Discussions on political theory for structuring government coordination in the world could result in a new triangle of policy that will trap, and then eliminate, small business. If implemented, the disappearance of small businesses will not be a myth.
A profound objective that on its face appears to be prudent will actually result in the death of creative economics. Unrestricted new ideas are the inspiration for progress that has benefited society’s standard of living as we know it today.
Progressives who advocate the coordination of all governments for the purpose of a one-world standard are insensitive to the needs of small businesses to be flexible. Liberals are numb to the consequences of imposed regulations on the free market sector. Once made aware of the threat regulations pose to small and family-owned businesses, certain leaders have no remorse for business owners' plight. Big government objectives requiring global coordination are paramount in purpose. Therefore, the consequences rendered of lost small business are acceptable collateral damage.
The first side of the triangle is the global objective of managing climate change. Globalists believe that anything the entire world uses should be managed by a global governmental body. The Treaty of the Sea was promoted pursuant to this thesis. The air a person breathes fits into this category of belonging to the world. The only way to effectuate climate control is for every manufacturer to be subject to a world standard of operation. The only way to control all manufacturers is through individual governments enforcing a global law. Certain manufacturers in the United States are required to add scrubbers to their towers to control emissions. These scrubbers cost millions of dollars, adding nothing to the bottom line. Businesses are told by government inspectors that, if they cannot afford the scrubbers, then they can’t afford to be in business. This is, of course, a government perspective, not a market definition.
Only a large business with a substantial market share can afford the regulation.
The second side of the triangle is the global objective of managing universal health care. Bill Gates, in a recent interview, laid out his strategy on how to avoid the next pandemic. Six thousand scientists, operating in research institutes, would be strategically placed around the world to watch for the next pandemic. They would take measurements and observations every day to shield the spread of the next virus outbreak. If a new coronavirus was detected, a protocol would immediately go into effect to shut down the immediate surrounding environment to contain the virus. Such a plan would require the cooperation of every government in the world to implement.
The third side of the triangle is the global objective of managing the financing of operations. This has most recently been stated as the great capital reset or capital redistribution. Such strategy involves the management of capital and labor worldwide to ensure that the objectives of the other two sides of the triangle are met. This side of the triangle is necessary so that every manufacturer and every government in the developing world can afford to comply with the new regulations and protocol.
What does this mean to world society? Small businesses are the innovative engines that present new and efficient products and services for a developing economy. The economy serves the people’s desires. Nimble management, unencumbered by burdensome government regulations or past legacies, allows for the creativity of the human imagination to flourish. Eighty percent of all new jobs currently created in the United States originate in businesses of 25 employees or fewer.
In a world system of coordinated governments, the people serve the government objectives. Limited economic choices are provided by government planning.
Progressives seek climate change as their moral authority. They pursue global health care as society’s essential authority. They demand redistribution of capital as their operational authority to achieve their means.
As possibly well-meaning as the construction of this triangle is, it eliminates an essential element of freedom in society, the right to pursuit of happiness in one’s own determination of economic destiny. In any elimination of freedom, society in general pays a great price. Elites are immune to the effects for they are privileged in their position. The more restrictive a government, the narrower the community of Elites. Authoritarianism is unselfish and insensitive to who benefits from the fruits of government. The ones who suffer are those who are subject to the government regulations that demand control of the fruits of their individual labor.
Government control of the economy minimizes business competition resulting in stale standardization. Business as usual becomes acceptable through tolerance. Excellence in service and innovative change become a threat to the status quo. Introduction of new products enhancing the standard of living become impossible for the entrepreneurs.
Individual freedom is the goal of righteous government. This Declaration of Independence is the founding principle of the United States. The Bermuda Triangle of Economics will not only change American society, it will destroy its spirit. The United States has produced the greatest economy the world has ever known. In this prosperity, opportunity has flourished.
One only has to recognize the liberation of individual talent in this one single economic fact to know what is important for any society. Fifty percent of the U.S. non-farm adult workforce works for a small or family-owned business of 25 employees or fewer, producing 50% of the Gross Domestic Product.
With this fact in mind, does anyone really believe that the consequences of the Bermuda Triangle of Economics are worth the cost?
We only have to look to our forefathers for direction in answering this question for our children.
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?