Career Decisions

For quite some time (although perhaps not here), I've been commenting on how nice it would be to simply pack it all in, and run away to live as a beach-bum in Costa Rica. Live in a little hut on the shore. Sell painted sea-shells to tourists for beer money. Do some wills or trusts for American ex-patriot retirees. Maybe lead some hog-hunts into the jungle (most tropical parts of the world, including Hawaii, by the by, have bounties on wild pigs, which are tearing the hell out of the rainforests). You know what I'm talking about: settling down in a place where there are fruity drinks with little umbrellas in them, and where the local language doesn't have a word that means "work."

Lately, this is seeming like a better and better idea. First, I'm waxing sour on Las Vegas, and considering options to get out of this town. This city sort of grows on you and sours you all at the same time, although in varying degrees, and I'm in the midst of a stretch where things have not really be going badly, but where I'm seriously eyeing greener pastures elsewhere. As in "anywhere other than here."

But besides my current short-term complaints about my home, I'm also wondering about the best way to ride out the current American economic situation. Realistically speaking, economic hard times are unlikely to really affect me for the next few years, since I'm young, educated, and work in an industry that is largely unaffected by most extrinsic factors. I won't really be in trouble until the system as whole comes crashing down, and even in the worst case scenario, that should take another decade or so. (Ask me how or why if you want to hear my theories on the way things are going to go.)

But as a student of history, I think I see where things are going (even though the timeline is still uncertain), and I'm not sure I want to be a part of it. As posted before: we, as a people, have reached a point where not only are we not working hard to get the things that we want, but where we don't need to work hard to get the things we want. All we need to do is buy "on credit" and then elect a leader who will forgive the debts, and use tax money to subsidize the standard of living for the entire country. Never mind the voodoo economics, we want a leader who will give us things we haven't earned and don't deserve. Barack, for example. He will make things right, especially for the lower classes. He is going to help them live and act like higher classes, but without requiring them to do things like earn enough money to support themselves in the lifestyle they want. He is going to be elected by a populace with their heads in the sand, who don't notice just how convoluted and contradictory his plans are. I think it's hilarious, for example, how Barack rails so strongly against Federal bail-outs of business and lending institutions, while at the same time promising lower-income Americans that they will be able to keep the houses they bought with loans (from those failing institutions) that they shouldn't have received and have now defaulted on.

I'm not saying that the situation would be a whole lot rosier with McCain at the helm. (As a brief aside, it is truly staggering the way the recent elections have gone. Last time around, the incumbent was George W. Dumb as a post. Proven liar. Total douchebag. Incapable of intelligent leadership, much less effective leadership. If ever there was a winnable election for the Democrats, that was it. And who was the best the Democrats could come up with? John Kerry. Talk about dropping the fucking ball. Now turning to this year. The Democratic candidate is a crusading black man, with no political experience or connections, and highly questionable social ties. This is right up there with running against George W as a winnable election! And who is the best that the Republicans could come up with as an alternative? John McCain. God save us, because it's clear that no one else is going to.) But at least McCain's economic plans theoretically include the idea that people need to stop living beyond their means, and thus does not require the remainder of the taxpaying workforce to underwrite the checks guaranteeing healthcare and standards of living for other people. His theoretical selling point is: "If you work hard and be successful, you will keep what you earn, rather than paying it all in taxes." While this is a good message and a viable plan, it's not nearly as seductive as: "Regardless of how hard you work, I will guarantee your lifestyle, and someone else will end up paying for things I will give to you."

Which brings me back to Costa Rica. I could easily slide by in my current situation, until people come to their senses and fix the economy, or until (and this is a more likely situation) they are forced to rebuild a new economy on the ashes of the current banking and and finance system. It'll be fun to watch, and even given a global meltdown, I'm well prepared, in good shape, and already have ideas for several cottage industries that I can operate to generate trade goods. But I'm not sure I want to participate in what is increasingly becoming a socialist system. I'd never turn into Ragnar Danneskjold, and I'm not in a position to be a Francisco D'Anconia, although he is the character I most closely empathize with. I don't know if I'd enjoy pulling a John Galt. But all that notwithstanding, I'm sure that I don't want to be Hank Rearden, beating back the tide, working to keep upright a system that considers you a monster BECAUSE OF YOUR SUCCESS AND INDUSTRY THAT CARRIES THE SYSTEM ALONG WITH IT. I suspect that a great many successful people are thinking this, and making plans to jump ship to an economy where they will be more appreciated. Don't for a second think it's a conicidence that major multinational corporations are moving more and more operations overseas.

I honestly believe that things are going to continue to get worse economically, not because of financial pressures, but because of the unreasonable expectations and desires of the general populace, turned into political/economic reality by their voting habits. There will be some rebounds and some surges as the economy rolls along, but generally speaking, people have become unreasonable, and reason cannot prevail over unreason until the unreasonable perish. Barring a drastic change in the mindset of the average American, we are going to go the way of Communist Russia: shortages of everything, because people consume more than they generate, and where politicians, rather than rewarding and encouraging personal and industrial growth, see such growth as something to loot to continue providing goods and services to people who have not earned them.

I don't want to play, and if there is any sort of meltdown or revolution (which will be a while in coming), I'd prefer to be outside the social blast radius of that, preferably with a cold beer in my hand. Have I mentioned that I have my eye on Costa Rica? I'm thinking that besides the weight of it's own unreasonability, America is going to suffer the problem previously faced by other nations: the best and brightest are going to flee to a place where they can benefit from their own success, rather than having their success appropriated for "the greater good." Maybe by leaving now, I can beat the rush. And once other people catch up, they are going to need someone to sell them painted seashells, take them hog-hunting, and draft their wills and trusts.