The Critical Difference Between Rentier Wealth And Wealth Creation

“…due to the ever-rising costs”

Well, before we get to the point when nobody will be able to afford rent, let’s look at those ever-rising costs.

“Are those costs structural, cultural, something in the system, or does it just have something to do with asset management”, may be the first question to raise in the debate.

via The Critical Difference Between Rentier Wealth And Wealth Creation | Zero Hedge.

Anti-IS coalition: Turkey ready for military role

ISTANBUL: Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Turkey could take a military role in the coalition fighting Islamic State IS militants as Ankara moves to take a frontline position in the campaign, the Hurriyet daily reported.

Ha! Of course they are. Who wouldn’t want to battle Saudis Arabia for the title of the lead, in this encounter?

In the Islamic world, it would be like being the nation to bring down Israel, only in the context of a nation-building Caliphate.

It’s the Church/State thing, which American’s forget about all the time, if it wasn’t for the Republican Party reminding us.

via Anti-IS coalition: Turkey ready for military role | Arab News — Saudi Arabia News, Middle East News, Opinion, Economy and more..

Observation In Maneuver Warfare

What one observes in Maneuver Warfare determines the direction and the amount of energy used in the conflict. The speed of the maneuver is only affected by Observation in such a way as observation determines position and position determines, not only, the distance between maneuver points and the direction with the greatest advantage.

Position is another way to say, where the advantages lay in the paths of Maneuver Warfare. Position is the way one orients towards an advantage in Maneuver Warfare. It should be obvious by now in our observation of our war with ISIL that we have positioned ourselves behind Saudi Arabia.

That much is revealed by the WSJ today in a piece exposing the backdoor dealings that the US conducted with Saudi Arabia to get the “green light” to launch its airstrikes against ISIS, or rather, parts of Iraq and Syria. And, not surprising, it is once again Assad whose fate was the bargaining chip to get the Saudis on the US’ side, because in order to launch the incursion into Syrian sovereign territory “took months of behind-the-scenes work by the U.S. and Arab leaders, who agreed on the need to cooperate against Islamic State, but not how or when. The process gave the Saudis leverage to extract a fresh U.S. commitment to beef up training for rebels fighting Mr. Assad, whose demise the Saudis still see as a top priority.”

via A Look Inside The Secret Deal With Saudi Arabia That Unleashed The Syrian Bombing | Zero Hedge.

The advantage we have for Saudi Arabia is that we have the ability to determine the direction and amount of energy that will be used against ISIL, as we are observed in the region, while we maintain no position in the “fight” against ISIL.

In other words, according to above article by Zero Hedge, the US is behind a force whose orientation is much the same as that of ISIL (ISIS is only a point or position), only their positions are different.

The speed of this Maneuver Warfare will be determined by the negotiations going on between like orientations, and the direction and the amount of energy used will be determined by the USA’s ability to isolate the area from outside forces such as Russia, Turkey, and Iran, to name the few and many.

OK, The War is On

On “Meet the Press” Sunday morning, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough outlined what success looks like in the war against ISIS. “Success looks like an ISIL ISIS that no longer threatens our friends in the region, no longer threatens the United States. An ISIS that can’t accumulate followers, or threaten Muslims in Syria, Iran, Iraq, or otherwise,” McDonough. Retired Gen. John Allen, newly appointed to lead the fight against ISIS, will sit down with the president Tuesday to consider options that could lead to such success, he said.

“War against ISIS.”

No it isn’t. Islam is the power of Muslims, and, at the moment, ISIS is the kinetic energy of that power, while in the same moment, the Levant is the potential energy of that power.

POTUS declared war on both the potential and kinetic energy that powers Islam. So Islam can find another power to base itself on, or watch these die.

That’s why Iran is “in” and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is “wavering.”

Iran wants to shift that power wayaaaaaaaaa- over towards their side, which may need to happen if the Kingdom makes an “arrangement” to keep what they got, in exchange for Iran under a Caliphate.

When you’re in a civil war, it is all family.

via White House: Fight Against ISIS Is ‘a War We Have to Win’ – NBC

Why Is Anybody Surprised That the Job Shortage Continues for so Long?

…individual managers think that if they hired more people and produced more stuff they would be unable to sell it at a good enough price to increase their profits.

This may surprise you, because it is not so much what the experts say the individual manager think, it’s that the managers need to hire more people to create a better quality of life, while keeping the consumer happy, by the manager’s ability to maintain the production/cost of its employees.

The surprise is that anyone thinks this is going to be easy.

Managers are going to have to find the same heart that their minds were able to take advantage of, in the workspace of their employees.

via Why Is Anybody Surprised That the Job Shortage Continues for so Long? In Which I Troll Noah Smith for a Lazy Monday Morning…: Featured for September 8, 2014 – Washington Center for Equitable Growth.

Manufacturing the future: The next era of global growth and innovation

The global manufacturing sector has undergone a tumultuous decade: large developing economies leaped into the first tier of manufacturing nations, a severe recession choked off demand, and manufacturing employment fell at an accelerated rate in advanced economies.

Manufacturing the future: The next era of global growth and innovation, a major report from the McKinsey Global Institute, presents a clear view of how manufacturing contributes to the global economy today and how it will probably evolve over the coming decade. Our findings include the following points:

  • Manufacturing’s role is changing. The way it contributes to the economy shifts as nations mature: in today’s advanced economies, manufacturing promotes innovation, productivity, and trade more than growth and employment. In these countries, manufacturing also has begun to consume more services and to rely more heavily on them to operate.


  • Manufacturing is not monolithic. It is a diverse sector with five distinct groups of industries, each with specific drivers of success.

And Orientation takes place in the workspace.

Manufacturing is a Orientation in that it is an orientation in which the workspace is it’s prime objective.

Sure, you have these other Orientations in the financial, security, and government workspaces. All strong positions.

What makes manufacturing unique is that it encompasses all the other orientations. Manufacturing acts as a gap between all others.

In all the other orientations, the prime directive is growth. This is especially true if the environment you are coming from is Capitalistic.

In a Capitalistic environment, manufacturing wants to shrink its base as much as it wants to grow it. Like the number cruncher’s numbers, manufacturing relies on both the positive (adding new jobs), and the negative (paying for fewer jobs) than the market allows.

Therefore, manufacturing becomes a pivot point which all flow is possible.

This law is, because, unlike the financial (number crunching) market, manufacturing maintains a position, not a potential.

via Manufacturing the future: The next era of global growth and innovation | McKinsey & Company.

An idealized mutual escalation spiral

In reality, a positive feedback loop can’t go on building indefinitely. Some form of external modulation must occur, either producing homeostasis or a crash, no?

How do we diagram that? — I ask as an interested amateur…

I realize that the author of a diagram gets to name the things in it, but to me the spiral he calls escalation looks to me like a pathway, while the points at zero on the graph that he calls peace is an orientation at the coordinate (0,0,0). (note: I give the orientation an extra zero, because I usually think in three dimensions.)

So, in answer to his question: “how do we diagram that?”, I say by putting the cross-sectional profiles that defines the orientation of each parties in escalation onto the pathway to peace, and then either swept, loft or define the boundaries between both profiles.

The difference being, when defining the space labeled “peace”, in the space between the swept or loft movements, we are dealing in relationships between the escalating profiles, while when we are dealing with boundaries between the two parties in escalation it’s mostly about resources.

But then war is mostly about economic considerations (boundaries) and fought by people with little economic considerations (cross-sectional profiles that are swept or loft).

So the ones who really have to do the agreeing (to peace) are those who go to war for economic considerations and those who go to war despite economic considerations, and not those doing the escalating.

via » Blog Archive » An idealized mutual escalation spiral.