$11 Trillion in US debt, the Federal Government has taken the cue that there is no need to have liquid assets when you control the printing press. In doing so, over the last decades, the perception of wealth has been superior to actual wealth... and as such, inflation of the US dollar has soared, making net wealth actually much less than mere decades prior. Standards of living are vastly improved, however, again, I submit that this is merely perception of wealth.
What is more troubling is the increased role the US government is taking in providing social programs by way of social bureaucracies. With the numbers of individuals dependent on these programs swelling, there is a simple question begin begged: What happens when the money runs out?
The old parable "Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will always be fed" comes to mind.
When the money runs out, when the system begins to shut down, you will get New Orleans circa Hurricane Katrina - where services were less than a mile away, with little "water walking", yet tens of thousands of people sat idly by yelling into the cameras and shouting into the air "WE WANT HELP"... sadly, some died as the mob idly stood by, unable and unwilling to save themselves - complete dependence on government assistance right up until the end.
When "we want help" fails to work for millions, as it failed during Katrina, there is going to be a catastrophe never before seen here in the United States. When the numbers are such that entire communities and ways of life have been established on government dependence, two things can happen when the well runs dry: One - entire communities begin to starve to death, disease overtakes the communities and they wither and die; two - they revolt and attack those who they perceive as 'hoarding' their entitled necessities.
I suppose option three is that the government gains total control of commodities as well as money, forcing government mandated crops for the "US Food Program" and government mandated occupation in support of the betterment of the nation. The full implementation of "to those based on their need from those based on their ability" - also known as the Marxist Dictum.
Regarding option one: private help, charitable foundations, and the like will step in, as they do now, to quell the hunger and aid those trained only to receive... however, the ability to sustain this level of charity will become impossible. You will surely begin to see limitless masses pining for their 'fair share' of the charity - unwilling to give back or to step aside for the next hungry mouth. Entire communities will be displaced or deceased... and it will be blamed on the inability of private charity to provide.
Regarding option two: I believe that conspiracy theorists refer to this scenario as the "race wars". Communities of inner city mobs will begin raids on the suburban area for wealth, then basics like food and water. The ethnic make-up of the cultural boundaries is clear to all, which is why the term 'race wars' is used. This civil unrest will be the final chapter in the story of the United States, as it existed as a free society.
The underlying problem continues to point toward government involvement. The establishment of sub-cultures, be they "migrant workers" or unskilled inner city welfare communities, is the horrible side effect of government social welfare programs. When the intent is to provide all for everyone, the system fails itself and the nation.
When the systems were 'sold' to the citizens of the US it was during a crisis - and remember the Obama administration taught us that no good crisis should go unused. Past crises were used to sell a "support net" intended to help folks get back on their feet... they became abused and resulted in the mess we see today - complete dependence.
In short - the money will run out... the money has run out. The continued wealth we see is perception only - the US is bankrupt and is digging faster into debt than ever before in the history of its existence. Once the money is gone, we are going to have a flood of government dependents screaming "We Want Help" - but in the end there will be ne'er an ear to listen.
Showing posts with label Karl Marx. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Karl Marx. Show all posts
Monday, May 4, 2009
Monday, July 7, 2008
Denver's Pepsi Center Not Large Enough for Obama's Head?
Barack Obama will not accept the Democratic nomination at Pepsi Center in front of the 20,000 volunteers and delegates... instead he has chosen a larger venue to offer himself to the people - INVESCO at Mile High.This move will be cause for change to city planning, state planning, and protester planning that has been in the works for some time.
But what it does is try to portray Obama as "the peoples candidate"... as in the "People's Republic of Obama"?
The acceptance speech is already going to be broadcast worldwide... what is Obama trying to show by snubbing the convention process in favor of a giant venue? His campaign's explanation is that he wants to make himself available to young folks who are new to the process...
While I would usually agree that this is a great idea, the 11th hour change to accommodate Obama's wishes is a sign of his arrogance and pompousness as he is dubbing himself Mr Inevitable... Alas, good sir... The American people are now watching you... and this intimate affair you have been having with the MSM is going to be coming to an end... The people of America will start to see your record, your habits, your confidants, and your true colors.
Hugh Hewitt, whom many of my long time readers know that I agree with rarely on Presidential Politics, has posted some great talking points regarding the True Obama. I will share some of them here, and we can begin to discuss why Obama cannot win in November.
1. He had a stumbling, bumbling close to his primary campaign, and the opening weeks of his general campaign have been marked by flip flops and lurches left. - Hillary Clinton made some of her biggest gains against Obama in the last few contests. Obama proved that he is not ready to handle a general election match-up.
2. He's hard left. - I have said it many times over, Barack Obama will implement change in America that will ensure that the United States of America becomes the United Socialist States of America.
3. He wants the marginal rate on total federal taxes, including his social security tax hike, to immediately rise at least 57% on the highest earners. Obama wants to raise taxes even in a weak economy, though this is a recipe not just for recession but worse. Obama also wants to raise taxes on dividend income and to return the death tax to its highs of eight years ago. - The top 1% of wage earners in the US already pay 50% of the total tax revenue, while the bottom 50% of wage earners pay 3% of the total revenue. The top 1% are the job creators. They are the innovative and motivated. They bear the highest burden of our society already, a burden that if it becomes too hard to bear may take them out of the game. Imagine if you earned $99 and paid $10 in taxes because you were in a lower tax bracket... That is where the middle class finds itself. Now imagine that you work overtime on the weekends to try and put your children through college, and you earn $101, putting you into a higher tax bracket... Now you pay $45 because you worked harder and earned more. It would have been more beneficial to NOT WORK and take the $89 instead of bustin' your hump to end up with $56.
4. Obama has proposed more than a trillion dollars in new spending - That is not total budget, like GW Bush's $3.1 Trillion budget he just sent to congress... it is additional spending. With no spending cuts for failed programs, no stop to earmarks, that brings the US federal budget to an unprecedented $6.1 Trillion.
5. He thinks the most liberal member of the Supreme Court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, is a great model for future Supreme Court appointments - Please see my post about the Heller v DC Supreme Court Case to see how this one would turn out.
6. Obama is not a strong friend of Israel. He spent 20 years in a church that was openly hostile to Israel, and he reversed himself on Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel after one day of criticism by Palestinians - I have posted my feelings many times regarding Israel, and their right to exist as a free country. Obama's embrace of the Muslim Countries to the extent that they regard Israel as a nuisance is the most troubling, especially to Jews who fight for life and religious freedom every day in that tiny country.
7. He supports abortion on demand, including partial birth abortion - The founders wrote in the Declaration of Independence that we were Endowed by Nature's God with certain inalienable rights, the most important was Life (as it was listed first). The Right To Life is the single most fundamental right that every being, every soul, has. It is more than just a "burden" that parents have to endure, being "punished with a baby" (Obama - "if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby")... it is a responsibility for the action of sexual intercourse, and a result that, if unwanted, should not punish the child with death! Obama is absolutely wrong and extremely left-ward on his approach to abortion in the US.
The list continues, and I will continue to work so that all 75,000 seats in that stadium are empty, or at least filled with those who know Obama's looming damage to the country and the world.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Heller Revisited - Under the Obama Court
The year is 2011.
Heller v. DC has long since been decided... Now the Supreme Court is witness to Michelle Obama v. United States - an historic case in which the First Lady of the United States has brought a federal suit against the US "on behalf of the people" to protect us from gun crimes plaguing inner cities and "polluting our society".
The case has been brought before the new faces of the Court.
John Paul Stevens retired after 35 years on the court, replaced by Associate Justice William Jefferson Clinton.
Anthony Kennedy retired after 22 years, leaving the swing vote seat open to replacement by a Ginsburg-esque radical left justice.
Antonin Scalia retired after 25 years, opening the door for the newest face of the court... another Obama appointed Ginsburg-esque justice.
The court is now comprised of 3 Conservative/Orignalist justices and 6 Liberal Marxist justices. The court's structure is the perfect setting for long lasting legacy of the Obama Presidency.
The opinion of the court falls along these lines, 6-3 in favor of Michelle Obama, stating that the intent of the founders was to provide security for the Citizens of the United States, "A security that is provided by the offices of the government and the military established to defend and protect the United States." The opinion further states that "the private ownership of firearms is a direct threat to the stability and security of the United States and the powers inherent to the offices and military of the government." The Liberal controlled Congress and Senate pass sweeping legislation calling for the upholding of the Court's decision, mandating an immediate mass-collection and destruction of all private firearms. The legislation passes into federal law after President Barack H. Obama signs the bill, with his proud wife standing immediately to his left.
On the streets of America, private citizens are instantly labelled as criminals. Scenes of violence erupt across the nation as police efforts to confiscate weapons are met with resistance.
States are forced to mobilize the national guard to aid in the efforts of disarming the populace.
As the resistance in America is crushed, the federal government, under Obama, announces a success in unifying the people of America in a crime free society.
*****
Of course, this is a fictional scene, but one that is eerily possible under a Socialist minded Marxist like Barack Obama. Barack Obama will be a political power for the state, over the individual... which is touted on his website: My.BarackObama.com.
Never before has a Leftist been so close to victory in American Executive Politics... There have been many Democrats or Center-Left leaders, like Bill Clinton, but Obama promises to lead this country with a Socialist fist... Some would classify this as hype or panic... I would suggest it is a prognostication of things to come under a Marxist leader in America - The end of Liberty... Change, indeed!
Heller v. DC has long since been decided... Now the Supreme Court is witness to Michelle Obama v. United States - an historic case in which the First Lady of the United States has brought a federal suit against the US "on behalf of the people" to protect us from gun crimes plaguing inner cities and "polluting our society".
The case has been brought before the new faces of the Court.
John Paul Stevens retired after 35 years on the court, replaced by Associate Justice William Jefferson Clinton.
Anthony Kennedy retired after 22 years, leaving the swing vote seat open to replacement by a Ginsburg-esque radical left justice.
Antonin Scalia retired after 25 years, opening the door for the newest face of the court... another Obama appointed Ginsburg-esque justice.
The court is now comprised of 3 Conservative/Orignalist justices and 6 Liberal Marxist justices. The court's structure is the perfect setting for long lasting legacy of the Obama Presidency.
The opinion of the court falls along these lines, 6-3 in favor of Michelle Obama, stating that the intent of the founders was to provide security for the Citizens of the United States, "A security that is provided by the offices of the government and the military established to defend and protect the United States." The opinion further states that "the private ownership of firearms is a direct threat to the stability and security of the United States and the powers inherent to the offices and military of the government." The Liberal controlled Congress and Senate pass sweeping legislation calling for the upholding of the Court's decision, mandating an immediate mass-collection and destruction of all private firearms. The legislation passes into federal law after President Barack H. Obama signs the bill, with his proud wife standing immediately to his left.
On the streets of America, private citizens are instantly labelled as criminals. Scenes of violence erupt across the nation as police efforts to confiscate weapons are met with resistance.
States are forced to mobilize the national guard to aid in the efforts of disarming the populace.As the resistance in America is crushed, the federal government, under Obama, announces a success in unifying the people of America in a crime free society.
*****
Of course, this is a fictional scene, but one that is eerily possible under a Socialist minded Marxist like Barack Obama. Barack Obama will be a political power for the state, over the individual... which is touted on his website: My.BarackObama.com.
This group is for self-proclaimed Marxists/Communists/Socialists for the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency. By no means is he a true Marxist, but under Karl Marx's writings we are to support the party with the best interests of the mobilization of the proletariat. Though the Democratic Socialists of America or the Communist Patty of America may have more Socialististic values, it is pointless to vote for these candidates due to the fact that there is virtually no chance they will be elected on a National level.Hat tip to The Rocky Mountain Right for the link to the Obama Page and the quote from the page.
Never before has a Leftist been so close to victory in American Executive Politics... There have been many Democrats or Center-Left leaders, like Bill Clinton, but Obama promises to lead this country with a Socialist fist... Some would classify this as hype or panic... I would suggest it is a prognostication of things to come under a Marxist leader in America - The end of Liberty... Change, indeed!
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Socialists in the Democratic Party
Just days ago I posted a blog on the dangers of an Obama Presidency, citing the Socialization of the United States, especially when it comes to energy.
Here is the proof: Democrats answer to the oil crisis is to nationalize the refineries so the government can control the flow of oil.
This is the FUNDAMENTAL CONTRAST between Republicans and Democrats in 2008. The Republican party still has ties to the far right, but very faint. The GOP has become a Political Party that would even be too liberal for the likes of John F Kennedy, should he be running for president today. However, the GOP maintains that Personal Property Rights are the fundamental basis of which rule of law and liberty are founded. The Democratic Party is hardly representative of it's name. They are Socialists, fundamentally. The very ideals that we fought through the Cold War have now come home to roost. The answer to every issue on the table is governmental control, or nationalization, of the land, industry, etc. Their belief is that the individual, or collective of individual private owners does not have the capacity to function in a way that meets societies needs, so they opt for control of those goods and services from their own offices. This is an ELITIST IDEOLOGY, that "they know better than I". It is a cancer in a free society, on every level... and now they are really showing their true colors (i hate to say it, but I told you so!)
What we need in 2008 is a rebirth of McCarthy. Someone willing to provide a list of all the members of Congress and the Senate who are outright Socialists, and point out the destruction they seek on the free United States.
Our Society is going the way of Atlas Shrugged, in which the government made it impossible for an industry to succeed with archaic laws, and when the industry could not survive, they nationalized it. Systematically the country fell to the whims of those in power... and the United States became a Socialist Hell-hole. Of course in the book the leaders of industry refused to continue to produce, and in so doing, took their knowledge of HOW to produce out of the hands of the government, leaving nothing. (a great read)
But I digress...
Every citizen of the United States needs to be made aware of the dangers that lie ahead with a Democratic Majority. There is nothing Progressive about Socialism or Communism. Public ownership / Government ownership of industry, property, and production are Marxist ideals that do not coexist with freedom. Freedom can only be achieved through individual rights, rule of law, and protection by the government of those rights... any role above these by the government is one that limits freedom.
The Democrats love to target the "Rich"... They love to tell stories about how the rich have become wealthy off the backs of the people. They have created a class warfare of blame and resentment. They want you to want what others have, and be willing to take it, if not by force, by granting them the power to take it on your behalf... WHAT YOU DO NOT REALIZE is that once they seize the property of the affluent, what protection do we, the proletarian, have?
When times are hard in America, we pick ourselves up by the boot-straps and we work through it. In the case of energy, we adapt... we evolve... we support an auto industry in favor of changing their power source from petroleum to electricity or other alternates. We support the free thinking imagination of the inventors, and rally behind great new technologies.
What we do not do is turn over all facets of life to the government, thus giving up entirely, and asking them to sort it all out for us. We are Americans. We do NOT take a back seat to our own destiny!
Take an active role. Contact your Senator or Congressman. Call the White House and leave a message for the President: We do NOT support the Socialist take-over of our refineries. We do NOT support the socialist tendencies of the Democratic party in these United States. And we will NOT support Socialist Democrats in 2008!
US Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121
White House Comments: 202-456-1111
White House Switchboard: 202-456-1414
Here is the proof: Democrats answer to the oil crisis is to nationalize the refineries so the government can control the flow of oil.This is the FUNDAMENTAL CONTRAST between Republicans and Democrats in 2008. The Republican party still has ties to the far right, but very faint. The GOP has become a Political Party that would even be too liberal for the likes of John F Kennedy, should he be running for president today. However, the GOP maintains that Personal Property Rights are the fundamental basis of which rule of law and liberty are founded. The Democratic Party is hardly representative of it's name. They are Socialists, fundamentally. The very ideals that we fought through the Cold War have now come home to roost. The answer to every issue on the table is governmental control, or nationalization, of the land, industry, etc. Their belief is that the individual, or collective of individual private owners does not have the capacity to function in a way that meets societies needs, so they opt for control of those goods and services from their own offices. This is an ELITIST IDEOLOGY, that "they know better than I". It is a cancer in a free society, on every level... and now they are really showing their true colors (i hate to say it, but I told you so!)
What we need in 2008 is a rebirth of McCarthy. Someone willing to provide a list of all the members of Congress and the Senate who are outright Socialists, and point out the destruction they seek on the free United States.
Our Society is going the way of Atlas Shrugged, in which the government made it impossible for an industry to succeed with archaic laws, and when the industry could not survive, they nationalized it. Systematically the country fell to the whims of those in power... and the United States became a Socialist Hell-hole. Of course in the book the leaders of industry refused to continue to produce, and in so doing, took their knowledge of HOW to produce out of the hands of the government, leaving nothing. (a great read)
But I digress...
Every citizen of the United States needs to be made aware of the dangers that lie ahead with a Democratic Majority. There is nothing Progressive about Socialism or Communism. Public ownership / Government ownership of industry, property, and production are Marxist ideals that do not coexist with freedom. Freedom can only be achieved through individual rights, rule of law, and protection by the government of those rights... any role above these by the government is one that limits freedom.
The Democrats love to target the "Rich"... They love to tell stories about how the rich have become wealthy off the backs of the people. They have created a class warfare of blame and resentment. They want you to want what others have, and be willing to take it, if not by force, by granting them the power to take it on your behalf... WHAT YOU DO NOT REALIZE is that once they seize the property of the affluent, what protection do we, the proletarian, have?
When times are hard in America, we pick ourselves up by the boot-straps and we work through it. In the case of energy, we adapt... we evolve... we support an auto industry in favor of changing their power source from petroleum to electricity or other alternates. We support the free thinking imagination of the inventors, and rally behind great new technologies.
What we do not do is turn over all facets of life to the government, thus giving up entirely, and asking them to sort it all out for us. We are Americans. We do NOT take a back seat to our own destiny!
Take an active role. Contact your Senator or Congressman. Call the White House and leave a message for the President: We do NOT support the Socialist take-over of our refineries. We do NOT support the socialist tendencies of the Democratic party in these United States. And we will NOT support Socialist Democrats in 2008!
US Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121
White House Comments: 202-456-1111
White House Switchboard: 202-456-1414
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Entitlement
A thought for the day: Entitlement is the enemy of liberty.
Property rights are the staple of free market, and a country of liberty. Without the ability to take ownership of property, there is no ability to freely trade in goods.
Entitlements are nothing more than the philosophy of need being equal to right... or something deserved without having earned.
So if the enemy of Liberty is a sense of entitlement, would someone please explain to me why the Government (IRS) has sent me a letter explaining how I am "ENTITLED" to a free check worth $1200? Am I really entitled to this money? What is the source? From whom did it come? Did I earn this money, and how? How do I pay it back? At what interest?
I am not entitled to free money, and to suggest that the American People are entitled to handouts from the government is little more than supporting the mentality of a welfare state.
Am I the only one who was offended by both the money and the letter?
Property rights are the staple of free market, and a country of liberty. Without the ability to take ownership of property, there is no ability to freely trade in goods.
Entitlements are nothing more than the philosophy of need being equal to right... or something deserved without having earned.
So if the enemy of Liberty is a sense of entitlement, would someone please explain to me why the Government (IRS) has sent me a letter explaining how I am "ENTITLED" to a free check worth $1200? Am I really entitled to this money? What is the source? From whom did it come? Did I earn this money, and how? How do I pay it back? At what interest?
I am not entitled to free money, and to suggest that the American People are entitled to handouts from the government is little more than supporting the mentality of a welfare state.
Am I the only one who was offended by both the money and the letter?
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Democrats Debate - Government the Answer
I was watching the Democratic debates last night, and wanted to share a few comments today.
During the first hour, the theme of the debates was "Integrity" and "Electability". Obama made reference on a few occasions that these topics were distractions, and the real discussion in the campaigns should be "the issues".
The fact that Mr. Obama doesn't seem to think that integrity is an issue MAKES it an issue!
When a candidate for president lies about being fired at and having to run for cover, but then gives a statement that she mis-remembered... well, it has the same integrity of a president asking what the actual definition of "IS" is... There needs to be a new occurrence in US politics: If a politician lies, it should be our duty to reply, "That sir (or ma'am) is a lie!"
Imagine the flashbulbs going off as they try to fix the statement on the spot... I'll tell you what, holding our elected officials accountable to their words is a great way to truly find out who the characters of substance are, versus the trash we see today.
In fact, Obama's lies are worse than Clinton's... Clinton at least knows that she is a liar... Obama believes that he is actually telling the truth. And if you believe it, it must be true... Ask Kucinich about his UFOs.
For instance, Obama should come out and say, simply, that the speech he gave in SF was meant to be heard only by those in the city. He was simply trying to tell the city folks that he believes they are living a better life for deciding to live blissfully in dense urban areas... meanwhile, he believes that those who live a rural lifestyle are bitter and angry that our lives do not amount to that of the city-folk... and as such, we cling to the bare-bone, knuckle-dragging basics of sentient beings: religion and guns. If he told the truth, THAT is what it would sound like.
Unfortunately, there is not an honest or moral bone between the two of them... IMHO.
The common theme in the second hour was that "government is not doing enough to make life better". Government is the answer. There is no way that the people can be trusted to improve their own lives... the government needs to step in and help.
I saw a great sign in front of a church last weekend, which read: God does not promise a smooth flight, just a soft landing.
That is wisdom! The trials and tribulations of day-to-day living ARE life! As people of high moral fiber, we should take the challenge of the storm and sail on, learning the lay of the land, and becoming wiser as we fail and try again.
But to be at a point where you can no longer stomach the fight, and you beg for mercy from government, you are no longer a citizen... you are a subject.
A citizen tells the government how it is going to be.
A subject is told by the government how it is.
To expect the government, an entity that is fastly becoming uncontrollable, to be the savior of the people is the suicide of liberty.
Hillary Clinton and Barry Obama both stated last night that the answer to the woes of the country is bigger government. Economic crisis - More government regulation and intervention. Fuel prices - more government regulation and intervention. Mortgage issues - more government regulation and intervention. Higher Taxes, more government social programs... rob from the rich to house, clothe, educate, feed, bathe, enrich the poor... Give to those in need from those who have the ability. The very basic principle of Socialism.
The summary of the debate: We cannot, as Conservative Americans, stand by and let one of these two Socialists step a foot inside the White House.
During the first hour, the theme of the debates was "Integrity" and "Electability". Obama made reference on a few occasions that these topics were distractions, and the real discussion in the campaigns should be "the issues".
The fact that Mr. Obama doesn't seem to think that integrity is an issue MAKES it an issue!
When a candidate for president lies about being fired at and having to run for cover, but then gives a statement that she mis-remembered... well, it has the same integrity of a president asking what the actual definition of "IS" is... There needs to be a new occurrence in US politics: If a politician lies, it should be our duty to reply, "That sir (or ma'am) is a lie!"
Imagine the flashbulbs going off as they try to fix the statement on the spot... I'll tell you what, holding our elected officials accountable to their words is a great way to truly find out who the characters of substance are, versus the trash we see today.
In fact, Obama's lies are worse than Clinton's... Clinton at least knows that she is a liar... Obama believes that he is actually telling the truth. And if you believe it, it must be true... Ask Kucinich about his UFOs.
For instance, Obama should come out and say, simply, that the speech he gave in SF was meant to be heard only by those in the city. He was simply trying to tell the city folks that he believes they are living a better life for deciding to live blissfully in dense urban areas... meanwhile, he believes that those who live a rural lifestyle are bitter and angry that our lives do not amount to that of the city-folk... and as such, we cling to the bare-bone, knuckle-dragging basics of sentient beings: religion and guns. If he told the truth, THAT is what it would sound like.
Unfortunately, there is not an honest or moral bone between the two of them... IMHO.
The common theme in the second hour was that "government is not doing enough to make life better". Government is the answer. There is no way that the people can be trusted to improve their own lives... the government needs to step in and help.
I saw a great sign in front of a church last weekend, which read: God does not promise a smooth flight, just a soft landing.
That is wisdom! The trials and tribulations of day-to-day living ARE life! As people of high moral fiber, we should take the challenge of the storm and sail on, learning the lay of the land, and becoming wiser as we fail and try again.
But to be at a point where you can no longer stomach the fight, and you beg for mercy from government, you are no longer a citizen... you are a subject.
A citizen tells the government how it is going to be.
A subject is told by the government how it is.
To expect the government, an entity that is fastly becoming uncontrollable, to be the savior of the people is the suicide of liberty.
Hillary Clinton and Barry Obama both stated last night that the answer to the woes of the country is bigger government. Economic crisis - More government regulation and intervention. Fuel prices - more government regulation and intervention. Mortgage issues - more government regulation and intervention. Higher Taxes, more government social programs... rob from the rich to house, clothe, educate, feed, bathe, enrich the poor... Give to those in need from those who have the ability. The very basic principle of Socialism.
The summary of the debate: We cannot, as Conservative Americans, stand by and let one of these two Socialists step a foot inside the White House.
Monday, March 31, 2008
USSA - The Union of Soviet Socialist Americas
While the right hand of the conservative movement fights for a more Libertarian country on the Healthcare front, the left hand of the conservative movement is cutting off the right hand by moving towards a completely socialized and over-regulated financial system. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has announced the plan of the Treasury in regards to the financial crisis... give it all to the Federal Reserve!This plan gives sweeping new powers to the Federal Reserve over the free market. This plan would give the Federal Reserve the power of "moderator" to the financial markets, and grant it power to ambiguously "step in" if it determined that there was some sort of a financial crisis. The plan also "streamlines" the institution, in a sense consolidating financial power:
Under the proposal, the Securities and Exchange Commission, which ensures the functioning of financial markets and is responsible for protecting investors, would merge with the Commodity Futures and Trading Commission, which regulates the trading of futures contracts. Meanwhile, the Office of Thrift Supervision would be folded into the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. The proposal would also establish a new federal regulator for the mortgage industry, affecting both lenders and brokers, which now follow a patchwork of state regulations. Paulson's plan includes other bold moves, including bringing previously unregulated financial entities like hedge funds and private equity firms within the reach of federal authorities and federalizing the oversight of the insurance industry.
In his closing remarks, Paulson warns of over-regulation... but this is exactly the tool that he is allowing the Fed to use!
So where do I begin on this one?
First, as I understand Paulson's strategy, is the further regulation of the market, moving us further away from a Free Market, so as to "save ourselves from ourselves"... I love the "Government can fix it" mentality! Paulson's strategy is the gateway to socialism... not that we aren't already two feet in THAT door!
Look... investing in anything is risky... especially something as unstable as real estate has been over the last decade. When banks "bet the bank" on the goodwill of folks, offering non-traditional high risk loans, they make a business decision that could provide huge profits upfront, but cause their company to collapse in the long run... this is exactly what has happened. And there is nothing that states that the US Federal Government shall bail out thy stupid! Let alone regulating PRIVATE equity firms!
What Paulson has done here is set a dangerous precedent, in that the failure of private industry is no longer going to be allowed to happen. What is going to happen instead is that the government will subsidize failing businesses to keep them open, and keep their employees working... on an indirect government salary. THIS IS THE ABSOLUTE COLAPSE OF THE FREE MARKET.This proposal is going to be sent before congress... congress, whose approval rating is in the teens, is the last line of defense against socializing the free market.
When the next generation asks "how did we let it happen?" they will look back on moments like these.
I urge you to contact your congressman, contact your senator, call the White House and the Treasury Department... e-mail them, fax them, show up on their doorsteps... Let them know that we WANT to be able to take responsibility for our own actions, we WANT the free market to fix itself, and we WANT the government to STOP regulating and subsidizing the (for now anyway) PRIVATE financial institutions... failing or not!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)