Sense of Entitlement

UntitledOrdinary people would have no chance of becoming president or members of congress. To win  elections, it takes personality characteristics the average person does not have.  Winning elections is more competitive than gaining in a playing slot in the NFL. Just like with successful athletes, certain attributes are necessary in order to compete successfully in politics. It takes a political personality which is similar to that of a sociopath.

Personality characteristics can be viewed on a bell curve. One ingredient to a political personality is a sense of entitlement.  The sense of entitlement is one of the important aspects of a political personality. There are many others such as little or no feelings of remorse or conscience.  A sense of entitlement is a subconscious belief that what others have rightfully belongs to you. The bell curve for sense of entitlement serves as an example. Ordinary people, like the ones in the middle of the chart are comfortable in their value which are similar to what most people possess. They have no clue that their elected leaders feel in side completely different than they do. This is why voters expect those they elect to represent them. Why wouldn’t they serve as representatives? They say the will.

Politicians are so different in mental make up that they are like a separate species.  Being childlike in their approach to government, voters believe politicians are no different than they are.  This is a huge mistake.

Americans need to adopt the delegate model of representation and lose the messiah seeking approach.

 

This entry was posted in Daily Comments on by .

About Fantasy Free Economics

James Quillian independent scholar,free market economist,and teacher of natural law. Who is James Quillian? Certainly I am nobody special, Just a tireless academic and deep thinker. Besides that, I have broken the code with respect to economics and political science. Credentials? Nothing you would be impressed with. I am not a household name. It is hard to become famous writing that virtually no one in the country is genuinely not in touch with reality. But, if I did not do that, there would be no point in my broking the broken the code. If you read the blog, it is easy to see that there are just a few charts, no math and no quantitative analysis. That is not by accident. Given what I know, those items are completely useless. I do turn out to be highly adept at applying natural law. Natural law has predominance over any principles the social science comes up. By virtue of understanding natural law, I can debunk, in just a few sentences , any theory that calls for intervention by a government. My taking the time to understand the ins and outs of Keynes General Theory is about like expecting a chemistry student to completely grasp all that the alchemists of the middle ages thought they understood in efforts to turn base metals into goal. Keynesian theory clearly calls for complete objectivity. Government can only make political decisions. Keynesian techniques call for economic decisions. So, why go any further with that? Fantasy Free Economics is in a sense a lot like technical analysis. Technical analysis began with the premise that it was impossible to gain enough information studying fundamentals to gain a trading advantage. Study the behavior of investors instead. Unlike technical analysis, I don't use technical charts. What I understand are the incentives of different people and entities active in the economics arena. For example, there is no such thing as an incentive to serve with life in the aggregate. In the aggregate, only self interest applies. It is routinely assumed otherwise. That is highly unappealing. But, I am sorry. That is the way it is. I can accept that because I am genuinely in touch with reality. Step one in using Fantasy Free Economics is for me to understand just how little I really know. A highly credentialed economist may know 100 times what I do based on the standard dogma. Compare the knowledge each of us has compared to all there is to know and we both look like we know nothing at all. There is always more than we don't know than what we do know. I am humble enough to present myself on that basis. Why? That is the way it is. I am not bad at math. I have taught math. What I understand is when to use it and when to rely on something else. Math is useless in natural law so I don't use it. While others look at numbers, I am busy understanding the forces in nature that makes their numbers what they are. That gives me a clear advantage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.