Aspects of Tyranny

 

The political spectrum meets at the extremes, with tyranny.  It is really just a word for central control, usually with one person.  

Tyranny always seems to become an endpoint for all democracies, and other governments.  However, it is always destroyed by its sheer incompetence in managing a complex economy.  The top guy always kills off anybody who looks like they have a brain.  Can't take any chances.

I prefer a spectrum that just shows 'laissez faire' and 'tight control', with a muddle in the middle.  This is the true choice.  Lf produces the best economies, but with a lot of social problems.  The best example was Hong Kong before the takeover.

The United States have gone with lf, especially with taxation.  The tech billionaires can avoid all tax, and that's why they are billionaires.  Is this just?  The alternative is a failed economy, since a totally fair society has everybody equally searching for toilet paper.

Tyranny is always 'tight control'.  The people have demanded to take care of them.  Trump will provide, and keep the trains running on time.  I find this is an interesting experiment.

 Billionaires have their moment of creating wealth, then they go to 'wine, women, and song'.  They destroy the economy.  This is the same cycle as monopolies, so we should apply 'anti-trust' to the billionaires.  However, they have the power to be left alone.  I think there will be social upheaval against the billionaires, but I hope it doesn't destroy the process of getting there.

A tech billionaire must give up all humanity.  They must be greedy and grasping for all the money they can get.  Otherwise, they are destroyed by 'touchy-feely' people.  If they abuse women, they better have the money to buy them off.  I find it sad, but the US is the only place to create tech billionaires.  Canadian billionaires all create monopolies for wealth, and the economy goes nowhere.