Facts are important but they are not the whole solution. So once again doing your job well is not good enough. Impression is everything. You have to present your case and ideas in a simple and attractive form. In another words you have to sell your ideas so that they are quick and easy to absorb. Pure facts will not get you the support you need when emotions are at play, too. Corporations are about people and people are humans. They are not rational machines. They have good and bad days, worries, domestic problems, and career aspirations. What does all this mean? Surprisingly frequently irrational decisions are made: the decision-maker(s) had a good impression or feeling about the person or the project, they loved the idea, or they had hidden agendas to satisfy (e.g. boost their own ego, increase the departmental importance/budget etc.). In some cases it’s more about who presents the idea than about the very project in question. In other occasions the complete ‘solution’ is more appealing than the more substantial alternatives. People who appear to be problem-solvers are liked. They remove worries from someone else’s plate and since everyone seems to have enough of them on their own it is no wonder that less trouble is received as good news. Naturally the reality might turn out to be an entirely different case but since impression is everything it counts only when it matters. The rest is only execution and reporting. Don’t be surprised to realise that project objectives and outcomes are not typically vigorously scrutinised afterwards, especially in cases when things turn south. It’s not uncommon that the very decision-makers have moved on or at least the management mantra or main objectives have altered along the new winds of continuous but often incremental change (read crises).

Running a small company is like constantly being under-equipped and sleep deprived—you seldom are feeling happy and relaxed longer than a few moments at a time. Small companies have it harder. You pay higher interest rates on your loans, you have less real choice for financial instruments, you don’t have the extensive support system and network that larger companies rely on, and the legislative burdens are ever increasing, never reducing by the year. Expect hard work with very little complements and support for your concerns. You are the workhorse of the society everyone expects to do his/her job without much noise and complaints.

Having a plenty of small companies around you does not mean that it is easier to deal with other small companies nor that you’re especially supported by the public sector. Small means often incompetent, under staffed, and unreliable. Lots of hassle and very little payoffs.

And why politicians are not very interested of SMEs? These companies do not contribute to the fundraisers due to their chronic lack of capital and excess funds or because they have better use for their hard earned money. Larger institutions are capable of providing decision-makers with favours, power, and prestige that often motives them to trade special-interest privileges at the expense of the rest of the society. So small might be beautiful but you are on your own.

For example, why it seems to be the case that large corporations, financial and public institutions together with politicians are in a different league and almost play by entirely different set of rules than the rest of the society? Because that is how our current political and economical system has been set up and evolved over the decades. It is not a fair and just system—there are no equal rules and opportunities for everyone. The odds have been tilted favourably towards the existing establishment and large corporations. The people behind these institutions are reluctant and afraid of change like most of the population. They prefer status quo to new entrants and rules that may jeopardise their existing wellbeing and social status. They are not willing to play by the same rules as the rest of the population has to. Open competition and transparency favour the competent and able, which is bad news for the incumbents and they fight against it.

The establishment is protecting the mighty and powerful. They are not helping the newcomers to offer superior products, services, and innovations for the benefit of the rest of the society. Don’t get fooled by the political rhetoric and keep your eyes firmly in the ball—in the real actions and outcomes. Deeds speak louder than any pep talk and it seems that where is the talk there is the lack.

Naturally this is not very good news for young people. They are placed in a hostile environment where they are considered as threats and troublemakers more than as valuable assets and resources enabling better future for everyone. Just observe the compulsorily pension legislation, labour law, small firm legislation, and every bit of government subsidies handed out to new or small enterprises vs. large corporations. It does not take a rocket scientist to realise that young people and small (or new) companies are not treated equally in respect to aging population or large institutions. The existing state of affairs is almost every time preferred over any changes that make the current status quo more vulnerable and exposed to circumstances that would favour merit, openness, transparency, and free competition. And let’s not forget that certain things and situation are way easier to handle and accomplish with adequate resources than with very limited or none at all. Money talks and the rest walk—especially with public affairs.

(Next guest appearances on Evident Footprints on 12th and 25th of March at

10:00 PM – 11:00 PM (PST)
1:00 AM – 2:00 AM (EST)
6:00 AM – 7.00 AM (CET – the 13th and 26th of March)

The shows can be listened to for free from BBS Radio at the above stated times and they will also be later available as recordings.)

- You can own silver and gold but never any fiat currency issued by someone else.

- Life is what happens when you jump out of your mind and use your senses.

- Time is the sequential experience of movement in consciousness.

- We seem to rely on systems, not people.

- No system is moral, only people are.

- The answer is more love, not less.

- We don’t have private property, only degrees of collectivism.

- Representation of wealth is not the wealth. We have forgotten this. We regard money as wealth and debt as money.

- Fiat money and sustainable society are not compatible.

- Talk is no substitute for doing. If you know how, why you have to talk?

- The more you are, the less you need to be.

- Only a society based on fear needs money.

- Our beliefs and thoughts are killing us, whereas imagination and creativity liberate us.

- Only when you listen, you can create.

The purpose of this essay is to address the role of government for private market and to find out the extent and the scope that government’s involvement with private establishments can be justified by economics. It seems to be assumed that government has a fundamental and necessary role in the business of private enterprises. This is not merely an assumption—it is the current paradigm and dogma.

Download the essay Can Government Increase Social Welfare (Utility) by Its Involvement with Private Market? (a pdf-file) or read it online.

For many of us it is not about saving the planet but reducing the guilt. We are bluffing ourselves and trying to be good citizens. However, this does not change the underlying facts and the ongoing destruction of the planet. Still, we are carrying on with our lifestyles and ways of working without changing anything radically. By our actions we are saying that we are concerned and I can do this and that but I don’t want to go any deeper. I’m not willing to do major sacrifices. This is my life—no matter how twisted or destructive its impact might be.

Buying carbon credits is easy. Following your carbon footprint and compensating it may sound like that you’re helping out in a big way. But what is it exactly that you’re trying to do? First you consume (destroy and pollute) and then you feel guilty or concerned about it and compensate by buying some credits that may either be someone ‘rights’ to pollute that have been sold to you or you are planting something back to nature that will take decades if not centuries to heal and compensate the loss you made. How can you be so sure that there is enough time left for future generations and your credits to ‘payback’ before the whole planet has been destroyed? You did not stop the destruction and pollution in the first place. What you said was that you’re continuing to do your mess now and you will fix it later somehow. And who has said that carbon credits or any other single concept is the right solution for the damages we are causing?

Regulators are keen to impose new taxes and restrictions on various items and processes. Energy is ‘bad’ in general and needs to be highly taxed. Some ‘alternative’ energy forms are preferred over others and there are sanctions and incentives for certain activities and actions. In an overall level we are forced to act in a unified and specific manner but in reality we may help out someone’s business interest more than save the planet—we just continue the destruction in another way that is more ‘socially’ accepted. How does it help the environment that governments impose taxes on energy? It certainly helps the government to get more revenues by appealing to our ‘responsibility’ to our living environment. At the same time the very same government is telling us that growing crops and other biomass for fuel are saving the planet and these forms need to be subsidised. What happened to the overall impact and energy input-output efficiency? We are just recycling the money and boosting business, not saving the environment. Guilty revealed and the new fashion trend harvested, mainly supported by coercion.

Money does not buy love. Neither can it buy nature. By looking around us it’s obvious that we have not learned this lesson. No matter how much money you have still you cannot undo the damage for rain forests, polluted water and land, corrupted crops and extinct species. We are good at destroying but very poor at creating. What has taken tremendous amount of time by nature to build we are destroying almost in seconds compared to the overall time perspective. We are irresponsible and ignorant of our support systems. What else can be said when we prefer short term at the cost of our children?

Guilt does not solve the issue, neither paying more. Something more profound is needed. We need to reconsider our priorities and values. We need to reassess our relationship with this planet, with nature. Now we consume. We use, utilise, and throw away. This is a one-way relationship that is not sustainable. We are living in a closed system called the planet Earth. We cannot pile up things forever and expect that our trash and pollution are well hidden and do not come back to us. Who do you think are already eating, drinking, and breathing hazardous waste? So far things have not gotten better. Our current solutions are not working. More regulation, more penalties, more subsidies, more forced ‘one right way policies’ are not the answer. The question is not what you do but why you do it. Everybody can do his or her own share. There is more than one way to live in this planet. Now it is time to explore and experiment other approaches that are based on a more balanced way of existence. What is it that you’re paying for?

Give people an illusion of control but take away their power. Centralise decision-making power away from local level where it would be most useful, effective, and also transparent. The further away and more consolidated the power the easier it is to make decisions that impact and possibly harm a large amount of people, and at the same time make people feel powerless and not capable of being in control and in charge of their own matters.

Release people from their own responsibility and tell them what they can and cannot do. This can be practiced by the powers and centralisation put in place. Most of the people are just relieved if the can obey rules and have a false sense of security where someone else is thinking and protecting their lives—in essence from themselves and their choices.

Control key resources. One of the most effective ways of control is to secure a permanent and exclusive privilege to be in charge of the means for indirect exchange. This instrument allows to manipulate, allocate, and define the direction of the society. One of the benefits of the monopoly is the right to create claims for resources without contributing anything back to the society. Using as a means of exchange something intangible or practically worthless in other usage enables to fabricate money out of thin air. This is very useful way to reallocate wealth in society.

Remove individuals’ means to protect themselves. Practical way to make people passive is to offer them physical protection and in return they are not allowed to use any other means to protect and seek justice. By monopolising justice it is possible to use the system’s resources against the very people it is supposed to protect. There is no objectivity and equality anymore when the asymmetry has been put in place: a private party against the system that is in practise defining its own rules and using coercion as a final means to execute it.

Make people dependent on your system. Create programs and schemes that distribute resources among the members of the public so that the system is acting as a middleman. Offering goods and services for ‘free’ or based on some arbitrary criteria remove the individual’s incentives to excel and support oneself. Direct employment by the system is the most natural way to tie people and resources as an integral part of the system. The more extensive the distribution of wealth the larger the impact and more integrated the system becomes to the society. One of the most effective ways to create dependence is taxation and other schemes that confiscate the financial resources from individuals. In some cases it is enough to keep intact the ‘ownership’ (or the claim for the resources) but centralise the control of the assets, for example by forced savings to dedicated funds.

Create a closed system that keeps people busy and turns them against each other. Imposed fear and lack are ways to produce an atmosphere of rivalry and controversy. Artificial lack can be fabricated by using a monetary system that has an inherit fault in it: there is never enough money to settle all accounts. This forces people to fight for resources and to protect their existing wealth by producing more economic activity out of scarce and limited resources. In short, perpetual growth is needed to keep the system going. By (re)distribution of resources via the system as stated above emphasises the fear once people are made dependent and passive for the ‘benefits’ given to them. They will turn against each other in order to protect their personal sources of dependency.

Remove personal responsibility and liability. In order to make the system work seamlessly it is beneficial to introduce a double-standard moral code where the system is not accountable for its actions in the same manner as individuals are, would they conduct the same deed. This enables central decision-making by selected members of the society without them being personally liable of the consequences of their actions. The system itself starts to live outside of its own rules and principals but is still run by the members of the society. People can only blame themselves—they have carried out all the actions.

Keep away from the limelight. At the end of the day it is not necessary to be a public figure and still influence the system. There are always people available that are willing to do the dirty work, and they can be replaced. Special privileges can be bought and the system manipulated when you have the financial resources for it. Some members of the society have a greater incentive to seek benefits for themselves and for their own advancement than to protect and cooperate with their fellow citizens. They are more than happy to make the decisions that harm the environment, people, pollute the planet, and destroy the future of the society. And in most of the cases they are not even aware of the consequences and do their acts in good faith or out of ignorance. The urge to tell others what they are supposed to do and save people from themselves appeals to many. And after all—who’s there to blame in a system like this?

“Life is about giving, and the rest is taken care of.”

“Nothing has any meaning except the one we give to it— everything simply is.”

“Humbleness is all it takes.”

“The impossible happens when the possible is ignored.”

“If you don’t know what to do, meditate.”

“The (future) wealth is in the people, the past is in the tangible assets.”

“Skills, knowledge, and experience build the future.”

“Life is simple—thinking is complicated.”

“Only two things: the ones you think are important, and those that are.”

“Happiness is a continuous flow of life.”

“Nothing to say, everything to realise.”

“You are what you think, say, and do.”

“Your senses know nothing, they merely register movement.”

“Only when you have done enough, you can be.”

“Complexity is easy, simplicity requires mastery.”

“Society is persons.”

“Separate money from politics and you find very little interest on public matters.”

“Poverty is a relative term. Don’t expect it to disappear from the lexicon any time soon. One can be poor or rich—it’s just a matter of definition.”

“Enjoy the moment. That’s all there is.”

“Our legal tender is based on a threat of violence, and nothing else.”