Tag Archives: inventors

The Choice, Part Three: One or the Other, by Robert Gore

merriamwebster.com

This is part three of a three-part series. For part one, click here. For part two, click here.

I and members of my family are minority investors in Dr. Kelly’s majority-owned company, fouRy LLC, or 4Ry. I have performed and will continue to perform, various services for 4Ry, for which I may be compensated. The opinions and analyses are mine alone. This blog post is neither a solicitation of investment nor an offer to sell securities. 4Ry is a Delaware Limited Liability Corporation and its trademark application is pending.

The guillotine is the most effective and humane way to execute someone. It severs the head and brain from the body; it’s quick and foolproof. Would that society’s ongoing attack on its own brain were so quickly effectuated. There would be an almost instantaneous regression back to the mindless miasma with which so many are comfortable, and that would be that. Unfortunately, the execution of creativity, invention, innovation, enterprise, and logic is death by countless brain excisions—each deeper than the previous one.

Pick your candidate for what, singly or in combination, causes the collapse of present civilization: debt, war, pollution, moral rot, statism, or any of the other ills besetting the world. They all have their champions. Rarely if ever mentioned is the effort to stymie the best human minds. It’s not new, having gone on since humanity made the evolutionary leap. The malevolent and malicious recognize that if the mind is threatened, persecuted, and ultimately, stopped, disaster takes care of itself. Of course this is suicide. but that’s precisely what the malevolent and malicious are after (see “Life, or Death?” SLL).

Historically, the times when the best minds have had the freedom to flourish have been blinks of an eye compared to the eons when they have not. The progress and innovation we take for granted are orchids, growing only under a limited set of conditions, not impossible-to-eradicate weeds. The weeds are the doctrines that hold that people’s lives and minds are not their own, they are common property, which boils down to the property of whomever exercises coercive power at the moment. The battle for freedom is the enduring theme of history. As it has waxed and waned, human hardship and misery have waned and waxed.

I invested in 4Ry for the usual reasons one undertakes such an investment: to make money and further promising technologies. I’m also buying a front row seat for the ongoing battles: freedom versus repression; progress versus decay; happiness versus misery. How badly has the commercial, legal, and political environment deteriorated, and how much worse will it get? As I said in Part 2, “you don’t really know how things work until they’re tried out under real life conditions.” 4Ry offers a real life demonstration of how well innovation and entrepreneurship, the fonts of progress, are working, or not working, in today’s economy.

This may seem like an odd, irrational motivation for an investment, but look at the current financial universe. Like most people in my age group (I’m fifty-eight), I have to generate a return on my savings if I’m to provide for my impending dotage. Where does one go for return? Many bonds now carry negative nominal yields, and virtually every bond’s real yield is negative after one factors in inflation, taxes, and credit risk. Capitalization rates for commercial and residential property have followed bond yields, and offer correspondingly unappealing yields. When interest rates rise, investors will be handed capital losses to go with their tiny or negative yields. Equities, valued on either GAAP or phony-baloney adjusted earnings, are trading at valuations that historically have been followed by minimal or negative long-term returns.

Consider the foundations of my investment in 4Ry versus the foundations of investment in today’s crop of financial instruments. The sprayer and other ESD technologies have been developed and tested by the foremost expert in the field. Importantly, I’ve seen demonstrations and understand the theoretical basis for the technologies—although not all the engineering nuances—and their potential applications. I know and trust Dr. Kelly and David Bird. I have an ongoing role in the company and its business plans, and can pick up a phone and get answers to my questions. There are substantial business risks, but in my judgment the potential returns are commensurate.

The prices of stocks, bonds, and property are artificially propped up by governments’ and central banks’ something-for-nothing perpetual motion machinations that must inevitably fail. I have no way to cut through the PR screens maintained by managements to evaluate their ability and integrity. From what they do disclose in their reports to shareholders and the SEC, many companies are earning less and borrowing more, often to speculate in their own shares or fund overpriced acquisitions, egregious wastes of corporate assets.

I can’t follow or understand the many ways earnings are adjusted and manipulated through accounting maneuvers. As financial engineering and accounting gimmickry has flourished, investment in raising labor force and industrial productivity, innovation, and invention—the foundations of long-run growth—has dwindled. Although it is difficult, bordering on impossible, to investigate individual companies, there are thousands of mutual funds and ETFs that bundle together stocks of multiple companies. I’m assured by financial salespeople that investing in companies I know next to nothing about will build my wealth. There’s certainly nothing odd or irrational about that.

Investing in financial assets is an implicit bet on the health of the underlying economy. Our economy is a camel burdened by an ever-increasing load of regulations, taxes, cronyism, financial repression, and debt, awaiting its final straw. We’re a seasonal or inflation adjustment away from a recession by the officially cooked figures, which means we’re already in a recession. Given the overhang of debt that cannot be repaid and the inevitability of debt deflation, this recession will either kick off or herald the resumption of a depression. (I prefer the latter interpretation, but ultimately the statisticians and historians will decide.) Which brings up one last reason for my investment in 4Ry. What’s coming will be relentlessly deflationary, and Dr. Kelly’s technologies can cut costs significantly.

Invention, innovation, and entrepreneurship are the foundation of a functional economy. Among all the economic statistics, the most ominous is that net business formation has gone negative—more businesses are closing than opening. Undermine the foundation and the structure collapses. Stop the Dr. Kellys and David Birds of this world—the inventors, innovators, and entrepreneurs—and it’s only a matter of time before the economy collapses. That could have a negative effect on the prices of stocks, bonds, and property, even if all the world’s central banks were to monetize debt full-time.

Grand designs to build new world orders from the rubble amount to grand fantasies. Stopping the mind stops logic and creation, and what will be left after the collapse is blind panic, irrationality, and terror. It’s one or the other: a world where the best minds have the freedom to create and thrive—and humanity benefits—or chaos, destruction, and death. The former requires a conscious choice and a relentless struggle against its foes. The latter requires only the failure to choose the former.

IGNORED BY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA:

WHAT BETTER RECOMMENDATION?

TGP_photo 2 FB

AMAZON

KINDLE

NOOK

Creation and Its Enemies, by Robert Gore

Two often overlapping professions represent an apex of human evolution on both an individual and social level: the entrepreneur and the inventor. Because they are an apex, they only emerged as identifiable professions relatively recently, within the last 250 years. Their emergence required hospitable social, political, and legal conditions, and their disappearance will be the hallmark and consequence of broader deterioration and regression.

Humanity has been communal since the days of cave dwellers. The preponderance of people have been defined and have defined themselves as members of a group: a family, clan, tribe, village, town, city, province, or nation. Rare indeed have been the individuals who have simply defined themselves as individuals. That rarity is not because individualists are genetic mutants or sociopathic misanthropes, but because of reflexive group hostility towards those who isolate themselves, especially those who question group beliefs and ideologies. The most prominent purveyors and enforcers of beliefs and ideologies have been religions and governments, and they have been the most intellectually regressive institutions.

Despite their imperfections, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were revolutionary when drafted and remain so today. The most significant philosophical departure was their embrace of individual rights and their protection by a government subordinated to that task. That stance remains an ideal, not a realized outcome, but it was an important intellectual advance. It put out an unprecedented welcome-mat for individualists and they responded, making the young United States a scientific, technological, industrial, and economic giant within a century.

Almost by definition entrepreneurs and inventors place their own self-interest and personal quests above the welfare of any group. They generally receive little encouragement from those around them, except for perhaps a handful of family members and friends (although that’s not a given), especially when they are first starting out. They are often ridiculed, discouraged, and opposed. Failure confirms the crowd’s belief in their foolishness; success brings its own problems. Innovation threatens the existing order, and the existing order rarely takes that lying down.

A new and innovative idea is never enough; the idea must meet the demands of the market. To take a product or service from idea through the planning, collaboration, experimentation, revision, production, and execution stages to a profitable business requires an amalgam of virtues and high-order aptitudes: ingenuity, creativity, determination, integrity, fortitude, flexibility, and an ability to work with and motivate other people. Entrepreneurs and inventors persist in spite of the daunting odds, and fortunately for the humanity to which they may be understandably indifferent or hostile, sometimes they win and progress happens.

Innovation can only grow and thrive when it’s planted in healthy soil. The foundation of innovation, intellectual property—the concept that an idea can acquire legal protection as a property right—is of fairly recent vintage. The evolution of the common law of contracts, the basis of voluntary exchange, was tortuously labored. It took several centuries for English courts to establish that a party who exchanges a promise for a promise—the basis of a contract—has a legally enforceable right to either performance or damages if the counterparty’s promise is not kept. Without that legal development, the Industrial Revolution never would have got off the ground. Innovative golden geese must also be protected from the danger, present since the dawn of civilization, of “plucking” by governments or other thieves. Nobody will create wealth that is likely to be stolen.

Entrepreneurship and invention are emblematic of an advanced stage of economic, and more importantly, philosophical, political, and legal development. Some of the critics of entrepreneurs and inventors—and the social conditions necessary for their existence—are motivated by the ostensibly admirable motivations they ascribe to themselves. Many are not. Underlying much of the antipathy is animus towards that “amalgam of virtues and high-order aptitudes,” or hatred of the good. The ancient hostility towards those who stand apart or question the group’s beliefs persists, rooted in diametrically opposed psychological orientations: independent self-interest versus dependence on other people.

It’s not a stretch to suggest that a bureaucrat, media figure, academic, or politician who cannot change a tire or figure out his or her iPhone might resent the creators who build automobile factories and design phone circuitry. It is not rational to hate those who supply not just the goods and services upon which one depends, but propel progress itself. However, there’s nothing rational about this kind of visceral resentment. It’s also not a stretch to suggest that much of the regulation, taxation, redistribution, extortion, and expropriation inflicted on productive, honest, responsible individuals and businesses stem from a toxic mix of ignoble and destructive emotions. Cutting through the noble-sounding dross, malice has been a primary impetus for much of the growth and expansion of power of governments.

It is tragic and wrong when people who achieve the highest degree of precision and logic in their fields acknowledge and validate irrational claims on their talents, productivity, creativity, time, and sometimes, on their very lives. Just as tragic and wrong are those innovators, creators, and producers who delude themselves into believing they can beat the irrational at their own game. Any accommodation or concession by the logical to the illogical can only work to the detriment of the former and the benefit of the latter.

Regrettably, the tormented rarely challenge their tormentors; instead, they give up or keep their work to themselves. The status of entrepreneurs and inventors is a reliable bellwether of a society’s wellbeing. In totalitarian societies, any sign of independence or extraordinary ability can be a death sentence; there are no innovators or innovation, only stagnation and regression. In the US, innovation and entrepreneurship are under siege, reflected in a grim statistic: since 2008, business closures have exceeded business startups. The hotbed of the Industrial Revolution has become a land of debt merchants, rent seekers, crony capitalists, and other government-connected slime. The independence and quest for liberty that sparked the American revolution, generations of immigrants, and the elimination of slavery has been replaced by a pervasive “something for nothing” ethic, in which those who have nothing to contribute demand their sustenance from those who do.

It has become fashionable to claim that “technology cannot solve all our problems.” That’s an indisputable proposition, but if innovation dies, technology won’t solve any of our problems. California suffers through a drought but sits next to the largest body of water on the planet. Affordable desalination would be a technological solution. The 1800s forerunners to today’s environmental doomsayers probably warned that horse-and-buggy transport would leave the world knee-deep in horse shit. The hydrocarbon-powered internal combustion engine—technology—solved that problem, but generated its own issues, notably emissions that befoul the air (although much progress has been made on that front the past three decades) and may contribute to global warming, if in fact the globe is warming.

From where will the replacement for internal combustion come? The world’s worthies will soon be jetting into Davos, Switzerland for their annual confab on the many pressing problems that beset the planet. Even the tech titans in attendance will concur with the general consensus: technology will play only a secondary role to primarily political solutions. Attendees will endorse more of the government expansion, ineptitude, corruption, and malice that is stifling and threatens to kill the liberty and spirit of innovation responsible for humanity’s progress. The 19th century doomsayers were wrong about a world literally covered in horse shit, but the Davos crowd, left unchallenged, will smother it in the figurative kind.

A CREATOR AND HIS MANY ENEMIES

TGP_photo 2 FB

AMAZON

KINDLE

NOOK