Grantors of merits don't own means of production


Americans have a dream. And human ambition is an interesting religious topic every nationality has sought to answer. The Americans want a state, regardless of race, gender, religion, national origin, disability, sexual orientation, or age anyone can succeed in. Yet, as the country developed following ratification of the U.S. Constitution, its land value has been purchased, subdivided, resold, and then ensured during the Global Financial Collapse 2008 at a cost of nearly $1 trillion in TARP money because subprime borrowers couldn’t sell their houses at a higher price than they paid for them. Established in 1,776, Americans still complain about opportunity two-hundred and forty-five years later, especially Barack Hussein Obama, assuming office AFTER enactment of that Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Land is one of many business assets.

Generally, everyone agrees opportunities result from people who make things possible to do. And social systems like Capitalism, Democracy, or Meritocracy were defined by humans to promote people based on their contributions to humankind. U.S. Democrats want to build a Meritocracy, a system of titled achievement. Evidence the Democratic state seeks support from Meritocracy is which advertises “unique hiring paths for veterans, students and graduates, (and) individuals with a disability,” links to “Occupations by college major,” and promotes significantly greater pay for longer academic investment from Bachelor’s degrees through Doctor titles. Since World War II, the primary engine of Meritocracy has been school. All the while U.S. Republican and Democratic parties accuse one another of Fascism– a concept of forcible suppression greater than Apartheid. Although Republicans are “right,” devil’s advocates argue Capitalism is oppressive. Overpowered by wealthy, people born to wealth-less families can get oppressed; yet, Meritocracy won’t work if evaluators don’t control assets. And Democratic voters agree that’s what the issue is! Those voters define Socialism. Socialists claim if Administrations control business, we’d all be better off.

Meritocracy can’t work and won’t grow economies if education doesn’t control jobs.

If an Administration controlled production, it would teach, evaluate, and direct students to become labor. But, when revenues decrease, unlike business, schools relax standards then cut programs and growth declines. Economic growth always stops in Socialist systems like Meritocracy because the means of production are dictated then ruled over. Curriculum, a planned sequence or course, prohibits innovation; creators (art versus science) are considered noncontributing-deviates in an economy that ensures the growth people voted for! Moreover, Democracy includes everyone like losers; high school like inclusion fertilizes an atmosphere in which criminals compete as well as Capitalists to control jobs. The result is a middle of the road product which today manifests as “middle class.” Democrats are admitting in their campaigns they intend to ensure human civilization’s failure.

Business owns means of production. Schools don’t control jobs!

Given opposition, teachers deny seeking rule over labor in Socialism and claim to be “providing students with tools they need to succeed.” Graduates obtained what’s needed to make valuable contributions. Yet graduates can’t find jobs because (land) owners won’t hire them. And Democrats cite their unemployment as a reason to increase the value of merits. But if traders don’t value the benefits of an education then the Administration HAS TO control means of production in order for a Meritocracy to work; that prohibits deviation, stifles innovation, and leads to economic collapse. SFR Yugoslavia eventually dissolved.

One Reply to “Unemployment”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *