The Most Basic Stupid Assumption

The most basic, stupid assumption is that everything exists automatically and the only challenge is how to exploit the results. Laws get in the way of the exploiters causing them to assume that the only purpose of government is to make them fight their war with one hand tied behind their backs.

The nature of exploitation is viewed in its simplest forms as parasitism and pathogenicity. Parasites and pathogens produce no accounting for the source that they feed on. They have a tendency to destroy the source of their exploits. Insect numbers increase and decrease in cycles, as the source of their exploits increase and decrease. Pathogens will often kill the hosts, which forces them to find "reservoirs" where they are less lethal. The hottest pathogens can burn themselves out, as shown by the Smallpox virus. The pathogens that survive longer are less lethal, such as the Staph bacteria.

The promoters of exploitation as a social ethic are not aware of the outcome. They assume that everything will be replaced and continue to come out of nowhere, as they exploit everything in life.

For this reason, the exploitation assumption includes a war against all elements of constructivity. If everything comes out of nowhere, attempts at constructivity get in the way. And worse, standards are required with constructivity which attempt to suppress the destructivity of exploitation.

So forces develop against the exploiters including laws created by governments. For this reason, exploiters try to reduce government to a totalitarian dictatorship, where whims replace laws.

The Second Most Basic Stupid Assumption

Another basic, stupid assumption is that rationality (not known to be rationality) is for fools. Rationality is one of the worst problems corrupters encounter, as they cannot produce anything resembling it. Yet they cannot fail to notice that rationality produces results. So corrupters assume there is a trickery involved in rationality, which makes it even more threatening than a simple and clear corruption would be.

Since the lower classes are always complaining of problems and demanding that they be solved, the stupid assumption is that nobodies fall for the quick fix for everything that doesn't work in actuality, which is what rationality looks like to persons who can't produce an iota of it.

As a consequence, corrupt persons conspire against rational persons, and one of the main consequences is that rational persons are kicked out of processes as being trouble makers. I wonder if I dare say that this reason is why Steve Jobs was kicked out of the company he created, until it went bankrupt and had no choice but to let him back in—the world's most valuable corporation now. Idiots claim Steve Jobs was a trouble maker, while constructive persons say he was good to work around—the difference being whether rationality is a bad thing or good thing.

Where mongered power is most extremely derived, the assumption is that everything related to rationality, which includes knowledge, constructivity, morality and justice, is a detriment to existence which losers pick up as fools gold. Losers demand constructivity and write laws to promote and protect it, while power mongers are destroyed by everything related to constructivity.

What is visible socially is that the losers and lower classes are viewed by power mongers as trouble makers when they are doing nothing wrong. The perpetual question is, what are corrupters seeing in the nobodies that lights them off. What corrupters are seeing in the nobodies is a demand for rationality which is assumed to be a corruption for fools by power mongers.

What then is supposed to replace constructivity? The substitute is supposed to be everything coming out of nowhere as arbitrated by power mongers—the first stupid assumption described above.

The Manufacturing Stupid Assumption

A stupid assumption that is not so basic is that manufacturers can get out of China and start manufacturing in the U.S. again. Where are the employees supposed to come from? There are about two billion workers producing the products that are used in the U.S., while there are one tenth that many workers within the U.S. Those workers produce for all countries globally, but they can't be split up and still be competitive. There is no space in the U.S. for creating a factory for every product that is manufactured globally.

When corporations moved "off shore," they kept saying they could not get the employees they needed. They often said that the few unemployed persons available were not qualified, and the education system was often said to be the reason.

Science (and maybe other professions) is dominated by foreigners, which seems to indicate that education is more functional in other countries. Education has become nonfunctional in the U.S. for reasons that seem mysterious but can be theorized. The trend was first visible as "the new math," which was a method of expecting students to guess properly without a procedure being learned. Then something similar was created for reading without phonetics. Students were supposed to just know how to read with no method of getting there. Often, diplomas were given to students who never learned to read.

Why did education fall apart in the U.S., if other countries continued to educate? Theory indicates that the problem is an extension of the same problem that developed everywhere and is quite provable in science. Incompetent power mongers moved into the complex social structures with no ability to meet the demands.

The manner in which education was degraded is shown in a textbook which I encountered where fermentation was separated into aerobic and anaerobic. The definition of fermentation is, a final electron acceptor other than oxygen. What makes it aerobic? What the writer did was cross out the terminology for glycolysis and plug in the word fermentation. Changing the terminology screwed up the subject. So teachers try to teach such garbage. Notice that the source was outside the education system where some corrupt power mongers subvert the education system through text books.

The reason why incompetent power mongers subvert education is because they consider it to be condescending. To try to explain something to them indicates that they don't already know. They are extremely intolerant of any negatives falling upon themselves, and they gain nothing from explanations including the entire education system. They don't want someone else to benefit from something they themselves gain nothing from to increase their advantage. So they subvert education.

The Tax Break Stupid Assumption

Another stupid assumption that is nonbasic is that tax breaks for corporations will stimulate the economy. Corporations do not pay taxes on expenses. They only pay taxes on profits. It means they could spend the money before calculating profits and pay no tax on it instead of spending the money after calculating profits and paying a small amount of tax on it.

The assumption that a tax break is money that corporations are going to invest in development is beyond idiotic. Corporations had the opportunity to invest that money before calculating profits. If they didn't needed the money before calculating taxes, they aren't going to need it after the government refuses to take it.

Corporations don't have to make any profit if they don't want to. They can spend all the money they make or sell their products at a reduced cost to avoid profits. Without profits, they pay no federal income tax.

Profits are as illusive as a puff of smoke, which means not a good basis for taxes. The tax base for corporations should be expenses instead of profits. Expense represents the size of the business in the most simple and definable method possible. It would be similar to a property tax being based on size rather than arbitrary decisions. An expense tax would be about the functional equivalent of the value added tax used in Europe but would be much simpler.

Making a profit and saving some of it could make sense in hedging for future problems, but hedging is not stimulating the economy. To save more for hedging adds nothing to the economy that saving less for hedging wouldn't do.

The only way to stimulate the economy now days is to give money to the lower classes who will spend it on something. Back when America was great the first time, the lower half of society paid no federal income tax due to deductions. Now days, the lower half of society pays some income taxes.

TOP