Many people write or speak to tell us what we should think. Some want to be believed because they are experts, or think they are. Some want to be believed because they claim to speak for us. Some have had revelations. Others want us to trust them because they communicate through prominent media outlets. Many tell us what we should think. I write to encourage my readers to think for themselves. I write to ask you to inquire. Question me. Have fun.

  
Comment of the Day
What is wrong with Russia?

Dec 22, 2015

It appears that Russian leaders cannot free themselves from the medieval concept of regional influence, where weaker neighbors were subdued into becoming serf states. Is anyone capable of explaining to them that in these times of a global economy, any influence comes from economic strength? Russia, thanks to its size, natural resources and well-educated labor force, has everything that it takes to maintain a dominant position in the region, just by maintaining free trade with all its neighbors. It can do so without military interventions in Georgia and in Ukraine. Russia has everything that it takes to be a respected wealthier neighbor, to whom everyone in the region would turn for help when needed. Instead, it is a bully and a hooligan. It would take so little to change that. But it is so hard for Russia to do it. 

PREVIOUS COMMENTS
Closed mind for closed borders
Nov 19, 2015

Known to some as a libertarian, Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. speaks against open borders. His argument is that it is an infraction against private property. He misses the point that most people migrate just because Mr. Rockwell’s neighbors want them on their private property – for picking apples, washing the dishes or writing a computer code. Then, Mr. Rockwell wrongly laments that those foreigners invited by his neighbors violate his private property rights by loitering in the public spaces that he frequents. He wants the government to deny the rights of his neighbors to do on their private property whatever they wish, so he will not need to face immigrants in the public spaces. Mr. Rockwell left the train called “liberty” at the station called “xenophobia.”    

More
They do not know…
Sep 14, 2015

Mr. Trump says: “A lot of what I’m doing is by instinct.” I prefer that our President would make decisions based on systematic due diligence. The instinct that guides Mr. Trump in his professional life arrives from his vast experience, starting when he was growing up under the mentoring of his successful father, followed by a solid education and years of practice. Mr. Trump's confidence is misguiding, as it gives his supporters the illusion that someone who mastered real estate dealing can be equally skillful as President. It is similar to the illusion surrounding Dr. Carson, that he can be as good a President as he is a brain surgeon. If both gentlemen were humbler, they would realize that they qualify to be President equally as much as Mr. Trump qualifies to conduct brain surgeries and Dr. Carson to run Mr. Trump’s real estate empire. The problem is not that they do not know many things they should; the problem is that they do not realize that.

More
Freedom cannot be legislated, its restriction can
Mar 31, 2015

Indiana voted in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. In his WSJ piece, Gov. Mike Pence claims it was needed to protect the religious freedoms of Hoosiers. Every legislative act by its nature limits someone’s freedom. The only way of increasing freedom is by identifying existing laws that curb personal liberties and then eliminating them.  Hence, if Gov. Pence sees that under some circumstances, the religious freedoms of Hoosiers are not respected, he could correct the situation by eliminating laws causing this problem. We have the Bill of Rights, and it suffices. No “enhancements” are needed.

More
Greed-driven health care
Feb 27, 2015

The solution to our health care crisis is in the implementation of more market-driven mechanisms into our health care policy. This is the only way to give patients the freedom to make decisions regarding their care between them and their doctors; not having these decisions made by faceless bureaucrats. The biggest obstacle in implementing a change of this kind is in a deep public conviction that the introduction of the free market into health care will result in doctors, hospitals, the pharmaceutical industry and everybody else involved being guided by their greed, not the best interests of sick people. The biggest challenge in overturning Obamacare is not in Washington. It is in winning the argument with Americans that free-market-driven health care can serve their needs much better than the government-distributed one.

More
Immigration inaction
Feb 17, 2015

Congress could not agree on the immigration reform. President Obama resorted to executive orders. Now he is stopped by a court order. It is sad to see that this legal wrangling substitutes for real discussion on why we have this immigration crisis and what we should do to get it resolved. Most Americans have strong, ideologically motivated views about immigration. If they were right, the policies implemented would work, and we would not have a problem anymore. We have an ongoing problem because most Americans are wrong in their understanding of what caused massive illegal immigration and what we should do to get it corrected. There will be no progress until someone  addresses this problem. For more about why we have this immigration mess go here.  

More
Immigration comedy
Jan 26, 2015

The Republicans’ challenge to President Obama's executive orders on immigration is simply comic. We have a President who is clearly a socialist. We have a Republican Congress that declares it is for capitalism. However, on the immigration issue, Republicans are for the purely socialist immigration laws we have. At least on this issue, the President recognizes that socialism does not work, and his executive orders bring a more capitalistic approach. In our theoretically capitalistic country we have a socialist as President who acts to strengthen capitalism. At the same time, the pro-capitalistic majority of Congress acts to defend socialism.   

More
More Comments

Closed minds for closed borders

My fifth open letter to Mr. Mitt Romney on immigration

Dear Mr. Romney,

We have not one documented incident of national security being endangered due to Mexicans crossing the border illegally, but everyone seems to be eager to spend my tax money on militarizing the border with Mexico. Without even considering the cost, if we build a wall along the Mexican border, or even two parallel walls as some suggest, and saturate this border with cameras, sensors and armed patrols, it will only change the way the border is crossed. When it is hard to find a spot without border guards, more people will try to bribe border guards. Just a few years ago, illegal border crossing was handled by petty smugglers. With tougher border control, it is falling into the hands of organized crime. With their resources and money, organized crime is on its way to criminalizing border crossing, as it criminalized alcohol production and distribution during Prohibition.

It is worth noticing that a law practically eliminating legal immigration was enacted in 1924, just a few years after Prohibition was voted in. Both acts represented the same illusion of the American people, namely, that the government can solve their personal problems. Prohibition made criminals out of people who enjoyed having a beer after dinner. Our immigration laws make criminals out of people who want their grass cut for less, or who want to cut that grass for less. Prohibition was repealed. Repealing our immigration laws should at least be an option worth considering.

The world has become a small village, and it is naïve to believe that we can stop people from moving around. Most countries have higher population density than the U.S. Most of these countries have much lower standards of living than here. From basic physics, we know that different potentials create a movement of medium. Some who do not like the laws of physics would build barriers, bureaucratic or actual concrete walls, to stop the flow – in this case – of people. It is natural for people to migrate. Instead of fighting against this rule of nature, we should accommodate it.

A much larger danger to national security would be due to too many high-tech jobs leaving the country. In particular, many major U.S. corporations have recently moved R&D jobs to China and other Asian countries. In the past, the U.S. became a superpower precisely because it was technologically ahead of everyone else in the world. This might not be the case anymore with major R&D centers in Asia. Furthermore, the technological superiority of American industry was the backbone of our military. This will be over if we lose too many scientists and engineers.

Americans are eager to give extra power to the government in order to stop foreigners trying to cross the border illegally. In other words, Americans are giving their government the power to control the migration of people. One can easily imagine that, as a result of our restrictive immigration policies, our economic crisis will deepen, prompting even more scientists and engineers to leave the country. It will be only a matter of time before this outflow of engineers and scientists will endanger national security. The government will react the way it does now: it will make it illegal for scientists and engineers to move out of the U.S. without government permission.

A government that is powerful enough to stop people from immigrating to the U.S., can, if needed, use this power to stop Americans from leaving the country. Only then, the militarized wall on the Mexican border will come in handy, catching scientists and engineers trying to escape from Silicon Valley.

Am I fantasizing, or I am envisioning the worst case scenario, as every good businessman should?

About me

I was born in 1951 in Gdansk, Poland.
Since my high school years, I have interest in politics and love for writing. During my college years, I started writing to student papers and soon became freelance author to major Polish political magazines.

In 1980 I wrote a book “Czy w Polsce może być lepiej?” (“Could it be better in Poland?” – this book is available only in Polish) analyzing major problems in Poland at the time and outlining possible solutions.

I was among those Polish political writers who by their writings contributed to the peaceful system transformation that finally took place in 1989. Since 1985, I live in the Chicago area. I went through the hard times typical of many immigrants. Working in service business, I have seen the best and the worst places, I met the poorest and the richest. I have seen and experienced America not known to most of politicians, business people, and other political writers. For eleven years, I ran my own company. Presently, I am an independent consultant.

My political writing comes out of necessity. I write when I see that the prevailing voices on the political arena are misleading or erroneous. Abstract mathematics and control theory (of complex technological processes) strongly influenced my understanding of social phenomena. In the past, my opponents rebuked my mathematical mind as cold, soulless, and inhuman. On a few occasions I was prized for my engineer’s precision and logic.

I have a master’s degree in electronic engineering with a specialization in mathematical machines from Politechnika Gdańska (Technical University of Gdansk).

... more