Thursday, February 23, 2017

California, Nestle and Decentralization

Here's a cycle we've noticed in the past. From Antonius Aquinas:

Nestle USA has announced that it will move its headquarters from Glendale, California, to Rosslyn, Virginia, taking with it about 1200 jobs. The once Golden State has lost some 1600 businesses since 2008 and a net outflow of a million of mostly middle-class people from the state from 2004 to 2013 due to its onerous tax rates, the oppressive regulatory burden, and the genuine kookiness which pervades among its ruling elites.* A clueless Glendale official is apparently unconcerned about the financial repercussions of Nestle’s departure saying that it was “no big deal” and saw it as an “opportunity,” whatever that means!

The stampede of businesses out of what was once the most productive and attractive region in all of North America demonstrates again that prosperity and individual freedom are best served in a political environment of decentralization.
This is a textbook example of just how unnatural and unsustainable big business is. It germinates and flourishes in conservative cultures, thanks to a deep-seated respect for initiative and private property. However, at a certain point, big business begins to encourage the rootlessness and radical individualism on which leftist ideology is based. The more isolated the individual, the more each person looks to consumerist culture for a sense of identity and purpose, which someone will happily supply -- at a price, of course.

But at another critical point, the leftist mindset becomes destructive, actively undermining the very institutions that made commerce possible by whipping the flames of envy and resentment, which erodes self-reliance and initiative. California's "progressives" are speeding toward that cliff at Thelma and Louise velocity.


Weaver said...

Great post!

Btw, one negative of our quasi-capitalist system is it's based on immigration-driven population growth. More workers --> larger economy.

What we'd really like to have is greater productivity. So, I actually welcome the automation everyone's worried about. I seriously doubt automation would create unemployment. More would be produced, so each worker would just receive more. Healthcare alone will likely continue to grow.

We also have many retirees who will drain on the economy. Within the global economy, those polities with fewer old people are in a sense wealthier. A polity like Greece that has lost many of its young workers is in trouble.

So, I believe there is plenty for workers to do, even with a great deal of automation. We need fewer immigrants and greater automation.

roho said...

Automation is inevitable.................But, I see this as a great example of States Rights and people voting with their feet.

When a State realizes that their young talent has moved away, they can only look in the mirror.

Weaver said...

Just to add,

another problem is how the type of people empowered by big business tend to be left-wing.

Right-wing types tend to be small business owners and employees of small businesses.

When you get into massive-scale global operations, all people involved tend to be more left-wing.

And once the managers/owners of these massive businesses obtain power either as managers or as compensated owners of capital, they then expend this power to advance globalisation, aggressively attacking us in multiple ways, not only via government as we like to claim.


It's also easier to control a people with big business.


So, there's need for government regulation to prevent this phenomenon, which means government is necessary.

The freedom worship we tend to do is just the result of lowest-common denominator ideology that's popularised in democracy. Also, big money manipulates us. Real political science is more complicated, even if approximately we do want less government.

One reason I like having a larger middle class is it should enable consumers to afford more options. Currently so many are living at near poverty level that their only options are government dependence and the mass-produced goods at places like Wal-Mart.

Socialist theory wants an abused proletariat that is focused on nothing higher than basic consumption needs. This abused proletariat is then meant to demand government to acquire big business capital, distribute the products. If we instead had many small business owners, things would better.

Our side though tends to defend wealth inequality, suggesting we also dream of socialist revolution, only desiring to ourselves be the victims. Though of course we deny this, playing the role of the capitalist fall guy. I think I differ with many on our side because I actually do not want socialism. I have no desire to be Bernie Sanders's fall guy.

Weaver said...

The most shocking transformation in the Anglo world is Canada.

Not long ago, Canada was something like 98% white.

Now, it might have been American money that changed things, but regardless Canadian whites have some power in their votes. And they've voted for more immigration.

The whites age. They have no children. Asians move in. You see the same trends everywhere there are Anglos. There is a major problem with Anglos traditions.

And yet, we Anglos are too proud to even consider that we could be at fault. And so we die out. It's a voluntary extinction though. Marxists/Jews no matter the fall guy: We're to blame for much of it, not someone else. We just can't bear the guilt of destroying our own societies across the world. We refuse to adapt, refuse to even consider that we could be wrong about anything. There is a problem with the vaunted Anglo traditions.

Presumably those who replace us will want to live though, so life will go on in another form.

roho said...

Anglos would be embarassed to alow other tax payers to support our children.

Weaver said...


Anglos are going extinct. What does that even matter?

In the US, we were granted the perfect geographical position, free from all worldly cares. Australia similarly is an island. Britain is an island. Canada is in an even better position than the US.

We gave it all away.

The problem is partly bigness and partly individualism, partly secularism, partly a lack of community borders, partly a lack of group traditions that should divide us from others.

Perhaps we should blame Cromwell. I don't know where the root problem lies. But we are sick with a cancer.

In Western Europe today they talk of fleeing, taking refuge in Eastern Europe. Mighty Anglos. Mighty Norse. Not so mighty. Bad political traditions.

roho said...

Weaver...................Where do I start?

Cromwell is partly to blame, as well as Napoleon, FDR, Churchill, and all other leaders that dare not be called antisemitic.

Queen Isabella, Catherine The Great, Adolph Hitler (I'm sure you just cringed.....LOL!) and others were even overturned by infiltrators. Like many Christian Cultures of the past, we have been infiltrated. Israel and Saudi Arabia are like brother and sister playing us like we have been played since the War Of Northern Agression.

See the root........It sees you.