I recently engaged in an email exchange with a reader. He was interested in finding out more information about the subjects broached in my article about the financial mess in Iceland released earlier this year. I assumed he was looking for information about central banking and told him about a book I had read years ago called "The Creature From Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin. This is a book written by a highly respected author that tells of the secretive creation of the Federal Reserve.
To begin with, I told him that I feel the current system is immoral and that is what I base my opinion on. When the power to print the money people use is given to a very few people, then those people become very powerful, too powerful. I believe those people have, without a doubt, abused the power they were entrusted with for their own benefit.
Anyway, this particular gentleman is almost done with "The Creature From Jekyll Island" and he had a couple of questions for me. I'm paraphrasing here, but he basically asked me why, if fiat money is really just worthless, counterfeit notes, would the Federal Reserve want to get their money back? He then went on to ask about inflation and wondered how anyone would know more money was in circulation if that was its cause. The following is part of the answer I gave him.
I'm no financial expert, but I do have a way at looking at these issues that may help. Let me run it past you to see if it works. The first thing to remember is that money may be counterfeit, but it is not worthless. In the case of a monopoly fiat system, this is usually because there are laws called legal tender laws that force people to trade using the fiat money that is created by the elite at the top of the pyramid. Money is just a medium of exchange. People have a tendency to think of money as a special case because of these laws, but in a free market, or a freer market, there'd be many choices we could make as to what to use as a medium of exchange. So, try to think of money as just a commodity. A commodity on the open market is only worth what people will give you for it. To illustrate, I'll try to use simple numbers. Say you can buy a loaf of bread at the market for a dollar. One could say that the loaf of bread is worth a dollar, but one could also say that a dollar is worth a loaf of bread.
Ok, now let's examine the question of why Federal Reserve notes are counterfeit. Early on in the history of the United States the US dollar was defined. It was to be worth about an ounce of silver. As you can see by the cost of an ounce of silver today this is no longer true. The Federal Reserve worked hard early on to get away from the silver definition and the gold standard in order to be able to print as much money as it wanted and to flood the system with that money. They got around these laws by printing the words Federal Reserve Note on their bills, which are actually debt notes, good for all debts, public and private. But you can see how much less a dollar is worth today than it was at the beginning of the 20th century, just try to buy an ounce of silver for a dollar today and see how far you get.
Inflation doesn't necessarily pop up overnight. It creeps upon us slowly. It has to do with how difficult it is to come upon a dollar. Let's look at the loaf of bread example. For simplicity's sake, let's say a loaf of bread cost a penny back in 1900. In the year 2000 that same loaf of bread cost $2.00. That's inflation of 20,000% over 100 years. Think about that. It means that a penny is 20,000 times easier to earn in the year 2000 than it was in the year 1900. A penny was actually worth something back then, it was worth a loaf of bread, it's more or less worthless these days. But it's also a measure of how easy it is to come across a loaf of bread. Back in the 1700s, a loaf of bread may have cost a nickel. This would be because it was harder to make loaves of bread back in the 1700s than it was in 1900. As a result of technology in farming and food production, the cost of a loaf of bread actually falls from the 1700s to the 1900s. In a stable economy, as the production of bread improves, the cost should go down. Indeed, if not for inflation, we might be paying a penny for two loaves of bread or it may have been necessary to introduce new coinage such as half pennies, quarter pennies or even tenth pennies. However, this wasn't the case after the Federal Reserve was created because suddenly it became easier to come across a dollar.
At the same time, the exchange rate of silver and gold remain approximately the same. I like this example, I'm sure you've heard it. In the Roman times, you could get a nice quality toga, a nice sash, a pair of high quality sandals and a nice haircut in exchange for an ounce of gold. In today's world, you can get a quality suit, a nice belt, a pair of high quality shoes and a nice haircut for about the price of an ounce of gold. You see, the buying power, the exchange rate of gold, has remained the same.
So, why would the fed want to keep printing their "worthless" notes? Well, if those who own the fed have been smart, and I think they have, they've bought and stockpiled tons and tons of stable commodities like gold, silver, copper, palladium, platinum, oil, diamonds, precious gems, etc. with their "worthless" notes. They're busy buying up or legally stealing the real wealth of the common man as I type this. They are acquiring land, houses, other products created and adding these things to their own coffers. Money is not real wealth, it is simply a means of exchange. Real wealth is what we create with the money.
You don't need to consciously "know" what the money supply is to be affected by it. It's a matter of how easy it is to come across a dollar that determines its worth. When the market is flooded with them, they become very easy to come across and prices rise. The buying power of the fiat currency drops. At the same time, there is the give and take of how easy it is to produce a product. It is easier to come across a dollar, for instance, but it is also easier to produce that loaf of bread in mass quantities. Meanwhile, other commodities that can also be used as means of exchange maintain their buying power. The wealthy elite, with their stockpiles of commodities, remain wealthy while the rest of us drown in the flood of dollars they created with the blessings of our politicians.
It ends up being a matter of control. Most of us common folk have nothing to offer as a means of exchange but our labor. If the amount of dollars to buy a loaf of bread becomes so great that we can no longer afford a loaf a bread, we will start to offer up our labor for that loaf of bread. A starving, desperate man will do most anything to get some food for himself and his family. In the end, we will likely even offer up our sweat and our labor for a very small amount of food. The powerful elite will be able to decide who eats and who starves. I fear that is the kind of power these people, the elite, are striving for, and we have helped them along by allowing the central banks of the world to control our money supplies. That's why I feel it's so important to allow competition in the currency market.
After reading that explanation, the gentleman emailing me asked another. He wondered if the elite were out to introduce a world currency and what gold would be worth if they did so. He also mentioned poverty and overpopulation. The following paraphrases my answer to his ruminations.
I certainly don't have the answers, just my opinion. Yes, I believe they are out to create a world currency. In fact, I wonder if they have as much gold in reserve as they say the do, or if they are selling non existent gold to people. That's why, in my opinion, it's important that if you buy gold you physically possess it. As for myself, I buy silver whenever I can, there's more of it and it's more useful to industry. Also, they will have the power to confiscate gold if they need to, like they did in the 1930s.
After driving across this great nation of ours, eastward bound, I no longer believe the hype of overpopulation. It's another propaganda ploy put out there by the elite to excuse their murderous ways. There's plenty of room in this world for everyone, and it can support us just fine. As our population grows, so does the technology to meet our needs. Not to mention, it has been shown that as technology progresses and the standard of living goes up, population growth levels off. The wealth pie is not static. We don't get just so much and then that's it. We created the wealth we have and we will continue to create it as we grow. It is government that I believe causes poverty with their restrictions on markets creating monopolies and preventing competition and innovation and their creative wars that kill and maim so many millions. I don't know what will happen with gold and other precious metals in the future, but I do know that honesty has to be demanded, the fraud has to stop and those responsible for the fraud need to be held accountable for their crimes against humanity.
It is my hope that these explanations help others better understand the fiat money system we currently operate under. My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
The New Green Fascists Threaten Everyone
I used to argue in favor of using green technologies. I used to believe that green technology was the way of the future and that taking steps to conserve energy was good for the planet. I no longer believe such things. Want to know what changed my mind? It was Greenpeace. It was others who were promoting the ideas I was promoting a few years back. They have abandoned all reason and have resorted to blatant threats to promote their agenda. I don't take kindly to threats.
I am talking about a couple of videos that have popped up onto the scene recently. The first was actually a video that came out a few years back, but it was only brought to my attention a couple of weeks ago. In it, a brainwashed child makes veiled threats to adults who refuse to accept the "reality" of climate change. Of course, this came out before the Copenhagen debacle, the exposure of climategate and the revelations of the data manipulation that went along with it. Still, had I seen this video back then, I certainly would have questioned the wisdom of those who decided that threats of violence, however veiled, is the way to promote the ideas of saving energy or creating greener ways of producing energy.
That video wasn't that bad, just a bit misguided. The problems were a bit overstated and a lot misunderstood. The debate rages hotter than ever whether manmade global warming ever really existed, or whether climate change is mainly driven by the sun. Gee, what a concept, the star that provides our planet with the warmth and radiation it needs for life to exist can effect the warming and cooling conditions on Earth. The giant orb in the sky which experiences temperature fluctuations beyond our imaginings affects the climate. Makes sense to me. It makes a lot more sense than the small impact we puny beings have on climate.
But we've been through that before. I know there are a few diehard global warming believers who won't be reached no matter the reasoning used. They will insist that global warming, um, global cooling, um, climate change, um whatever you want to call it exists and is caused by man even if the sun blew up and melted us all or stopped shining and sentenced us to an icy death. Man must be the cause of it. We must be creating the planet's doom. And, here's the best part, the only way to stop this happening is through authoritarian global government and a global carbon tax. Nothing else will work.
That's the real rub. Their agenda isn't a green agenda. They are not concerned with saving the Earth. They are only concerned with social engineering. They are only concerned with controlling human life. Their message is simple and obvious, mankind bad, nature good. We need to de-industrialize and those who disagree and continue to advance technology, use technology, engage in manufacturing and/or simply live as modern people should live, they should be taxed to the maximum or perhaps even punished. More frightening, their latest message suggests they should be killed.
This video is quite disturbing. It is brought to you by 1010global.org. It depicts school children, office workers, a professional soccer player and a professional voice over actress getting blown to bloody, fleshy bits for disagreeing with the ecological views of the organization. Watching it, one can make the argument that it's a joke, but if it is, it's an awfully sick one. It may be amusing to some sick folks, perhaps the same people who are amused by pictures of depleted uranium babies or men being tortured, but to those of us who have a semblance of empathy and a general respect for life, the kind of callous disregard for human life enacted in the video is abhorrent.
The message seems obvious to me; "If you don't agree with our point of view, you deserve to die and we're happy to kill you." If you or I were to make this kind of threat to someone we'd be arrested, thrown in jail, and likely later found guilty and sentenced to spend some time in prison. The people who produced and aired this short film have threatened thousands of people and will likely never be investigated. I doubt they'll even be put on a terrorist watch list despite their obvious call to instigate violence against those who disagree with them. Perhaps that's because they said "no pressure" to their victims before blowing them up. Perhaps it's because supposedly a majority agree with these people, so it's okay to murder because that's democracy. You know democracy, two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner, so it's okay to violate the natural rights of the individual because most people agree with the 1010 people and they are, after all, trying to protect the Earth.
Along with the disturbing nature of the video there's the questionable target of the organization's ire. These people keep talking about carbon emissions, specifically carbon dioxide. They speak of it as if carbon dioxide is the culprit of all our environmental problems. They speak of it as if it's as bad as mercury, lead, sulfur dioxides and other harmful pollutants. But carbon dioxide is necessary for life. Plants thrive on carbon dioxide. The more carbon dioxide is produced, the greener the planet becomes. As a bonus, the plants create oxygen with the carbon dioxide they use. It's a symbiotic relationship animals have with plants, they produce oxygen, we produce carbon dioxide, that's how the planet evolved. But the green fascists believe carbon dioxide is bad and we should be killed if we produce too much of it.
I want to thank 1010global.org for showing me their true colors. I want to thank them for exposing the green movement as the brutal, dictatorial bunch they are. I am now more certain than ever that all this green eco hype is nothing more than political propaganda meant to frighten the unthinking masses into accepting a global tax and control system. Anytime any movement feels it has to abandon reasoned debate and resort to threats, lies and secrets, that just reeks of government force. Anytime an attempt such as this is made to manipulate the emotions of the masses, that's when it's time to stand one's ground and demand accountability. Hopefully, savvy politicians will see the folly in associating with such a group and start opposing any efforts to impose carbon taxes anywhere.
You know, it's too bad, I still think some green technologies are worth employing. I still think that personal wind and solar plants on one's house would be a good idea to not only achieve energy independence, but help create financial independence as people would be able to stop paying energy companies on a monthly basis. I think there's a lot of good alternatives to coal and oil out there just waiting to be developed. I'd love to see mankind freed from the old technologies and moving forward with more modern ways of generating energy. I just don't want to see government force, or any force, employed to achieve these ends. I just can't support these things while so many violent people inhabit the movement. I don't want to be associated with those who would use such despicable threats to forward their agenda. Until those people leave the movement and find some other project to focus their fascism upon, I will have to protest their ideas and actions.
I think on 10/10 I will take my SUV out for a nice long drive. I think I'll leave every light in my house on and run all my fans. I think I'll leave the vacuum running and the refrigerator door open. I think I'll do my best to produce as much carbon dioxide as I can and increase my carbon footprint so that my houseplants can get a little greener. Sure, it might cost me a few extra dollars, but it's worth it to see the efforts of such an evil, violent organization backfire. Besides, I believe I'll be doing the plants of the world a favor and helping them to thrive. I'll be making this planet a little greener for everyone. Will you help in my effort? Personally for me, I couldn't care less if you do or not, there truly is no pressure, and I don't want to see anyone killed regardless of what they believe.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
I am talking about a couple of videos that have popped up onto the scene recently. The first was actually a video that came out a few years back, but it was only brought to my attention a couple of weeks ago. In it, a brainwashed child makes veiled threats to adults who refuse to accept the "reality" of climate change. Of course, this came out before the Copenhagen debacle, the exposure of climategate and the revelations of the data manipulation that went along with it. Still, had I seen this video back then, I certainly would have questioned the wisdom of those who decided that threats of violence, however veiled, is the way to promote the ideas of saving energy or creating greener ways of producing energy.
That video wasn't that bad, just a bit misguided. The problems were a bit overstated and a lot misunderstood. The debate rages hotter than ever whether manmade global warming ever really existed, or whether climate change is mainly driven by the sun. Gee, what a concept, the star that provides our planet with the warmth and radiation it needs for life to exist can effect the warming and cooling conditions on Earth. The giant orb in the sky which experiences temperature fluctuations beyond our imaginings affects the climate. Makes sense to me. It makes a lot more sense than the small impact we puny beings have on climate.
But we've been through that before. I know there are a few diehard global warming believers who won't be reached no matter the reasoning used. They will insist that global warming, um, global cooling, um, climate change, um whatever you want to call it exists and is caused by man even if the sun blew up and melted us all or stopped shining and sentenced us to an icy death. Man must be the cause of it. We must be creating the planet's doom. And, here's the best part, the only way to stop this happening is through authoritarian global government and a global carbon tax. Nothing else will work.
That's the real rub. Their agenda isn't a green agenda. They are not concerned with saving the Earth. They are only concerned with social engineering. They are only concerned with controlling human life. Their message is simple and obvious, mankind bad, nature good. We need to de-industrialize and those who disagree and continue to advance technology, use technology, engage in manufacturing and/or simply live as modern people should live, they should be taxed to the maximum or perhaps even punished. More frightening, their latest message suggests they should be killed.
This video is quite disturbing. It is brought to you by 1010global.org. It depicts school children, office workers, a professional soccer player and a professional voice over actress getting blown to bloody, fleshy bits for disagreeing with the ecological views of the organization. Watching it, one can make the argument that it's a joke, but if it is, it's an awfully sick one. It may be amusing to some sick folks, perhaps the same people who are amused by pictures of depleted uranium babies or men being tortured, but to those of us who have a semblance of empathy and a general respect for life, the kind of callous disregard for human life enacted in the video is abhorrent.
The message seems obvious to me; "If you don't agree with our point of view, you deserve to die and we're happy to kill you." If you or I were to make this kind of threat to someone we'd be arrested, thrown in jail, and likely later found guilty and sentenced to spend some time in prison. The people who produced and aired this short film have threatened thousands of people and will likely never be investigated. I doubt they'll even be put on a terrorist watch list despite their obvious call to instigate violence against those who disagree with them. Perhaps that's because they said "no pressure" to their victims before blowing them up. Perhaps it's because supposedly a majority agree with these people, so it's okay to murder because that's democracy. You know democracy, two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner, so it's okay to violate the natural rights of the individual because most people agree with the 1010 people and they are, after all, trying to protect the Earth.
Along with the disturbing nature of the video there's the questionable target of the organization's ire. These people keep talking about carbon emissions, specifically carbon dioxide. They speak of it as if carbon dioxide is the culprit of all our environmental problems. They speak of it as if it's as bad as mercury, lead, sulfur dioxides and other harmful pollutants. But carbon dioxide is necessary for life. Plants thrive on carbon dioxide. The more carbon dioxide is produced, the greener the planet becomes. As a bonus, the plants create oxygen with the carbon dioxide they use. It's a symbiotic relationship animals have with plants, they produce oxygen, we produce carbon dioxide, that's how the planet evolved. But the green fascists believe carbon dioxide is bad and we should be killed if we produce too much of it.
I want to thank 1010global.org for showing me their true colors. I want to thank them for exposing the green movement as the brutal, dictatorial bunch they are. I am now more certain than ever that all this green eco hype is nothing more than political propaganda meant to frighten the unthinking masses into accepting a global tax and control system. Anytime any movement feels it has to abandon reasoned debate and resort to threats, lies and secrets, that just reeks of government force. Anytime an attempt such as this is made to manipulate the emotions of the masses, that's when it's time to stand one's ground and demand accountability. Hopefully, savvy politicians will see the folly in associating with such a group and start opposing any efforts to impose carbon taxes anywhere.
You know, it's too bad, I still think some green technologies are worth employing. I still think that personal wind and solar plants on one's house would be a good idea to not only achieve energy independence, but help create financial independence as people would be able to stop paying energy companies on a monthly basis. I think there's a lot of good alternatives to coal and oil out there just waiting to be developed. I'd love to see mankind freed from the old technologies and moving forward with more modern ways of generating energy. I just don't want to see government force, or any force, employed to achieve these ends. I just can't support these things while so many violent people inhabit the movement. I don't want to be associated with those who would use such despicable threats to forward their agenda. Until those people leave the movement and find some other project to focus their fascism upon, I will have to protest their ideas and actions.
I think on 10/10 I will take my SUV out for a nice long drive. I think I'll leave every light in my house on and run all my fans. I think I'll leave the vacuum running and the refrigerator door open. I think I'll do my best to produce as much carbon dioxide as I can and increase my carbon footprint so that my houseplants can get a little greener. Sure, it might cost me a few extra dollars, but it's worth it to see the efforts of such an evil, violent organization backfire. Besides, I believe I'll be doing the plants of the world a favor and helping them to thrive. I'll be making this planet a little greener for everyone. Will you help in my effort? Personally for me, I couldn't care less if you do or not, there truly is no pressure, and I don't want to see anyone killed regardless of what they believe.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Politicians, the Blame Game, the Constitution and the American System
Anyone who has ever had to deal with elected officials, particularly at the federal level, has probably been frustrated trying to get them to listen to your point of view, let alone agree with it. Unless, of course, you have lots of money. It seems to me that the congress critters inhabiting the halls of power in Washington DC represent no one but themselves and their corporate sponsors. They certainly don't seem to want to have anything to do with the common folk. It seems to me that even when a great number of their constituents complain and ask for change and accountability, they do their best to wriggle free from their responsibilities and chase an agenda that grants them and their cronies more power and control.
One of the senators from the state of Illinois has once again managed to raise my ire without really trying. Mr. Dick Durbin, upon answering a request for more transparency and accountability in government, decided to play the blame game. The request was made by myself and thousands of others through downsizeDC.org, an organization dedicated to putting pressure on our elected officials to actually do something about shrinking the size of the federal government and adhere to the laws that are supposed to govern them.
Mr. Durbin wrote an email explaining that there was a budget surplus when Mr. Bill Clinton was serving as president, but that it disappeared during Mr. George W. Bush's administration. While this is a true statement, I do not believe that it is a legitimate excuse for the continuation of the practices that drove our nation into such debt. Nor do I think it is a legitimate reason to excuse Mr. Durbin and the current batch of spending crazed congress critters who continue to shirk their responsibilities and blame others for the mess we're in.
Certainly, I've no doubt that Mr. Bush bears much of the responsibility for our current financial mess, but he was not the only one to blame. Indeed, in the American form of government, it's supposed to be congress that approves the spending. So, if we're going to play the blame game, shouldn't we mention that the Republicans controlled congress during Clinton's presidency? Mr. Durbin seems to conveniently forget that fact as he tries to convince myself and others that the fault does not lie with him or his fellow Democrats. Well, the fault lies with all of them, Democrats and Republicans.
The political class long ago decided to stop following the Constitution, that little bit of writing they swear an oath to uphold, and to just do whatever they want. They don't seem to remember that there were three branches of government created in order to create a separation of power that was supposed to protect the natural rights of individuals from the intrusive and too often tyrannical power of the state. Instead, those in power made backroom deals with each other behind closed doors. They slowly eroded individual rights until we have left only a sliver of what we were meant to have. The powers of the states were usurped by the federal government and they became the tyrants they were supposed to protect us from. Now we sit and worry about them violating those natural rights they pledged to respect as they fish for dissidents challenging their "authority."
The president is not a dictator, or a king, or a despot, or any kind of lone authoritarian, as much as some seem to want him to be. He can't just make laws by decree and expect his "subjects" to obey them. There is a process, Mr. Dick Durbin, that this country must go through in order to take us down the road to ruin. You must all be on board for this to happen, or at least the majority of you. You don't need a dictator when there are 545 petty tyrants who can create the same tyranny, and a federal justice system that will support and even encourage it. The only reason to have such an authoritarian figure is so there is someone to blame when things go south. So, you want to blame George W. Bush for our current situation, as if he was the king and the sole decision maker during our slide into socialism, do you? Well, I have a few questions for you then.
Did you vote against the Patriot Act? Did you speak out against it citing how it would trample upon the natural rights of sovereign citizens? How about the Military Commissions Act? Did you stand and argue against that bill because of its unconstitutional nature? Did you ever try to introduce legislation repealing these laws when it became obvious that abuses were taking place? Did you ever bravely stand before your compatriots in the Senate and demand unbiased investigations into such allegations?
Did you speak out against going to war with Iraq? Did you vote against going to war? Did you speak out about the constitutional requirement that war be declared by congress? Did you speak against sending our troops into Afghanistan? Did you ever vote against funding these wars so we would be forced to end them? Did you do anything at all to try to prevent these catastrophes and avoid the expense that goes along with them?
Did you vote against the bailouts back in 2008 when the Bush administration was on the way out? Did you speak out against the timing of such a move? Did you point out the folly of such an action? Did you point out the price that would be paid by future generations? Did you stand up and vote against such a bill because so many of your constituents were calling, writing and emailing telling you to allow the mega banks to fail? Did you ever do the right thing, or did you just do as you were told by your corporate handlers, like so many of your colleagues? I only know of one man in Washington DC who stuck to his principles through all that, and he was not in the senate, but the house.
And then how about after Bush left office and Obama became the anointed one? Did you speak out against his socialist agenda? Did you stick up for the natural individual rights of the freeman? Did you argue against passing the tome that is the new health care law? Did you pay attention to the multitudes coming out to protest that law? Did you see the fury of the masses as they challenged their representatives and demanded they oppose the health care bill? Did you read that bill before voting for it, or did you listen to Ms. Nancy Pelosi as she determined it needed to be passed so we could find out what was in it? Did you ever once even care what the common folk thought, or did you simply follow the dictates of your corporate masters? I think the answer to all the above is a resounding "no."
You, Mr. Durbin, had ample opportunity to show your courage. You had ample opportunity to be one of the few who should not be blamed for the mess that has been created. You decided to ignore popular sentiment, ignore the Constitution, and ignore the principles this nation was built upon. You decided to do what you were told to do by those who pay for your campaigns. You, my friend, have no room to play the blame game. You are just as culpable for this mess as Mr. Bush, Mr. Obama, or any of the other bought and paid for congress critters.
We don't need senators who play the blame game anymore, Mr. Durbin. We need men with the guts to stand up to those in power and say "enough." We need someone with the courage to defend the common man. We need someone who understands the power of the free market and will allow his financial backers to fail. We need someone who will demand accountability from the corporate elite. We need someone who will deny the wishes of special interests in order to empower the common man through honoring his natural rights. Don't try to tell me who's to blame for the current mess we're in, concentrate on doing what's right and getting back to obeying the Constitution so that we might have a future we can look forward to.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
One of the senators from the state of Illinois has once again managed to raise my ire without really trying. Mr. Dick Durbin, upon answering a request for more transparency and accountability in government, decided to play the blame game. The request was made by myself and thousands of others through downsizeDC.org, an organization dedicated to putting pressure on our elected officials to actually do something about shrinking the size of the federal government and adhere to the laws that are supposed to govern them.
Mr. Durbin wrote an email explaining that there was a budget surplus when Mr. Bill Clinton was serving as president, but that it disappeared during Mr. George W. Bush's administration. While this is a true statement, I do not believe that it is a legitimate excuse for the continuation of the practices that drove our nation into such debt. Nor do I think it is a legitimate reason to excuse Mr. Durbin and the current batch of spending crazed congress critters who continue to shirk their responsibilities and blame others for the mess we're in.
Certainly, I've no doubt that Mr. Bush bears much of the responsibility for our current financial mess, but he was not the only one to blame. Indeed, in the American form of government, it's supposed to be congress that approves the spending. So, if we're going to play the blame game, shouldn't we mention that the Republicans controlled congress during Clinton's presidency? Mr. Durbin seems to conveniently forget that fact as he tries to convince myself and others that the fault does not lie with him or his fellow Democrats. Well, the fault lies with all of them, Democrats and Republicans.
The political class long ago decided to stop following the Constitution, that little bit of writing they swear an oath to uphold, and to just do whatever they want. They don't seem to remember that there were three branches of government created in order to create a separation of power that was supposed to protect the natural rights of individuals from the intrusive and too often tyrannical power of the state. Instead, those in power made backroom deals with each other behind closed doors. They slowly eroded individual rights until we have left only a sliver of what we were meant to have. The powers of the states were usurped by the federal government and they became the tyrants they were supposed to protect us from. Now we sit and worry about them violating those natural rights they pledged to respect as they fish for dissidents challenging their "authority."
The president is not a dictator, or a king, or a despot, or any kind of lone authoritarian, as much as some seem to want him to be. He can't just make laws by decree and expect his "subjects" to obey them. There is a process, Mr. Dick Durbin, that this country must go through in order to take us down the road to ruin. You must all be on board for this to happen, or at least the majority of you. You don't need a dictator when there are 545 petty tyrants who can create the same tyranny, and a federal justice system that will support and even encourage it. The only reason to have such an authoritarian figure is so there is someone to blame when things go south. So, you want to blame George W. Bush for our current situation, as if he was the king and the sole decision maker during our slide into socialism, do you? Well, I have a few questions for you then.
Did you vote against the Patriot Act? Did you speak out against it citing how it would trample upon the natural rights of sovereign citizens? How about the Military Commissions Act? Did you stand and argue against that bill because of its unconstitutional nature? Did you ever try to introduce legislation repealing these laws when it became obvious that abuses were taking place? Did you ever bravely stand before your compatriots in the Senate and demand unbiased investigations into such allegations?
Did you speak out against going to war with Iraq? Did you vote against going to war? Did you speak out about the constitutional requirement that war be declared by congress? Did you speak against sending our troops into Afghanistan? Did you ever vote against funding these wars so we would be forced to end them? Did you do anything at all to try to prevent these catastrophes and avoid the expense that goes along with them?
Did you vote against the bailouts back in 2008 when the Bush administration was on the way out? Did you speak out against the timing of such a move? Did you point out the folly of such an action? Did you point out the price that would be paid by future generations? Did you stand up and vote against such a bill because so many of your constituents were calling, writing and emailing telling you to allow the mega banks to fail? Did you ever do the right thing, or did you just do as you were told by your corporate handlers, like so many of your colleagues? I only know of one man in Washington DC who stuck to his principles through all that, and he was not in the senate, but the house.
And then how about after Bush left office and Obama became the anointed one? Did you speak out against his socialist agenda? Did you stick up for the natural individual rights of the freeman? Did you argue against passing the tome that is the new health care law? Did you pay attention to the multitudes coming out to protest that law? Did you see the fury of the masses as they challenged their representatives and demanded they oppose the health care bill? Did you read that bill before voting for it, or did you listen to Ms. Nancy Pelosi as she determined it needed to be passed so we could find out what was in it? Did you ever once even care what the common folk thought, or did you simply follow the dictates of your corporate masters? I think the answer to all the above is a resounding "no."
You, Mr. Durbin, had ample opportunity to show your courage. You had ample opportunity to be one of the few who should not be blamed for the mess that has been created. You decided to ignore popular sentiment, ignore the Constitution, and ignore the principles this nation was built upon. You decided to do what you were told to do by those who pay for your campaigns. You, my friend, have no room to play the blame game. You are just as culpable for this mess as Mr. Bush, Mr. Obama, or any of the other bought and paid for congress critters.
We don't need senators who play the blame game anymore, Mr. Durbin. We need men with the guts to stand up to those in power and say "enough." We need someone with the courage to defend the common man. We need someone who understands the power of the free market and will allow his financial backers to fail. We need someone who will demand accountability from the corporate elite. We need someone who will deny the wishes of special interests in order to empower the common man through honoring his natural rights. Don't try to tell me who's to blame for the current mess we're in, concentrate on doing what's right and getting back to obeying the Constitution so that we might have a future we can look forward to.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Why I Still Won't Take a Flu Shot, Even if Paid
It's that time of year again. The flu season is upon us, or should I say the season to push flu shots for the benefit of the bottom line of the big pharmaceutical companies. I am now hearing radio ads, seeing print ads and being generally inundated with pronouncements about the necessity of flu shots to prevent coming down with such a malady. I've read stories about how the flu shot should be taken, especially by pregnant women. Every time I hear or see such nonsense, it makes me want to cringe.
I must say, however, that at least this year they're not pushing it as hard as they did last year. Remember last year? The media hype was huge. There was going to be a terrible plague like we hadn't seen since 1918. Millions were going to die. It was going to be terrifying. The flu was going to wipe us all out.
Well, that didn't happen. In fact, it was the lowest flu rate in years. Not only that, but less people than normal were taking the flu shot. It seems that maybe the hype and fear mongering had the opposite effect than it was supposed to. Or maybe people are just becoming more wary. Maybe they're starting to research claims on their own rather than simply trusting large corporations and doing as they're told by the media. Maybe others besides me just don't trust the way flu vaccines are made and don't like the thimerosal, squalene, adjuvants and other questionable ingredients in the shots. Maybe some, also like me, discovered that the flu shots made them sick. I can't say for sure, but I'm fairly certain that the low numbers of people getting the flu and the low numbers of people taking the shots are not merely coincidental.
I read at MSNBC that scientists are now saying most Americans have an immunity to the swine flu. How convenient. Just at a time when people are finally beginning to question the effectiveness of flu vaccines, they had to figure out something to say to explain away the low amount of flu cases last year after all their fear mongering. They call it herd immunity, I call it herd mentality. We are beginning to think for ourselves, to question authority, to worry about ourselves and to stop worrying so much about the herd. This is scaring the establishment.
The specter of millions of deaths like in 1918 wasn't enough to send the people flocking to get their shots, and now they have to think of some reason flu cases were down at the same time inoculations were also down. So, most of us have an (cough) immunity to swine flu because of past exposure or we already had the vaccine. Yeah, right. Next look for fear to be raised of some other kind of flu, something we haven't been exposed to. Maybe the bird flu. Or the Asian flu. Or perhaps a horse flu. Or a cat flu. Or a kangaroo flu. It doesn't matter. They need to figure out something to scare us with so that we'll flock to them begging to be saved from some malady. They need to make their money.
Do you suppose that the past deceptions and misleading statements have taken effect against the makers of flu shots? How often were we told how safe the shots were only to find out later that they might have links to certain side effects like Guillain Barre, autism and even Alzheimer's? How much covering up can the media do for corporate big pharma before people scream enough and learn not to trust them? Personally, I discovered long ago that I'd rather take my chances with nature and risk catching the flu than risk putting the chemicals in my body that the greedy big pharmaceutical companies tell me are safe. Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.
I'm not saying that all vaccinations are bad. I will say this, however. I had the measles. I had the chicken pox. I had the childhood diseases and lived through them, and now I am immune for life. Those vaccinations, the shots that you take once when you're a child and then never again, those perhaps aren't so bad. Or at least they weren't when I was a child, I'm not so sure anymore. But if you have to take a shot every year to prevent illness, is it worth it? Is it worth the risk when combined with even the small amounts of questionable ingredients and poisons necessary to preserve the active ingredients in the shot?
The shot isn't even guaranteed to prevent the flu. They have to guess the type of flu that's going to be catching that year. And if they prevent one flu this year, they may not prevent another, or that flu may be around again next year. One is better off just taking precautions like washing their hands often, eating well to boost immune health and avoiding crowds if possible. I also wonder that if one catches the flu, how long will that immunity last as opposed to the immunity one gets by taking the shot? I remember the really bad flu I got the last time I took the shot because I thought I was going to die and now I wonder if I have an immunity to that flu for life. I hope I do.
It bears repeating, the hype doesn't seem to be there this year. I don't see the corporate media pushing the shots. I don't see celebrities taking the shots to show how safe they are or news outlets talking about a viral infestation threatening to take out mankind this year. The advertising is still there, but much more low key, which just might work for them. As for me, they couldn't pay me to take their shot, let alone get me to pay for it. In fact, if I had a job where the flu shot was required, I just might be forced out of work. That's how much I distrust the pharmaceutical establishment and their government cronies. I know there are others with similar feelings. I hope this is one battle the corporate establishment is going to lose as more and more people discover that maybe they can survive quite well without taking part in the yearly ritual of getting a flu shot.
I guess the big pharmaceutical companies are just going to have to figure out another way to make lots of money. Perhaps they can get the government to pass some kind of health care reform bill. Oh, wait, that already happened. I wonder how much big pharma contributed to that tome. Perhaps they can start experimenting on our soldiers overseas, vaccinating them against strange diseases and over charging our government for their medical products and services. Perhaps they can sell their questionable wares to third world nations where no one is paying attention. Perhaps they'll think of something even more devious and destructive than imaginable. One can only hope that those with principle can keep an eye on them and expose any shady dealings they may have. One can only hope that one day we will live in a world where individuals can chose to frequent medical professionals they feel are principled and trustworthy rather than being forced to use products that are only available due to political connections.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
I must say, however, that at least this year they're not pushing it as hard as they did last year. Remember last year? The media hype was huge. There was going to be a terrible plague like we hadn't seen since 1918. Millions were going to die. It was going to be terrifying. The flu was going to wipe us all out.
Well, that didn't happen. In fact, it was the lowest flu rate in years. Not only that, but less people than normal were taking the flu shot. It seems that maybe the hype and fear mongering had the opposite effect than it was supposed to. Or maybe people are just becoming more wary. Maybe they're starting to research claims on their own rather than simply trusting large corporations and doing as they're told by the media. Maybe others besides me just don't trust the way flu vaccines are made and don't like the thimerosal, squalene, adjuvants and other questionable ingredients in the shots. Maybe some, also like me, discovered that the flu shots made them sick. I can't say for sure, but I'm fairly certain that the low numbers of people getting the flu and the low numbers of people taking the shots are not merely coincidental.
I read at MSNBC that scientists are now saying most Americans have an immunity to the swine flu. How convenient. Just at a time when people are finally beginning to question the effectiveness of flu vaccines, they had to figure out something to say to explain away the low amount of flu cases last year after all their fear mongering. They call it herd immunity, I call it herd mentality. We are beginning to think for ourselves, to question authority, to worry about ourselves and to stop worrying so much about the herd. This is scaring the establishment.
The specter of millions of deaths like in 1918 wasn't enough to send the people flocking to get their shots, and now they have to think of some reason flu cases were down at the same time inoculations were also down. So, most of us have an (cough) immunity to swine flu because of past exposure or we already had the vaccine. Yeah, right. Next look for fear to be raised of some other kind of flu, something we haven't been exposed to. Maybe the bird flu. Or the Asian flu. Or perhaps a horse flu. Or a cat flu. Or a kangaroo flu. It doesn't matter. They need to figure out something to scare us with so that we'll flock to them begging to be saved from some malady. They need to make their money.
Do you suppose that the past deceptions and misleading statements have taken effect against the makers of flu shots? How often were we told how safe the shots were only to find out later that they might have links to certain side effects like Guillain Barre, autism and even Alzheimer's? How much covering up can the media do for corporate big pharma before people scream enough and learn not to trust them? Personally, I discovered long ago that I'd rather take my chances with nature and risk catching the flu than risk putting the chemicals in my body that the greedy big pharmaceutical companies tell me are safe. Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.
I'm not saying that all vaccinations are bad. I will say this, however. I had the measles. I had the chicken pox. I had the childhood diseases and lived through them, and now I am immune for life. Those vaccinations, the shots that you take once when you're a child and then never again, those perhaps aren't so bad. Or at least they weren't when I was a child, I'm not so sure anymore. But if you have to take a shot every year to prevent illness, is it worth it? Is it worth the risk when combined with even the small amounts of questionable ingredients and poisons necessary to preserve the active ingredients in the shot?
The shot isn't even guaranteed to prevent the flu. They have to guess the type of flu that's going to be catching that year. And if they prevent one flu this year, they may not prevent another, or that flu may be around again next year. One is better off just taking precautions like washing their hands often, eating well to boost immune health and avoiding crowds if possible. I also wonder that if one catches the flu, how long will that immunity last as opposed to the immunity one gets by taking the shot? I remember the really bad flu I got the last time I took the shot because I thought I was going to die and now I wonder if I have an immunity to that flu for life. I hope I do.
It bears repeating, the hype doesn't seem to be there this year. I don't see the corporate media pushing the shots. I don't see celebrities taking the shots to show how safe they are or news outlets talking about a viral infestation threatening to take out mankind this year. The advertising is still there, but much more low key, which just might work for them. As for me, they couldn't pay me to take their shot, let alone get me to pay for it. In fact, if I had a job where the flu shot was required, I just might be forced out of work. That's how much I distrust the pharmaceutical establishment and their government cronies. I know there are others with similar feelings. I hope this is one battle the corporate establishment is going to lose as more and more people discover that maybe they can survive quite well without taking part in the yearly ritual of getting a flu shot.
I guess the big pharmaceutical companies are just going to have to figure out another way to make lots of money. Perhaps they can get the government to pass some kind of health care reform bill. Oh, wait, that already happened. I wonder how much big pharma contributed to that tome. Perhaps they can start experimenting on our soldiers overseas, vaccinating them against strange diseases and over charging our government for their medical products and services. Perhaps they can sell their questionable wares to third world nations where no one is paying attention. Perhaps they'll think of something even more devious and destructive than imaginable. One can only hope that those with principle can keep an eye on them and expose any shady dealings they may have. One can only hope that one day we will live in a world where individuals can chose to frequent medical professionals they feel are principled and trustworthy rather than being forced to use products that are only available due to political connections.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Pledge to America or a Plague Upon Her?
"There's nothing in the streets, looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left is now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight..,
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss."
From "Won't Get Fooled Again" by The Who
Politics in the United States of America has degraded into nothing more than a circus. It has become a cancer on our society that will not stop growing until we cut it out by its roots. This is partially a result of the two party duopoly that has been established by the rich elite who continue to pay for it, and partially a result of decades of popular apathy, ignorance and indoctrination that has led to acceptance of that system. It has become obvious that, with a few, but a growing number of exceptions, the worst possible humans are the ones that have decided to run for political office. That is because, I believe, positions of power attract control freaks who wish to exercise force over people and all their dealings.
The Republicans have managed to reach a new level when it comes to insulting my intelligence. They have drug out an old political has-been named Newt Gingrich in an attempt to placate the politically astute and herd those embracing the changing views on politics back into the two party, big government Republican versus big government Democrat box. In order to do this, he and his fellow Republicrats have come up with a not so original "Pledge to America" where they offer a similitude of so called solutions to the problems they believe are creating anger in America. They are merely trying to tap that anger to levy more power for themselves and implement their own big government agenda as opposed to actually shrinking government, lessening the burden and allowing free markets to once again bring prosperity to our nation.
Does Mr. Gingrich think we've forgotten his "Contract With America?" Does he think we've forgotten what a dismal failure that was? Does he believe we'd forgot how they managed to break that contract? Does he believe we'd forget that while the Republicans were in charge they still managed to grow government? Has he forgotten that it was the Republican policies of undeclared war and empire building that led us to this moment? That is what they are pledging, more of the same like we had back then, not more liberty, or less government, or even more autonomy at the more accountable state and local levels. Well, apparently, he thinks we've forgotten and that they can just pull the wool over our eyes and do as they want once they get in power.
Just look at the pledge, it doesn't even say much. They will try to repeal parts of Obama's healthcare bill. Parts of it. A step in the right direction? Maybe. But the whole bill is unconstitutional. It all needs to go, including the parts the Republicans say they like. Let the free market decide what services insurance companies want to offer, not bureaucrats. The federal government has no business mandating any kind of health care perestroika, period. I don't care what loopholes they find or legalese they use to argue otherwise. Those kind of decisions were to be left to the states to handle, or to the individuals, at least according to the tenth amendment to the Constitution.
They pledge to implement sanctions against Iran. Huh? What happened to no nation building? What happened to no empire building? There's a reason George Washington believed we should have commerce with all nations but entangling alliances with none. Sanctions are an act of war. It has been estimated that the sanctions imposed against Iraq caused millions of deaths, mostly children. Wars are expensive. They have nearly bankrupted this country both morally and financially. Can we really afford another war?
They pledge no more TARP funds. Ok, fine. How about pledging to arrest those who perpetrated that fraud on the United States in the first place? How about pledging to prosecute those who threatened our congressmen with images of martial law, economic collapse and rioting in the streets? I'm certain they could find something in all their RICO and terrorism laws to charge them with. Hey, better yet, how about getting all that money back? How about allowing those big companies to fail as they should have, get back the taxpayer money that was used to prop them up, and allowing smaller, more agile, more financially savvy companies to succeed where the large, cumbersome, bureaucratic, inept companies couldn't?
Does Newt Gingrich and his political cronies really think they can fool us again? Sadly, many will likely fall into that trap as they continue to hope that principle will trump money and power. This simply won't happen unless and until the outcry is so great that the political elite quake at the thought of being caught in a compromising position. It won't happen until there is some teeth put into the laws governing how the federal government is run. It won't happen until there is a real danger of politicians who stray from the principles set down in the Bill of Rights being held accountable for their actions.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like Barack Obama or his administration. I don't like what he's trying to turn our country into. But I didn't like George W. Bush either. I didn't like the direction he was taking America. I also didn't like being lied to back in the 90s when Newt Gingrich and his ilk introduced their "Contract With America." Perhaps if they had kept their word back then I might look differently upon them now, but that's not what happened. I can't trust them anymore. Perhaps Republican socialism is slightly better than Democrat socialism, but it is long past time for these types of comparisons to stop and for issues to be looked at separately instead of grouped together in party platforms. It is time to frame them in terms of freedom versus tyranny rather than in terms of big government Democrat versus big government Republican.
I can't tell you how angry it makes me that Newt Gingrich and the Republican establishment think I'm so stupid that I'll fall for their lies again. I can't tell you how angered I am that they have usurped a popular movement like the tea party, a movement that promised to bring freedom back to our nation and reinstate the power of the individual, a movement that wanted to once again make America a place where one's rights are respected and they are expected to take responsibility for their own lives and the decisions they make.
The tea party movement shouldn't be about Republican or Democrat, it should be about principle and honor. Both the Republicans and the Democrats have been a plague upon our nation. Both parties are, for the most part, without honor and without principle. Both parties have sold out the common folk for the thirty pieces of silver the corporate establishment has thrown at them.
I have an idea, Newt. How about you make a simple pledge. How about you pledge to stick to the Constitution? How about you pledge to limit government power to the powers enumerated in it? How about you repeal all unconstitutional laws, not just those passed by the Obama administration? How about repealing the Patriot Act, The Military Commissions Act, and other such unconstitutional, intrusive, freedom killing legislation brought on by the Bush administration?
How about pledging to audit the Federal Reserve? Oh, did you think your little ruse would make us forget about that little bit of legislation? Did you think that by focusing on the most recent bit of criminal activity and pledging to reverse those injustices we'd forget about that issue? Did you think we'd get angry enough to turn our heads away and just let them continue their unaccountable ways as they march us to economic ruin? How about we see if our gold is still where it's supposed to be? Let's not forget that those who control the supply of money control everything.
Of course, even if you made such a pledge, how could I trust you? How could anyone? You have deceived us before. You will continue to try to deceive. It's just in your nature. It's in the nature of almost every politician, almost everyone who seeks to exercise power over people. The problem is in the system. The system needs to be made more accountable. It needs to be made more voluntary. Until we can decide to stop paying for it, until we have the ability to withhold our taxes with impunity, it will remain unaccountable and inhabited by the worst, the most corruptible and the most power grubbing that humanity has to offer.
It seems to me that all that needs to be done is for government to get off the backs of the common folk. It seems that if it just lets the common folk be that we will all prosper. That is how our nation operated a hundred years ago when we were more prosperous than any of the socialist countries in the world. In fact, we were so prosperous that it held us together to this very day despite the anti free market sentiment of the power elite. We can no longer expect that prosperity to grow if we stay on the socialistic track we adopted in the thirties. Get the government off our backs and we will do well, as we have in the past.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left is now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight..,
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss."
From "Won't Get Fooled Again" by The Who
Politics in the United States of America has degraded into nothing more than a circus. It has become a cancer on our society that will not stop growing until we cut it out by its roots. This is partially a result of the two party duopoly that has been established by the rich elite who continue to pay for it, and partially a result of decades of popular apathy, ignorance and indoctrination that has led to acceptance of that system. It has become obvious that, with a few, but a growing number of exceptions, the worst possible humans are the ones that have decided to run for political office. That is because, I believe, positions of power attract control freaks who wish to exercise force over people and all their dealings.
The Republicans have managed to reach a new level when it comes to insulting my intelligence. They have drug out an old political has-been named Newt Gingrich in an attempt to placate the politically astute and herd those embracing the changing views on politics back into the two party, big government Republican versus big government Democrat box. In order to do this, he and his fellow Republicrats have come up with a not so original "Pledge to America" where they offer a similitude of so called solutions to the problems they believe are creating anger in America. They are merely trying to tap that anger to levy more power for themselves and implement their own big government agenda as opposed to actually shrinking government, lessening the burden and allowing free markets to once again bring prosperity to our nation.
Does Mr. Gingrich think we've forgotten his "Contract With America?" Does he think we've forgotten what a dismal failure that was? Does he believe we'd forgot how they managed to break that contract? Does he believe we'd forget that while the Republicans were in charge they still managed to grow government? Has he forgotten that it was the Republican policies of undeclared war and empire building that led us to this moment? That is what they are pledging, more of the same like we had back then, not more liberty, or less government, or even more autonomy at the more accountable state and local levels. Well, apparently, he thinks we've forgotten and that they can just pull the wool over our eyes and do as they want once they get in power.
Just look at the pledge, it doesn't even say much. They will try to repeal parts of Obama's healthcare bill. Parts of it. A step in the right direction? Maybe. But the whole bill is unconstitutional. It all needs to go, including the parts the Republicans say they like. Let the free market decide what services insurance companies want to offer, not bureaucrats. The federal government has no business mandating any kind of health care perestroika, period. I don't care what loopholes they find or legalese they use to argue otherwise. Those kind of decisions were to be left to the states to handle, or to the individuals, at least according to the tenth amendment to the Constitution.
They pledge to implement sanctions against Iran. Huh? What happened to no nation building? What happened to no empire building? There's a reason George Washington believed we should have commerce with all nations but entangling alliances with none. Sanctions are an act of war. It has been estimated that the sanctions imposed against Iraq caused millions of deaths, mostly children. Wars are expensive. They have nearly bankrupted this country both morally and financially. Can we really afford another war?
They pledge no more TARP funds. Ok, fine. How about pledging to arrest those who perpetrated that fraud on the United States in the first place? How about pledging to prosecute those who threatened our congressmen with images of martial law, economic collapse and rioting in the streets? I'm certain they could find something in all their RICO and terrorism laws to charge them with. Hey, better yet, how about getting all that money back? How about allowing those big companies to fail as they should have, get back the taxpayer money that was used to prop them up, and allowing smaller, more agile, more financially savvy companies to succeed where the large, cumbersome, bureaucratic, inept companies couldn't?
Does Newt Gingrich and his political cronies really think they can fool us again? Sadly, many will likely fall into that trap as they continue to hope that principle will trump money and power. This simply won't happen unless and until the outcry is so great that the political elite quake at the thought of being caught in a compromising position. It won't happen until there is some teeth put into the laws governing how the federal government is run. It won't happen until there is a real danger of politicians who stray from the principles set down in the Bill of Rights being held accountable for their actions.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like Barack Obama or his administration. I don't like what he's trying to turn our country into. But I didn't like George W. Bush either. I didn't like the direction he was taking America. I also didn't like being lied to back in the 90s when Newt Gingrich and his ilk introduced their "Contract With America." Perhaps if they had kept their word back then I might look differently upon them now, but that's not what happened. I can't trust them anymore. Perhaps Republican socialism is slightly better than Democrat socialism, but it is long past time for these types of comparisons to stop and for issues to be looked at separately instead of grouped together in party platforms. It is time to frame them in terms of freedom versus tyranny rather than in terms of big government Democrat versus big government Republican.
I can't tell you how angry it makes me that Newt Gingrich and the Republican establishment think I'm so stupid that I'll fall for their lies again. I can't tell you how angered I am that they have usurped a popular movement like the tea party, a movement that promised to bring freedom back to our nation and reinstate the power of the individual, a movement that wanted to once again make America a place where one's rights are respected and they are expected to take responsibility for their own lives and the decisions they make.
The tea party movement shouldn't be about Republican or Democrat, it should be about principle and honor. Both the Republicans and the Democrats have been a plague upon our nation. Both parties are, for the most part, without honor and without principle. Both parties have sold out the common folk for the thirty pieces of silver the corporate establishment has thrown at them.
I have an idea, Newt. How about you make a simple pledge. How about you pledge to stick to the Constitution? How about you pledge to limit government power to the powers enumerated in it? How about you repeal all unconstitutional laws, not just those passed by the Obama administration? How about repealing the Patriot Act, The Military Commissions Act, and other such unconstitutional, intrusive, freedom killing legislation brought on by the Bush administration?
How about pledging to audit the Federal Reserve? Oh, did you think your little ruse would make us forget about that little bit of legislation? Did you think that by focusing on the most recent bit of criminal activity and pledging to reverse those injustices we'd forget about that issue? Did you think we'd get angry enough to turn our heads away and just let them continue their unaccountable ways as they march us to economic ruin? How about we see if our gold is still where it's supposed to be? Let's not forget that those who control the supply of money control everything.
Of course, even if you made such a pledge, how could I trust you? How could anyone? You have deceived us before. You will continue to try to deceive. It's just in your nature. It's in the nature of almost every politician, almost everyone who seeks to exercise power over people. The problem is in the system. The system needs to be made more accountable. It needs to be made more voluntary. Until we can decide to stop paying for it, until we have the ability to withhold our taxes with impunity, it will remain unaccountable and inhabited by the worst, the most corruptible and the most power grubbing that humanity has to offer.
It seems to me that all that needs to be done is for government to get off the backs of the common folk. It seems that if it just lets the common folk be that we will all prosper. That is how our nation operated a hundred years ago when we were more prosperous than any of the socialist countries in the world. In fact, we were so prosperous that it held us together to this very day despite the anti free market sentiment of the power elite. We can no longer expect that prosperity to grow if we stay on the socialistic track we adopted in the thirties. Get the government off our backs and we will do well, as we have in the past.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Cut Taxes, Cut Spending, Shrink Government
So, I heard part of Barack Obama's speech yesterday. He held some sort of televised "town hall meeting" on CNBC which was entitled "Investing in America Forum." This on the heels of the declaration by The National Bureau of Economic Research that the "recession" ended in June of 2009. I definitely didn't get that memo. Well, one thing I can say for sure, these guys don't give up on the rhetoric. They don't lighten up on the propaganda. Barack loves to pretend that he cares and the elitists on top love to pretend that they can fool everyone just by saying everything's okay and the economy is hunky dory.
I don't know about the rest of you, but for me the recession is anything but over. In fact, it seems to me to be a depression. Anyone who believes otherwise must have a view of reality akin to tripping on acid. I hate to think of the distortions that are going on in the minds of those at The National Bureau of Economic Research who made such a declaration, but then again it might not be hard to declare an end to the recession when you're employed with a nice, cushy, well paying government job with all kinds of benefits paid for by the suffering, lowly tax payers and small businessmen. Let's see how they feel if their obviously worthless tax feeding positions in the propaganda ministry are downsized as they should be.
But Barack Obama calls this good news. He seems to believe it, that the recession is over and has been for some time. But he knows that some of us are still struggling. Boy, that's a relief. I mean, at least he knows, right? The economy simply isn't growing as fast as he'd like it to grow. Not to worry, soon everything is going to be better, unemployment will be a thing of the past, but right now we need to impose more taxes on the citizenry to pay for it all. We all just need to invest in America, and that means giving government more of your hard earned money.
One comment I heard Barack make was that his detractors call for cutting government spending, but they haven't gone into enough detail as to what government programs would be cut. Not enough detail, huh? This coming from a man who campaigned on "change" and "hope." Those concepts aren't nebulous at all. Those words provide us with detail galore. Why, I knew exactly all along what Barack Obama meant when he talked about those things. Unfortunately, too many people didn't.
Anyway, I thought I'd throw a few ideas out there at Barack. Let's start with the empire we're trying to maintain. We can start by closing down the military bases we have open all over the world. We can declare victory and end the conflicts in the middle east. We can bring our military home and park them in our own borders. We can come home from Germany, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, France, England, etc., etc., etc. That would save us trillions.
We can shut down the Department of Education. No, really. When I was a kid, public schools were paid for by the states and by the communities they served. Back then, American public schools were rated amongst the best in the world. It was only after the federal government became involved with the educational system that the ratings began to fall. It was only after federal mandates took effect that the students more likely to excel had to sit back and let the more mediocre catch up. There's an old saying, if it isn't broke don't fix it. I think there's nothing wrong with going back to something proven to work if something is working and breaks when one attempts to fix it.
Then there's the IRS. How many billions is spent on that organization? Get rid of the income tax and you can get rid of the IRS. I'm sure all those accountants would be able to find work in the private sector if that organization was shut down. Companies are always looking for good CPAs. I'm sure the enforcers who threaten and arrest so many of my fellow citizens for refusing to pay, questioning the validity of the income tax, or simply making a mistake on a tax form can find jobs investigating, arresting, and protecting us all from criminals who actually harm and steal from others. This would greatly shrink the government and reduce the tax burden.
I'm not suggesting that these things be done all at once or across the board. It can be done gradually to reduce the shock. But government isn't moving in this direction at all. It's moving in the opposite direction. Mr. Obama strives to increase the burden of big government, not lessen it. He and his party refuses to listen to the cries of the common folk who wish the freedom to tackle these problems on their own. The big government Republicans aren't much better as they simply wish to grow government in a different manner. Too few politicians are discussing true free market reform and so those of us with such ideas are ignored even though these concepts have been proven in the past and were codified in America's founding documents.
Barack Obama claims no one has gone into detail as to what can be cut because Barack Obama has chosen not to listen. He either believes his administration's own propaganda despite the evidence against it or purposely continues to deceive for his own personal agenda. His policies and the policies of his predecessors need to be reversed if we are to live up to the promise of freedom our founding fathers tried to bestow upon us. That is what the ground swell of popular indignation needs to focus on, a return to the principles that made us a prosperous nation.
It is time to cast off the yoke of big government and once again declare independence. We can no longer afford to be fooled by the propaganda. We can no longer continue to believe the rhetoric while reality delivers a different message. It is time to stop accepting politics and to start addressing issues. It is time to once again have an America where the individual accepts personal responsibility and individual liberty is respected. This can be done by doing exactly the opposite of what's being done now and hopefully the politicians will get that message before it's too late.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
I don't know about the rest of you, but for me the recession is anything but over. In fact, it seems to me to be a depression. Anyone who believes otherwise must have a view of reality akin to tripping on acid. I hate to think of the distortions that are going on in the minds of those at The National Bureau of Economic Research who made such a declaration, but then again it might not be hard to declare an end to the recession when you're employed with a nice, cushy, well paying government job with all kinds of benefits paid for by the suffering, lowly tax payers and small businessmen. Let's see how they feel if their obviously worthless tax feeding positions in the propaganda ministry are downsized as they should be.
But Barack Obama calls this good news. He seems to believe it, that the recession is over and has been for some time. But he knows that some of us are still struggling. Boy, that's a relief. I mean, at least he knows, right? The economy simply isn't growing as fast as he'd like it to grow. Not to worry, soon everything is going to be better, unemployment will be a thing of the past, but right now we need to impose more taxes on the citizenry to pay for it all. We all just need to invest in America, and that means giving government more of your hard earned money.
One comment I heard Barack make was that his detractors call for cutting government spending, but they haven't gone into enough detail as to what government programs would be cut. Not enough detail, huh? This coming from a man who campaigned on "change" and "hope." Those concepts aren't nebulous at all. Those words provide us with detail galore. Why, I knew exactly all along what Barack Obama meant when he talked about those things. Unfortunately, too many people didn't.
Anyway, I thought I'd throw a few ideas out there at Barack. Let's start with the empire we're trying to maintain. We can start by closing down the military bases we have open all over the world. We can declare victory and end the conflicts in the middle east. We can bring our military home and park them in our own borders. We can come home from Germany, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, France, England, etc., etc., etc. That would save us trillions.
We can shut down the Department of Education. No, really. When I was a kid, public schools were paid for by the states and by the communities they served. Back then, American public schools were rated amongst the best in the world. It was only after the federal government became involved with the educational system that the ratings began to fall. It was only after federal mandates took effect that the students more likely to excel had to sit back and let the more mediocre catch up. There's an old saying, if it isn't broke don't fix it. I think there's nothing wrong with going back to something proven to work if something is working and breaks when one attempts to fix it.
Then there's the IRS. How many billions is spent on that organization? Get rid of the income tax and you can get rid of the IRS. I'm sure all those accountants would be able to find work in the private sector if that organization was shut down. Companies are always looking for good CPAs. I'm sure the enforcers who threaten and arrest so many of my fellow citizens for refusing to pay, questioning the validity of the income tax, or simply making a mistake on a tax form can find jobs investigating, arresting, and protecting us all from criminals who actually harm and steal from others. This would greatly shrink the government and reduce the tax burden.
I'm not suggesting that these things be done all at once or across the board. It can be done gradually to reduce the shock. But government isn't moving in this direction at all. It's moving in the opposite direction. Mr. Obama strives to increase the burden of big government, not lessen it. He and his party refuses to listen to the cries of the common folk who wish the freedom to tackle these problems on their own. The big government Republicans aren't much better as they simply wish to grow government in a different manner. Too few politicians are discussing true free market reform and so those of us with such ideas are ignored even though these concepts have been proven in the past and were codified in America's founding documents.
Barack Obama claims no one has gone into detail as to what can be cut because Barack Obama has chosen not to listen. He either believes his administration's own propaganda despite the evidence against it or purposely continues to deceive for his own personal agenda. His policies and the policies of his predecessors need to be reversed if we are to live up to the promise of freedom our founding fathers tried to bestow upon us. That is what the ground swell of popular indignation needs to focus on, a return to the principles that made us a prosperous nation.
It is time to cast off the yoke of big government and once again declare independence. We can no longer afford to be fooled by the propaganda. We can no longer continue to believe the rhetoric while reality delivers a different message. It is time to stop accepting politics and to start addressing issues. It is time to once again have an America where the individual accepts personal responsibility and individual liberty is respected. This can be done by doing exactly the opposite of what's being done now and hopefully the politicians will get that message before it's too late.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Taxing the Poor; Creating Victims and Criminals
There's a big, public debate going on right now about whether or not to keep the "Bush era" tax cuts. The Democrats are claiming that anyone making more than a quarter of a million dollars a year should be taxed more to close the national deficit and the Republicans are claiming that these are the very people who need the money to create jobs and kick start our economy. By the way, they've been trying to kick start the economy for a couple of years now, even after they spent hundreds of billions or even trillions bailing out the mega banks and corporations.
As you may have guessed, I believe we should do more than just keep the "Bush era" tax cuts. I think tax cuts should be expanded. In fact, I think the income tax should be completely eliminated. It can be shown by looking through history that more government causes greater economic stress. It can be shown that fiat money systems inevitably collapse. That's because they are nothing but ponzi schemes. All the money flows to the top of the pyramid, the people who set it up. When it collapses, those at the bottom get hurt, those at the top still have all the money.
Before 1913, there was no income tax in the United States of America. It was, however, necessary to implement one in order for the Federal Reserve to be created. The Constitution of the United States of America had to be changed in order for this to happen. Back then, it appears, people still cared about what the Constitution had to say and about the protections it codified for the individuals residing in this nation. Some have made the case that the change made (the 16th amendment for those who don't know) was made illegally and was never properly ratified. Whether or not this is true I'm not entirely certain due to the obfuscation of the English language by the injection of Legalese into our lexicon, but in my opinion the confusion surrounding it should make the article null and void. There was certainly no meeting of the minds when this change was foisted upon the American people. It was fraudulent from its very inception.
So taxes were sold to the American people as a propaganda maneuver to sell them a system they wouldn't have bought into had they known the truth about it. They were told it was necessary to stabilize the economy. They were told it was necessary to keep the depressions of the past from recurring. They were told it was necessary to keep the specter of high unemployment from rearing its ugly head. They were told that only a small percentage of the richest Americans would be required to pay any income tax whatsoever. They were even told that the very people who wrote the Federal Reserve Act were against passing it, creating the illusion that an elite group the American public inherently distrusted would be adversely affected by the legislation. They were lied to. It is their progeny that now pays for their error.
The Federal Reserve has not done what it was set up to do. It did not stabilize the economy. In fact, in certain ways it made the economy less stable. Since its creation in 1913 the dollar has lost more than 95% of its value. Before that, from the mid 1700s to 1913, the dollar had actually increased in value. In other words, anyone who had saved a dollar prior to 1913, even if they had simply put the money away in a home safe, could buy more with that money after, say, 10 years, than they could when they first put it away. A retirement plan could have been as simple as a savings plan. After 1913, a dollar saved today was worth less tomorrow. Suddenly, retirement plans had to take inflation into account and it was necessary to find investments that grew or what seemed like a nice nest egg at the time might not be enough in the future. Investments also involve risks and can cost the investor a significant portion of the money they thought they'd have to retire on. Not to mention, many times that money is taxed once the investment matures, where the pre 1913 savings plan was tax free.
But I have digressed. The point is that neither income taxes nor the Federal Reserve which caused them to be created have done what they were originally supposed to do. Why do we continue to support failure? Is it any wonder our prosperity has been squandered when one considers the amount of failed institutions that have been propped up by our taxes? Why do we continue to pay?
Taxes are immoral. One can talk about laws, obedience, services that may or may not be rendered, contributing to society, etc. all one wants, but when push comes to shove taxes are theft. More accurately, they are the form of theft known as extortion. Face it, most all people would not pay their taxes if they had a choice. If there wasn't the threat of force, if there wasn't the specter of arrest and jail hanging over one's head, then most people wouldn't give their money to the government. There is, in my opinion, no difference between the government saying "Gee, I'd hate to see you have to go to jail for not paying your taxes" and some mafia thug saying "Gee, it's a nice business you have here. I'd hate to see something happen to it." The only difference might be that the mafia thug is a little bit more overt about his threat and does not try to pretend that he is something he is not.
If the services government offers are so necessary to society, why do we need such a threat to get people to pay for them? Wouldn't people who wanted such services be willing to pay for them? If they are doing such a good job, why do they have to force people to pay? Why won't they allow everyone to vote with their dollars? Perhaps it's because the services they offer aren't so necessary, or because they aren't doing a good job providing them, or because they have a monopoly on such services, they know they have a monopoly, and they don't want to relinquish that monopoly because they know their competitors would do a better job and they wouldn't be able to stay in the business of providing those services when their competitors would take their market share from them by providing better service at a lower cost.
Taxes also punish success. Who wants to make more when it just means the government will take more? Who wants to produce when more than half of what's produced is taken away by the faceless bureaucratic institutions that rule over our lives? The more successful you are, the more you have to pay, the more you have to carry the rest of society, the more you have to bear the burden of big government. It just makes no sense. It would be a much fairer system to not tax anyone and let everyone decide for themselves which goods and services they want to pay for, what they can and can't afford, and what charities deserve any extra money they may have.
There is no doubt that taxes help some people, but I don't believe taxation is the most efficient way of doing that, and I certainly don't think that government bureaucrats are the best people to determine where the money should go. One can and should question the wisdom of trying to redistribute wealth, of taxing the rich to help the poor. As the income tax was originally supposed to tax only the wealthiest one percent of Americans, it has morphed into a burden on all of us, even the poorest and least able to pay. My personal experience is evidence of this.
I have been without a job for some time now, and looking for work. While I have made a little money here and there, I have been mostly surviving off of unemployment insurance and what was left of my 401K plan when I was laid off. Little did I know that I would have to pay taxes on these money sources. When I filled out my 2009 tax returns like a good slave, I was surprised to see that I owed several hundred dollars to the feds and a couple of hundred to the state of Illinois.
Having no money to spare, I wrote to both the feds and the state, explained my situation and asked for a payment plan. The feds sent me a payment plan so I wouldn't take a big hit in a month and charged me a little bit of interest. The state of Illinois, on the other hand, demanded their money in one lump sum and fined me for not paying my taxes on time. There's your compassion. There's how much the state "cares" about the poor. They talk about taxing just the rich, but one way or another taxes are eventually paid for by even the poorest amongst us. The only real solution is to completely eliminate taxes and fund government services in a voluntary manner.
Taxes create victims by robbing the taxpayer. They will tax the rich until the rich are poor and not bat an eye. They create criminals by making it illegal to withhold payment when one feels that the services rendered are less than satisfactory. This monopolistic system is antithetical to the principles upon which this nation was built. Income taxes are exceptionally abhorrent since their enforcement intimates that government owns a portion of your labor. It's not enough to simply keep the "Bush era" tax cuts, the time has come expand income tax cuts and end the extortion.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
As you may have guessed, I believe we should do more than just keep the "Bush era" tax cuts. I think tax cuts should be expanded. In fact, I think the income tax should be completely eliminated. It can be shown by looking through history that more government causes greater economic stress. It can be shown that fiat money systems inevitably collapse. That's because they are nothing but ponzi schemes. All the money flows to the top of the pyramid, the people who set it up. When it collapses, those at the bottom get hurt, those at the top still have all the money.
Before 1913, there was no income tax in the United States of America. It was, however, necessary to implement one in order for the Federal Reserve to be created. The Constitution of the United States of America had to be changed in order for this to happen. Back then, it appears, people still cared about what the Constitution had to say and about the protections it codified for the individuals residing in this nation. Some have made the case that the change made (the 16th amendment for those who don't know) was made illegally and was never properly ratified. Whether or not this is true I'm not entirely certain due to the obfuscation of the English language by the injection of Legalese into our lexicon, but in my opinion the confusion surrounding it should make the article null and void. There was certainly no meeting of the minds when this change was foisted upon the American people. It was fraudulent from its very inception.
So taxes were sold to the American people as a propaganda maneuver to sell them a system they wouldn't have bought into had they known the truth about it. They were told it was necessary to stabilize the economy. They were told it was necessary to keep the depressions of the past from recurring. They were told it was necessary to keep the specter of high unemployment from rearing its ugly head. They were told that only a small percentage of the richest Americans would be required to pay any income tax whatsoever. They were even told that the very people who wrote the Federal Reserve Act were against passing it, creating the illusion that an elite group the American public inherently distrusted would be adversely affected by the legislation. They were lied to. It is their progeny that now pays for their error.
The Federal Reserve has not done what it was set up to do. It did not stabilize the economy. In fact, in certain ways it made the economy less stable. Since its creation in 1913 the dollar has lost more than 95% of its value. Before that, from the mid 1700s to 1913, the dollar had actually increased in value. In other words, anyone who had saved a dollar prior to 1913, even if they had simply put the money away in a home safe, could buy more with that money after, say, 10 years, than they could when they first put it away. A retirement plan could have been as simple as a savings plan. After 1913, a dollar saved today was worth less tomorrow. Suddenly, retirement plans had to take inflation into account and it was necessary to find investments that grew or what seemed like a nice nest egg at the time might not be enough in the future. Investments also involve risks and can cost the investor a significant portion of the money they thought they'd have to retire on. Not to mention, many times that money is taxed once the investment matures, where the pre 1913 savings plan was tax free.
But I have digressed. The point is that neither income taxes nor the Federal Reserve which caused them to be created have done what they were originally supposed to do. Why do we continue to support failure? Is it any wonder our prosperity has been squandered when one considers the amount of failed institutions that have been propped up by our taxes? Why do we continue to pay?
Taxes are immoral. One can talk about laws, obedience, services that may or may not be rendered, contributing to society, etc. all one wants, but when push comes to shove taxes are theft. More accurately, they are the form of theft known as extortion. Face it, most all people would not pay their taxes if they had a choice. If there wasn't the threat of force, if there wasn't the specter of arrest and jail hanging over one's head, then most people wouldn't give their money to the government. There is, in my opinion, no difference between the government saying "Gee, I'd hate to see you have to go to jail for not paying your taxes" and some mafia thug saying "Gee, it's a nice business you have here. I'd hate to see something happen to it." The only difference might be that the mafia thug is a little bit more overt about his threat and does not try to pretend that he is something he is not.
If the services government offers are so necessary to society, why do we need such a threat to get people to pay for them? Wouldn't people who wanted such services be willing to pay for them? If they are doing such a good job, why do they have to force people to pay? Why won't they allow everyone to vote with their dollars? Perhaps it's because the services they offer aren't so necessary, or because they aren't doing a good job providing them, or because they have a monopoly on such services, they know they have a monopoly, and they don't want to relinquish that monopoly because they know their competitors would do a better job and they wouldn't be able to stay in the business of providing those services when their competitors would take their market share from them by providing better service at a lower cost.
Taxes also punish success. Who wants to make more when it just means the government will take more? Who wants to produce when more than half of what's produced is taken away by the faceless bureaucratic institutions that rule over our lives? The more successful you are, the more you have to pay, the more you have to carry the rest of society, the more you have to bear the burden of big government. It just makes no sense. It would be a much fairer system to not tax anyone and let everyone decide for themselves which goods and services they want to pay for, what they can and can't afford, and what charities deserve any extra money they may have.
There is no doubt that taxes help some people, but I don't believe taxation is the most efficient way of doing that, and I certainly don't think that government bureaucrats are the best people to determine where the money should go. One can and should question the wisdom of trying to redistribute wealth, of taxing the rich to help the poor. As the income tax was originally supposed to tax only the wealthiest one percent of Americans, it has morphed into a burden on all of us, even the poorest and least able to pay. My personal experience is evidence of this.
I have been without a job for some time now, and looking for work. While I have made a little money here and there, I have been mostly surviving off of unemployment insurance and what was left of my 401K plan when I was laid off. Little did I know that I would have to pay taxes on these money sources. When I filled out my 2009 tax returns like a good slave, I was surprised to see that I owed several hundred dollars to the feds and a couple of hundred to the state of Illinois.
Having no money to spare, I wrote to both the feds and the state, explained my situation and asked for a payment plan. The feds sent me a payment plan so I wouldn't take a big hit in a month and charged me a little bit of interest. The state of Illinois, on the other hand, demanded their money in one lump sum and fined me for not paying my taxes on time. There's your compassion. There's how much the state "cares" about the poor. They talk about taxing just the rich, but one way or another taxes are eventually paid for by even the poorest amongst us. The only real solution is to completely eliminate taxes and fund government services in a voluntary manner.
Taxes create victims by robbing the taxpayer. They will tax the rich until the rich are poor and not bat an eye. They create criminals by making it illegal to withhold payment when one feels that the services rendered are less than satisfactory. This monopolistic system is antithetical to the principles upon which this nation was built. Income taxes are exceptionally abhorrent since their enforcement intimates that government owns a portion of your labor. It's not enough to simply keep the "Bush era" tax cuts, the time has come expand income tax cuts and end the extortion.
My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)