Tough Sell

I have sometimes wondered about the poor chap that took up the job of telephone salesman to sell the first telephones. I mean think about the sort of conversations he would have had.

“Good Morning Lord Meldue, I would like to interest you in the very latest technology, the Telephone, it will revolutionise all aspects of commerce and social discourse”

“Well that sounds exciting what does it do?”

“Well you simply pick up this part and you can talk to anyone you like without leaving your house”

“Marvelous old chap, let’s talk to Lord Budgie I need to send word to him about lunch”

“Ah, well you can’t actually do that yet”

“Why not?”

“Well Lord Budgie would need one too and then we, the telephone company need to run a wire from your house to his house”

“I see, well who can I speak with?”

“Well currently no one because you will be the first”

“So I should buy this thing, so that it should do nothing until such time as my friends buy one, also to do nothing, until after you have run wires to and from all of their houses to mine, and then the thing will work”

“Exactly sir you have it now”

“Thank you but goodbye to you”

When you think about how did this system ever get going, the very idea of running wire from every house to a central exchange seems extraordinary but that is how it works after all.

And there is a lot of this stuff when you start thinking about it, Sir Walter Raleigh who brought tobacco back to England. “well you take these leaves place them inside a paper roll put one end in your mouth and set light to the end” or “you take this powder of ground up leaves and shove it up your nose” You really do have to admire the salespeople who pulled off getting tobacco off the ground.

But the tough sell I was really thinking about was God, without Heaven. Is there a religion that does not promise an afterlife which is as far as I can tell an improvement on the current state? So why do all religions have a heaven?

There is no automatic connection between the existence of God and the existence of an afterlife, apparently according to most religious traditions this is exactly the proposition that holds for all creatures on earth except us of course. Dogs don’t go to heaven according to any priest of minister I have ever spoken to, which in my mind is a yawning gap in the system as I like my dogs a lot more than most people I know.

I reckon you don’t find a God without a heaven because it would be a tough sell. It would be similar to the conversation above wouldn’t it. “you should worship God and do as he says” “and if I don’t” “well he will be really grumpy with you”, “umm I’ll get back to you”

So it seems potentially that Heaven may potentially be nothing more than an air points scheme dreamed up by religious advertisers to encourage people to join their team. As a scheme of course it is perfect because the liability to deliver is placed on someone else and only after the customer is dead and effectively worthless from a mortal bound churches point of view.

Based on my scant understanding of Buddhism this appears to be a system of Heaven but no God which may be a step in the right direction, also dogs presumably are part of the cycle of life they seem to believe in. Not sure if the orange robes would come in my size and then there is the whole don’t eat meat thing... Hmm it’s a hard road finding the perfect religion.

Occupy

These occupy people have become cause for some head scratching. Originally I thought they were the usual grab bag of professional protesters and complainers and I still think some of them are. And I have no idea what they want. Well yes I know they want the world to be fairer and nicer and lets all hold hands and the like but.... what exactly is their proposed solution to the problems they have identified. It is hard for concrete thinkers like myself to get on board with ideas based on feel good slogans. But gradually and grudgingly they have earned a level of respect from me.


Our City Council is desperate to have them removed and stop them from making the place untidy and has called on the police to “do their duty” and forcibly evict them. The police refused which made the Mayor very unhappy. Trouble is I find myself agreeing with the police. These people are being totally peaceful and very polite. They don’t shout and carry on, they don’t get in the faces of passersby no one is prevented from their lawful business and I suspect with Christmas approaching and their “campground” normally be used for various events they are more than likely to politely move out of the way for the event and move back once it is over. It’s actually hard to dislike people who are acting reasonably even if you don’t understand what it is they want. Live and let Die I have always said so why should they be “bullied” by the police.

The other level of success for the protesters is I have been paying more attention to the rich / poor divide and wondering what the solution to this is. The current political flavours don’t seem to work. On the right we have “every man for himself and work hard” On the left we have the equally silly “let’s all share everything evenly” Then we have the Green movement which seems to desire a great leap backwards to a non existent fairytale world of gentle farmers.

So articulating the problem is pretty easy, the economic cake is not shared evenly enough. We decide what share of the cake you should get by assigning value to the inputs you bring to the economic table be that labour, mental labour or capital. So based on that equation some peoples inputs are not valued at a high enough level to make it work for them and they become (or always were) poor.

Assuming for a moment that the laws of supply and demand still work then the assumption must be that there is an oversupply of certain inputs which drives down the price. So who in our society is poor... as a general and almost universal rule it is the unskilled and the uneducated.

So on to solutions, the most popular are to either “create” more jobs or upskill the unemployed. Neither of which will work. There are no more unskilled jobs to be “created” we don’t need them any more and any way how does this help presumably more low paid work doesn’t really assist with raising living standards. As to upskilling, well despite a bit of hand wringing every now and then there are very good opportunities for education in this country so that doesn’t appear to be working. It’s the “lead a horse to water” thing.

In normal economics if there is an oversupply of anything leading to a reduction in price then people stop producing that thing which brings the supply demand equation into balance. Think of farmers and crops, if the price of corn falls too low they switch to growing grain or whatever. So here is where it starts to get tricky the obvious conclusion must be that we need to limit the “supply” of the unskilled and uneducated and this means limiting the support we give to people to have children. (see told you its tricky, and yes I am not unaware of the issues that sort of statement will raise in peoples minds) Yet as a society we like children and we do lots to help and promote the idea of children, but in lots of ways it isn’t helping. Apart from unemployment and poverty exponential growth in the population isn’t exactly helping the planet either. Time for society to stop promoting children. Try winning an election with that as a policy.