Tag: rich people

It’s Great That Trump Surrounds Himself with Rich People: The scoreboard matters

There continues to be a lot of discussion about all the wealthy people who are around Trump in the White House, and to express that condition as if it were a bad thing.  Those criticisms are mainly coming from communist Democrats like Bernie Sanders, who have openly embraced the philosophies of Karl Marx and are inherently un-American.  I love that so many wealthy people associate with President Trump because it shows that successful people are around him.  How do you know they are successful, because they are wealthy?  Wealth is a measure of success.   It’s the scoreboard of life.  When people say you can’t take your wealth with you, why try? You are hearing a loser’s point of view, where someone wants to erase the scoreboard and use other value judgments that don’t make them look so lazy and dumb.  Wealth is a measure of success.  It’s not the only measure, but if a person has built independent wealth, the chances are that they have been very successful in life.  So when wealthy people surround Trump, it shows that he is surrounded by people who know what they are doing, and that’s a good thing.  I like and trust wealthy people because the scoreboard shows they know what they are doing, which is why a society of wealthy people is good.  Critics of this system tend to be losers trying to justify bad decisions they have made in life with some social condition that hides their incompetence.  So they hate the wealthy and disparage the wealthy as some immoral embodiment of social erosion, instead of representatives of the best that a person can be by being a winner at life.  Wealth lets people know of those victories with measures that truly matter. 

That’s not to say that all wealthy people are good, but it does give a measure to put next to the value of a person.  Someone like Nancy Pelosi, who has gained a lot of wealth off government information with insider knowledge of the markets, is not the same.  Some people cheat in life to get wealth.  But even in that condition, you learn much about the people involved based on how they play the game.  Because the scoreboard matters.  The pressure to put points on the board makes people do all kinds of things to show a winning score.  However, the pressure to play the game was what Karl Marx was trying to build a society to avoid.  Even in a biblical context, when wealth is discussed, the writers who have spent their lives writing and thinking philosophically about things tended not to have very much money, so there is always a little jealousy when they look at the scoreboard and see that they haven’t put up many points of their own.  To get through life and say it’s not whether you win or lose at life, but how you play the game, is to try to substitute the game with another value system that embraces other ways of showing success at life.  I see great morality in wealth earned because it forces people to compete and win at life, which shows that they did something of great value somewhere along the line.  And if you want to hire the best person for the job, how else do you determine their value?  If you are building a new driveway and you quote the job to two different contractors and one shows up in a barely running pickup truck looking like they just rolled out of bed, and the other shows up in a brand new dual wheeled truck with a nice paint job and advertising painted on the door, who do you think will do a better job?

While it’s true that the contractor with the beat-up truck might be a diamond in the rough, generally speaking, if people have been successful in life, they tend to show it in their social interactions.  If you go to a fancy restaurant on a Friday night and a man smelling like expensive cologne gets out of a bright red supercar, with a date that looks like she just climbed off the cover of a fashion magazine, what do you think about him?  He’s successful at something because he has acquired assets that society would consider the best of what can be gained in life from the perspective of living.  Can you take all that with you into the afterlife?  No, just like people forget the score of a football game they watched on Sunday, by Monday.  But that doesn’t mean that the players shouldn’t try hard to play and win the game.  To say the game isn’t worth playing because the score doesn’t matter is a loser position in life, and lazy.  And to be envious of the person who has a lot of wealth because they won at life a lot is petty, and a bad foundation for measuring the value of life.  Wealth is a good thing, and it’s better in life to win and to have a scoreboard that shows it than a value system that avoids the competition altogether.  Those like Bernie Sanders, and other socialists, communists, and Marxists from the Democrat party want to get rid of the scoreboards in life so that there is no measure of how much of a loser they are.  They aren’t looking to help people experiencing poverty, but to exploit them so that they don’t look so bad themselves. 

The reason Trump is getting respect around the world, especially during this Saudi Arabian visit, is that the world likes scoreboards, and America has been for them that guy getting out of the fancy car at valet parking with the hot chick on his arm smelling good for a night on the town.  And everyone else has fallen into a measurement system of a loser mentality.  They disparage wealth because they are too lazy to play the game to win themselves.  Most of us root for our favorite sports teams when they play, and when they win, we feel good.  When they lose, we get upset about it.  And the difference between those two things is the scoreboard.  We might like the players, but if they can’t win the game as measured by the scoreboard, they can’t be considered outstanding players in that sport.  The scoreboard matters, it matters in life, and in death.  The wins and losses a person has tell others they should listen to you.  How else would one generation know to listen to a previous one?  It all comes down to the scoreboard and what people do to win or lose.  Even if they cheat to win, it shows the world what they are, which is much better than saying that the scoreboard doesn’t even matter, which is the Marxist proposal.  When it comes to the Trump White House, which I just recently visited, it is good to see the displays of wealth around President Trump.  And it shows in the wins we are now getting out of the Executive Branch.  And losers like those in the Democrat Party don’t get to hide their detrimental status from the world with social criticism of a system, so they don’t look like the fools they are.  We must see it for ourselves and measure its value to the world. 

With all that said I know a lot of people who have made a lot of money by being boot lickers, con artists, and general social lowlifes who have traded their very souls to have a full wallet.  Just as in sports, our favorite teams don’t always win.  Sometimes the refs rig the game, people cheat, or luck doesn’t point in the direction of success.  Even among the very rich, most of them have not been entirely ethical along the way.  But the game itself evolves the value, and that value has great worth in its own context, one win at a time.  And it is in the pursuit of victory that life improves for everyone, and the drama of competition brings out the truth in people that would otherwise not be seen.  And behind all the merits of wealth building, there is a desire for quality, whether it’s fake or genuine, that forces a value judgement where values are very much in need of definition.  And the world is a lot better off with those judgments. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

How to Fund Science: Get government out of the process so they can’t corrupt it

We need to get government out of funding science

If we have learned anything from the embarrassing Covid experience worldwide, it’s the validation that you do not want government funding to be the lifeline to the sciences.  Because when it is, such as what we saw with the NIH under Dr. Fauci, we have the all too tempting scenario where scientists will say anything to get that funding, including whatever governments want them to do.  For instance, to control elections, like made-up death totals, false models, bloviated cable news statements about the danger of a virus, the origin of a virus, and the long-term consequences of a virus to secure that funding.  What we have in modern times is not the best science that a rich country can buy; what we have is essentially the Institute of Science that they had in the famous book Atlas Shrugged.  A superficial branch of the government which attempts to quell people’s concerns as the government seeks to dominate every aspect of our lives.  And that is partly why it took me so long to write my latest book, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business; it’s not because it takes a long time to write a book. Still, instead, it took a long time to look at our world and ask and answer the hard questions about existence, how money is made, and what kind of world we should build for this next century.  To do that, we have to surgically take out a cancer called progressivism that started to seep into America during the end of the 19th century and advanced to critical mass before the roaring 20s.  Most of us wouldn’t know any better because it happened slowly over time before many of us were even born.  So nobody even thinks to ask the question as we build our assumptions on failure after failure disguised as success.  Yet, I had the fortune recently to travel most of the United States, particularly in the Old West, and dig into our history and consider what a healthy government should look like instead of what we have.  Two fine examples of why the government should not be funding science emerged, but that private industry should, became evident. 

When Andrew Carnegie told the famous paleontologist Earl Douglas that he wanted something big to fill the great museum that the steel tycoon was building in Pittsburg, it set Douglas west into the Morrison Formation site to achieve that goal.  Carnegie didn’t know what Douglas would find.  He just knew what he needed and discovered the fabulous quarry that is still there to this day and continues to tell the world much of what we know about dinosaurs.  If it hadn’t been for Andrew Carnegie’s money, the giant apatosaurus that Douglas brought back to fill that museum would have never been found if the government had been funding that endeavor; likely, the giant sauropod would still be lost out there in that Utah mountaintop.  It took a prominent thinking capitalist like we used to make in America to give science a platform, which was the case for most of the early development of the science fields from archaeology, anthropology, paleontology, even astronomy.  Remember when the Obama administration told NASA that they should be studying Islamic contributions to science in the past instead of thinking of going to the stars yet again?  NASA listened and did what they were told because they wanted continued government funding.  See the problem? 

Teton National Park at Jenny Lake

Another example is the long story of making Teton National Park possible because essentially John D. Rockefeller started buying up land in Jackson Hole to make it possible for the government to set that area apart for a national park eventually.  He wanted that site to stay pristine and undeveloped.  In a video I show here from Instagram, you can see just how beautiful the Teton’s are.  The amenities at Jenny Lake, for instance, are incredible.  Now I could make a lot of arguments that Jackson Hole would have been better off developed and that I might want to enjoy Jenny Lake from a condo porch rather than a National Park.  But the concept of our National Parks is a good one.  It is good to see these places as they have always been, undeveloped.  It’s suitable for scientific study to discuss the socialism of these National Parks managed by the government another time.  After seeing the Tetons up close, it was good that Horace Albright was able to convince Rockefeller to spend a small fortune to buy the land then donate it to the government to create Teton National Park as a separate park from Yellowstone.  It was then signed into being by the great president Calvin Cooledge because it gave us what we see today.  But it took a personality like John D. Rockefeller to do it.  Without big-time capitalists operating with such large amounts of capital, places like the Teton National Park would have never happened. 

This idea that rich people are evil, or that they should “pay their fair share,” as determined by some socialist government viewpoint or the lazy and wretched in society who are naturally below-the-line thinkers, is the sure way to secure failure in all aspects of life.  In July of 2021, it is not an accident that three private industry tycoons of significant capital are going to space.  Richard Branson is about to personally fly to space himself to demonstrate the safety of his Virgin Galactic company.  Right after him, Jeff Bezos is flying into space with his Blue Origin rockets.  And Elon Musk is planning to get his Starship into an orbital test flight on a fast track to get back to the moon.  The government is not doing these things at NASA.  Government funding shapes what they do, which is why they have been stuck in a holding pattern of innovation for such a long time.  Private industry driven by great capital enterprises is how science is best developed.  It’s also how you get the best answers to complicated problems. We see the failures with Covid and how big pharma tied directly to FDA approvals have to play the government game if they want to exist, so they will do so whatever the government wants.  The key is to separate these problems, not to join them together as one entity.

That is the offerings in my book to identify these problems and separate them as they have before for a better approach for the future.  I could speak all day about the need for more understanding in science.  We are learning a great deal about our past that makes our assumptions here and now seem silly.  Which needs attention in just about all the sciences.  Truthfully, where we are today is embarrassing when comparing the rate of discovery to what it was when private funding drove most of the results, such as in the examples provided here.  But that is the case with all scientific fields.  Instead of intelligent scientists finding the freedom to discover, they are more like prostitutes catering to the desires of perverts in government. If the government had discovered flight and stuck its fat socialist ass in the development of it, we would never have gone from flying a kite to landing on the moon in just 70 years; we’d still be looking for the string for the kite in the garage of the Wright Brothers.  Government is slow, unmotivated, and essentially corrupt no matter where it is formed in the world.  They are needed to some extent for a free society to function well, but they must be as small as possible to stay out of the way of actual progress.  And we’ve done it well before.  Our task for the future is to look at those times where we did get it right and learn to remove the cancer of progressivism that is now threatening to kill us as patients.  That’s essentially the problem of our times.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense at the link below. Use my name to get added benefits.
http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Share, subscribe, and see you later,https://rumble.com/embed/vciikp/?pub=3rih5#?secret=bniNjt4gIIhttps://rumble.com/embed/vd9a53/?pub=3rih5#?secret=I8cwvuaVB9

The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business