Saturday, July 26, 2025

Ukraine Outcome

As expected, peace talks between Russia and Ukraine have failed. Volodymyr Zelensky is a puppet leader controlled by hardline ultra-nationalists, so he cannot agree to any agreement that looks like surrender, even though his forces are being beaten. NATO leaders are encouraging him to keep going, but this is a mistake, as the longer he keeps fighting, the worse will be the outcome for the Ukranian people.

The Ukrainian people have backed the wrong horse. Ukraine will join the long list of nations that have been abandoned after putting its trust in promises of US support. The outcome will be ugly.

  • The Ukrainian army is already defeated, and cannot win, even with American support. Trump’s attempts to establish peace in Ukraine will eventually fail.

  • If Volodymyr Zelenskyy signs up to a peace agreement, he will be destroyed by the ultra-nationalists and oligarchs who control him.

  • Ukrainian forces fighting against Russia will flee west and attempt to destroy him.

  • American attempts to fly in Valery Zaluzny or some other leader more amenable to the West will fail, as these efforts always fail. A worse person usually rises in the place of the person who was supposed to be a safe alternative.

The longer the war goes on the worse the situation will become for Ukraine. Once the Ukrainian defence collapses and the war ends, the situation could deteriorate rapidly.
  • The Ukranian population will continue to collapse. 20 million Ukrainians have migrated and most will not return. The birth rate has collapsed. In 2024, 495,000 Ukrainians died while 176,000 were born.

  • Fleeing soldiers will return home without their pay or any financial support. Many will have to go overseas to serve as mercenaries to earn a living.

  • Without US funding, the Ukrainian bureaucracy will not be able to pay staff and many good jobs will disappear.

  • Most Ukrainian industry has been destroyed, so employment will become scarce.

  • Government services will cease as funding collapses.

  • The massive weight of debt will cause the economy to collapse and civil society to break down.

  • Numerous disappointed Ukrainians will migrate to Western Europe looking for work opportunities.

  • Ukrainians who fought in the war will feel betrayed by their leaders and the people who have lived in comfort in Western Ukraine.

  • Civil disruption will become widespread.

  • A massive rebuild will be needed, but Europe and then the US will be unwilling to fund it.

  • Eastern Ukraine will be rebuilt with Russian and Chinese support.

  • The political struggle for power in Ukraine will continue.

  • The ultra-nationalists and oligarchs who have been ripping off Ukraine will seize control and civil strife will break out in Kiev.

  • European leaders will be embarrassed when it becomes obvious that they have been supporting ultra-nationalists and oligarchs with nazi sympathies.

  • Europe will become absorbed in its own economic problems as it is weakened by disunity. It will lose interest in supporting Ukraine.

  • The security guarantees of NATO and its promises of support have been exposed as useless.

  • Without NATO holding it together, Europe will fragment into disunity.

  • Tariff wars will undermine the EU, leading to more fragmentation.

  • Europe has lost its soul, and will go into sharp decline, unless a real Hitler emerges in France or Germany.

For background comments on this issue, see Russia and Ukraine.

Thursday, July 24, 2025

Zelensky and Ukraine

I published this piece in December 2022. It is probably becoming more relevant now.

Zelensky has not acted with truthfulness and integrity
His lies will be exposed
A bad spirit will come between Zelensky and the western news media.
When they realise that he has duped them
They will be filled with scorn,
They will turn on him and attack him with a vengeance.

They will accuse him of doing the things
that he has accused his enemies of doing.
His false accusations will turn back on his head,
and he will lose his place.

A bad spirit will come between Zelensky and his people.
When they realise that he has lied to them,
making false promises that he cannot deliver
and used their men as cannon fodder for no benefit,
destroying their country
and wrecking their economy,
while stealing their wealth.
They will hate him, and he will lose his place.

The battle has been heavy but he did not acknowledge it
so something bad will close in on them.
Some of the soldiers whom he betrayed
will be so angry
that they return to Kiev to destroy him.

Ukraine will be given into the hands of the people who have plundered them.
The oligarchs and ultra-nationalist who rule the country will be exposed
when they openly seize control.
Their true character will be revealed.
God will surrender them in the hands of the nation they hate
His hand will be against them
so they cannot stand against it.
Things will go badly for them
as they come under intense pressure.

Western military and political leaders
will be embarrassed when they realise
who they have been supporting
and will turn against them with a vengeance.
They will break faith with each other,
and blame each other for their failures.

Tuesday, July 22, 2025

OT Prophets

I am currently reading through Kings and Chronicles and am constantly amazed at the achievements of some of the Old Testament prophets, given that the Holy Spirit still had not been released to move freely on earth. This morning, I read the account in 2 Chronicles 28 of one called Oded. Most Christians will not have heard of his name, but he was an incredible peacemaker.

As so often happened, the Ahaz king of Judah and his people had forgotten about God and worshipped idols. Ahaz even offered one of his children as a sacrifice in accordance with the way of the surrounding nations.

When the King of Aram attacked Judah, the King of Israel joined in and killed 120,000 Judeans in one day. He also took 200,000 Judeans captive and was marching them back to Samaria to be slaves.

The bible does not explain where he came from, but a prophet of Yahweh came out to the returning army and confronted the King of Israel. He explained that Yahweh had allowed them to defeat the Kingdom of Judah, but now they were going over the top and going beyond what Yahweh would allow. Oded said,

With you yourselves there are only liabilities in relation to Yahweh your God, aren’t there? So now listen to me. Give back the captives you've taken from your brothers (2 Chron 28:10-11).
Some of the people of Samaria heard the words of the prophet and pushed back against the army, repeating his words.
You will not bring the captives here, because it will be a liability upon us in relation to Yahweh. You’re saying you’ll add to our wrongdoings and to our liabilities, because our liability is great (2 Chron 28:13).
The armed men received the word and let their captives go. And abandoned their plunder. Designated people came and served the captives from the spoil. They clothed them, gave them boots, and food and drink. They put those who had collapsed onto donkeys and led them. They returned all the captured people to the plain of Jericho, so they could return to their homes. Then they went home.

This is the only event in Oded’s life that is recorded in the Bible, yet it is an amazing achievement. He was able to receive God’s word and declare it boldly to people who needed to hear it. Speaking to people who have been victorious is always risky, but Oded was able to follow the Spirit’s leading and be in the right place at the right time. And because he obeyed God, his word was effective, and changed history.

These days, in the age of the Spirit, many Christians call themselves prophets, but I can't think of many who could do what Oded managed to do for God. Even though God has poured his Spirit out at Pentecost, I can't think of many American prophets who could confront Donald Trump or Benjamin Netanyahu and say, “You are increasing our liability to God. Stop doing harm and put things right”.

Saturday, July 19, 2025

Prophets of the Night

According to the file properties I wroted this in March 2023. I did not share it at the time, because it seemed too soon. I might still be ahead of myself.

The dawn of day is coming
but the night must come first (Isaiah 21:12).
Because the people of God are so unprepared,
the night will be much longer and darker than many expect.

It is good for watchers to share about the light of the dawning,
because it gives people hope.
But if they don’t warn about the darkness of the night that comes first,
it will be a false hope.

Many prophets know that God needs his church to change
They are talking about a big paradigm shift
in a season of restructuring;
a metamorphosis from one shape to another;
but they don’t seem to know the detail of the change he needs.

The church urgently needs more guidance about what he requires.
People are praying for revival,
begging God to move by his Spirit,
but God is not the problem,
because his spirit is always moving.

The problem is the church.
It does not seem to be willing to make the changes
that God needs it to make
before it can carry the revival that he wants to send.

The church is celebrating
as if the dawn has arrived.
but the current model of doing church is inadequate
because it cannot cope with the darkness of the night;
Reliance on personality pastors (or their sons)
and programs in buildings
will not be viable during the darkness that is coming.
And the current model will not even cut it when the light of dawn comes,
because it cannot carry the Kingdom of God.

There is a time to laugh and dance,
but also a time to weep and mourn.
The twilight is a time for weeping, mourning and seeking.
Continuing to celebrate as if victory is being won
is discouraging for an army that is being overwhelmed
by forces that are stronger.

God is calling prophets of the night
who can prepare God’s people for the long darkness
that we must pass through to get to the dawn of the new day.

Some of the changes he requires will be painful.
If we don’t make them now in the twilight,
we will have to do it during the darkness of the night.
The changes will be the same,
but they will be hugely more traumatic during the darkness.

Tuesday, July 15, 2025

Climate Science

I think that it is dangerous for Christians to announce that they know what science is saying because they have found a scientist that supports their point of view. Some scientists are popular with Christians because they like what they are saying, but that does not mean that it is true. Cherry-picking a scientist whose message you like and assuming that you have arrived at the truth is a dangerous game. We don’t get to the truth just by listening to voices that we like.

I get nervous about scientists on both sides of the climate change debate who are excessively certain about their claims. I really worry about those who mock other scientists by saying "they don’t get it". I prefer scientists who are a little bit humble.

The climate is far more complicated than most scientists realise. Their models are often too restrictive to represent the climate accurately. If their models were fully reliable, they would be able to predict what the climate will be like a year ahead, but they can’t, so I presume their models are not that accurate. Therefore, we should take the claims on both sides of the debate with a grain of salt.

Christians should be careful about saying to people that climate change is true or not true. The reality is that we don’t know. Rather they should be seeking the wisdom of God about how we should live in this season. If we get his wisdom, we will be prepared for the future, regardless of what happens to the climate.

The climate change advocates have exaggerated the situation over many years (presumably to scare people into action) but that does not mean they are wrong about everything. They could be partly right, so we must not bury our heads in the sand.

One thing is certain. The economic development of the world and our use of fossil fuels to support rampant consumerism over the last 200 years has been a reckless and irresponsible use of the planet God gave to us. So, it would not be surprising if we have done serious harm to the climate.

My position about the climate is that we don’t know. I think it is foolish to say that the climate people are totally wrong. Nor will I panic about the future. But I do think that we must be more serious about living more simply and less materialistically in obedience to God.

More at Climate Change.

Saturday, July 12, 2025

Romans 13

If your interpretation of Romans 13:1-5 would require you to submit to a ruler like Hitler, then there is something seriously wrong with it. You need a better interpretation.

See Understanding Romans 13.

Thursday, July 10, 2025

Energy and Creation

My knowledge of the theory of relativity is very limited but the well-known equation E=MC2, (E=energy, M= Mass, and C= speed of light) gives insight into the structure of our universe.

An atom consists of a few electrons circulating around nuclei with the opposite charge. Both are so small that they cannot be seen and there is nothing between them, because they are repelled from each other by the opposite charge, it an atom is mostly energy.

When looking at the universe we see the mass of the stars and the planets. Therefore, the equation above is more informative, if the terms are re-arranged to highlight the nature of this mass, ie M=E/C2.

One explanation of the equation says that “Energy can be used to make mass out of nothing... except pure energy”. Of course, humans do not have sufficient energy to make anything significant, but God does.

The Mass of the universe is mostly formed from energy. Reality is nothing held apart to become something (with mass) by a massive amount of energy. This is why the smashing of a single atom of hydrogen releases a massive amount of energy.

So when God created the universe, he just released an enormous amount power in the energy need to form the created world out of nothing. The world is nothing pulled apart to become something huge. Millions of atoms were created by a massive infusion of energy. If in the equation above, M is the mass of the universe, then E must be massive too. God was able to release all that energy without any loss of power to himself.

In the same way, at the end of the age, God could just withdraw the energy/power that keeps the mass of the created world in place. It would instantly collapse back into nothing again. And when God receives the energy back, he will not be any greater, because he was able to give it at creation without being diminished in any way.

Modern scientists see a lumpy universe expanding rapidly and randomly to become the vast array of galaxies that can be seen with powerful telescopes.

I see the creation the other way around. The universe was a small lump of matter that God infused energy and power, causing it to grow rapidly, as he pushed matter apart creating the sun, the moon and the stars by inserting his power in the same way that yeast causes dough to bubble and grow.

The modern view is a massive explosion to become a random universe. The theological view is a massive expansion of matter to become orderly universe.

The modern scientific view begins with a massive concentration of energy, without any idea of where it came from. (Some suggest that this singularity might have come out the back of black hole.) This huge mass of energy explodes and expands out rapidly to form the visible universe. This expansion is randomly uneven, so stars and planets are formed in a random way.

God worked the other way around. He probably began by creating atoms by separating electrons from their nuclei with by inserting his energy. As matter formed he separated out lumps of matter by inserting more of his energy to form gaps between them.

As more and more energy was inserted the stars and planets we observe were formed. This was not a random process. Rather, God inserted his energy in a way that caused the stars planets to form in the way that he had intended. God stretched out the heavens in a controlled process that followed his design.

Monday, July 07, 2025

Richard Beck on Boredom

After discussing our feelings of arbitrariness in modernity -- making something matter in a world where nothing matters -- Dunnington goes on to discuss a second symptom of modernity's malaise: Boredom.

Because modernity lacks a telos, we don't have a Story that gives life purpose, direction and meaning. Any story we do have is the story we pick for ourselves, a story that can be dropped in an instant, making that story seem hollow and arbitrary.
You'd think that this would create a feeling of existential crisis for us. But as Dunnington points out, most moderns don't feel existential angst. What we tend to feel is bored.

But why argue that boredom a uniquely modern problem? Dunnington points to two things.

First, due to our material affluence modernity has increased our leisure time. That's no small accomplishment. However, and this is Dunnington's second point, modernity has accomplished this feat by eliminating our Story.

And these two things -- time without a telos -- create an existential vacuum. Space in our lives has been created -- leisure time -- but we lack a Story to fill that space with meaningful activity. Consequently, we fill our leisure time with entertainments and distractions. Again, this is situation perfectly suited to capitalism, large amounts of free time needing to be filled with products and activities for sale.

The trouble, we all know, is that after we cycle through all these entertainments we become increasingly bored. There's a million shows on TV and across our streaming platforms and we can't find anything to watch.

Addiction, according to Dunnington, cracks through the boredom by giving us something compelling to do. Addiction, if it's anything, is a motivated state, something that consumerism struggles to give us consistently.

Further, rather than facing a vast, undifferentiated sea of choices, addiction focuses life upon a single, unifying activity.

In short, addiction alleviates boredom in two different ways: Making something matter when nothing matters and making one thing matter in a sea of choices. When we're bored we have a million things we could do, but nothing we want to do. And if that's the experience of modernity, the experience of addiction is the exact opposite.

Addiction gives you a single, compelling thing to do. Once again, we see addiction filling in a void created by modernity and, thus, implicitly functioning as a form of social critique.

Here's Dunnington making these points:

Addiction provides a response to the underwhelming life of boredom that plagues the bourgeois in its leisure time by making one thing matter. And addiction provides a response to the overwhelming life of boredom that plagues the working class with the fragmented and compartmentalized striving by making one thing matter. For those who are bored with nothing to do, addiction stimulates by entangling and consuming; for those who are bored with too much to do, addiction disburdens by simplifying and clarifying.
If modern life is, by turns, underwhelming and overwhelming, addiction shows up as a solution.

From Richard Beck's Stubstack

Tuesday, June 24, 2025

Census Cancelled

Statistics New Zealand has announced that it will not undertake a Census of Population. According its media release,

Wide-ranging improvements to the data system will modernise and future-proof how New Zealand’s economic and population statistics are produced… By tapping into information New Zealanders have already provided, we will deliver more relevant, useful, and timely data to help inform quality planning and decision making.
This decision was a long time coming. The Department of Statistics had been widely criticised for the low response rate to both the 2018 and 2023 censuses.

I have argued for many years that our society has changed, so it is almost impossible to do a census in the way it was done in the past. We need to understand that in our changing society, a traditional census of the population is becoming almost impossible to do. I wrote the first draft of the following article in 2019 to explain the problem.

Social Change
All the organisations that included cold-calling on households as part of their activities have given up and switched to other methods. The reason is that when you call on most dwellings, there is nobody home to respond to the call. In most households, all adults are working, so there is no one home during the day. Visiting at night or the weekend does not produce much better results, because many people work at night or the weekends, too. They are also busy in various social, sporting and cultural activities.

  • Only a few decades ago, many people made their living doing door-to-door sales, selling brushes, health foods and medicines, insurance and other products. Those activities are no longer profitable, so marketers have switched to party plans and on-line sales as a substitute.

  • Many charities undertook door-to-door collections on a Saturday morning. For some this was their main source of funding. These collections are no longer viable, because it is hard to get collectors willing to knock on doors and too many people are away from home on Saturday morning.

  • Church ministers no longer undertake casual pastoral visits in the way they did in the past, because it is too difficult to find people home.

  • Most churches no longer engage in door-to-door evangelism. Even the Jehovahs Witnesses have moved towards displays on city street corners. (Their stand beside the Bridge of Remembrance rightunder the noses of the census experts working a hundred meters in the office of Statistics NZ is a public demonstration of the social change).

A number of social changes have made it impossible activities that require cold calling impossible.
  • Many dwellings now have locked gates and intercoms, which make it impossible for cold-callers to enter. Many other dwellings have dogs loose in the yard, which prevent people from calling on their house. Organisations cannot demand their employs enter dwelling where the dogs could be dangerous.

  • More and more people are living in gated communities, which are impossible to enter, if you do not know a resident who will open the gate. The residents will often be upset, if one person lets a census taker onto their site.

  • People buying houses as an investment sometimes choose to leave them empty, rather than running the risk that tenants might damage the building. Collecting information from these dwellings is impossible, because no one is ever there, but collectors do not know that and waste time going back against and again.

  • Many people live in more than one dwelling. They go to one dwelling while they are working and go to a different one when they are off work. Some people will live a couple of nights a week with their partner, and live in their own home for the rest of the week. Children often spend every second week with their mother and the alternate weeks with their father. These fluid living arrangements make it increasingly difficult to contact people in the place where they live.

These social changes make it impossible for organisations that rely on cold-calling to operate in the way that they did in the past. It explains why most have given up and switched to other ways of operating.

The same applies to the operation of a census of the population. Attempting to contact every person living in a nation has become an impossible activity. A method that relies on calling at a dwelling and giving the forms a resident who will get the other members of the household to complete them and be there when the census taker returns for a second visit to collect the forms is an impossible task, given the way that society is structured.

A couple of decades ago, there was someone at home most of the time, usually the mother of the family. She felt a duty to do the right things and could organise her family to complete the forms. If her husband did not get around to doing it, she would complete the form for him, often without him knowing. More adult children were living at home, so their parents would persuade them to complete the forms, or do them for them. They could persuade any boarders that they should complete the forms. That has changed in modern societies.

  • Mothers are no longer at home, because most are working. Finding someone at home who will take forms and undertake to return them when they are complete has become much more difficult. I presume that women have always been much more conscientious about these things than men.

  • One person no longer has the moral authority to tell another member of their household what to do. It is no longer acceptable to complete forms for other people, unless they are children or medically incompetent.

  • Young adults no longer live at home. They often live together in flats. There is no one with moral authority to badger people into completing a task if they do not get around to it.

  • Once neighbours could tell a census worker quite a lot about the people living the house next door. Now they often don’t know the people who live there, and they would be unwilling to give a government official information about them if they did.

  • Many people have holiday homes that they live in during the weekends. This makes them harder to contact.

When undertaking a census, it is not sufficient to contact a household once. They have to be contacted at least twice, once to know how many forms to leave, and a second time to take the completed forms back. That is hard, but if a household is tardy in completing the forms, a census worker may have to contact a household them three or four times before they obtain the completed forms. In a society where people are frequently not at home, this becomes very difficult to do.

All over the world, statistical offices are finding it increasingly difficult to run population censuses using door-to-door visits. Many have switched to other methods for collecting information.

Allowing on-line collection is a partial solution to the people. Mobile people who are hard to contact at home, are usually comfortable sharing information on-line. Young people are comfortable sharing information about themselves on Facebook and Instagram. An on-line census is a much better way to collect information from this generation. However, it does not solve the problem, because the people who are not comfortable sharing information on-line will get more and more difficult to contact.

Social change takes place slowly, so the consequences appear slowly. However, they are most serious for activities that need participation by 100 percent of the population. A door-to-door salesperson only needs to find a few people at home for their activities to be economical, but most have still given up. The problems are much greater for census takers, because they need to find 100 percent of people at home, which is much harder to do.

Anti-Government Attitude
In the past, people trusted their governments and did what they told them to do. If they were asked to complete a census form, they felt obligated to do it. That has changed.

The proportion of people who do not trust their government and are hostile to its activities is growing. These people do not trust the government, so they do not want to give it their personal information.

The declining trust in government is reflected in voter participation in government elections. In recent elections, parliamentary elections more than twenty percent of the population do not vote. (Only 6 percent did not vote in 1984). More than half of the population do not vote in local government elections.

The decline in voter turnout reflects a declining obligation to support government activities. If twenty percent of the population did not bother to vote in elections for the government that can control their lives, then it should not be surprising if half of them did not complete a census form that has very little impact on their lives.

Our migrant population has increased rapidly. Many migrants have come from nations that use the information people provide to monitor their behaviour and harass them. When they come to New Zealand, they are often reluctant to give information to the government, because they fear it could place them in danger.

Busy Lives
Modern people live busy lives. Completing a census form might only take half an hour, but many modern people do not have half an hour to spare. So even people who are happy to complete the census, often don’t get around to doing it. We all have things that we intend to do, like phone an acquaintance, read an article, repair a blown light bulb, weed the garden, but we don’t get it done, because we get busy with other things. Things that we want to do get pushed down the list, and eventually forgotten.

A census form often just gets forgotten. People intend to do it, but then something happens to distract them: extra hours are offered at work, a relative dies, rugby training starts, Game of Thrones is on TV, a friend gets cancer, so the census form gets forgotten. No one asks for it, and before long the time for responding is over, without the form being completed.

Very few people get prosecuted for refusing to complete the census. The fine is only a few hundred dollars, so fear of prosecution is not a real incentive.

When people give examples of how a census should be done, they assume the easy examples: a conscientious person with lots of time. Unfortunately, a population census can be wrecked by the small proportion of people whose lives are not ordinary.

Response Rates
Censuses have always been hard to do. The politicians seem to be obsessed with response rates, but they are just one measure of quality, and they are a slippery concept to measure. The response rate is the number of the population responding divided by the total population. The problem is that the denominator in this formula is not known. To estimate the percentage that has responded, you need to know the size of the total population that you are trying measure. That number is not available, because it one of the figures that the census is trying to measure. You only know the number that responded, so a response rate can only be produced by guessing the number that should have responded.

When the census relies on contacts with household, you need to estimate the total number dwellings that are occupied by people, so that you can measure the number of households you should have had a response from. The total number of dwellings is known, but unfortunately, it is hard to count the number of dwellings that are unoccupied, because their status is not obvious, even if you knock on the door. The occupants might be away for the day. So response rates have to be taken with a grain of salt, particularly those from the past, when guestimates of the total population being surveyed were much weaker. And I presume that diligent statisticians have always found clever ways to tweak their estimates to make their response rates look better. That probably explains why a 95 percent response rate was achieved in 2013.

Non-response is unavoidable in every statistical survey, even if it is mandated by the government. The key issue is what is done about the non-response. Statisticians have robust techniques for dealing with non-response, so it is not really a serious problem, provided it is well managed.

Complex Organisation
Most businesses start small and grow gradually. They learn and develop as they expand. A census has to be undertaken within a few weeks. Organising a census means taking on thousands of employees all at once and training them for a task they have not done before. They cannot be employed for too long, because the cost would get too high. No matter how good the screening process, some of the employees selected will be duds. The problem is that by the time that is discovered, the census is finished and the damage is done.

Most businesses develop and adapt as they expand. A census has to be completed in a couple of weeks. This means that there is very little ability to adapt and resolve problems as they emerge. By the time a pattern of problems emerges, it is to late to make a significant change, because by that time the census period is nearly complete.

Getting good people to work on a census is not that easy. Once there was a large pool of family carers at home, who were pleased to have a temporary job that would allow them to earn a few extra dollars while their children were at school. Many of these had done administrative jobs before they had children, so they were well-suited to census work. That situation no longer exists. The pool of carers and retired people who could do the job are already employed.

  • Census work cannot be done while children are at school, as that is the time when the fewest people are not home.

  • Most people do not feel comfortable cold-calling on people they do not know.

  • People do not want to go onto a situation where a dog is loose, but that is part of the job. Several census worker get attacked by dogs each census.

  • Census workers will get yelled at by people who are angry with the government. That makes the job quite unappealing.

Getting good people to be census workers is increasingly difficult.

Poor Quality Information
A population census relies on self-complete forms. These have to be designed so they can be understood by everyone. This is very difficult. The form has to be designed for someone with a reading age of about nine. The questions have to be kept simple, so they are easily understood, but this is not always possible because even simple questions can be complicated for some people.

Income is an example. At first thought, it would seem easy to collect. For some it is, but for others, it is not, and a census form has to cope with the tricky cases. Some people know the amount of their take-home pay, but they do not know their gross pay. People on casual jobs, with several employers find it very difficult to say what their income is for a particular period. Self-employed people often do not know their exact income until well after the end of the financial year. The income questions in a population census have to be sufficiently vague to make the information provided fairly useless.

The ethnicity of New Zealanders is increasingly diverse and complicated. This means that collecting information about ethnicity in a self-complete form is very difficult. If people do not understand the concept being asked, there is no one to ask. If too many guide notes are put in the form, it clutters the layout and makes it hard to follow.

There is always pressure from public agencies to add extra questions to a census form. A decision has to be made on how long the form can be without becoming an obstacle to collection. When completing voluntary form people get tired, so if they encounter questions that they find hard to answer, they often give up. The census is a long form, so not surprisingly, many people give up before they get to an end.

Some people are mischievous when they are completing a government form. They put in false information, just to be funny. I understand that in one census, a dozen people reported an occupation of Prime Minister, and several said they were the queen. People put mischievous responses when they are reporting their ethnicity or religion. This natural behaviour cannot be stopped, but it reduces the value of the information collected.

If governments need information about people to support social policy, they would be far better to use voluntary interviewer-administered surveys of representative samples. This is a far cheaper option than trying to take a full census. It is more efficient, because a social survey can provide detailed information that is far more useful. It will also produce more reliable information, because people are less likely to lie to an interviewer.

Governments have Information
The reality is that governments already have most of the information that they attempt to collect in the census. People supply this information in the forms they complete when engaging with the government for various services. Statisticians call this information “administrative data” as it is collected through administrative processes.

The government knows the number of people living in New Zealand. It can derive that from the numbers of births and deaths registered, and from immigration data reporting the numbers of departures and arrivals. Being a couple of islands, makes this much easier than it is for countries on large continents with fairly porous borders. Statistics NZ could continue producing reliable population projections even if there was never another census of the population.

Inland Revenue has accurate information about the incomes of all New Zealanders. They know exactly how much each person earns. Governments would be better to use this information than relying on vague information supplied in a self-completed form. When people apply for National Superannuation and Social Welfare Benefits, they have to supply a huge amount of information about themselves. When families apply for “Working for Families” benefits, they have to supply information about their family and their partners. Governments are collecting data about us all the time, often without us being really aware of it. They should use this information better, rather than relying on expensive and unreliable information from a census.

The government says it needs census information to allocate health funding. Using census data is actually a lazy way to do it. The Ministry of Health collects information about people who visit doctors and more detailed information about people who get hospital treatment. The Ministry of Health already knows where the sick people live, and what is wrong with them. Statistical techniques are available for projecting this information forward, so governments should be using health information to allocate health funding. This would be better than relying on census data that does not record anything about health needs.

Governments also say that they need census data to know where to build schools. That is nonsense. The Ministry of Education has information about every child attending school and preschool or kindergarten in New Zealand. They know about every child born, through the birth registration process. The schools provide a statistical return to the Ministry of Education twice a year. This a better way to obtain information about social problems at the schools. The government should use this information that they already have to allocate education funding, and make sure that it is directed to where it is needed, rather than relying on census information that tells them very little about the education needs of students.

Building consents provide information about districts where new housing is being built. Using the information about the type of dwellings, it is quite easy to estimate the number of children that will be moving into these new residential areas. The government has this information before the houses are built. This should be used when deciding where to build new schools. If they wait for census information to be available, they will build the schools too late to meet the need.

Census information is used to shift the electorate boundaries for the general election. Running a census is a fairly inefficient way to do it, because, by the time the data is collected and the boundary adjustments made, the information used will be well out of date. Through the land information system and valuation process, the government knows where every dwelling in New Zealand. is. Through the building consents process, they know where new dwellings will be built, even before they are built. It is quite easy to estimate the number of people in each dwelling. The need for changes to the electorate boundaries mostly come from new housing development. Using the information about dwellings that they already have, governments could establish electorate boundaries that are fit for purpose.

Conclusion
Operating a population census in a modern society is becoming an increasingly impossible task. That does not matter, because governments have far better ways of obtaining information.

Friday, June 20, 2025

Challenging Organisations

A reader asked told me about their experience in a Christian organisation that had gone off the tracks. He asked the following question.

How should a ministry deceiving the public, the community and its members be treated when one is discovered?
This is a good question, but a difficult one.

I think that the response will depend on the situation of the person who has become aware of the person in the troubled organisation.

Leadership
If the person is in leadership, they should have the right to speak to the other leaders of the organisation. If the person is trusted by the other leaders, their warning might be heard. However, if the problem begins with the main leader, the other leaders are more likely to line up behind him, and the person challenging will be perceived as a troublemaker. Their message might be rejected.

Resigned Leader
If the leader has resigned from their role due to their concerns about the organisation, they will have less credibility with the other leaders. Any criticism of the organisation that they articulate will be seen as “sour grapes.” The remaining leaders of the organisation will attempt to dampen their influence. They might be able to give a warning to the people in the organisation with whom they have strong relationships, but outside that group, they will have very little interest.

Members of the Organisation
A member of a Christian organisation should be able to raise the concerns with its leadership. But there is a big risk that they will not be listened to. The recent history of Christian organisations indicates that whistle-blowers will frequently be ignored and, worse, will be treated badly.

If the leadership bring their power against the person who gives a warning, it can be very unpleasant for them. Many followers of Jesus have suffered terribly when they attempted to challenge the leaders of their organisation. I cannot think of a situation where warnings have been heard, and the organisation changed when the leaders understood the problem.

A member of an organisation can speak to other people in the organisation that they know and warn them of the problem, but they will be seen by the leadership as troublemakers. The leaders will speak against them and portray them as disloyal. The people who they speak to will have to choose who they trust. Many will side with the leadership, against the member expressing concerns.

Members who have left the Organisation
People who have left the organisation will have greater freedom to speak, but they will have less credibility, except with people who know them and trust them. That is likely to be a small group. So, even if they speak out boldly, their influence will be limited.

The leadership will portray the person speaking as betraying the organisation and trying to undermine it. They will describe the person as bitter. They will say that they are deceived because they were challenged by the leadership and are speaking out of their hurt.

They will be attacked by the leadership in an attempt to discredit them before they gain any influence. If the person speaks out publicly, the leaders of the organisation will attack them in order to dull their influence.

Hard to Prove
The person who is concerned about the spiritual state of an organisation will have difficulty proving their case. The experience in many organisations dealing with accusations of sexual and spiritual abuse shows that they will often be ignored, even when there is testimony from several people. Many cases that have been raised have been investigated by lawyers appointed by the leadership team and discounted or ignored.

The people who have raised the claims have often been ostracised by people they have been connected with over many years. These attempts to challenge the leadership of an organisation have mostly failed, even though justice was on their side. Experience in the United States shows that “victim-shaming” is a very effective tool for shutting down people who are criticising an organisation.

If the challenge is about an evil spiritual influence, it will be even harder to prove to a leadership team. The challenger can describe what they have discerned in the Spirit, but the leaders will be able to reject their claim by saying they have discerned something different. The leaders will have people they trust who claim to have the gift of discernment, and will take their word over that of someone that they don’t trust.

The leadership will often denigrate the character of the whistle-blower to undermine their discernment. Leaders tend to take criticism as a sign that they are doing the right thing. Attacks on whistle-blowers by leaders and their supporters have frequently been vicious.

Prophets
In some regions, people who are recognised as “a prophet” by several churches might have emerged. Agabus is an example (Acts 11:27-30; 21:10-14). A prophet to the churches in a region like Agabus might have sufficient respect to successfully challenge a church or organisation that is going astray.

The problem in the modern world is that very few prophets of this type exist. Prophets get ahead these days by being attached to a megachurch, or by joining a group of prophets. Most churches are led by pastors, and the prophet is expected to submit to the pastor, which tends to undermine their independence and leave them too compromised to freely challenge error.

Conclusion
In most situations, there will be nobody who can challenge an organisation that has lost its way. God will have to deal with the problem. This is a pessimistic conclusion, but it is confirmed by the experience of those who have tried.

Building Right
In my books, I explain how the prophetic ministry should be pushed down to the eldership level. Every church should have several elders, and though most will be pastoral, at least one should be an evangelist, and one should be a prophet. Having a prophetic ministry built into its DNA should help a church or organisation stay on track.

The prophet will have a strong relationship with the other elders. If one of them seems to be taking the church in the wrong direction, the prophet will be able to challenge them. Having a balanced leadership is the best safeguard against an organisation losing its way.

The problem for IHOP KC was that the “Kansas City” prophets were unaccountable itinerants. They had joined together to support each other, but in practice, they were probably condoning and covering up each other’s sins. They were not in a place where they could challenge the direction that the organisation was moving.

Mike Bickle
I witnessed with Mike Bickle’s well-known prophecy that God was going to change the church dramatically in one generation. However, I was puzzled by his response to it. I expected that he would press in to find out how God wanted to change the church, so he could articulate it for believers to grab hold of. However, he never seemed to do that. Instead, he started an intercession organisation that was structured in the same way as the church that God had said he wanted to change dramatically. It seemed like he was locked in the past, not pressing into the future.

I have always been a bit sceptical about intercessory ministries. I believe that the New Testament teaches that every follower of Jesus needs to be an intercessor. This makes our intercession more effective, because we will be praying in areas where we have influence and authority.

In my view, most organised intercession is ineffective because intercessor organisations are praying for areas in which they do not have authority, so there they cannot release God to act. In many cases, a claim to be an intercessor is just an excuse for doing nothing. It is an excuse for never sharing the gospel or discipling new believers. Consequently, intercessory organisations are often an obstacle to change because they validate inactivity. Therefore, I am not surprised that IHOP lost its way.

Tuesday, June 17, 2025

Bible Translations

A reader asked me which English translation of the bible I prefer.

I don’t have strong views about translations. Most are of value, provided the reader understands the basis on which they are done. I have always used the New International Version (NIV) because it was a fresh translation when I started teaching and preaching (and easier to read in public than the (KJV). I realise that it is not perfect, but I know my way round my NIV bible, so I have stuck with it.

I also used the New American Standard Bible (NASB) because it is a more literal translation, but harder to understand.

The balance between accuracy and readability is one that every person must work out for themselves. Because I am quite analytical and a bit nerdy, I prefer to err on the accuracy side. But for most people a translation that is readable will be more important.

I always say that the “best translation” is the one that you can regularly read and understand. That will vary from person to person. It is no use having a totally accurate translation, if you never read it. People who are not confident readers are probably better to go with one of the modern paraphrases, such as the Passion Bible.

I think to is good to switch translations from time to time, because it helps you see things that you missed. If one translation gets stale, a new one might be more illuminating.

I am currently reading from the First Testament translated by John Goldingay and the Second Testament by Scot McKnight. Their approach to translation is to try and make their English as much like the structure and style of the original Hebrew and Greek text. This makes them a bit harder to read, but I have found these translations quite refreshing.

One thing that I like most about the second Testament is that Scot McKnight assiduously avoids the religious words that dominate most English translations. This gives a different slant on what Jesus and Paul were teaching.

For example, Scot uses the word “deliverance” for the “sozo” related Greek words instead of the usual religious translation “salvation”. I find this really refreshing, and it has forced me to think more clearly about the gospel message and the nature of what Jesus achieved.

“Salvation” has become a religious word carrying meanings that Jesus and Paul did not intend. Using the words “Deliver/deliverance” gives the New Testament a different emphasis.

Thursday, June 12, 2025

Prophet and Lion

1 Kings 13 tells the story of a prophet who challenged King Jeroboam, but was killed by a lion on his way home. I have always been intrigued by this man who is not named. Why did he end up being killed, when he had completed a very challenging prophetic task?

Jeroboam was one of the most evil kings in Israel’s history. In the Old Testament, he is the benchmark for political evil. Jeroboam built two gold bullocks for the people to worship. He established priests in Bethel (where Jacob had met Yahweh), and made an altar to make burnt offerings. It is not clear who they offered to.

A man of God came and challenged Jeroboam while he was standing by the altar ready to make an offering. The prophet declared that human bones would one day be offered on this altar. He said that the altar would be split in half and spill its ashes as a sign to the king.

Jeroboam called for his guards to seize the prophet, but when he stretched out his hand it shrivelled up and the altar split in half before him. The king asked the prophet to pray for him and plead with God for his hand to be restored. There is no hint that the king repented of his idolatry. The prophet sought Yahweh’s goodwill and the hand was restored.

The King then asked the prophet to come to his house and eat with him and receive a gift. He offered up to half his household. The king was obviously grateful for the healing of his hand, but he did not seem to repent. The prophet was uneasy about dining with the rebellious king, because he could easily be compromised. He said,

Even if you were to give me half your possessions, I would not go with you, nor would I eat bread or drink water here. For I was commanded by the word of the LORD: ‘You must not eat bread or drink water or return by the way you came.
The prophet then went out by a different way from the way he came to Bethel.

I wonder if God did really say that he should not eat or drink until he got home. That is a strange thing for God to say, as a prophet needs to be alert and sharp, whereas going without food and drink would make him weak and vulnerable. I am reminded of 1 Kings 19:5, where God sent an angel to provide Elijah with food when he was sending him into a tough spiritual encounter. God wants his prophets to be sharp.

I wonder if God had told the prophet not to socialise with the king. Given that he had not repented, God would not want the prophet to be in fellowship. So probably did tell his prophet to avoid the king and go home without visiting his house.

Maybe the prophet exaggerated what God said, to make his refusal to accompany the king more emphatic. The anti-climax after a prophet has given a powerful word is the time when he is most vulnerable. So I can understand that the prophet exaggerated God’s command and said he was not allowed to eat and drink until he got home, to enforce his message to the king and provide justification for refusing his fellowship.

Expanding God’s word is a huge temptation for prophets. The prophet is so committed to God’s word, that they sometimes reinforce the word with their own additions to make the word seem stronger. This is a mistake. God’s word is always powerful and can stand on its own. The Holy Spirit will make it effective.

Old Prophet
An old prophet heard what the prophet had done. He invited the prophet who had delivered the word to Jeroboam to his house for a meal. It is not clear what his motivation was, but he seems and seemed to want to get in on the glory of the miracle that God had done. This is a temptation for the old prophet. Had God called him to go and speak to Jeroboam. I suspect that he might have, because it makes sense that he would have used an experienced prophet for this tough task. Having missed out on a great victory, I suspect that the old prophet invited the successful one to a meal, so he could share in the glory of the victory he had heard about.

The old prophet did a couple of things wrong. First of all, he said,

I two am also prophet, like you (1 Kings 13:18).
A true prophet does not need to announce his ministry. God’s word demonstrates his ministry for all to see.

Secondly, the old prophet compared himself to the prophet who had been successful and said that he was “like him”. That was not true, because he had not given a word or completed a task that got him into the scriptures. Old prophets should be careful about proclaiming their own success, especially when they have been off task.

The old prophet lied and said that Yahweh had told him that the successful prophet had to come back and eat and drink with him. The prophet went and ate with him. If the prophet had added the words about not eating and drinking himself, he would know they were not true. This would tempt him to go and eat with the prophet, even though God had told him to go straight home.

Listening to directions from an older prophet is a mistake for a younger prophet. He should be focusing on hearing the Holy Spirit’s directions, rather than following the instructions of other prophets. Obeying a command from another person is risky, if you have not heard from God himself. The scriptures note that the older prophet was lying (1 Kings 13:18).

Old Prophet Speaks
The conclusion of the incident is strange. A word of God came to the old prophet and he spoke to the prophet dining with him. You have defied the word of the LORD and have not kept the command the LORD your God gave you. You came back and ate bread and drank water in the place where he told you not to eat or drink. Therefore, your body will not be buried in the tomb of your ancestors (1 Kings 13:21-22).

This is a strange word. The first part was true. The prophet had defied God’s word by stopping and dining when God had told him to go straight home.

I suspect that the second half of the prophecy was not from God. The old prophet had lied, so that would have left him vulnerable to a lying spirit.

I suspect that the second part of the prophecy was given by a lying spirit, because God needed the prophet to live, not die. He just needed him to learn a lesson from what had happened, and be careful about how he behaved after he had successfully delivered a word.

The prophet from Judah had submitted to the older prophet and obeyed his instructions by coming to dine with him. This placed him under the authority of the spirit that was at work in the old prophet. The serious consequence of this submission was that the prophet opened himself to a spirit of death. As he was going home, he encountered a lion and was killed. This was a sad end for a man of God who had begun well.

The prophetic declaration of the older prophet was fulfilled, but that does not mean it was from God. It is more likely that it was the lying spirit who was speaking through him. The word was fulfilled because the successful prophet submitted to the word by accepting it. He implicitly submitted to the evil spirit that was behind the word.

God indicates his view of the prophet from Judah by the reality that the lion does not maul him or the donkey that he was riding. It just stands beside him and guards his body. God wanted him to be honoured, even though he had made a mistake.

After hearing that the prophet from Judah had died, the older prophet said,

It is the man of God who was disobedient to the word of the LORD (1 Kings 13:26).
This is a bit rich, as the older prophet did not have the right to judge the prophet who had died. The older prophet had deliberately lied to deceive him, and possibly released the spirit of lying and the spirit of death that led to his killing.

The older prophet had the dead prophet buried in his own grave (which is a bit odd), I presume that he was still trying to share in his glory in some way, which is a dangerous behaviour.

The old prophet declared.

For the saying which he cried out by the word of the LORD against the altar in Bethel, and against all the shrines on the high places which are in the cities of Samaria, will surely come to pass.
It was good that he honoured the prophet who had died and attempted to validate his word, but it was too late. It would have better if he had stood with him when he spoke against Jeroboam. If he had had another prophet supporting him when he spoke to the king, he might have been bolder and less vulnerable to fear.

Two lessons
The usual interpretation of this incident is that disobedience to God is dangerous. However, the message from this passage is more subtle and more important.

  • Older experienced prophets should be careful about how they treat younger prophets. They should avoid trying to bask in their glory and should certainly not lie to make them part of their team.

    An older prophet who lies can harm a less experienced prophet. By lying, even if it is for good, he can release a false spirit that can do a lot of harm.

  • Less mature prophets should be cautious in their relationships with older prophets. They should not take the older prophet’s word as gospel, especially if it is flattering. Flattery is really dangerous for a prophet who has successfully delivered a word. It can leave them open to spiritual attack. It does not matter who the flattery comes from, it should always be resisted.

    During the period after successfully delivering a word from God, every prophet should be alert, because this is the time when they are most vulnerable to spiritual attack and deception.

    After delivering a confronting word, a prophet can feel a bit flat, even if his word was received as truth. He probably needed the older prophet to encourage him, not trick him and judge him.

Fulfilled
The story ends in the time of King Josiah. He tore down all the altars in Judah. He also destroyed the altar that Jeroboam had built at Bethel. When he saw the tombs on the hillside around it, he dug them up and burned them on the altar to defile it, as the prophet had prophesied would happen (1 Kings 13:2).

The king asked, “What is that tombstone I see?” The people of the city said, “It marks the tomb of the man of God who came from Judah and pronounced against the altar of Bethel the very things you have done to it.” “Leave it alone,” he said. “Don’t let anyone disturb his bones.” So they spared his bones and those of the prophet (2 Kings 23:17-18).
When his prophecy was fulfilled, the prophet from Judah was honoured, whereas the older prophet was not mentioned, even though he was buried in the same tomb.

Monday, June 09, 2025

Economic Theory

Rod Carr is a leading New Zealand economist. In a recent article called Markets Have No Morals, he explained the benefits and the flaws of the standard economic theory that has prevailed for the past fifty years. In this post, I tease his comments out a bit to make them clearer. The words in italics are mine.

Benefits
The 1980s saw an explosion in enthusiasm for using markets to allocate scarce resources. That enthusiasm set off a period of rapid and comprehensive deregulation and privatisation.

  • Taxes, tariffs, and subsidies were ‘inherently bad’ as they caused resources to be “misallocated”.

  • The pursuit of profit was “inherently good” as resources would flow to their most valuable use.

  • Least cost was assumed to create the most value for society (least cost alcohol or tobacco harms society).

  • Markets are effective at efficiently allocating scarce resources.

  • Markets allow producers and consumers to act in self-interest, leading to the best outcomes for society. (Pareto Optimal in the limited sense that no one can be made better off without making someone worse off, which is not really optimal at all).

  • At the time, there was little doubt that markets could allocate financial capital more efficiently than politicians, technocrats, or corporate conglomerates (The global financial crisis showed that this is not true).

  • The market acolytes were in control at the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organisation and most central banks and Treasury Departments in the world, taught, advised and acted to promote light-handed regulation, tariff-free trade, low taxes, private property rights and market-based solutions.

Assumptions
Markets are ruthlessly efficient at allocating privately-owned scarce resources with a price, provided:
  • Price is determined in free market exchanges between many buyers and many sellers (most markets are not free).

  • Complete information is available to all participants (rarely true)

  • Search and transaction costs are trivial and .

  • All the impacts, costs and benefits, are reflected in the prices buyers are willing to pay and

  • Sellers are willing to incur (producers push many costs onto the community).

However, this set of ideal circumstances is rare (It probably never occurs). Economists build economic models based on their assumptions, so there models do not match reality.

Selfish, Myopic and Reckless
Markets are myopic, reckless and selfish. Markets are short-sighted:

  • A direct result of discounting the future due to uncertainty

  • Market participants face a constraint on their access to cash.

  • Understate future benefits and exclude or understate future costs.

  • Underinvestment in long-life infrastructure.

  • Degradation of natural ecosystems and

  • Underinvestment in public health and education (explains why our hospitals and schools are struggling).

Markets are reckless:
  • They create an asymmetry that sees profits accrue to those with private property rights, while costs are left to lie with the general public.

  • Limited liability companies limit downside risk and encourage risk-taking. (Limited liability is a hugely significant government intervention that business owners never admit, despite claiming to believe in free markets.)

  • Children do not inherit their parents’ debts (but benefit from wealthy parents).

  • Irreversible biodiversity loss is unpriced yet deprives future generations of options and choices while exposing them to unknown risks and costs.

  • Decisions today without accountability have irreversible consequences, seriously reduce future choices, raise future costs, transfer risks to other members of our society and undermine social cohesion.

Markets are inherently selfish.
  • Markets are indifferent as to the distribution of benefits and costs throughout society (This is a massive problem, because the rich get richer, and the poor stay poor).

  • Market acolytes argue that the efficiency gains from market-determined resource allocation allow the winners to compensate the losers, leaving society better off (a rising tide lifts all boats), but political obstacles prevent this from happening.

  • As it turns out, the winners attribute their winnings to personal attributes, such as hard work, thrift, ability, and are reluctant to pay enough tax or gifts to compensate the losers.

Rod Carr concludes that markets are a tool to achieve strategic, social, political and economic outcomes, not a result to be pursued for its own sake. Markets should be a tool to enable people and not a mantra to enslave us.

Saturday, June 07, 2025

Rule of Idiots

Chris Hedges on the Rule of Idiots.

In the last days of all empires the idiots take over. They mirror the collective stupidity of a civilization that has detached itself from reality.
The last days of dying empires are dominated by idiots. The Roman, Mayan, French, Habsburg, Ottoman, Romanoff, Iranian and Soviet dynasties crumbled under the stupidity of their decadent rulers who absented themselves from reality, plundered their nations and retreated into echo chambers where fact and fiction were indistinguishable.
In “Hitler and the Germans,” the political philosopher Eric Voegelin dismisses the idea that Hitler — gifted in oratory and political opportunism, but poorly educated and vulgar — mesmerized and seduced the German people. The Germans, he writes, supported Hitler and the “grotesque, marginal figures,” surrounding him because he embodied the pathologies of a diseased society, one beset by economic collapse and hopelessness. Voegelin defines stupidity as a “loss of reality.” The loss of reality means a “stupid” person cannot “rightly orient his action in the world, in which he lives.” The demagogue, who is always an idiote, is not a freak or social mutation. The demagogue expresses the society’s zeitgeist, its collective departure from a rational world of verifiable fact.
These idiots, who promise to recapture lost glory and power, do not create. They only destroy. They accelerate the collapse. Limited in intellectual ability, lacking any moral compass, grossly incompetent and filled with rage at established elites who they see as having slighted and rejected them, they remake the world into a playground for grifters, con artists and megalomaniacs.
A society convulsed by disorder and chaos, as Voegelin points out, celebrates the morally degenerate, those who are cunning, manipulative, deceitful and violent. In an open, democratic society, these attributes are despised and criminalized. Those who exhibit them are condemned as stupid; “a man [or woman] who behaves in this way,” Voegelin notes, “will be socially boycotted.” But the social, cultural and moral norms in a diseased society are inverted. The attributes that sustain an open society — a concern for the common good, honesty, trust and self-sacrifice — are ridiculed. They are detrimental to existence in a diseased society.
Read the entire article.

Thursday, June 05, 2025

US Insolvable Economic Problems

I made a list of some of the serious economic problems being faced by the United States.  One reason why they are unsolvable is that political leaders and their people believe lies about the situation that prevent them from understanding the cause.

The other obstacle is that many of the problems do have known solutions, but they cannot be implemented because they are politically unacceptable.  No politician would promise to implement them, because it would destroy their candidacy for office.

I have summarised the problems, the lies that people believe about them, and the truth that needs to be understood in the following table.

US Problem

Lies

Truth

Structural
Trade Deficit

($850 billion)

Deficits are necessary to supply dollars to the nations
(wrong – they did this when running a trade surplus.

The nations are stealing from us

Foreigners pay tariffs

Strong dollar limits exports and encourage imports

A high-cost structure is the problem,
- health care
- education
- social problems

Lack of skilled staff

Financialisaton shifted industry to cheap labour.

Tariffs might help but would also increase inflation.

Persistent Budget Deficits

($2 trillion)

Deficits do not matter

Donors demand tax cuts.

Political processes demand pork.

The massive military machine costs money.

The only solution is to increase taxes and/or reduce spending, but this is not politically expedient.

Government Debt

($30 trillion)

We owe it to ourselves so it does not matter.

The Fed is too slow.

Persistent budget deficits feed debt.

Interest is now one of the largest budget items.

Debt pushes up interest rates which slows the economy and hurts consumers.

The big beautiful bill is making the debt situation worse.

De-industrialisation

Financialisation moved industry to cheap labour nations for profit.

China is skilled in industrial production

China has an educated population

More STEM graduates than the USA.

Tariffs will shift some industries back to the US, but they will have to be specialised activities that can support expensive labour.

Free market capitalism combined with debt-led consumerism throws up the problem.

Military Weakness

To be a world hegemon, the US must keep China down.

The US military relies on China for imports of technology.

The US cannot afford to be the world policeman.

The US military does not have sufficient personnel, and military recruiting is getting harder.

The US military demands extremely expensive hardware which is not effective in a peer-to-peer war.

Complex technology takes too long to develop and is too expensive to use against weak enemies.

Debt-fuelled consumption

Cheap consumption makes people happy.

They will not accept a reduced standard of living.

Consumerism depends on cheap labour in poor countries.

The US cannot produce the cheap goods that people want.

Household and student debt are problematic.

Incompetent political leadership

Technocratic leaders have the solutions that society needs.

Challenges to the political establishment are a threat to freedom.

Western politicians are intellectually, morally and politically weaker than ever.

They are Detached from reality, assuming they live in a world that does not exist.

Elite groups on both sides of the spectrum take turns at leading.

Leaders don’t have effective solutions and don’t know how to implement t them effectively.

Covid and the global financial crisis confirmed their incompetence.

No political appetite for solving structural problems.

Flawed economic model

- neoliberalism

Unconstrained free market capitalism will produce economic outcomes for everyone.

The western economic model has failed.Its weakness is confirmed by the global financial crisis.

The world economy needs to be restructured but no one understands how this could happen or what should be the outcome.

Migration

The nations are emptying their prisons and mental asylums and sending the inmates to America.

Immigrants are "poisoning the blood of our country".

The US needs low-paid workers for its agriculture, to collect the garbage and clean the homes of the wealthy.

The US lacks effective processes for managing the selection of migrants.

The Migrants arriving are remaining in ghettoes because they fear the law. Many don’t speak English.

Migrants are changing the culture at a time when Christian influence is declining.

Debate about the merits of migration is impossible, because people who raise concerns about its effects are labelled as right-wing.

Resource Constraints

Drill baby drill!

American wealth was built on an abundance of mineral resources that were easy to extract.

Unfortunately, most of the easily extractable minerals are now becoming exhausted.

There are plenty of mineral resources still available, but they are more costly to extract and use.

This will push up the price of everything.

These are interlinked problems. One cannot be solved without solving the other. Most of these problems cannot be solved politically. Most solutions are politically unacceptable.

Donald Trump understands the seriousness of the problems, but he remains part of the problem, not the solution. His economic decisions and political rhetoric are exacerbating many of the problems.

Saturday, May 31, 2025

Tariffs - Who Pays?

Tariffs are paid by importers when the goods imported cross the border into the nation that has established the tariff. They are primarily a tax on consumption. Nations cannot make other nations pay taxes. They can only tax people and businesses resident in their nation.

Who bears the cost of tariffs levied on traded goods is a different issue. As economists like to say, “It depends…”.

Importers of consumer goods are often retailers or their agents. If they cannot absorb the additional cost of the tariffs, which is unlikely, they will have to pass most of the cost on in price increases to consumers. If consumers still want the good, they will have to pay the higher price.

Importers of capital and intermediate goods will usually be manufacturers, or their agents. They will have to pay the tariff on the goods when they cross the border. Unless they can absorb the cost, they will need to pass the additional cost on to retailers, and eventually to consumers.

Changes in prices affect the demand for goods. If consumers have a strong preference for a particular good, they will have no choice but to pay the higher price. This makes them worse off, however, because they will have less money to spend on other goods.

If consumers are not fussy about what they consume, they might be able to switch to an alternative good that is not subject to the tariff, but still meets their needs. However, they will still be worse off because they have been forced to shift to a product that was not previously their first choice, presumably because they did not think it was as good.

If people are forced to switch from an imported product, to a locally produced product, it is likely to be more expensive than the imported good that they used to buy. It is likely to be poorer quality relative to price. For example, if Americans are forced to switch from Chinese or Japanese-manufactured autos to American-produced ones, the quality might be poorer and the price higher. This makes them worse off, even if American manufacturers and workers benefit.

Some manufacturers of foreign manufactured goods might choose to reduce their prices to absorb the cost of the tariff in order to maintain their market share. There will be a limit to how much they can do this if their profit margins are tight. To the extent that they do choose to reduce their prices, some of the cost of the tariffs falls on them. This will reduce their profits.

If a manufacturer is unable to reduce the price sufficiently to maintain market share, they will sell less product, which will reduce their profits, unless they can quickly find alternative markets for their products.

Putting it simply:

  • If buyers are indifferent to price, then buyers pay the tariffs.
  • If buyers are highly sensitive to price, then sellers sell less and receive less revenue per unit sold.
However, in economics, nothing is ever simple.

Exchange Rates
The introduction of tariffs can have a significant effect on exchange rates. When Donald Trump introduced his tariffs many economists assumed that this would strengthen the US dollar. This would have the effect of making imports cheaper and exports more expensive, which counteracts the effect of the tariffs. A strong increase in the US dollar would cancel out the impact of the tariffs and prevent any price inflation.

In reality, the opposite has happened. The US dollar depreciated against the currencies of its major trading partners. This actually amplifies the effect of the tariffs by pushing up prices for increased inflation. As some economists have pointed out, allowing the US dollar to depreciate would have had a similar effect as the Trump tariffs, but it would have been more widespread.

Inflation
Inflation is a problem for most modern economies. An increase in prices caused by the imposition of tariffs might bring an increase in inflation. The Federal Reserve might need to push up interest rates to keep inflation under control. This would make people worse off and might slow the economy.

World Economy
The introduction of large tariffs can create uncertainty and disrupt world trade. The reduction of specialisation could undermine efficiency and push up the costs of economic production. If the disruption to trade is serious the world economy could go into decline. This would make everyone worse off, although the effects would be uneven.

Thursday, May 22, 2025

Lazy Trump?

In my previous post, I suggested that Donald Trump is lazy. In this post I explain what I meant.

Donald Trump puts a lot of energy into things that he likes doing but neglects many important aspects of his job. The US presidency is a massive job, probably more than one person can do, even if the person is incredibly fit and energetic. It is unlikely that any eighty-year old will struggle to keep up.

A president has four important things to do.

  1. Collect and analyse information about the issues about which he will have to make decisions.
  2. Make decisions about key issues the nation is facing.
  3. Communicate the decision effectively when it has been made.
  4. Ensure that the decision is implemented. This is the hard part.
On top of this the president must campaign for the next election.
  1. Trump does not do the first task very well. He obviously has plenty of advisors, but it seems that he is not keen about reading briefing papers prepared for him. I suspect he assumes that he already knows all that he needs to know. Consequently, he often makes bad decisions, because he did not understand the issue sufficiently well.

  2. Trump is decisive when making decisions. And when his decisions are wrong, he corrects them, but it would be better if he got the decision right in the first place.

  3. Trump is extremely good at communicating his decisions. The problem is that God can speak and it comes to be, but humans cannot speak things into being.

  4. A president must rely on his team to implement the decisions that he has made. Trump has some very skilled people on his team, but they are people with strong views about what should be done, so they often will try to implement their own plans. Presidents have to be very active to ensure that their team implements their decisions.

    This is where Trump is lazy. He does not ensure that the team he has appointed carry out his decision. This was a problem in his first term. He negotiated a ground breaking agreement with North Korea, but then allowed John Bolton to undermine it and that agreement was never implemented. This problem will continue to undermine the effectiveness of his presidency.

Monday, May 12, 2025

Donald Trump and Daniel (4) Broken and Discarded

Donald Trump will have a dazzling rise like a bright shining shooting star, but will fade quickly and disappear. After several fiascos resulting from the overuse of international power that he does not have, he will be broken by failure.

Donald Trump will discover that he has immense power over the federal bureaucracy (great power in the nation) but that his power to control the nations of the world has evaporated. Too many bad economic decisions and the failure of too many foolish international adventures will shatter him. Trump will be a broken man, destroyed by the shame of failure. Like Nebuchadnezzar, he will collapse at the peak of his power (Dan 4).

Trump will be pushed aside by the powerful men who surround him. His VP will probably pushed out too. He has empowered these men, but they will disempower him.

Broken Trump will be succeeded by a despicable person, who will use the power techniques that his predecessor has developed to exercise immense power and control over the American nation. People who are scared of Donald Trump will applaud his collapse and embrace his successor, but this is a mistake, because they will be deceived into welcoming their betrayer.

A despised person will stand in his place (Dan 11:21a).
The people who dislike Donald Trump will praise his successor, but they will be surprised when he lasts longer and uses the power that Donald Trump has released to develop immense executive power. He might seem to be good at first, but according to Daniel, he will be around for a long time and will do great evil.

Donald Trump will only last for a short time, but is important, because he will open the way for another ruler more successful. The second ruler will use the same methods as Donald Trump to massively expand presidential power. He will do far more harm, because his power will last much longer.

The ruler who replaces Donald Trump will be dishonest from the start.

A despised person will stand in his place, to whom they had not given the respect of the kingdom: but he will come without warning and seize the kingdom by intrigue (Dan 11:21).
When he gains his place, this ruler will not have the respect of many in his nation. Some will recognise that he will be a despicable person and assume that he will not gain power, but he will engage in intrigue and seize control of his nation.

Once he gains power, this ruler is successful against strong opposition.

The forces of the overwhelmer will be overwhelmed before him; they will be broken (Dan 11:22).
Stated literally, this verse says that "overwhelming forces will be overwhelmed". Or a deluge of forces will be deluged. There is no reference to the King of the South, so the expression "overwhelmer" could have a different more local meaning. A perceived threat to the United States at the current time is the millions of refugees from Latin America who are travelling through Mexico and sneaking across the southern border into the southern states. So many were coming that they have been "overwhelming" the border control forces. Associated with this overwhelming flood of people is a flow of illicit drugs that are destroying the youth of America.

To distract the people of his nation from the pain of his losses overseas, the despicable ruler might attack Mexico to once and for all close the border to the overwhelming flood of people who are crossing every night and the flow of drugs that are striking the heart of his nation. Daniel might be warning that Mexico will be broken when the United States invades to secure its border and overwhelming flow of people and drugs.

Daniel also explains that

A commander of the covenant will be destroyed (Dan 11:22).
The despicable ruler will destroy a key military leader in Israel.

The full series can be read on Substack.

Saturday, May 10, 2025

Donald Trump and Daniel (3) Limited Power

Donald Trump is not a good man, but he is arrogant and easily sidetracked, so he will not personally deliver as much harm as people fear. He loves power, but he does not have the wisdom needed to use it effectively. One reason he will fail is that he has vastly over-estimated his power over the nations of the world.

Trump’s big problem is that he understands presidential power, but he vastly over-estimates the power of the United States. He assumes that the nations of the world fear the military and economic power of his nation, but he does not understand that the nations no longer fear his nation’s power. He does not understand that American power is crumbling around him.

Donald Trump believes that he controls the greatest military in the world, but he forgets that the recent military efforts of his nation have ended in failure. The United States had to retreat from Afghanistan in embarrassment. The US proxy war against Russia is ending in defeat. The US efforts to subdue Yemen with a destructive bombing campaign has ended in an embarrassing failure (two F18s falling off an aircraft carrier is a sign). Too many unsuccessful military adventures and the economic boondoggles of the weapons industry have severely weakened the American military.

Donald Trump does not seem to understand that financialization and deliberate de-industrialisation by American financial leaders have massively undermined the strength of the US economy. America is no longer the great innovator. nor is it the world’s manufacturer. American industrial power has been destroyed along with many communities that depended on it. Imposing tariffs on imports will not instantly restore production in the United States. Donald Trump will not be able to restore US industrial strength, despite his many promises. A trade war may damage his perceived enemies, but it will also harm the United States.

Donald Trump has always been a bully. That worked in the business world that he came from because he could intimidate his opposition, while buying the support that he needed. He could use lawyers to do the bullying, while he pretended to be the nice guy coming to the rescue those they had beat down. Bullying might work against weaker nations, like Panama, Colombia, and perhaps even Mexico, Iran and Canada. However, when he tries to bully stronger nations like the UK, Germany, Russia and China, they will push back and he will have to make an embarrassing retreat.

Donald Trump’s attempts to bring peace in the Middle East will end in failure. Giving impunity to Israeli bullying will result in the destruction of thousands of lives. His support for Israeli bullying will undermine his credibility in the world when the ugliness of the Israeli heart is exposed. Trump will be accused of supporting and equipping a genocide in Gaza.

The blustering bully will be crippled by failure and disappointment.

Friday, May 09, 2025

Donald Trump and Daniel (2) Surprise

Many Christians are upset by the actions of Donald Trump’s presidency, but I believe that Donald Trump will burn out quickly. Unfortunately, the power he has accumulated will not disappear when moves from office, but will still be in place, waiting for a successor to pick it up.

The most dangerous thing that Donald Trump will do is show the way for a younger successor who will exercise immense executive authority to gain dictatorial power. The real danger for the nation and the world is not Donald Trump, but a successor, who will learn to use power in the same way as the Trump administration has been exercising it. His power will be greater, because he will hold it for much longer.

I have been studying Daniel 11 for several years as it seems to describe the season we are living through: the climax of government power. More detail can be found in All Whats Going On. If my interpretation of this chapter is correct, Daniel describes a strong ruler emerging in the western world following a series of tumultuous events. Donald Trump is a key person in a transition to autocratic power.

The ruler who precedes him became obsessed with the “borderlands” (Ukraine)

He will turn his attention to the coastlands and will seize many of them (Dan 11:18).
This is a good description of Joe Biden.
So he will turn his back face toward the strongholds in own land, but he will stumble and fall and not be found (Dan 11:19).
He stumbles and falls, and then disappears from the stage. This is what happened to President Biden.

Daniel describes the ruler who emerges in his place (Dan 11:20).

He stands in his place and sends an extractor of tribute for the glory of his kingdom (Dan 11:20a).
This ruler sends out a tax collector. There was no income tax in Daniel’s time, so kings raised money by levying tariffs and duties on trade and by imposing the payment of tribute on other kings. The tariffs on imports and the sanctions being imposed by the US on various nations could be a fulfilment of this prophecy.

The United States has imposed more sanctions and tariffs than any other nation. It has destroyed numerous nations using economic sanctions, including Syria, Iraq, Iran and Libya.

Daniel explains that this king engages in "trade war" for the “glory of his kingdom”. This sounds like “Make America Great Again”. Using tariffs and sanctions to restore American power points to the second term of President Donald Trump.

This transitional ruler is powerful, but Daniel explains that within a short time, he will be broken.

In a few years, he will be broken, yet not in anger or in battle (Dan 11:20b).
If this is a reference to Donald Trump, it suggests that he will have great power, but it will not last long. Daniel explains that he will rise fast, but fizzle out. He will be broken, but not by war or plague.

Many Christian leaders are concerned that Donald Trump is undermining democracy and will become a permanent dictator. The reality is that he is too old and lazy to become a dictator (wielding autocratic power is a young man’s game). I believe that he will not last long enough to become a real dictator. His administration has started with a hiss and a roar, but Trump does not have the energy to sustain it, especially when the opposition to policies builds up.

I will explain how this could happen in my next post.