(Adapted from the original version available here)

WASHINGTON , DC–Congress is considering sweeping legislation which will provide new benefits for many Americans. The Americans with No Abilities Act (AWNAA) is being hailed as a major legislative goal by advocates of the millions of Americans who lack any real skills or ambition.

“Roughly 50 percent of Americans do not possess the competence and drive necessary to carve out a meaningful role for themselves in society,” said California Senator Barbara Boxer. “We can no longer stand by and allow People of Inability to be ridiculed and passed over. With this legislation, employers will no longer be able to grant special favors to a small group of workers, simply because they have some idea of what they are doing.”

In a Capitol Hill press conference, House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pointed to the success of the U.S. Postal Service, which has a long-standing policy of providing opportunity without regard to performance. Approximately 74 percent of postal employees lack any job skills, making this agency the single largest U.S. employer of Persons of Inability.

Private-sector industries with good records of nondiscrimination against the Inept include retail sales (72%), the airline industry (68%), and home improvement “warehouse” stores (65%). At the state government level, the Department of Motor Vehicles also has a great record of hiring Persons of Inability (63%)

Under the Americans with No Abilities Act, more than 25 million “middle man” positions will be created, with important-sounding titles but little real responsibility, thus providing an illusory sense of purpose and performance. Mandatory non-performance-based raises and promotions will be given so as to guarantee upward mobility for even the most unremarkable employees.

The legislation provides substantial tax breaks to corporations that promote a significant number of Persons of Inability into middle- management positions, and gives a tax credit to small and medium- sized businesses that agree to hire one clueless worker for every two talented hires.

Finally, the AWNAA Act contains tough new measures to make it more difficult to discriminate against the Non-abled–banning, for example, discriminatory interview questions such as “Do you have any skills or experience which relate to this job?” “As a Non-abled person, I can’t be expected to keep up with people who have something going for them,” said Mary Lou Gertz, who lost her position as a lug-nut twister at the GM plant in Flint, Michigan, due to her lack of any discernible job skills. “This new law should really help people like me.” With the passage of this bill, Gertz and millions of other untalented citizens will finally see a light at the end of the tunnel.

Said Senator Ted Kennedy: “As a Senator with No Abilities, I believe the same privileges that elected officials enjoy ought to be extended to every American with no abilities. It is our duty as lawmakers to provide each and every American citizen, regardless of his or her adequacy, with some sort of space to take up in this great nation.”

Poor, poor bureaucrats. Those pesky individual rights are so tricky to grasp… they keep trying, but just can’t seem to get it.

In Florida, a measure soon to be signed into law would allow legally permitted individuals to possess firearms on their employers premises, regardless of the property owners discretion. I’m all for removing all barriers to concealed carry except for those imposed by individuals in pertinence to their property. This is a clear violation of property rights and a perfect example of the ends not justifying the means. Interesting that GovCo. is perfectly fine with individual rights to property being violated for the sake of another individual’s self-defense, but only in areas where GovCo. sees fit.

So, in this chaotic blob of mob-rule spooge our nation has become, you can carry a gun on your employers property despite their wishes and legal right to specify that you don’t. But, you cannot carry in a restaurant where as little as one molecule containing alcohol is sold, despite the owners legal right to decide for themselves. In other words, they can mandate where you can carry against the property owners will, and they can mandate where you can’t carry regardless of the property owners will. I think the message is clear, they presume ownership of everyone and everything.

Of course this does fit the template of failing to see a business owner as himself an individual. Without that identification, the faceless nothing is much easier to sacrifice on the altar of the collective.

It’s very strange hearing a politician mention the sanctity of property rights, especially one with a ‘D’ beside their name. I’m sure if the issue were minimum wage, eminent domain abuse, or smoking bans, he’d lose the individualistic spirit. Selectively supporting rights based on whim or consensus is much more effective in buying votes.

On another note, this article and others mention the support of the measure by the National Rifle Association, although I cannot verify to what extent if any. As an NRA supporter , I must contend that any support of this measure would be an ignorant and self-defeating blunder, considering the right to “keep and bear arms” is only derivative to our rights to life, liberty and property. Condoning such an encroachment would essentially be them cutting off their foot to paint their toenail. Their involvement in this issue will likely determine my future support of their cause.

Gus Van Horn writes of an alarming example of state sponsored religion in Minnesota. I urge anyone who’s on the fence with regards to supporting public education to read. Also, anyone who doesn’t object to Christianity, or any other religion, creeping into education should realize that the underlying principle is exactly what enables situations described above. In other words, when you give government permission to indoctrinate your kids because you may happen to agree with the particular variant of indoctrination, the permission grants the practice, not the subject matter, which could change at any whim of consensus. In fact, the same risk applies when allowing government sponsorship of any religion in any way.

The point that Gus makes that I think is noteworthy is this:

In a mixed economy, controls breed controls (and not just in the economic realm), making all arrangements inherently unstable. This is partly because of distortions in the economy created by the controls, and partly due to the fact that there are always people willing to take loot when it’s being passed around. In other words, mixed economies foster bad decision-making and dishonesty.
[bold added]

Control breeds control - in every form, every time. Economic laws are absolute and just. As long as there are objective laws pertaining to theft or fraud, the market will operate smoothly. Players seeking reward will always act in their best interest or the market will punish them either immediately, or in time. Unless there is some form of external meddling, some entity forcing a player in the market to act against his better judgment, a free market is self regulating. When there is meddling of any form or degree, the balance is disturbed and reverberative waves will result to the degree of the tinkering. Players react and adjust to the waves, often times acting against their self-interest, which inevitably entices government to further regulate. The cycle of destruction continues until the economy is a wreck. Look no further than our current “housing crisis” for a perfect example where government promotion (via rates, policies and bailout) of subjective, economically ignorant lending and borrowing was a recipe for disaster. Yet another social and economic engineering project attempting to defy reality.

Once again we hear the cause is the “free” market and the remedy is more onerous restrictions which will wreak more havoc, and will leave the central planners calling for more regulation.

while(governmentMeddling==true){
     result = furtherEconomicDestruction;
     if(economicDestruction == true){
        bureaucrats.blameCapitalism();
        bureaucrats.callForEmergencySuperPowers();

        moreBandAidRegulation++;
     }else{
         a!=a;
     }
}

The environmentalist rash is certainly flaring up. Whether it’s the trendy “Green” packaging (usually showing some type of little green leaf icon) of consumer products, the patronizing “why aren’t we just doing something about it?” commercials from the smugly confused energy corporations, or the silly news segments showing us all how to sacrifice for the greater good of mother earth - the barrage of green propaganda is hard to miss. ‘We are in a crisis’ they say, and only mouth-breathing, greedy, war-mongering, redneck, gluttons could think otherwise.

The latest man-hating charade was in the form of a solemn tribute called “Earth Hour”, where in the spirit of renouncing consumption, the symbolic act of going without carbon based energy for an hour was supposed to prove allegiance to the movement to save the earth. What exactly was this supposed to accomplish? What are the motivations of those playing along?

There are many who would surely love to see man and his innovation crumble back to the cave, or worse, who see humans as a disease that the planet must purge itself of. They envision what the world could be like without man. Unfortunately, those who crave destruction (or reduction) of human life, seem reluctant to lead by example.

I think these varmints only represent a small segment of the movement. Then there are those who still have managed to hold on to just a twinkling desire to live. They feel guilt of man’s sins against the earth, but enjoy the tangible results of the human mind. They are the ones who urge us to live a sort of “diet-life”. Basically, they think we should live, but we should devolve every innovation or luxury as a compromise. They regard them with the same pantomimic superficiality that they do their own life, where the facade is what should be valued, not the underlying reality. They think we should keep using light bulbs, just handicap them to near junk. We can still enjoy automobiles, just render them impractical and/or nearly unusable. We can still apply a protective finish to stringed instruments, just not as attractively or with as much protection.

Through sacrifice we can all exist and die at the same time, like zombies going through the motions of only a fraction of our potential lives. To them, a “diet-life” is the ideal compromise between life and death.

I suspect the rest being herded into this cause are nothing more than environmental poseurs. They have no intention of full compliance with the green code, they only seek the prestige of belonging to a cause, and will play along for the approval of others. Sure, they’ll play the game for an hour, but full devotion to the cause has never crossed their minds. They remind me of “Sunday Morning Christians”, those who put on the happy face, clean up their language, and code-switch into a religious devotee for an hour or two on Sunday morning; then resume their normal state of mind, and mode of operation until next week. I know this feeling well. They go through the motions and put on the mask when they feel the judgment of their peers. The reason they regard it as a mask is that they really don’t subscribe to the doctrine. They want to subscribe, and they want others to think they are “feelin’ it”, but it doesn’t feel natural or rewarding. They know their checkbook of reason doesn’t balance, but they’ve been lead to believe that it shouldn’t, or that faith demands they ignore it. They feel guilt for questioning it, shame for denying it, and fear embarrassment if they don’t project it.

The religious nature of environmentalism demands that we feel guilty for consumption, that utilizing natural and man-made resources in order to survive and enjoy our existence is evil. We should sacrifice our quality of life for the greater cause of not interfering with the natural balance of the earth. The premise is that the earth, a spinning ball of gas and dust, has a higher priority than man, a volitional being capable of reason, creativity and love.

This is a complete inversion of reality. Mans purpose is to live and be happy. The earth has no purpose. It is a random result of energy and matter that merely exists. It simply is. Sacrificing the living to the non-living isn’t justified or moral for any cause.

I had heard the name John Allison in the context of reason, Capitalism and success before, but I was unaware of just how explicit his philosophic convictions were. This interview is the most inspiring conversation I’ve heard in some time. If more business leaders held these premises, and integrated them into their career as John has, the potential impact on the human race would be tremendous. For anyone who owns their own business or who’s in an influential position within one, implementing the core values or mission statement of BB&T could very well invoke monumental change. In fact, any group, entity, family or organization could benefit from the mindset of BB&T.

BB&T’s Core Values:

The great Greek philosophers saw values as guides to excellence in thinking and action. In this context, values are standards which we strive to achieve. Values are practical habits that enable us as individuals to live, be successful and achieve happiness. For BB&T, our values enable us to achieve our mission and corporate purpose.

To be useful, values must be consciously held and be consistent (non-contradictory). Many people have conflicting values which prevent them from acting with clarity and self-confidence.

There are 10 primary values at BB&T. These values are consistent with one another and are integrated. To fully act on one of these values, you must also act consistently with the other values. Our focus on values grows from our belief that ideas matter and that an individual’s character is of critical significance.
Values are important at BB&T.
Back to Top

1. Reality (Fact-Based)
What is, is. If we want to be better, we must act within the context of reality (the facts). Businesses and individuals often make serious mistakes by making decisions based on what they “wish was so,” or based on theories which are disconnected from reality. The foundation for quality decision making is a careful understanding of the facts.

There is a fundamental difference between the laws of nature (reality), which are immutable, and the man made. The law of gravity is the law of gravity. The existence of the law of gravity does not mean man can not create an airplane. However, an airplane must be created within the context of the law of gravity. At BB&T, we believe in being “reality grounded.”
Back to Top

2. Reason (Objectivity)
Mankind has a specific means of survival, which is his ability to think, i.e., his capacity to reason logically from the facts of reality as presented to his five senses. A lion has claws to hunt. A deer has swiftness to avoid the hunter. Man has his ability to think. There is only one “natural resource” - the human mind.

Clear thinking is not automatic. It requires intellectual discipline and begins with sound premises based on observed facts. You must be able to draw general conclusions in a rational manner from specific examples (induction) and be able to apply general principles to the solution of specific problems (deduction). You must be able to think in an integrated way, thereby avoiding logical contradictions.

We cannot all be geniuses, but each of us can develop the mental habits which ensure that when making decisions we carefully examine the facts and think logically without contradiction in deriving a conclusion. We must learn to think in terms of what is essential, i.e., about what is important. Our goal is to objectively make the best decision to accomplish our purpose.

Rational thinking is a learned skill which requires mental focus and a fundamental commitment to consistently improving the clarity of our mental processes. At BB&T, we are looking for people who are committed to constantly improving their ability to reason.
Back to Top

3. Independent Thinking
All employees are challenged to use their individual minds to their optimum to make rational decisions. In this context, each of us is responsible for what we do and who we are. In addition, creativity is strongly encouraged and only possible with independent thought.

We learn a great deal from each other. Teamwork is important at BB&T (as will be discussed later). However, each of us thinks alone. Our minds are not physically connected. In this regard, each of us must be willing to make an independent judgment of the facts based on our capacity to think logically. Just because the “crowd” says it is so, does not make it so.

In this context, each of us is responsible for our own actions. Each of us is responsible for our personal success or failure, i.e., it is not the bank’s fault if someone does not achieve his objectives.

All human progress by definition is based on creativity, because creativity is the source of positive change. Creativity is only possible to an independent thinker. Creativity is not about just doing something different. It is about doing something better. To be better, the new method/process must be judged by its impact on the whole organization, and as to whether it contributes to the accomplishment of our mission.

There is an infinite opportunity for each of us to do whatever we do better. A significant aspect of the self-fulfillment which work can provide comes from creative thought and action.
Back to Top

4. Productivity
We are committed to being producers of wealth and well-being by taking the actions necessary to accomplish our mission. The tangible evidence of our productivity is that we have rationally allocated capital through our lending and investment process, and that we have provided needed services to our clients in an efficient manner resulting in superior profitability.

Profitability is a measure of the differences in the economic value of the products/services we produce and the cost of producing these products/services. In a long-term context and in a free market, the bigger the profit, the better. This is true not only from our shareholders’ perspective (which would be enough justification), but also in terms of the impact of our work on society as a whole. Healthy profits represent productive work. At BB&T we are looking for people who want to create, to produce, and who are thereby committed to turning their thoughts into actions that improve economic well-being.
Back to Top

Read the rest of this entry »

These days, our corrupt political parties are virtually indistinguishable. Neither give a damn about individual rights, both will gladly march us into the bowels of statism. Both of which project either a complete ignorance, or smug disdain for the just nature of economics. In a move which will result in nothing but economic destruction (in the name of the public good), our current administration announced it’s intention to further sink it’s meddling fangs into our economy.

The Fed would become the government’s “market stability regulator,” given sweeping powers to gather information on a wide range of institutions so that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and his colleagues could better detect where threats to the system might be hiding.

They, in fact, are the only threat to the system. A market left free of meddling will respond and eliminate any threats, as long as they aren’t delivered at gunpoint, in which case Government is supposed to the one responding to the threat, not the one holding the gun.

“It will have broad powers and the necessary corrective authorities to deal with deficiencies”

Well, well… wonder what they mean? Surely they aren’t implying that they’d trample the rights of a business owner by forcing him to comply with their vision of how he should do business? Not here, not in America? The deficiencies they speak of only exist in any relevancy as a result of intervention in the market. Removing the safety net introduced via government bailouts would force those who didn’t want to lose money to invest or lend it wisely. Instead, we have beaurocrats with very little to lose enforcing their will on the market, then blaming the results on the market in order to justify more meddling.

Regulation, like always is the culprit. All problems, true problems, one’s which cause destruction that impacts our country negatively in terms of years, decades and centuries; where rights are trampled, and wealth is destroyed, are caused by illegitimate government action.