Category: Macroeconomics

The Term Capitalism Has Been Tainted by the Big Business / Big Government Partnership

There is no wonder why capitalism gets a bad name. Ever since the dawn of time, governments have been used by large business ventures to secure their market and guarantee their revenue.

Back in colonial days, the East India Company had a monopoly supported by the British Empire, and in more recent times the canal/railroad building and steel industry in the United States were given favored treatment to drive away competition.

In the past decade and especially during the plan-demic, it is obvious that most large businesses and their owners have benefited (top 0.1% elite’s wealth increased dramatically) from the government connection as they were exempt from the strict and arbitrary rules that government handed down to small businesses, in effect scaring them out of business.

There is a name that is appropriate for this arrangement, crony-capitalism.

Understanding this, it is easier to ready articles that criticize capitalism, because one know that the target is not free market capitalism, but capitalism achieved by exploiting a government connection to get favored treatment.

In the United States, there is no one who better understood this connection and profited from it than Abraham Lincoln, a railroad lawyer who made land purchases based on the insider knowledge he had of the railroad-industrial complexes intentions. Once president, he would further intertwine private corporations to enter into partnership with federal government to set the stage for all the fraud that the Grant administration had to face. Truth comes out eventually, and that is a treat that the political establishment has to live with every day. The corrupt US government/big corp/big tech web of deceit of 2021 is only the natural progression of what has happened over the past 200+ years here in America.

Now that we have this knowledge, there is an article by Caitlin Johnstone that helps us all understand the mental harm we are being subjected to in and around the Covid-19 overreaction.

How many of people’s mental health diagnoses are really just them struggling to function in a capitalist system that is amoral, destructive, overwhelming, overbearing, unsatisfying, and bereft of meaning?

It’s surely one of the most under-examined questions in the field of modern psychology. People in general and researchers in particular all too rarely think to take a step back from the data they are looking at and consider the large-scale framework within which that data is materializing, and to consider whether there’s anything about that particular framework which is giving rise to the particular data sets they are seeing.

Specifically:

How many people end up consulting with mental health professionals because they find themselves psychologically unable to keep up with the frenetic corporate pace that’s demanded of them in order to “earn a living”? Or earlier on as children because they are unable to successfully navigate the capitalism boot camp known as school? How many people are given diagnoses, and corresponding bottles of pills, simply because they can’t march to the beat of the capitalist drum?

Know anybody? Know yourself?

I know that listening to my company’s CEO makes me ticked that he feels he can impose HIS political agenda on the sheep in his company. Especially this past year it seems that this occasional ramp-up of subtlety saying that BLM is inherently good and Trump was 100% bad. The Kool-Aid has been moved from favored beverage almost to a point of being a mandatory IV in the past year.

But I digress.

While the sheep will always be with us, I believe there are some critical thinkers that may have been tricked by a slick marketing campaign as well as Covid-19 narrative has given hope to the climate change cult that their agenda is not dead. No doubt that the evil high priests that believe man can totally shape his world into the perfect utopia that has failed in the past, that Marxism 15.0 accomplished by an exceptional USA can give everyone equality and no hurt feelings. The marketing of this “new normal” is obvious to those that look and are not afraid of questioning the various cult’s claims:

How many of these stressors are exacerbated by being psychologically pummelled with mass media propaganda day in and day out, artificially twisting your mind into the belief that this is all normal, and that if you can’t keep up, you’re the problem? Telling you that it’s fine and normal for there to be billionaires and empty investment properties while you struggle to keep a roof over your head? Telling you it’s fine and normal for wealth and resources to go toward murdering strangers overseas while you’re forced to choose between medicine and groceries?

Apparently, the elites believe that they have too many people to manage in this world (right Bill Gates?) and the case-demic/plan-demic is intended to be version 1.0 of an annual ritual where select sections of society can be culled so that future people management attempts may be easier to carry out with less insurrection, revolt or rebellion.

And by the capitalism propaganda known as advertising? How is our psychological health affected by a nonstop barrage of corporate messaging informing us that we are deficient, and that there are things we lack which we must obtain in order to become whole? That we’re not beautiful enough, not skinny enough, not fashionable enough, not affluent enough, that we don’t own enough of the top-line items which only the well-off can afford?

Expanded areas of deficits might be some are too white, too racist and not doing enough good to keep our neighbors safe.

If you don’t know this is slavery, then you might want to research things for yourself.

The antidote to all this is to connect with others on similar paths and talk openly about your own fears for the future as society blindly follows the diktats of the ruling elite and all those who “only are following orders”. Simple actions like walking into a store sans masks as a group and watch others embolden by your actions remove their masks as well. Plan for the future in strategic ways so you are prepared for what our government might have in store for us as this twisted and demented decade rolls on, squashing freedoms and liberties. Make a hobby out of learning and training to be able to live in a much different world that is more like East Germany of the 1970s or Venezuela of the 2010s.

Good luck in all you do while seeking to really living your life in spite of the tyrannical diktats of disillusioned political types that have finally exposed their superiority complex. Small businesses and individuals need to be encouraged while big government and all their complexes who desire to group us serfs into various groups that will determine our futures needs to be frustrated by our throwing sand into the gears of their plans and programs in non-aggressive ways.

Every little bit accomplished in our communities helps. The small things do add up as there is more of us than there are of “them”.

-SF1

With China Reeling from Corona-virus, Is Russia in the US Empire’s Cross-hairs?

 

Sanctions, embargoes and tariffs might not enough for the DC Elite to be convinced that Russia is not a threat to the US Empire’s future. It seems that China, which owns a substantial chunk of US debt, has been marginalized, either by design or by coincidence.

What is the source of this paranoia? Is it that the Russians embarrassed the US by really defeating ISIS? Maybe it was what the Russians found in Syria after ISIS retreated that had the US Empire’s fingerprints all over it. Maybe it is because Russia has done fairly well in spite of the embargoes by trading with other nations, getting off the USD petro-dollar and securing Crimea? Is it because Putin pulled levers to get Trump elected? (Don’t make me laugh)

The MIC / Deep State does need a war soon to keep the defense industry humming and keep those DC lobbyists busy with a majority of Congress in lining their pocketbooks. The Israel-First policy has been a great program for two intense decades (preceded by a couple of decades of US-centric support) ..

.. but that program might be plateauing a bit now that Iraq is pushing for independence from the US orbit, thanks to Trump’s assassination of Iran’s 2nd in command on Iraqi soil. Israel will keep crying that it needs the Golan Heights, more Palestinian soil to settle on and protection from Iraqi missiles.

So to move on and ratchet up some war or preparation for war somewhere on this globe, the US has to focus on Russia. I mean, look at the way Russia has encroached on NATO since 1990:

Oops, I guess NATO has been in expansion mode. Oh well, the narrative pays little attention to facts.

Paul Craig Robert’s article caught my eye this week as he sensed that Russia should be alert to what the US Empire is up to. It seems from this article, that the Russian people don’t see the US as an enemy:

… a contemporaneous poll published by the Levada Center, an independent Russian pollster, reports that 80% of Russians see Washington and its NATO vassals as “friends.” https://tsarizm.com/news/eastern-europe/2020/02/18/poll-4-out-of-5-russians-view-west-as-a-friend/

“Only 3% of Russian respondents said they see the West as Russia’s enemy, Levada said. Another 16% said they view the West as a rival.

“Two-thirds of Levada’s respondents (67%) said Russia should treat the West as a “partner,” while 11% said Russia should treat the West as a “friend,” according to the Kommersant business daily’s breakdown of the data.”

Roberts is concerned that the reality of the US Empire’s hate on Russia is a struggle that should be more apparent and real.

Consider the expense (and debt) that the US has expended only to be shown up by Russia’s new hyper-sonic missiles and other emerging technologies.

Examples of the technological lag were made public almost two years ago:

– Mach 20 allows supersonic missile delivery system that can quote “deliver missiles to the needed point in just a matter of the seconds

– A cruise missile with a nuclear engine

– The 200 ton SARMAT ballistic missile that circles around the Earth and again come to the other continents from a surprisingly weird angles

There are a couple more, but I think you get the picture.

With a 1/10th of the US Empire budget (not including the black budgets and other military agencies that do not figure into the DoD official budget), Russia has been 10x more innovative in an attempt to defend itself. I contend that only these new systems that have come of age in the last 5 years helps to deter the US from attempting regime change on Russia itself .. again.

While Roberts thinks that Russia’s military understands the latest war-game that NATO is amassing near Russia’s borders, he contends that the government is failing their people in getting them to understand this reality. Maybe Russia understands that a distracted population is not an innovative or productive one, I guess that would be my own take. In either case, Roberts then says:

How can the Russian people, humiliated by American sanctions and endless denunciations of their elected president, who led them out of American captivity, and threatened by Washington’s nuclear missiles on their border, possiblly(sic) believe in friendship and partnership with Washington?

If the polls are correct, and the Russian people do not understand Washington’s hegemonic impulse, Russian sovereignty is not a sure thing.

I contend that psychologically, having the people surprised by an overt act of aggression on the part of the US Empire would kindle a defensive posture more than warning them day after day that the evil empire (US) is poised to strike at any minute. That is something only the US government would do to justify expensive military interventions around the globe as well as a massive debt.

I stand impressed to date of Russia’s attitude on the world stage, patient with countries like Turkey that vacillate between Russian and US circles while providing true relieve to the people of Syria that is still reeling from Obama’s and Hillary’s induced “civil war’ there using ISIS as their weapon of choice.

Things sure have changed in 40 years, from crazy Ivan to reasonable Putin while the US’s collateral damage was JFK on their way to having crazy Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Obama and now Trump manning the wheel.

Peace out

-SF1

Point of No Return – Ruling Class’s Power Over the US Empire

Sometimes it takes a very small quote to wake up to the new reality. I contend that this reality could have come much earlier, like in 1814, or 1860, 1867, 1870s, 1913, 1941, 1950, 1964, 1971, 1990, 2002, or 2008. I think it comes from our nature to assume the best in some tough situations.

But, consider this quote from Angelo Codevilla in his article “Facing Up to the Revolution” :

Our country is in a state of revolution, irreversibly, because society’s most influential people have retreated into moral autarchy, have seceded from America’s constitutional order, and because they browbeat their socio-political adversaries instead of trying to persuade them. Theirs is not a choice that can be reversed. It is a change in the character of millions of people.

The sooner conservatives realize that the Republic established between 1776 and 1789—the America we knew and loved—cannot return, the more fruitfully we will be able to manage the revolution’s clear and present challenges to ourselves. How are we to deal with a ruling class that insists on ruling—elections and generally applicable rules notwithstanding—because it regards us as lesser beings?

It does have to be considered how the US Constitution actually helped the oligarchy, the ruling class, to gain access to the US government. If the colonies had remained sovereign states, like under the Articles of Confederation, it would have been more difficult and easier to resist from a grassroots level. The spread of “general” government to that of a federal government forever changed the structure of this nation as well as the fabric of society. Today, 99% of people can not imagine life without their safety net, their protector, their ‘mom’, their ‘dad’, .. their government.

Last month in a Lew Rockwell article, Gary D. Barnett proclaimed:

No nation-state is valid, as all states tend to seek a hierarchal structure of power, specifically in the name of protecting the common man collectively with profoundly restrictive laws. No free individual has need for such false protection. The beginning of this American experiment to create a powerful state was said to be about freedom of the individual, while all along, the hierarchy of power became more and more evident. What started out as a few separate colonies quickly became separate states with a new ruling class, and then one nation-state was formed and centralized, with allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. This progression was intended all along, and so the sought after tyrannical state came to fruition. Today we live as slaves in a society with a ruling structure akin to a fascist oligarchy. This is now a nation that is in constant war, and has become the largest and most murderous empire in the history of the world.

Unfortunately, secession will never be tolerated (if Lincoln didn’t tolerate it, you can bet no 21st century president would), and those who speak of this will be marginalized one way or another.

The US Empire will have to die before anything like the 1783-1789 federated group of states could ever be attempted again. As Mr. Barnett predicts:

Collectivism breeds empire and allows it to flourish, and because of the loss of individual thought, it becomes the internal disease that leads to the extermination of that empire. This is the real America, not the land of the free and home of the brave, but a collective mob of ignorant sheep awaiting the slaughter due to their own weakness and stupidity.

With collectivist thought at an all time-high we seem to be a long way from breaking up this evil empire that continues to wage war all around the globe. War is the only thing it knows, and the only thing that brings in the $USD and props up the petro-dollar.

Sad times indeed, however, by planting the seeds of individual thought in our kids and our friends, we can all be best prepared for the next season of the US Empire.

-SF1

Trajectory of the State: What Happens When Statists Overplay their Hand?

It has been a good run for state worshipers. The 1800s gave more and more people the belief that the state could bring about a good utopia for all to enjoy. (Outside those who saw peril in the state, like those in the most southern seven US states in the “deep south” in 1860 and 1861)

By the end of the 1800s it seemed that the progressive movement was about to birth and bring about a century of peace. However, WWI and WWI PLUS all the genocides of the 20th century meant millions died during as well as outside of official wars.

By the end of the 20th century we saw two collectivist Communist states morph in various ways towards entities that pay more attention to well-being of the taxpayers. Russia emerged out of a God-less era to embrace family and Christianity in the 20th century. China backed off on the underground Church (that was thriving under persecution) to a degree where this is tolerated in this Communism version 2.X coupled with quite a capitalist friendly environment where regulations are minimized that allow entrepreneurship to thrive. While these states are not perfect, it does appear they have learned the lessons of the 20th century.

This brings us to the US state complex that is exceptional enough that it still believes there are no lessons to learn. However, if Lew Rockwell’s post “Working Around Leviathan” predictions are true, their days are numbered as they get less and less relevant in society as technology advances so much faster than the state can digest it.

Lew does a great job at balancing the forces at work in 2020, where he compares the US state apparatus:

Never before has a government in human history owned more weapons of mass destruction, looted as much wealth from a country, or assumed unto itself the power to regulate the minutiae of daily life as much as this one. By comparison to the overgrown behemoth in Washington, with its printing press to crank out money for the world and its annual $2.2 trillion dollars in largesse to toss at adoring crowds, even communist states were powerless paupers.

.. to the private commercial/business side:

At the same time — and here is the paradox — the United States is overall the wealthiest society in the history of the world. The World Bank lists Luxembourg, Switzerland, and Norway as competitive in this regard, but the statistics don’t take into account the challenges to mass wealth that exist in the US relative to small, homogenous states such as its closest competitors. In the United States, more people from more classes and geographic regions have access to more goods and services at prices they can afford, and possess the disposable income and access to credit to put them to use, than any other time in history. Truly we live in the age of extreme abundance.

Some will claim it is the government’s role that has made especially large corporations most successful and should receive credit for all they do. However, Lew is quick to point out a disclaimer to that effect, but not before sharing what both the so-called “right” and so-called “left” tend to think:

It seems that people on the right and left are quick to confuse correlation with causation. They believe that the US is wealthy because the government is big and expansive. This error is probably the most common of all errors in political economy. It is just assumed that buildings are safe because of building codes, that stock markets are not dens of thieves because of the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission), that the elderly don’t starve and die because of Social Security, and so on, all the way to concluding that we should credit big government for American wealth.

I do hope you chuckled as you read this. Only those in DC would take this seriously, most of the rest of us recognize sarcasm.

If we are looking for those that create value and wealth, do we think of government? Does on think of Obamacare, Amtrak or the United States Postal Service?

Government is not productive. It has no wealth of its own. All it acquires it must take from the private sector. You might believe that it is necessary and you might believe it does great good, but we must grant that it does not have the ability to produce wealth in the way the market does.

If you understand economics, or if you have ever spent time in a monopoly, you will find that they do not have any good feedback loop that helps them indicate what the market needs. Government is even more handicapped since no one in their bureaucracy is ever accountable for government action or inaction. They simply have no skin in the game and do not see the taxpayers as customers:

Economic law limits what the state can do. The state cannot raise wages for everyone. It cannot dampen prices that want to rise without causing shortages, or increase prices that want to fall without causing surpluses. It cannot predict the course of markets or human events. It can control surprisingly few forces that work in the world.

In all its central planning, government is forever declaring the major combat operations are over, whether in foreign or domestic policy, only to discover that its real struggles and battles last and last. A good example is in the area of foreign trade. If a good or service is more efficiently produced abroad, the logic of the market will reassign production patterns until they conform. An attempt to protect domestic industry can do nothing to change this reality. Instead, protection only increases prices for consumers, subsidizes inefficient firms, and brings about ever-increasing amounts of wasted time, work, and resources.

On the other hand are those that seek to truly bring value to the market and are rewarded with wealth that can be placed into capital improvements that can make the business even more productive, efficient and even adaptable to the changing market. This was seen by the 1700 and 1800 farmers all the way to the manufacturers of the 1800s that could accomplish this all without government involvement.

Lasting prosperity can only come about through human effort in the framework of a market economy that allows people to cooperate to their mutual advantage, innovate and invest in an environment of freedom, retain earnings as private property, and save generation to generation without fear of having estates looted through taxation and inflation. This is the source of wealth. This is the means by which a rising population is fed, clothed, and housed. This is the method by which even the poorest country can become rich.

I will only add one more quote and if you are interested, please read all of Lew’s words that at least to me, give hope for the generations to come:

But here I would like to concentrate on what I think is an explanation that is too often overlooked. It requires that we understand something about the extraordinary capacity of the human mind to overcome obstacles put in its path. In all the history of states and the history of reflection on social organization and economics, this component is the most underestimated because it is the least predictable and the most difficult to comprehend. Human beings are creative and determined, and, if they have a love of liberty, and cooperate through exchange, they can overcome seemingly impassable obstacles.

It is because of this power of human ingenuity and determination to improve the world around us, despite the state, that a vast gulf has come to separate the accumulated power of the nation-state from its effective power in the management and guidance of society and the world economy.

Yes, despite the state, human ingenuity can improve the world, as well as its parallel, despite religion, humans with God’s help and hope, can improve the world in loving those around them.

Praying that the future does see the archaic state fall by the wayside and that grassroots communities with free trade on a global basis can improve the lives of those all over the world.

One can dream can’t they?

Acts 2:17

Your sons and your daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, and your old men will dream dreams.

-SF1

When the Honeymoon is Over: Is the First Fight Always About Money?

One of the most ridiculous claims I have ever heard is that the South left the North over slavery. Anyone with a thinking mind should have done their research and realize that when the media/government spins a yarn so very hard and for over a century, it is probably false.

In reading a 1960s well documented book by Murray Rothbard called “Conceived in Liberty, Volume 5: The New Republic”, it becomes apparent that the new “marriage” of several colonial regions in America had some high hopes and dreams that were quickly dashed with some harsh realities. Promises made or implied give away to a selfish attitude that neatly translates for the North into some more economic bondage for the South.

This core resentment and distrust would eventually be the key reason why the South (as of 04MAR1861, just the seven states of the deep south) did not flinch when Lincoln promised them LEGAL and PERMANENT slavery of blacks IF they would simply re-enter the Union. By this time the South was tired of the abusive relationship the North treated them with and it was apparent that as of NOV1860 that the North could elect a president without ANY Southern support or votes spoke volumes.

As the American Revolution ended in 1783 with the Treaty of Paris, the engagement of the thirteen colonies signed 04JUL1776 with the Declaration of Independence led to the creation of the wedding vows on 15NOV1777 followed by the commencement of the marriage on 01MAR1781. Note that the language of the vows talks of a perpetual union, however, by the time a constitutional convention was called in 1787, these original vows were discarded for a new set (the United States Constitution) that “promised” a better relationship. In hindsight, it was all downhill from that point forward.

With the end of the war-period in which these thirteen colonies fought together, but with a wide range of sacrifice, it was time to settle all the debt incurred during this period. It is in this period that some significant character flaws started to make themselves known that should have been red-flags, especially for the South, to anticipate what a continued relationship might look like and if the North could be trusted in the long-term.

Murray Rothbard shares a summary:

“A key to the politico-economic problems of the Confederation period, as well as one of the leading arguments for centralized power, was the swollen corpus of war-born public debt. The mass of federal and state debt could have depreciated and passed out of existence by the end of the war, but the process was stopped by Robert Morris. Morris and the nationalists moved to make the depreciated federal debt ultimately redeemable at par, and also agitated for federal assumption of the states’ debts. This was done to benefit speculators who purchased the public debt at depreciated values and to force a drive for a national taxing power ..”

To have a “spouse” like that to hijack the relationship towards a future that philosophically was repulsive to the independent minded Southern colonies, in effect, USING the South for it’s economic engine (which at that time was much more healthy than the North, this in spite of the major conflicts that occurred in the South during the last 1/2 of the war).

As a result of the nationalists’ efforts to assume the public debt, the value of the public debt, in specie, increased from $11 million in 1780 to $27 million in 1783, the vast bulk of which was held in the northern states. While scrambling to assume some of the debt themselves, the states had also amassed a huge burden of their own debt. Thus, by the end of the war, Massachusetts’ total debt was nearly £1.5 million; Rhode Island, about $0.5 million; Connecticut, over $3.75 million; Pennsylvania, over £4.6 million; Virginia’s over £4.25 million. As a result, payment of interest on the debt amounted to an overwhelming proportion of the state budget, and one estimate is that 50–90 percent of state expenditures went for this purpose ..

Not cool. The elites looked to benefiting themselves and placing the common folk on the hook for all the taxes needed not just to satisfy the interest payments on the debt, but to eventually pay off all the American Revolutionary War debt,

One problem that bitterly divided the states during the Confederation period was the settlement of common accounts. Under the Articles, expenses made by the several states for causes common to them all would be lumped together as “common charges” and the charges paid proportionately by the various states. In short, “debtor” states would pay their share to claimant “creditor” states through Congress and thus settle their accounts. Wartime expenses were clearly a common charge for the general welfare, and therefore those states which had expended more in the war effort (notably the southern states, because of the nature of the last few years of the war) were entitled to payment from the others. Logically, the public debt incurred by Congress should also have been assumed pro rata by the separate states, but the nationalists’ fierce determination to amass and retain a federal debt was able to keep that debt a federal rather than a “common” charge.

Talk about a bait and switch. So the vows that were agreed to in 1781 were just words on paper and the actions after the war’s end were highly dishonorable in regards to the nationalist’s agenda:

Throughout the 1780s the southern states tried to obtain their just settlements, but the northern states faithlessly fell back on technicalities, lack of official vouchers and authorization, etc., to keep the southern states from their just due. Also the South in particular had gone much further than other states in assuming unliquidated federal debt during the war (e.g., Quartermaster and Commissary certificates) and had exchanged them for state debts, only to find Congress (i.e., the North) balking about accepting these federal certificates as evidence for expenditures in the common welfare. Again, the North was depriving the South of their just due.

It should be noted that many Southern militia members never got the pensions deserved and yet so many New Englanders who never fought a battle received the same pension. Basically, the Yankee’s word meant nothing, and this was only the beginning:

As the dispute dragged on during the decade with the southern states unable to redeem their claims, Robert Morris’ wily “solution” proposed in 1783 began to look better to all concerned. An ultra-nationalist’s dream, the proposal was to accept all southern claims without cavil, but not to be paid by the debtor states: to be assumed by the federal government, which would issue federal securities for all claims. In short, the federal government would assume all war-born state debts. The tax-and-debt burdens of the states were, of course, aggravated when the depression of 1784 hit the country, for now a fixed sum of taxes and debt payments had to be exacted from a depressed economy in which prices were generally lower and therefore the real tax burden greater. One critical problem was whether the debt would be paid at its depreciated market value, which at least reflected current economic realities, or whether the state would insist on paying them at their far greater face value, and thus impose an enormously greater tax burden upon the people. The anger of people at paying debt charges was considerably aggravated by the fact that the bulk of this debt had passed from its original owners at highly depreciated amounts into the hands of speculators. Payment of face value, then, would not even benefit the original public creditors; in fact, they too would suffer from being taxed for the benefit of a windfall to a comparative handful of speculators in the public debt.

The way two former colonies would handle this situation showed the difference in character between the regions, which to me meant that they were not compatible for a “tight” marriage but might work in a loose “federation”. Unfortunately, the actions in 1787 with the new “vows” (the US Constitution, coup d’tat) would make this marriage so tight that it could only become abusive in the long haul.

Virginia showed honorable character:

Virginia was sensible enough to pay much of the debt at its depreciated market value, and make its taxes to pay the debt payable in depreciated certificates. Hence, Virginia was able to reduce its debt rapidly and without imposing enormous burdens on its taxpayers .. Numerous county petitions in Virginia pleaded the impossibility of paying taxes, a condition aggravated by the low price of tobacco in the mid-1780s. The Virginia legislature reacted sagely to the protests .. and agreed to lower or suspend taxes, and to allow hemp-growing western farmers to pay their taxes in hemp or flour. Indeed, Virginia agreed, in the spring of 1784, to suspend all tax collections for six months, and then agreed to cut taxes in half for the year 1785.

Massachusetts not so much:

Massachusetts, on the other hand, so handled its debt during the war as to benefit its debt holders and speculators, consolidating its debt by 1784 at twice its market value. To pay this particularly large debt, Massachusetts levied enormous taxes and insisted on collecting them in specie. This is not surprising, since the Massachusetts government was basically run by the very groups that owned the great mass of state debt. The debt burden was borne particularly by the poor, since roughly 33 to 40 percent of Massachusetts’ state revenue was raised by poll taxes, which were equal for each citizen. As a result, it is estimated that at least a third of a Massachusetts farmer’s income after 1780 was extracted from him in taxes, and in specie at that. Farmers and the poor demanded that the state debt at least be scaled down to market value, but the conservative ruling groups angrily refused. Typical of the eastern mercantile oppression over the mass of citizens and farmers was the imposition of excise taxes, which harmed the bulk of consumers. Thus, the tax on spirits (e.g., cider brandy) distilled from one’s own apple orchard was twice the level of the tax on New England rum: a clear privilege to the Boston and other eastern merchants over the western farmers. Tax oppression upon the Massachusetts people was enormous, and the courts ruthlessly threw those who could not pay into jail. Tax defaulters’ property was seized, but in the time-honored way of neighborhood solidarity, local mobs prevented anyone but the owner from bidding for the property.

The rifts were real and would be aggravated over time.  These events should have given caution to the southern states by the late 1780s that had the nationalists accelerate their efforts to centralize the US general government and create a central bank. It seems the longer the South stayed with the North the more the North sensed that it OWNED the South, as a slave and not respected her as a spouse.

Hindsight is indeed 20/20 .. but learning these things from real history is priceless!

-SF1