Two Wolves and a Lamb

The Tragedy of Democratic Politics [The Daily Reckoning] September 12, 2024 [WEBSITE]( | [UNSUBSCRIBE]( Two Wolves and a Lamb Annapolis, Maryland [Brian Maher] BRIAN MAHER Dear Reader, Professional obligations required us to view Tuesday night’s presidential debate. The experience jackhammered home our central contention: Politics is disguised violence. There you had the two combatants, Harris and Trump, Trump and Harris. Perhaps one half of the nation is for the one. The second half is for the other. One will win and the other will lose. Thus roughly one-half of the population must suffer for the following four years — if not more. As we have argued before: Assume your election. 50.1% of voters yank a lever for X. 49.9% pull one for Y. Thus X claims the laurel. He proceeds instantly against the desires, wishes and interests of the vanquished 49.9%. Each day they live this hapless bunch must cringe, wither and chafe beneath X’s atrocities… helpless as worms on fishermen’s hooks. A Binary Choice Let us consider the case at bar. If Ms. Harris gets in, half the nation must endure an additional four years of unfettered immigration, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, sexual deviancy boosting, “green” energy drumming, election disintegrity, et cetera. We would cite additional debt heaped on by extravagant Democratic spending. Yet the nation’s debt galloped by bounds under Mr. Trump’s reign. Prior even to the pandemic, the fellow liked to spend money. We do not believe the shade of Cal Coolidge will seize control of Don Trump next time. And if Mr. Trump gets in? The other half of the nation — the half for Ms. Harris — must endure four years of dictatorship, threats to democracy, retribution, isolationism, trade war, racism, disinformation, Russophilia and every other species of calamity. That is, victory by either will leave half the nation very far from gruntled. The Old Politics Are Gone We recall the days when politics centered within a fairly limited range. Should the highest marginal tax rate settle at 36% — or 39%? Should this regulation go upon the statute books or come off the statute books? Should we spend x on “defense,” x+1 or x-1? Yet in these our days, political combats assume a more… fundamental coloring. [We noticed you’re inactive]( ACCOUNT # NAME CASH LINE STATUS 000103047050 {EMAIL} Inactive A recent routine analysis of our customer records revealed that you are currently missing out on the most profitable trade ideas in our company. On Monday mornings, our most successful trader is set to deliver a real-time time update - LIVE - to a select group of Paradigm Press readers. [Make Sure Your Name Is On This List Now]( Red-state America and blue-state America are at each other’s throats. And neither intends to let go the chokehold. At essence — as we have argued before — it is because politics disunites, divides, disrupts, discombobulates. It is a twin of war itself. For politics disunites, divides, disrupts and discombobulates as war itself. Democratic politics offer no exception. It in fact constitutes the very proof of the rule. The Beauty of Federalism And as we have likewise argued before: The higher the office… the greater the menace. We argued, for example, that the mayor of Why, Arizona, may impose his torments upon his outvoted victims — as may the mayor of Whynot, North Carolina. Yet these victims are free to jump the fence. The bordering hamlet might run to saner and more tolerable settings as the outvoted sees them. And so the oppressed can flee, refugees from oppression. The same asylum-seeking applies to individual states. Has a California or an Oregon or an Illinois gone lunatic? For many they have. But a Texas or a Tennessee or a Utah holds out its beacon. These local competitions form a severe brake on the natural rascalities of politics, especially in the American system. These local competitions, in fact, form the crowning glory of the American device of government. But to escape a president? A fellow must jump the Rio Grande to the south, the 49th parallel to the north or swim oceans east or west to get away. If he chooses to linger on, he must rot down four years until he takes another go at the vote booth. And if the scalawag wins reelection? Our poor wretch must endure another four years under occupation — for a total of eight. We have previously contrasted the political system with the market system. Today we do it again… Voting in the Marketplace We have argued that free markets — authentically free markets — lack entirely the violent combats central to politics. And that they are scenes of peace, tolerance… and justice. Consider, for example, a Coca-Cola. This beverage holds itself out before the American people. It is Candidate X in a theoretical market election. “Vote for me,” yells this candidate. I’m the “real thing.” Behind the other podium stands a Pepsi-Cola — Candidate Y. “No. Vote for me,” counters this fellow. Drink me “for the love of it.” The fickle and capricious voter proceeds to choose. Out comes his wallet, containing his vote for one or the other. Yet does his individual vote injure, usurp or ruffle the opposing voter? Does he club the other voter over the head to enforce his wishes… as he does in politics? He does not. [Buy this Sub-$5 Play on Elon Musk’s Final Masterpiece]( After revolutionizing space exploration and the auto industry… Elon Musk is now planning to revolutionize MONEY with this new venture. [See the details because once Elon flips the switch…]( Which could happen in the next 24 hours… It could send [this sub-$5 play skyrocketing in the coming months.]( [Click Here To Learn More]( Satisfied Voters A voter for either Coca-Cola or Pepsi-Cola is a satisfied voter. Crucially, neither denies the other his soft drink of choice. Multiply this one example countless times and in countless directions. What emerges is a picture of majestic electoral peace and serenity. McDonald’s vs. Burger King, Honda vs. Ford, Nike vs. Adidas, Walmart vs. Target… it is all one. Chain a red-state American to a blue-state American. Compel them to vote between any product on the free and open market. The blue-state voter may razz the red-stater’s ghastly and barbarian tastes. The red-state voter may in turn razz the blue-stater’s effete and supercilious tastes. But neither attempts to dragoon or bayonet the other. Each concedes the other’s freedom to vote his own way, as he might, according to his liver and lights. Thus peace prevails between them. Yet when the political voter steps into the vote booth on Election Day— conversely — he conducts a sort of warfare. He wants to boss the opposing voter in a way the opposing voter does not wish to be bossed. He in essence places a gun against the fellow’s ribs. And when he pulls the lever? He pulls the trigger. Two Wolves and a Lamb We must therefore conclude the free market’s voting system is vastly superior to political voting. A vote in the marketplace is a “win, win” deal, as our co-founder Bill Bonner styles it. Both purchaser and producer benefit from the transaction. What is politics then but a colossal “win, lose” deal? Do we propose an alternative to the political arrangement? No — not earnestly. We merely diagnose a disorder. We do not prescribe a fix. You say the system under which we wallow is the best on offer in this fallen world of sin. There is very little alternative. We must simply make the best of it. You may very well be correct. You are very likely correct. Yet as old Ben Franklin never said: “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.” What if you are the lamb? Regards, [Brian Maher] Brian Maher Managing Editor, The Daily Reckoning [feedback@dailyreckoning.com.](mailto:feedback@dailyreckoning.com) Editor’s note: Enough about politics — let’s talk markets. Jim Rickards calls this man [The Banker.]( In all Jim’s experience over the years working in capital markets, he believes this man’s a financial anomaly. He doesn’t target 1,000%... 3,000%... or 5,000% gains that entail a lot of risk. Instead, this former hedge fund manager is all about steady — but fast — income. And he’s among the absolute best in the world at that. That’s why we strongly urge you to [learn The Banker’s strategy.]( He uses a few unique market indicators (that you can learn all about for yourself). And he’s closed trades that have made $6,492 in four days… $10,617 in six days… and $13,203 in two days. Not too bad for an income strategy! Right? [Click here now to learn all about it.]( Thank you for reading The Daily Reckoning! We greatly value your questions and comments. Please send all feedback to [feedback@dailyreckoning.com.](mailto:feedback@dailyreckoning.com) [Brian Maher] [Brian Maher]( is the Daily Reckoning's Managing Editor. Before signing on to Agora Financial, he was an independent researcher and writer who covered economics, politics and international affairs. His work has appeared in the Asia Times and other news outlets around the world. He holds a Master's degree in Defense & Strategic Studies. [Paradigm]( ☰ ⊗ [UPDATE PREFERENCES]( [Contact Us]( © 2024 Paradigm Press, LLC. 1001 Cathedral Street, Baltimore, MD 21201. By submitting your email address, you consent to Paradigm Press, LLC. delivering daily email issues and advertisements. To end your The Daily Reckoning e-mail subscription and associated external offers sent from The Daily Reckoning, feel free to [click here.]( Please note: the mailbox associated with this email address is not monitored, so do not reply to this message. We welcome comments or suggestions at feedback@dailyreckoning.com. This address is for feedback only. For questions about your account or to speak with customer service, [contact us here]( or call (844)-731-0984. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized financial advice. We allow the editors of our publications to recommend securities that they own themselves. However, our policy prohibits editors from exiting a personal trade while the recommendation to subscribers is open. In no circumstance may an editor sell a security before subscribers have a fair opportunity to exit. The length of time an editor must wait after subscribers have been advised to exit a play depends on the type of publication. All other employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line publication or 72 hours after the mailing of a printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company. The Daily Reckoning is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. We do not rent or share your email address. Please read our [Privacy Statement.]( If you are having trouble receiving your The Daily Reckoning subscription, you can ensure its arrival in your mailbox by [whitelisting The Daily Reckoning.](