Bloga-Rhythms 3/4/2010

Boy, did I get blasted yesterday. Not that I have that many readers for my new blog to begin with, but a couple of the ones I do have really took me to task.

Apparently, there's a protocol to blogging and a particularity about what you post. It seems that what you write is supposed to be about what's on your mind at that moment, random thoughts, stuff like that. Me, as an unskilled blogger wrote a treatise on competition, covering aspects of the subject that I had planned to use as a basis for future postings. Unfortunately, that approach is wrong, as I've now been told.

Blog-planning for the future is verboten. What's more, I was informed, yesterday's entry was not only way out of line, it was boring. I was so upset, I almost considered permanent de-blogging. Why not just sit back and let some other typist take all the abuse.

Nonetheless, although I've been warned, I still believe competition is an important subject and it's something I think about rather often. But, perhaps, I should have used another word. I used the word "competition" because I believe that it's how people compete that separates human wheat from chaff. Winners rise to the top, while losers fall by the wayside. However, maybe it isn't so much competition that I should have focused on, but on "productivity" instead.

And, that brings me around to another subject which I'm certain is blog taboo. Politics.

Now, I'm not going to go off the deep end here and endorse or support a particular party or political belief. I surmise that would be tantamount to committing blogicide. I'm thinking more about politics in general. And, why for instance, someone will raise and spend half a billion dollars or so to try and win a job that pays a little over a hundred thousand bucks. I think the answer to that one might be, that although a politician might be able to raise mega-dollars as a candidate, in the real world no business or other enterprise would likely pay them a quarter (naturally, there are a few exceptions). And that brings me back to productivity.

Exactly what do these politicians produce or contribute that helps anyone do anything, unless you're totally incapable of helping yourself? And, if that's the case, that you can't support yourself, politicians help you by offering the aid of someone else's hard-earned money. It seems to me that most elected folks sit on the sidelines and do their best to figure out how to get their fingers into successful people's pies. Thus, if by chance and hard work, you come up with some fantastic new system or widget, within a heartbeat some pol or other will figure out a way to tax it.

As you delve further into this morass, and consider how politicians think, the more successful one is in the real world, the bigger target one becomes for governmental fleecing. It makes one wonder why economically successful people would want to be successful at all. Beyond that, there's the question of why politicians would want to kill the proverbial goose.

If logic says that government can't function without income, and is obviously incapable of earning anything itself (except for taxation), it needs the producers to stay alive, especially the best ones. Why then try to deincent producers from earning by taxing them into next Tuesday?

There are several answers to that one, which I'll likely get into on another day. Because, even though I've been warned that carrying thoughts over and purposefully continuing them on another day is un-bloglike, this is stuff I think about all the time, so I'm sure it will come up again by itself.

Adios for now. Hope to see you tomorrow.