Archive for the ‘Human value’ Category

Arizona and Immigration?

April 30, 2010

Just look at all these sob stories.

At this rate, Democratic congress members will try to pass a law that makes it legal for illegal immigrants to live here. I don’t have a problem letting them live here – free trade is great! In fact, I want everyone to be able to come to American and work.

But we need to get rid of welfare and minimum wage first, or else the consequences will be dire:

1. Once they are legally living here, they will be eligible for wealth redistribution. This will increase the demand, without increasing the supply(since the government can only get 19.5% of GDP). Meaning we will have to mortgage more grandchildrens’ futures.

2. Minimum wage laws. The demand for minimum wage will shoot up by however many millions of them there are, without increasing the supply of such jobs. And unemployment will greatly increase, both among the capable illegal Mexicans and among our own poor people.

3. They will be able to vote. And with one party giving them wealth redistribution, amnesty, and minimum wage, who do you suppose they will vote for?

I would love to allow everyone to come to America – that is how this great nation was built! But allowing everyone to come to America to take someone else’s pie is very different from allowing everyone to come to America to bake their own pie.

Check out IMAO’s post about it.

How Actual Free Market Capitalism Would Save Healthcare

June 17, 2009

Healthcare has saved so many lives, it is about time that something saved it.(and as the past has proven, it isn’t the government that can do the saving!)

John Stossel writes about it.

America Becoming Unsafe for the Successful?

June 14, 2009

“Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen.” President Obama warned CEOs of financial institutions. “The public isn’t buying that. My administration is the only thing standing between you and the pitchforks.”

And it’s true, too. Employees who were supposed to receive bonuses at AIG have received many vulgar death threats, some even hiring guards to protect their homes.

What inspires this kind of fear? A mob. What inspires a mob? It takes charisma. It takes a repeated message, that someone greedy or successful is responsible for everyone else’s problems… Let’s look back in history.

“Yet formerly Germany, without blinking an eyelid, for whole decades admitted these Jews by the hundred thousand. But now… when the nation is no longer willing to be sucked dry by these parasites, on every side one hears nothing but laments.” – Adolf Hitler, in his speech on September 12th, 1938

And now look into the present.

“This is a corporation that finds itself in financial distress due to recklessness and greed. Under these circumstances, it’s hard to understand how derivative traders at AIG warranted any bonuses, much less $165 million in extra pay. I mean, how do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?(…)excuse me, I’m choked up with anger here(…)” – Barack Obama, in his speech on March 16, 2009

The speeches share a common tone – anger at a particularly upper class or rich group of people. Class warfare. According to Obama and his liberal allies, the wealthy are the cause of our problems. The wealthy are taking care of themselves. The wealthy are ‘sucking us dry’ and giving themselves ‘$165 million in extra pay’.

And Barney Frank says that the AIG bonuses were “rewarding failure”. Isn’t it ironic that he would say something like that? After spending nearly 2 trillion in bailouts for companies that were failing, he is upset about 280 million in bonuses spent on employees that were part of a failing company. Didn’t he know that employees in a failing company would get money when congress bailed out AIG with taxpayer dollars? Didn’t he know that the bailout would ‘reward incompetence’? Perhaps he forgot that momentarily when he was signing the 700 billion TARP into law…

That means that Mr. Frank and his liberal allies have spent 2,000,000,000,000 on buying up failures, and he’s upset that AIG spent 280,000,000 of that on failures. If you do the division, that means he outspent AIG by 7142:1 in taxpayer dollars. He and his liberal allies spent seven thousand times as much on failures! How very intriguing that he would be angry about rewarding incompetence. Perhaps we should lower his salary, as he is obviously ‘incompetent’ when it comes to basic arithmetic.

Vote Democrat and you can help cap the successful people’s salaries who ‘must have cheated to get there'(or had signed contracts including bonuses from over a year ago with AIG…), vote Hitler and you can eliminate their lives and liberty altogether. We are on a slippery slope to class warfare, and the pitchforks are already being sharpened. The trouble is, once the wealthy are out of the way, who is there to stop the government from bearing down on the middle and lower classes? Is shared misery in a socialist system what Americans really want? Do we really want to end up like India?

The difference between us and India is that we were founded on protection of God-given rights such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all. It doesn’t guarentee us happiness – how can that be possible in such an evil world? But when the government honors those basic rights, it protects our lives and liberty – allowing us to pursue our gifts and desires without excessive taxation or any redistribution of our long work hours.

But today in this country, the mob rule government redistributes the long hours of workaholic CEOs and careful planning to other people. It steals 39 percent of the most wealthiest peoples’ lives to give to the poorest peoples’ lives(Robin Hood style, minus the stealing from wealthy officials). And since the government has been waging a war on poverty for nearly 80 years, people don’t feel the responsibility to help eachother. Did you know that 70% of your money that goes to welfare is lost in government overhead, paperwork, and government employee salary? But yet Americans no longer feel responsibility to help other people by donating to private charities that only lose 5% in overhead. “It’s not my problem” syndrome is becoming more and more common among Americans(especially liberals!)

Let me leave you with a few suggestions: Don’t be jealous. Vote for basic protections for everyone, whether they are successful or not, and vote against government officials who redistribute your wealth to either failing corporations or to massively wasteful welfare programs. Give to charity! Love your neighbor. And most of all, don’t rely on the government to solve your problems.

Leave Us Alone Already!

May 23, 2009

You know, I don’t understand why the government can’t just leave people alone… Yes, obviously you have to have law enforcement… but look at all this excess stuff. Does any of it solve the problem it sets out to solve? No. (education, welfare, FDA, AMA…) They should stop stealing people’s money, and let the consumers hold education, food, and medicine responsible for pricing themselves! Prices would drop without excessive regulation!

Did you know that the way the regulations are, only 40 in 10,000 drugs gets through? That drives prices up for healthcare a great deal, and it doesn’t even stop all the bad drugs! Private institutions and watchdog groups do a much better job.(like eBay’s rating system, i.e)

I don’t think I have to tell you how much of a mess public education is.

70% of government charity is lost in overhead, whereas in private charity where the citizens keep the institution accountable only lose 5% in overhead. Ronald Reagan illustrated it quite nicely in his 1964 speech when he pointed out that “if we divided the 45 billion dollars up equally(…)we’d be able to give each family 4,600 dollars a year.(…)Direct aid to the poor, however, is only running only about 600 dollars per family. It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead.”

Some quick mathematics shows that if 10% of someone’s income would go to government charity, if we abolished welfare and allowed people to choose for themselves, to get the same amount we’d only need 3.15% of that person’s income in private charity to have the same effect on poverty. And honestly, I don’t think Obama really cares about poverty more than he cares about votes. He already has much of America’s poor enthralled with him emotionally. However, they don’t realize what he really wants to do. When he reduces charitable deductions, you can tell what he really wants: Money and power.

Finally, can you imagine if everyone had food insurance, and food assistance programs from the government or employers autmoatically? You’d just buy everything you felt like buying, without looking at the price! And the people at the front desk would sell it to you, too, smiling merrily even though they don’t know the price either. You swipe the card, and off you go. What would happen to food prices? They would skyrocket! Insurance premiums would continue to climb to meet the expenses. Who would be gettting rich off of it? Yes, that’s right, the government that taxes the food and the businesses that sell the food. Ever wonder why surgeons and doctors make so much more money than the average income?

If we want to reduce the price of medicine, and increase the quality, public healthcare is not the way to go! We must eliminate government regulation, intervention and taxes on healthcare. Encourage private competition to drive prices down and quality up. Look at the other things that the government controls the service of, and ask yourself: Do I really want the government to have that much of direct control on my health?

Freedom Fries or French Fries?

April 30, 2009

Reason TV posted a revealing comparison of the French and American ways of life.

Folks, there are reasons for people trying to get into the US for centuries, and socialistic slavery isn’t one of them. Beware the tendrils of socialism. 

“Obama and Biden will set a goal that all middle and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year, and will establish a new tax credit that is worth $4,000 a year in exchange for 100 hours of public service a year.”

“Required community service” is a fancy name for slavery to the government.

Pie, Bread, and Socialism

April 24, 2009

Yum, pie. Just thinking of pie makes my mouth water.

Do you have pie? I do. I just had a big slice of blueberry pie a little while ago, and let me tell you: It was incredibly delicious.

I’m sorry if you don’t have any pie. It’s just a fact of life: Not everyone has pie. There are probably some people in poverty stricken countries that have never even heard of pie. Their ignorance of pie could perhaps be explained by the fact that most of them don’t eat on a daily basis.

Poverty stricken countries share one trait – a massive government. At first, you know, it always starts with some kind of a revolution(peaceful or violent), with the charismatic leaders claiming how everyone would have equal rights to the pie under his regime. It always seems like such a great idea for awhile. But look at the USSR now – look at India now. The government wanted to give everyone pie, but somewhere along the line this envisioned Utopia was broken.

Why is that, you might ask? Well, let’s look at this from an economics viewpoint. And to make it easy to think about, let’s think in terms of pie.

Think about the little red hen. Let’s say her master(whom I will refer to as ‘Farmer John’)  gave her complete economic freedom. She went out, found some wheat, and then looked for business partners in making some pie. Unfortunately, no other farm animal wanted to do any work. So she made just one pie alone. Yet in the end, everyone wanted to eat some pie, even though there was less of it due to the other animals not contributing. Farmer John didn’t let them take her pie from her, though, so she ate most of it and gave some to Farmer John as a tax. The other animals saw how the little red hen was rewarded for making pie, so they helped make pie in the future, and there was more than enough for everyone, since Farmer John didn’t confiscate more than 10% of their pie, no matter how much pie they made.

Now think of what would happen if Farmer John said ‘Everything belongs to everyone!'(cough, cough, socialism, cough) Well, the little red hen, being the industrious young fowl she is, would go out, find some wheat, and then look for business partners in making some pie. Of course, the other farm animals are still as lazy as ever. She goes ahead and makes the pie alone, but lo and behold, once again the other farm animals wanted to eat her pie. This time Farmer John forced her not only to give him some as a tax, but to share the remainder with the other animals. The little red hen didn’t like this treatment of her, and began to resent it. Soon she began eating bird feed given to her by Farmer John and quit making  pie altogether.

Now, since she quit making pie and giving some of it to Farmer John as a tax, Farmer John was no longer able to afford bird feed. So the whole farm yard began to starve. In order to stop himself from starving, Farmer John eventually used some animals as slaves, and ate the others.(cough cough, like the slave camps in the late USSR) Of course, in order to keep his animals from getting out, he had to set up a fence, and hire people to watch the animals(cough cough, NKVD, tight border control in the late USSR)

And that’s how a big government leads to the decay of an entire nation,  and eventually to people in those countries starving and in being in poverty.

The moral of the story: When everyone owns the pie, there is less of it. And the only way to even make such a pie is slavery.(required community service hours, anyone?)

Liberty and Tyranny

April 20, 2009

“The world has never had a good definition of the word liberty, and the American people, just now, are much in want of one. We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the product of his labor; while with others the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men’s labor. Here are two, not only different, but incompatible things, called by the same name———liberty. And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatible names———liberty and tyranny.” – Abraham Lincoln – 4/18/1864.

Read Liberty and Tyranny by Mark Levin. It’s a great book that defines true conservatism and constitutional backing for it – how the role of government is to protect every individual’s freedom, and their God given rights to ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’. Not state given rights, not Republican given rights, and not Democrat given rights; God given rights.

Equal Opportunity or Equal Circumstances?

April 20, 2009

“Some enslaved men wish to become free. Some free men wish to lose responsibility.  However, without responsibility there is no freedom… Upon fighting for equal opportunity, slaves are rewarded with capitalism. Upon fighting for equal circumstances, free men are rewarded with enslavement.”

The nature of the world is not fair. Not everyone is born into the USA. Some are born into poverty stricken countries with heavy handed governments. Some die at a young age due to starvation in those very same countries.

There is no way to guarantee equal circumstances for all without enslaving everyone. The only way to make everyone equal is to treat them all as slaves, and take away all their rights.

However, there is a way to give everyone equal rights. The Declaration of Independence talks of ‘certain, unalienable Rights’. It does not describe ‘Happiness’ as a right, because the authors knew that it isn’t possible to guarantee everyone happiness, but rather they say of the rights ” that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” 

Happiness is something only the individual can attain, as only the individual knows what will make him happy. The truth is that a small percentage of the population(the government), cannot work hard enough or long enough to give all people happiness. People have to make people happy. In order for the government to even attempt to supply for everyone’s needs, they must also enslave everyone to their work forces at the same time. And as the USSR has proven, such a plan results in millions of deaths.

As the fantasy novel author Terry Pratchett so aptly puts it in his novel Witches Abroad: “You can’t go around building a better world for people. Only people can build a better world for people. Otherwise it’s just a cage.”

Views of complete socialism from the inside – from a Russian spy’s perspective

March 8, 2009

The following are excerpts from “I Was An NKVD Agent” (Living Sacrifice Books) by Anatoli Granovsky, an ex-Russian spy, written in the first person perspective. They are interesting because they shed light on some of the darker aspects of socialism; aspects that are difficult to reverse once enacted. The bolded parts of the following are most interesting for the sake of comparison to ongoing events in the United States.

“During the long, hard advance over 500 miles of territory beyond the western frontiers of the U.S.S.R., both soldiers and officers of the Red Army had seen many aspects of western life that made them wonder. Is this the degenerate capitalism that we have heard so much about? How is it that the slaves of capitalists live in such nice, cozy little houses with radios, gas stoves, and sometimes even hot and cold running water? ”

Unfortunately, in a socialist system, the government isn’t able to get water, electricity, and heat to everyone. You have to apply for it, and it can take months or years to acquire. The country of India is a fine example of this.

“He[a high ranking soviet official] had Rijkov[a capitalist]dismissed from his job, and ordered all his property and possessions confiscated. For a Communist there can be no gratitude towards capitalism. To a Communist such people are by definition inhuman and unworthy: it is never a question of whether to destroy them, simply of when to destroy them.”

“For Gregori[Another Russian spy], communism was an affair of the heart, not of the head.”

“Communization was being carried out very fast. In the Sudetan area particularly, where the Communist party had always been very strong, the population now found itslef treated with that total disregard for individual liberty that is characteristic of the Soviet Union. The principal industries and banks were nationalized(…)”

“Most of the information, as per my orders, concerned people who had show signs of having sympathies with the West: people who would eventually have to be somehow rendered harmless to the Soviet purpose. They would have to be either eliminated, jailed, deported, somehow discredited or ruined, and there were many hundreds of them.”

“Now, in order to achieve its purpose,the Soviet Union(…)made full use of not only the more orthodox methods of espionage, sabotage, propaganda, and naked power, but also of the whispering campaign, false rumor and organized ridicule. All groups who were not pro-Communist were open to subtle attack by the method of discrediting its leaders and prominent members in the eyes of their fellow members and followers.”

“During the time I spent in Czechoslovakia I saw many things that angered me, though why they should have done so I did not at first understand. The truth is that before going to Prague I would not have been unduly worried by the sight of what was, after all, simply the rule of power. But to see this cultured and civilized people being surely bent under the yoke of Soviet domination, to see them being forced to accept the Soviet system and way of life when their own had been demonstrably so much better, was somehow pitiful. I realized that my feelings about life and the common people were undergoing the final stages of a complete change.”

Economics of Bailouts – article link

February 25, 2009

A short article, Real Jobs Create Wealth by John Stossel.

And a more detailed economic evaluation of the bailout, Does Government Spending Increase Prosperity? by Percy L. Greaves Jr.

These economists make a good point – moving production around doesn’t make everyone happier, it just makes the people who receive those jobs happier. It doesn’t make consumers happier, either. Would you willingly surrender 3,300 dollars to increase government subsidies on family planning, or to spend on local roads that the state government is already charging you income tax to maintain?

Most people wouldn’t.  That’s why massive government spending doesn’t make everyone happy – it just makes the government happy. If you want to make everyone happy, give them their $3,300.33 back in a tax credit. (1 trillion divided by 303,824,640 American citizens.) In some community colleges, that is a years worth of school or more.

It’s called supply and demand, and it’s the best way to create jobs that make everyone happy – consumers and producers. Not just government officials, or the people in their states’ industries that they’d like votes from.