A Democracy?

One of the characteristics of circling the drain is that we keep passing the same spot each spin around the tub. Lately it is the ‘popular vote’ spot that we have passed by once again. We keep hearing how wrong it is that Hillary won the popular vote but not the White House. It is almost as though people think they live in democracy – when a democracy was what the founders explicitly wished to avoid.

Why would the founders want to avoid a democracy in favor of a republic? Simple reason – a republican form of government is the only form of government that protects minority rights. One might think that most people learned this by the 7th grade – but based on all of the screaming people do in the mistaken belief that they live in democracy it is obvious that people did not learn this.  Damn public schools again!

I would imagine the great majority of those wishing to live in an actual democracy would quickly regret the decision. A democracy is form of government where a majority decides. The minority has no effective rights.

I have heard people like Rachel Maddow claim that there is no difference between a republic and a democracy. I do not know if she truly believes that or if she is attempting to deceive people into believing a lie – but there is little going back from bad decisions in a democracy. Because it only requires 50%+1 to do as you wish with and to others a democracy is very susceptible to emotional arguments and the Zeitgeist – hence in a democracy the emphasis and path to power resides in deception and emotionalism. In a democracy all one must do is control the emotions of 50%+1 voters on the day they vote – and you can then do what ever you wish.

How it works. One must wonder about the motives of people who desire such a system…

24 Selected Paragraphs from Trump at the UN that Bear the Subtitle: In Your Ineffectual Face Barack Obama

A singularly striking thing about President Trump’s speech today to the United Nations is how much of it could not and never would have come out of the mouth of the president who preceded him. From America’s recent economic progress, to the historic success and resiliency of the Constitutional formula, to America’s positive role in the world, to aggressively confronting threats such as North Korea, Islamic terrorism, Iran and its sugar daddy nuclear deal, to opposing the brutality and oppression of Cuba and Venezuela, to resisting the corruption and cynicism of the organs of the United Nations, this speech was the manifesto of an anti-Obama. Below are some excerpts. Enjoy:
The United States has done very well since Election Day last November 8th. The stock market is at an all-time high — a record. Unemployment is at its lowest level in 16 years, and because of our regulatory and other reforms, we have more people working in the United States today than ever before. Companies are moving back, creating job growth the likes of which our country has not seen in a very long time.
But each day also brings news of growing dangers that threaten everything we cherish and value. Terrorists and extremists have gathered strength and spread to every region of the planet. Rogue regimes represented in this body not only support terrorists but threaten other nations and their own people with the most destructive weapons known to humanity.
Authoritarian powers seek to collapse the values, the systems, and alliances that prevented conflict and tilted the world toward freedom since World War II. International criminal networks traffic drugs, weapons, people; force dislocation and mass migration; threaten our borders; and new forms of aggression exploit technology to menace our citizens.
In America, we do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to watch. This week gives our country a special reason to take pride in that example. We are celebrating the 230th anniversary of our beloved Constitution — the oldest constitution still in use in the world today.
This timeless document has been the foundation of peace, prosperity, and freedom for the Americans and for countless millions around the globe whose own countries have found inspiration in its respect for human nature, human dignity, and the rule of law.
As President of the United States, I will always put America first, just like you, as the leaders of your countries will always, and should always, put your countries first. The United States will forever be a great friend to the world, and especially to its allies. But we can no longer be taken advantage of, or enter into a one-sided deal where the United States gets nothing in return. As long as I hold this office, I will defend America’s interests above all else.
We must reject threats to sovereignty, from the Ukraine to the South China Sea. We must uphold respect for law, respect for borders, and respect for culture, and the peaceful engagement these allow.
The scourge of our planet today is a small group of rogue regimes that violate every principle on which the United Nations is based. They respect neither their own citizens nor the sovereign rights of their countries. If the righteous many do not confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph. When decent people and nations become bystanders to history, the forces of destruction only gather power and strength.
The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea. Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime. The United States is ready, willing and able, but hopefully this will not be necessary. That’s what the United Nations is all about; that’s what the United Nations is for. Let’s see how they do.
We face this decision not only in North Korea. It is far past time for the nations of the world to confront another reckless regime — one that speaks openly of mass murder, vowing death to America, destruction to Israel, and ruin for many leaders and nations in this room.
The Iranian government masks a corrupt dictatorship behind the false guise of a democracy. It has turned a wealthy country with a rich history and culture into an economically depleted rogue state whose chief exports are violence, bloodshed, and chaos. The longest-suffering victims of Iran’s leaders are, in fact, its own people.
We cannot let a murderous regime continue these destabilizing activities while building dangerous missiles, and we cannot abide by an agreement if it provides cover for the eventual construction of a nuclear program. The Iran Deal was one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into. Frankly, that deal is an embarrassment to the United States, and I don’t think you’ve heard the last of it — believe me.
It is time for the entire world to join us in demanding that Iran’s government end its pursuit of death and destruction. It is time for the regime to free all Americans and citizens of other nations that they have unjustly detained. And above all, Iran’s government must stop supporting terrorists, begin serving its own people, and respect the sovereign rights of its neighbors.
Oppressive regimes cannot endure forever, and the day will come when the Iranian people will face a choice. Will they continue down the path of poverty, bloodshed, and terror? Or will the Iranian people return to the nation’s proud roots as a center of civilization, culture, and wealth where their people can be happy and prosperous once again?
In Saudi Arabia early last year, I was greatly honored to address the leaders of more than 50 Arab and Muslim nations. We agreed that all responsible nations must work together to confront terrorists and the Islamist extremism that inspires them.
We will stop radical Islamic terrorism because we cannot allow it to tear up our nation, and indeed to tear up the entire world. We must deny the terrorists safe haven, transit, funding, and any form of support for their vile and sinister ideology. We must drive them out of our nations. It is time to expose and hold responsible those countries who support and finance terror groups like al Qaeda, Hezbollah, the Taliban and others that slaughter innocent people.
Last month, I announced a new strategy for victory in the fight against this evil in Afghanistan. From now on, our security interests will dictate the length and scope of military operations, not arbitrary benchmarks and timetables set up by politicians. I have also totally changed the rules of engagement in our fight against the Taliban and other terrorist groups. In Syria and Iraq, we have made big gains toward lasting defeat of ISIS. In fact, our country has achieved more against ISIS in the last eight months than it has in many, many years combined.
For decades, the United States has dealt with migration challenges here in the Western Hemisphere. We have learned that, over the long term, uncontrolled migration is deeply unfair to both the sending and the receiving countries.
For the sending countries, it reduces domestic pressure to pursue needed political and economic reform, and drains them of the human capital necessary to motivate and implement those reforms. For the receiving countries, the substantial costs of uncontrolled migration are borne overwhelmingly by low-income citizens whose concerns are often ignored by both media and government.
We thank the Secretary General for recognizing that the United Nations must reform if it is to be an effective partner in confronting threats to sovereignty, security, and prosperity. Too often the focus of this organization has not been on results, but on bureaucracy and process. [snip] it is a massive source of embarrassment to the United Nations that some governments with egregious human rights records sit on the U.N. Human Rights Council.
That is why in the Western Hemisphere, the United States has stood against the corrupt and destabilizing regime in Cuba and embraced the enduring dream of the Cuban people to live in freedom. My administration recently announced that we will not lift sanctions on the Cuban government until it makes fundamental reforms.
We have also imposed tough, calibrated sanctions on the socialist Maduro regime in Venezuela, which has brought a once thriving nation to the brink of total collapse. The socialist dictatorship of Nicolas Maduro has inflicted terrible pain and suffering on the good people of that country. This corrupt regime destroyed a prosperous nation by imposing a failed ideology that has produced poverty and misery everywhere it has been tried. To make matters worse, Maduro has defied his own people, stealing power from their elected representatives to preserve his disastrous rule.
The Venezuelan people are starving and their country is collapsing. Their democratic institutions are being destroyed. This situation is completely unacceptable and we cannot stand by and watch. The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented, but that socialism has been faithfully implemented. From the Soviet Union to Cuba to Venezuela, wherever true socialism or communism has been adopted, it has delivered anguish and devastation and failure. Those who preach the tenets of these discredited ideologies only contribute to the continued suffering of the people who live under these cruel systems.
America stands with every person living under a brutal regime. Our respect for sovereignty is also a call for action. All people deserve a government that cares for their safety, their interests, and their wellbeing, including their prosperity. The United States of America has been among the greatest forces for good in the history of the world, and the greatest defenders of sovereignty, security, and prosperity for all.

Good Cop / Bad Cop

Maybe many years ago I was perchance consuming an adult beverage imaginably prior to the legal age of doing so. Conceivably I was drinking this beer at a public beach and for all one knows two policemen appeared. Perhaps these two policemen did the Good Cop / Bad Cop routine and one perhaps threatened to throw us in jail while the other maybe pretended to be our best friend and perhaps sympathized with twenty year olds drinking beer at a public beach at night. As the case may be the effort was perhaps so amateurish and heavy handed that we underage partiers perhaps simply rolled our eyes but lost our remaining beer – which the policeman perhaps enjoyed later that evening in a public place with their policemen friends.

The Good Cop / Bad Cop routine is probably as old as law enforcement itself.

The Good Cop / Bad Cop routine is also as old as politics as well.

An example of Good Cop/ Bad Cop in politics is the claim that only government can protect us from corporations. Examples such as Dodd-Frank and the Affordable Care Act are held out to the public as the politicians protecting us from the evil Wall Street Banks and the evil health insurance corporations. I am not questioning the evil of some of the people in these industries but the idea that government will protect you from this evil is simply absurd – the government and the corporations are all on the same team. Including Bernie Sanders.

The Dodd-Frank legislation was drafted by CitiGroup, the Wall Street bank. The Affordable Care Act, AKA Obamacare, was drafted by the former Vice President of Lobbying for WellPoint. Understand this – the legislation that the politicians are so adamant in claiming will protect you from Wall Street banks and giant health insurance companies is written by – wait for it – Wall Street banks and giant health insurance companies.

This is nothing more than the Good Cop / Bad Cop routine and at the end of the night – the politicians and corporations will drink your beer with their friends instead of you drinking it with your friends.

It is the same scam written to the tune of trillions of dollars.

How do we end this cycle of abuse and corruption and more importantly – how do we get the general public to quit supporting this government/corporate partnership to rip them off?

First of all – principles. Do you think that legislation, taxation and regulation should create situations where your money or labor is required to go to corporations? No you say? Then do not support it – regardless what politicians, celebrities, and political parties tell you to support it. When you support something that violates your principles due to a politician, celebrity, or political party saying you should support it – that will fall into the general realm of a Cult of Personality. Do not participate in a Cult of Personality. That is bad. I should not have to say ‘that is bad’ but in 2017 – well – it must be pointed out that Cults of Personality are bad.

“But but but – what the other guys want to do is WORSE!” – more Good Cop / Bad Cop. The majority of these politicians profit from the corporations – both parties. “The other guy wants to throw you in jail but I just want to take your beer – see, I am your friend!” Is that about how it works? Exactly how it works in DC.

Have some principles, have some morals, understand the effects of legislation, taxation and regulation and those who profit and gain power from it. Those profits and power are directly at your expense. If a politician, celebrity or political party tells you what legislation, taxation and regulation does – be skeptical. Be very skeptical. Chances are better than 90% that what they are telling you is a lie at least in that they will omit significant truths.

Principles, principles, principles – not Cults of Personality. This is the only answer that will prevent the politicians and corporations from taking your beer.

One Black Man’s Manifesto; One Black Man’s Rebuttal

This week, I encountered two stunning new pieces of writing. Beautiful prose flowed lyrically from each, but, they poured out wholly different ways of thinking and seeing life and race. One, The First White President by celebrated writer Ta-Nehisi Coates, declared Donald Trump a white supremacist lifted to office on dominant currents of white racism. The other, An Open Letter to Ta-Nehisis Coates, by Jamaican immigrant and De Paul Professor of Philosophy Jason Hill serendipitously ran in Commentary Magazine about the same times Coates’s piece appeared online in The Atlantic. It actually was penned to rebut an earlier book by Coates. Hill does not mention Coates’s more recent essay.
Despite the misalignment of content, however, the thesis and antithesis of the two men is vivid. Coates declares the American dream a racist fraud and goes on to describe, or to demand, really, a tribal world of endless conflict between white and black, grievance by black, guilt and obligation for white. All thinking, politicking, and transacting in Coates’s world happens under an overlay as inescapable as gravity of tension and distrust among human beings based on race.
Hill, in optimistic contrast, describes his hopes and experience as an immigrant meeting other immigrants, a welcoming society, and living out the memorable phrase of Indian immigrant Dinesh D’Souza “writing the script of your own life.”

Consider Coates’s opening paragraph, rejoined by Hill’s starting and finishing words.

First Coates:

It is insufficient to state the obvious of Donald Trump: that he is a white man who would not be president were it not for this fact. With one immediate exception, Trump’s predecessors made their way to high office through the passive power of whiteness—that bloody heirloom which cannot ensure mastery of all events but can conjure a tailwind for most of them. Land theft and human plunder cleared the grounds for Trump’s forefathers and barred others from it. Once upon the field, these men became soldiers, statesmen, and scholars; held court in Paris; presided at Princeton; advanced into the Wilderness and then into the White House. Their individual triumphs made this exclusive party seem above America’s founding sins, and it was forgotten that the former was in fact bound to the latter, that all their victories had transpired on cleared grounds. No such elegant detachment can be attributed to Donald Trump—a president who, more than any other, has made the awful inheritance explicit.
Now Hill.
Dear Ta-Nehisi Coates:
I read your book Between the World and Me, an elegant and poetic elegy written to your son on “the question,” as you put it, “of how one should live within a black body, within a country lost in the [American] Dream.”
[Y]our book, while moving, reads primarily like an American horror story and, I’m sorry to say, a declaration of war against my adopted country.
My fear is that Between the World and Me aims to reach far beyond the scope of the reader’s moral imagination and into the actual lives of Americans, black or white, who share this thing you refer to as the Dream. My concern is that you and your book function as deputized stand-ins for the black male and the black experience in America, respectively. And I believe that as stand-ins, both fail.
Because I write as a black immigrant who chose to live in the United States, whose biggest hope as a child was to become an American citizen, and who chose to embrace the American Dream you condemn, please consider these words my Declaration of Independence—an independence that only my beloved America could have given to me.
And Hill’s closing paragraphs:
Many more personal dreams of mine continue to be nurtured in and by America. In 32 years of living in this country, the United States has never once failed me. Becoming an American citizen was the greatest privilege of my life.
Your book reads like an American horror story because you have damned to hell the noblest and most endearing trait of those who come to this country and who love it: the Dream. You declare: “This is the foundation of the Dream—its adherents must not just believe in it but believe that it is just, believe that their possession of the Dream is the natural result of grit, honor, and good works.” Well, it is. And we, the Dreamers and achievers who continue to make this country the exceptional wonder that it is, will never capitulate to your renunciation. The world we desired has been won. It exists. It is real. It is possible. It is ours. And it should be yours, and your son’s.
Coates’s examination should prompt reflective readers to ask if his vision is accurate, and what part if any, the reader might play causing or preserving division. Hill’s declaration should  cause any reader to consider their choices and what they are making of their own circumstances. Each essay is beautifully written and, though long, will reward your time and thought.

Become Wealthy By Serving Your Fellow Man

“Prior to capitalism, the way people amassed great wealth was by looting, plundering and enslaving their fellow man. Capitalism made it possible to become wealthy by serving your fellow man.” – Walter Williams

“As a dog returns to its vomit, so fools repeat their folly.” – Proverbs 26:11

Looting, plundering and enslaving certainly seems to be the desired direction of many people and ironically under the guise of making it ‘fair.’ “Healthcare is a right!” is the cry while ignoring the correlation – that if healthcare is a ‘right’ then healthcare workers are essentially slaves to be plundered and looted. Why aren’t donuts a right then as well and then we can enslave the bakers too?

The endgame to all this will be fewer doctors, nurses, therapist and technicians – and hence less healthcare. To the socialist the truth that there will be less healthcare is irrelevant. For the doctors, who wants to spend all of that money to acquire an education and then enter a profession that is essentially slavery? Very few. But wait – the socialist have an answer to that as well – enslave everyone to the same degree. Is that not the end result? Of course it is.

So yes bakers are already slaves to others ‘rights’ – “Bake the cake!” – as are a plethora of other professions and occupations in this country. Let’s face it – if you can force someone in the United States to violate their conscience and their deepest held religious beliefs – if you agree with them or not – in order to perform labor for someone else then is slavery not what you have embraced? Of course it is.

How fortuitous that the people calling for the destruction of statues because of racist history are the same people calling out for the modern enslavement of doctors, nurses, bakers – the irony is completely lost on them.

Lost on them for now.

The irony never remains lost for very long because the delusion that ‘other’ people will be forced to do what they do not desire- but not you! – will come to a quick bitter end. Once society starts down this track there is no logical pause to it – in fact the farther society goes the steeper the decline and the greater the acceleration into misery, poverty and death.

For those of you who may advocate for “Healthcare for all” in the Bernie Sanders mode and making bakers “Bake the cake!” – enjoy the vomit. You won’t be getting the rest of us to eat it – we worked too hard getting rid of it to return to it. We would rather get wealthy serving people than create poverty by enslaving them.

Root Cause

“Entitlements and other mandatory spending alone is projected to reach $2.566 trillion or 63% of total FY 2018 outlays. Another $307 billion will be required for interest on the nation’s $20 trillion public debt, while upwards of half the $1.22 trillion for so-called “discretionary” or appropriated programs also reflects funds appropriated years ago. Altogether, $3.5 trillion, or 85% of outlays, will be essentially baked into the cake before a single Congressional vote is taken on anything regarding the FY 2018 budget. The Federal spending machine is almost entirely on autopilot and heading for disaster owing to ballooning populations and debt. Ten years from now the combined cost of mandatory programs and debt service will reach $5.12 trillion compared to just $2.87 trillion during FY 2018.” – David Stockman, former congressman and former Director of the Office of Management and Budget

“Rational people recognize this $20 trillion for the supernatural scale of obligation it represents, and understand that it will never be paid back, so, what the hell? Why not just drop the pretense, but keep on working this racket of the government borrowing as much money as it wants, and the Federal Reserve creating that money (or “money”) on its computers to infinity. Seems to work so far. Rational people would also suspect that at some point, something might have to give.” – James Kunstler

Meanwhile the Census Bureau reports that real inflation-adjusted earnings for men are less than they were in 1973. Earnings for males are basically unchanged from what they were in 1968. In other words, on an apples-to-apples basis, i.e. real inflation-adjusted earnings for men, we have been static now for decades.

We have failed as voters to grasp how deceit, war, debt, net wealth and wages are connected. Here is a short history of how we accelerated into disaster (and why wages have been stagnant for 45 years!): JFK and LBJ created more dollars than the United States had gold to cover. France accumulated an immense number of physical dollars. After Nixon was elected, France having accumulated all of these dollars, demanded to exchange their dollars for gold (as they were entitled to do). The United States, not having the gold reserves to cover the dollars that had been printed, left the gold standard in 1971 in order to avoid insolvency in not being able to redeem the dollars that France held.

Understand what happened.

Additionally and of no less significance – LBJ increased Federal spending via launching the Great Society at the same time he was fighting the Viet Nam War. LBJ fully intended to run for re-election in 1968 and the deficits and increases to the Federal debt that sourced in the war and the Great Society was bound to be an election issue in 1968. LBJ in true LBJ fashion simply ordered the Federal government to abandon Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). In other words, LBJ directed the Federal government to only count the financial burdens that LBJ found politically convenient and ignore those that would be a detriment to his re-election efforts.

Let me summarize where we are in this history lesson – by 1968 JFK and LBJ had gone on a printing spree to artificially goose the economy and printed far more dollars than the United States had gold to redeem. LBJ also stopped the United States Federal government from using Generally Accepted Accounting Practices. Nixon then took us off of the gold standard.Notice the wage growth in the male inflation-adjusted earnings has been stagnant since 1973 – that it is not a coincidence! But wait – there is more!

In 1971 Nixon removed the United States from the gold standard due to there being more dollars than gold to redeem the dollars. The United States moved to a fiat currency – but more importantly the United States moved to fiat credit. The volume of credit that could be introduced was no longer tied to and limited by gold and savings. Those of you old enough to recall may remember the 1970’s stagflation that was the immediate result of these events. In response to the stagflation congress passed Humphrey-Hawkins in 1978. This legislation basically outsourced congress’s job to the Federal Reserve. It provided the Federal Reserve with the twin mandates of controlling inflation and stimulating full employment – in a fiat credit environment. See the problem here? The United States congress made the disastrous decision to manage employment and inflation via monetary policy – not fiscal policy.

The only tools the Federal Reserve possesses in order to achieve the twin mandates are manipulating interest rates and introducing additional credit – in other words creating financial bubbles, That is what they do for a living.

What is more, when Nixon took the United States off of the gold standard it presented the potential problem of why anyone would purchase fiat credit from the United States in the volume needed to support the deficits being generated by the Great Society programs plus the additional government programs that Nixon introduced.. The solution devised by Nixon and Kissinger was the petrodollar system. Simply put the petrodollar system is an agreement by many of the worlds leading oil-producing nations that they will only accept U.S. dollars in exchange for oil exports. By only accepting U.S. dollars for oil, the nations that purchase the oil must have U.S. dollars on hand to pay for the oil. The easiest method to acquire U.S. dollars is by purchasing United States debt – hence our ability to continue to borrow is primarily dependent on the oil production of middle-east nations – and their demanding only U.S. dollars for oil. In exchange the United States provides military and political security to these nations – this is the primary reason that we have the worlds largest defense budget and most powerful military and why we are constantly militarily engaged defending these regimes in the middle-east.

Understand how all of this is tied together.

Now let us return to LBJ removing us from Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The obligations that LBJ removed from being counted as part of the official deficit and the debt were primarily entitlement obligations. No President since LBJ has seen fit to return to GAAP. It is simply too politically inconvenient to have honest accounting. However the Congressional Budget Office has calculated the actual Federal debt using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and the debt number the CBO arrived at is not the $20 trillion that has been in the headlines the last few days – but $210 trillion. The actual debt is ten and half times greater than the debt the Federal government officially claims.

Let us quickly review – the United States left the gold standard shortly after the Federal government ceased calculating the actual debt. In order to replace the discipline that should have been inflicted by the gold standard (but that JFK and LBJ failed to adhere to) the petrodollar and then Humphrey-Hawkins were put in place. These actions had a profound effect on how the United States operated. Prior to LBJ credit was a limited and valuable resource to be provided primarily in situations that would result in increased productivity and consequently increased profits that fed into a growing economy – and an improved standard of living and wage growth. Understand how these are connected – by market incentive.

In the previous model credit was regulated by the amount of savings on hand and the volume of gold in possession – hence it was limited and only provided in the most profitable of situations.

In the current system we have fiat credit – there are no limits on how much credit is available and consequently credit is nearly valueless in terms of only being provided in the most profitable of situations. Previously the only means that creditors had to make money was if the borrower paid back the loan – hence creditors were invested in the success of their borrowers be it with a home mortgage, a business expansion or a business start-up. In the current system the collateralization of the debt is much more profitable than an individual debt being repaid. Grasp that fact and you will understand much in regard to why wages are stagnant and why we have such sub-par growth and most importantly why we have ever expanding gaps in net wealth between the many and the few.

It is popular to advocate for a return to Glass–Steagall in order to address this situation. That is not only impractical at this point but it would simply provide a band aid on the gushing of a severed artery. Glass–Steagall does nothing to address the root cause of why we are bleeding to death. There are many people, notably Trump and Sanders supporters, who advocate for a return to policies of the 1950’s that favored labor and favored manufacturing and all of that. Once again, you cannot have that or anything resembling that if you do not fix the root problem.

The root cause is that with endless fiat credit it can be rolled into a bundle and subject to collateralization and there is no longer an incentive to grow any part of the economy other than the financial sector. Fiat credit with collateralization is being able to create free wealth via the mere introduction of credit. Those who are in a position to introduce the credit or invest in the credit grow wealthy for nothing more than a few keystrokes on a computer – while producing nothing. These people at the top receive the wealth from the credit and the rest of us receive the debt. This is the root cause of the $15 trillion net wealth transfer from the bottom 93% to the top 7% that occurred during the Obama years. What people do not want to grasp is that every government program introduced is funded with credit – hence every Obamaphone and every person receiving government healthcare amounts to a wealth transfer to the wealthy. Do you not ever wonder why the wealthy are overwhelmingly in favor of larger and larger government acquiring more and more debt? This is why.

“If socialist understood economics they wouldn’t be socialist.” – Hayek

That these government programs lead to the enriching of the few and the impoverishing of the many is the root cause of the failure of the -ism’s. I have attempted to explain in this post why that is and what decisions caused us to reach this disaster. At this point people typically argue to raise taxes in order to not have to borrow more money. Using GAAP accounting the Federal government is running a deficit of $5.5 trillion or more. If you were to tax everyone making more than $200K a year at 100% you would raise about $750 billion – so still $4.75 trillion short. If you took every asset everyone making $200K a year had you would raise another $750 billion – so still $4 trillion short.

In other words there are simply not enough tax dollars out there to even approach covering what the United States is on the hook for today – let alone increasing those obligations. In order to balance you would have to tax everyone making $20K a year at 100%. You could only do that once though – after that no one would bother to make more than $20K ever again. What is the point?

When you hear Bernie Sanders argue for Medicare For All – understand that knowingly or not he is arguing for wealth transfers to the 1%. That is the net result of that plan. Furthermore let me connect the dots for you – Medicare (and every other government program) is funded by debt, that debt is dependent on the petrodollar, the petrodollar is dependent on United States military engagement in the middle-east. Not to put too fine a point on it – but innocent people will be killed in other countries in order for you to have that government benefit. I understand that society has abstracted the connection in such a convoluted manner that most people are obtuse about this – but that is the ugly truth. You might want to recall this fact the next time you argue for a government benefit – and leave your moral superiority complex in the dumpster where it belongs.

This model we have moved to the past fifty years has a logical end – aside from the fact that other countries are getting fed up with our willingness to kill innocent people with brown skin so the government can provide Obamaphone’s. If we reach that logical end it will be painful beyond what any of us has ever experienced. Is there time to avoid that pain? Perhaps, each passing day reduces the chances of avoiding the pain. However our real enemy is that we ignore this problem in favor of whatever the talking heads, social media and politicians tell us we should care about today. That is not to say that there are not ten thousand other things that happened the last fifty years to contribute to our predicament – there are. However those things are not the root cause of our disaster but rather unintended consequences and reactions to the problem.

This is our most serious problem and it is a lethal problem.

“But but but statues…”

“Sometimes societies just collectively go insane.” – James Kunstler

Page 1 of 3112345...102030...Last »