We’ve talked about compromising, the bigger issue, living by a congruent philosophy, and acting on principle. Which almost no one in the herd does today.
And when you talk about principle, most of them will start labeling you with words like “stubborn,” “unreasonable,” “narrow-minded,” “unrealistic,” and “intransigent.” They will argue that the complexities of today’s world require you to compromise more, be more flexible, and relax your standards.
I’ll take my cue from Thoreau, and settle for a “majority of one.” Try this belief on for size:
It is your conceptual faculty to form principles that gives you the means to deal with complex issues. Your need to act on rational principles is inescapable, if you want to live a life of happiness, meaning and significance.
So how you doing on that?
-RG
Subscribe to Randy’s Blog via Email
Hi Randy,
Awesome philosophy. In my opinion, "Relaxing your standards" means making room for laziness, which can spread like a cancer.
Thoreau had it right. Instead of marching to the ever-changing beat of the herd, listen to your own drummer. You might be labeled as a little different, but from what I know about history, you'll be in quite exquisite company.
Thanks for sharing, Randy. Keep up the good fight.
Gregory
Randy,
I think living on principle is living in truth. That means there is no lack or limitation in the mind of God, only in man's mind. God is my health I can't be sick. I have spent many days in my "story" and have forgotten the true meaning of who I am.
If you are talking about honesty and integrity, than I think that is just that persons truth. What they believe to be true.
You can compromise on a highway bill. You can't compromise on gravity.
Thanks
Jim
Should the rules, because the issues need solutions, compromise. These people can create, so not sure what the mondunkk compromise that both parties well. Should not accept everything, which is why we must use our brains in the most difficult because we are sentient beings. The man is called to create the emotions and brought forward to this solution.
Principal, as I understand it is a fundamental truth. Compromise is weakness With that being understood, all we need to do is WHATS RIGHT. We make our beliefs into our principals. I know intuitively if I am doing what is right or what is wrong. I find people are so busy paying attention to their outside worlds and what others think of them, that they forget the basic truths as if we had the power to change them. We were given intuition as a gift. When I read this blog, I immediately thought of Mother Theresa when asked if she would attend a war rally. She declined and said if you have a peace rally, I will be there. She understood that what you draw attention to grows. If I respond intuitively, I live in truth. If I react to the world, I compromise. There is nothing more sexy on this planet that a truthful person. Can't wait to meet him.
I don't see a conflict between my progressive values and compromising. Let's take for example:Universal Health Care law passed in the U.S. While I would have preferred a public option so the goverment could compete with private companies,Yet, the next 30 of 35 million un-insured Americans would have access to health care.
Even though Universal Health Care would be mostly by HMO and private companies, I am called a socialist,communist,and a pinko from people who never read Marx,Engel and Stalin!
Enrique- I think you misunderstood the prompt and instead used this forum to push your political agenda. And yes...it is socialist.
Aundrea:
If you would read Randy's blog for the past three posting,you will see that he is describing a libertarian philosophy.
Define socialism--
Socialism is when the government makes people needy and weak then control their actions in the name of the greater good. A wretched system that punishes producers and rewards leeches.
10 people in a room. 2 have worked hard to create lots of money and 8 have sat in the pub and watched TV.
The 8 decide that it would be great to help each other so they demand that all the money is to be put in a pot and then shared evenly between everyone. They vote on it and win by a majority vote of 8 - 2.
Then they use the police and army to force the 2 to share what they have with the leeches because life is just a game of luck and chance and those who have lots by luck should be made to share with those who have not had the luck. (I smell bullshit from the mouths of Socialists)
Question - what is the difference between Socialism, Communism and Prison?
Answer - Not a heck of a lot.
Freedom is the way. Let us take the upside and the downside of freedom. If we want to help someone we should be allowed to choose to and if we don't want to help then we shouldn't have to.
I didn't know that paying for our firefighters,teachers,and policemen were people who were needy.
They are goverment workers.
David-- the problem with your reasoning is that you equated a corporation with an individual.
You are living in a world that doesn't exist.
Good luck.
um...i have to agree 100% with david on this one. no one has the right to the fruits of another man's labor. universal healthcare makes people who excel in the medical profession the lamb to slaughter for the masses. it is not the place of a just government to make such decisions for us. a free market society has the right to seek the care they want. if it weren't for government involvement (complicating business processes here, while playing favorites and handing out bailouts there) prices wouldn't be so high, they'd be competitive because thats what the market would have dictated. if only the rich could afford these services, there aren't enough rich to sustain all the insurance companies and medical facilities. lassaiz faire capitalism is the only rational and fair system. it'd just be nice if we actually practiced that here. 🙂
The Education and Health care rules and regulations are what make them not work.
We are not even allowed to choose how we educate our children. We have to send them to a programming device that turns them into wages slaves. If we don't we get sent to jail.
We are not allowed to choose who we get health care from either. Many medical professionals who can easily provide low cost health treatment for the masses are not allowed to treat people because they have not learned how to treat everything with drugs.
The government keeps the masses addicted to drugs supplied by the Big Pharma companies and passes laws to restrict use of natural herbs that have been used successfully for thousands of years.
The world I am talking about did exist and worked very well in the 19th century. But the scared Robin Hoods who are programmed by the media demand that a few educated idiots control everything. The creativity and intelligence of 300 million people in America could run the economy much better than several thousand do gooders with their own agendas.
I understand principal to be a fundamental truth. Compromise is a weakness. We are all gifted with intuition. We know what is right and what is wrong. Why do we complicate this? DO WHAT'S RIGHT! So many of us concern ourselves with what others think. This blog brought to remembrance what Mother Theresa once said after being invited to a war rally. She said if you have a peace rally I will attend. She knew that what we pay attention to grows. If we paid more attention to our own individual actions and how they impact one person or the mass, I can only imagine how we could change the world for good. There is nothing sexier on this planet than a truthful person. I can't wait to meet him.
I have a question , How far will you go for your principles?
I believe sometimes we have to fight for that and be ready for consequences. But is it worth it?even if the price is your or others life?
I don't know, but something in my heart says:"It is worth it"
What do you think?
Take a look at this:
I think we are all here to stand for the same principals. Love one another. I don't think that act can or will ever have a negative outcome for anyone. It's when we try to force our beliefs on others that the conflict occurs. If it's what we believe, we are right. The only universal action that will bring us all together is love. It's the strongest drug on the planet and has the same affect on us all, even if we try to deflect it. Light always overcomes darkness.
Nicely said, but as you said : "It’s when we try to force our beliefs on others that the conflict occurs." And let's face it, there are some who do that. What I meant by fighting is fighting those people.
As Albert Einstein once said, “The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.”
What is your idea on that?
I'm not sure I would respond back with an idea, being that it is a mental perception or image. And an ideal would be a thought of being in perfection which none of us are. I would respond that the world is full of evil and that I have weep for the pain and suffering of others. Should we do nothing? Absolutely not but we must look at what we are doing from the perspective of what and why we are trying to accomplish with it. Retaliation, is a punishment for kind, like for like. Which is why I say it only brings more of the same. And for what? To prove that an evil act is O.K. as long as it is mine? Doesn't all evil begin with a thought that, if held onto, becomes rooted and if focused on becomes deeper and stronger. Is this not why so many societies can't let go of negative conditioning and beliefs. It's like the story of the ham that has both sides cut off by tradition, only to find out that it started because the original pan wasn't big enough. And where did we ever get the idea that we were going to be around to cook the ham tomorrow. All we have is today. Why are we projecting outcomes for our actions today for tomorrow. Of course we need to have plans and goals but don't these also come to a positive outcome if we take steps each day to improve upon the last. Do we ever get a positive outcome by doing what's wrong. I only need to look at my life to know that no wrong has ever made a right.
I never meant brutality by fighting. I meant cultural conflict, maybe I used a wrong word. (Sorry,I am not a native speaker)
I believe in this caricature, (I approve the one with the brush)
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=117055625002465&set=a.103855169655844.2009.100000940848395&pid=83413&id=100000940848395
I think if we do evil things too, there would be no difference between us and those who do that, but we must do something, something in a true way.
And as Gandhi said: we must become the change we want to see in the world.
Thanks for sharing you comment on that,you have a nice and peaceful view 🙂 .
The Thing is to start with yourself. In Marianne Williamson's book her famous (all due respect To Mr. Nelson Mandela) Quote/ poem speaks volumes:
"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us.' We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world. There's nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we're liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others." (A Return to Love: Reflections on the Principles of "A Course in Miracles", Harper Collins, 1992. From Chapter 7, Section 3])
Course in Miracle help me find principles that I live by. MY TRUTH.
Thanks Randy!
A very thought provoking post indeed! And a good one too. I guess we must separate ourselves from the herd and go do our own thing.
Well I have to agree with the rest of the gang here with respect to equating our principles to our Truth. I also would add to the equation that living our principles is also living our purpose to some degree.
If we are clear about our Life purpose we have principles we live by. If we live by our principles, we live in Truth. And if our Truth is The Thought we hold for our vision, we will achieve it. Therefore, living with principles for me is the highest and best thing I can do for myself.
Thanks Randy.
It is your conceptual faculty to form principles that gives you the means to deal with complex issues. Your need to act on rational principles is inescapable, if you want to live a life of happiness, meaning and significance
So,Now Randy is going to define happiness,meaning and signficance by having less goverment,thinking only about me, and making money.
Next year, when Facebook goes public, there would 3 new billionaries under the age of 28.
Where is Facebook headquaters located?In Palo Alto,California.- more regulations than any other state in the union.
I love when Randy talks about freedom around the world and all the country he visits and yet the U.S has more billionaries than any other country.
what exactly are you driving at? just curious.
oh, and yes, less government, thinking about me FIRST, and making money will bring happiness.'
sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder enrique. how's that working out for you?
I am providing specific examples on how more regulation leads to more innovation.
Anthony:
You don't have to drink Randy kool-aid just because he says so.
I gave you specific examples that most the wealth in the nation is been created in California and New York. Those are facts.
It is working great for me with my social democratic values!
More regulation leads to more innovation????? You are kidding, right? If that is what you believe then you are living in the wrong culture. Maybe Cuba or North Korea would be more to your liking. Plenty of regulation there. How is their innovation coming along?
The US has more Billionaires because it was build on free trade. The 19th century was the greatest jump in quality of life for the masses in all of history. It was all free trade then.
This made America push far beyond the wealth of any other Nation. But the Socialist ideals that destroyed Eastern Europe have filtered in more and more every year. That is why America will probably lose most of it's wealth because it is destroying the very thing that made it so prosperous.
It was built on Freedom and now with Obama it will be restructured on Socialism and Protectionism. Anyone who is against the Free Market should take a visit to Poland or Romania and talk to the locals about how their lives used to be. It is was like living in a horror movie for most of them.
Robin Hood cannot save America, but Adam Smith could 🙂
David:
When was Microsoft,Intel,E-Bay,HP,Google,Facebook,Oracle created? in the 19th Century? oh yeah, starting in 1980
Where?
not Alabama or Mississippi but California.
Some people no matter how many facts they are given, they still belive the Earth is flat.
You are using the argument from intimidation. It's a foul and insidious tactic. You are using only partial facts and dropping context. Context dropping is exactly what the secondhanders do to win arguments. Innovation Is stifled under intense regulation. Far more evidence IN CONTEXT supports that. Specific example? The atomic bomb. Germany had attempted for quite sometime to develop it so Hitler could further his agenda. It wasn't until many of the same scientists were given the FREEDOM to work unfettered here in the US that this daunting task was accomplished.
Antothy:
What don't you answer the questions?
Are there more regulations in California or Alabama?
Hi Randy, great post!
I wanted to ask you if it's true that wealthy people get robbed a lot more often than poor people?
A couple of people have said to me that they don't want to become rich because of the fear of being robbed or kidnapped. What are your thoughts on this?
Thanks in advance
I don;t know if that is true or not. But something thinking they want to stay poor so they don't get kidnapped is the perfect demonstration of lack programming and limiting beliefs that keep people broke.
-RG
Weren't your original principles and beliefs a product of your programming as a child from your parents principles and beliefs, your friends, your church's. Wouldn't that differ depending on how accepting, open, or closed their viewpoint is of the world. Randy speaks of Thoreau and everyone becomes closed minded about their principles.
I truly think Randy is sitting back laughing right now while he reads this blog. Thoreau wrote "Walden" which was once described as "Opening the Inner Frontier of Self-Discovery". It is only through stepping outside of those principles and evaluating them by being truthful with yourself, and your view of the world, that you understand yourself and develop your own point of view. Thoreau new that and Randy knows it. I think he wanted to see if everyone else knows it. I for one know it.
People speak of being devout, yet it was devout men from our country who went to Uganda and told the people that Gay men prey on teenage boys and turn them gay. Uganda responded by trying to enact the death penalty for gays. Is this your principle?? One of these devout gave the invocation at the last Presidential Innaguaration. So now your religious, but is this your principle?? So now your a Democrat but do you believe this man should give the invocation at your Democratic Presidents innaguation??
This is why we step outside, like Thoreau and open the frontier to self-discovery. Life isn't a label imposed by others to self-describe because as much as you subscribe, you are not completely like anyone else who walks this planet.
I wish I had the answers to peace. I do know one thing and that is I am blogging too much today and need to focus on work for a while. Not sure why I am so compelled to respond to this blog. I think for me, peace starts from within. It's easy to see when some one has it as is truth easy to recognize when you own it. Maybe if we all just start small, doing what we can with where we are at. Action instead of words. It's like dropping a pebble in the water. It has an amazing ripple effect. How about we all try dropping a little bit of the best of ourselves out in the world today. Who knows what the impact can be.
We need chaos as much as peace. Always peace would be boring. The calm after the storm is best enjoyed because of the storm.
I think the world needs another great evil villain just to shake things up a bit. We can't have a Churchill without a Hitler. We are all evil sometimes and good sometimes. Let us embrace all sides of life. If we take the positive side of the magnet we need to take the negative side of it too.
It is the balance between challenge and support that creates the greatest people. All support without challenge makes us weak. All challenge without support will destroy us. Tough work and great luxury is a perfect life.
They say shit happens because shit fertilises us and makes us grow. Happiness and peace makes us ripen and when we ripen we rot.
It is important to choose the tough challenges that we love. We always have challenges, but we either seek out the tough challenges we want or the ones we don't want will find us.
David:
If you want chaos, why don't you volunteer to fight in Afghanistan just like Bush,Cheney and Rove send their kids. They did not.
Lost in your ideology of the 16th century!
LOL.
I was just joking with the evil villain comment.
I don't like physical war with killing etc. But I do like different types of battles and competition.
Capitalist battles are the most fun. Go head to head with amazing competition to take a bigger share of the market. It is fine to put the competitors out of business with by providing better service and quality than the competition. I like how Richard Branson takes on the big lazy companies and provides better service.
As Donald Trump said ' I like to see bad people fail'.
This way we get the fun of battle and chaos (while keeping our lives) and the customers win because prices are better, quality is better and everyones lives are improved. WalMart put the small inefficient companies out of business because they provided what the customers wanted and gave much better service. Survival of the fittest in the economy makes all of our lives better. The weak companies just pack up and do something else.
The problem with Socialism is that it creates Monopolies by passing laws that restrict competition. The Banks went bust, not because of lack of regulations, but because of the regulations. The tight laws will restrict the recovery of the economy because people cannot get access to money.
How can new smaller, more efficient banks start up and provide better service when they are competing against Nationalised banks with unlimited budgets and an army to back up their rules of trade?
The Banks go bust because they know they can be reckless and the Government will bail them out. If they know they will not have this option they need to operate in a very different manner. Also their customers would be more careful and only lend their money to a bank that would be able to pay it back.
Because the Government insures savings people don't care which bank they give their money to. Most banks love this because it means that the herd will not check their financial records to see if they are safe.
Putting money in a bank in a free market would be the same as investing in a company. It would be like dragons den and the savers would be the dragons with the banks walking up the stairs asking for investment.
If you want to live in the 19th century, why don't you move to Mexico, where the richest person in the world lives and 1/2 of the population lives in utterly poverty.
That's your idea capitalism. A few people control all the wealth and the countries are run by oligarchies.
Carlos Slim controls 83% of all telephone communication in Mexico. There is your monopoly!
David wants the U.S to go back 1909 when Standard Oil has a monopoly on oil produciton in the U.S.
LOL: I'd love to see a show of hands from those who have gotten "better customer service" at a Wal-Mart...?
Mexico is a far way of being a free market. It is illegal for foreigners to freely trade property.
If you look at how many industries are nationalised and run by unions it is clear to see that Mexico is certainly not even close to a free market.
The only way a company can create a monopoly in a free market is to give the customers what they want. When they no longer do this the customers will go somewhere else.
In a Socialist economy laws are passed to keep monopolies in place and to prevent competition either domestic or foreign.
Standard oil could only keep a monopoly by providing the consumer with what they want. If they stop doing this then the consumers will go somewhere else. They controlled the market because of restrictions placed on foreign imports. No company has ever kept a monopoly over a long period of time without government intervention.
Enrique you are very mixed up on your facts about the free market. I talk about the 19th century so much because it was the only time there ever was a free market. And it worked better than any other in the world at the time.
Michele
If people did not get better value for their money at Walmart they would not shop there. The little shops that got put out of business by Walmart closed early, charged higher prices, ran out of stock lines and had many other problems customers did not like. Walmart found out what the customers liked and did not like then gave them what they want in a much better way than any of their competitors.
If they stopped doing this and tried to rip off the customers they would soon go broke.
David:
If the 19th century was so great?Why is the explotion of wealth is happening now?
How billionaries were in the 19th? 10?
even if adapt your calculations for inflation.
Please give specific examples.
You cannot compare the actual wealth today with that of the 19th century. The advances in technology have made all quality of life far beyond that of the 19th.
The comparison has to be made between America in that time period and other countries with a restrictive government in that same time period. It is clear to see that even with thousands of years of a head start very few countries even got close to the wealth and freedom of America.
I am not sure what you mean by the exploitation of Wealth that is happening now?
What is obvious tho is that people can only be exploited in a Socialist/ Communist economy. You talk about Billionaires in different countries while the masses are poor. This very often happens by the special interests using their government influence to create barriers to competitors. The government laws make it almost impossible for many to get out of poverty.
Even look at minimum wages the goal is to have a better standard of living for all classes.
One solution is to let the free market sort it out and rely on peoples own initiative to work themselves from poverty. Just like the British and Americans who went through the industrial age. They endured extremely tough circumstances worked long hard hours without government intervention and over a period of time lifted the whole nation out of the desperate poverty that was present at the time.
People worked for whatever wage they could negotiate and if they didn't like it they went somewhere else. People with low skills got jobs by offering to be paid less than others and gain on Job experience and skills and in time had an increase in wages. This system in the 19th century led to the greatest increase in the wealth of a population ever recorded. If a company will make more profit by having someone they will employ the person. If they will lose profit by having someone they will not employ them.
Socialist equality movement solution. Minimum wages!
Take Ireland for example
€6.06 for under 18
€8.65 for over 18
This looked great and everyone thought now everyone will get more and we will all be better off. The poor will get more from those who do not need it as much.
But what does it really mean?
It really means that for anyone to gain employment in Ireland their skills need to be worth more to the market place than €8.65 per hour. Automatically this means that anyone who does not have the skills to justify this wage will not be able to find employment. Employers will not pay €8.65 for someone who is only worth €4 to their business. The company would rather do without the employee than take a loss on them. This will then force them onto welfare to accept handouts and because they cannot get the skills watching daytime tv they are stuck there forever.
Without this law the unskilled person could offer to work for €4 per hour and gain on job experience and gradually climb to higher levels. €8.65 is already on the ladder so we don't need a law to get to it, we just need skill and value development.
If an employee has skills worth €12 per hour then someone will pay it to them because it is profitable to do so. If they have skills worth €4 then no one will pay them €8.65 because it will lose them money. This condemns many people to a life of welfare and hopelessness. Especially the young, inexperienced, uneducated people.
The original intent was to make the lower classes better off but it has actually made them worse off. If we let the free market work its magic then it will be hard at the beginning but it was hard for the westerns who had to do it and built prosperity for themselves and all of the following generations.
Well, I meant explosion. Why shouldn't I compare the 21th explosion of wealth with a 19th century idea of Capitalism?
You are.
The explosion of wealth is happening because the whole world has advanced technology so far that it makes it easy to grow wealth. The jump between quality of life in Europe in the 17th century and the 19th would have looked like a huge explosion of wealth had happened. 200 years is a lot of time for progress.
We can now get the best quality of services and prices from all over the world (except when the governments pass laws to restrict trade). GM would never have kept their market share if it wasn't for the high taxes on foreign cars. The Government takes on the losses of the big companies and pays for inefficiencies in the name of helping the economy. Stupidity!. Bad companies should be allowed to fail.
You said that more legislation produces more innovation. I would guess that you have never spent any time in Romania or Poland where there everything was regulated by the government. Talk to the locals and they will tell you enough horror stories to make you fall deeply in love with the free market.
It is now 1000 times easier to create $Billions. We can trade with the whole world. Look at how quickly the facebook developers became billionaires with new technology. Hundreds of years ago that kind of wealth would only have been possible by having hundreds of factories and 10's of thousands of employees.
Do you think that Carlos slim could control 83% of the telephone communication if there was free trade?
The American or Chinese companies would come in and take a huge share of the market and provide a much better service and better prices. The reason he keeps control is because of restrictions on foreign competition. The governments sell this idea as something that will be better for the Mexican people. Even thought the results prove otherwise.
Legislation keeps people poor and helps the few who are rich and have a powerful network. Free trade gives everyone an opportunity to create wealth.
I am moving forward:Universal Health Insurance has arrived to the U.S, call it socialism even though the goverment is just setting the rules for HMO's to complete in the market.
The first 1,000 MW solar plant has been approved and it is going to be built in the next 2 years with subsidies from the goverment.
People don't any problem with the oil companies having $36 billions subsidies even though they had had record profits since Bush invaded Iraq.
There is only one Libertarian in Congress.
That is the point Enrique!
The oil companies have been receiving huge subsidies for years. This is what has prevented much of the development of clean renewable energy sources. If oil was charged at full rate we would probably not be using much of it by now.
The governments manipulate markets for the special interests. The oil subsidies would not have happened in a free market. Also the wars for oil are paid for by taxes. I do not think this is a good use of the money.
The losses of Big Corporations are paid for by taxes and they get to keep the profits. Is this a good system?
I think not!
I have found the last few posts to be somewhat confronting and challenging.
“So how you doing on that?”
What are the principals I stand by? Hummph. Dunno. I would say I am reasonably happy, the usual ups and downs. Certainly very busy, with a few minor achievements along the way. Do I take time out to consider my principles? Well….no. I make decisions based on what seems right in the instant, what will be acceptable, and approved by others - “the herd” I guess. I’ve always thought of myself as average. But SOMEONE has to be average, no? Actually lots of people, really. Isn’t that just the way of things? When you look at people who excel, don’t they usually have some talent, even if it is just high levels of energy, excellent interpersonal skills etc…?
So if I try to improve my lot in life, am I just setting myself up for failure? Perhaps I am already using my skills to the best of my ability.
Still, I can see that only positive things can come of taking time out to consider what I believe to be my guiding principles. To increase my integrity, honesty – to myself and others – has to be a good thing. Will I make time to do it? Will it have a major impact on my actions?....we’ll see…. : )
The Principle of self reliance and no entitlement. This is what I am striving for. I hate to admit it, but my retirement plan - even though its 30 years away included the canada pension plan and old age security. Well, if I am expecting this in the future it will impact my actions now on what I am doing to become more prosperous. I will pretend these things do not even exist and rely upon myself to build a great real estate portfolio that I can create wealth and derive income from.
Can the flexibility be a principle?
For example
5. Be flexible with the people you love.
Every 3 months or so,Randy loves to preach about his political philosophy. My point is that you don't need to believe in his political philosophy to make money.
Warren Buffett who is the richest person in the U.S is a Democrat and he is more taxation for the rich.
George Soros- a hedge fund manager-another billionarie- is a social democrat who has given millions to liberal causes.
And of course,Randy loves the Netherlands but he doesn't tell us that the Dutch pay one of the highest taxes in the World.
And my favorite countries-Scandinavians-There are Swedish billionaries.
A laizze-faire ideology of the 18th century doesn't work in the 21 the century because we are not living in Agricultural Society.
What can more shallow that have a belief-"I am somebody because I know how to make money."
Reading this blog, there's occasionally some really good stuff. There's also a lot of off-topic tangents. Somehow 'congruent philosophy' morphed into 'political philosophy'.
I'll speak frankly: In this venue, I couldn't care less about anyone's political philosophy. Not yours, not Randy's, not even my own. There are many many other blogs out there where thoughts, ideas and passions about the political state of the world can be vented.
I'd love love love to read what everyone has to say...as long as it's sticking to the topic at hand.
I have been following Randy's thoughts for a year now. He has mentioned his own political leanings, but only to illustrate his topic. I've never gotten the sense of being preached to...which I appreciate, because I won't stand being preached to.
However, I do see that the concept of 'congruent philosophy' (hereinafter referred to as "CG") is well demonstrated in this blog. Everyone here clearly has a CG...and they are all beautifully different! That's the beauty of a CG: you are right and true unto yourself, and everyone else is right and true unto themselves. For the sake of this blog, the specific details of each CG is irrelevant. More importantly:
Do you recognize your CG?
Do you completely understand your CG?
Did you kick the tires, test it for leaks, question it? (They are adaptive: my CG when I was 20 is not my CG now that I am 40).
Are you backing up your CG with your thoughts and actions?
Now: imagine if every person on the planet had the same exact CG. Where's the fun in that?
A solid CG is a fantastic base of operations. A place you can always go back to to get your bearings.
You be true to you; I'll be true to me; see you all at the top of the food chain.
Thanks for keeping the debate on track..
-RG
This is a post on congruent philosophy. Randy you never stated what philosophy you are talking about.
We have a philosophy on economics, health, prosperity, business ethics, race, lifestyle and many more. Many of us just chose to explore our political/ economic philosophy. That is the one that is the most important when it comes to prosperity.
So I am not sure how it was off the topic?
If I say that I am for freedom to build wealth but also say that I am for a system which punishes those who create wealth then that is not congruent. Just like the story in Randy's book about the group stranded on the Island.
I am a supporter of people being prosperous but I think it is disgusting that some people are wealthy while others are poor. So they should be forced to give what they have to those who don't have much.
Surely that would be an incongruent philosophy that is very anti prosperity.
I think Michelle stated it best. We can all have a consistent philosophy which is different from everyone yours and still make money.
That's my only point in this discussion!
Good post Randy! Travel Safe!
My basic principle is supporting a world that works for everyone, with no one left out or left behind. Usually that leaves only the majority of one. What I think is best for me does not mean I get a vote on how you or anyone else should operate. The best government is no government is rule number two.
The best government is no government is rule number two.
Wow!Anarchy-sounds to me like Somalia
Thanks Randy ... I needed to hear that today ... was just about to think I was being unreasonable and stubborn instead of living by principle. Appreciate your thoughts.
Interesting...and fun to read.And a little bit stressing to.I guess:The one who knows much doesn´t need to speak much can tell here. Discussion is great but most of the time we only defend something instead of putting value to the conversation.Why?
No gouvernment doesn´t mean anarchy, I suppose.
Most of the time today we choose leaders who are not the right persons to be on high posts.And let them act.
And.-socialism and communism destroys the human evulotion.It prevents that what is meant to be for us.
I guess we can be libertanians-as long as we have a focus on love.
Just had to ad something.Thank you Randy.What is clear and wise, mostly is fruitful.
Prosperity TV
Hi Randy,
Awesome philosophy. In my opinion, "Relaxing your standards" means making room for laziness, which can spread like a cancer.
Thoreau had it right. Instead of marching to the ever-changing beat of the herd, listen to your own drummer. You might be labeled as a little different, but from what I know about history, you'll be in quite exquisite company.
Thanks for sharing, Randy. Keep up the good fight.
Gregory
Randy,
I think living on principle is living in truth. That means there is no lack or limitation in the mind of God, only in man's mind. God is my health I can't be sick. I have spent many days in my "story" and have forgotten the true meaning of who I am.
If you are talking about honesty and integrity, than I think that is just that persons truth. What they believe to be true.
You can compromise on a highway bill. You can't compromise on gravity.
Thanks
Jim
Should the rules, because the issues need solutions, compromise. These people can create, so not sure what the mondunkk compromise that both parties well. Should not accept everything, which is why we must use our brains in the most difficult because we are sentient beings. The man is called to create the emotions and brought forward to this solution.
Principal, as I understand it is a fundamental truth. Compromise is weakness With that being understood, all we need to do is WHATS RIGHT. We make our beliefs into our principals. I know intuitively if I am doing what is right or what is wrong. I find people are so busy paying attention to their outside worlds and what others think of them, that they forget the basic truths as if we had the power to change them. We were given intuition as a gift. When I read this blog, I immediately thought of Mother Theresa when asked if she would attend a war rally. She declined and said if you have a peace rally, I will be there. She understood that what you draw attention to grows. If I respond intuitively, I live in truth. If I react to the world, I compromise. There is nothing more sexy on this planet that a truthful person. Can't wait to meet him.
I don't see a conflict between my progressive values and compromising. Let's take for example:Universal Health Care law passed in the U.S. While I would have preferred a public option so the goverment could compete with private companies,Yet, the next 30 of 35 million un-insured Americans would have access to health care.
Even though Universal Health Care would be mostly by HMO and private companies, I am called a socialist,communist,and a pinko from people who never read Marx,Engel and Stalin!
Enrique- I think you misunderstood the prompt and instead used this forum to push your political agenda. And yes...it is socialist.
Aundrea:
If you would read Randy's blog for the past three posting,you will see that he is describing a libertarian philosophy.
Define socialism--
Socialism is when the government makes people needy and weak then control their actions in the name of the greater good. A wretched system that punishes producers and rewards leeches.
10 people in a room. 2 have worked hard to create lots of money and 8 have sat in the pub and watched TV.
The 8 decide that it would be great to help each other so they demand that all the money is to be put in a pot and then shared evenly between everyone. They vote on it and win by a majority vote of 8 - 2.
Then they use the police and army to force the 2 to share what they have with the leeches because life is just a game of luck and chance and those who have lots by luck should be made to share with those who have not had the luck. (I smell bullshit from the mouths of Socialists)
Question - what is the difference between Socialism, Communism and Prison?
Answer - Not a heck of a lot.
Freedom is the way. Let us take the upside and the downside of freedom. If we want to help someone we should be allowed to choose to and if we don't want to help then we shouldn't have to.
I didn't know that paying for our firefighters,teachers,and policemen were people who were needy.
They are goverment workers.
David-- the problem with your reasoning is that you equated a corporation with an individual.
You are living in a world that doesn't exist.
Good luck.
um...i have to agree 100% with david on this one. no one has the right to the fruits of another man's labor. universal healthcare makes people who excel in the medical profession the lamb to slaughter for the masses. it is not the place of a just government to make such decisions for us. a free market society has the right to seek the care they want. if it weren't for government involvement (complicating business processes here, while playing favorites and handing out bailouts there) prices wouldn't be so high, they'd be competitive because thats what the market would have dictated. if only the rich could afford these services, there aren't enough rich to sustain all the insurance companies and medical facilities. lassaiz faire capitalism is the only rational and fair system. it'd just be nice if we actually practiced that here. 🙂
The Education and Health care rules and regulations are what make them not work.
We are not even allowed to choose how we educate our children. We have to send them to a programming device that turns them into wages slaves. If we don't we get sent to jail.
We are not allowed to choose who we get health care from either. Many medical professionals who can easily provide low cost health treatment for the masses are not allowed to treat people because they have not learned how to treat everything with drugs.
The government keeps the masses addicted to drugs supplied by the Big Pharma companies and passes laws to restrict use of natural herbs that have been used successfully for thousands of years.
The world I am talking about did exist and worked very well in the 19th century. But the scared Robin Hoods who are programmed by the media demand that a few educated idiots control everything. The creativity and intelligence of 300 million people in America could run the economy much better than several thousand do gooders with their own agendas.
I understand principal to be a fundamental truth. Compromise is a weakness. We are all gifted with intuition. We know what is right and what is wrong. Why do we complicate this? DO WHAT'S RIGHT! So many of us concern ourselves with what others think. This blog brought to remembrance what Mother Theresa once said after being invited to a war rally. She said if you have a peace rally I will attend. She knew that what we pay attention to grows. If we paid more attention to our own individual actions and how they impact one person or the mass, I can only imagine how we could change the world for good. There is nothing sexier on this planet than a truthful person. I can't wait to meet him.
I have a question , How far will you go for your principles?
I believe sometimes we have to fight for that and be ready for consequences. But is it worth it?even if the price is your or others life?
I don't know, but something in my heart says:"It is worth it"
What do you think?
Take a look at this:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=150861998288494&set=a.103855169655844.2009.100000940848395&ref=nf
I think we are all here to stand for the same principals. Love one another. I don't think that act can or will ever have a negative outcome for anyone. It's when we try to force our beliefs on others that the conflict occurs. If it's what we believe, we are right. The only universal action that will bring us all together is love. It's the strongest drug on the planet and has the same affect on us all, even if we try to deflect it. Light always overcomes darkness.
Nicely said, but as you said : "It’s when we try to force our beliefs on others that the conflict occurs." And let's face it, there are some who do that. What I meant by fighting is fighting those people.
As Albert Einstein once said, “The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.”
What is your idea on that?
I'm not sure I would respond back with an idea, being that it is a mental perception or image. And an ideal would be a thought of being in perfection which none of us are. I would respond that the world is full of evil and that I have weep for the pain and suffering of others. Should we do nothing? Absolutely not but we must look at what we are doing from the perspective of what and why we are trying to accomplish with it. Retaliation, is a punishment for kind, like for like. Which is why I say it only brings more of the same. And for what? To prove that an evil act is O.K. as long as it is mine? Doesn't all evil begin with a thought that, if held onto, becomes rooted and if focused on becomes deeper and stronger. Is this not why so many societies can't let go of negative conditioning and beliefs. It's like the story of the ham that has both sides cut off by tradition, only to find out that it started because the original pan wasn't big enough. And where did we ever get the idea that we were going to be around to cook the ham tomorrow. All we have is today. Why are we projecting outcomes for our actions today for tomorrow. Of course we need to have plans and goals but don't these also come to a positive outcome if we take steps each day to improve upon the last. Do we ever get a positive outcome by doing what's wrong. I only need to look at my life to know that no wrong has ever made a right.
I never meant brutality by fighting. I meant cultural conflict, maybe I used a wrong word. (Sorry,I am not a native speaker)
I believe in this caricature, (I approve the one with the brush)
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=117055625002465&set=a.103855169655844.2009.100000940848395&pid=83413&id=100000940848395
I think if we do evil things too, there would be no difference between us and those who do that, but we must do something, something in a true way.
And as Gandhi said: we must become the change we want to see in the world.
Thanks for sharing you comment on that,you have a nice and peaceful view 🙂 .
The Thing is to start with yourself. In Marianne Williamson's book her famous (all due respect To Mr. Nelson Mandela) Quote/ poem speaks volumes:
"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us.' We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world. There's nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we're liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others." (A Return to Love: Reflections on the Principles of "A Course in Miracles", Harper Collins, 1992. From Chapter 7, Section 3])
Course in Miracle help me find principles that I live by. MY TRUTH.
Thanks Randy!
A very thought provoking post indeed! And a good one too. I guess we must separate ourselves from the herd and go do our own thing.
Well I have to agree with the rest of the gang here with respect to equating our principles to our Truth. I also would add to the equation that living our principles is also living our purpose to some degree.
If we are clear about our Life purpose we have principles we live by. If we live by our principles, we live in Truth. And if our Truth is The Thought we hold for our vision, we will achieve it. Therefore, living with principles for me is the highest and best thing I can do for myself.
Thanks Randy.
It is your conceptual faculty to form principles that gives you the means to deal with complex issues. Your need to act on rational principles is inescapable, if you want to live a life of happiness, meaning and significance
So,Now Randy is going to define happiness,meaning and signficance by having less goverment,thinking only about me, and making money.
Next year, when Facebook goes public, there would 3 new billionaries under the age of 28.
Where is Facebook headquaters located?In Palo Alto,California.- more regulations than any other state in the union.
I love when Randy talks about freedom around the world and all the country he visits and yet the U.S has more billionaries than any other country.
what exactly are you driving at? just curious.
oh, and yes, less government, thinking about me FIRST, and making money will bring happiness.'
sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder enrique. how's that working out for you?
I am providing specific examples on how more regulation leads to more innovation.
Anthony:
You don't have to drink Randy kool-aid just because he says so.
I gave you specific examples that most the wealth in the nation is been created in California and New York. Those are facts.
It is working great for me with my social democratic values!
More regulation leads to more innovation????? You are kidding, right? If that is what you believe then you are living in the wrong culture. Maybe Cuba or North Korea would be more to your liking. Plenty of regulation there. How is their innovation coming along?
The US has more Billionaires because it was build on free trade. The 19th century was the greatest jump in quality of life for the masses in all of history. It was all free trade then.
This made America push far beyond the wealth of any other Nation. But the Socialist ideals that destroyed Eastern Europe have filtered in more and more every year. That is why America will probably lose most of it's wealth because it is destroying the very thing that made it so prosperous.
It was built on Freedom and now with Obama it will be restructured on Socialism and Protectionism. Anyone who is against the Free Market should take a visit to Poland or Romania and talk to the locals about how their lives used to be. It is was like living in a horror movie for most of them.
Robin Hood cannot save America, but Adam Smith could 🙂
David:
When was Microsoft,Intel,E-Bay,HP,Google,Facebook,Oracle created? in the 19th Century? oh yeah, starting in 1980
Where?
not Alabama or Mississippi but California.
Some people no matter how many facts they are given, they still belive the Earth is flat.
You are using the argument from intimidation. It's a foul and insidious tactic. You are using only partial facts and dropping context. Context dropping is exactly what the secondhanders do to win arguments. Innovation Is stifled under intense regulation. Far more evidence IN CONTEXT supports that. Specific example? The atomic bomb. Germany had attempted for quite sometime to develop it so Hitler could further his agenda. It wasn't until many of the same scientists were given the FREEDOM to work unfettered here in the US that this daunting task was accomplished.
Antothy:
What don't you answer the questions?
Are there more regulations in California or Alabama?
Hi Randy, great post!
I wanted to ask you if it's true that wealthy people get robbed a lot more often than poor people?
A couple of people have said to me that they don't want to become rich because of the fear of being robbed or kidnapped. What are your thoughts on this?
Thanks in advance
I don;t know if that is true or not. But something thinking they want to stay poor so they don't get kidnapped is the perfect demonstration of lack programming and limiting beliefs that keep people broke.
-RG
Weren't your original principles and beliefs a product of your programming as a child from your parents principles and beliefs, your friends, your church's. Wouldn't that differ depending on how accepting, open, or closed their viewpoint is of the world. Randy speaks of Thoreau and everyone becomes closed minded about their principles.
I truly think Randy is sitting back laughing right now while he reads this blog. Thoreau wrote "Walden" which was once described as "Opening the Inner Frontier of Self-Discovery". It is only through stepping outside of those principles and evaluating them by being truthful with yourself, and your view of the world, that you understand yourself and develop your own point of view. Thoreau new that and Randy knows it. I think he wanted to see if everyone else knows it. I for one know it.
People speak of being devout, yet it was devout men from our country who went to Uganda and told the people that Gay men prey on teenage boys and turn them gay. Uganda responded by trying to enact the death penalty for gays. Is this your principle?? One of these devout gave the invocation at the last Presidential Innaguaration. So now your religious, but is this your principle?? So now your a Democrat but do you believe this man should give the invocation at your Democratic Presidents innaguation??
This is why we step outside, like Thoreau and open the frontier to self-discovery. Life isn't a label imposed by others to self-describe because as much as you subscribe, you are not completely like anyone else who walks this planet.
I wish I had the answers to peace. I do know one thing and that is I am blogging too much today and need to focus on work for a while. Not sure why I am so compelled to respond to this blog. I think for me, peace starts from within. It's easy to see when some one has it as is truth easy to recognize when you own it. Maybe if we all just start small, doing what we can with where we are at. Action instead of words. It's like dropping a pebble in the water. It has an amazing ripple effect. How about we all try dropping a little bit of the best of ourselves out in the world today. Who knows what the impact can be.
We need chaos as much as peace. Always peace would be boring. The calm after the storm is best enjoyed because of the storm.
I think the world needs another great evil villain just to shake things up a bit. We can't have a Churchill without a Hitler. We are all evil sometimes and good sometimes. Let us embrace all sides of life. If we take the positive side of the magnet we need to take the negative side of it too.
It is the balance between challenge and support that creates the greatest people. All support without challenge makes us weak. All challenge without support will destroy us. Tough work and great luxury is a perfect life.
They say shit happens because shit fertilises us and makes us grow. Happiness and peace makes us ripen and when we ripen we rot.
It is important to choose the tough challenges that we love. We always have challenges, but we either seek out the tough challenges we want or the ones we don't want will find us.
David:
If you want chaos, why don't you volunteer to fight in Afghanistan just like Bush,Cheney and Rove send their kids. They did not.
Lost in your ideology of the 16th century!
LOL.
I was just joking with the evil villain comment.
I don't like physical war with killing etc. But I do like different types of battles and competition.
Capitalist battles are the most fun. Go head to head with amazing competition to take a bigger share of the market. It is fine to put the competitors out of business with by providing better service and quality than the competition. I like how Richard Branson takes on the big lazy companies and provides better service.
As Donald Trump said ' I like to see bad people fail'.
This way we get the fun of battle and chaos (while keeping our lives) and the customers win because prices are better, quality is better and everyones lives are improved. WalMart put the small inefficient companies out of business because they provided what the customers wanted and gave much better service. Survival of the fittest in the economy makes all of our lives better. The weak companies just pack up and do something else.
The problem with Socialism is that it creates Monopolies by passing laws that restrict competition. The Banks went bust, not because of lack of regulations, but because of the regulations. The tight laws will restrict the recovery of the economy because people cannot get access to money.
How can new smaller, more efficient banks start up and provide better service when they are competing against Nationalised banks with unlimited budgets and an army to back up their rules of trade?
The Banks go bust because they know they can be reckless and the Government will bail them out. If they know they will not have this option they need to operate in a very different manner. Also their customers would be more careful and only lend their money to a bank that would be able to pay it back.
Because the Government insures savings people don't care which bank they give their money to. Most banks love this because it means that the herd will not check their financial records to see if they are safe.
Putting money in a bank in a free market would be the same as investing in a company. It would be like dragons den and the savers would be the dragons with the banks walking up the stairs asking for investment.
If you want to live in the 19th century, why don't you move to Mexico, where the richest person in the world lives and 1/2 of the population lives in utterly poverty.
That's your idea capitalism. A few people control all the wealth and the countries are run by oligarchies.
Carlos Slim controls 83% of all telephone communication in Mexico. There is your monopoly!
David wants the U.S to go back 1909 when Standard Oil has a monopoly on oil produciton in the U.S.
LOL: I'd love to see a show of hands from those who have gotten "better customer service" at a Wal-Mart...?
Mexico is a far way of being a free market. It is illegal for foreigners to freely trade property.
If you look at how many industries are nationalised and run by unions it is clear to see that Mexico is certainly not even close to a free market.
The only way a company can create a monopoly in a free market is to give the customers what they want. When they no longer do this the customers will go somewhere else.
In a Socialist economy laws are passed to keep monopolies in place and to prevent competition either domestic or foreign.
Standard oil could only keep a monopoly by providing the consumer with what they want. If they stop doing this then the consumers will go somewhere else. They controlled the market because of restrictions placed on foreign imports. No company has ever kept a monopoly over a long period of time without government intervention.
Enrique you are very mixed up on your facts about the free market. I talk about the 19th century so much because it was the only time there ever was a free market. And it worked better than any other in the world at the time.
Michele
If people did not get better value for their money at Walmart they would not shop there. The little shops that got put out of business by Walmart closed early, charged higher prices, ran out of stock lines and had many other problems customers did not like. Walmart found out what the customers liked and did not like then gave them what they want in a much better way than any of their competitors.
If they stopped doing this and tried to rip off the customers they would soon go broke.
David:
If the 19th century was so great?Why is the explotion of wealth is happening now?
How billionaries were in the 19th? 10?
even if adapt your calculations for inflation.
Please give specific examples.
You cannot compare the actual wealth today with that of the 19th century. The advances in technology have made all quality of life far beyond that of the 19th.
The comparison has to be made between America in that time period and other countries with a restrictive government in that same time period. It is clear to see that even with thousands of years of a head start very few countries even got close to the wealth and freedom of America.
I am not sure what you mean by the exploitation of Wealth that is happening now?
What is obvious tho is that people can only be exploited in a Socialist/ Communist economy. You talk about Billionaires in different countries while the masses are poor. This very often happens by the special interests using their government influence to create barriers to competitors. The government laws make it almost impossible for many to get out of poverty.
Even look at minimum wages the goal is to have a better standard of living for all classes.
One solution is to let the free market sort it out and rely on peoples own initiative to work themselves from poverty. Just like the British and Americans who went through the industrial age. They endured extremely tough circumstances worked long hard hours without government intervention and over a period of time lifted the whole nation out of the desperate poverty that was present at the time.
People worked for whatever wage they could negotiate and if they didn't like it they went somewhere else. People with low skills got jobs by offering to be paid less than others and gain on Job experience and skills and in time had an increase in wages. This system in the 19th century led to the greatest increase in the wealth of a population ever recorded. If a company will make more profit by having someone they will employ the person. If they will lose profit by having someone they will not employ them.
Socialist equality movement solution. Minimum wages!
Take Ireland for example
€6.06 for under 18
€8.65 for over 18
This looked great and everyone thought now everyone will get more and we will all be better off. The poor will get more from those who do not need it as much.
But what does it really mean?
It really means that for anyone to gain employment in Ireland their skills need to be worth more to the market place than €8.65 per hour. Automatically this means that anyone who does not have the skills to justify this wage will not be able to find employment. Employers will not pay €8.65 for someone who is only worth €4 to their business. The company would rather do without the employee than take a loss on them. This will then force them onto welfare to accept handouts and because they cannot get the skills watching daytime tv they are stuck there forever.
Without this law the unskilled person could offer to work for €4 per hour and gain on job experience and gradually climb to higher levels. €8.65 is already on the ladder so we don't need a law to get to it, we just need skill and value development.
If an employee has skills worth €12 per hour then someone will pay it to them because it is profitable to do so. If they have skills worth €4 then no one will pay them €8.65 because it will lose them money. This condemns many people to a life of welfare and hopelessness. Especially the young, inexperienced, uneducated people.
The original intent was to make the lower classes better off but it has actually made them worse off. If we let the free market work its magic then it will be hard at the beginning but it was hard for the westerns who had to do it and built prosperity for themselves and all of the following generations.
Well, I meant explosion. Why shouldn't I compare the 21th explosion of wealth with a 19th century idea of Capitalism?
You are.
The explosion of wealth is happening because the whole world has advanced technology so far that it makes it easy to grow wealth. The jump between quality of life in Europe in the 17th century and the 19th would have looked like a huge explosion of wealth had happened. 200 years is a lot of time for progress.
We can now get the best quality of services and prices from all over the world (except when the governments pass laws to restrict trade). GM would never have kept their market share if it wasn't for the high taxes on foreign cars. The Government takes on the losses of the big companies and pays for inefficiencies in the name of helping the economy. Stupidity!. Bad companies should be allowed to fail.
You said that more legislation produces more innovation. I would guess that you have never spent any time in Romania or Poland where there everything was regulated by the government. Talk to the locals and they will tell you enough horror stories to make you fall deeply in love with the free market.
It is now 1000 times easier to create $Billions. We can trade with the whole world. Look at how quickly the facebook developers became billionaires with new technology. Hundreds of years ago that kind of wealth would only have been possible by having hundreds of factories and 10's of thousands of employees.
Do you think that Carlos slim could control 83% of the telephone communication if there was free trade?
The American or Chinese companies would come in and take a huge share of the market and provide a much better service and better prices. The reason he keeps control is because of restrictions on foreign competition. The governments sell this idea as something that will be better for the Mexican people. Even thought the results prove otherwise.
Legislation keeps people poor and helps the few who are rich and have a powerful network. Free trade gives everyone an opportunity to create wealth.
I am moving forward:Universal Health Insurance has arrived to the U.S, call it socialism even though the goverment is just setting the rules for HMO's to complete in the market.
The first 1,000 MW solar plant has been approved and it is going to be built in the next 2 years with subsidies from the goverment.
People don't any problem with the oil companies having $36 billions subsidies even though they had had record profits since Bush invaded Iraq.
There is only one Libertarian in Congress.
That is the point Enrique!
The oil companies have been receiving huge subsidies for years. This is what has prevented much of the development of clean renewable energy sources. If oil was charged at full rate we would probably not be using much of it by now.
The governments manipulate markets for the special interests. The oil subsidies would not have happened in a free market. Also the wars for oil are paid for by taxes. I do not think this is a good use of the money.
The losses of Big Corporations are paid for by taxes and they get to keep the profits. Is this a good system?
I think not!
I have found the last few posts to be somewhat confronting and challenging.
“So how you doing on that?”
What are the principals I stand by? Hummph. Dunno. I would say I am reasonably happy, the usual ups and downs. Certainly very busy, with a few minor achievements along the way. Do I take time out to consider my principles? Well….no. I make decisions based on what seems right in the instant, what will be acceptable, and approved by others - “the herd” I guess. I’ve always thought of myself as average. But SOMEONE has to be average, no? Actually lots of people, really. Isn’t that just the way of things? When you look at people who excel, don’t they usually have some talent, even if it is just high levels of energy, excellent interpersonal skills etc…?
So if I try to improve my lot in life, am I just setting myself up for failure? Perhaps I am already using my skills to the best of my ability.
Still, I can see that only positive things can come of taking time out to consider what I believe to be my guiding principles. To increase my integrity, honesty – to myself and others – has to be a good thing. Will I make time to do it? Will it have a major impact on my actions?....we’ll see…. : )
The Principle of self reliance and no entitlement. This is what I am striving for. I hate to admit it, but my retirement plan - even though its 30 years away included the canada pension plan and old age security. Well, if I am expecting this in the future it will impact my actions now on what I am doing to become more prosperous. I will pretend these things do not even exist and rely upon myself to build a great real estate portfolio that I can create wealth and derive income from.
Can the flexibility be a principle?
For example
5. Be flexible with the people you love.
Every 3 months or so,Randy loves to preach about his political philosophy. My point is that you don't need to believe in his political philosophy to make money.
Warren Buffett who is the richest person in the U.S is a Democrat and he is more taxation for the rich.
George Soros- a hedge fund manager-another billionarie- is a social democrat who has given millions to liberal causes.
And of course,Randy loves the Netherlands but he doesn't tell us that the Dutch pay one of the highest taxes in the World.
And my favorite countries-Scandinavians-There are Swedish billionaries.
A laizze-faire ideology of the 18th century doesn't work in the 21 the century because we are not living in Agricultural Society.
What can more shallow that have a belief-"I am somebody because I know how to make money."
Reading this blog, there's occasionally some really good stuff. There's also a lot of off-topic tangents. Somehow 'congruent philosophy' morphed into 'political philosophy'.
I'll speak frankly: In this venue, I couldn't care less about anyone's political philosophy. Not yours, not Randy's, not even my own. There are many many other blogs out there where thoughts, ideas and passions about the political state of the world can be vented.
I'd love love love to read what everyone has to say...as long as it's sticking to the topic at hand.
I have been following Randy's thoughts for a year now. He has mentioned his own political leanings, but only to illustrate his topic. I've never gotten the sense of being preached to...which I appreciate, because I won't stand being preached to.
However, I do see that the concept of 'congruent philosophy' (hereinafter referred to as "CG") is well demonstrated in this blog. Everyone here clearly has a CG...and they are all beautifully different! That's the beauty of a CG: you are right and true unto yourself, and everyone else is right and true unto themselves. For the sake of this blog, the specific details of each CG is irrelevant. More importantly:
Do you recognize your CG?
Do you completely understand your CG?
Did you kick the tires, test it for leaks, question it? (They are adaptive: my CG when I was 20 is not my CG now that I am 40).
Are you backing up your CG with your thoughts and actions?
Now: imagine if every person on the planet had the same exact CG. Where's the fun in that?
A solid CG is a fantastic base of operations. A place you can always go back to to get your bearings.
You be true to you; I'll be true to me; see you all at the top of the food chain.
Thanks for keeping the debate on track..
-RG
This is a post on congruent philosophy. Randy you never stated what philosophy you are talking about.
We have a philosophy on economics, health, prosperity, business ethics, race, lifestyle and many more. Many of us just chose to explore our political/ economic philosophy. That is the one that is the most important when it comes to prosperity.
So I am not sure how it was off the topic?
If I say that I am for freedom to build wealth but also say that I am for a system which punishes those who create wealth then that is not congruent. Just like the story in Randy's book about the group stranded on the Island.
I am a supporter of people being prosperous but I think it is disgusting that some people are wealthy while others are poor. So they should be forced to give what they have to those who don't have much.
Surely that would be an incongruent philosophy that is very anti prosperity.
I think Michelle stated it best. We can all have a consistent philosophy which is different from everyone yours and still make money.
That's my only point in this discussion!
Good post Randy! Travel Safe!
My basic principle is supporting a world that works for everyone, with no one left out or left behind. Usually that leaves only the majority of one. What I think is best for me does not mean I get a vote on how you or anyone else should operate. The best government is no government is rule number two.
The best government is no government is rule number two.
Wow!Anarchy-sounds to me like Somalia
Thanks Randy ... I needed to hear that today ... was just about to think I was being unreasonable and stubborn instead of living by principle. Appreciate your thoughts.
Interesting...and fun to read.And a little bit stressing to.I guess:The one who knows much doesn´t need to speak much can tell here. Discussion is great but most of the time we only defend something instead of putting value to the conversation.Why?
No gouvernment doesn´t mean anarchy, I suppose.
Most of the time today we choose leaders who are not the right persons to be on high posts.And let them act.
And.-socialism and communism destroys the human evulotion.It prevents that what is meant to be for us.
I guess we can be libertanians-as long as we have a focus on love.
Just had to ad something.Thank you Randy.What is clear and wise, mostly is fruitful.