex nihilo credit is directed to build a pointless mall, such as this $190 million mall built in 2005 (last in, first out?) and the debt cannot be serviced, what happens?

The 1.1 million square foot mall, once valued at $190 million after being opened in 2005, sold at a foreclosure auction this morning for $100 (yes, not million...just $100).  According to CBS Pittsburgh, the mall was purchased by its lender, Wells Fargo, which credit bid it's $143 million loan balance, which was originated in 2006, to acquire the property.

So Wells Fargo, which has a license to create ex nihilo credit, did so to the tune of $143 mil way back when, and are still owed, under capitalism.  So they "bid" their $143 mil debt paper, plus another one hundred dollars, and won the auction.

Well, so what, now they have a money losing property on their hands. It appraised for 11 million last summer.  The mall itself is a waste. What did they win?

They own the leases on the 55% of the mall that is occupied.  Then there is this:

So it's probably safe to keep buying those mall REITs...afterall those 3% dividend yields are amazing alternatives to Treasuries and you're basically taking the same risk...assuming you overlook the billions of property-level debt that ranks senior to your equity position. 

They tap into the equity funneled into the projects by the REITS, and Wells Fargo has first call on that now.  Your pension moves over to the bank, you get ...well... nothing.

The hegemon is stage managing the economy until the fall of 2017, when the Trump regime is well-settled, and then comes the big crash, and with that the Donald has the team and time to manage the economic correction necessary for regime maintenance.

Who pays for the excesses of the ex nihilo credit regime?  Check your 401K to see how much you'll be charged.

Better start a business.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Export Food Small Business Start-up

This is why, in addition to my general small business international trade start-up courses I teach a a specific class on food export.  The information offered everywhere except from me is not only bad, it is downright harmful.  The harm in these articles is people contemplating export expansion say "If that is what it takes, then I cannot do it." Well, what is described in the article is not what it takes. What is described in the article is a whole lotta waste.  The way it is done worldwide is not at all like this article describes.

Someone has to present what really happens in small business international trade.

This article is an example, and start out with a claim that is rather wrong.

While food giants such as P&G, Nestle and Unilever have long operated with a global footprint, it’s only recently that small- to mid-sized companies have been able to effectively tackle these markets.

Small businesses have been exporting food from the United States all along, nothing has changed in recent years, the tools tactics and attitude necessary have been there all along.  Yet the story will tell us about a "pioneer" in this field.

One of those food retail pioneers is Kontos Foods, a mid-sized New Jersey-based manufacturer and distributor of traditional artisan breads and Mediterranean specialty foods. A little over three years ago Kontos began a vigorous overseas expansion program, and now ships its products globally, to a wide range of locations, including Singapore, Indonesia, the Caribbean, Panama, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and Dubai.

I've never heard of Kontos Foods, and I am sure they are a fine company.  But what bothers me with these perennial articles telling us about "pioneers" is they never mention cost/benefit...  I can get sales into all of those countries pretty quick too...  at a cost.  The trick is to have sales and maintain a profit, at least as good as what you would have if you expanded domestically.  If Kontos is New Jersey based, then export orders ought to be no more difficult (or costly to acquire) and every bit as profitable as a domestic sale.  And alongside testing the overseas market, one would be obliged to test expanding domestically to compare with the overseas opportunities.

Now, recall the opening false claim that biggies like Nestle and Unilever were the only possible players before.  And who is making this claim?

Before Kontos, I worked at Unilever and my colleague, Kontos Foods’ Global Sales Director Doug Werts, is formerly of Nestle. Combined, we’ve lived and worked in different markets around the world, including the Netherlands, Brazil, and the U.K.
At Unilever, for instance, I spent significant time and resources building market share in Europe and South America. Those experiences, along with our current Kontos research about consumer shopping habits, provided us with the deep consumer insight we needed to target the right products and packaging to shoppers.

So to help a small or mid-sized company break into export markets, the process is the same as for Unilever and Nestle?  This is an internal contradiction: "nothing has changed, things are now different."

Now notice the valentine-to-self slipped in there, "my experience and my time spent on the Kontos dime travelling gives ME deep consumer insights."  Bull$#!+.  Since valid and reliable market information costs tens of millions, any other "experience or insight" is mere anecdote, and the plural of anecdote is not science.  There is a way to test market with spending tens of millions, and getting solid results.  It is search and learn, a process where you discover customers not otherwise discoverable.  But the tool tactic and attitude is utterly contrary to all of the elements this article proffers.  In short:

1. The tool - LCL MOQ FOB ...  if you have specialty, overseas buyers are looking to test this in their market.  They want and need that smallest order rational, not the largest order possible.  They want a pallet load to test, not a 40' container. It is FOB because you will be prepaid before anything rolls out of your warehouse destined for overseas.

2. The tactic:  Your export offer is one-size fits the entire world.  You ship overseas what you ship domestically. All "localization" for the export market is up to the importer overseas.  No good deed goes unpunished, so you never help your buyer by doing localization.  Recall we are talking a one pallet load shipment, and as a tst possibly several of these in sequence.  Why would you foot the cost of "localization" for a test order, in which most test will come up nil?  Don' worry, your importer overseas knows how to localize on the spot if necessary.  I am also an importer, and have had to "localize' many shipments on the spot in which customs has found fault.  it's a small shipment, no sweat.

3.  The attitude:  I came here to sell, why are you here?  At the trade shows, every buyer ought to place an order for your LCL MOQ FOB.  If not, why not?  If the person you are speaking to is not a buyer, end the conversation and move on to a buyer.  If the buyer says no to your one-size-fits-all worldwide offer, then find out why not.  Start a matrix of objections to see if any changes wold be worthwhile in your offer.  This is science, something sorely lacking among those who go to trade shows happy to settle for "trade leads."

What exporting gets down to is a test of the product by the importer overseas to whom you sell.  This article has a lot of moving parts, but bottom line is you find an importer overseas who wants to test your product.  On the one hand all of the rigamarole laid out in this article nets no advantage, and on the other hand you can achieve the same results with none of the rigamarole.

Then on this this:

The problem, however, is that overseas research isn’t cheap: Attending one trade show could cost upwards of $15,000-$20,000. There are nonprofit and government programs to help assist with companies as a means of trying to boost overseas trade. We found FoodExport NorthEast, a non-profit organization that supports international commerce. The organization is designed to help American food and beverage manufacturers attendforeign trade shows, connect with potential customers and learn about consumer trends.

Sigh. It could cost that much, but you can achieve the same results at a fraction of the cost.  Here is the funny thing, it could cost that much if you take the help those orgs offer, because their help is in the form of rebating half your costs if you do things their way, which "could cost upwards of $15 -20K..."

OK, so you spend $15,000 on a trade show and get $7500 back.  And their way is not the optimal way.  And I can do an optimal version the same thing all in for about $5000.   Now what kind of leverage is it when you net net you spent too much to do largely the wrong thing?

With the assistance of FoodExport, we started hitting the global trade-show circuit. They provide exploratory tours to help retailers discover whether a particular market is right for them. These tours offer crucial learning time, where retailers, manufacturers and distributors can quickly learn which regions are worth pursuing. When you’re on one of these tours, I recommend maximizing every minute of your research gathering.
For instance, while in Shanghai for a trade show tour, I learned that people in Northern China prefer bread much more so than their southern countrymen. This helped steer Kontos’ sales efforts to the correct part of the country, saving time and money.  

Any any Chinese food importer would already know this.  Why not just find a competent Chinese importer and have them test your product and provide feedback?  If and when something developes, then you might go visit China.  All this travel and time is expensive.

The international export business is on an upward trajectory. If you plan to join in on an overseas expansion program, gather an experienced team, do your homework and get your passport ready. People are now enjoying Kontos flatbread in Bahrain, Singapore, South Korea, Saudi Arabia and Dubai. Who would have dreamed that three years ago?

As I started out this post asking, where is the cost benefit, I am pretty sure Kontos has gone well into the hole getting those export orders.  The question is when, if ever, it will proven to have been profitable.  For overseas expansion, you need no more talent than a good Freight Forwarder and a solid importer, who may be discovered without ever leaving your office.

Because these articles claiming "small businesses can export just like Nestle now" have been coming out the last 40 years, I offer a corrective course.  No nonsense, the tool, tactic and attitude to find export business no more difficult and every bit as profitable, from the first sale and onward.  You may read about the course here, and enroll now and pay later at the same site.

Tuesday 1/24 - 2/14/2017   Four Sessions

Section One ~ 6 PM to 7 PM Pacific Time

(This would be 7 PM to 8 PM Mountain, 8 PM to 9 PM Central, 9 PM to 10 PM Eastern)

This work can be done either as a proprietor producing food, or an agent representing a food producer.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Trump Victory: Cleaning the Stables

As I have said, the real problem is when Trump delivers no improvements.  A productive core in the USA got Obama elected, hoping for change from the warmongering Bailout Bushes.  They got burned by Obama. That same core that got Obama elected just elected Trump.  There will be trouble when yet again there is no change.

The hegemon does seem to be interested in reining in the intel world, an out-of-hand independent nation causes havoc to the Hegemon.  Just as the donors to the Cinton foundation, such as the people in the Norway government who donated a half billion to them for personal advantage, a whole lotta payback goin' on.

Here is an interesting example:

Mr Steele, who friends say fears for his safety, has gone into hiding while the veracity of the claims made in his dossier, and his own reputation, continue to be fiercely debated.

Forget the specifics of his story.  Although as a secret agent, he was unlikely to be much of a secret to the "enemy, " now that he has been officially outed, his network of contacts and beneficiaries worldwide are now in trouble.

Think about the lesson here, share info with the FBI or USA intel, and your life is in danger.

After 9-11 800 new "intelligence" agencies were created, along with the "full employment act" TSA. USA can afford neither, both in money and counterproductive results.  Before the necessary crackdown on USA, in USA, any possible rogue agencies must be eliminated.

We will all cheer this process of elimination, the collectivization of intel in USA.  Like he Ukrainians who cheered both the Soviet overthrow of the Tsar and the nazi overthrow of the Soviets.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Entrepreneurs Do Not Take Risks

When I first read that back in the mid-1980s, written by Drucker, I was astonished.  How could he say such a thing?  All I ever heard was entrepreneurs and risk were one of the same.  Then I began to reflect on what I had learned so far in business, and realized he was correct. Everyone with whom I was familiar and was successful never took risks, they worked to eliminate risks in the business process. Entrepreneurs do not take risks.

So how come we all hear "entrepreneurs take risks"?  At the risk of achieving sic passim, believe it or not the idea only got started with, guess what, ex nihilo credit in the 1970s.  How come?   Well, once you set up an ex nihilo credit regime, there is no rational limit to what can be lent, because literally nothing is being lent.  Only debt is being agreed to...  well, with a limitless supply of debt on offer, at zero cost to the lenders, well, how do you lend all of it out?

First you must socially condition people to borrow more than they need, and to do so you must overcome their natural prudence and common human sympathies.  What worked was to socially condition through media, schools, entertainment and government the idea that entrepreneurs take risks.  Borrowing from banks (who had "risk capital") was step one in an entrepreneurs saga.

According to Merriam Webster, the term "risk capital" first shows up in 1944.  Since business start-up has been around since Cain settled down after bumping off Abel, is it not a little odd the idea of "risk capital' does not show up until 1944?  These are early abuses of the term, and meanings change as people grab an emerging use to apply to an urgent need.

Let's look at some etymologies -

risk (n.) 

1660s, risque, from French risque (16c.), from Italian risco, riscio (modern rischio), from riscare "run into danger," of uncertain origin. The Englished spelling first recorded 1728. Spanish riesgo and German Risiko are Italian loan-words. With run (v.) from 1660s. Risk aversion is recorded from 1942; risk factor from 1906; risk management from 1963; risk taker from 1892.

So the word risk itself is fairly new, in light of how long we've been doing business on earth.

risk (v.) 

1680s, from risk (n.), or from French risquer, from Italian riscare, rischaire, from the noun. Related: Risked;risks; risking.

Etymology[edit]

From earlier risque, from Middle French risque, from Italian risco ("risk"; > Modern Italian rischio) andrischiare ("to run into danger"). Most dictionaries consider the etymology of these Italian terms uncertain, but some suggest they perhaps come from Latin *resicum ‎(“that which cuts, rock, crag”) (> Medieval Latinresicu), from Latin resecō ‎(“cut off, loose, curtail”, verb), in the sense of that which is a danger to boating or shipping; or from Ancient Greek ῥιζικόν ‎(rhizikón, “root, radical, hazard”).

A few dictionaries express more certainty. Collins says the Italian risco comes from Ancient Greek ῥίζα‎(rhíza, “cliff”) due to the hazards of sailing along rocky coasts. The American Heritage says it probably comes from Byzantine Greek ῥιζικό, ριζικό ‎(rhizikó, rizikó, “sustenance obtained by a soldier through his own initiative, fortune”), from Arabic رِزْق ‎(rizq, “sustenance, that which God allots”), from Syriac [script needed]‎(ruziqā, “daily bread”), from Middle Persian [script needed] ‎(rōčig), from Middle Persian [script needed] ‎(rōč,“day”), from Old Persian [script needed] ‎(*raučah-), from Proto-Indo-European *lewk-.

Cognate with Spanish riesgo, Portuguese risco

The word is a good one, but notice it has more to do with logistics than with business dealings; as to the soldier taking risks, well, war is hardly business, and from the beginning soldiers have had to over run their opponents to gain the necessities to fight.  Rebels assault the armory.  Again an ancient idea, but not business, not trade.  In logistics, oh yes indeed, there are risks, but here again, and expressly, entrepreneurs since the Phoenicians ruled the waves have mitigated risks.  Marine insurance is arguably charity, not insurance, since those whose goods go overboard are made whole by those whose goods did not, thus arguably even halal, especially since the relationship ends with the docking of the vessel.

More here...

So to move from risk in logistics, the problems of time space and matter and botlenecks, and move the idea over to human action took some doing.  But they did it.  How?  Social conditioning, just like today when your smart phone tells you what to think, what to like, where to go, what to do.  (Yesterday a cabbie became perplexed when google maps told him to go one way, and Garmin another...)

Check this bit of research out...

A look at Google Ngram – a search engine tool that allows you to see how often a given word is used across books, newspapers and magazines through time – shows that the usage of “Risk” was fairly stagnant from 1800 to the early 1960s. The frequency with which it appeared during this 160 year stretch ran from 0.002% to 0.004%, about as often as words like “Poverty” or “dog”. Starting in 1970, however, “Risk” became a hot topic. The frequency of its usage increased by over 3.5x, peaking in 2006 at 0.015%. That may not sound like a lot, but the word “Risk” now appears in print four times more often in English-language press than the word “Weather”, according to Ngram. And you know how popular the weather is…Source:Nicholas Colas, chief market strategist at Convergex, a global brokerage company based in New York.Full Disclosure: Nothing on this site should ever be considered to be advice, research or an invitation to buy or sell any securities, please see my Terms & Conditions page for a full disclaimer.

Well, there it is.  After 1971, when Nixon went off the gold standard (lite), the hegemon got to work flogging the idea of risk as central to business.  We've always had fake news and state controlled press, and they did their work.  A term normally associated with logistics is hijacked and applied to human action, business, in order to get their cannon fodder to soak up as much of this ex nihilo credit as possible, and enslave them.

Terms do not just show up universally adopted one day.  They need time to incubate.  You can study such incubation of any given word at the Oxford English Dictionary site, and see how at high levels (academia) the idea of risk and investment begins to emerge even 100 years ago or more, with the dates and works in which a term was used.  This demonstrates how slowly a critical mass forms as more an more people address the idea in their own works.  Certainly before Nixon's move there were people referring to risk in investing.  There had also began the implicit criticism of NOT taking risks, with the term risk-averse first showing up in 1961, and the illiterate version of risk-adverse showing up in 1969.

Just as it takes time for a term to solidify, and the idea behind it, it takes time for the idea to have its intended effect.  The point of misinforming entrepreneurs was to get them to take risk in the form of borrowing ex nihilo credit.  Although it was in 1971 that Nixon made lending ex nihilo credit lending possible, bankers needed proof this would not backfire on them.  Two entities that massively borrowed ex nihilo credit when Nixon changed the rules, Chrysler and Penn Central, went bankrupt, Uncle Sam bailed them out.  Bankers then understood.  In the ex nihilo credit regime, profits are privatized and the losses are socialized.  All that was left was how to carry ex nihilo credit loans on the books?

I have in hand a 1983 seminar manual for bankers, "conducted throughout the country", in which bankers are instructed to lend credit instead of money.  (Note bankers know the difference, even if you are not allowed to know the difference.) How?  There is the problem for bankers of reserve requirement and the bank balance sheet liability of such action.  The solution is clever.  Put the ex nihilo credit loans under Standby Letters of Credit, which at once have no reserve requirement and is off balance-sheet financial statement category.  Sound familiar?  The idea was so evil and contrary to sound banking, that the manual carried a sign letter of endorsement from a regulator for the Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

(As a side note, this scam is also the basis for gold leasing, specifically mentioned in the manual, and a matter of great concern worldwide, with Germans and Italians, etc, demanding that gold supposedly in USA for safekeeping be sent back to Germany, Italy etc..  Problem is, the gold may be in China, and legally so, for apparently people did rash things under "gold leasing.")

As each banking disaster occurred, and taxpayers picked up the tab, the practice got worse.  S&L Crisis in the early 80s, the the 87 crash, the 97 crash, the dot com bust, 2008... not to mention the countless individual disasters.  In every instance, the banks get bailed out.  We are now at total saturation. When Boeing builds a jet, ExImBank creates ex nihilo credit for India to buy it, it costs nothing for India to be a customer of Boeing.  The USA taxpayer is on the hook for any default.  Boeing takes the profits.  When an unemployed 18 year old stops off at a gas station and pays for two corn dogs and a supersize drink with his EBT card, the ex nihilo credit is created at that moment.  Again, it it added to the taxpayers tab. What appears to be happening is this regime is over.  The beneficiaries of this boom can no longer get any benefit.

Airlines are dying for too many airplanes.  I flew Seattle Paris round trip at Christmas holidays, $650 (about $400 taxes, $250 to the airlines).  McDonalds can't find anymore victims.  Sorts Authority cannot find enough people who want more junk.  The dinosaurs are dying.

We all love a system that works for us, even if it doesn't.  What Busby Berkeley learned in the 1930s is you could make a lot of money showing unemployed people movies about rich people living it up (We're in the money!)  Hope is a theological virtue, but it can be hijacked by bankers, and affixed to nothing, giving false hopes.  It is cruel, but the victims are all willing accomplices.

By the way, tell me, what is the primary job of the United States Secret Service?  Do you know?

Here is some more reading, which only bolsters my argument.  These open as .pdfs, and here.  That last one, if viewed in terms of promotion of ex nihilo credit, is devastating to modern economics.  Out of the mouth of babes!

Entrepreneurs do not take risks.  The regime that was based on that is dying off.  What always was and will always be is customers.  You need customers, not finance.  Find customers, and you'll succeed.  And I teach how to find customers first.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Unemployed PhDs

For over 30 years I have taught on the side, in live classroom settings and online.

This avocation has added feathers to my hat, developing a product, setting up a market distribution channel, written a book, aside from the fact I work when I want, where I want, for what I want, and teach what I want.  This is a second career (a double major?), when most people are lucky to have a single career.

I have no tenure so I never had to falsify science or suppress truths I know to get a position.  I bring money to the school, the school does not have to pay me out of taxpayers subsidies.  It's not that I cannot be fired, it is just they don't want to cut off what money I bring them (out of which they pay me some.)

The point if this is when people say "I have a PhD and can't find work in education..." well, I say, you aren't trying.  Like everywhere else in the world, there may be no jobs, but there is plenty of work.  Just because the ex-nihilo credit regime distorts markets to the point no one needs you IN THAT REGIME does not mean no one needs you.  Look outside that regime.  Get creative.

Here is a book I wrote on this...  Kindle version... paperback version...

It does not matter what happens on Wall Street or in Washington, what matters is what we do.  It ain't what we think that makes us happy or unhappy, it's what we do...

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Where Brick and Mortar Pure Play Beats eCommerce

Now if you ever talk about any given business, even with audited statements, you really cannot tell very much.  And even if a single example is valid, then question the is, is it reliable?  Will it work for anyone else?

I've been in Paris the last couple of weeks, and was introduced to a brick and mortar retailer specializing in sporting goods.  The tactic is pure contra-eCommerce, something I have yet to see, a "brick and mortar pure play" to reverse the jargon of the 1990s.

The natives tell me this fellow spotted the flaw in the eCommerce conceit, and devised a way to best the internet.  But first, let's review.  There are two insurmountables in eCommerce -

1. It costs more to gain a customer marketing online than you can make off what you sell to that customer.  eCommerce is a money pit.

2. The "last mile" is the most expensive part of logistics.

And what is the big advantage of the internet?  If you know what you want, the best version at the best price, the internet is the place to go.  (Fantasy, of course, but that is the world we live in now.)  knowing reality, you may then proceed to make money.

Dealing with reality, this fellow has rented out many small storefronts in one section of Paris, called the Latin Quarter.  Take a look at their website (and scroll down to see a map for a visual of how many stores he has in this one area, and only this area.)  Twenty years so far and still ticking.

Each boutique is dedicated to one sport.  There is the sailing boutique.  The rock climbing boutique.  The whitewater kayaking boutique.  The skiing boutique.  The bicycling boutique.  In each the has the the best brands, the best models and sizes at persuasive prices.  In this way he kills the internet competition.   He has what you want, in your size, at the right price and you can have it right now (which means the last mile is handled by you taking it home.)

Not only has he conquered Paris for sporting goods, he has repeated this pattern in ten other French cities.

Yes, you can order online.  Sort of.  But pay by check is preferred, mail it in.  But over 800 euros, they want a bank transfer. Yes, you can pay by credit card or debit card, but they make that difficult, not easy.  In essence this is just the way you'd pay thirty years ago from a mail order catalog,

Indeed, their stores hand out free-of-charge a huge 500 page paper catalog, for today, as 30 years ago, you have to have a paper catalog for effective retail.  The internet is strictly self-service checkout.

It has a website, with all of the social media buttons, so it is not short of organic materials for being ranked high in search engine searches.  But guess what?  The number one retailer of sporting goods in Paris shows up not until page three on a google search for "Paris sporing goods."  But then, who cares about what a google search gets you?

Another sporting goods store, REI, has proven to be internet-competition-proof as well.   In this instance the store is a co-op, that is it is owned by its customers, so it is not another example as a test of the hypothesis.

How did he figure this out?  First of course, ignore the hype, deal with reality. Was a Starbucks on every corner an inspiration?  Who knows?  But as the dinosaur retailers die, and a small business renaissance fills in the vacuum, examples of how to do it right will be valuable.  If this example is valid, now it needs to be tested for reliability.

The title of this post is disingenuous.  eCommerce is a non-starter, so brick-and-mortar is already the winner.  The internet is about self-service check-out.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

You Have To Ask For The Order

Any salesperson will tell you, you must ask for the order.

"May I have your order?"  If you cannot look another straight in the eye and ask for the order you want, then you have no business in sales.  Of course you must be a good consumer of good salesmanship, but sales itself is not for you.

A critical step in the sales process, after the approach, is qualification.  Are you talking to a buyer, ready, willing and able to place an order?  If not move on.  An acid test is to simply just ask for the order, when in doubt.

One desired result of the qualification is to limit your audience to people who place orders.  Those who respond self-select as the audience for what you offer.

All this comes to mind as I watch churches today.    Just as in sales, so it is in fund-raising, to get the money, you have to ask.   Church based money scams goes back to Simon, and the sin of Simony, that is selling of spiritual power.  At least then it was money.

Today it is about ex-nihilo credit.  Ex nihilo credit works, for now.  If the Church has a leaky roof, and you ask for "the money" you'll get enough ex nihilo credit moved from one tally to yours, to entice the workman to come fix the roof in trade for those ex nihilo credit tallies being moved to the workmen acocunts.  Ex nihilo credit makes the world go 'round.

But it is ephemeral, and at some point it will go poof! like a ponzi scam.  In the meantime, the party rages on.

But to my point, just as asking for the order is effective and self-selects an audience, so to with churches.  When ex nihilo credit began flooding the world, smart fund-raisers got a % of the action for working church mailing lists for donations.  They were amazingly successful.

At what?  Raising finds, and winnowing the lists down to the self-selected donators. Problem with ex nihilo credit success is the funds are spent on projects that ever need more funds.  Slowly the shift moves from saving souls to raising money.  The church organization becomes geared to constant fundraising, to support all of the ministries it runs.

I am familiar with a very common event.  A religionist meets some disaster, and will get a one line note offering support in the hour of need.

The elaborate letters urging money continue unabated.  (There is always the obligatory "if you cannot give, pray for us" but it never rings authentic when the urge for "money" is so dire.)

A Church is judged by its fundraising, and those who can and will contribute self-select as the object of the church's attention.  The shift is from the joining with the suffering of the individual to the program needing funding.  Jesus united the suffering of humanity with his suffering.

When churches send a seven page letter to people explaining how their suffering has meaning is all a part of the process of making all things new, and send a one paragraph note asking for $12,000 for fix a leaky roof, then I think churches will be back on track.

Ex nihilo credit wrecks churches too.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Time or Money?

If you worry more about money than time, you are poor.

If you worry more about time than money, you are rich.

So what is the amount where you worry more about one than the other?

Subjective, isn't it?

Self-employment is lifestyle, the emphasis is on time, not money.

Happy New Year!

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

BlockChain Follies

Ungh...  I am travelling and this got published before I was ready...

Recently I encountered a scammer who said he had launched the blockchain ground floor architecture with some $5 million is seed funding, and was inviting me among others to be impressed and talk about him.  No.

I was there at the advent of computers, and they are yet to yield a net benefit.  Show me you see what was lost, then you can total up what you think was gained, and give me your assessment: have computers offered us a net benefit?  If you account accurately, the answer is no.

So the constant promise is computers will set you free, a promise on par with Jesus saying the truth will make you free.  The promise must be huge, because the reality is short on deliverables.

The proffered benefits are secrecy and security.  What nonsense.  As if the internet is something the intel agencies cannot control.  They already do.  InQTel controls people down to their skin care.

The key fallacy is blockchain will allow anyone anywhere to be able to trust anyone anywhere regarding any even online.  Who, outside of an intelligence agency, needs an infrastructure which offers this benefit?  Donald Trump has probably a dozen people he needs to trust, after that it is all six degrees of separation.    We all need few others we trust to be effective, we all have a limited capacity to engage others, emotional, mental physical.  Even if true, how would blockchain transform this present reality?

Is this a video gamers dream?  In a video game thouisands of people are killed in a few minutes time, giving the impression that one is a superman, able to engage many people from all over the world in one place and deal with them all effectively.

Life is different.

Blockchain proposes to change the eternal aphorism from "it's all who ya know" to "it's all who you don't know" as if being able to transact with people you do not know will somehow improve your life, give you some advantage.  If so, how?  No word on that yet.

Where the internet is not being used, but could be effective, but not allowed. (I'll expand on this point, for example, allowing all patients to upload their medical histories to public sites so we can plainly see which hospitals are running secret human subject trials on the ill, as USA did in the Tuskegee experiments).

So to harness a generation to play at life, from well within the confines of mom's basement, in a world no more real the Grand Theft Auto, we have blockchain.  Here is an article promising "the world is different now":

uPort will feature tight integration of RepSys, our multifaceted, multi-tiered reputation system, that enables people, organizations and things (devices or software) to attest to the conduct of their counterparties with respect to various kinds of transactions: buying/selling, lending/borrowing/repaying, collaborating on projects, gaming interactions, and data quality and reliability. uPort serves as a container for reputational attributes like email addresses, Facebook URLs or state issued ID.

Oh. State issued ID.  Well, there is the money shot, as long as you submit your system to the hegemon, then it will be permitted.

Identity providers like governments, banks, and IT companies can cryptographically sign such attributes attesting to their validity using “reputational attestations.” 

There are two funny tactical errors in this article, the first is to cite Herbert Coase, a Nobel laureate for his work putting a halo on the hegemon's depradations.   The next is case law cited involving Florida land sales scams, from the 1940s, as a precedent for blockchain.  I think sometimes the people behind these movements have fun abusing their devotees.

This is not just the rantings of some cranky old man.  I am self-employed, I get to eat based on my productivity.  I have done everything with computres that can be done, I was in on TalkCity at ten cents a share and it went up to $35 something in its IPO, I have a profitable ecommerce site that has outlasted 1000 competitors... I beat the publishers and POD,  I deliver courses over the internet.  Few people have exploited the web as thoroughly as I have.  And I make it pay.  But it is hardly an improvement over anything we had before.  I know, as I have the advantage of having had worked n both worlds.

But the insurmountable alternative to this blockchain hype is the reality that anarchy works.  Think of business like those wagon trains (in fact businesses), which had private law agreed to at the beginning, all voluntary, and worked out quite well.  Violators were shunned, that is tossed out of the train. And anyone at anytime could elect to leave or gone on his own (important if you find yourself travelling with the Donner party.) At the end, this "government" (non-hegemomic) simply ceased to exist.  Any business relationship, indeed a lifelong career in self-employment, needs nothing.  How does blockchain in any way help?  Except to feed some fantasy of how the world works.  And at he same time to delight the hegemon with what, yet again, alacrity people clamor to be oppressed.

It has lowered to cost and widened the access to communication and research, but the vast majority of communication is desultory and the research pointless.  It has speeded some things up, but that which is faster was never in a hurry to begin with.

Time spent integrating into this blockchain thing is time not spent being productive, and thus you'll deny the rest of us the good of your genius, what you ought to have been doing.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Start At The Top

In my book I address the specialized work in international trade of acting as an agent, giving the example of a friend who put together a deal between a Mexican manufacturer of a specialized device and a Japanese hospital group.  I point out this is in essence semi-retired work for people who have established themselves in business and are trusted by all the players to put the deal together.

Regardless of role in international trade, there are two things that are fundamental: relationships and taking no risk.  Since here is no recourse in international trade if and when things go wrong, everyone relies on the other party to do the right thing when things go wrong.  Insurance might help, but the bottom line is relationship.

The "taking no risk" is not a matter of somehow pawning risk off on a third party, it is a matter of pay as you go and at no step would failure be catastrophic.  For the semi-retired player, he knows what he is doing and manages the risk with experience and wisdom.

Long before there was ever an internet, there were trade leads and trade lead brokers.  They were to be ignored then as now, for they are people with no product talking to people with no customers. The best customers and suppliers with whom the start-up needs to work cannot be found there.  Alibaba is the most successful and worst. My analogy is Alibaba is a firehouse of waste water when you just need a sip of clean water. Great place to waste time and lose money.

To my regret, in my book I mention a clever tactic one of these semi-retired experts employed, and that is occasionally looking at old trade leads, and I explain why this was clever (although in the context, it should be clear it is inadvisable.)  Lord help me, occasionally someone will seize on that secondary tactic in an unlikely scenario and bet their life on it.

It is occurring to me way back then and to this day, those who want to work the "trade-lead" fantasy essentially want to start at the top.  You know, find a lead, a supplier, bring the two together, $100,000 deal, letter of credit to eliminate risk, make $5000 commission, next... sounds great but it cannot happen, will not happen in the real world.  It's all fantasy.  You know, someone has a great script, you get it in front of Spielberg, he contacts De Niro, they put a movie together, you make a $100,000 grand commission, you have passion for the deal, what could be more natural?  It ain't gonna happen.

(Some day I will catalog all the ways the delusion can go wrong.  Well, some week, since the problems are legion.)

Now as one of the participants this special session proceeds, I can see clearly the juxtaposition.  Continuing with the movie analogy, there are plenty of people today who contact Spielberg with a script, who then contacts De Niro, they put together a movie and the guy with script gets $100,000, etc.  That guy started at the bottom 30 years ago.  He was a messenger boy in a mailroom.  He worked his way up.  it wasn't the passion for the deal, the deal is easy, it was his passion for producing quality results within that medium, knowing everything there is to know.  All parties know and trust him.

Still with the analogy, what I teach in this export food class is how to start the only place you can start, in the mailroom as a messenger boy.  You take news you found and bring it to a seller, and then when you have permission you tell a buyer what the seller offers, again as a messenger boy.  The risk is mediated because the deal is so small, the lcl moq fob.  if the deal goes bad, expect both sides to expect you take the loss.  of course.  That is true no matter what.    But the deal is so small, and amelioration so easy, this risk is unlikely.  Frequency, not volume, is the way to growth and prosperity.

You flogging the lcl moq fob is to act as messenger boy between people who can trust you that much, to deliver a message.  if and when anyone cares about the message, then you can offer to help with the discussions, and given the likelihood more work is necessary than both parties can handle, you have created your own opportunity.  So all this work is search and learn, passing messages, finding the unseen opportunity that you create.  You grow from there.

I cannot teach anyone to be successful, or even what to trade.  i only teach people how it is done so they can save time and money getting to their own success. And how it is done is you start at the bottom and work your way up.  You cannot start at the top.  With what product is the one you love, you see how this product is a solution to that problem.

Spielbergs work is limited to pop culture and engllsh and disposable income.  With food it is non-discretionary budget, all languages and worldwide.  More opportunity there, but as always, demand is for quality content.  In food we call that specialty.

The process is easy, the customers are easy, getting the product right is the only hard part in this business.  That takes passion/joy.  Without it, your progress is unlikely.  And there is no way to start at the top.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

A Colloquy On Entrepreneurial Error

On Nov 12, 2016, at 4:39 PM, DS wrote:

‘

See: https://mises.org/blog/there-are-two-types-credit-%E2%80%94-one-them-leads-booms-and-busts

Shostak writes about the distinction between the two. He also says that firms experience difficulties not because of entrepreneurial errors but in tandem with the economy.

In your blogs you state that start-up firms fail due to assumed customers. That is, founders assume there is a market of ready, willing & able customers for their products when, in fact, no such market exists.

Question: Does this kind of assumption represent an entrepreneurial error?

Question: Does anybody bother to measure/quantify commodity credit? In other words, how much commodity credit is available to the economy overall? Does it matter?

All the best

DS

On Nov 17, 2016, at 5:35 PM, John Spiers wrote:

***Right, Shostak is great...  I use the terms credit and ex nihilo credit...  Mises assumes an interest rate is legitimate in biz, I do not...***

In your blogs you state that start-up firms fail due to assumed customers. That is, founders assume there is a market of ready, willing & able customers for their products when, in fact, no such market exists.

***One big factor for many...***

Question: Does this kind of assumption represent an entrepreneurial error?

***No, if entrepreneur is defined properly...  it is fantasy, not entrepreneurship...***

Question: Does anybody bother to measure/quantify commodity credit?

****Illegitimate forms yes, but definitions are wild....  legitimate credit is difficult to track, because it is private...***

In other words, how much commodity credit is available to the economy overall? Does it matter?

*** Matter to whom? the amount availble to industry is pitch perfect, since it is created based on supply and demand, and carries no interest.  It is created when two traders trust each other....***

JOhn

On Nov 21, 2016, at 4:39 PM, DS wrote:

Follow up on Entrepreneurial Error. I was looking for an example of what the Austrians mean by Entrepreneurial Error. Mises provides one:

Now it happens again and again that entrepreneurs err in anticipating the future state of the market. Instead of producing those goods for which the demand of the consumers is most intense, they produce less urgently needed goods or things which cannot be sold at all. These inefficient entrepreneurs suffer losses while their more efficient competitors who anticipated the wishes of the consumers earn profits. The losses of the former group of entrepreneurs are not caused by a general abstention from buying in the part of the public; they are due to the fact that the public prefers to buy other goods. –Human Action 298

Question: Is this Mises’ way of saying that (at least some) entrepreneurs simply misread the market?

Comment: JWS has given us Milestones 1&2 to deal with those errors. #2 tells us to get specialty retail to say it’s a good idea but unavailable. So, given the milestones it’s hard to make the errors mentioned in Human Action.

DS

On Nov 22, 2016, at 1:14 AM, John Spiers wrote:

Hey DS,

Great colloquy!  Can I reformat it and hide identity and post it?

To answer, yes...  I say I am informed by the austrian school, but it is capitalist, and all capitalism presumes usury.. its fatal flaw...

The problem is the definition of entrepreneur.. there is Mises', Kirzner's, Drucker's and at least a dozen others I've read...  (and they cannot agree on a definition of money, credit, profit, customer and so many other terms!)

All of them are academics, so had to form a definition of what they were referring to...  and I think their definition formed their entity, not the other way around...  they made the definition fit their ideas...

Reading them against what I learned working for others I could see their errors, and already knew from practice how as Drucker notes, "entrepreneurs do not take risks"  as you so exactly note below...

And they think of entrepreneurs as starting boeing, the corporation, not noting Bill Bowing the tinkerer who manages to get an airmail contract can then went into production, and after 15 years quit in disgust as the government accused him of ripping off the system...

They are rare.  Airborne cold medicine started by a teacher getting sick of being sick is more common, or for that matter, the fish taco stand...

As you say, hard to make the errors if you follow the practice representing actually how humans act.  You still make errors, they are just amendable , one step back, two forward...

and the academics seem to miss it is passion/joy/lifestyle that drives innovation, not some animal spirit that sees some opportunity...

but Mises is great on how we take over lesser utilized resources and organize them into a better result...  we are on the margins in every way to start...  since we can command more, we outbid those marginals, and get going...

Our initial products are poor quality, rare, expensive, inefficient...  we design just enough to get to milestone #3, no more, to start...

think of the first apple computer...

John

On Nov 22, 2016, at 6:17 AM, DS wrote:

People still make errors, they are just amendable , one step back, two forward...

***Go right, in order to go left. Produce in order to consume (Say’s Law). Round-about production. Umweg (detour) Yet, not all who wander are lost (Steve Blank)***

and the academics seem to miss it is passion/joy/lifestyle that drives innovation, not some animal spirit that sees some opportunity...

***Yet, entrepreneurs organize on opportunity. How to organize? Mises has pointed out that value is a ranking, a scale. So it may apply to opportunity as well. More from Mises: “In order to succeed in business a man does not need a degree from a school of business administration. These schools train the subalterns for routine jobs. They certainly do not train entrepreneurs. An entrepreneur cannot be trained. A man becomes an entrepreneur in seizing an opportunity and filling the gap. No special education is required for such a display of keen judgment, foresight, and energy. The most successful businessmen were often uneducated when measured by the scholastic standards of the teaching profession. But they were equal to their social function of adjusting production to the most urgent demand. Because of these merits the consumers chose them for business leadership.” Human Action 311.***

***Which opportunities to organize? The one’s that appeal to your passion I guess. Admission: I’ve been concerned about passion because I see so many starving artists. But knowledge of opportunity and the ways to organize it gets me past any fear based objection. So, I’m always checking my passion . . . and matching it with world class discipline.***

DS

On Nov 22, 2016, at 7:03 AM, John Spiers wrote:

 Produce in order to consume (Say’s Law). 

***If you are quoting Keyne's reference to Say's "Production creates its own demand" Say never said it.  The first recorded instance of the phrase is with Keynes, a wicked man who attributed it to Say.  he know it was nonsense, so he tried to pass it off as Say.    Keyne's gerneal theory is full of such nonsense, written as a game  plan for the new utilitrianism...  Keyne sin his foreword to his german language version to the new Nazi regime...***

***Yet, entrepreneurs organize on opportunity. How to organize? Mises has pointed out that value is a ranking, a scale.

**cardinal vs ordinal, an important observation...***

So it may apply to opportunity as well. More from Mises: “In order to succeed in business a man does not need a degree from a school of business administration. These schools train the subalterns for routine jobs. They certainly do not train entrepreneurs. An entrepreneur cannot be trained. A man becomes an entrepreneur in seizing an opportunity and filling the gap. No special education is required for such a display of keen judgment, foresight, and energy. The most successful businessmen were often uneducated when measured by the scholastic standards of the teaching profession. But they were equal to their social function of adjusting production to the most urgent demand. Because of these merits the consumers chose them for business leadership.” Human Action 311.***

***d'accord...  and thanks for repeating his definition of entrepreneur.... ***

A man becomes an entrepreneur in seizing an opportunity and filling the gap. No special education is required for such a display of keen judgment, foresight, and energy.

**Ayn Rand created a comic book hero based on this definition... entrepreneur as here, when in fact the entrepreneur is usually inspired by the mundane "it hurts."  Passion and joy...  Someone who is annoyed and invents a airplane is not the stuff of heros, it is quite common.  Comic books have mass appeal. ***

***Which opportunities to organize? The one’s that appeal to your passion I guess. Admission: I’ve been concerned about passion because I see so many starving artists. But knowledge of opportunity and the ways to organize it gets me past any fear based objection. So, I’m always checking my passion . . . and matching it with world class discipline.***

*** An excellent critique, because starving artist is a lifestyle too,....  All entrepreneurs grow on customer feedback...  Picasso answered a young artist's inquiry as to how to make money as a painter and Picasso replied "use blue paint."  (one original painting I bought was of Hong Kong harbor.  It was largely blue, the only color you do not see in Hong Kong harbor.)

And...  you have not seen the countless people who do the passion/joy lifestyle who are thriving, unless it is the family restaurant 100 year old, etc..something retail...  vast majority are unseen becuase they a few million in sales and lower...

The discipline is in the test of the hypothesis....  keeping the offer standard until enough feedback warrants a change...  the siren is to run and make a change based on each feedback experience...

JOhn 

On Nov 15, 2016, at 9:48 AM, DS wrote:

What to do? Read Say’s Political Economy. I’ll have to follow up on this issue after further study & analysis because Says’ book is a deep read. And that takes more time . . . Meanwhile, I have WH Hutt’s book: A Rehabilitation of Say’s Law to get me going. Straight away, it seems as if barter plays a prominent role in Say’s economy.

I borrowed that phrase (we produce in order to consume) from Paul Cwik’s discussion (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YTJtwYrzak) Around t29:30 he discusses Keynes’ spin on JB Say: supply creates its own demand. So, in Cwik’s rendition of Keynes production becomes supply and consumption becomes demand. Keynes’ error here is that a definition has been transmuted into a cause. Even Austrians may be victim to the same trap. To say that we “produce in order to consume”, as Cwik does, may be a transmutation in itself.

All the best

DS

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

In Defense of Alibaba

I have nothing but scorn for Alibaba, for it fails on all metrics as far s world trade goes.  But on this point, I must defend the outfit:

The world's top online retailer said on Thursday it was "very disappointed" by the decision to be restored to the list of "Notorious Markets", after the US Office of the Trade Representative cited a high level of alleged piracy and counterfeiting.
"We are very disappointed by the USTR's decision to include Taobao on its 'Notorious Markets' list, which ignores the real work Alibaba has done against counterfeits," Alibaba President Michael Evans said.

The objection to anyone selling fakes is absurd.  Who cares if some people want to make, and others want to buy, fake anything.  How is anyone else harmed?

1. Would people who buy fakes otherwise buy the real thing if the fakes were not available?  Of course not.  If you delusionally believe they would, then the response would be for those who would be taking a loss to also manufacture and sell fakes of their own products.  If you want sales, it is only right you should work for them.

2. Is anyone's reputation harmed by the fact fakes are on the market?  Of course not.  If a Louis Vuitton bag is falling apart, then it is clear it is not a Louis Vuitton.  If a Louis Vuitton bag is being knocked off, it is because of the fine reputation of Louis Vuitton.  If someone actually believes he can pay $30 for a fake $20,000 Louis Vuitton bag, and return it for a refund or replacement to a Louis Vuitton dealer when it falls apt in a year, then that person needs that experience.

Fakes take time, money and skill to get out onto the market.  The dealers in fakes gain just compensation for their efforts.  No one is harmed.  the only people harmed are the taxpayers who must foot the bill in taxes for some congressman's niece to have the $125,000 a year job fighting a problem that does not exist, the "problem" of fake products.

And it is rich that the USA pot should be calling any kettle black.  The USA offers the world fake money, fake war cause, fake news, fake crisis, fake food, fake leaders, fake religions... ad nauseum.  Maybe USA just does not like competition, and Alibaba is an existential threat.

Let Alibaba be the worlds source for fakes.  It should be good for something.  Indeed, the whole thing as an enterprise is a fake.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

The End of Advent - Christmas Eve Reminder

It was December 24, 1857, 160 years ago, that ancestors of mine had some slaves auctioned off.  They had inherited them, did not want or need them.  Instead of manumitting the slaves, they auctioned them off.  Got about $700 each for them.  That was a lot of money back then.

Word to slaves: "We have some good news and some bad news.  The good news tomorrow is Christmas.  The bad news is today we are selling you down the river."  I wonder who got a slave for Christmas?

A daughter at ten years old was appalled when apprised of this bit of family history.  A teachable moment: "It ain't your roots, it your fruits.  Never mind what crime they did 150 years ago, what's the crime, perfectly legal, even expected, you might do today without a second thought?"

Slave auction yield - good prices.

"Unto the third and fourth generation..."  It was the fourth generation, with the stock crash of 1929, that the family wealth was wiped out, and the pater familias was packed off to the Puzzle House.  My father lived like a Virginia gentleman, which people found overwhelmingly charming.  He could live it on a small liberal college professor's salary.  And he, armed at all times, a .38 police special on the hip and a Derringer at his ankle.  Few knew.  Sic semper tyrannis. A Virginia gentleman.

God is Love.  Without free will, there can be no love.  There is the rub: with free will, we can do anything, good or bad.  The Christmas story is God intervened, given our choices.

What crime, perfect legal, are we doing that requires divine intervention?

Merry Christmas!

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Netflix On Banking and Usury

Now that the oldest bank in the world is dying, a bank started over 500 years ago in compliance with Catholic teaching,  Netflix purports to tell the story.  Here comes a typical view;

The Netflix series shows the Medici family scrupulously avoiding what was considered to be Usury. This was condemned from the earliest years of the faith, but this condemnation ended in the 16th century, liberalized in law by the 18th century, and is today not even an issue. It is hardly talked about at all apart from perfunctory warnings against usury (and what the difference between interest and usury is precisely has never been spelled out).

Nonsense.  That Catholic church today still teaches usury, clearly defined as any loan for any duration at any rate for any amount, as a grave sin, mortal even.

As even the 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia said: the Church “permits the general practice of lending at interest, that is to say, she authorizes the impost, without one’s having to enquire if, on lending his money, he has suffered a loss or deprived himself of a gain, provided he demand a moderate interest for the money he lends.”

Ignorant.  First, the Catholic Encyclopedia is not a Church teaching document.  It is a Knights of Columbus gig, usurers themselves.  That Catholics violate church teaching is nothing new, some 85% reject church teaching on contraception, so what if 99.999% reject it on usury?  Next, clearly this entry is in regards to the old sense of interest as a loss recovered, not a gain on an investment.

One of the earliest statements against interest comes from the Council of Nicea, which sought to crack down on avaricious practices among the clergy, among which was lending money at a profit. The Council condemned this and other attempts at “dishonourable gain.”

Substantive basis from scripture.

The war against interest was a war against basic economic logic.And thus began a long tragic history of the Catholic Church’s 1000-year war against interest and the money-lending profession. And it is a strange war indeed, one undertaken with little to no substantive basis from scripture (the above hardly suffices)

His parenthetical note reveals he is aware there is far more in scripture on the topic.  Intellectually dishonest!

Attacking lenders as heretics contradicts normal commercial dealings. It even contradicts Jesus’s own parable of the talents, which presumes and praises the existence of money lenders and condemns the failure to give them idle money as profligacy itself.

This is just bad exegesis. All religious contradictions are on what is normal. As to contradicting Jesus, first, it is a leap to assume the wicked master meting out punishment represents God, and not just a pedestrian wicked master; and next one never takes a sole item in the bible against overwhelming contrary scripture.

The writer goes on to rehash Noonan's arguments, and then,

Since those times, there has been no real debate in the Church on this question. Yes, usury continues to be warned against, though no one makes the attempt any more to distinguish between interest and usury. They were once considered synonymous; today they are distinguished as a reflection of a continuing bias against lenders who would seem to display more avarice than charity in their work. But in practice, there is no clear difference. What’s more, even seemingly usurious loan rates serve a social function: the higher the rate of interest, the more saving is encouraged and borrowing discouraged.

More ignorance, they are NOW considered synonymous, they were once opposites.  The etymology tells you that, underlying historical use.

Economics is not the primary domain of Church competence in any case, and sometimes the line that separates economic theory from faith and morals can become blurry indeed. If nothing else, this history should instill a bit of humility on the part of Church teachers, and a cautionary point as regards economics and other sciences.

O dear.  Loans at usury are a crime.  This is a matter of faith and morals.  An economics writer should exercise a bit of humility in regards to church teachings on faith and morals.

And yet, without exception, when a plague would appear, people would blame the Medicis because, surely, this is the wrath of God against the usurers. Of course! Yes, the 15th century had its own Occupy Wall Street movement.

The world is still awaiting someone to trace the path of paper currency and the black death that rode on the notes. Yhe article is poorly edited, methinks whoever wrote this did so in a rush.

O dear me!  I criticized this in progress, without knowing who wrote it.  Jeffrey Tucker, a fellow Catholic I have met a few times ay Austian conferences.  He is a solid figure in the Austrian School of Economics, with many accomplishments to his name.  So none of what he says surprises me, but his defense now runs to the disingenuous. And sloppy writing.

But many Catholics celebrate the defeat of doctrine.  On the left they claim the Church is wrong on contraception, on the right they claim the Church is wrong on usury.  Both are wrong.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post