Addressing the issue of “In today’s world are there any good investments?”

Long-term, lets say 50+ years or maybe even 30+ years, there’s no such thing as a good investment, since the world (with respect to human habitation) is dying and no, capital won’t be able to escape to outer space, at least in that time frame.

Disastrous garbage mega-banks are “too big to fail”, yet during the Copenhagen sham the US was only willing to give $10 Billion to help save the planet. Apparently the planet is NOT “too big to fail”. Wrap your head around that logic and continue to tell me that the elite are “rational”.

In the short to medium term, I completely disagree with those who say there’s no such thing as a good investment. Right now there is a massive India/US alliance and with US power backing India, investments look good in India. Investments are also strong in areas with positive near-future expectations, like the Western-allied Pakistan. China is a strong economy right now and with the exception of their stock market bubble which could crash this year there are many good investment opportunities.

Green technologies which are successful would be tremendous investments, at or exceeding the value of early investments in Microsoft. Much of the elite, barring big oil, big coal, etc. of course, are behind green technologies.

What’s a more pertinent question perhaps is the issue of whether one’s primary focus should be on power calculations, which is what investment is all about, versus a focus on saving the world. Power calculations are amoral. Power calculations can lead one to believe mega-banks are “too big to fail” while the planet is worth, well, $10 Billion.


13 Responses to “Addressing the issue of “In today’s world are there any good investments?””

  1. David Says:

    Still enjoying your poignant writing and centered perspectives from afar, Mr. Koontz.

    Just read some interesting info here in Chile — my new pedagogical post for a few years — on the Nazca Lines, geoglyphs and aquifers up north in the Atacama Desert, none of which comes as a surprise to me.

    Hope you’re doing well as the world continues to revolve around and seemingly fold in upon itself.

    Best to you.

  2. briankoontz Says:

    It’s funny how Americans always ask me “How are you doing?” instead of “How is the world doing?” I’ve never been asked the latter question while the former has occurred maybe 4,000 times.

    Soon we’ll realize that unless the world is doing well, none of us is well. Soon won’t come soon enough to save the world though.

    Here’s a clever analogy I came up with recently:

    The American state gave hundreds of billions of dollars to bail out banks that were “too big to fail”. Then in Copenhagen it pledged $10 Billion for the health of the world.

    Isn’t the world the one thing that really IS “too big to fail”? What are banks going to do when there’s no people left to transact with them?

  3. David Says:

    The world, Mr. Koontz, will be just fine without all of us people, just as it was before our recent arrival. Mother will shake us off like fleas if need be, as I don’t believe for a minute that we, as a species, can cause her ultimate destruction and extinguish 4.5 billion years of evolutionary success.

    “Soon we’ll realize that unless the world is doing well, none of us is well.” While this logic lacks any shades of gray, neither one of us came up with this stated truth, although we both obviously realize the fact of the matter. Krishnamurti beat us both (as well as P. Joseph) to the punch on this, as I’m sure you’re familiar with his proverb which I needn’t repeat.

    I already know how the world is doing, friend, as I live and reside amongst it in various geographical locations. Yes, I would like to see it get better, and eventually be well. If you read closely, though, you’ll realize that I never actually inquired into your well-being as 4,000 others have, I simply stated a wish for you as an intelligent and aware individual living amongst the unwell herd.

    There are 3 types of people amongst the Taker humanity, as Ishmael refers to us; 1) those who aren’t aware that our society is sick, 2) those who are aware and don’t give a shit, and 3) those who are aware and would like to see a change toward our collective well-being and health.

    Be the change you wish to see in the world, as Ghandi suggested, or be an angry victim whose sanity and well-being relies on the rest of the world — that choice is yours, and yours alone. Collective change can occur one person at a time, until it becomes so infectious that there is no denying it.

    You give them too much power and credit, as this isn’t about the pointless banks or their unsustainable economic system, it’s about the survival and transformation of our species — it’s about our collective awakening which will move us toward our potential.

    Because the world IS too big to fail, what choice will you — as an intelligent and aware individual — make to ensure that the world succeeds with humanity as an active component?

    As always, best to you.

  4. briankoontz Says:

    We see things differently in some respects.

    Ghandi made a strategic choice that worked out well. His nationalist agenda, which is a long way from “saving the world”, came to pass.

    The world is a far worse place since Ghandi’s time regarding global totalitarianism and even a latter day Ghandi, much less someone truly radical, would likely quickly become a corpse or a prisoner.

    I don’t believe in collective awakening, and I don’t believe that people don’t know what’s going on. I believe that humanity overwhelmingly is the 3rd type you’ve listed – probably 95% of them.

    The problem is that the world itself severely limits the actions of people regarding their desire to improve the world. Here’s an analogy:

    Let’s say you’re in hell. You try to improve hell but it’s your job to burn people alive. You constantly smell burning flesh, flesh that you yourself are obliged to burn in order for yourself to stay alive.

    There are any number of ways you could try to improve hell. You could try to free some of the humans you’re obliged to burn. Of course it’s a long way from hell to earth, so the freedom you give them is likely to merely extend their life by a few minutes until a devil sees what’s going on and not only burns the human, but then burns you.

    So of course you have to be smart – you have to succeed in getting the human to earth and in escaping detection.

    This is quite a project – the planning stage alone takes years and a flubbed execution makes all that work worthless. Or worse than worthless, because you’re a traitor toward hell itself by means of the treason you’re committing against it by planning to free humans.

    The people you claim “don’t give a shit” actually do give a shit – they just don’t feel themselves up to the task of acting against the ruling powers – so they become happy slaves. They “feed their family”, in other words.

    These happy slaves don’t end up charred corpses, which is the usual result when one threatens the state. Tell me – as these happy slaves examine the charred corpses of would-be heroes, do they tell themselves they made the right choice?

    I’m not recommending people not engage in the project of saving the world. But let’s be clear about what that really means, and let’s be clear about the vast number of corpses that will pile up before such a change is made.

    We are all victims. Happy slaves can’t lead a moral life – therein lies their victimization. Revolutionaries lead lives of terror which usually end in death or imprisonment – therein lies their victimization. Pick your poison.

    My anger and well-being is a strategic choice designed to communicate and educate. My anger, at least my overt anger, is fading nowadays since I’ve largely fulfilled that aspect of communication (and for other personal reasons).

  5. David Says:

    I agree that we do see things differently in some respects, and quite similarly in others, Brian.

    That 3rd category of people could possibly be as high as you indicate, but I’d personally drop it a bit based on my experiences around the world. However, at this point we’d be squabbling over insignificant percentages, which is a waste of both our time.

    In that 3rd category reside many individuals stuck in apathy — yet content in having their big ass flat screens, video games and numbing substances; escape mechanisms. I sense that this type of behavior is prevalent in the U.S. and in many parts of the Westernized world. I myself enjoy comfort, but not at any price, and certainly not at the cost of becoming utterly complacent.

    I’m sure you’re familiar with the old expression that you won’t see something until you believe it, as the mind easily rejects what it doesn’t consider possible. I adhere to the realm of all possibilities, and therefore do believe in some degree of collective awakening as that is what I feel is necessary for our survival. Nonetheless, it may be quite feasible that the pile of corpses could well exceed the height of structures in Dubai.

    Your analogy is truly paradoxical, as is life much of the time. I won’t argue the fact that it comes down to picking our own poison in many instances. Nevertheless, neither one of us is facing the dilemma of charing would-be heroes, and morality is subjective with varying shades of gray between the black and white.

    Anger blinds us from acting intelligently, as it darkens our heart. A Japanese proverb states clearly that one cannot speak intelligently without heart; I’m therefore glad to know that yours is fading.

    Chau for nau compay…

  6. briankoontz Says:

    Anger and fear are directly related. Fear occurs first, and anger follows as a means of alleviating fear through granting strength and aggression to the angered and thus giving the best chance of eliminating the threat causing the fear.

    You’re mistaking my contempt for anger though. My “inability” to communicate as some people have claimed is the result of the contempt I have for the audience, not my own anger. Chomsky’s faith in Americans is not rational but rather *allows* him to avoid contempt.

    I have joined Chomsky in corruption – my contempt for Americans is fading not for any rational reason but for entirely selfish reasons – in order to allow me greater social power within America.

    So I’ve changed my poison – irrational corruption instead of maintaining my proud rational outcast stance.

    I have a more positive view of people than you do. I believe that people are already awake, which is WHY they need to drown themselves in alcohol or television or movies or video games. It’s much better they need to drown themselves than if they were asleep, where they could go to work with smiles on their faces.

    Adolf Hitler for example never needed alcohol, television, movies, or video games. A drug addict is an order of magnitude greater morally than Hitler. A revolutionary is an order of magnitude greater morally than a drug addict. But a *corpse* is useless.

  7. David Says:

    A drowning victim who isn’t rescued quickly becomes a lifeless corpse who sinks to the bottom where decomposition commences if unable to continue treading water — it’s simply a matter of how much time a person can go on that way. In that capacity a person is no more useful than if they were asleep, the end result is still the same aside from a pseudo-smile; i.e. a façade. Drowning oneself does nothing to manifest otherwise positive results from being awake.

    I have my doubts as to our difference in perspectives regarding people. While you selfishly diminish your contempt for Americans, in particular, my contempt for humanity, in general, is directed more toward those who hold positions of power and those who mindlessly follow; the latter which there are plenty of in this world, make no mistake about it.

    The most recent and tangible example which supports this was the frenzy demonstrated around the world for Obama prior to his election and the months following his entry into office. People everywhere REALLY believed in the whole YES WE CAN/CHANGE rhetoric; in response to desperation and ignorance of where power actually resides. I was criticized again and again for not exercising my right to vote as an “American” citizen. The system has no credibility, which even Chomsky asserts, and I therefore refuse to participate in the charades. It’s no different than my refusal to visit Disneyland/world — all just a fantasy, so what’s the point?

    Despite differences, anger, contempt or perception, I continue to believe — perhaps forcefully — that individually and collectively, mankind can do better, for we continue to fall way short of our potential as intelligent beings. But not all of us are intelligent, many out there are quite stupid, in fact, and act accordingly as they look to false gurus who will lead and give them answers, as so many Germans did under Hitler. Mindless behavior is nothing more than manifested stupidity. Repeat a lie often enough and it eventually becomes the truth thanks to a dearth of critical thinking among the masses.

    Nonetheless, there is much beauty to be experienced on this planet and throughout humanity. Random acts of kindness, compassion, cathartic laughter, branches swaying in a coastal breeze, the colors to be consumed at sunset, grapes maturing on a vine — I suppose it all depends on where we aim our focus. I abandoned socio-political analysis and ranting about it through posting my reactionary works online more than a year ago, as that focus was driving me mad. I want nothing to do with TV, religion or politics because they are void of anything worthwhile — they simply hollow out one’s soul.

    Life is what we make of it, and yes, happiness can be had in this world, as well as genuinely accompanied smiles that go beyond a façade.

    In the grand scheme of things, Brian, we know far less than what there is to actually know — a handful or two of sand amongst all the beaches of the world. And, Bill Hicks may have nailed it by claiming that it’s all just a ride, nothing more.

  8. briankoontz Says:

    Madness is the frenzy before the calm, as anger is the terror before victory or death.

    Someone void of madness is usually a fool.

    Genuine smiles of course always exist – someone mad is fighting to make the world a better place – what would be the point of the fight if there was nothing in the world to smile about?

    So smell the roses, and then smell the stench of totalitarianism. And the next day, there’s more roses and more totalitarianism. But unless victory is obtained, eventually there will be no roses left. And then there will be no more genuine smiles.

    What does a Palestinian think of “I want nothing to do with TV, religion, or politics”? Does he agree with you, or does he understand that unless he wins the political battle, he will be exterminated? He may be disgusted with politics and not *want* to participate, but he must.

    The global project of capitalism will result in human extinction. So while beautiful things are the REASON to fight, that’s all they are. The fight itself must be the primary focus of life, or we will not obtain victory and the world will be made completely ugly.

    Someone who tells the mad to attain sanity is telling them to stop fighting and let the world die.

    Smile as much as you like. But don’t let beautiful things distract you away from your protection of them.


    Humans have gone crazy, and not in the good way, with despair. This despair has led to them embracing distractions and buying into obvious sloganeering such as what the Obama campaign produced. This despair has led Americans into a very high level of irrationality.

    When one’s despair reaches a certain stage the truth becomes terrifying. This terror in turn renders communication impossible. My primary problem with Americans is that I can’t communicate with them – they are so lost is their own despair, ignorance, and terror that they treat truth as the enemy.

  9. David Says:

    As usual, Brian, many of the points you make are absolutely valid. Your communication comes across with clarity, thereby challenging me to explore my own weaknesses and way of viewing the world.

    The global project of capitalism will result in human extinction, as it has temporarily enabled humanity to surpass the planet’s natural carrying capacity. It is no mystery that contemporary life is largely artificial; e.g. our extraction from the natural order of things where competition is reduced to interpersonal levels as we are led to be distracted from truth.

    Truth, however, is not my enemy, nor is it necessarily absolute. Truth is often subject to one’s own point of view. What I consider truth, another may consider a lie, and the cycle goes on and on toward our eventual confusion and destruction.

    Just the same, while we fixate solely on the problems, what are the solutions being proposed? What do you advocate as a solution to snuffing out totalitarianism and moving humanity toward something established in equality, health and sustainability? How do you propose to get the entire world on the same page, at least for the majority who aren’t pulling the totalitarian strings?

    Again, we can focus on the problems and issues all day until we become so maddened that we no longer function as rational human beings, until a genuine smile can no longer be mustered up, until we are blinded from seeing beauty.

    More than anything, I want to see the world turn around, I want humanity to reach its potential, I want to reach my potential as a human being. At present, though, we can’t begin to fathom what that potential is, we can only imagine what it must be like.

    As for the Palestinian, if given some reasonable option other than participation in the struggle or death, I’m sure he would choose so.

    What sacrifice are you or myself making to ease that person’s struggle? Have you gone to take up arms at his side lately, have I? No. You sit at your computer somewhere up in the northern region of this continent, while I sit at mine here in the south. Neither one of us is therefore really doing anything to ease that person’s ugly reality.

    The truth of the matter is, his fight takes place in his back yard, ours takes place conscientiously. Perhaps that is the root of our despair.

  10. briankoontz Says:

    I ask myself frequently whether I’m doing the right thing in terms of maximizing my value as a human being. I’m not talented enough to take on the Israeli Defense Force with a rifle and a Palestinian at my side, but I can talk and write effectively, so that’s what I do.

    I’ve been an educator, organizer, and instigator, urging people toward a revolutionary position. My perception of Western humanity is that it needs to be more radical before it can do anything useful.

    Other places are more radical, but impoverished as well. There’s a kind of bell curve to radicalism – once one becomes too impoverished, radicalism goes out the window since life becomes merely a matter of survival. Socialism is a system rather than a foodstuff.

    This is the real agenda of capitalism – to eliminate the middle class (broadly speaking) and reduce the world to the rulers and those scrabbling to survive. At that point there will be no resistance to capitalism. Control is the primary goal of capitalists, wealth is secondary. Wealth is only pursued when control is held in confidence. This is why totalitarianism is necessary – it provides the political framework for the control global capitalism needs. There are a slew of people out there who erroneously believe that they can fight totalitarianism without simultaneously fighting capitalism.

    Many of us are excited by modern South America not just because of recent political developments, but because unlike Africa it’s well-off enough economically to muster a political force which can take on the global totalitarian system.

    Two types of useful organizations are most needed – global and local. There needs to be a global organization to fight the global order wherever the battle is most advantageous, as well as share information.

    Local groups make sure all local needs of the community are met.

    One problem is that people continue to think in terms of nations and patriotism. It would be very helpful if those concepts went out the window and were replaced by thinking of humanity as a whole (globally) and of the humans in their immediate area.

    Americans, even radicals, often know very little about the world. They often call for greater distribution of wealth, by which they mean that the American criminal ruling class should give more of it’s blood money to American workers. Meanwhile 30,000 people per day die due to the capitalist system, which these radicals don’t take into account perhaps because these “radicals” care about little beyond the size of their bank account.

  11. David Says:

    When you and I first began our discourse nearly two years ago, I remember you stating the importance of identifying our differences. At this point, however, it becomes more than obvious that our similarities are as congruent as our differences are incongruent.

    I’ve been asking myself the exact same question for what seems like too many years; how can I maximize my value as a human being? From family members, to teachers, friends and strangers, I’ve always been accused of being an instigator who thinks too radically and/or unrealistically. I’m not content with the general consensus or the status quo because I believe that the world is inundated with lies and nearly void of any truth. Face value is generally worthless, and almost always warped, except in nature wherein resides so much beauty.

    The solution to my dilemma has been to go out and explore the world in order to gain a greater understanding of it, as I am not an American so much as I am just another member of our global community. This has proven to be an effective measure in my experience, confirming many of the lies told in the classroom and via the media.

    My disdain for nationalism/patriotism has been conducive for being widely accepted by strangers regardless of the country. I accept it as the highest compliment when Latin Americans, Europeans and Asians call me a very atypical “American”.

    However, it isn’t about me, it’s about breaking cultural and social stigmas, it’s about opening eyes to a different reality. It is for those reasons that education has become my medium for creating change, which can’t be done without opening eyes, shedding stereotypes and false perceptions. Until I find a more effective means, this method will have to suffice.

    We both agree that our world is facing critical problems, and these problems must be confronted with radical solutions. I believe that organizing both locally and globally is what ultimately needs to occur. Perhaps by working together; i.e. the root of organization, the two of us can come up with something more effective to combat this dysfunctional capitalist system. One thing is for certain, no one man can do it alone.

  12. briankoontz Says:

    Beauty undeniably resides in nature. Moderate-ranged morality however rarely does, and *expansive* morality (such as brotherhood of man) never does. Complex morality gives humanity a special meaning and is one reason truth is so important for humans.

    There are many problems with organizing humans beyond those commonly considered. Many “moral” humans have pride in their own powerlessness, as they contrast their helplessness against the terrible powerful forces which cause such destruction. Therefore, instead of taking charge of their own lives and participating in organizations they pathologically focus on the terrors of the world. This type of human has been inadequately identified as “lost in despair” or “apathetic”.

    This type of human opposes popular organizations, not for ideological reasons but because he feels that power corrupts, and the more powerful that organization becomes (however true they stay to their popular roots) the more doomed to immorality they become.

    This type of human’s logic amounts to Slaves = Moral. He happily remains a slave in order to remain moral. One frequent use of this type of logic is Moral = Non-violent. These people would be happy if the world is saved from destructive forces just so long as they don’t have to pick up a weapon or use any form of power for that to happen.

    This issue has not been addressed by would-be organizers. Most would-be organizers in order to gain a following appeal to the popular belief in non-violent resistance, and simply ignore or pretend away the fact that they wish their organization to become powerful.

    In America the idea of *defensively* using weapons died in the 1970s along with the black socialists. When some of them were killed Americans got the message that picking up a weapon focuses the state on them, so cowardly they turn to “morality” as the excuse to not become powerful.

    In the past couple decades there’s so much talk of fear, of everyone being afraid, of everyone being irrational, that noone *trusts* themselves with weapons, so the idea of defensive use of weapons is thrown out the window and the idea of oneself as irresponsible, immature, and not capable of handling a weapon is favored.

    I’m happy to attempt to work together with you.

  13. David Says:

    I’m pleased to receive your affirmative response to attempt to work together, Brian.

    Your dissection of morality and weapon use is quite definitive, certainly an issue worthy of additional discussion.

    Regarding future communications pertinent to this topic and that of organization, how about accomplishing this via email? I can be reached at:, look forward to receiving your reply.

    Chau for nau…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: