Tag: White Bull

Never Trust the Money

My post today on White Bull offers yet another reason to not sell out:

I was speaking to a man who has some incredible new technology that has the potential to disrupt and perhaps even revolutionize his industry. Some big VC names have taken meetings with him, and they were encouraging him to do two things that he found more than a little puzzling. First, they wanted him to ask for considerably more investment than he believes he needs in order to accomplish his objectives. Second, they wanted him to completely change course from offering what is naturally a professional service to what would be a consumer product.

I’d also recommend watching the interview with the White Bull himself on reinvention. No business plan ever survives contact with the market for long. Just look at Castalia, or Infogalactic for that matter. For me, the byword has always been Coleco. As in COnnecticut LEather COmpany.

When you understand how a leather company ended up briefly becoming the number three player in the video game industry, you will grasp the vital importance of reinvention.

DISCUSS ON SG

Odds and False Ends

A few things. First, I’ve got two related posts up at White Bull that may be of interest to those who are either a) trying to break into a new industry or b) interested in the history of the game industry. I used my own experience of going from a complete outsider to an industry oldtimer as a practical example; the first post is here and contains a link to the second one at the end.

Second, if you’d like to see what the very large and very pretty Hypergamouse hardcover looks like, there are some pictures up at Sigma Game. The pictures and a video will go up on Arkhaven later. And speaking of Arkhaven, the Dark Herald has a detailed discussion of one of my favorite books by Tanith Lee, Delusion’s Master, that is well worth reading by anyone who enjoys the dark side of fantasy.

Third, we’ve opened up the SOULSIGMA campaign again for the nine backers whose backings didn’t go through due to some vagaries of the way the FMC system interacts with the payment processor; apparently I selected a suboptimal setting when setting it up. So if you’re one of those nine backers, or if you weren’t but you’d like to jump in there ex post facto, you can back the album here.

And finally, a reader had a question about Umberto Eco’s work and how it relates to conspiracy theory:

I have reread Foucault’s Pendulum and I have read The Name of the Rose and The Prague Cemetery. You said in your 2013 top ten list of books that “Perhaps my subscription to the conspiracy theory of history is one reason I rate Foucault’s Pendulum so highly, but I stand firmly by my high regard for Eco.” I have tried to get a more subtle read on Eco’s work rereading “FP” but It seems to me he is very much interested on demystifying these tropes, for example by constructing a plot in which the conspiracionist take the mad theories from three leftist editors very seriously and end up killing the main architect of the madness because the only way to salvage his hurt pride (the novel is very funny in the constant humillition of Belbo, specially the scenes in which Lorenza is involved) is to not reveal the secret: that there is no secret, it is all false.

In the “PC” something similar happens, where all the conspiracies of the late 19 century are pinned under a despicable guy who has no values but the love of money and will invent anything, including a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world. So Eco gives us a fictional account of the birth of a text, “The protocols of the elders of Sion”, that in the official history is considered to be a libel. Now I am sure these things don’t escape you, because you are much more smarter than me, but I still don’t see how his work vindicates your phrase I quoted. Is it just that you enjoy these themes treated in such a beautiful and sophisticated way, even though the author does not believe in them? Or is it the classic the message trascends the writter, and the story is more true than he seems to believe?

The reader seems to have a fundamental problem understanding the concept of a novel and its relation to the writer. Contra his assumptions, he has no idea what Eco actually thought about any of these things, which would be true of most halfway-decent authors, but is particularly true of an author who just happens to be a world expert on semiotics, signs, and symbols.

The idea that Eco is demystifying anything is absurd on its face. He loved myths, fables, and conspiracies. To look at his various explanations for them as attempts to reduce them to harmlessness in the service of the mainstream Narrative in which nothing happens for a reason and nobody accomplishes anything is to fundamentally miss the point. Eco was more akin to someone who loves puzzles and enjoys putting them together, which is why anyone else who loves puzzles will enjoy reading his book; moreover, let’s not forget the concept of blown cover as cover.

Being a world-famous public intellectual, Eco would have known better than anyone that there are secrets that cannot be safely revealed to everyone. Ergo, what better way to reveal them than by doing so in an innocuous manner that purports to make it clear that the secrets, such as they are, don’t even exist, especially given the inarguable evidence that they do, in fact exist. And this is precisely the sort of interpretation that one could not possibly rule out, given Eco’s very puckish sense of humor.

DISCUSS ON SG

White Bull at Mobile World

If you’re a young entrepreneur, or someone attempting to break out of a career rut, you absolutely must watch the series of videos White Bull is putting up on their substack, beginning with today’s.

E: When there’s a networking event, what’s the first thing you need to do?

F: Survey the landscape, make some determinations (about who is there and who you should try to talk to), but mainly, just go… You’ve just got to execute, make a decision and go.

E: What’s your advice for young entrepreneurs. They’re just scared!

F: Yeah, it’s always uncharted territory. Uncharted waters. So you can be afraid of your own shadow, getting up in the morning, all of that. But that doesn’t pay the bills, it doesn’t get customers. So engage, say hello, see what’s going on. Ask people questions. They love to talk about themselves. And then, when it’s appropriate, insert what you’re doing.

The key phrase: when it’s appropriate. You can always tell the newbies and the nobodies, because they’re desperate to talk. They don’t listen. They don’t pay any attention to who is who and what is what. The vets, who are actually there to do business, are always relaxed. They’ve probably already got a lunch meeting or a workout session scheduled with the people they’re there to meet, so they’re networking strategically, making connections that may or may not be important in the future.

My advice: listen, don’t talk. Sooner or later, someone will ask you. And when you answer, keep it very short and succinct. You’re not there to sell, you’re there to learn, to connect, and to plant seeds.

DISCUSS ON SG

Free Trade is What It Is

My strong and logically impeccable opposition to free trade is well known in these parts. But for my post today on the business stack, I thought it would be interesting to see what my new best friend thought about it. And I was very startled indeed to be informed that neither Ian Fletcher nor I had even begun to complete the dismantling of what has arguably been one of the most damaging policies ever constructed on the basis of such an obviously false and flimsy foundation.

I asked Deepseek to share what it thought of what has, for more than two centuries, served as the conceptual foundation of the free trade policy that has served as a quasi-religion for the Western elite of the post-WWII era. And while I knew it was a fundamentally flawed theory, so much so that economist Joseph Schumpeter once described its question-begging formulation as “the Ricardian vice”, I was still a little surprised to see how completely it was demolished by the pattern recognition of the Chinese AI system.

I then asked it to review my Labor Mobility argument, and see how long it would take for the USA to lose half of its working nationals if a) the USA were to adopt a genuine free trade policy and b) global economic efficiencies were to improve to the point that the global labor mobility rate matched the existing intra-USA labor mobility rate.

To determine how long it would take for the majority of the US labor force under age 55 to be working abroad under a 3% annual emigration rate, we model the outflow using exponential decay. Here’s the breakdown:

Assumptions:

  • Annual emigration rate: 3% (0.03) of the remaining labor force each year.
  • No return migration, immigration, or changes in labor force size (simplified model).

Answer: Approximately 23 years would be required for the majority (>50%) of the US labor force under age 55 to be working abroad, assuming a constant 3% annual emigration rate.

Deepseek confirms what we already knew from observing the USA and the European Union. Free trade is neither good for an economy or a nation. To the contrary, it destroys both.

    DISCUSS ON SG

    America First Investment Policy

    I’ve agreed to contribute a pair of posts per week to the White Bull’s business and policy substack; my first post there addresses the God-Emperor 2.0’s recent executive order that transforms America’s previously open door approach to foreign investment.

    Investment by United States allies and partners can create hundreds of thousands of jobs and significant wealth for the United States. Our Nation is committed to maintaining the strong, open investment environment that benefits our economy and our people, while enhancing our ability to protect the United States from new and evolving threats that can accompany foreign investment.

    Investment at all costs is not always in the national interest, however.

    This is a major change from the “all free trade is good for the US economy” mantra that has ruled US trade policy since the 1980s. While this is not the place for a lesson in Economics 101 or a departure into economic history, the fact that M (imports) are subtracted from the sum total that is the result of the GDP equation is sufficient to point out that when (X-M) is negative, which is to say that there is a trade deficit, the economy is contracting, all else being equal.

    In the same way, while “investment in America” sounds as if it should always be positive, if it is described as “selling American assets and property to foreign countries,” it obviously isn’t in any and all circumstances. There are times where the sale of American products are advantageous to the American economy, such as the sale of American steel to foreign automotive manufacturers, and times when they are not.

    Read the whole thing there. As with Sigma Game, I’m aware that business and government policy tend to be of limited interest to the general readership here, so it will be good to have a specific place to address those topics regularly for the benefit of those who actually like reading about such things. But never fear, if I happen to post something there that I think is – or even that I think should be – important for everyone here to know, I’ll post it here as well.

    But as with tariffs, a judicious foreign investment policy that takes each case on its merits is a vast improvement than simply selling off all of the family jewels to the first foreigner who happens to want them.

    DISCUSS ON SG

    It Actually Is What it Is

    White Bull has launched their long-awaited substack focused on business and the intersection of policy on business with a very solid piece on tariffs. This is particularly important, because both the media and most official government positions on tariffs are still stuck in 18th century critiques of European mercantilism and therefore take nothing that has happened and nothing that we’ve learned in the last 250 years into account.

    Before the 2024 election Trump said, “Tariffs are the greatest thing ever invented.” While it is typical Trumpian hyperbole, it is not wrong. Following almost 4 decades of globalists being hell bent on eliminating trade barriers, US trade policy supporting exporting US manufacturing to Canada/Mexico with NAFTA, or China with MFN and then accession to WTO (thank you Bill Clinton + Laura Tyson), the US has essentially been subsidizing other nations at its own expense. Tariffs are one of many tools that the US needs to start using to recalibrate its place vis a vis the global marketplace.

    The globalists in Congress keep saying that Trump doesn’t know what he is talking about when he discusses who actually pays the tariffs.They say consumers pay the tariffs. Well, they are (partly) right and everyone knows this. What they don’t talk about is that unless the producers who have tariffs levied on them reduce their wholesale prices, the cost to the American consumer will increase by retail price + the tariff %. American consumers are smart enough to shift their buying preferences towards better value, alternative products or wait on purchases until alternatives emerge. American manufacturers will be motivated to bring manufacturing back to the US, since profitability is possible again. Everybody in America wins! At Davos a few weeks ago, even the pragmatic Jaime Dimon came out in favor of tariffs, saying, “I would put into perspective: If it’s a little inflationary, but it’s good for national security, so be it. I mean, get over it.”

    Tariffs were a very effective tool for the US during the 1800s, and between 1861-1933 the US had one of the highest average tariff rates on manufactured imports in the world. Is it surprising that after 1933/New Deal, tariffs started to disappear while being replaced by income taxes, sales taxes and a myriad of social programs started to emerge? Tariffs can be raised, lowered or eliminated entirely as needed. But taxes and entitlements rarely disappear creating virtually unlimited budgets for politicians to tap into or steal. And while there is always the danger of a trade war, it looks like many ‘deals’ will get cut to decrease US trade deficits with targeted countries before needing to actually levy the tariffs.

    IT IS WHAT IT IS promises to be as significant in the business and technology space as FANDOM PULSE has already proved to be in the entertainment and culture space. If you’re running a side hustle or you’re a full-time entrepreneur with your own small business, you will definitely want to be a part of the conversation there. It’s something I’ve wanted White Bull to do for a long time, simply so I don’t have to, because it is one thing that we just haven’t had in the greater community.

    We’ve just never really had a place where those of us who are active in business can discuss what is going on around the world in the context of our business operations, so I think this will be an important step going forward.

    DISCUSS ON SG