Billionaires: Grab It!

Posted to Subscribers on 15 November 2019


This post is actually a follow-up on some of the points raised in the recent and very long post on Entrainment. There is a global movement targeting billionaires. Because it is part of the political platform for candidates for office in many countries, we cannot refer to it as a grassroots or even partisan issue. Disproportionate distribution of wealth is seen by some as a modern form of slavery and, of course, by others as a reward for success. At the Oxford Union, Anand Giridharadas stated that it is immoral to be a billionaire. In a way, I agree with him, but my reasons splash over into issues he has not addressed.

When I was a child, there was rule in the house that if something needed to be divided, like a piece of cake, one person got to cut the cake and the other got to choose which piece she wanted. I said she because my sister and I were usually the ones slicing or choosing. It should have taught us to be very careful to be extremely fair so as not to end up with a smaller slice. On a far larger scale, this is the issue being framed by Greta Thunberg, some journalists and ethicists, as well as numerous candidates for high office.

Personally, I feel the issue goes well beyond wealth and whatever power attends that wealth. Entirely new thinking about economics in general and morality in particular are what civilization needs in order to survive. When I was a student at Yale, I stuck out like a sore thumb, the only woman in any of the classes. I complained to my boyfriend that hardly anything in any of the courses made sense. He said that I should give up trying to make sense out of the curriculum because the first step in economics is to assume away reality. After that, we can conjure up whatever hypotheses we want. Facetious as it sounded to my ears, he was essentially correct because aside from a few rather basic assumptions about supply and demand, almost everything else was theoretical and often quite divorced from actuality. The "issue" was not new, but it, of course, had support from centuries of propagandistic control over what is and is not academically acceptable. In recent political times, we have seen crises that actually have little to do with population explosions or droughts or any of the factors used to define cycles in classical texts. The vast majority of the crises had to do with corruption rather than Nature.

Politicians tend to rant on about jobs and growth, but Nature only supports a replacement economy, not growth. So, the first mistake in textbook terms is the notion that growth is possible. The reality is that the broader issue is how to divvy up what exists. This has contributed to a nightmarish scenario in which population growth always seems threatening to those who crunch numbers and influence policy. There seems also to be a lack of faith in the capacity of Nature to supply enough food for all. The shadow that this casts has resulted in agendas to keep population within a certain range. Of all of the possibilities proposed, I would suggest that family planning is probably the least offensive strategy, but even to gain partial acceptance, several cofactors had to be addressed. One of these is that prior to socialism and various forms of insurance, public and private, children were not merely the hope of the future but the strategy for avoiding destitution in old age. With very high fatality rates as well as unemployment, larger families were often perceived as the best way to increase the odds of someone being there when the chips were down. In truth, this is still the case in some areas where it is not unusual that the extended family consists of over a hundred members, often double or triple that, and only one or two of those members might be gainfully employed.

In places where the family size is smaller, we have, in fact, seen improvement in the standard of living. I will argue that the modern nuclear family has, however, created new social problems such as more emphasis on earning and success and lower social skills when it comes to interacting with others. There are many other problems as well, however, this is not the subject for today's examination of billionaires and power. The real issue, I believe, is the ethical foundations of society. Keeping the size of the global population as low as possible has prompted a predatory segment of society to decide the proportion of resources to devote to guns and the proportion to devote to butter. We have as a civilization an immense investment in defense — and dare I add offense — including some really reprehensible expenditures and experiments using chemical and biological weapons. I might even suggest that one of the contributing factors to the current gender dysphoria has a chemical (and intentional) basis.

This is one of many shadows I want to discuss because we have to examine how and why any resources at all are devoted to guns if we live in an ethical world. I majored in Asian Studies and lived in Japan for a while between my undergraduate and graduate years. It was a sensitive time because most people in Japan still had vivid memories of World War II. This included the shame, the losses, and the horror of nuclear weapons, but Japan was beginning to prosper. This was accomplished despite deconstruction of all the major corporations of Japan because U.S. occupation forces prohibited the Zaibatsu — who were blamed for creating the infrastructure that enabled the Japanese to wage war — from investing for ten years. Think about this. Think really hard about it. What if the military industrial complex in the U.S. or any and all countries in the world were to suspend all activity for a decade. What do we learn from the Japanese experience?

Another interesting observation I made while living in Japan was that ethics is part of the basic educational curriculum. There were other very significant differences between Japan and the U.S. In those days, there was no real job mobility. If one took a job after graduation, one tended to stay in that job until retirement. This contrasted sharply from the musical chairs in the U.S. There was great company loyalty and also many policies that differed sharply from ours. In India, I saw this going even further because the huge new post-British Raj companies were often much more socially responsible than their Western counterparts. That is not to say that the situation remained stable. I am sure there is ample corruption to be found everywhere, but the recovery periods were often more encouraging than discouraging, meaning that some do learn from experience and there is room for optimism.

Being observant and analytical and having had more than half a century to brood on the subject, I have come to the conclusion that the dominant corporate model in today's world is a liability for civilization. It is often argued that corporations are responsible to their stockholders, suppliers, and customers. I am not sure this is straight fact since it is obvious that balancing the obligations has not been successful due to the emphasis on profits . . . and, sorry to add, profiteering. In the crude examples we see on the air, words like "grab" and "dominate" send shock waves through me. This means there are strategies to acquire and control that may or may not have cascading consequences.

If we want to continue living on this planet, we need to examine the rapacious appetites of corporations and ask if there is a solution. Going back to the too big to fail banking crisis, I think the response only encouraged more of the same rather than reform. By this, I mean that the consequences of gross mismanagement were borne by the victims rather than the perpetrators, and this is what is wrong with power and with allowing power to dominate.

Obviously, financial prowess should be divorced from government. Decisions should be made on the basis of the merit of the ideas, not the donations and freebies bestowed on candidates, especially those who win the elections. I do not see this happening because short-term advantages outweigh responsibility for the future.


In the last post on technology, there are two points I want to mention. The immense success of Ocean Cleanup is due largely to two factors. The first is that the public has been generous and has supported the effort, which, of course, is wonderful and encouraging. The second is that there are really no losers in the operating model used by Ocean Cleanup. The companies that make plastic and that use plastic are not losing. The ocean and rivers are benefiting. It is a lovely model because it addresses an issue and provides a solution.

When we come to the next step, recycling of plastic, there are however winners and losers. Converting a plastic back to oil does compete with existing petrochemical giants, and we have seen very slow growth in this arena. Likewise, finding ways to use plastic by washing it and grinding it and so on and so forth competes at least somewhat with existing industries so innovation has been undercapitalized and hence progress has been slow in this area.

In finding alternatives to petroleum in general, obstacles have been immense though, in some quarters, efforts are being made to become energy independent. Speaking for myself, even though I live in a place with very dark winters, I do use some alternative energy but would, of course, like to be using much more. I mention this so as to bring some of my more abstract comments into sharper focus. Basically, if I use language like "protecting the status quo," it means something to some people and flies right past others. This produces a nervous reaction in me for which I have a nickname based on the I Ching: Holy Madness. It means something like I am standing on the top of the mountain shouting but only the wind can hear me.

Ultimately, I feel the language barriers are due in part to terribly poor education and even worse curriculum in our schools. Economics is not a required course. Well, I am not sure about that but it was not required when I was in school. It ought to be required for everyone involved in budgets and expenditures at the governmental level.

As you know, I am a pacifist so when it comes to "guns or butter," it translates to me as waste and danger versus meeting basic needs. I understand the need for security, but we can have security without fighting IF we learn respect and if we are satisfied that we have the strength to stand on our feet or confidence that if this is not the case, our needs will be met by family, friends, or some service provided because of our insurance or taxes. The issue of power boils down to what limits are experienced when exercising power, and the alternative to force is cooperation. In the post on Entrainment, I referred to unskillful means. When force is used, there is surrender of autonomy to authority. If we discipline ourselves, authority is only used to teach, not to control. In my lifetime, I have seen a monumental decline in ethical use of power. Worse, I think, is how advances in technology enable those who are prone to abuse power. That said, I know there are wizards out there developing new technologies that are safer. It is also comforting to remember that the strongest force in the Universe is Divine, not human. Our misuse of energy will not survive. It can create temporary discord but not annihilate our inherent divinity. Yes, some may die, but they will be reborn with even stronger incentive to make things right.


What we experience when young is supposed to provide role models for adulthood. I nearly failed a psychology exam as an undergraduate when it asked about the most influential force in life. The "correct" answer was family or parents, but I did not feel that as a personal truth because I felt there were many potential role models: religious figures, characters in novels and films, historic individuals who contributed to society: artists, musicians, philosophers, scientists, explorers, and many more. We are exposed to so much media that we can pick and choose what we allow to influence and to guide us. We do not have to subscribe to toxic models.

So, what makes people think that being a thug and a threat to others is somehow cool?

Not everyone is born with the preparations to function at his or her optimum level. That has to be encouraged through recognition of the special talents of the individual in question. This is actually easily discovered by reference to what children find interesting. Not everyone fits into the boxes built for conformity. Other options have to be developed that are consistent with proclivities and abilities. Our schools do not do a good job of identifying traits. Worse, they might even stigmatize people who do not fit into the molds built for them. Children are however naturally attracted to certain things more than others, but we try to silence them with distractions: endless indoctrination through increasingly violent and gruesome, distorted, and lethal programming. It's so easy to get so lost that one cannot find one's place in this world.

If we add to the cognitive dissonance of indoctrination, the economic hardships of trying to survive, it is clear that many are discouraged. However, this can change, and it can change fast.

Salt Flats in Bolivia - Lithium

Bolivian Salt Flats with Mounds

Photo 125827003 © Delstudio -


Grab It!

The above was written yesterday, but I felt I had been deluging you and kept this for today. In the meantime, I want to give some examples of how a story is told. As many know, the president of Bolivia, the fastest growing economy in Latin America, was granted asylum in Mexico. I am glad for his safety, but this is an example of lack of skillful means. The media has faulted Morales for saying that there was a coup, insisting that his election was unconstitutional because of term limits. He won by a margin of 10% and has been extremely popular with the poor. Michele Greenstein however has filed a completely different story saying that Bolivia has the largest deposits of lithium anywhere in the world and that all lithium processing is done in government facilities. The tech industry needs lithium for batteries and Morales tried to negotiate with various Western companies coveting the lithium, holding to a position that the Bolivian people would share in the profits from the sale of lithium. This was declined by Germany and the U.S., but China agreed to the terms. She says the coup has CIA fingerprints all over it. She is an excellent reporter.

This is what I mean about misuse of power and how, temporarily, the thugs may seem to benefit, but instability will follow. Yes, some stocks rose sharply after Morales landed in Mexico City. Tesla Motors is happy that their solar cars will have enough lithium for the batteries, but is this ethical? This is not an isolated incident nor an unfamiliar modus operandi. Just think of the Congo or any other country with resources coveted by others: Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran . . .

For the record, this is what Tulsi Gabbard is targeting in her campaign against regime change wars. I don't know if demonstrations where people get injured or killed qualifies as war, but "mind your own business" might be appropriate counsel.

Bolivia was one of the countries I wanted to explore for the Institute. At the time, it had a stable government. It was poor by South American standards but had good leadership and the economy was growing fast, through redistribution, not Nature. However, Bolivia requires a yellow fever vaccination when arriving by air which is why I scratched it off the list. My attention then turned to Peru, and the question I have had is "what next?" since there is so much intervening in the affairs of our southern neighbors by many foreign powers, not just the U.S., but also by Russia and China as well as those who use money but not other more deadly strategies.


Late last night, a friend sent me a link to a video that was free but perhaps not for long:

I shared the link with several others and all were thrilled, but it is long and relevant to exactly what I have been discussing. I will give you time to watch it (hurry) and make my comments later. On balance, I found the film inspiring and on point. The details, of course, are just that . . . lots of Virgoan stuff on my end.


To wrap up, I want to answer the question posed in the beginning of this post. Is it immoral to be a billionaire. My Ayurvedic teacher, a very wise former yogi, felt so, but I am slightly more equivocal. We can postulate that the only way to amass such vast resources is to have overcharged for one's product. It doesn't matter what the product is, an invention or tangible product or service. It also implies that others who contributed to the success were perhaps underrewarded. It might also mean that competition was trampled and probably that both people and Nature were exploited and that taxes were avoided or evaded. So, most likely there are ethical concerns about how the wealth was amassed as well as whether or not there is any sense of social responsibility and that depends somewhat on how the wealth is used. A lot of wealth is used to buy influence and more wealth, but some might go to worthy causes.

Reverting back for a moment to my graduate studies and work in economic development, I can say that there is usually a pattern of exploitation, rejection of the exploiters, and redistribution of assets. For example, colonists might be exiled and their wealth seized or companies might be nationalized. Many colonists I have met over the years empathize with the generation that caused their personal losses, but they admit that the situation for those who were colonized was seriously unjust.

Losing one's assets, even after several generations, is probably fair, but if we applied this to North America, South America, Pacific Islands, Australia and New Zealand, it would be quite dramatic. For the same reason, we have to study the implications of reparations, which I oppose. We have to look deeper and harder at the situation. For a moment, let's just look at the financial hub of the U.S. Manhattan Island and Long Island were supposedly purchased by the Dutch from the Lenape Native Americans for $24 worth of trinkets. Most likely, the First Nation People had no concept of ownership of real property since their culture supported reverence and trusteeship over ownership. The deed may therefore be invalid in current legal terms. Can a claim be filed? What about the rest of the land of at least three continents?

Going a step further, living in Santa Fe, I sometimes felt the horror of Conquistadors, but noted that many former Conquistadors were incarnate in Native American bodies at this time. I think we would call this poetic justice, but if they are not aware of this, their laments would seem entirely valid. It helps sometimes to feel the shoe on the other foot to know what is wrong, and, on the soul level, each finds harmony and balance using the strategies that are likely to work best for the soul.

In short, while there are people alive today who have suffered in this lifetime because of their color or ethnicity, there are also some who have had unusual advantages for the same reason. Again, one size does not fit all, but justice can be sought for events that occurred in this lifetime. The karma from previous lifetimes is usually handled by the soul.


As we know, many financial institutions were involved in marketing of toxic assets and many people who are today homeless were victims of fraudulent foreclosures. One simple change in the law would deter predatory banking. When foreclosing, the entity purporting to have the right to foreclose can only collect what is due. The equity accumulated by the borrower must be handed over 60 days prior to eviction.

In an even more enlightened financial system, the occupants would be assisted in restructuring the loan. It would be cheaper for the government to offer loans at very low interest than to deal with homelessness on the scale we are currently seeing.

Taking this even a step further, mismanaged companies can be nationalized or their assets can be sold for pennies on the dollar to the victims of their fraud. We would soon find that the companies are run more ethically. It's pretty simple if there is a moral rudder.

Races and Reparations

When my mother first moved to Hawaii, her 45th birthday and the day the governor got the phone call from Washington, D.C., that Hawaii would become the 50th state, there was a theory that Hawaii would become the breeding ground of a new golden race, literally physically different due to generations of intermarriage. This was for some reason hugely exciting to me; and as my metaphysical studies went deeper and deeper, I came to understand that this is not just a matter of pigmentation but also very complex differences in our inner organization. Some of these differences were alluded to in the film I mentioned. If one's dreamtime reality is more persuasive than one's five defined sensory perceptions, one's concepts are bound to be different. As I wrote, I came here from another galaxy to work on this issue because it goes much deeper than superficial examination would suggest. It has to do with whether or not we can express divinity in a human way and this, in turn, relies on the heart and soul. Obviously, it is very complicated for someone in a modern Western body to bridge the gaps, but it is essential that the bridges are built.

The rest, the healing, the ethical issues, the philosophy, and picky points here and there are peripheral to the main goal, and I think I am one of the few individuals who does not see light as a solution to much more than reading at night. Understanding is very different and emerges usually first in the heart and only later in the mind. Likewise, love and compassion emerge from the heart as do charity and the other acts that uplift others, so the heart is the starting point, not the light. As mentioned, the Sirians are light workers, but they failed to build the bridges to the older cultures on this planet. There is nothing wrong with their motivations or teachings except that some pieces are missing.

In Closing

From a practical perspective, I cannot make a living by writing about philosophy. I realized that after graduating in 1962 and went on to get another degree and a job. I quit because I saw the flaws of the system, but I do have to get back on track if body and soul are to remain together. That said, these topics are important and I want to write about them. Yes, we can have a completely different economic system, one without debt and servitude, and it could literally happen overnight. However, the only way it will happen quickly and easily is if people have access to a body of knowledge that topples the lies created by endless manipulation of Truth. The Bolivian story is just the newest case in point. If an alien took over our air waves or a charismatic leader were to do so, things would change very quickly and easily . . . so now you know why it is so hard to get the facts!

Meanwhile, please use your social networks to recommend my products to your contacts! Thank you!

Copyyright by Ingrid Naiman 2019








Seventh Ray Press
Copyright by Ingrid Naiman 2019

Home || Contact Us

No content on any of the pages of this web site may be reproduced without written permission of
Ingrid Naiman and Seventh Ray Press, publisher of this site.


Design by Damien Francoeur