The Message Is Plain Part 2

     I know, I know: I’m supposed to be off-line while my hand heals up. But this piece has been getting a fair amount of attention, so I thought I’d try to “complete the syllogism” before that has a chance to wane. Please be tolerant of any typos.

     Just this morning, a gentleman at Gab responded to the piece thus:

     No asset held by a 3rd party is safe.

     That is so incontestably true that it approaches tautology. What’s “yours,” but is not in your possession, is only “yours” in some formal sense that might not be practically enforceable. In a high-trust society, the formal “yours” is largely reliable. That is, you can depend on what’s “yours” but not in your possession being put in your possession when the time comes for it. However, the high-trust society Americans once enjoyed is a thing of the past.

     The implications are many, but one that escapes most people is that the loss of the high-trust society makes actual investment impossible. Indeed, it transforms what we once would have called “an investment” into a speculation.

     To make the matter more lucid, let’s have some differentia:

Investments are based on productivity;
Speculations are based on other behavior.

     One who buys stock in a company because he anticipates that it will provide a popular product in a growth environment is an investor. However, he may not have actually invested. Factors other than the productivity of his target company might prove more important than his projection of its productivity. In a low-trust environment where fraud and theft are rampant, he might not receive the reward for his foresight even if the company should prove to do and be all he hoped:

  1. He might be defrauded by the company itself;
  2. He might be the victim of theft by his broker;
  3. His returns might be seized by the State.

     The more common are such crimes and the “whatever I can get away with” ethic that underpins them, the less possible is genuine investment, for all investment is dependent on the ethics of third parties who stand between the investor and “his” asset.

     If this is truly the case – and it seems to be so, at this time in America’s devolution – then investment is increasingly impossible in these United States. One must have actual physical possession of the asset to be sure of possessing it, or any returns it may generate, in the future. It’s possible to invest one’s own labor in something such as a garden or a “fixer-upper” house, but not in anyone else’s productivity. The probability of one’s return in someone else’s effort being stolen is high and steadily getting higher, which makes what we once would have called an investment into a speculation. The identity of the most likely thief is our enemy, the State.

     I’m not minded to flog this interminably. It’s just a logical consequence of the loss of our former high-trust society that needed to be stated explicitly, and besides, my hand is starting to hurt. If there’s a more important message in that previous piece, I’m not sure where to find it.

     Guard your wealth. Keep it real, tangible, and close to you.


    • Ownerus on June 27, 2024 at 11:21 AM

    And even if it’s in your possession, it’s STILL not safe unless you can defend it with force.

    Difficult, especially in the case of theft by government. Then the best you can hope for is to make the theft costly.

    1. (chuckle) Well, it’s safer if it’s in your possession. But granted, safety is never absolute. Neither of person nor of possession.

Comments have been disabled.