bu·reauc·ra·cy

bu·reauc·ra·cy /byo͝oˈräkrəsē/

noun

1. a system of government in which most of the important decisions are made by state officials rather than by elected representatives.
2. what the United States have become.

How to Argue like a Leftist

The Left uses a convenient method to prove a point. First, take the facts, then remove any data which contradicts your claim and provide what is "Left". Here are some examples of how this is done.

Example 1: Budget Spending

Leftist Premise: Defense spending is the biggest part of the Federal Budget.  

They will present a budget chart that looks like this to support their premise...

Leftist Conclusion: Clearly, Pentagon spending is more than half of our budget spending. Therefore my argument is valid and anything that follows it is also true, such as...

• That's too much to spend on defence
• Military contractors are overpaid
• We don't need a big military
• We are an unethical global hegemony
• We're racist

It's all perfectly logical, right?

No, it is built on a foundation of bull and the substance of their argument drops in quality from there on. Some of their conclusions may have merit, but by using deceptive evidence they errode the value of their own argument.

The graphic is not the "Federal Budget", it's only the "Discretionary Spending" portion of the Federal Budget. The full budget looks like this...

Defense spending drops to a distant third place at 16% of total spending after Social Security with 33% of total spending and running a close second is Medicare at 27% of total spending.

Consider for a moment what this means,

• 60% of all Federal spending does nothing except rob Peter to pay Paul. That is the vast majority of "work" that our Federal government does.

• This activity produces no real wealth it merely transfers ownership of wealth while taking a substantial cut for overhead costs.

• These programs have no actual accounts or deposits for the beneficiaries. They are both effectively Ponzi schemes.

• Neither Social Security or Medicare are mentioned in the Constitution, while a Common Defense (the military) is specifically mentioned.

So, the Constitutionally mandated military has taken a back seat to some creative financial products that are not mentioned in the Constitution. Weird, right?

It's not that I am against a social safety net or senior citizens. I realize they worked hard all their lives for their Social Security benefits. The problem is the architecture of the system. We pay it in reverse. We should be "investing" for the future, rather than paying off the past. This allows small sums regularly invested over a couple decades to grow into a sizable sum, and the investor can retire on the principle plus interest.

Social Security takes money from worker's checks and pays that money directly to beneficiaries. There is no "investment", nothing to grow, and no principle for interest to accrue upon, instead we are just performing account swaps. As long as the workforce is growing at a healthy pace, account swaps work fine. Unfortunately, we have a stagnant work force and a growing number of increasingly compensated beneficiaries. That is unsustainable.

I'm not for punishing grandma and grandpa. I'm against fraud, and that is what the Leftist Budget Spending argument is based upon. Any system that requires constant rescue is not financially sound. The Social Security architecture must be changed in a fundamental way to address its structural deficiency. Adjusting this requirement or tweaking that benefit only prolongs the systemic failure and allows the resulting damage to grow exponentially.

Example 2: The Clinton Budget Surplus

Leftist Premise: Bill Clinton produced a budget surplus.

Speaking of fraud, here is another accounting irregularity. How many times do you have to repeat a lie before it becomes true? Infinity + 1, but you can make a bunch of wishful thinking people believe it's true way before you reach that critical mass.

Simply follow this recipe...


First, propose that there is going to be a surplus

Second, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat,  repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat,  repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat...

Third, claim there was a surplus. Even a decade later...

Repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat...Draw it in a chart! Or two, or three hundred...

As long as the chart includes a surplus, then there had to be one! Yes, sirree. There had to be a surplus. Liars can figure, but charts can't lie!

Repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat...

Leftist Conclusion: The "investments" (Pronounced: spending) and "cuts" (Pronounced: reduced increases) that Bill Clinton succeeded in placing in the budget did what no President had accomplished in decades.

In truth (the untarnished variety), a budget surplus" should (theoretically) produce a REDUCTION in national debt, just as the inverse a "budget deficit" produces an INCREASE in the national debt. This is fairly basic arithmetic. If the surplus fails to REDUCE the national debt, I argue that the surplus is imaginary, accounting hocus-pocus, or just damn good propaganda.

If we are shoveling more debt on our unborn children many generations hence, then a surplus is nothing to brag about and it certainly is not a surplus of anything but all-natural organic bovine produced fertilizer.

So, let's take a look at the effects of the Clinton Surplus....

Ta-Da! No budget surplus. None at all. The "surplus" is accounting flim+flam=fertilizer. For an explanation of how the equation worked out to be flim/flam= (half) truth, see Bill Clinton says his administration paid down the debt.

Example 3: Right Wingers are Sociopaths

Leftist Premise: Those espousing Right wing ideas are murderous neo-nazis, while the Left is the abode of loving, maternal farm folk and working class heroes. 

Look at the death toll results for Left wing dictatorships vs. Right wing dictatorships in the Western hemisphere the Left has a much lower body count. (Paraphrased)

- Claim made by Thom Hartmann on his RT show The Big Picture

Okay, Thom, you have me there! You are absolutely correct. No doubt about it, the facts are behind you on the claim that Leftist dictators have killed far less than Right wing dictators in the Western hemisphere. You win!

However, when we remove your "Western hemisphere" filter and look at THE REAL BIG PICTURE rather than what is left, you're full of all-natural organic bovine produced fertilizer...

When we look at the BIG PICTURE, Right wing dictators are monsters following in the footsteps of Elmo!

But now for the only question that I have LEFT, what kind of asshole justifies any dictators and calls himself a patriotic American, Tomm? 

Okay, she's acting like a dictator but that's as reprehensible as you playing apologist for one. You and Nancy Pelosi suck, Tomm, and here is why...

Left wing, Right wing, East wing, Wingding, or Chicken wing, we should tolerate no dictators! We're Americans, Tomm! We believe in Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness! Not the Nancy Pelosi Nanny State, Equality of Outcome, and Universal Healthcare. 

Oops! I forgot that this is How to Argue like a Lefty, not with a Lefty. Anyways, that's how you do both.

Next: How to Argue like a Right Winger

(Because they suck too!)

Politics Reflects Comedy

Now we have a choice!

Just Another Conspiracy Theory (JACT!)

.

Think it through 

My Idea of a Congressional Retirement Plan!

Truth in Advertising

On the Rights of Mankind

Our nation's Founders set down principles of the Rights of Mankind which they described as "self-evident" or as Merriam-Webster defines the term clearly true and requiring no proof or explanation. Yet, today we have a difficult time asserting a single principle of the Rights of Mankind which isn't quickly whittled away by well developed counterpoints, diluted by qualification or exception, or laughed off as antiquated. We are left bereft of self-evident principles regarding our Rights. This is exactly what the Framers and Founders feared. This is why they took so much time, risked much personal wealth, and their lives along with their families well-being. It seems a long time ago, and the patina of time adds a mythical color to our history. It seems more fable than fact. That allows us the opportunity to minimize the risks that were taken in order that we might fully possess those self-evident Rights which come directly from God without intermediary or interpreter.

God > People > Government

This was the flow chart for power, authority, and sovereignty which the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights lays out. In by much as God made people and holds sovereign power over them, so people made government and hold sovereign power over it. The Founders used the phrase, "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,.."
Note that the Rights pre-exist the formation of government. The government is only a tool for securing, or making safe, these Rights.

Former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt
with the UN Declaration of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted and proclaimed on 10 December 1948, by the General Assembly of the United Nations makes no claim to such a hierarchy of power. Instead, the flow chart of power, authority, and sovereignty looks like this...

Government > People > God

Article 8 states, "Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law."

President Nixon said, "When the President does it , that means that it is not illegal." [1]

The monarch our nation's Founders rebelled against, King George III said, "I wish nothing but good; therefore, everyone who does not agree with me is a traitor and a scoundrel." [2]

Herein lays the problem with the type of "rights" stated in the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They are not Rights but privileges which originate from the government by Constitution or by law. One moment one may have a Right, and a stroke of the pen later they have it not.

Rather than a touchstone of inherent Rights bestowed by God as the Ultimate, Eternal, and Unchanging Law Giver upon individuals the Declaration constitutes a non-binding resolution of feel good language about privileges we may, or may not, be afforded to possess depending upon what manner of government holds sway over our heads.

We err in believing that governments are lasting institutions. The most fortunate government lasts but a few centuries before they collapse under their own bureaucratic weight or are swallowed by another government with an appetite control problem. What remains in the rubble are the people who imagined the fiction they called government to be a thing of permanence. If Rights are derived from government by law or constitution, then how can individuals posses them without government? Are we to assume that by the establishment of government we thereby create tangible Rights as a result of a new fiction or are the Rights of mankind endowed by a higher permanent Authority?

One of these paradigms anchors the Rights of mankind in a permanent and unchanging monolith, the other is built on ever shifting sand, ebbing and flowing with whatever winds prevail for the moment. One elevates humanity to the pinnacle of Creation and the other reduces human beings to the law of the jungle. One appoints us with onerous responsibility for each other and all else in Creation, the other only requires that we eat and propagate. One of these imparts that we are our brother's keeper, the other justifies that we may be our brother's murderer. One of these emulates the Nature of God, and the other represents the school of the Serpent and man. One walks in the Light of Truth, the other clings to shadow and deception.

Our nation signing this Declaration would indicate a paradigm shift away from the Natural Rights of God and the Sovereignty of God towards the synthetic privileges of tyrants and the rule of men. Subtle deceptions are the mark of the serpent and this is that. The document is pleasing to the eye, its text emits a fragrant aroma, but its taste is bitter and its succour is death.

This should never be in our future.

1.http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2007/sep/07/greatinterviews1

2. Saratoga: Turning Point of America's Revolutionary War. Henry Holt and Company, Inc. p. 65. ISBN 0-8050-4681-X.

A Desert of Extremes

Terrorism and Islamic extremists have become a staple in the nightly news, White House sound bites, and newspaper headlines. We always seem to be just about there with putting these handful of nutty Jihadis out of business permanently. Just about there. Any time now. Almost done, and then the lull.

Massive explosions shook downtown Someplace, Somewhere. The Allah Al-Akbar Waka-Muslim game starts all over again. New strategies, new weapons deals, and a new "moderate" Muslim ally we can count on to quell the oddly Al-Queda like junior varsity extremists cadre. It's Groundhog Day in or around the Fertile Crescent, the birthplace of our misguided perceptions.

America took up the banner of being the Arsenal of Democracy after World War II. In truth, we manufactured the banner, staff, and the occupation all on our own. However, we did not live up to our lofty job title because we sucked so bad at the mission statement. We jumped between the sheets with every two-bit thug with a national check book at his disposal. If there wasn't one, we'd depose the democraticly elected  LEFTIST government and install one we found to be more "democratic and freedom oriented", or whatever catch phrase covered our covert intentions.

We pay for the sins of our ancestors, sometimes immediate ancestors, or elected office predecessors. We don't always live up to our own expectations.

Moderate Islam is portrayed as a religion of peace, tolerance, and is accredited with giving us numerals we can easily multiply. Oprah gave it a thumbs up and so does every politician and U.S. Government, Corp. compensated public relations speaker. Yea Allah!

But don't you draw a cartoon of peace be upon him Muhammad or these peaceful, tolerant, numerate devotees will #%$ing kill you! Kill you at the market or car bomb you at the disco. Yea Allah!

The First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Does this Right cover any and all actions of Religion? No! For instance, some religions may call for human sacrifice and such exercise is not covered under the "free exercise thereof" clause. Yet, the faithful of Islam are called by their prophet, the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad, to do precisely this kind of exercise in the practice of Islam (Arabic for "submission").

Does this Right cover political action, sedition, and economic subversion? Obviously not. However, these things are part and parcel within the practice of Islam. The Islamic republic is the model of what Islam seeks to achieve world wide. It is called Dar al-Islam, and that is the intended goal of Muslims. The world in submission.

Individuals may disagree on how to implement and achieve Dar al-Islam, but make no mistake, this is the ultimate goal of a faithful Muslim. The wishy washy Muslims will simply sit by and let it happen.

Painting Islam as just another religion of peace is a disservice to understanding the threat that our Constitution, our nation, and our beliefs face. It's like fighting Communism while claiming Communism is great. Yea Communism!

There is apparently no shortage of " Islamic extremists", because Islam is extreme. While one hand calls for tolerance and peace the other supports Jihad, and we seek to support the "moderates" in this desert of the extreme. Islam in both theory and practice calls for the subjugation of all non-Muslim believers.This constitutes a call to arms among Muslims who practice what their prophet preached and their illah (god) commands. There is no middle ground for the moderates we hear so much about to occupy. The Koranic landscape allows for only dominance or submission.

The all-encompassing nature of Sharia law reveals the true nature of Islam as a political, judicial, and economic ideology wrapped in a viel (perhaps "burka, is a more appropriate analogy) of religion.

Are Muslims evil? No, they are being misled, kept ignorant of the caustic nature of Islam, and we should be reaching out to them. This is a difficult task since as a part of the Islamic ideology the adherent is warned never to question or examine their faith and conversion (apostasy) is punishable by death.

Yea Constitution!

Fuck it! I'm Going Shopping.

Chart includes all forms of suicide attacks

The reports of suicide bombers in the Middle East are inaccurate. Every one of these news stories is a bold-faced lie. They are fabricated to mislead and confuse, to present a fictional storyline based upon a false premise. There has not been a single intentional suicide bombing anywhere in the Middle East as a result of Islamic fundamentalists acting alone or in concert with others of like mind. Not one.

Suicide  noun /ˈsu·əˌsɑɪd/
the act or an instance of taking one's own life voluntarily and intentionally especially by a person of years of discretion and of sound mind. Merriam-Webster

The purpose and intent of suicide is to end one's own life, this DOES NOT include other unwilling participants to end their lives. As I said, There has not been a single intentional suicide bombing anywhere in the Middle East. Not one.

Murder noun  /ˈmər-dər/
the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought  Merriam-Webster

Their intent is murder, cold blooded, unfeeling, inhuman murder. It is the premeditated murder of anyone and everyone regardless of age, political persuasion, religious beliefs, innocence, or saintly intentions, all die in a volcanic blast of shrapnel and fire. The victims of this ultimate form of violence one human can commit upon another are done no justice when they are reduced to a body count.

What we hear reported as news is,

"A suicide bomber attack in Rumalah today killed FOUR, the bomber is suspected to be affiliated with Islamic (whatever) and the suicide bombing came as a reprisal against (blah-blah-blah)". 

Nothing can possibility justify this insane murderer's action! No thing!

What should have been reported is,

"A mother and her two young children were murdered along with the father of two honor students by a psychopath who brought a bomb into a peaceful market in Rumalah and then murdered them as they shopped for their suppers. Our thoughts are with the families of the victims in this difficult time."

That is what matters, not what motivated the murderer or those who bear such contempt for human life or any life. If the murderer had walked into a zoo and took out a family of penguins there would be world-wide moral outrage. Instead, the story becomes a ten minute fluff piece on how to paint murder as "martyrdom".

Martyr noun /märdər/  

a person who is killed because of their religious or other beliefs (Merriam Webster)

The martyrs are the victims, NOT the perpetrators! Perhaps, we in the West are as morally wrong as the perpetrator when we so casually accept that wandering into a crowded venue with explosives strapped to one's chest and blowing to kingdom come as many human beings as you can conveniently fit into your blast radius as a suicide!

I posit if such a flagrant and blatant inaccuracy of fact goes unnoticed, unquestioned, and uncorrected for years in the reporting of news, then we cannot be informed, educated, or aware enough to run a republic. Not that we would be able to discern the specific nature of our deficit. We would remain blissfully unaware of the down-side of republic which imparts, "We have no one to blame but ourselves."

We might be inclined to settle for an exciting brawl in the (political) arena, the stuff of good politics a Roman plebeian would revel in. Distracted by bread and circuses, free health care, victories on distant battlefields, plentiful entertainment, and generationally deferred taxes life is good! The world is our empire and we are too big to fail or fall. With all this and anything else we desire why should we concern ourselves with the facts when we can't discern it from fiction.

On my way home this evening I'll be tossing a brick through a jewelry store window and taking what I please. This should be reported as, "shopping".

We are Not this Stupid

Using recreational drugs can kill you.

Maintaining a diet high in cholesterol can kill you.

Getting involved with gangs can kill you.

Using electrical items in the bath can kill you.

Running your car in a garage can kill you.

Ignoring inclement weather can kill you.

Texting while driving can kill you.

Leaving the toilet seat up for the wife can ... 


Well, OK, that may be stretching the truth a fractionation, but I expect that none of these potential killers come as remarkable revelations to you. 

Now, we could engage in an intelligent discussion about these hazards, however at some point in the near future we will have exhausted all there is to say. We understand the concepts and further illustration, elucidation, or contemplation of the inherent dangers they pose are fairly remedial. 

So, let's not waste time on posting the obvious dangers to your life, let's address the dangers that the gross stupidity of believing and therefore participating in a corrupt political system pose.

We're well on our way to having eight years of the man who promised, "Change we could believe in" and "Hope", remember that? 

How's your faith now? Do you even recall what it was you were hoping for? 

You got the change, so you can't complain about that. What changed was the occupant of the best maintained public housing unit,  the White House. Other than that, the policies of Bush II went on unabated. Bailouts, wars on stuff that scares us, military adventures in places we don't understand (Obama took this one to new heights) , and drone wars where we can deal out death with the bravery of being out of range. 

I don't mean to be a cynic, I just am one... due to many years of rigorous training in the political arena. I watched promising, idealistic candidates turn to sycophantic political hacks after a few sizable campaign contributors slipped an envelope into their hand while whispering into their ear. 

How do you think corporations became persons with the right to make unlimited contributions to their favored candidate?  That was a Supreme Court decision, and the lifetime appointed Justices are supposedly the least influenced by politics! 

You could just as easily ask yourself,  "How did Julius Gaius Caesar get elected dictator for life by the Roman Senate? "

It seems the only viable answer is, We are dumb. Selectively, generally,  communally, individually, randomly,  categorically, eternally, and terminally dumb. Zappa had it right...

Still I wonder, aren't we the same species that decided making fire and spear was preferable to being nutrition for others? Didn't we invent writing, pharmacopia, the wheel, philosophy, the calculus, and strip clubs (I'm only counting the ones that serve booze as genuine here)? 

There are times when I am unapologetically and completely fucking dazzled by the brilliance of our  species. But then the flicker of light fades away and we sit there season after horrific season and watch the Kardashians! 

I want to methodically go from home to home and commandeer every human cerebellum and give it to a phylum that would really appreciate higher consciousness, like mollusks or maybe nudibranch. They would love that shit... Holy shit, look at all these tentacles! I'd make Mozart sound like a novice on a fucking Playschool xylophone.

But instead, humans deliberate and conclude, "I'll think I'll vote for Obama because he has "Hope", and then I'll watch the fricken' Kardashians until I projectile vomit blood and feces!"

That is why I'm a realist, you may call it cynical, but may I remind you about the Obama Hope thing? How about the Clinton mandate for change?

George Bush, the Elder didn't bother offering anything. He just wanted to sit in the Big Boy chair while serving the same horse droppings to the American public with a parsley garnish. It helps keep your breath fresh after gorging yourself on political bandwagon full of road apples.

Then Reagan, remember that senile old man who lost a vital organ every time we had a national crisis? Seriously, the news cap would say,

Trouble with Russian nukes, and President Reagan has gall bladder surgery.
-OR-
Kadaffi threatens Mediterranean sea lanes and  President at Bethesda for colon resection.

While Ronnie didn't have all his innards,  he did have this..

 

Can you fucking believe it???

Hope and Change!

That's why I say,

"Don't vote, you're consenting to an illusion of choice; Coke or Pepsi, McDonald's or Burger King, Budweiser or Coors, Bank America or Chase, Safeway or QFC, Republicrat or Demopublican. Take your pick and don't spare the parsley."

Drowning in Debt

Would you consider it over the top to call our government's handling of our national finances “Psychotic”? If not psychotic, then what shall we call it? Would “denial” be a more palatable term? Perhaps we could label it an “addiction” making them less accountable for their actions? However you choose to label it, we're a country that's in so deep in debt that we have reverted to simply pretending it doesn't exist, or used unsound accounting to convinced ourselves that our debt doesn't matter. More or less we have adopted a "grown-up" way of pulling the blanket over our head to hide from the monster lurking in the closet.


Liberals in this country, for the most part, will admit that we are running up “unsustainable” deficits. Yet, these same liberals adamantly oppose any and all serious efforts to do anything about it. If a private fiduciary did the same with a client's funds, we would call this a breach of ethical behavior and failure in their due diligence obligation, making the offending fiduciary liable for criminal and civil charges in a court of law. Among the general public, once again you'll find plenty of people who admit that this nation has a huge problem. Yet, when you leave generalities, get down to specifics, and start looking for programs to cut, then suddenly everyone gets nervous and says, “never mind.” At the other end of the perceived political spectrum, Conservatives claim a devotion to fiscal responsibility, but when given the opportunity to demonstrate their self discipline they fair no better than the Liberals. Regardless of what others may decide to call it, I will call it what it is, "treason."[1]

This fiscal foolishness is a natural outgrowth of ladling out public funds to special interests. There is so much collective money that few people feel or appreciate it even when billions are saved. Yet, if we yank even a few million away from special interest groups like PBS, Planned Parenthood, or the unions, they squeal like pigs that are about to accidentally be put in the wolves pen at the zoo.

In the face of that, people have to realize that this country is on pace to go bankrupt — and it could happen relatively soon if we don't start taking serious steps to control our spending. Mike Pence thinks we could be just ten to fifteen years away. Tom Coburn is less optimistic and thinks it could happen in as little as five years. If that happens, we’re not a tiny country like Greece — we’re the biggest economy in the world. That means there’s no cavalry coming to pay our bills for us because we ARE (or were) the cavalry.

What happens then? Well, we don’t know for sure, but we can make some educated guesses about what COULD happen and how it will impact YOUR life.

1. Your life savings will evaporate. Inflation is a fact of life. Thomas Sowell has noted, “As of 1998, a $100 bill would not buy as much as a $20 bill would buy in the 1960′s.” That’s under normal circumstances. However, the thing governments have traditionally done when they simply can’t pay their debts is print more money. The problem with this is the further you expand the money supply, the less the money you already have on hand is worth. This can wipe out the savings of a lifetime in a relatively short period. Imagine spending billions of dollars just to buy a loaf of bread. Sound far-fetched? Well, guess what? That has happened in the Weimar Republic, which was crushed under debts from WWI and decided to pay it off by printing more money. It could happen here, too, and all the money you’ve scrimped and saved could become worthless in a short order.

2. Your taxes will skyrocket. We've been conned into thinking that we can fund a massive government on the backs of the rich. This is simply not so. It’s not working today and it’s not going to happen in the future. We cannot tax the rich enough to pay off our debt or even enough to keep the government going long-term. Even if we could, the rich have the resources to flee the country for greener pastures if they're being taxed into oblivion. The middle class? Not so much. What that means is the more desperate the government gets, the more the average American is going to be hammered with new taxes. How much more of your income can you afford to send overseas to pay China for the money they've loaned us to keep PBS, Planned Parenthood, and the National Endowment of the Arts going? What about if the country goes bankrupt and your income tax rate shoots up to fifty percent? How are you going to pay your mortgage? How are you going to feed your kids? When the government runs out of cash and it can’t borrow any more money, then it will start leveling massive taxes on the American people.

3. Your life will be brutal. If the government goes bankrupt, you'll have an extremely angry, confused, and frustrated populace that has little faith in its leaders — combined with a horrific economy and a reduced ability of the government to keep order. Under those circumstances, widespread rioting and violent crime seem entirely plausible. When Argentina had its crisis, violence went up 142% and “young men began looting supermarkets.” Here’s some of what happened during the German hyperinflation of the currency in Weimar Republic after it started printing money night and day,

“The flight from currency that had begun with the buying of diamonds, gold, country houses, and antiques now extended to minor and almost useless items — bric-a-brac, soap, hairpins. The law-abiding country crumbled into petty thievery. Copper pipes and brass armatures weren't safe. Gasoline was siphoned from cars. People bought things they didn't need and used them to barter — a pair of shoes for a shirt, some crockery for coffee. Berlin had a “witches’ Sabbath” atmosphere. Prostitutes of both sexes roamed the streets. Cocaine was the fashionable drug.”

4. Your government checks, housing, food stamps, and health-care will disappear. Contrary to what most people believe, Medicare, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and Social Security are paid out of the same fund that pays for everything else. In other words, if the government goes bankrupt, there is no money in any lock-box set aside to pay for these programs. So, if you're receiving Social Security, , Medicare, welfare, food stamps, or any other similar programs, those checks could stop or be slashed down to nothing. That seems unthinkable to people, but if the government doesn't have any money, then it can't pay it out to people. As they say, “You can't get blood out of a turnip.”

5. You will be very poor. If taxes and inflation escalate dramatically, both of which are very likely if we go bankrupt, economic activity will slow to a crawl and we'll go into a depression. We're not talking about a “This is the worst economy since the Depression” situation that we hear every time there's a mild downturn in the economy; we're talking about a REAL depression. Established and well managed businesses will fail in record numbers, the stock market will topple, unemployment will soar to heights not seen since the thirties, and the government will be too concerned with maintaining its own power to be concerned with your needs. 

If that happens in a country like America, where people have been so prosperous for so long, it’s going to produce utter misery. It’s not a lot of fun to be poor under the best of circumstances, but it’s much worse to go from having a comfortable life with a bright future to stealing vegetables or a crust of bread to eat and wondering how you’re going to keep warm while homeless in the winter.

I know what you're thinking, "it couldn't happen here in the richest country in the world", but this only displays how ill-informed you are, when one does the real accounting (assets minus liabilities) to arrive at net worth, we are far from the richest country in the world...

US Total Household Value (Home Equity + Stock Value): $48.8 trillion
US Social Security, Medicare, and Prescription Liabilities (Does not include National Debt): -$119 trillion


US Net Worth: -70.2 trillion





Footnotes:

[1]  “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” U. S. Constitution, Art III. My justification for calling their failure to address the debt issue is that by selling our debt to foreign powers, namely China, they are handing immense authority over our currency, property, and economy over to their whim.  

The Politics of Unintended Consequences

Who could shoot down a great idea based on sound research and motivated by the best of intentions?








If the idea crept out of the incestuous swamp we call Washington, I would summarily execute that idea. No blindfold, no last cigarette, no drum roll, as fast as they could foment new ideas; I would gun them down. 

Wait, I know what you're thinking...

"I just hate all government so it stands to reason I would hate any idea that came from government officials." 

I understand why you might feel that way, but my judgment is not based on knee-jerk emotional reactions or some visceral reflex. In truth, I have a great deal of respect for government so long as the government has a great deal of respect for the Constitution, and not a second longer. You see as long as the government respects the Constitution it is bound by the ideals it embodies. The foremost of which is, the government must respect my person, my faith, my privacy, my property, my liberty, and yours as well. When one takes the time for thoughtful deliberation rather than flying off on some rash tangent because it feels good at the moment it is a sign of wisdom. The virtue of wisdom, like all other virtues, are nearly extinct in Washington.


Unintended consequences are the political equivalent of Sir Isaac Newton's third law of motion, which states “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction”. 

1.      The Treaty of Versailles was not supposed to incite the German people to into provoking another world war, but it did.

2.      The “Great Society” programs were not intended to increase out-of-wedlock births and broken families, but it has.

3.      Extended unemployment benefits were not meant to discourage employment searches or dissuade entrepreneurship, but it has.

4.      Guaranteeing the solvency of the banks was not meant to make them more reckless in their lending and investing practices, but it has.

5.      Social Security and Medicare was not meant to nearly eliminate personal planning for retirement, but it has.

6.      Easy credit loans were not intended to create massive foreclosures, destroying families, and their finances, but it did.

7.      Student Loans were not intended to send tuition costs skyrocketing while trapping graduates in a crushing debt load which threatens to destroy their careers before they begin, but they did.

8.      Farm Subsidies were not intended to artificially raise the price of food and diminish the production so high that low income families required Food Stamps to eat, but they did.

9.      The welfare system was not intended to become a snare for the impoverished entrapping them at a serf like subsistence existence for generations, but it does.

10.   Public schools were not intended to produce the lowest common denominator of education with continuously declining standards, but it has.

If this were the total of the unintended consequences produced by the short-sighted, herd-mentality policy makers we seem to have no shortage of in Washington it wouldn't be so bad, however it isn't the total and it is worse... 

 And yet more unintended consequences...

 

And more...

I could go on but at this point I'm too disgusted to write...