The above white text is a button link that takes you to a Fox News Article
A report came out recently that lowered the competitiveness of the US economy from 1 to 3.
The report is largely about various factors that effect economic performance such as trade relations and government spending but I never let an opportunity pass to talk about actual business competition and how it is so vital for our economy, and how so many companies dont offer a good enough product at a good enough price, yet go unchallenged in the market.
There is definitely a tendency to avoid competition in business, isn't the object of competition to destroy your opponents ability to compete? How much do Coca-Cola and Pepsi compete? After awhile it just isn't worth it to companies that in many cases can just agree on a higher price and both be richer, like two boxers resting against each other in the ring, the public don't get the benefits of the fight and the boxers save energy.
The report is largely about various factors that effect economic performance such as trade relations and government spending but I never let an opportunity pass to talk about actual business competition and how it is so vital for our economy, and how so many companies dont offer a good enough product at a good enough price, yet go unchallenged in the market.
There is definitely a tendency to avoid competition in business, isn't the object of competition to destroy your opponents ability to compete? How much do Coca-Cola and Pepsi compete? After awhile it just isn't worth it to companies that in many cases can just agree on a higher price and both be richer, like two boxers resting against each other in the ring, the public don't get the benefits of the fight and the boxers save energy.
"There are usually two reasons boxers clinch. One is because the boxers are tired and they think they have no other choice. The other is because one of the boxers is getting pummelled and needs to stop the onslaught."
Pepsi and Coke have invested so much in the brand that they have a psychological advantage over the customer. Supermarkets could try to compete with all of the various products on their shelves but it is an unwritten rule that they only offer ‘generic products’, which in business school they teach you are intentionally drab and unappealing.
We live in a world where companies, or even hole in the wall overseas call centers with a micro contract can blacklist someone with the click of a button, ban them from doing business based on some meager violation in an inordinately complicated web of rules and regulations that you “check the checkbox” that you have read, when nobody actually does. The growing number of ‘web moderators’ can choose to restrict access ‘secretly’ to your page so if the company culture at Facebook disagrees with you, people will see your posts less.
On Twitter ‘shadow-banning’ allows the staff to limit the exposure of people with whom they do not agree. Some of these accounts pay for marketing on the sites, so dissenters are punished by monopolistic companies not giving them all that they paid for. So what kind of competition do you have when people don't even consider competing with the ideas and political ideologies of companies let alone competing with the actual business?
That sounds more like competition against the customers, not between business for the customers. The reason competition is encouraged is to create better products under pressure and promote efficiency and low prices, somthing has gone horribly wrong when the customer goes from being "always right" to not only being wrong, but being fair game for the financial and social weapons that companies are capable of leveling against them.
Pepsi and Coke have invested so much in the brand that they have a psychological advantage over the customer. Supermarkets could try to compete with all of the various products on their shelves but it is an unwritten rule that they only offer ‘generic products’, which in business school they teach you are intentionally drab and unappealing.
We live in a world where companies, or even hole in the wall overseas call centers with a micro contract can blacklist someone with the click of a button, ban them from doing business based on some meager violation in an inordinately complicated web of rules and regulations that you “check the checkbox” that you have read, when nobody actually does. The growing number of ‘web moderators’ can choose to restrict access ‘secretly’ to your page so if the company culture at Facebook disagrees with you, people will see your posts less.
On Twitter ‘shadow-banning’ allows the staff to limit the exposure of people with whom they do not agree. Some of these accounts pay for marketing on the sites, so dissenters are punished by monopolistic companies not giving them all that they paid for. So what kind of competition do you have when people don't even consider competing with the ideas and political ideologies of companies let alone competing with the actual business?
That sounds more like competition against the customers, not between business for the customers. The reason competition is encouraged is to create better products under pressure and promote efficiency and low prices, somthing has gone horribly wrong when the customer goes from being "always right" to not only being wrong, but being fair game for the financial and social weapons that companies are capable of leveling against them.
Have you ever noticed that being sneaky and duplicitous is actually a trait with an evolutionary advantage? Being confrontational is usually seen as instigating, but in many cases the instigators are actually people who are carrying on subterfuge and quietly starting a raging fire that burns out of control which then causes the victim to lose their temper- in a way the victim is being framed. People talk about how brutal the south American and Mexican drug cartels are, these cartels operate on an overt basis, carrying out assassinations. Many American business’ want to protect their interests just as bad as cartels do, let’s not forget that- but instead of masked hit men you have whatever other tools they can use to further their interests, whether that be using the courts, computer attacks, character assassination, or just purchasing their rivals business entities.
Companies need to be competitive, it is not acceptable to be complacent, and it is not the American way. But what about when the better option for the consumer literally depletes an entire industry? Think about razors for example, isn't there a strong material they can use to keep the blade sharp? Or how about a simple sharpening stone you can wipe your razor against to not have to go through so many! I personally think shaving is overrated, in the Army we have to shave every day and can you imagine the total amount of time spent on simply shaving off stubble just for it to grow back the next day? I think that a ‘0’ setting on a clipper is enough, and is far more time efficient and cost effective. It would be interesting to see what happens to the price of razors if an entire sector of the economy no longer needs them.
Competition should be promoted not only in private business but in government as well!, And within major companies that rely heavily on government assistance, including hospitals. Incentive is literally the only thing that we work for in life, we have incentive to go to work, and we should have incentive to work hard and be productive, competition is literally the best possible way towards improvement.
In the Army we had to take a course in combative s in BT, which included wrestling each other, which was an activity repeated on many less official occasions. It is fascinating to me that while some will avoid hard physical exertion at all cost when it comes to push-ups, running, and lifting- when wrestling they always want to win, and so are willing to exert the most energy possible.
Incentives need to be used for almost everything when it comes to jobs that don't have a natural and immediately discernible relationship between amount of effort and quality and quantity of result.
Companies need to be competitive, it is not acceptable to be complacent, and it is not the American way. But what about when the better option for the consumer literally depletes an entire industry? Think about razors for example, isn't there a strong material they can use to keep the blade sharp? Or how about a simple sharpening stone you can wipe your razor against to not have to go through so many! I personally think shaving is overrated, in the Army we have to shave every day and can you imagine the total amount of time spent on simply shaving off stubble just for it to grow back the next day? I think that a ‘0’ setting on a clipper is enough, and is far more time efficient and cost effective. It would be interesting to see what happens to the price of razors if an entire sector of the economy no longer needs them.
Competition should be promoted not only in private business but in government as well!, And within major companies that rely heavily on government assistance, including hospitals. Incentive is literally the only thing that we work for in life, we have incentive to go to work, and we should have incentive to work hard and be productive, competition is literally the best possible way towards improvement.
In the Army we had to take a course in combative s in BT, which included wrestling each other, which was an activity repeated on many less official occasions. It is fascinating to me that while some will avoid hard physical exertion at all cost when it comes to push-ups, running, and lifting- when wrestling they always want to win, and so are willing to exert the most energy possible.
Incentives need to be used for almost everything when it comes to jobs that don't have a natural and immediately discernible relationship between amount of effort and quality and quantity of result.
|
The following section is about abortion
|
|
You can’t be competing with me while I’m settled into my safe zone with all of my preconceived notions of idealism dangling in front of me on strings and rotating like orbiting planets.
The following is sophisticated sarcasm:
A state rights are not state rights they are my rights and luckily I have several high power companies ready to coerce a different policy out of certain states that suits my interests. If you disagree with me on abortion I can make life miserable for you by financially sanctioning you for your opinion, and your legitimate use of democracy to further your states misguided notions on intimate issues about which I care. Maybe we can throw in a second civil war just for good measure.
Once I see the other creatures of the aquatic coral oasis rearing onto their hind legs and letting out a long neigh I myself gallop forth and convene on the target predator which converges on my nest of sublime virtue.
I think our modern society and consumerism has ‘sucked’ much of the life out of the family. I grew up with step parents and all my family worked and I attended after school and summer programs and I have an understanding of how television and modern financial requirements put pressure on the ‘life giving’ aspects of a family. We give each other life, and we nurture each others lives to be valuable, but trying to ‘economize’ on these stages of growth can be very depleting to the human psyche. My priority in my political judgment is to make sure there is enough life giving capacity for the people already here before requiring parents to keep children who they would otherwise kill prior to birth. I talk more about this in my video.
But I am not an advocate for abortion and I absolutely do not believe that the child is the sole property of the woman because it is growing inside of her, and I don't like that argument. My view is that we have state rights for good reasons and if the representatives and the people of various states choose to outlaw abortion that is there right. Why Disney and Netflix would need to intervene by barring business in Alabama is beyond me, I guess you better think twice before competing ideologically with companies.
We have bigger fish to fry politically, like choosing sides in the war between the Philippines and Canada.
NEWS FLASH
|
|
The military fury of Duterte is on display here as he seethes with venomous rage against his enemy, Justin Trudeau, who glories in his advanced military tech, his trigger finger itching for combat.
Russia has concluded selling Facebook ads to stoke the debate will accelerate the conflict, and has begun sales of nuclear turbines and heavy water factories on Facebook marketplace.
Russia has concluded selling Facebook ads to stoke the debate will accelerate the conflict, and has begun sales of nuclear turbines and heavy water factories on Facebook marketplace.
North Korea has deployed covert military units to distribute surreptitiously created fortune cookie propaganda to further engender volatility in this flash-point area.
The notorious regime has also decided that a more efficient way of punishing disidents to the countries brutal regime is to subject them to hours of Trump Collusion television coverage.
|
|
Jackson's Story-time Nook
Today we will be talking about "Iran Wars" by Jay Solomon
|
|
Al Quaeda is a Sunni organization and so is ISIS, Iran is a Shiite dominant non Arab country, 'Persian' specifically. Iran has close ties to Syria, and Bashar Al Assad is President of Syria, and is an Alawite, which is a Shiite subset and is derided by many Sunni's. Although the leadership is Alawite, the majority of Syria is Sunni. The Syrians have strong ties to Lebanon, which is a kind of protectorate and was part of a 'greater Syria' during the Ottoman Empire. There was a Lebanese politician who made billions doing business with Saudi Arabia, the arch nemesis of Iran, named Hariri, who served as Lebanon's prime minister for 4 years, he was known to be against the Syrian occupation of Lebanon and when he met with Assad he was allegedly threatened with having Lebanon 'broken over his head'. He was assassinated in a massive explosion on February 14, 2005.
Lebanon is to the north of Israel and Hezbollah is an organization fighting the Israeli occupation of their territory, Hamas is a Palestinian organization with ties to Syria doing the same. Hamas and hezbolah are both designated terrorst organizations by the United States.
Saddam Hussein was a Sunni president of Iraq, and engaged with a war with Iran from 1980-88 after the infamous 444 day Iranian Hostage Crisis of 1979-81. President Ronald Reagan and HW Bush supported Hussein's war because they wanted to hit back at Iran for disrupting the alliance by overthrowing the Shah during the 79 revolution.
Iraq is a majority Shiite country and Saddam was Sunni, so the Iranians believed that if Saddam was out of the way, they would be welcomed into Iraq, in fact many opposed W Bush's invasion of Iraq for this reason. The Iranians were also at war with the Taliban, and so spurred a warm reception to America's insertion of forces into the Panjir valley, where Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps international Quds force was already operating.
Military intelligence was tracking the recruitment and training of militia fighters by Iran to harass the Americans in Iraq, and also the further development of the Iranian nuclear program. The Americans and Israeli's, especially the intelligence apparatuses hold a long lived grudge against Iran for many Iranian proxy and terrorist attacks such as a bombing of a Jewish center in Argentina in 1994 that killed 84 people, and the bombing of the US embassy in Beirut, Lebanon in 1983 that killed 63 people and 17 Americans.
The book catalogues the many financial sanctions imposed and the complexity of implementation, including searching out non descript banks in the UAE, and uncovering disguised funds in the many Island based European tax havens. Society for Worldwide Inter-bank Financial Telecommunication, (SWIFT), is an extremely well connected facilitator of banking transactions which are cataloged by bank identifier codes (BIC), this organization presented a problem in imposing the sanctions, along with various other European banks such as Credit Suesse.
Lebanon is to the north of Israel and Hezbollah is an organization fighting the Israeli occupation of their territory, Hamas is a Palestinian organization with ties to Syria doing the same. Hamas and hezbolah are both designated terrorst organizations by the United States.
Saddam Hussein was a Sunni president of Iraq, and engaged with a war with Iran from 1980-88 after the infamous 444 day Iranian Hostage Crisis of 1979-81. President Ronald Reagan and HW Bush supported Hussein's war because they wanted to hit back at Iran for disrupting the alliance by overthrowing the Shah during the 79 revolution.
Iraq is a majority Shiite country and Saddam was Sunni, so the Iranians believed that if Saddam was out of the way, they would be welcomed into Iraq, in fact many opposed W Bush's invasion of Iraq for this reason. The Iranians were also at war with the Taliban, and so spurred a warm reception to America's insertion of forces into the Panjir valley, where Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps international Quds force was already operating.
Military intelligence was tracking the recruitment and training of militia fighters by Iran to harass the Americans in Iraq, and also the further development of the Iranian nuclear program. The Americans and Israeli's, especially the intelligence apparatuses hold a long lived grudge against Iran for many Iranian proxy and terrorist attacks such as a bombing of a Jewish center in Argentina in 1994 that killed 84 people, and the bombing of the US embassy in Beirut, Lebanon in 1983 that killed 63 people and 17 Americans.
The book catalogues the many financial sanctions imposed and the complexity of implementation, including searching out non descript banks in the UAE, and uncovering disguised funds in the many Island based European tax havens. Society for Worldwide Inter-bank Financial Telecommunication, (SWIFT), is an extremely well connected facilitator of banking transactions which are cataloged by bank identifier codes (BIC), this organization presented a problem in imposing the sanctions, along with various other European banks such as Credit Suesse.
|
Article by the NY Times
|
Wikipedia article
|
|
|
The sanctions impose a cost on our allies, and prove the extravagant global power of the US financial system.
We are now threatening Iran with military action over it's violations of the nuclear deal and funding of terrorists inhibiting US foreign policy- Saudi Arabia and Israel are threatening action as well. The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee AIPAC is one of the most powerful lobbying organizations in the US and is very interested in promoting America's military defensive posture against Iran, they also joined the chorus of angry betrayal that accompanied John Kerry to his Nuclear negotiations in Austria.
My Judgment about American Foreign Policy
I do not 'run around like an irritated child with a blindfold indiscriminately rapping people on the head', I think the political establishment in Washington is interested in promoting stability in middle east, and they have extended the longest olive branch to Iran. The leadership in Iran was sabotaging the nuclear talks while they were in session, and the political ideologues routinely chant death to America. The middle eastern pax Americana is achievable but our efforts to engage the Syrian revolution were not enough, we need a credible threat of force to cause regimes to actually soften their stance to the US. If the Americans are involved we should demand peace, if US soldiers are killed and we trace the murders to Tehran, then Tehran must pay. The US put up with unacceptable humiliation at the hands of this regime, including murders, hostage situations, threats against our country, and subterfuge. This is the unique strength of the US position; we could take Damascus in 2 days, it's the trouble dealing with the aftermath that presents such a problem.
|
American diplomats held captive by Iranian revolutionaries in 1979
|
Everybody wants a peaceful middle east, but Iran wants a project power through the area that can form a coalition to threaten Israel and the Saudi's. The racial discrepancies, tensions and rivalries are like having the flu, the more rigorously active you are, the worse it's going to get. But the flu is like a demon, it needs to be exorcised before it leaves the body. Israel is not an innocent actor in the middle east, and neither is Saudi Arabia, but the United States is in a position where all they need is to sanction the use of force and our targets will be tested and further weakened. Security is the most important part of an American presence in middle east, and with more presence we are going to have more casualties- the American hesitance to place troops in harms way is a characteristic that harms our foreign policy objectives, and overlooks several opportunities to hold territory, and relieve the fears of local populations. Being deployed gives the troops valuable experience in conflict zones, and allows for them to be properly trained on effectively dealing with civilians. We have hundreds of thousands of troops sitting here in America when there are war ravaged regions of the middle east which are rife for terror organizations to fester in poverty with destructive ideologies floating in the sewage of famine, uncertainty, and fear. The American dollar is so rich over there that the subjection of these local economies to the stimulating effects of the US dollar is going to be constructive, also it is cheaper to house soldiers there.
I am surprised by the inaction of US troops at home bases, especially infantry. They are always readily available to help with natural disasters including hurricane and tsunami relief efforts- they should be involved with providing infrastructure to less developed regions, such as building, facilitating, and even attending schools.
I am very skeptical of how money is spent in official capacities on public levels, including foreign aid, especially to war torn countries, military acquisitions, military contract work, and development funds. That being said, even though the US trademark phrase is "we don't negotiate with terrorists" there are countless examples of plenty of money being paid for hostages, and you could even look at the Iran deal itself as being a kind of bribe for them to stop producing nuclear tech- it's beneficial to be able to bribe them with their own money. I think bribery or better, "positive reinforcement aid" can be a very sharp financial instrument in the dismantling, or re-configuring of middle eastern regimes.
Thank you for reading this weeks installment of Marketing with Jackson
I am surprised by the inaction of US troops at home bases, especially infantry. They are always readily available to help with natural disasters including hurricane and tsunami relief efforts- they should be involved with providing infrastructure to less developed regions, such as building, facilitating, and even attending schools.
I am very skeptical of how money is spent in official capacities on public levels, including foreign aid, especially to war torn countries, military acquisitions, military contract work, and development funds. That being said, even though the US trademark phrase is "we don't negotiate with terrorists" there are countless examples of plenty of money being paid for hostages, and you could even look at the Iran deal itself as being a kind of bribe for them to stop producing nuclear tech- it's beneficial to be able to bribe them with their own money. I think bribery or better, "positive reinforcement aid" can be a very sharp financial instrument in the dismantling, or re-configuring of middle eastern regimes.
Thank you for reading this weeks installment of Marketing with Jackson