Tag Archives: economy

The Man We Need: Sins of the Father pt2

“I do want to share a few final words from one of my own mentors, a speech he once offered.

“He said, ‘we’re in the age of transition away from Keynesianism, because Keynesianism is a modified version of central economic planning and people thought we could have this modification, reject the total free market and reject total socialism, but total control through regulations and central banking is just as harmful and will bring the economy down. And that is what is happening to us today. It took a long time. We’ve lost 98% of the value of our currency since 1913 because of the Federal Reserve System. The major crisis that we need to talk about back in the 70’s coming from the loss of the last link of our dollar to gold that would lead to the economic crisis we have today. And in the last four years, believe me, people are waking up. That is why we’re getting attention on the Federal Reserve. We’re in the transition: Keynesianism doesn’t work. Socialism and Communism didn’t work. The great Austrian economist Mises predicted as early as 1912 that socialism would fail because it alters the important factor that you don’t have a pricing structure. Under Keynesianism, under the system, we have an economic pricing structure for interest rates. So that disrupts the economy. And it encourages the debt. We have a debt crisis. Not only in the United States, not just in our individual states, but worldwide. Greece is just a bare opening up of what is going to happen in many, many countries. And we’re not much better off. We’re just in better shape because the people still trust our dollar. But the transition is occurring. Something will have to replace it. That is our job as conservatives and Constitutionalists and free-market people and people who believe in property rights. We better have an alternative, because those who want to use force and power are up there, they’re in Washington and they’re anxious to go to this.

“’This is why the grassroots’ effort and making sure you send only individuals who honestly believe in something and understand the marketplace, because there will be a change and we will not be able to maintain the status quo. This debt cannot be maintained. I am convinced in economic terms that our country has been slipping for more than ten years economically: no true jobs, jobs going overseas, explosion of debt, devaluation of the currency. And with all jobs going overseas with an explosion of debt which cannot be maintained. So that time is coming; we don’t know when it will come, but I do know we have our work cut out for us. But the answers are there and that’s the great thing about it! And it’s a great answer! It’s a freedom answer! It’s sound money, it’s honest money, property rights and it’s individual liberty.’

“Do you see? Can you see? The foundation of our entire society has seen various forms of government come and go, but it was not upon government that our prosperity has been realized, but by the intelligent hard work of individuals doing what they love best, and being most free both to pursue it and reap benefit from its doing.

“Banks have raped our nation of its prosperity by watering down our money supply, saying its to stabilize us, but wouldn’t we be most stable if our savings were worth as much or more than they were when we put them in the banks? Wouldn’t that create stability? Wouldn’t that encourage us to save more for our own futures instead of depending on a government run by the banks, themselves? Run by the very people watering down your money supply? Can you see how we’re owned by those who want us in debt?

“We’re not better than plantation owners after the War Between the States, who re-enslaved Americans by debt instead of merely by chains. Do you know your history? Can you see us now?

“And so, because I cannot change US code unilaterally, I’m calling upon all the newly appointed and elected members of congress and the senate to raise your pens and cut from our hearts the poison of private banking’s control of our nation and its money supply. End this enslavement and the monopoly of our currency and economy by the Federal Reserve system. End the control of such men over the average citizen. It is time our economy was free, once more, to do what it does best — help the ambitious individual realize his or her own full potential.

“For those of you who fear the change, let me assure you that an economy has seasons — just like nature — and there will be times of plenty and times of scarcity, but when we leave it be, they are gentle rises and falls, and have great purpose in the grand scheme of healthy economies. This crashes and depressions people speak of have come in such great severity only as the bankers have worked to cause them. The more they can make it appear that a lack of control will create chaos, the more they can whisper silken words into the ears of citizens that bankers need more control.

“We have given them that control, and look where it has gotten us in past presidents … cronyism, bailouts, fraud, laundering … The list goes on.

Jefferson_ETF“I gutted congress and senate to destroy the entrenchment of interests. Now, are you willing to do what’s necessary? You who have had much less time to fall to the bribery and lobbyism of your predecessors. You who have a chance to save your country from its darkest secret since its founding more than three hundred years ago?

“This is my request to you. The bankers who rule cannot be trusted. It’s time we took that power back for the people — and only for the people. This isn’t about rebuilding our government. It’s about our people rebuilding our country in their own image, just as we did in 1788 when we ratified our U.S. Constitution.

“I’m citizen Barry Potter, and this is the last new thing I will ask of this government. End the bankers’ rule. End your own. Put the citizen back on the throne of his own destiny, his own culture, his own life. It’s not ours to dictate. It’s not our place to tell a man he’s too fat or too skinny, too sexual or too chaste, or that words are too vulgar or too religious. We are not the arbiter of man or his decisions. We are only here to protect his liberties from violations of others. We are not here to protect his feelings or sensitivities, but ensure that he is as free to fight back against a divergent culture by his own sense of persuasion as others’ culture is to him, and that none may use the coercion of government-backed morality in an attempt to homogenize all others to a singular form of living.

“We are a free people! So let the people be free! That is what truly makes us American! Not white picket fences and not policing the world! Freedom! That’s what makes us great! That’s what makes us so wonderful! Not that we tell others how to live their lives, but that we remain ever free to live our own however we wish!

“So be free. Let no senator or congressman or governor tell you you can’t. Let no banker manipulate the economy into believing more of their control is needed. Let no power threaten your freedom, and know that freedom, alone, is the single most powerful force in lifting the poor from his poverty and letting each man and woman seek destiny as they see fit.

“Thank you for watching.”

Barry watched the camera until the red light go out.

“And we’re clear, Mr. President.”

Charlie raised his hand. “Thanks Bill!”

The room sat full of those who had become his biggest supporters. Suzanne stood nearby, along with the joint chiefs, FBI director, and a number of other prefects.

“How’s Christine?” Charlie leaned over toward Suzanne.

“They’re checking in constantly, sir,” Suzanne said.

Charlie nodded. Coming on the heels of the beginning of a major congressional gutting currently in progress by much of the country, including arrests, recalls, massive damage control campaigns and some of the biggest upheaval in U.S. political history, Charlie wanted to nail the coffin with a sledgehammer.

Charlie started coughing and one of his agents walked over and handed him a fresh bottle of water.

needle-300x225“Thanks, John,” Charlie nodded, twisting off the crackling cap and taking a big gulp. “Reading takes it out of you.” As he recapped the battle, he felt his palm get wet. He paused and raised his hand, eyeing a tiny hole in the top of the plastic cap.

He froze. His eyes darted to the camera. “Bill.”


“Turn it back on.”


“Record me, now.”

“Yessir!” Bill snapped into action as Charlie began to feel his heart start beating faster.

The room froze, watching him with interest. Suzy’s eyes widened, watching Charlie’s face grow white.

“Quickly, Bill!” Charlie snapped.

Bill panicked and yelled across the room for the other technician to throw him a fresh card. The tech scrambled in the bag and tossed it to Bill, who loaded it and frowned at the camera.

Charlie’s heart began to flutter inside his chest, growing erratic. He gripped the table, his agents growing alarmed.

“Bill!” Charlie growled.

“Almost there, sir! Just five seconds!”

Charlie set the bottle next to him and put his finger on it, eyeing the room. “Stop John.”

Many twisted to find John gone, the team lead yelling for them to lock down the house and find him.

Charlie saw the red light come on as his heart suddenly seized in his chest and he forced himself to remain upright as he felt the blood drain from his head.

“I’m not a martyr. I don’t die for you. …” He pointed at the camera. “Allow no one to rule you, and live so that no one else need try. Just … control yourself. One- rule. One- hope.

“Rule thyself.”

Charlie’s eyes rolled back in his head and he slumped as the room erupted in shouting as his agents rushed for him, screaming for medical attention. The camera stayed on, watching the whole debacle.

The world would later see it broadcast on the news, around the world, and they listened, and asked: Why not a martyr?

But they watched and watched and talked and talked until finally one man raised his hand and explained it simply.

If I worry about the plank in my own eye first, then I can help the other man with his splinter, and if the man with the splinter pulls it out himself before I have to help, then neither of us need rule over other. And for those who do not believe we have a plank or a splinter, we become the few and quickly the blind as all others who have ruled themselves and their own passions are as equally prepared to keep us from attempting to rule theirs or anyone else.

Rule thyself, Charlie had said. A simple rule, one much more difficult to live than hoping to rule others so you don’t have to change. Changing yourself is the hard part, but more effective than changing others. Rule thyself, and allow no one else to rule you, and live so that no one else needs to rule you.

For Charlie, that’s all it took.

The Separation of Hobby Lobby and State


If you’ve read anything about the battle ongoing for Hobby lobby and other businesses fighting the ObamaCare contraception mandate, you’ll know it’s a rather hot battle, defined by the state’s reach into business and health.

Ask those who support ObamaCare’s contraception mandate and you’ll hear arguments of religious oppression of the corporation against its own workers. That the corporation, being a for-profit entity, has no religious say, and even for religious institutions of any kind to get out of what supporters consider best for everyone, or at least equitable for women, is wrong. That Hobby Lobby has a responsibility to their workers that extends beyond religious protests.

I have a few considerations for these arguments:

1. Our land was founded on religious freedom. Not religious freedom up until those who don’t believe in religion decide what’s best for everyone else. We’re all humans, and regardless what we choose to believe, we have the right to live our lives as we see fit. And yes, there are those who abuse that liberty, but also consider:

2. Every employment contract is signed by two voluntary entities who agree to trade capital for labor. The moment neither side remains equitable or agreeable, the other party is free to terminate the agreement. Neither side owes more to the other than agreed, and what is agreed upon is not a permanent state of affairs.

3. Employing people neither infantasizes them nor absolves them of taking care of themselves or their own futures. Dedicating your time and effort into a company does not engender the company into adopting you as children, nor gives you ground to demand ownership of the company. What’s so beautiful about this country is that if you don’t like what your company is doing, you can go start your own company, just like that company’s founder did, and outsell your predecessor.

4. The market and business is not a location separate from individuals and their belief systems. The market is location in interaction between people, even incorporated people, and people cannot be told to leave who they are and what they believe at home just because it clashes with what other people or the state say is inappropriate. The market is PEOPLE, and people believe. Some believe in God and a higher morality, some believe in no God and a subjective morality. Whatever you believe, you have to run your life and your business as you see fit.

What I see is a desire to bypass the natural system of proving your idea has the most merit by selling it to voluntary individuals and expect a superior sell to intelligent people will work, and instead just trying to force it on people because you and your friends think it’s the best idea and will use the political pendulum to make it law.

The defining difference is control and ownership.

1. Those who start and/or retain controlling stock in a company have the right to run that company in expression or non-expression of their religious beliefs. They are the ones with the inspiration, drive and dedication to turn self-employment into incorporation. Every employee has that exact same right to start their own company. If they want control of the type of company for which they work, they can go do it themselves, take their own risk, find their own investors, take out their own loans, and manage their own employees.

2. This is a voluntary society with people who voluntarily choose to work at this company or that company. Until companies begin owning people as slaves, they cannot be held responsible for the indefinite states of affairs for present employees who voluntarily offered their labor for company capital. That voluntary contract is everything.

3. Lastly, there’s no such thing as a social or otherwise implied/unspoken contract. To imply otherwise is to impose something unagreed upon something previously agreed. That’s to force something illogical upon the logical, and ignore reason for emotion. Emotion cannot be measured for legal proceedings, and shouldn’t be, as there is no universally agreeable standard by which to measure, as emotions are a subjective reaction, not an objective foundation upon which to make rational decisions.

Hobby Lobby has the right to exercise it’s beliefs in business. To say otherwise is to believe business (interaction and trade with other people) is universally governable by the state, as if the state (really just other people) can do any better than the two primary parties in any given exchange.

The Greed of Socialism

All I’ve ever heard is about the greed of capitalism. Oh, those self-serving and self-interested capitalists want nothing but to take, take and take!

I watched some of Dr. Zhivago last night and I’ve read things from Ayn Rand who lived both before, during and after the Russian revolution that brought Communism to a land of tyranny, and while I don’t advocate the monarchy, I can’t help but feel that socialists are the greediest out there. Why?

Look at your average capitalist (not corporatist, big difference). They’re probably a moderately successful small business owner who makes custom carpets for people’s homes. This man might want to become a highly successful businessman and very wealthy. He wants to have a house with many rooms on a property with many cars. But short of him outright thieving it from people, the only way he can get that wealthy is to continue to improve upon the quality of his product while increasing his customer base. Essentially, he must create a VALUE and TRADE it with willing consumers.

If he cannot make something people are willing to buy, then he will get nowhere. Therefore, he will always create something that will add to society, not detract from it. And his own highest motivation isn’t taking care of everyone around him (by obligation), but taking care of himself and his family.

Look at the heavy socialism of the Bolshevik Revolution. As the ideals of the revolution set in, people began taking what belonged to others. Roving groups moved into homes larger than they had. Nothing belonged to anyone, regardless of if that property had been earned or not. It wasn’t just the occasional businessman who turned greedy and tried taking what didn’t belong to him, it was an entire nation!

What’s the difference between the average capitalist and average socialist? The capitalist recognizes that nothing belongs to him he cannot earn or trade for without a product or labor, which means the person from whom he gets money gets something of value in return, and thus both parties benefit. The socialist believes that everything belongs to him without earning or trading for it and that no one deserves a fair trade of value before being taken from.

We can say that it’s best for everyone if we distribute property, but history proves over and over that property is always better taken cared of when the owner, such as a private party, has the most benefit and investment in its care. For everyone reading this who automatically thinks of companies dumping sewage in lakes and streams and burying toxic waste, you’re looking at the fraction of a percent bad apples of private industry. These are the 5% of all motorcyclists nationwide who ride irresponsibly, and only 1% of American motorcyclists are members of gangs, and yet everyone’s first concept of a rider is that of a leather-wearing thug.

Is industry so different? 80% of American companies are small businesses, the other 20% are large companies. Are you really going to be so deceived into thinking one out of every five companies is run by evil people. So that means one out of every five houses in your neighborhood is housed with an evil dude or duddette. But, that also means there’s a one in five chance YOU are that evil person.

Are you evil? Maybe only 1/5th evil?

Maybe, and this is only me being realistic here, there’s a tiny portion of any industry that actually is willing to abuse its own environment, and maybe our God-forsaken, trash-seeking media plays those tiny numbers up to imply that the ENTIRE sugar industry is out to make you fat, get you cancer, and steal your dog and sell it the local Chinese restaurant just to rub it in.

How about private industry is run almost entirely by your best friend? Your uncle? Your wife? How about yourself? How about you just want to do good in life? Do mistakes occur? Abuses? Sure. But in a non-corporatist system, free-market system, workers have the most freedom to go start their own businesses free of high regulations and government-incurred startup costs.

Socialism is greedy because it says “What is yours is mine because for you to gain more through skill I don’t have is evil, because I can’t do it your way or gain your wealth, therefore you owe me through my inability to do what you can do.” It says that the world is owned by everyone merely because we’re alive, and by partitioning it off, we’re cutting off our posterity from an ability to have a life.

Capitalism says that property is sacred, and that those who own it are mostly like to want to keep it at its highest quality for their own highest return. It says that what one man earns, he has first and complete rights to until he divulges himself of it, which is only to occur if something of equal or greater value is offered in exchange, thus forcing everyone to produce versus take. Socialism only ever takes and ends private innovation, the absolute hallmark of our Industrial Revolution from the 1800’s.

Take away a man’s right to benefit from his own labor, and you remove his incentive to live free. Offer him what everyone else owns, and his own worst nature will arise — greed, lethargy, avarice, suspicion, betrayal, hate … Don’t believe me? Take an honest minute and read what happened to the people who lived through the Bolshevik revolution — they went from moderately poor in peaceful union with each other to an entire country of poverty with no food, no jobs, no trust and little love. The entire community turned on itself, eating its young and casting its elderly. They turned into a pack of dogs attacking each other for scraps, all the while claiming they had the moral high point on the capitalists. America? We continued promoting our rich because those rich had come from dirt poor, and helped the dirt poor the best we could. Our nation has the richest and most well-taken cared of poor in the history of man, and that didn’t come from government programs, but from the goodness of honest private citizens who wanted to help those from whom they’d come.

If you think differently, then I don’t question everyone else, I question you, and why you think it’s necessary to bind everyone to our lowest common denominator, as if that were a moral goal, and not loosing our best and brightest to inspire us all to reach for the stars!!

"I'm Not Focused on the Poor" for good reason.

I’m no fan of Mitt Romney. I don’t like him, actually. Not because he’s Mormon or what have you, I just prefer someone who doesn’t flop on his standpoints, doesn’t follow the party line and actually wants to free Americans, not merely help one group, such as the Republicans who worship the rich or the Democrats who worship the poor.

However, I have to give him credit, and not necessarily for the reasons he gives for his own statement that he’s not focused on the poor.

Before I begin, let me post two quotes he made.

The first quote: (para) he said he’s “not concerned about the very poor” because they have an “ample safety net.”

His rebuttal to people’s protests: “I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich. They’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of America, the 90-95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling.”

First, if your focus is on the poor, giving money from the government at a time the economy has little money is helping the poor when there’s no economy for them to be helped into. The idea is that we help the poor until they can get on their feet and take care of themselves, right? However, the economy is broken. If we find better ways to improve their safety net and actually give them the tools to get out of poverty, it’s like increasing pressure to get water out of a hose while there’s a cap on the end. You’re creating activity, but you’re not actually helping them out of it.

The economy doesn’t care if you’re rich or poor, it’s just plain sick. Rampant inflation, high regulation, business-defeating measures in congress keep anyone, rich or poor, from healthy success in business. If we don’t address those issues first, such as ending the Federal Reserve’s dangerous experimentation in the economy and hold on our government, simplifying the tax system and ending tax loops, ending bureaucratic waste in federal and state governments, removing unneeded federal agencies. When you release the power within the economy from unhealthy interference, there are sellers, buyers and money for everyone.

Second, for all I disagree with Romney singling anyone out, he’s not far off track. The true lifeblood of American business IS the middle class — always has been. Our nation is 80% entrepreneurs, our economy built upon them. Without them, business stops. If you want to focus on a group, the middle class is better to focus upon than the others, because when the middle class succeeds, so does everyone else.

If your focus is not merely on helping the poor (because you can give money to the poor whether the economy is good or bad), but if you give them money and they have nowhere to aim for or improve to, you’ve served only to feed them for the day. And let me qualify that — any day you help someone through another day is GREAT, but this is about making your efforts of TEACHING them to fish worth a damn.

Thirdly, the government is a dangerous entity to ask to take care of people. Ask the Native Americans in the early 1800’s. Chinese in the late 1800’s. Japanese in the early 1900’s. Blacks in the mid 1900’s. Stop asking the entity which created our welfare state to fix our welfare state. The government didn’t create the poor, but it expanded the number of people who are poor and locks them into their poverty using the progressive tax system, which punishes low-earners from making more.

If we don’t simplify the entire system and reduce the government’s footprint, remove roadblocks to small businesses expanding, reduce the strain of taxation, and prevent the singling out of any group of people as classes, it won’t matter if we help the poor first. We’re not solving the long-term problem of a broken economy. We’ll end up giving the poor all the money the middle class needs to stay in business, effectively giving capital to people who can’t manage it from people who can, leaving only the rich as capable businessmen, and then where are we?

Help the poor? Absolutely. I personally believe people who have their own money will do the right thing and offer more to charity. I don’t believe a government is somehow more noble, especially when that same government starts wars and then leaves people to suffer for their interference (Vietnam), tests chemicals on their own people (CIA), assassinates people without trial, and no efforts to make it legal to circumvent our own bill of rights (NDAA). Let them help the poor? These careless bureaucrats?

Help the poor yourself. Find someone who needs your help and teach them to manage their money, offer them funds to improve their lifestyles and help them get out of their rut. But make no mistake, poverty is a culture, not a mere state of your budget. My own family has been on nothing, but it was temporary and we moved on and up, without a college degree.

The best way to help the poor is involve yourself in their lives, not asking a cold bureaucracy to do it for you.

Ultimately, you can’t save the economy by saving the poor. You can’t neglect them, but helping them doesn’t necessarily help everyone else. Focus on the economy so everyone benefits, THEN worry about freeing the poor to move up by their own merit.

Modernity's Case for Less Systemic Welfare

A society built on the precept that every member within it works to do their best, utilize every available resource and otherwise stand on their own two feet as capable is a society best suited to face any ill, upset or conflict, to include war, economic upheaval and natural disaster.

Imagine a pool full of people wearing those duck floatation devices and are linked, arm-in-arm. If everyone pulls their feet up, everyone sinks. But if everyone stands, or at least tries, then those who truly need the support will have a great deal more support. The whole becomes stable and everybody keeps kicking to stay above the surface.

Never in human history have the lowest members of society had such incredible access to help, and that doesn’t include any state-funded assistance. The internet and other online resources, vehicles, television and newspapers offer our poorest citizens so many venues to find and travel to work. Education is so absolutely free the government has begun paying students to attend. It’s so free that people who make it into this country illegally, have paid no taxes and don’t report their earnings to the government, receive free education.

Travel between states is not only unlimited but as cheap and easy as it has ever been. Hitchhiking can get people across the country in days – 3,000 miles! Television keeps everyone apprised of what happens around the world, radios display cultural music and local events, all free.

Thousands of charities for the poor offer skill training, financial education, beds, food and clothes for those willing to seek them out. By and large, our poor own cars, televisions, cable and satellite programming, nice clothes and often eat to their heart’s content.

There are some who actually are in severe need, cannot provide their own shelter, food or clothing, but they make up a small minority of even the poor.

Today, many people believe the only way to help the poor is by centralizing funds in a powerful government, to redistribute our earnings as a bureaucracy sees fit. This same bureaucracy can’t manage the funds it has for people who expect a return, such as social security. This same bureaucracy which can’t agree on a budget. This same bureaucracy that wants control over more than it’s constitutionally mandated, and it spends a great deal of its time consolidating power, enforcing that power, and convincing us that we need its power.

Imagine a world with less safeguards for the poor.

We the American populace believe it is our moral responsibility to help the poor. I can’t necessarily disagree with that sentiment, but to believe that an “all-knowing,” “all-seeing” government – who can’t even keep the savings insurance known as Social Security solvent, or even the Post Office – is best suited to help those who largely just won’t help themselves is an insult to intelligence and discredit to the most valuable premise this country was founded upon – EACH MAN IS CAPABLE TO HIMSELF IF KEPT FREE TO DO AS HE OUGHT.

Government’s Role

In other words, when we left the tyrannies of yesterday, only steps above medieval society, we believed that shaking off the oppression of a top-heavy government and keeping the government out of our way would go much farther toward the health, wealth and happiness of man than any other activity.

Government has never led a populace to happiness in any manner but victory in war, and if that is all government is capable of achieving, how can we base a society of freedom and peace on the premise that it must come at the death of someone else?

I’m all for picking up weapons when weapons must be raised, and even more so that all citizens should carry personal armament. It says: “I won’t take any threat on my life, my family or my property, and I will fight to protect both what belongs to me and to the community I choose to live in.”

But if we ask the government to fight that fight so we don’t have to, we surrender our personal weapons, personal responsibility and personal stake in our own lives. If we cannot defend our way of life, we cannot defend our claim to it.

If we want to end poverty, it can’t come through a hands-off approach of passing the buck to a system that promotes the ambitiously greedy (politicians) and punishes the honest hard-workers (everybody else). Stop bureaucratic welfare, which pays no real attention to the needs of the poor and only blankets everyone in a systemized program of theft that actually keeps the poor right where they are.

Peoples’ Roles

Some distrust people in general. I’ve met and had discussions with those who believe that humans are incapable of helping others enough. They don’t believe free individuals are capable of taking care of each other. They believe a government is necessary, and that due to our modern wealth and capability, we should bind ourselves to the poor through law and force our funds to their aid.

And yet, there has never been a time in the history of mankind where it was so EASY for the poor to leave their poverty.

You mean to tell me that now, more than ever, you have the right to take my money, mismanage it so badly that not only do you not offer the services you promise, but that I now owe you more money for that mismanagement, and I have no choice in how you pass on more of that money to people who either are too lazy to work or are culturally prone to taking the money and staying exactly where they are?

Those who believe people can’t be trusted to help others without force, I ask you: Who so benevolent in a government setting is honorable enough to be trusted with not just my money, but that of hundreds of millions of other people? You’re creating a system of power that allows those who WOULD steal in their personal lives to OPPRESS professionally! And yet you don’t trust individuals? Don’t you see that terrible disconnect?

“Well! Someone’s gotta help ‘em!!”

You’re absolutely right, but what about YOU!!?? YOU help them! You get off your ass and go teach them how to manage their money, improve their standing at work, help change their culture!

But make no mistake, anyone barging in to change other people will get no positive response. Our poor want our money, they don’t want to have to change themselves to see success.

The very first person who must want to help the poor is the poor themselves, and this is so difficult for soft-minded Americans to grasp, that it’s not just a shame, it’s an absolute travesty that we have allowed hard working citizens to be roped into systemic theft and redistribution.

When the poor are ready to leave their poverty, they will seek out help. It’s time we stopped enabling their ability to live without working.

The Benefits of Less Welfare

The first benefit is obvious – Destruction of self deception.

When someone who says they can’t find work and has lived off other people’s money no longer has an option, they will find work somewhere.

In this economy, the problem has never been the small businesses, entrepreneurs or hard working employees, but the government who keeps attempting to equate hard workers with non-hard workers, attempting to say they’re all the same and deserve equal outcome, despite a severe difference in effort.

People with excuses who can’t use them anymore will stop making them. They will begin seeking out their opportunities. They will begin forcing their children to stop using school as a playground and start learning so they can get out of the trouble they’re in.

Ignore today’s economy, because it was created and is still perpetuated by the same force – Government. If we can stop government from trying to “fix” the problem, it will take care of itself.

Wanna see something crazy? Check out this link: FDR’s policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate. Can you believe that? It could have been a 5-6 year depression. I heard elsewhere that FDR and Hoover combined made it 9 years longer.

NEVER believe the government can do it better than a competitive citizen who cares. They will find cheaper, faster and more effective ways to help educate the uneducated, feed the unfed and otherwise help their fellow humans. NEVER be so arrogant as to think that everyone needs control so a few can benefit.

WE ARE FREE! Freedom is the most powerful tool to give a man. Give it to him and see what he does with it! See how far slaves went when they finally found true freedom! See how far Americans went in 300 years! The fastest rising, wealthiest nation in history in only 300 years! That didn’t come from a powerful government, it came from a powerful people who believed in self reliance, independence and property.

Get the government out of the way, reduce its hold in society, stop expecting safety from a bureaucracy and watch the human spirit soar in freedom!

It's Complicated

I’m watching “The Daily Show” (with Jon Stewart) today and just marvel as the lapdogs of our Oh Glorious el Presidente (sans Margarita) chew him up. He even made a BUSH joke about Obama! He kept showing clips of Obama explaining why the government hadn’t been able to solve one particular issue or another and EVERY clip, and there were about four — the economy, Guantanamo, healthcare and the oil spill, ended with President Obama saying “it’s complicated.”

“Sean, why is there lipstick on your collar?”
“It’s complicated.” IOW “You’re too stupid to figure out on your own that I’m cheating on you.”

“Why are we out of money?”
“It’s complicated, honey.” IOW I stole it, and your’e too stupid to realize it.

“Why did you lie to me?”
“It’s complicated.” IOW You’re just really stupid.

So, to see Mr. Stewart railing Obama was a sure sign that Mr. Beck is very accurately portraying that Obama’s own party and support base are turning against him for not being as radical as they’d like him to be, and yet he’s still very radical! A report today said that Obama is issuing Presidential orders at an unprecedented pace.

This isn’t funny and it’s not complicated. What’s happening is very obvious, however hard it might be to believe: people are out to destroy our economy, make us subject and equal to other nations as equally in trouble as we are and then exercise unprecedented governmental authority to “fix” the issue.

Anyone who has studied government understands that power soaks more power. Human nature does not change based on whether a corporation and Wall Street have authority or if a central government does. The same type of crooked people will join and move up the ranks of either a capitalistic corporation abusing customers and stockholders or an authoritarian government. What’s the difference? Big business can only abuse some. Big government abuses all.

I really get passionate about people’s misconception that somehow big government is a better alternative to big business. Really? What big business has ever murdered 12 million OF ITS OWN PEOPLE? Or set about the xenocide of an entire race?

Socialism, marxism, and thus communism, national socialism and fascism have led to the deaths of millions. According to one minor study, The Soviet Union alone murdered more than 150 MILLION people in its great “social experiment.”

Tell me, please, oh great haters of capitalism, how many people have died under the hands of big business? There are deaths, to be sure, but we’re talking millions of people. Millions from Soviet Russia, millions from National Socialist Germany and millions from Communist China.

Capitalism can always be reformed, big business always torn down, and Wall Street properly regulated (a gray term, given its subjective nature, but still possible to the greatest benefit of all). But socialism can only destroy and be destroyed. Socialism never creates long-term growth, it only seeks to cap it.

It’s complicated? Then, in the words of Jon Stewart, “Simplify It!” Everyone knows that complicated issues are unstable and usually the wrong option. Complications are what happens when the right steps are not taken to solve an issue. It’s complicated for our president because BP is one of his biggest financial contributors. That means he can’t swagger in there and call them to Capitol Hill like he did the Wall Streeters.

Oh no, it’s complicated.

In other news, I finalized the planning of my next book enough to begin writing. I thought it would occupy two volumes, but I’m not so sure now. It will be 30 percent larger, though. I wonder what the third volume will be like. I hope awesome plus Wowwee, but we’ll see. It’s going to be a helluva lot of fun, though. Unlike the first book, where it starts kinda slow and builds, this jumps directly into the action and doesn’t really let up. For those of you who like complicated (time to LMAO) and convoluted story lines that build on each other, you’ll LOVE my stories. Ha!

A Pearl Harbor ad is running on my TV and I think I need some Pepto Bismol to keep the sudden urge to vomit down. Anyway, good night all. Please, remember to keep your minds open about human nature and the dangers of our world. Consider for yourself the value of freedom and how human nature affects it. Consider our modern ability for education and our lack of responsibility.

Our problems will be solved by people, not bureaucracy. So change your life. Don’t wait on anyone to change it for you. Be responsible, be innovative, take initiative.

Change the world.