Here is an article that has me even more concerned about the viability of the United Nations.  Doesn't the US provide funds to support the United Nations?  Is the U.N. working or is it a big spy ring like this article alleges? 

The Associated Press

UNITED NATIONS -- A former Russian top spy says his agents helped the government steal nearly $500 million from the UN's oil-for-food program in Iraq before the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Sergei Tretyakov, who defected to the United States in 2000, says he oversaw an operation that helped Hussein's regime manipulate the price of Iraqi oil sold under the program -- allowing Russia to skim profits.

Tretyakov, former deputy head of intelligence at Russia's UN mission from 1995 to 2000, names some names, but sticks mainly to code names. Among the spies he says he recruited for Russia were a Canadian nuclear weapons expert who became a UN nuclear verification expert in Vienna, a senior Russian official in the oil-for-food program and a former Soviet bloc ambassador. He describes a Russian businessman who got hold of a nuclear bomb, and kept it stored in a shed at his dacha outside Moscow.

Tretyakov, 51, had never spoken out about his spying before this week, when he granted his first news media interviews to publicize a book published Thursday. Written by former Washington Post journalist Pete Earley, the book is titled "Comrade J.: The Untold Secrets of Russia's Master Spy in America after the End of the Cold War."

"It's an international spy nest," Tretyakov said of the UN, during an interview this week. "Inside the UN, we were fishing for knowledgeable diplomats who could give us, first of all, anti-American information."

His defection was first reported in 2001, followed by the news that he was not a diplomat, but a top Russian spy who was extensively debriefed by the CIA and the FBI.

Here is a John Maynard Keynes quote that describes why we must discuss economics on this blog.  I could take the easy way out and not discuss any controversial issue.  But if we don’t discuss any controversial subjects—how do we learn the truths to live life by?    I understand that thinking through issues can be tough, but I promise to not attack anyone personally and only attack error and focus on leading people to truth.  If someone does not agree, then develop a reasoned argument of why you think differently and help me grow.  I believe that when people go into labeling and name calling, then it signals a lack of rational points to discuss and have resorted to attacking personalities not principles.  I encourage all of us to not take the low road and focus on principles instead of personalities.  Let’s fear ignorance more than disagreement and focus on iron sharpening iron as we all grow on our way to serving and leading.  As Tim Marks states, “Know why you believe what you believe.”  I am proud of everyone for thinking, whether they agree or disagree is not as important to me as logically thinking through why you think what you think.  If you do not know why you believe what you believe, you may be a victim of some defunct economist or political philosopher.  John Maynard Keynes was an economist who lived in England during the Great Depression.  I personally disagree with much of his thinking, but I respect the fact that he thought deeply about economic issues.   Keynes' ideas still hold sway in many economic circles and his thinking made an impact in our world.   Keynes quote below is an appropriate quote for our discussion on the presidential elections and will help us to hold all of our beliefs to critical reasoning.

The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood.  Indeed, the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back. I am sure that the power of vested interests is vastly exaggerated compared with the gradual encroachment of ideas.

What intellectual influences have helped you develop the way you think about the economy and government?  Have you studied and read for yourself or have you developed your ideas through parents, teachers, and the media?  Please share. God Bless, Orrin Woodward

No economic system has been proven more wrong than Karl Marx and his communist revolution.  With this being said, no system that has failed so miserably has so many of its ideas still in practice.  It is like a person who realizes that drinking a whole cup of poison will kill him, but determines that half a cup a poison will help him.  The communist spent millions of dollars and years of propaganda to inject their poison into the thinking of Americans.  It is now a documented fact that the communist worked to control the media and change the American values to communist positions.  I would like to take you back to the recognized father of modern communism, Karl Marx.  I believe economic understanding is one of the keys for the future of America.  With so much misinformation out there, I run the risk of being labeled by many sincere people who do not fully understand what is at stake.

America was founded on strong free enterprise and rule of law principles.  How few voters understand this and freely buy into communist positions ought to concern of all us.  The whole goal of this blog is to generate discussion and a better understanding of what the media war is about.  I am not offended in the least if you disagree with our discussion.  All I ask is we think together in an effort to learn truth.  Here is an article on the 10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto.  Do you recognize some of these originally radical ideas as now mainstream American thought?   The ideologies of free enterprise and communism are polar opposites on their view of man, God, and government.  Please read carefully and think about the 10 Planks.  Does it concern anyone else that America would adopt so many principles from a communist system that is defunct, an abject failure, and Godless from an atheist economist Karl Marx?  Why have so many of us been taught these principles as the American way of life?  Some will say I am paranoid, but are we paranoid if they really are after us?  Here is the linked article with the 10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto.

Karl Marx describes in his communist manifesto, the ten steps necessary to destroy a free enterprise system and replace it with a system of omnipotent government power, so as to effect a communist socialist state. Those ten steps are known as the Ten Planks of The Communist Manifesto… The following brief presents the original ten planks within the Communist Manifesto written by Karl Marx in 1848, along with the American adopted counterpart for each of the planks. From comparison it's clear MOST Americans have by myths, fraud and deception under the color of law by their own politicians in both the Republican and Democratic and parties, been transformed into Communists.

Another thing to remember, Karl Marx in creating the Communist Manifesto designed these planks AS A TEST to determine whether a society has become communist or not. If they are all in effect and in force, then the people ARE practicing communists.

Communism, by any other name is still communism, and is VERY VERY destructive to the individual and to the society!!

The 10 PLANKS stated in the Communist Manifesto and some of their American counterparts are...

1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes.

Americans do these with actions such as the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868), and various zoning, school & property taxes. Also the Bureau of Land Management (Zoning laws are the first step to government property ownership)

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

Americans know this as misapplication of the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913, The Social Security Act of 1936.; Joint House Resolution 192 of 1933; and various State "income" taxes. We call it "paying your fair share".

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

Americans call it Federal & State estate Tax (1916); or reformed Probate Laws, and limited inheritance via arbitrary inheritance tax statutes.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

Americans call it government seizures, tax liens, Public "law" 99-570 (1986); Executive order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 which gives private land to the Department of Urban Development; the imprisonment of "terrorists" and those who speak out or write against the "government" (1997 Crime/Terrorist Bill); or the IRS confiscation of property without due process. Asset forfeiture laws are used by DEA, IRS, ATF etc...).

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

Americans call it the Federal Reserve which is a privately-owned credit/debt system allowed by the Federal Reserve act of 1913. All local banks are members of the Fed system, and are regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) another privately-owned corporation. The Federal Reserve Banks issue Fiat Paper Money and practice economically destructive fractional reserve banking.

6. Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State.

Americans call it the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Department of Transportation (DOT) mandated through the ICC act of 1887, the Commissions Act of 1934, The Interstate Commerce Commission established in 1938, The Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Communications Commission, and Executive orders 11490, 10999, as well as State mandated driver's licenses and Department of Transportation regulations.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

Americans call it corporate capacity, The Desert Entry Act and The Department of Agriculture… Thus read "controlled or subsidized" rather than "owned"… This is easily seen in these as well as the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and the IRS control of business through corporate regulations.

8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

Americans call it Minimum Wage and slave labor like dealing with our Most Favored Nation trade partner; i.e. Communist China. We see it in practice via the Social Security Administration and The Department of Labor. The National debt and inflation caused by the communal bank has caused the need for a two "income" family. Woman in the workplace since the 1920's, the 19th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, assorted Socialist Unions, affirmative action, the Federal Public Works Program and of course Executive order 11000.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries, gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of population over the country.

Americans call it the Planning Reorganization act of 1949 , zoning (Title 17 1910-1990) and Super Corporate Farms, as well as Executive orders 11647, 11731 (ten regions) and Public "law" 89-136. These provide for forced relocations and forced sterilization programs, like in China.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.

Americans are being taxed to support what we call 'public' schools, but are actually "government force-tax-funded schools " Even private schools are government regulated. The purpose is to train the young to work for the communal debt system. We also call it the Department of Education, the NEA and Outcome Based "Education" . These are used so that all children can be indoctrinated and inculcated with the government propaganda, like "majority rules", and "pay your fair share". WHERE are the words "fair share" in the Constitution, Bill of Rights or the Internal Revenue Code (Title 26)?? NO WHERE is "fair share" even suggested!! The philosophical concept of "fair share" comes from the Communist maxim, "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need! This concept is pure socialism. ... America was made the greatest society by its private initiative WORK ETHIC ... Teaching ourselves and others how to "fish" to be self sufficient and produce plenty of EXTRA commodities to if so desired could be shared with others who might be "needy"... Americans have always voluntarily been the MOST generous and charitable society on the planet.

Did anyone else recognize how many of Marx’s principles have been swallowed whole into the body politic of American thinking?  How do we educate Americans on the root source of much of our modern thinking on economic issues?  Although communism as a system is dead, the ideas are alive and well in the flow of American consciousness.  Isn't it ironic (to put it mildly) that the American ideals beat the communist ideals in the ideology war, but at the very moment the former communist countries are attempting to learn free enterprise from us - we have swallowed so much of their poison that we have forgotten what made us win the war in the first place!  America is a great nation with great ideals.  I am proud to share the ideals our country was founded upon with anyone.  We must learn our heritage in order to protect our posterity.   I have said and continue to say that, “Ideas have consequences.”  What we believe as a country today, will be tomorrow’s reality.  We need a group of people with the hunger to learn the truth and the courageous leadership to share it.  Will anyone help Chris and I Launch a Leadership Revolution?  God Bless, Orrin Woodward

Update:  I want everyone to know that I believe in a limited government as the founding fathers did.  Limited government means—let the citizens accept responsibility for the greatest sphere of action and only utilize government where no individual or group of individuals can accomplish the task.  Government is by nature a monopoly and when government gets involved in an activity, it very rarely withdraws from the field.  Everyone knows that it is much easier to start a government program than to end one.  The more government is involved, the less money and influence the private sector has in that field.  People naturally learn from mistakes due to the pain of failure, but government rarely learns because they do not experience the same pain of failure as individuals and private companies.  An example would be GM, which ran like a federal government for years, (and had a budget like some smaller countries) but is now paying the price for failed policies and learning hard lessons.  Our federal government when it fails, merely taxes more, increases money supply through inflation or borrows more money—this delays the lessons for our future generations.  I am not the type of person to pass the buck to our future generations and I desire a restoration of the government principles that made our country great originally!  The founding fathers spelled out their principles of government in the Federalist Papers in three broad categories:

1. Settling disputes according to the Rule of Law between individuals.

2. Protection from criminals attempting to steal, lie or coerce profits vs. earn them by service.

3. Ensure liberty for all by providing protection from foreign invaders.

I am reading a book called WIKINOMICS by Tapscott & Williams.  My good friend Bob Dickie III, the CEO of Team, bought it for me for Christmas.  I have not finished it, but the first couple of chapters were enlightening.  The world is changing and the command and control organizations are going the way of the dinosaur.  Peter Senge stated, “The only competitive advantage is your organizations ability to learn faster than the competition.”  I have stated, “The only way for your organization to consistently learn faster is to engage as many minds in thinking and learning as possible!”  How can you get any faster than engaging the entire world to help you?   Read what the authors said in WIKINOMICS:

A new kind of business is emerging—one that opens its doors to the world, co-innovates with everyone (especially customers), shares resources that were previously guarded, harnesses the power of mass collaboration, and behaves not as a multinational but as something new: a truly global firm. . . The new art and science of wikinomics is based on four powerful new ideas: openness, peering, sharing, and acting globally. 

Let’s discuss the first concept today and as I read further, we can discuss more of the concepts.    When you think of openness, you think of candor, transparency, freedom, flexibility, access, and sharing.  The old industrial age companies believe in confidential information, hierarchical structure from top to bottom, authoritarian command and control, and contracts to control people and other companies.  Today’s informational age companies that make their boundaries porous to external ideas and human capital outperform the dinosaur companies that rely solely on their internal resources and capabilities.   Here is what the authors expressed in their book:

Yet another kind of openness is exploding: the communication of previously secret corporate information to partners, employees, customers and shareholders, and other interested participants.  Transparency—the disclosure of pertinent information—is a growing force in the network economy. . . People and institutions that interact with firms are gaining unprecedented access to important information about corporate behavior, operations, and performance.  Armed with new tools to find out, inform others, and self-organize, stakeholders are scrutinizing the firm like never before.

Customers can see the true value of products better.  Employees have previously unthinkable knowledge about their firm’s strategy, management, and challenges.  Partners must have intimate knowledge about each other’s operations to collaborate.  Powerful institutional investors who now own or manage most wealth are developing x-ray vision.  And in a world of instant communications, whistle-blowers, inquisitive media, and Googling, citizens and communities can easily put firms under the microscope. 

Leading firms are opening up pertinent information to all these groups—because they reap significant benefits from doing so.  Rather than something to be feared, transparency is a powerful new force for business success.  Smart firms embrace transparency and are actively open.  Our research shows that transparency is critical to business partnerships, lower transaction costs between firms and speeding up the metabolism of business webs.  Employees of open enterprises have higher trust among each other and with the firm, resulting in lower cost, better innovation, and loyalty.

The old adage, “information is power” has changed to “information shared is empowering.”   So why do some companies conceal and control all information from their customers?  I talked earlier of the benefits of social capital, but a firm that controls all the information loses its ability to create social capital.  The market today will reward the companies who are open and punish companies who are closed.   It is hard to trust a person or company who keeps secrets from others.  This is why I love the NY Times test.  If what you are doing cannot be written on the front page of the NY Times, then why are you doing it?   Joseph Schumpeter described free enterprise in a concept he called, “Creative Destruction.”    Creative Destruction according to Mr. Schumpeter is what makes free enterprise so effective in creating long-term wealth.  The underlying principle is that old wealth and ideas will be replaced by new wealth and ideas.  The new creations will destroy the old businesses.   This has happened numerous times over the years.  Look at the record industry; how is that idea doing today?   How about the carbureted automobile?  Is anyone making money with carbureted cars today?  New ideas and money moved in to create CD’s and fuel injectors.

The opening thesis of the WIKINOMICS book is: the future will be created by the open and transparent companies and the firms who guard their information will be destroyed.   I strongly believe the future belongs to the company who will learn and adapt the fastest.  Slow companies who guard all the information necessary to improve the company are committing corporate suicide.  Is your company, job, or business in the (Open) information age or the (Closed) industrial age?   I advise you to take Mr. Schumpeter’s principle of Creative Destruction seriously—it will make all the difference whether you are created or destroyed financially in the information age.  God Bless, Orrin Woodward

A major plank for any presidential candidate is how they view government’s role in the economy.  Some candidates view the government as the insurer of the people’s welfare; while others, view government’s role more like an umpire to ensure all citizens play by the rules of free enterprise.  This discussion could develop into many separate books so I give an overview with a couple of specifics cases that will validate the principles.  I feel strongly that no government can insure the welfare of its citizens.  By the very nature of government, it only receives money from the citizens.  How can a government take from its own citizens, pay for all the bureaucrats and still provide more than it has taken?  It is economically impossible, which means the plan is to take from those who have money to give to those who don’t.  There is not one example in the long history of mankind where a reward for laziness has produced more wealth.  Not one, ever!  

Collectivism, regardless of what name you give it—communism, socialism, fascism, Nazism or modern liberals—derives it support from what Albert Jay Nock termed “Epstean’s Law.”  Epstean’s Law states, “Man tends always to satisfy his needs and desires with the least possible exertion.”  What could be better for some uninformed voter than to vote for some politician who promises free food, health care, housing, ET all, under the guise of compassionate care for the less fortunate?  Big companies also get involved by throwing money to politicians who promise special monopoly deals in the marketplace for their product or business.  Epstean’s Law applies to everyone rich or poor and must not be wrongly catered to or our whole country will suffer.  Look at all the well-intentioned government programs that fail and perform the opposite functions of originally planned.  This is why democracies with time become collectivist, as mass-man votes against private property rights and for government welfare for all.   But Epstean’s Law also is the driving force behind every material improvement and labor saving device.  It is highly beneficial when directed by a competitive free-market economy based on the right of private property and equality before the law.  Henry Ford understood Epstean’s Law and stated, “I give the laziest man in my factory the toughest job, because he will find an easier way of doing it.”  This is the positive side of Epstean’s Law.

Government cannot provide for the welfare of its citizens and survive.  Even today we see the results of collectivist action in destroying our great country.  The taxes paid by Americans are at an all time high—when you include all the hidden fees and charges.  The people are drowning through over taxation and are desperate to see their individual financial lives improved.  It is tempting to believe that government can solve their issues and politicians are tempted to promise this to get elected.  DO NOT BE FOOLED!   All we should ask of government is to ensure that everyone plays by the rules and allows human beings to enjoy their God-given rights to grow as fast and as far as they are willing to work.  No one should get a free ride from the government.  But Orrin, what about the unfortunate who need charity?  I am all for charity and we are commanded in the Bible to provide for those in need.  Charity ought to be a private affair and not government directed.  The only thing that has saved this country from collectivism is the inefficiency of the bureaucracy in implementing the collectivist policies.   

Let me give an example from a congressman who understood this principle well.  Davy Crockett, the famous outdoorsman was also a congressman from Tennessee.  After the war of 1812, Congress proposed a bill to appropriate ten thousand dollars to Stephen Decatur’s widow.  The war hero’s widow had fallen on hard times and Congress discussed giving the money to ameliorate her distress.  Only a hard heart would vote against such a compassionate measure, but Davy Crockett had his reasons.  Here is Crockett’s speech he delivered to Congress:

We must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. . . . Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity.  Every member upon this floor knows it.  We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but. . . . We have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. . . Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him.  This government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price.  If it is a debt, how much is it?  If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount.  There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. . . . But if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House.  There are thousands of widows in the country just such as this one. .

Sir, this is no debt.  The government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died.  I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. . . We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt.  We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate as charity. . . I am the poorest man on this floor.  I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.

Crockett knew that “Hard cases make bad law."  The widow bill was defeated and some members did donate money for her hardship.  Not all of the congress participated with their private funds.  It seems most of congress is more willing to be compassionate with public funds than personal funds.  Imagine if Bob Dickie, the Team CEO, started taking Team funds and donating to charities of his choice.  These are Team funds and not at the disposal of any one of us.  In the same way, government funds are the citizen’s money held in a trust to provide the basic infrastructure for all of the people.  Politicians should not spend the public funds on pet projects or anything that creates a special deal for some against others.  This divides people and initiates Epstean’s Law in a detrimental way. 

Any candidate for president that proposes more government to solve the ills of the people is a direct descendant of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao.  Whatever else government is, it is the society’s apparatus of coercion.  Government has monopoly power to enforce the rules of the game.  If someone enters a bank and attempts to illegally withdraw funds by violence—the police have authority to coerce the bank robber out of his actions through force.  To quote Edmund Opitz, “The business of society is peace; the business of government is violence.  So, the question is: What service can violence render to peace?  The libertarian answer is that violence can serve peace only by restraining peace breakers.”   If you don’t think the business of government is violence then stop paying your taxes and see if violence occurs.  Remember, every law passed also passes corresponding punishments for not obeying the law.  Every law passed means more government intervention to ensure the law is followed.  I am not for a lawless society, but am for reducing the quantity of laws and the controls that bind the human spirit and liberties needlessly. 

To sum up, government provides for defense, ensures God-given rights, and allows the pursuit of happiness.  Government cannot ensure the welfare of its citizens and any politician promising the government will take care of you is either lying or hopelessly ignorant.  We as Americans must insist that our candidate for president allows America to do what it does best—freely solve our own problems.  A moral people following the principles of the Bible does not need a new Sovereign.   The more people follow God, the less they will need government regulations & rules to enforce a myriad of issues.  The American phenomenon is based upon free people thinking, doing and solving issues for themselves with minimal government involvement.  Ronald Reagan said it best, “The ten scariest words to hear—‘This is the government and we are here to help.’”  God Bless, Orrin Woodward