Monday, November 25, 2019


If you’re “woke,” you'd better get some sleep, because everything you say is so stupid that you sound only half conscious. Your essential complaint about “social injustice” is that capitalists steal their profits from wages.

In fact, the saving and productive expenditure of the capitalists show up as wages and expenditure for capital goods, which in turn show up as costs of production and thus a deduction from sales revenues. This means a reduction in the amount of profit relative to sales revenues.

For elaboration, see my Kindle essay “Rectifying the Greatest Error in the History of Economic Thought: ‘Demand for Commodities Is Not Demand for Labor’ Versus the Marxian Exploitation Theory.” 99¢ at

My essay shows that the original income of labor was profit not wages, and that capitalists create wages, costs, and capital and thereby reduce profits relative to sales revenues and capital, while raising wages relative both to sales revenues and to prices.

Thus, “wokes”—Marxism-inspired morons—denounce capitalists for creating and enlarging what they in fact reduce, i.e., relative profits, and for reducing what they in fact enlarge, i.e., relative wages and their buying power.

Capitalists enrich everyone through the rise in the productivity of labor they bring about, and which progressively reduces prices relative to wages, thereby raising real wages, and making possible shorter hours, better working conditions, and the abolition of child labor.

On these points, see my Kindle essay “Marxism/Socialism, a Sociopathic Philosophy Conceived in Gross Error and Ignorance, Culminating in Economic Chaos, Enslavement, Terror, and Mass Murder: A Contribution to Its Death.” It’s available at Price: 99¢.

And see also, my essay “How the 1% Provides the Standard of Living of the 99%.” It’s available at also for 99¢.

As for the issue of racism, that “woke” people are allegedly so concerned about, what profit-seeking capitalists discriminate in favor of is that which is the color of money, such as, gold, silver, and greenbacks.

So, for example, if blacks are getting paid less than whites for the same work, profit-seeking capitalists will employ equally good but lower-paid blacks at every opportunity, provided there are no laws or regulations that threaten them for doing so. Cutting costs raises profits.

The result is a rise in the wages of blacks and a fall in the wages of whites. The further result is equal pay for equal work. (The same applies to the wages of women relative to those of men.)

For elaboration on the true relationship between capitalism and racism, read my essay “Capitalism: The Cure for Racism.” 99¢ at
Just think, for a mere $3.96, you can transform yourself, at least on the major subjects of capitalism, profits, wages, and racism, from being an ignorant victim of contemporary “education,” into someone with actual knowledge of these subjects.

Friday, November 22, 2019


If in fact the temperature and the sea level are rising, both phenomena are now acts of nature and it is insane to try to fight them by crippling industrial civilization and punishing the human race.

Industrial civilization has made possible a growth in the world’s population from 1 billion to over 7 billion, well more than a billion of whom now live at levels surpassing that of kings and emperors of the past, which all will be able to do with the use of more energy.

Crippling industrial civilization will cause the deaths of billions and leave those who survive, in a state of poverty and misery, as though the Industrial Revolution had never happened.

Our only rational choice is to adapt to the forces of nature, not to prohibit the use of energy that is the foundation of our means not only of adapting to nature but of adapting nature to us.

Even if the result of industrial civilization were a warmer world and higher sea levels, it would still be an incredible bargain.

And all the more so, since the alleged price need only be paid over the course of a thousand years or more, with sea levels rising just a few feet per century, if they in fact rise at all.

Industrial civilization can easily cope with such a problem. The whole of the United States from the Appalachian Mountains to the Pacific Ocean was settled in the hundred years between 1776 and 1876.

On a timescale of centuries, the loss of many of today’s coastal areas could easily be made good by the opening up to settlement of such vast, presently largely uninhabitable areas as Alaska, central and northern Canada, Greenland, Siberia, and Antarctica.

In a free, capitalist economy, if matters actually came to this, the settlement of these vast new territories would be a great adventure, comparable to that of the settlement of the American West, but on a much greater scale.

So, stop being terrified of the future and welcome it. Just be sure that when it comes, we have the freest, most energy-intensive, industrial economy that it is possible for us to have.

In other words, stop fighting nature and adapt to it. If the threats are real, we’ll need all the man-made power we can get, including, above all, fossil fuels and atomic energy. And to get them, we’ll need the freedom of the most capitalistic economy we can have.

For more, read my essay “The Toxicity of Environmentalism,” available in Kindle format at for 99¢.

And click below to listen to the lecture version of this essay. 

Thursday, November 21, 2019

Bernie's $100 Billion Heist Daydream

Here’s Bernie’s daydream: (as stated at

“Say Bill Gates was actually taxed $100 billion. 
“We could end homelessness and provide safe drinking water to everyone in this country.
“Bill would still be a multibillionaire. 
“Our message: the billionaire class cannot have it all when so many have so little.”

Bernie, you need to start small—say by knocking over a few gas stations and mom-and-pop grocery stores. Then you can rob a few small banks and go on to some major banks. Only then, should you think of stealing $100 billion at one fell swoop from Bill Gates.

You poor, pathetic would-be little gangster. You don't even realize that the wealth of the rich is in the form of capital, that is, means of production, and as such is the foundation of the supply of products and the demand for labor.

In your ignorance, you think the wealth of the rich is practically all in the form of consumers' goods, just like that of the average person, i.e., in such things as their houses, cars, food, and clothing, but in much larger quantity, along with paintings, jewelry and much cash.

The truth is that in a capitalist country, such as the US, the great bulk of the wealth of the rich is in the form of factories and machinery, farms and mines, stores and warehouses, trains and planes, and pipelines, trucks, and freighters. Also, it is the source of most wages.

As such, it is what makes it possible for practically everyone in the US to have a house or apartment, a car, indoor plumbing, a flush toilet, electricity, a color TV, a computer, a telephone and a cell phone, a refrigerator/freezer, and much, much more.

Because of your ignorance, you don't know that when you loot capitalists, you're destroying the foundations of everyone's standard of living—the source of the supply of goods available for them to buy and of the demand for the labor they sell.

So, if you ever get to loot $100 billion from Gates or anyone else, you won’t solve the problems of homelessness and unsafe drinking water, or any other problem. You’ll be creating or intensifying problems of poverty.

That’s because you’ll be increasing the demand for consumers’ goods at the expense of decreasing the demand for capital goods and labor. In response to this change in demand, temporarily more consumers’ goods will be produced at the expense of less capital goods being produced.

The reduction in the supply of capital goods will result in a reduction in the supply of consumers’ goods and also in a further reduction in the supply of capital goods, since with fewer capital goods, the ability to produce capital goods is also cut.

In addition, the government and its clients will be consuming at the expense of wage earners, for the taxes on capital will have reduced wage payments.

You've repeatedly whined that the economic system should work for all of us, not just the rich. It does work for all of us. Thanks to the wealth of the rich, practically everyone in the US has all the goods I described several tweets back, plus much, much more.

Because of its great success in raising the general standard of living, capitalism is denounced not only for its alleged hunger and poverty but also, however contradictory, for its alleged excess of consumption, e.g., the alleged problem of the volume of wrappings in which our abundance of goods comes.

Capitalism and its freedom for everyone to become as rich as he can, is hated because the greater success of some is irrationally taken by many as the measure of their failure, despite the fact that its actual result is the enrichment of all.

Friday, November 08, 2019


Someone apparently influenced by Marxism, and writing on Twitter under the handle “@btclbc,” says, “No man in history has ever worked hard or `earned’ a billion dollars. At that level your wealth has come from the exploitation of others. Plain and simple.” (His comment is at (

To which, I say, forget the first billion and let’s talk about all the billions beyond that, that someone can earn only by hard work. So, here’s a billionaire who, thanks to his billion, can afford to hire, organize, train, and equip 10,000 workers to carry out his plans.

Isn’t he responsible for the results and didn’t he work hard at putting it all together and achieving the outcome he wanted? which outcome, let us assume, is the accumulation of his second billion.

Or do you think that 10,000 workers happened to meet at a football game, say, and all burst out with “Hey, gang, let’s all go and produce some product we never thought of, by means we know not how, with equipment we know not what?”

The billionaire earned his second billion…and his 100th billion by providing the guiding, directing intelligence at the highest level in the organization he controls, and using his capital to carry out his plans, which is also how he earned his first billion.

His labor is primarily a labor of thinking, planning, and decision making and its results vary with the means he employs for carrying out his plans. Just as a manual worker digs a hole of very different size with the same amount of labor and effort, depending on whether he digs with his bare hands, a shovel, or a steam shovel, so the results achieved by a capitalist vary with the size of the capital he employs. 

His position is analogous to that of Columbus, Napoleon, or the leader of a country. It is analogous to that of whoever in an organization of people provides the guiding, directing intelligence at the highest level in the achievement of a goal.

Just as the credit for the discovery of America, the French victory at Austerlitz, and the foreign policy of a country, belongs respectively to Columbus, Napoleon, and the country’s leader, so, in a business firm, it belongs to such men as Bezos, Gates, and Zuckerberg, and before them, to men like Ford and Rockefeller, Carnegie and Vanderbilt.

Gates played an enormous role in making possible the computer age, Bezos in adapting retailing to the existence of the computer age, and Zuckerberg in adapting social interaction to the existence of the computer age.

Transforming the economy of the world in these ways resulted in and requires vast fortunes. The fortunes were earned by the introduction of improvements, which resulted in high profits. The high profits were overwhelmingly saved and reinvested, providing the capitalists with more capital with which to pursue their plans.

The fortunes were and are used in bringing the improvements to billions of people around the world and in financing the development of still further improvements.

Just like the crew members on Columbus’s ships, the soldiers in Napoleon’s army, and a country’s embassy employees, the employees of the billionaires, and of businessmen/capitalists in general, are the "HELP" in producing the results achieved by the billionaires.


And for a full treatment of the subject, read my book Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics, available at Read in particular pp. 296-326, 462-498, and 613-669.

The link to all of my writings on Amazon is



Tuesday, November 05, 2019


Elizabeth Warren has announced that her single-payer Medicare-for-all plan, which would eliminate private medical insurance, would increase government spending by $20.5 trillion over the next ten years ( Others say, $34 trillion (  

Currently, Federal Government spending is $4.1 trillion per year. So, at a cost of between $2 and $3.4 trillion per year, her plan would represent an increase in government spending of roughly 50% to 85%.

To help finance it, she announced yesterday that she wants to double the tax on wealth over $1 billion to 6% from her initial proposal of 3%. She claims that only the taxes of the rich will be increased, not those of the middle class.

According to Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and countless others who know nothing of the role of capital in production, i.e., how it is the source of the supply of products and the demand for labor, the average person is untouched by reductions in the capital of the rich.

He may be hurt by increases in his own taxes, they believe, but certainly not by increases in the taxes of the rich which reduce their capitals not his ability to spend.

This is exactly like saying that while the average person would be hurt if his own home burned down, he has nothing to lose if the stores where he shops and the factories et al. that supply those stores, burned down and this happened throughout the economic system.

Warren, Sanders et al. have never learned that in a division-of-labor society, which is what capitalism is, every individual is benefitted by the wealth and the talents of all who supply him and that he would benefit still more if they were richer and more talented.

And he would earn more too, as the result of their greater capitals resulting in greater competition for his labor.

Warren and Sanders and the rest are ruled by an anti-social, indeed, sociopathic philosophy. They are profoundly ignorant and as dangerous as they are ignorant. They know nothing but envy and hatred of the rich.

And they are ready to use physical force to impose their programs, which they seek to enact into law to which they will compel obedience at the point of a gun.

For answers to them, including how to make medical care in particular better and more affordable, read these two titles immediately below:

They’re available for 99¢ each at and, respectively.

For a comprehensive, in-depth defense of capitalism and thorough-going critique of socialism, go to and buy and read this book, which is my magnum opus:


A link to the audio/visual version of this post:


Elizabeth Warren is an economics ignoramus and thus unqualified to be President of the United States. She does not know that the wealth of the hated rich is in the form of capital—means of production—and as such is the foundation of the supply of products and the demand for labor.

Because of her ignorance, she advocates a wealth tax that every year would take away 2% of the wealth of everyone worth more than $50 million, and 3% of the wealth of everyone worth more than $1 billion.

This taxing away of capital means less means of production and thus less production and higher prices. At the same time, it means less demand for labor and thus lower wages.

Elizabeth Warren’s program is a call for mass impoverishment. And the same is true of the essentially similar programs of her fellow haters of the rich, such as Bernie Sanders and AOC.

These haters of the rich think they can get away with it because the rich are a small minority and do not have nearly the number of votes as the mobs the haters are trying to inflame. (This is what the haters mean by “democracy.”)

The rational self-interest of everyone lies with the freedom of everyone to become as rich and successful as he can. In a capitalist economy, others’ greater success is not the measure of our failure but the major source of our success.

I am benefitted by the billions of Bezos, Gates, and Buffet et al. If they were no richer than peasant farmers, I would be impoverished. If they were half as rich as they are, I would be much less well-off than I am.

Under capitalism, the effects of unequal wealth run parallel to those of unequal intelligence. The intelligence of Aristotle and Newton and all the other great geniuses of philosophy, science, mathematics, and the arts, cost the average person nothing, but give him everything.

The wealth of the rich, bearing the imprint of the discoveries of geniuses and employed in producing products that the average person buys and in employing the labor that he sells is responsible for the great and growing wealth the average person enjoys under capitalism.

Warren, Sanders, and probably the whole rest of the field of Democratic contenders should withdraw in shame for their ignorance of economics.  

If they’d like to learn economics, they should start with my essay “HOW THE 1 PERCENT PROVIDES THE STANDARD OF LIVING OF THE 99 PERCENT.” It’s available for 99¢ at
After that, they should read the works of Ludwig von Mises ( and Ayn Rand ( and my own Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics (

Maybe they will then become defenders rather than destroyers of wealth, capital, and capitalism.


A link to the audio/visual version of this post: