Category Archives: Food For Thought

A New Year Message For 2013

The year is now 2013 and I wanted to take a moment to write a big thank you to all of the young people who voted for Obama to have a second term, and for keeping the Senate in control of the tax and spend Democrats. Thank you for allowing yourselves to be the sacrificial lambs for myself and my generation. You are truly amazing and I appreciate your willingness to give so much to us.

By voting for this group of losers, you have ensured that my generation will be able to spend like drunken sailors, get all of the benefits before we die, and you will be picking up the tab well after we are gone. There will be very little (if anything) left for you, we will have used it all up.

This President and Congress, like so many before them, are once again kicking the can down the road so that nothing can collapse on their watch, as it should have done years ago. They are spending more, taxing more, and borrowing more so that my generation can live in comfort and not need to worry about paying anything back.

The deficits are climbing, no one is cutting any spending, and they are working hard to raise whatever tax they can to make up for it. What budget balancing that cannot be accomplished by these methods will be attempted on more borrowed funds. Once borrowing reaches the legal debt ceiling limit, they will simply raise it again so they can borrow more. When that does not work, they will raise taxes again and the whole cycle will repeat.

The great thing about all of this is, I will have Social Security and Medicare until I die. But when it comes your turn, there will be nothing and you will likely die of hunger, illness, and possibly malnutrition…. because no one wants to look at reforming these programs now, before they break the bank when it is your turn.

Because you voted for Obama and his plan to make government a perpetual Santa Claus, you will be forced to eat healthier and live longer. But as luck would have it, the healthcare system will not be able to serve you when you get old and sick, and Social Security will not be there for you as you age. What little resources remain will go to those who are now your age, so they can be fed and kept healthy, while being slaves to the whims of government.

I have used this blog as a platform to warn you against these coming events, many others with more far-reaching audiences have too. You labeled us as right wing tea-baggers. You said we wanted to take this country back to the stone age and even called us racist for trying to get this message to you.

As a father raising two children I sacrificed much, so they could have what they needed for the time they were unable to provide it for themselves. I have been willing to sacrifice some things in my life today, in order to preserve your future, for you and your children. But you would have none of it. Such altruism has never been known.

So someday when someone comes across this sleepy little blog and this particular post, may you know how grateful I am that you chose the chains of government dependence over the liberty of self-sufficiency. It was just long enough to get me to my grave. Because no one wanted to make the hard choices now, you will be in misery looking back with much regret at the choices I would have gladly made alongside with you today.

Peace out, peeps.

Advertisements

6 Comments

Filed under Administration, Congress, Economics, Food For Thought, Progressives

Newtown One Week Later: Placing Blame Where Blame Belongs

In all of our rhetoric and talk about guns this week, I wonder how many people know that despite America having the highest per capita gun ownership, we do not have the highest murder rate?

Talking per capita, here. Venezuela has 9 times less guns, but 9 times the murder rate of the United States. South Africa has just a few more guns per capita than Venezuela and has a 7 times higher rate. And get this, Honduras has a mere fraction of the guns America does per capita… and they have 11.5 times more. By the same token, most of the European nations have more guns per capita than these which I cite, and their murder rates are much lower.

This leads me to draw the conclusion, a correlation in the number of guns owned by people cannot be directly tied to murders in either direction.

This means we do not have a gun problem here in the United States, we have a violence problem. Just like the countries I cited with far lower gun ownership rates, we seem to have a culture that does accept their norm.

Folks, it’s not a tool that we should be concerned about in this crisis. Things need a life or energy force to work. Energy is the movement of matter, an exertion of power from available sources. Nothing moves without it. Without our life force behind us producing the energy and the will to act independently, we too would be inanimate. We’d just be a pile of useless carbon matter and we’d decay away.

When a life force makes a choice to operate any machinery in a given way, the matter will obey the will of the life force. Unless there is a malfunction of the equipment, there is a reasonable expectation that the operator of a firearm will make it fire, at will. It is a hard heart that kills.

If anything, there needs to be a conversation as to why there is an increasing amount of violent behavior manifesting itself in this particular time in our existence. We have to consider the roles of violent movies, TV shows, and video games that allow the player to blow people away, until the player gets whacked….and then the player gets to reset to a new game. When we do this, then we can get to the root of the matter and we may learn something about our culture and why these tragedies keep occurring. Making gun free zones will only result in Chicago-like crime stats and put law-abiding citizens at risk.

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture Watch, Food For Thought, Progressives

Taxes And The Business Cycle 101

From this essay by Penn Jillette, we get this little snippet:

“It’s amazing to me how many people think that voting to have the government give poor people money is compassion. Helping poor and suffering people yourself is compassion. Voting for our government to use guns to give money to help poor and suffering people is immoral self-righteous bullying laziness. People need to be fed, medicated, educated, clothed, and sheltered. If we’re compassionate, we’ll help them, but you get no moral credit for forcing other people to do what you think is right. There is great joy in helping people, but no joy in doing it at gunpoint.”

–Penn Jillette

It’s amazing at how many people take offense at something like this. They truly believe that the government’s role is to tax people and give it to others who are less fortunate, than the ones who are taxed. Since the initiation of Johnson’s Great Society, the goal for government has been to wipe out poverty. But sad to say, it hasn’t been able to it.

Here’s why:

If government truly took money from Biff Anderson CEO and President of Entrepreneur Inc. and gave it to Ms. Molly Coddle who has nothing in the way of skills and cannot seem to hold a job, it would be one thing. I might even be persuaded to rethink my position just a little. But this is not what happens.

What really happens is, the government taxes Mr. Anderson and puts it into the Treasury. The Treasury funds a government department that has throngs of employees, with salaries larger than their counterparts in the private sector–better benefits too. The department is run by a political crony of someone who is in office (because that person was owed a favor for helping someone get elected). He/she usually gets a healthy salary, and expense account to go with it.

Many of these government employees are in unions that demand more from the Mr. Andersons of the world and the skilled workers that he hires. The union leadership gets their cut from the union members. So when the government employees get their checks, the union gets theirs before the employee. On top of that, the employees must pay taxes. Union dues out of the employees’ checks and taxes are in many ways, a double dip for the unions.

So let’s look at this from another angle.

Progressive government lovers will identify a problem. Ms. Molly Coddle is in need of a program to give her money so she can survive.

Government goes along with it. It sets up a department that requires money from the Andersons. We know it takes money to run the department that sees that she gets it. The union gets their cut. The government employees get theirs. The companies that do business with the government supplying the offices get a cut, so do the utilities that must heat the building, provide the electricity, and phone support. Ms. Molly Coddle gets her money after everyone else gets theirs.

So what if we eliminated the bureaucracy and red tape for money to transfer from Biff to Molly? What if we let Biff give to a private organization that will help Molly get skills and help her pay her bills while she gets them?

He can write it off on his taxes. And without the extra expense of higher tax rates to fund a wasteful government entity, he will have some money to invest in his business’s growth. About the time he can accumulate the necessary funds to do this, he realizes he will need to hire some people to help his business get bigger. And wouldn’t you know that Molly is about to complete her course work, which now gives her the skills to perform one of those jobs that Biff needs filled?

What about those government workers who will lose their jobs?

Biff and all of his CEO friends will need more help than Molly. With interest rates low, the bank is not going to help them make money in CDs. So the best way for them to make it is to invest in business expansion. This will mean openings in the private sector. Less government + more private sector jobs = more freedom.

Molly comes home tired at night. But she knows that she is not dependent on anyone else for her well-being. So on payday, she can pay her bills and treat herself to some fun once in awhile, instead of watching the mailbox for that check. That’s freedom.

Leave a comment

Filed under Economics, Food For Thought, Local Government, State Government

Reflections

I thought I’d do a non-denominational, somewhat secular, spiritual, enlightening, thought-provoking feature on Sundays, when I feel like it. This weekend, I feel like it….but I am not sure it will meet any of that criteria.

With graduation speeches going on nationwide, it’s highly likely the vast majority of the commencement speeches are the traditional:

…you are the best, you are special; you can conquer hunger, disease, and a whole host of other maladies that no one before you has ever been able to defeat. But, you are the chosen generation and the ones you have been waiting for…so get ready to make the world rise up and obey your every command, get ready to heal it so it can rise up and walk with its chair.

But this one is different:

It wasn’t a dynamic delivery. There were no raving masses, no one chanted the speaker’s name in cadence and/or tune. It was monotonous, dry, and would make a speech teacher cringe when he/she wasn’t fighting sleep. But what the delivery lacked, the content clearly did not. The words were truth, they were reality, even though very few people have the scrotal integrity to speak them in a public setting with teachers in the room.

And while he was primarily speaking to kids who have exercised the same egocentric behaviors as past generations, he was also speaking to their parents as well. These kids are the product of the parents, like we are the products of our parents (and our parents were theirs). Pampering kids too much yields dependence, not teaching them in reality yields delusional expectations and a pattern of disappointments later in life.

So before we get caught up in a speech that sounds pleasing to the ear and stirs up unwarranted emotions in desperation, we should listen to the verbiage and analyze the validity the words may (or may not) have. We need to measure them carefully and see if they line up with rational principles that have passed the test of time and heavy critique. We must make sure we can determine the objectives of the speaker and those he/she represents, we must hear the true message.

If there is no message or it is too flawed to trust, it must be ignored. Truth does not always come in the form of tonal inflection, but rather it comes in the form of well-constructed sentences placed together in such a way as to form clear and communicative thoughts.

Leave a comment

Filed under Food For Thought