Featured
Reply
Tariffs
Tariffs
James Quillian, Economist, Political Analyst, Natural Law
Tariffs are taxon the overall population. The U.S. is broke. Consumer prices are skyrocketing. Individual citizens are the only entities which have any true income, or for that matter any genuine assets. In order to survive, the government must find ways to bleed what is left in resources out of the general population. The only other solution is to start closing Federal Agencies or cutting salaries of Federal employees.
Tariffs can be described as a benefit, and guess what? A huge portion of the population can be duped into believing that they are. I have this saying. Never trust a politician, billionaire or broadcaster, Tariffs work against you, despite what these types say.
How is this possible in a democracy? As I say, democracy is the wrong system for a people who trust leadership. Americans hang on every word coming out of the mouths of the powerful. It is as simple as that. Add to that a number of misguided myths that purvey the national consciousness, as follows. here are a few.
Intellectuals routinely assume that what works on paper will work in practice, as if foreign vendors will not change their marketing practices in response to U.S. Tariffs. They will respond with their own protectionist policies with regard to the United States. It will make more sense to them to lower their prices elsewhere than it will to pay U.S. taxes.
The president has the role of guiding the economy. This is not the case, nor is it the case that the economy must be guided, at all, from the top down.
There is actually no such thing as the U.S. economy. The economy, as it effects you, is a worldwide phenomenon, regardless of how it is presented. People are easily manipulated as they treat it as a my team vs the other team, situation, as if they have anything to gain by a stellar GDP relative to China, for example. There is no go team go in economics. Its every man for himself, independently of the way you would like it to be.
Government does not provide safety. More people have died due to government’s efforts to keep us all safe programs than not. Our intelligence agencies may very well be the leading cause of death in the country,
Experts do not know what is best. For the most part experts milk society. Without government funding for their efforts, most would go broke.
This is the essence of tariffs in the light of reality. Eventually reality imposes itself on all of us. Why not deal with it in advance?.
With tariffs, just add more economic misery to what you are already experiencing.
The Case For A Long War
The Case For A Long War
By, James Quillian, Economist Political Analyst, Natural Law
The best question that can be asked before entertaining any others is why start the war right now, six months before the November elections. Congress is a club where every member has dirt on every other member, some unrelated to Epstein. Few, if any, are safe from the impact of the Epstein files. This is similar to a Nash equilibrium: each player protects himself because any deviation risks catastrophe. Given such a dire situation, there is remarkably little noise coming out of Washington. If preventing a disaster were the goal, lawmakers would be outraged and showing it.
Anyone who believes that any incentive other than self‑interest guides the behavior of leaders simply cannot cope with the truth about human nature. Chances are the war will bog down until after the election.
I doubt that any of us will find answers until after the election, when leaders are able to speak more freely. One thing is obvious: dialog about Epstein has disappeared. By November, the public may be bored with crises and controversy.
Who wins the war is less important than who profits from a prolonged war. According to reporting and public analysis, defense‑industry entities stand to benefit from extended conflict. Some observers also note that Russia is profiting from high and rising oil prices. The U.S. oil industry benefits from the same price environment. The United States produces roughly ten percent of the refined rare‑earth minerals used in batteries and electronics, and a prolonged conflict increases the strategic value of those materials. The more one thinks about it, the longer the list gets.
As time goes by, the more profits derive from the war, the more power shifts toward the parties benefiting from the war. Incentives to continue a war increase as profits from it increase. That does not mean profits overall increase; they don’t and won’t. It comes down to who profits and who doesn’t. Wars never end. A war that ends generates more wars in the future based on outcomes that never generate peace. The power struggle is eternal.
The losers in a long‑term war are obvious: members of the great unwashed. Yet they continue to trust government because trust in authority is inborn. As time passes, the public adapts and gets used to its new normal.
The Game of Dominance and Subservience
The Game of Dominance and Subservience
James Quillian, Economic, Political Analyst, natural Law
Would it not be nice to have a board game called Dominance and Subservience? Perhaps if enough people played the game, it would come to light that life exists in a system of dominance and subservience.
It is the job of each species to dominate and make use of as many other species as possible. Dominate all of the other species and have them serve mankind. They don’t all get a bad deal. Dogs volunteer to be dominated and get a decent deal in return. Dogs end up trading freedom for comfort and are content when able to do so.
Human being are the dominant species living in the world today. Humans not only dominate all other worldly species, they also dominate and make servants of each other. Dominance and subservience are such an important part of life, the process is sometimes hard to notice. Subservience is almost always voluntary as with dogs.
Early in life, humans gain some knowledge of what they are capable of and who and how many people they can influence. Decisions are made to serve in exchange for comfort, mostly when individuals have concluded in their own minds that it is their best option for survival. None of this is spoken.
Some are more successful at the game of Dominance and Subservience than others. What becomes of the most successful players of the game? These folks become presidents, congressmen and CEOs of huge corporations. The very most successful are private citizens who control enough wealth to dictate policy to government. World leaders are among the very best at dominance and subservience. Power and money are the rewards.
Where is the game of dominance and subservience played? It is played everywhere but the greatest contests go on in and around government. Democracy turns out to be a predator’s playground. Government’s primary activity turns out to be that of those with enough power getting what they want through government and having others pay for it.
Ordinary citizens fall in the trap of believing elected officials are motivated by ideology and are trying to improve the country. Governments have never operated that way.
Who Has the Trump Cards
Who Has the Trump Cards
By James Quillian, Economist, Natural Law
Some people treat Donald Trump as a kind of savior. He tells them what they want to hear, and who doesn’t enjoy a politician who does that. Politics has long operated on that formula: flatter the public, win their votes, then pursue a private agenda. A skilled politician counts on loyal supporters to excuse every misstep as long as he continues to speak to their sensibilities. It works every time.
Anyone willing to think past the surface can see why presidents, across eras, often display the traits required to climb that far. The incentives reward the personality type that can pursue power without hesitation.
Now look at MAGA. The slogan assumes there was a moment in American history worth restoring. Which one? The country was strongest before power centralized, before the press consolidated into a handful of corporate owners, before imperial ambitions surged at the turn of the 19th century. After the Reagan era, federal policy accelerated the dismantling of free‑market disciplines. Nothing in Donald Trump’s record suggests he intends to address the underlying causes of national decline. There is no indication he is steering the country toward a healthier trajectory.
As for his agenda, only he knows it. For a small class of people, power itself is the incentive—on par with wealth and personal elevation.
Given the current moment, his recent actions strike me in a particular way.
When I was in middle school, my brothers and I used to hand a loaded BB gun to a five‑year‑old neighbor. We taught him how to cock it and told him to try to hit us. He never did. Not once.
That childhood scene mirrors Trump’s behavior since returning to office. He is working hard to please the people who enable him—especially those who could harm him if he disappoints them. It resembles a five‑year‑old taking cues from older kids, eager for approval. And just as the boy never managed to hit any of us, Trump is not achieving the goals he claims to pursue. What he is enjoying is the power itself. He also seems to have forgotten an old truth: no one swallows the ocean in one gulp.
Nothing he is doing points the country toward genuine renewal. Still, he keeps firing BBs—hoping one of them will redeem him or expand the power he already holds.
An Iranian Win IS A Win For Americans Overallll
An Iranian Win IS A Win For Americans Overall
By James Quillian, Economist, Political Analyst, Natural Law
The United States actually consists of two economies, even though it is assumed to consist of just one. Economic statistics are calculated by combining both, which hides the reality on the ground. Very smart people speak on the basis that the US Israeli war might—just might—enter a recession. None dare say depression. Smart is a good thing/, only if it is accompanied by awareness.
The top economy generates the numbers used for official statistics, showing that the whole economy is growing. The bottom economy is leaving a recession and entering an outright depression. The split is real, even if it is never acknowledged.
A loss in the war will throw the top economy into a depression as well. That alone will not help folks in the bottom economy. But a U.S. war loss will make China the world’s most largest economic influencer. That is what will benefit ordinary Americans.
There is a go team go mentality that pervades humanity. “Yea, my team wins” is a natural human reaction. But the economy is not a football team, so this is an irrational reaction.
Organized crime controls legislation in all countries, but it focuses out of proportion in the most influential economic entity. This will work to the benefit of Americans in the bottom economy. All will suffer, but those at the top will see their wealth destroyed and their domestic economic power destroyed. The poor will suffer even more than they already are. Despite that, the country will be purged of organized crime—at least in the short term.
The U.S. economy will collapse more severely because it is now a service based economy. It consists mostly of services that have no genuine utility to society. Manufacturing economies produce what is needed. Service economies prosper from the activities manufacturing generates. When manufacturing disappears, the service economy becomes a hollow shell.
Failure in the war hurts first the parties who lobbied for starting the war. The war—whoever comes out ahead—hurts the rich and the poor. A loss will hurt the rich disproportionally.
The United States actually consists of two economies, even though it is assumed to consist of just one. That fact alone explains why official numbers look strong while ordinary Americans sink deeper into hardship. The split is baked in, and the consequences are already unfolding.
The Great Stock Market Conspiracy
The Great Stock Market Conspiracy
By James Quillian, Economist, Political Analyst, Natural Law
When did the great stock market conspiracy begin? It didn’t. It never “began.” It has been running in plain sight for years, and it is running now. How do I know? Because when you think in the light of reality, it is impossible for it to be anything else. That is the Fantasy Free Advantage. Strip away the illusions and the answer sits there, obvious and unembarrassed.
The Case for Listening to Jiang Xueqin
The Case for Listening to Jiang Xueqin
By James Quillian, Economist, Political Analyst, Natural Law<
I pay attention to people who see the world clearly, and Jiang Xueqin is one of the few doing it. He is not part of the pundit class, not a product of a think tank, and not another voice chasing the news cycle. He is an educator who treats geopolitics as a system with rules, incentives, and predictable outcomes. In a time when most commentary is reactive and shallow, his work stands out for one reason: it explains the world as it actually functions.
End the War Possibility
End the War Possibility
By James Quillian, Economist, Political Analyst, Natural Law
This analysis does not rule out the possibility of a broader Arab uprising. It simply argues that the most likely path for the United States is a slow, deliberate reduction of activity through November. Not a clean exit. Not a decisive victory. A controlled bog‑down. Continue reading
The Emotion of Patriotism
The Emotion of Patriotism
by James Quillian, Economist, Political Analyst, Natural Law
Patriotism is an emotion, not a derivative of deep thinking or even superficial thinking’s.
Emotions as good, as they may feel, serve as tools others can and do use to manipulate people.
To say “I am an American Patriot” is the equivalent of saying I am an angry American. Leaders love patriots. Patriots are useful resources. No one needs to present a sentient argument to a patriot. No need to convince a patriot of anything. Just tell them to jump off a cliff for the sake of their country, and they will do it.
Continue reading
How to Save Israel
–How to Save Israel “
By James Quillian, Economist, Political Analyst, Natural Law
I’ll say this plainly: only Jews can save Israel. And before anything changes, each individual Jew has to decide whether Israel is worth saving in its current form. Speaking for myself, the Jewish faith is worth preserving. Zionism, as a political project, is something else entirely. Saving one may cost the other.
Possible Outcome of the War on Iran
Possible Outcome of the War on Iran
By James Quillian, Political Analyst, Natural Law
Israel is weakening. The Strait of Hormuz is effectively closed—not by an Iranian blockade, but by Lloyd’s of London refusing to insure tankers through a high‑risk zone. A military attempt to “open” the strait would change little. Insurance markets, not naval escorts, are determining the flow of oil.
Human beings are hardwired to treat the pronouncements of their governing authorities as gospel. History shows that this trust holds only until the consequences become personally painful. The Vietnam era is the clearest example: belief collapsed only when the cost became undeniable.
Today, Israel sits in a region where every surrounding population views it as an adversary, regardless of what their governments say publicly. With Iran demonstrating unexpected resilience against the United States, anti‑Israel sentiment across the region is hardening into its own version of “Never Again.” For many Arab societies, this conflict is existential. For the U.S. and Israel, it is tied to power, influence, and strategic positioning.
Israel’s manpower is limited and dispersed. Motivation is becoming the decisive variable. Populations under existential pressure fight differently than populations exhausted by years of conflict and destruction. As morale erodes, the strategic balance shifts.
Meanwhile, the U.S. media environment reflects only the level of scrutiny Americans demand from it. When the public stops insisting on honesty, the information they receive becomes shaped by convenience, not truth. In moments like this, skepticism is not cynicism—it is survival.
Israeli troops are few and scattered elsewhere. Who will be more motivated? Look for militias from surrounding nations to overrun Israel incoming days as the Israeli population becomes even more demoralized than they already are.
The Vanishing Fear of Nuclear Bombs
The Vanishing Fear of Nuclear Bombs
James Quillian, Political Analyst, Natural Law
The world once lived under a shadow so dark it shaped every waking thought. After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the fear of nuclear bombs was not an abstraction — it was the atmosphere. It governed diplomacy, restrained leaders, and kept ordinary people aware that one mistake could end civilization. That fear acted as a kind of global circuit breaker. And then, almost without notice, it disappeared.
Then the Cold War ended. The Soviet Union collapsed in the early 1990s, and the fear that had hovered over the world for nearly half a century began to evaporate. It didn’t disappear all at once. It simply faded, the way a storm fades when people stop looking at the sky. The threat remained, but the fear did not.
What replaced it was something far more subtle and far more dangerous. The United States emerged as the only superpower, and its level of influence grew to heights that are difficult to comprehend. With no rival to restrain it, the national conversation shifted. The fear of nuclear weapons was no longer about two great powers destroying each other. It became a kind of administrative concern — a worry that other nations might develop nuclear capability. The tone changed from existential dread to casual speculation. Dialogues about “nuking this, that, or the other” became common enough that they barely raised eyebrows.
This is what concentrated power does. It normalizes the unthinkable.
As American power grew, it also became more concentrated. Influence narrowed into fewer hands, and the public grew strangely comfortable with it. The fear that once kept the world cautious was replaced by a kind of numbness. The general population no longer reacts with the anxiety that once accompanied nuclear discussions. The danger is still there, but the emotional guardrails have fallen away.
This is the part people miss: fear once served as a stabilizing force. It kept leaders cautious. It kept populations alert. It kept the world from sleepwalking into catastrophe. When the fear disappeared, the restraint disappeared with it.
Concentrated power behaves like cancer. It grows without limit, without self‑awareness, without regard for the body that sustains it. It spreads until something stops it. Sometimes cancer can be removed. Sometimes it can be treated. But often it becomes lethal. Power works the same way. When it becomes too concentrated, it stops serving the world and begins consuming it.
To understand where this leads, you have to think in moving pictures, not still frames. A still picture shows a moment. A moving picture shows a trajectory. The trajectory of concentrated power is always the same. It expands until it meets resistance. It grows until it destabilizes the system that allowed it to grow in the first place. It continues until the consequences can no longer be ignored.
The world once feared nuclear weapons because the consequences were obvious. Today, the consequences are just as obvious, but the fear is gone. That is the danger. When a society stops fearing the tools that can destroy it, the tools become easier to use. When power becomes concentrated enough, the unthinkable becomes part of the casual conversation.
History has shown what happens when fear disappears but the weapons remain. The world is not safer. It is simply less aware of the danger. And that is when mistakes are made.
When the Market Breaks, the War Effort Breaks With It
Why the stock market—not the Strait of Hormuz—is the real battlefield
James Quillian, Economist, Political Analyst, Natural Law
Throughout history, power has always behaved according to its nature. When a group gains enough control over the resources of others, it uses that control to shape events in its favor. No announcements are made. No declarations are issued. Power simply acts.
