Tag Archives: politics

Why I Support Bitcoin: A Personal Journey Through the Global Failure of Fiat

Posted on by
1

For most of my life, I’ve worked with businesses and nonprofits trying to make the world better. I’m a mechanical engineer by trade. I like building things that work. But the more I’ve worked across systems, the more I’ve realized something deeply broken sits at the root of almost every failure: fiat money.

A Friend, a Business, and a Broken Economy

A few years ago, a friend of mine was helping advise a small, sustainable clothing business in Sri Lanka. They used natural dyes and traditional techniques to create jobs for locals—especially for people who often couldn’t access the formal economy. It was working. Until it wasn’t.

The Sri Lankan currency collapsed during a financial crisis. Inflation soared. Imports became unaffordable. And the business, despite doing everything right, failed—not because of bad management or a poor product, but because the foundation it was built on—its currency—was rotten.

This is what fiat does. It breaks systems from the bottom up. And it leaves regular people holding the bag.

How Fiat Hollowed Out America

We often think of developing countries suffering from bad money, but the same decay has hit the United States. The post-WWII American economy was built on sound money and a manufacturing base that rewarded long-term planning and production.

That changed in 1971, when Nixon took the U.S. off the gold standard. With no monetary anchor, we entered the era of fiat—the era of cheap credit, endless deficits, and quarterly capitalism. Easy money made it easier to offshore jobs , because capital flowed wherever short-term profits looked best. Domestic manufacturing collapsed (such as in Janesville, Wisconsin). Towns hollowed out. Entire regions like the Midwest were gutted for the sake of Wall Street’s earnings calls.

Short-termism infected everything:

  • Companies spent more on stock buybacks than R&D or wages
  • Governments ran up debt with no repayment plan
  • Individuals chased consumption over savings, just to stay ahead of inflation

Economic Hitmen and Empires of Debt

In Confessions of an Economic Hitman, John Perkins explains how U.S. institutions loaned billions to developing nations for infrastructure that looked good on paper but benefited U.S. contractors more than locals. When those countries couldn’t repay, they were forced into austerity, resource sell-offs, and geopolitical obedience. Debt became a weapon.

Today, China is doing the same through its Belt and Road Initiative. In Sri Lanka, China took control of the Hambantota Port on a 99-year lease when the country couldn’t pay its debts. In Greece, China’s COSCO controls the Port of Piraeus. In Australia, they secured a 99-year lease on the Port of Darwin, now under review due to national security concerns.

This isn’t charity. It’s colonialism with spreadsheets.

Fiat Money Rewards the Few, Punishes the Many

Every time a central bank prints new money, it steals from savers and wage earners. Those who hold fiat see their purchasing power decay. This is especially cruel during periods of inflation, like the 8% spike in the U.S. in recent years.

Bitcoin fixes this.

  • It has a fixed supply: 21 million coins, ever.
  • It can’t be printed or manipulated by any government.
  • It rewards saving, planning, and long-term thinking.

It flips the fiat incentives:

  • Instead of spending now, you’re rewarded for holding.
  • Instead of inflation eating your wealth, deflation preserves it.
  • Instead of trusting a corrupt institution, you trust code and math.

Why I Share Bitcoin With Others

I’ve read the books. I’ve seen the failures. I’ve lived through broken systems and watched people I care about suffer—not from laziness or ignorance, but because the monetary foundation was cracked.

Bitcoin is the best alternative I’ve found to a rigged, decaying system. It’s not just about investment. It’s about dignity. Agency. Fairness. It’s about building something that can last.

This is why I support Bitcoin. And this is why I speak up.

🛑 You Can’t Outgrow a Debt Spiral — But You Can Exit It (or Reprice It)

Posted on by
Reply

The U.S. won’t grow its way out of a debt spiral — it’ll inflate, debase, and extract.
The real exit ramp is Bitcoin: a parallel system with hard rules, not political ones.
Opting into BTC isn’t about returns — it’s about exiting a rigged game before the math breaks.

Conventional wisdom keeps hoping that the U.S. can grow its way out of a fiscal doom spiral:

“If GDP just grows fast enough, even the most reckless overspending by Congress won’t matter.”

But that assumes we still live in an age of manageable debt, cooperative politics, and sound incentives.

We don’t.

📉 The U.S. Fiscal Reality

  • $36+ trillion in debt
  • $2 trillion annual deficits
  • $1.1 trillion in yearly interest
  • Interest payments now exceed military spending

We are no longer debating whether the debt matters — we’re just seeing how long it can be delayed before the math breaks. Growth won’t fix this. It hasn’t yet, and it won’t now.

So what’s the plan? Inflate, extract, or collapse?

🇳🇴 But What About Norway?

Norway is often brought up as a model of fiscal sanity — and with good reason:

  • Budget surplus in 2024: 13.2% of GDP
  • Sovereign wealth fund: $1.74 trillion (largest in the world)
  • Debt-to-GDP around 55%, but fully offset by national savings

They even run a structural non-oil deficit, but it’s funded by planned withdrawals from their sovereign fund. In short: they spend with discipline and have assets to back it.

So why can’t every country do that?

🚫 Because It’s Not Globally Sustainable

Norway is rich in oil, small in population, and extremely disciplined in governance. They:

  • Save during booms instead of spending
  • Use their wealth fund to smooth volatility, not plug holes
  • Issue debt strategically, not out of desperation

For the rest of the world, especially the U.S., that model isn’t available.

Most countries are net debtors. They’ve hollowed out their productive base, offshored manufacturing, and replaced savings with speculation.

You can’t run a surplus if:

  • Your economy is dependent on imported energy and goods
  • Your entitlement promises are growing faster than your tax base
  • Your political class has no incentive to say “no”

Surpluses require restraint, surplus-producing sectors, and trust — all of which are in short supply.

🧱 So What’s the Real Path Out?

It’s not hoping for a miraculous growth surge. It’s not copying Norway. It’s not electing better managers of a broken system.

It’s opting out. It’s repricing trust.

🔑 Enter Bitcoin.

  • A monetary system with hard limits, not political ones
  • No printing. No bailouts. No “emergency exceptions”
  • Open, auditable, neutral — like a global sovereign wealth reserve for the people

Bitcoin is:

  • An exit for individuals
  • A hedge against sovereign collapse
  • And, increasingly, a foundation for new financial instruments — including Bitcoin-backed bonds.

🧾 Bitcoin-Backed Bonds: Repricing Sovereign Risk

Here’s a future worth considering:

Nations issue bonds backed by Bitcoin reserves, restoring credibility and reducing borrowing costs.

Instead of trusting central banks or political stability, investors trust digital collateral — liquid, auditable, incorruptible.

  • Governments get lower interest rates
  • Investors get higher real returns
  • The system regains trust — not by promising growth, but by tying itself to something outside its control

This isn’t sci-fi. El Salvador is already moving in this direction. Others will follow — especially as debt costs soar and trust erodes.

🧠 TL;DR

  • You can’t outgrow a debt spiral.
  • You can’t copy Norway unless you’re already Norway.
  • You can’t reform a system whose core logic is delay and inflate.

But you can exit.

Bitcoin offers individuals, institutions, and eventually even nations a path out — not to escape responsibility, but to rebuild trust from the ground up.

This isn’t about being early to an investment. It’s about being on time to a monetary exit.

Elon vs. Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill”: Why It’s All Noise Without Bitcoin

Posted on by
Reply

Elon Musk is on a rampage again—this time, against Donald Trump’s so-called “One, Big, Beautiful Bill.” He’s called it a “disgusting abomination,” a pork-stuffed monstrosity that will explode the national deficit and bury Americans under a mountain of debt. And he’s not wrong.

But here’s the thing: yelling into the void of Washington politics won’t change a system that’s already rigged to print, spend, and inflate its way into oblivion. The real protest isn’t a tweetstorm. It’s opting out.

Elon Tried to Fix It—And Got Burned

Let’s not forget: Elon Musk didn’t start out as a critic. He tried to work within the system. He joined advisory councils, met with presidents, and even offered to help streamline government operations. He believed that innovation and logic could steer the ship of state.

But the bureaucracy didn’t budge. The incentives were too broken, the politics too entrenched. Eventually, Musk walked away—disillusioned and vocal. His recent outburst isn’t just frustration; it’s the sound of someone who tried to fix the machine and realized it’s designed to resist change.

Why Fighting the System Is a Distraction

The U.S. government isn’t going to stop spending. It’s not going to balance the budget. And it’s certainly not going to voluntarily give up the power to print money. So while Elon’s outrage is justified, it’s also futile. The system isn’t broken—it’s working exactly as designed.

The Only Real Exit: Bitcoin

If you’re tired of watching your purchasing power erode while politicians play Monopoly with your future, there’s only one real move: opt out. Buy Bitcoin.

Bitcoin isn’t just a hedge against inflation—it’s a peaceful protest. It’s a decentralized, deflationary alternative to fiat currencies that can’t be manipulated by central banks or corrupted by politics. It’s the lifeboat in a sea of fiscal insanity.

Conclusion: Don’t Rage—Exit

Elon’s fury is understandable. But the real revolution won’t be televised—it’ll be verified on the blockchain. If you want to send a message to Washington, don’t waste your breath. Move your money. Buy Bitcoin.

The Fake Money That Fueled a Real War: How Mefo Bills Led to WWII

Posted on by
Reply

This post was created from this video

Hitlers Gamble That Ignited War | Blood Money Inside The Nazi Economy | Part 1 | Documentary Central

In the 1930s, Nazi Germany was broke. The country was reeling from the Great Depression, saddled with war reparations, and shackled by the Treaty of Versailles, which banned it from rearming. Yet within a few years, Germany had built one of the most fearsome war machines in history.

How did they pay for it?

They invented money.

The Mefo Trick

Enter Mefo bills—a financial sleight of hand orchestrated by Hjalmar Schacht, Hitler’s economic wizard and head of the Reichsbank.

The plan was simple and devious:

  • A fake company called MEFO (Metallurgical Research Corporation) was set up.
  • MEFO issued IOUs, or “Mefo bills,” to arms manufacturers instead of actual cash.
  • These IOUs were guaranteed by the German government, and companies could trade them or cash them in later at the Reichsbank.
  • Crucially, the bills were kept off the official budget, hiding the scale of rearmament.

This created a parallel currency used only within the military-industrial complex. No taxes raised. No gold reserves touched. Just promises backed by more promises.

But there was a catch: each Mefo bill had a five-year maturity. That meant the government had, at most, five years before they had to repay the IOUs in Reichsmarks. The first wave of bills, issued in 1934, would come due in 1939—just as Germany was preparing to invade Poland.

A Booming Mirage

It worked—at first.

Factories roared back to life. Steel, chemicals, and synthetic fuel production surged. Unemployment plummeted. To the outside world, it looked like an economic miracle.

But it wasn’t prosperity—it was military Keynesianism on credit.

By 1938, 20% of German GDP was going to the military. Consumer goods remained scarce. Wages were frozen. Trade unions were banned. Prices were controlled. And Mefo bills kept piling up.

Schacht warned that the system couldn’t last. Eventually, the bills would come due—and the Reichsbank would either default or start printing money. Hitler didn’t care. Instead of slowing down, he pushed harder. Schacht was sidelined, and Hermann Göring took over economic planning with a singular goal: prepare for total war.

War Became the Only Exit

The Mefo system couldn’t sustain itself. Germany was running out of foreign reserves and raw materials. The economy was overheating. The only way out was forward—through invasion, plunder, and conquest.

Occupied countries like Austria, Czechoslovakia, and eventually Poland were stripped of gold, steel, coal, and labor. France was forced to fund the German occupation. The Nazi war machine was now self-financing—by theft.

By the time the Mefo bills started coming due in 1939, the regime began repaying them not through taxes or trade, but by printing money and launching war. The economy was now riding on a tidal wave of credit, conquest, and coercion.

Why It Matters

The Mefo bill scheme shows how financial manipulation can fuel political extremism, militarism, and war. When money is divorced from accountability and markets are warped by ideology, the result isn’t just inflation or inefficiency.

The result is destruction.

Is Factory Work Exploitative If It Saves You From Something Worse?

Posted on by
1

In 2012, a Chinese student studying in the U.S. wrote a letter that was later shared by David Pogue in Business Insider. He described how his aunt had worked for several years in what Americans might call a “sweatshop”:

“It was hard work. Long hours, small wage, poor working conditions. Do you know what my aunt did before she worked in one of these factories? She was a prostitute.”

The student emphasized that, despite the difficult conditions, the factory job was a step up—it provided safety, legality, and stability she had never known before.

This story raises a profound moral question: Does an improvement from desperation make an exploitative system justifiable?

Let’s explore why this tension sits at the heart of modern global capitalism.

Better Than Nothing Isn’t the Same as Fair

A factory job may lift someone out of desperation. But an improvement from rock bottom does not equal justice.

The woman in this story is performing the same labor as someone assembling parts in Michigan. She’s not less intelligent or less valuable. She’s just on the wrong side of a global wage arbitrage system.

Corporations don’t pay her less because she’s worth less—they pay her less because they can.

What Is Exploitation?

Exploitation occurs when value is extracted from someone without fair compensation.

You can have:

  • Exploitative jobs that are better than the alternative, and
  • Exploitative systems that improve people’s lives short-term

But the core question is: Who captures the surplus value?

In this case, it’s not the woman. Her labor adds real value to a global supply chain, but she sees only a sliver of it. The rest flows upward:

  • To multinational corporations
  • To shareholders
  • To high-income consumers paying less for products made with underpaid labor

This is exploitation by design—not an accident, but a business model.

Does “Choice” Make It Ethical?

Many people argue:

“Well, she chose the job.”

But choice under coercion of circumstance isn’t freedom. If the only options are wage slavery or something worse, the system isn’t ethical—it’s merely tolerable.

Asking someone to be grateful for a better form of poverty is morally hollow.

So What Can Be Done?

This is where technologies like Bitcoin offer potential.

No, Bitcoin doesn’t magically fix global labor markets. But it creates an escape hatch:

  • A way to store value in a neutral system not subject to local currency collapse
  • A method of payment that bypasses middlemen
  • A step toward economic sovereignty

It lets workers keep more of what they earn. And that alone makes it powerful.

Final Thought

A factory job may save someone from a worse fate. But if it pays unfairly, concentrates profits far away, and denies workers ownership of what they build—it’s still exploitation.

We can be grateful for progress while demanding more. Dignity requires more than survival.

And we don’t have to wait for permission to build something better.

🥾 Bootstraps Without Boots: Why the Global System Still Extracts Talent

Posted on by
Reply

We love to say “just pull yourself up by your bootstraps.”
It’s a neat, comforting idea. Work hard, be smart, and success is inevitable.But here’s the truth:

That advice only works if you were born with boots.

In many parts of the world — from Haiti to Senegal to rural India — people aren’t lazy. They’re not stupid. They’re simply locked out of the systems that reward effort.

🌍 Talent Is Universal. Opportunity Is Not.

As economist Ha-Joon Chang points out, people in poor countries are often more entrepreneurial than those in rich ones — because they have to be. There’s no safety net. No trust fund. No stable job waiting after graduation.

But despite this hustle, the game is rigged:

  • Currencies collapse.
  • Corruption is common.
  • Legal systems are slow or predatory.
  • Borders are closed.
  • Global capital flows around them, not toward them.

You can be brilliant and still stuck.

👣 Magatte Wade’s Truth: The Problem Isn’t the People

Senegalese entrepreneur Magatte Wade has built global businesses from Africa. She’s seen the raw talent. The drive. The ideas. The hunger.

Her message?

“Africa isn’t poor because Africans are lazy. It’s poor because the system makes entrepreneurship nearly impossible.”

She calls it “permission-based economies.” In many developing countries, just starting a business requires dozens of licenses, bribes, and approvals — often taking months longer than in the U.S. or Europe.

So even if you’ve got the mindset, you don’t have the infrastructure to win.

🎯 The Bootstrap Narrative Fails Globally

MythReality
“Anyone can invest.”Not if your currency melts or you can’t access a bank.
“Just learn online.”Not if you have no internet, no laptop, no electricity.
“Start a business.”Not if your government makes it illegal or corrupt.
“Just move to a better country.”Not if your passport locks you out.

🍀 And Yes — Luck Matters More Than We Admit

Even in the U.S., success often comes down to:

  • Who your parents were
  • Which zip code you were born in
  • Whether a policy loophole happened to exist in a year you applied

You may know someone in Haiti who made it to the U.S. only through a temporary rule — and only with personal support. That’s not “bootstrapping.” That’s a rare alignment of chance, help, and timing.

🔑 So What Do We Do?

✅ 1. Stop Pretending Meritocracy Is Global

Effort matters. But effort without access is just exhaustion.

✅ 2. Support Systems That Shrink the Luck Gap

  • Bitcoin → access to global savings
  • Online education → access to real skills
  • Remote work platforms → access to higher wages
  • Legal reform → access to build freely, without bribery

✅ 3. Build Platforms That Let Value Flow to the Creator

Not to the middleman. Not to the gatekeeper. Not to the “aid industrial complex.”
To the person doing the work.

💥 Final Thought

The tragedy isn’t that people in poor countries are lazy.
It’s that they’re invisible to the systems that claim to reward merit.

Talent is everywhere.
Boots are not.

If we want a fair world, we don’t need more advice.
We need to start building the Earned World — where those who create value are finally allowed to keep it.

Further Reading:

Earned World Manifesto – Thinkers I Wish to Unite

Posted on by
Reply

I generated the above table using ChatGPT. I have been invovled in all of these communities that are swirling around the same ideas. I wish I could get them to work together.

ChatGPT also generated the below. It’s not perfect but I wanted to publish it because I want to.

  1. offer it to the world
  2. open for critique and improvements.

The Earned World Manifesto

A Declaration for Builders, Not Rent-Seekers

1. The Problem We See

The current system extracts more than it empowers.
It rewards proximity to power, not creation of value.
It builds systems that entrench dependency, then calls that stability.

We see:

  • Productivity rising — but wages stagnating
  • Knowledge abundant — but credentials gatekept
  • Labor outsourced — but profit hoarded
  • Currency inflated — but savings eroded
  • Talent global — but opportunity gated
  • Work automated — but ownership concentrated

This is not an accident.
The rules are rigged — and the game is extraction.

2. What We Believe

🧱 Agency Is Non-Negotiable

Each individual has the right — and the responsibility — to direct their life.
Freedom is not given. It is constructed.

📈 Value Should Flow to the Builder

The person who creates, fixes, or risks should own the upside.
Rent-seeking is a tax on the capable.

🧠 Education Must Be Sovereign

Learning is abundant. Gatekeeping it is theft.
We reject the credential treadmill in favor of demonstrated skill.

💰 Money Must Be Earned and Preserved

Currency debasement is economic theft.
Savings must store effort, not melt it.

🔐 Ownership Is the Foundation

He who owns the tool, the platform, the protocol — holds the power.
We choose ownership over permission.

3. What We Support

This is not a utopia. It is a direction.

We support:

  • 🔸 Individuals achieving financial independence through disciplined action
  • 🔸 Workers becoming owners, not just operators
  • 🔸 Monetary systems (like Bitcoin) that cannot be corrupted
  • 🔸 Skill-first pathways over debt-fueled credentials
  • 🔸 Systems that reward contribution, not compliance
  • 🔸 Local or global opt-out zones where new rules can be tested

We reject:

  • Coerced redistribution
  • Forced altruism
  • Dependence disguised as security

4. Our Two-Stage Strategy

🛶 Stage 1: Build your lifeboat.
Earn freedom through action.
Reduce expenses, save in hard assets, develop durable skills, and reclaim your time.

🏛️ Stage 2: Rebuild the harbor.
Use your freedom to build systems that don’t demand sacrifice to survive.
Not as charity — but as infrastructure for agency.

5. Join Us

We are the builders. The earners. The ones who won’t rent our future.

We will:

  • Speak plainly about value and power
  • Share tools, not just tweets
  • Reward proof-of-work, not status
  • Create systems where sovereignty scales

If you’re tired of extraction,
If you still believe in ownership,
If you’re ready to build —

Welcome to the Earned World.

As I was generating the Manifesto, I had a lot of conversation with ChatGPT. Below was a powerful statement it had.

“The current system extracts more than it empowers.”

This means that the rewards of the modern economy are disproportionately claimed by systems, institutions, and owners — not by the individuals doing the work or taking the risk. The value flows upward, while the burden flows downward.

Here’s what that looks like across different dimensions:

💼 In Work
  • Wages have stagnated while productivity and corporate profits rise.
  • Most workers trade time for money with little long-term upside (no ownership, equity, or growth path).
  • Gig work and contract labor shift costs (insurance, risk, taxes) to the individual while stripping stability.

Extraction: Time, energy, creativity — taken for a wage that doesn’t keep up with cost of living.
Empowerment: Would mean building ownership, autonomy, or long-term equity from your work.

💸 In Money
  • Fiat currency loses purchasing power over time (inflation), punishing savers and wage earners.
  • Asset inflation (stocks, real estate) benefits those who already hold wealth — not those trying to build it.
  • Central banks and governments distort money supply in ways individuals cannot control or escape.

Extraction: Your savings melt while those close to the money printer get richer.
Empowerment: Would mean access to stable, sovereign, permissionless money, Bitcoin.

🏥 In Healthcare
  • Healthcare is tied to employment — meaning you’re not truly free to leave your job.
  • Insurance costs rise faster than wages; many avoid treatment due to fear of bills.

Extraction: Your health and security are used to bind you to jobs and debt.
Empowerment: Would mean decoupling basic needs from corporate control.

🏠 In Housing
  • Real estate is increasingly used as an investment vehicle, not a place to live.
  • Young people are priced out of ownership, forced into permanent renting.

Extraction: Rent drains wealth every month with no asset built.
Empowerment: Would mean pathways to ownership, equity, or cooperative housing.

🎓 In Education
  • Education costs have exploded, leading to decades-long student debt burdens.
  • The credential economy keeps people in a treadmill of debt just to be “qualified.”

Extraction: You pay to enter the game, and the game changes by the time you finish.
Empowerment: Would mean low-cost, high-agency pathways to skill and livelihood.

🤖 In Technology
  • Tech companies extract your attention, data, and time to sell to advertisers.
  • Users create content and community, but ownership and profits go to platforms.

Extraction: You are the product.
Empowerment: Would mean open platforms, data sovereignty, and user-owned networks.

🔁 Why This Matters

When a system extracts more than it empowers, it means:

  • The average person gets poorer in power, even if they get richer in consumption.
  • Stability, dignity, and control are replaced with dependency and precarity.
  • People become functionaries, not free agents.

Stagnation in the U.S. and suppression in Mexico are two symptoms of the same disease:

A system where capital moves freely, but labor and ownership do not.

Personal sovereignty is the prerequisite for systemic sovereignty.

Entrepreneurship without savings is economic quicksand.

I think there are solutions to a lot of these propblems. But this is teh start of framing for myself to think more about solutions.

I encourage everyone in the communities I identified to read this as well as consider how they coudl work to make their own lives better as well as make the system better.

I want to highlight the 2 step process.

🛶 Stage 1: Build your lifeboat.
Earn freedom through action.
Reduce expenses, save in hard assets, develop durable skills, and reclaim your time.

🏛️ Stage 2: Rebuild the harbor.
Use your freedom to build systems that don’t demand sacrifice to survive.
Not as charity — but as infrastructure for agency.

While I believe everyone is capable of building their lifeboat, it is certainly harder for some than others.

Please comment with any thoughts you have to update this.
Please feed this into AI and discuss with it how you might make chagnes to or improve it.

Here are a few resources I referenced when thinking about this.

Gold, Silver, Debt To GDP, Wealth Preservation

The Idea of Bitcoin Needs to Succeed, Even if Bitcoin Fails

World Wage and Work

23 Things They Don’t Tell You About Capitalism -Ha-Joon Chang

Post Labor Econonomics Videos – David Shapiro

Post Labor Econonomics Videos – David Shapiro

Posted on by
4

Update 7-27-2025 – He added a 5th video Post-Labor Economics Lecture 05 – “Bridging the Gap” (2025 Update)

as well as a long podcast – Full Post-Labor Economics Deep Dive and Book Preview! Interview with Dalibor Petrovic

I am looking forward to the book.

original post below

Over the past couple weeks, I’ve been diving deep into David Shapiro’s Post-Labor Economics lecture series (linked below — all around 40 min). I’ve listened to each one twice, and then used a mix of ChatGPT, Copilot, and Grok to create four 10-point summaries — one per video. Then I asked ChatGPT to synthesize those into a single meta-summary of the core ideas.

Here are the 4 videos. Each about 40 minutes long. 

Post-Labor Economics Lecture 04 – “Day 1 Implementation & Solutions” (2025 Update) 

Post-Labor Economics Lecture 02 – “Economic Agency Paradox” (2025 update)

Post-Labor Economics Lecture 03 – “That which gets measured gets managed!” (2025 update)

Post-Labor Economics Lecture 04 – “Day 1 Implementation & Solutions” (2025 Update)

ChatGPT – Here is a 10-bullet-point meta-summary that synthesizes the key themes and insights from all four “Post-Labor Economics” video summaries:

  1. Automation is Inevitable and Transformative: AI and robotics are displacing human labor across all sectors, making wage-based employment increasingly obsolete while simultaneously threatening consumer demand and economic stability.
  2. Economic Agency is the Core Concern: Individuals require labor rights, property ownership, and voting rights to retain agency. As labor rights erode, property rights become the cornerstone of financial autonomy.
  3. The Demand Paradox: Businesses want to automate to cut costs but still need paying customers. Without jobs, people can’t spend—creating a structural contradiction that leads to economic collapse unless resolved.
  4. Rethinking Metrics: The EAI: Traditional KPIs like GDP and unemployment are no longer sufficient. The Economic Agency Index (EAI) measures household income sources (property, wages, transfers) and highlights the need to prioritize ownership income.
  5. UBI: Helpful but Not Enough: Universal Basic Income is necessary as a safety net but inadequate on its own due to inflation risk, governance issues, and centralization. It must be paired with decentralized, property-based income streams.
  6. Ownership is the New Wages: Future economic resilience depends on expanding access to trusts, wealth funds, co-ops, patron equity programs, and digital tokens to replace lost labor income with ownership-based dividends.
  7. Counties as Innovation Labs: With 3,100 U.S. counties, local governments are ideal sites for experimenting with and scaling post-labor economic models, offering granular data and tailored policy solutions.
  8. Banks as Economic Interfaces: Banks will evolve into the primary economic hubs, managing dividend flows, investment portfolios, and identity verification, replacing the role of traditional employers in financial life.
  9. Guardrails Against Technofeudalism: Preventing elite capture and concentrated corporate control is critical. Transparency, participatory governance, and broad-based ownership are essential safeguards.
  10. Market-Driven, Not Ideological: Post-labor economics distinguishes itself from socialism and communism by preserving markets and private property. Its goal is not wealth redistribution through state control, but wealth inclusion through distributed ownership and market-based tools.

I continued to have a conversation with ChatGPT to understand further. 

I asked it “”How does post-labor economics differ from individuals simply investing in the stock market to generate passive income?”

It gave a very nicely formatted response, below. 

🧩 TL;DR: It’s Not Either/Or

Buying stocks is one tool — a good one — for individual financial freedom.

But post-labor economics is about designing an entire economy where capital income is as normal, widespread, and accessible as having a job once was.

It’s not just you winning the game — it’s everyone getting a seat at the table.

Great question — and an important one.

🤔 At first glance, post-labor economics might sound like:

“Just buy stocks and live off dividends — problem solved.”

But post-labor economics goes beyond that in a few key ways. Here’s how it’s different from individuals simply investing in the stock market:

🏛️ 1. System Design vs. Personal Strategy

  • Stock investing is an individual solution — you build capital and income for yourself.
  • Post-labor economics is a system-wide redesign — it’s about building structures where everyone can participate in ownership, even if they don’t have savings, brokerage accounts, or financial literacy.

💵 2. Barriers to Entry

  • The stock market requires:
    • Disposable income
    • Access to financial tools
    • Risk tolerance
    • Education
  • Post-labor models focus on lowering those barriers by:
    • Distributing residency-based dividends
    • Creating local trust funds
    • Offering non-transferable community equity (you don’t have to “buy in”)

🏘️ 3. Ownership of Local, Tangible Assets

  • The stock market mostly involves ownership of national or global corporations.
  • Post-labor economics emphasizes ownership of local assets: businesses, land, water rights, data, energy — things that create direct, community-level income streams.

Owning Amazon stock ≠ owning the gas station, solar field, or rental housing in your own town.

🤝 4. Shared Governance & Resilience

  • When you buy stock, you have no governance power, unless you’re a billionaire activist investor.
  • Post-labor structures are built on shared governance — resident voting, dividend boards, and community stewardship.

💬 5. Not Everyone Can or Will Invest

  • A huge portion of the population has no stock market exposure. About 45% of Americans own no equities at all — and among the bottom 50% of income, it’s more like 10–15%.
  • Post-labor economics seeks to bake ownership into the system so that even non-investors receive income from capital.

🧠 6. Ownership as Policy, Not Privilege

  • Stock investing is optional and personal.
  • Post-labor economics treats ownership as infrastructure — like roads or clean water. It should be available to all by design, not just those who planned ahead or got lucky.

🌐 7. Resisting Elite Capture

  • The stock market concentrates wealth — the top 10% own over 85% of equities.
  • Post-labor models try to decentralize ownership — giving communities a stake in the economy before everything gets bought up by private equity or mega-corps.

🛠️ 8. Designed for the Age of Automation

  • Stock market investing was never intended as a wage replacement for the masses.
  • Post-labor economics is explicitly built to answer:

“What happens when jobs disappear, but people still need income?”

My next question. 

“What mechanisms does post-labor economics use to avoid the tragedy of the commons when assets are collectively owned?”

✅ TL;DR:

Post-labor economics avoids the tragedy of the commons by turning shared access into structured, incentivized, accountable co-ownership.

It’s not a free-for-all — it’s a designed economy, where people are rewarded for taking care of what they collectively own.

Excellent question — and one of the core design challenges of post-labor economics.

The tragedy of the commons refers to a situation where a shared resource is overused or neglected because no one feels personal responsibility. In a post-labor economy — where ownership is distributed rather than concentrated — this is a real risk. But it’s not unsolvable.

Here’s how post-labor economics intentionally designs around the tragedy of the commons:

🧩 1. Move from “Common” to “Co-Owned”

  • The key shift is from open access (commons) to structured, governed co-ownership.
  • Think: community trusts, resident shares, dividend boards — where everyone has skin in the game, not just access.

📜 2. Define Clear Rights and Responsibilities

  • Successful post-labor models include smart governance charters:
    • Who can vote?
    • Who maintains assets?
    • How are profits used?
    • What happens if you leave?
  • This clarity prevents freeloading and aligns incentives for stewardship.

💰 3. Tie Participation to Rewards

  • Dividends aren’t just handed out — they can be tied to local contribution:
    • Show up to meetings
    • Volunteer hours
    • Local residency
    • Use the service or shop locally
  • This ensures that ownership feels earned, not distant or abstract.

📊 4. Transparency and Dashboards

  • Many models propose using public dashboards to show how community-owned assets are performing.
  • When people see the numbers — usage, revenue, maintenance costs — it creates accountability and pride.

🧑‍🤝‍🧑 5. Decentralized Governance Structures

  • Rather than one central authority, post-labor systems push decisions downward:
    • Counties manage their own trusts
    • Co-ops elect local boards
    • Banks help automate compliance and distribution
  • Local control = stronger stewardship.

🏦 6. Hybrid Ownership Models

  • Some assets are shared (like land or solar arrays), while others are individually owned (tokens, local equity).
  • This creates a blended structure where people benefit both as individuals and collectively, reducing the temptation to abuse shared goods.

🛡️ 7. Guardrails Against Elite Capture

  • Ironically, many “commons” in the modern economy (like housing or water) have already been captured — just not by the public.
  • Post-labor models bake in protections: voting caps, local-only ownership, anti-speculation rules, etc.

It’s a powerful framework. Personally, I’m still focused on achieving my own financial freedom — and I encourage everyone to do the same. But once we secure our own foundations, we’re in a much better position to help build a freer, more equitable world for everyone.

Elon Musk’s Vision Still Matters for Tesla

Posted on by
Reply

On a recent episode of the Sanity Podcast, hosts Dave Briggs and Allison Camarada sat down with Ross Gerber, an early Tesla investor who once held nearly 500,000 shares. Gerber’s take? Elon Musk’s political stances, his Twitter antics, and his role in slashing government spending via DOGE have turned Tesla into a “pariah brand,” tanking its stock and alienating owners. He’s sold off much of his stake and wants Musk out as CEO, pointing to a board he claims is overpaid in stock options and lacks independence. As a Tesla shareholder who’s voted twice to back Musk’s compensation, I’ve got a different view—one that sees Gerber’s complaints as shortsighted and the hate for Tesla as misplaced. Here’s why Musk’s vision still matters, and why Tesla wouldn’t be Tesla without him.

Stock Options Align Incentives, Not Greed

Gerber griped about Tesla’s board getting rich off stock options instead of flat pay—$600 million for chair Robyn Denholm, he says, versus the $400k norm at companies like Disney. But isn’t that the same deal Musk has? Back in 2018, when Tesla was a $50 billion company, shareholders like me voted for his pay package: for every $50 billion in value he added, up to $650 billion, he’d get a payout. The media called it absurd, saying Tesla would never hit that mark. Guess what? It did, and then some—12xing my investment. We voted again in 2024 to reaffirm it, with 75% approval. So why’s Gerber mad when the same stock-based incentives that rewarded Musk also rewarded him 20-fold? The board and Musk win when shareholders win—when Tesla provides value to the world. That’s not a flaw; it’s the point. The only ones whining are Gerber and an activist lawyer pushing a BS lawsuit with a guy who owns nine shares. Most of us aren’t mad—we’re counting our gains.

Tesla’s Success Isn’t Luck—It’s Elon

Gerber wants Musk gone, but look at the alternatives. Ford’s stock has been stuck at $9 since 1989. GM went bankrupt in 2008, wiping out shareholders like me (I lost $100—not much, but still). Meanwhile, Tesla’s the only new U.S. car company to thrive in a century. Why? Musk’s vision. He’s not just churning out cars—he’s pushing grid-scale Megapack batteries, humanoid robots, and electric semis. New EV players like Fisker and Canoo crashed and burned; Tesla didn’t. People think CEOs micromanage daily ops, but that’s not the gig. A CEO makes a few big calls a year to set the course. Compare Musk to GM’s Mary Barra—stock flat since their bankruptcy—or Ford’s latest CEO, whoever that is. Musk sees where tech and the world are headed; they don’t. Without him, Tesla might coast for 10-15 years on Model Ys and 3s, but the visionary spark would die.

Apple’s Lesson: Visionaries Matter

Take Apple. People see it as a juggernaut now, but in 1998, it was nearly bankrupt. They’d kicked Steve Jobs out in 1985, and for over a decade, the company floundered—until they brought him back in 1997. Jobs turned it around with the iPod, iPhone, and more, making Apple a titan. Since his death, though? They’ve coasted—new iPhones, sure, but nothing revolutionary. Tesla could follow that path if Musk were axed: profitable for a while, but stagnant, no longer dreaming big. Gerber might not care, but I do—because that’s where the real value lies.

The Hate’s Misplaced—And It Hurts the Wrong People

Yes, Musk’s dive into politics stings for Tesla owners. I get it—nobody likes being hassled for driving one. But the pain isn’t from Elon; it’s from people attacking us for his views. I don’t see folks boycotting Amazon over Jeff Bezos, or GM over Barra. Why Tesla? Gerber notes Musk owns just 13% of the company—87% is us: shareholders, pension funds, workers. Protests at Tesla stores, keying cars—that doesn’t hit Elon; it hits regular people. Tesla owners now have to worry their cars will be vandalized every time they go oujust because they drive a Tesla. It’s unfair, and it’s missing the point: Tesla’s still fighting climate change, even if Musk’s tweets rile up the culture wars.

Musk’s Not Perfect, But He’s Proven His Worth

Is Musk distracting? Sure, sometimes. Twitter was a wild move, and his Trump endorsement after the assassination attempt raised eyebrows. But Gerber’s wrong that it’s all downhill. Musk’s quirks—political or otherwise—come with the genius. He took Tesla from a cash-strapped EV geek dream to a global force. When Biden snubbed Tesla for GM and Ford in that EV summit, Musk fought for the credit he’d earned—because he built the industry they’re now riding. And DOGE? If it’s slashing waste, I’m not crying over it—especially when Gerber admits the SEC’s understaffed anyway. Musk’s not “taking his eye off the ball”; he’s juggling more balls than most CEOs could dream of.

The Bottom Line

Gerber’s selling because he’s cashed out his 20x gains and doesn’t like Musk’s vibe anymore. Fine (we, other Tesla Shareholders, don’t like him! Go start your own company Ross!)—he’s free to buy Ford or GM instead. But for me, and plenty of other shareholders, Musk’s the reason Tesla’s not just another failed startup—or a coasting has-been like Apple post-Jobs. The stock’s down 40% from its peak, sure, but it’s still worth more than Ford, GM, and Stellantis combined. BYD’s cheaper cars don’t touch Tesla’s software edge, and robo-taxis? Good luck finding a better bet. Tesla’s not dying—it’s evolving, and Musk’s the one steering it. If you don’t like it, nobody’s forcing you to buy the stock—or the car. Me? I’m still in, because vision beats complacency every time.

How to keep your house – Gary Economics

Posted on by
Reply

“ the US government or every government in the world is the largest spender of things and they are pushing the price of things up. For example, all the money that the US spends on buying tanks and airplanes and other things consumes some steel and electronics and such and that pushes the price up when Ford or John Deere or Apple wants to buy steel or electronics for their cars or tractors or phones.”

I like Gary Economics. He has a book and a youtube channel. But his message is just so diluted and garbled and he is blinded by his knowledge that he misses some things. 

To start off with, I don’t hate rich people. But this is probably one of the best descriptions of the actual problem with wealth inequality.

How To Keep Your House – Gary Economics – Youtube

And to note, if you have even $50,000 worth of assets, you are probably in the top 10% of the world. So, well this guy is describing the difference between multi-millionaires and billionaires and the middle class he could just as easily be describing the middle class in the USA out paying for services of people in India. For example, many Indian doctors come to the United States and leaves less doctors in India.

Anyway, his whole message is a little garbled all the time. I’ve read his book and listened to enough stuff that I get it but I feel like he’s not that great of a communicator. In general, his argument is we need to tax the rich because they have too much money and push the price of goods up.

 If you heard the bit where he was talking about the rich buying doctors services to do cosmetic surgeries instead of normal surgeries that does a similar thing to Medical care costs as we talked about house is getting the monetary premium. So his argument is we need to have the rich have less buying power so they can’t push the price of goods up for the average person

You sent

And he is right to some point. But a thing he misses is that the US government or every government in the world is the largest spender of things and they are pushing the price of things up. For example, all the money that the US spends on buying tanks and airplanes and other things consumes some steel and electronics and such and that pushes the price up when Ford or John Deere or Apple wants to buy steel or electronics for their cars or tractors or phones.


The whole world is at competition for goods and services. This is explained in a great book, Economics in One Lesson – Henry Hazlitt which you can read here for free or buy here.