Manifesto

Preamble: There is nothing wrong with wanting to help people, but it is a mistake to think that in order to do that we have to punish people who are doing well. It is a mistake on many levels, not the least of which is the fact that people who are doing well are a vital part of the economy, and it is better for all concerned that they not be punished for doing well. Among other things, they provide natural "stimulus" to the economy.

1. The fact that some people have more money than others is just a natural fact that flows from the natural differences amongst individuals. The statement in the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal" is just a statement of what happened at the beginning, not a statement of how everything should turn out in the end. We should all start out the same at the starting line, and in America we have tried hard to create that condition. What happens after that is up to the individual.

2. The fact that some people have more money than others does not make those who have money automatically bad. Similarly, the fact that there have been some bad people who acquired wealth illegally does not mean that ALL people who acquire wealth are not playing "by the rules." Furthermore, there are plenty of laws that can be enforced against those who do obtain wealth illegally or actually unfairly.

3. Americans, statistically, give more money to charity than any other people in the world. They want to help. Many of the richest give huge sums.

4. The economy is not a zero sum-game. If some people get more, it DOES NOT FOLLOW that necessarily others get less. On the contrary, the EXACT OPPOSITE can happen. Because of the GROWTH factor, EVERYONE GETS MORE!!!!!!!! If a business grows, provides needed goods or services and creates jobs, everyone benefits. If "everyone" includes the owner of the business, well, that is the fulfillment of the American Dream for him.

5. To expect everyone to end up with the same amount or even remotely similar amounts is unnatural and artificial. It is a nice thought, but to try to force that outcome gums up the whole works.

6. To take money away from key people in the economy (those in positions to enhance economic growth) and from productive businesses is DESTRUCTIVE to the economy.

7. To take money away from people who make a lot because they are highly skilled and do work that is of major benefit to the society as a whole (e.g., doctors, engineers and such) is DESTRUCTIVE to the society at large.

8. Rich people are as imperfect as everyone else. They can be obnoxious or caught up in the trappings of their wealth. This is not nice, but it is not a crime. They should get religion or something, but taking money away from them is not the answer.

9. If we stop punishing productive people and businesses by taking resources away from them, the scariest thing about it would be how fast we will grow. (And of course sometimes we would go too fast and have a crash. Then we would start this debate all over again.)

10. There would be plenty of money and resources to care for those unable to care for themselves. The flow of money to charity would be immense.

11. The government is NOT the best entity to help those who need help. It just creates jobs for politicians and bureaucrats.

Cover-of-Time Theory

Time Magazine's 9/6/2010 cover proclaimed "Rethinking Homeownership." Inside, the cover story speculated that homeownership may no longer makes economic sense.

Funny thing about the cover of Time. Many times over the years, trends that have appeared on the cover were just about played out and were on the verge of reversing.

They didn't miss the top of the housing bubble by very much in 2005 when they extolled the virtues of owning a home, wondering on their cover if your home would make you rich.

Many years earlier, when interest rates were the highest they've been in the memory of several generations, Time's cover featured those sky-high rates. Not long after that, interest rates were on the way down.

Maybe the editors are just very slow at recognizing a trend. Or maybe they don't put these things on their cover until the trend is on everyone's mind.

If it is the latter, it fits in with the contrarian view that when everyone is stampeding in a certain direction, the best thing to do is to head the other way. If the cover-of-Time theory is correct (i.e., the cover of Time is a contrarian indicator), your home may be about to make a comeback as a valid investment.

Let's hope that is the case.