Posted by
Lingensjo on Monday, February 23, 2009 6:43:33 PM
*
Is entrepreneurial capitalistic “free enterprise” sustainable? Or, has the (233 year) experiment in individual property rights come to a failed conclusion? Is the human race returning (evolving) to a natural state, in which everyone is subservient to the state, totalitarianism?
As quoted in the magazine, “Land Development Today” (January 2009 - page 14); “Many readers continue to have the same misunderstanding of sustainability that is held by the general public. Too many still equate the word “sustainable” with “environment”. Lingensjo’s response is; political and economic topics should be included when evaluating environmental issues. Much, much more is at stake than pristine air, clean water and soil erosion.
Citizens’ personal and real estate property ownership; including use, distribution control, compensation for transfer, and relief from confiscatory taxes, must be recaptured from an ever expanding government if modern civilization is to be sustained. Prosperity for a large (as percentage) middle-class must be present for liberty to function as we have experienced.
Maintaining private property rights (previously protected in the US Constitution) enhance sustained prosperity, which is a prerequisite for liberty. Australia, Canada, Indian Empire, New Zealand, Poland, South Africa, United Kingdom, and United States of America have been the engine for prosperity and consequently liberty around the globe. Due to its size, when USA gets sniffles others get pneumonia, the USA must survive and provide leadership.
Priorities must be considered for ANY real (as apposed to theoretical) world condition to be sustained. Without prosperity civilization will not have the excess (beyond food, shelter, and police) resources to pursue improvements in construction activity and results. History teaches us that collectivist economies do not provide the wealth necessary to sustain such activity.
I recall the concerted effort by my college (1970-74) professors’ to indoctrinate “corporate social responsibility” into business school students. Curious, nothing was mentioned about government responsibility; that only altruistic people were in government “service” was considered a given. “Big brother” has all the correct answers.
Over the intervening thirty years, liberals continually pontificated about the lack of ethics in the business sector, which has been highly controlled by taxes, and as government incessantly tampers by regulating every market and industry. Throughout history, and current events prove, that government has not acted ethically as well, in their supposed over-sight of the bad business people. FREE World, Republic founders perceived this situation.
Unbridled lazy-fare business activity in the USA ended, as it should have, one-hundred years ago. By the completion (1945) of President FDR’s terms, government (Supreme Court acquiescence) controls had expanded beyond Constitutional authority. However, PROOF that all elites were responsible for the 2008 failed government over-sight of the financial markets is that Representative Pelosi (fierce adversary in opposing party) immediately joined President Bush in the TARP bail-out response.
Lingensjo’s answer to the original question (above), “Is entrepreneurial capitalistic free enterprise sustainable?” Considering ever increasing government control of “private” markets, the response is, NO. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. With fear of police action and judicial punishment to enforce their desires, the answer is emphatic.
The book CONSTRUCTION BUDGET MANAGEMENT (author Independent Book Publishers Association member) is controversial because it exposes the inherent tyrannical nature of consolidated government power, and consequently the potential for misdeeds by government organizations. The author’s public works construction experience describes a microcosm of governments’ bureaucracy interface with private industry.
The book has been validated by numerous industry professionals. Not one challenge has been made regarding CONSTRUCTION BUDGET MANAGEMENT’s (CBM) content. Don’t limit the book by its title. Unlike many books and articles that criticize blotted government with a broad brush; CBM takes the NEXT STEP and provides detailed solutions to specific problems.
In addition to many positive reviews of CBM by architects, engineers, contractors, facility owner representatives … etc.; one of the favorites was a dentist’s comment. He was an elected school board member, and he said, prior to reading CBM he abstained from active participation in building project discussions; after studying CBM he then lead those meetings.
CBM contends that, in public contracting the selection process of “private” firms should be, following conservative principals, as objective as possible. Making the decision events transparent, and thereby minimize the temptation for abuse and corruption.
Most government organizations (thousands of local, State and Federal) have building programs. From the recent “Visitor Center” fiasco in Washington D.C. to university campus facilities, mis-management of public works construction projects is legendary. This topic is timely because, here we are on the threshold of spending hundreds-of-billions of dollars on the “stimulus” package.
The speaker’s platform is his book:
Construction Budget Management by Richard Lingensjo
seventeen-hundred are in the fulfillment warehouse ready to ship.
An on-line perusal of the CBM web-page, including book reviewers, will reveal that CBM is the best text to prepare people to manage public works projects. As an example, when the author was consulting for the University of California, he initiated a new project delay calculation into UC building contracts. That single suggestion has saved the UC system ten-of-millions of dollars over the past seventeen years.
The author met, and spoke one-on-one, with Dean (Pepperdine Law School) Kenneth Starr last year during an event at the President Ronald Regan Library. Dean Starr accepted the CBM book given him and he said he would pass it along to someone in his Department. The author may be speaking there in August.
The author is scheduled to speak at the EduComm 2009 event in June and potentially at the iap2 seminar in September. Those presentations will be posing a public police ethical question (specifically CBM page #171). Should government be fair in their contracting with private companies?
*