Socialism and Poker

A poker game in a casino is like a Socialist form of government.
Each player starts the game with exactly the same amount of money, let’s say $100.  There are 9 players at the table,  so there is $900 in the game,  or “the economy”. So at best, any one player can only hope to win $800, or can he?

You see, on every hand the dealer takes “a 10% cut” of the total pot, which represents “taxes”.  On every hand, one player will win money (becoming richer), and one player will lose money (becoming poorer).  Nobody complains about the tax because it’s only the guy who wins (the rich guy) who has to pay it.

Nobody has any more money with them than the original $100 they sat down with. So the longer the game goes on, the less money there is “on the table”; as the house (government) continues to take its 10% off the table (out of the economy) on every hand.  If this game were to go on as long as possible, eventually,  just ONE player would be left with any money at all (super rich by comparison to the losers), and the house would have the vast majority of the original $900!

But this is a Socialist system, so the house, seeing that the game is about to die, “invests” in the game by giving each player, who lost all his money, $25 of free money to play with, just to keep the game going.  How long could the game last?  Where does the house get the $25 to give the losers?  The houses only means of income is the tax on the game.

How does the casino pay the dealer, or for the lights, or heat?  Oops! The casino could never afford to give each player back $25 each time they lost all their money.  Somehow, they would have to find a different source of cash, but where?

What about that fat cat player who keeps winning, you know the RICH GUY!  He’s sitting over there with $400!  He started with $100 and he’s made $300 profit!  What if the casino charged him a special RICH MANS TAX?  So for every $1.00 a player wins, over $100, the casino takes 50%.  So the rich guy would now only have $250.  Do you suppose the losing players would think this was a great idea? Heck the winning player might even think it’s a good idea, since he’s winning and doesn’t see any reason to think he won’t continue to do so, and if the casino doesn’t kick the money back in, he won’t have any players to beat!  But can you see that no “new money” is being added to the game?  Eventually it would all leak out through the costs of keeping the game going as in the dealers pay, the lights and heat.  It cost money just to run a casino (government).

What if the "rich guy" decides his $250 is enough and goes home, compare this to investors taking their money out of the stock market when investment risk is too high, or taxes on return are too high.

The only way the game can continue is if the casino can attract ‘new money’ to the game.  Somebody must produce new money or “wealth”.  There are only two ways to produce wealth, earthier you produce new goods and services or you steal it from someone else!  Many wars have been fought to bring new wealth back to the winning country!

Government does not produce ANYTHING!  Therefore it cannot create wealth; it literally must steal all it makes, either from its own people or from other countries!  The problem is, eventually you run out of money as it is spent on perishable goods such as food or energy.  Unless an economy can produce excess wealth, that is more wealth than it must consume in perishable goods and services, that economy is doomed.

Socialism is a form of government that expects some people to produce, while others merely consume.  Sooner or later, the producers stop producing as they realize all their effort is going to the benefit of the consumers.  If a man is not allowed to make excess money, because the government takes all excess as a tax (Communism), then what incentive is there for anyone to produce? 

Liberalism VS Conservatism

Let’s begin by agreeing that the majority of Liberals and Conservatives want to make the world a better place. If you can’t agree with that statement, you’ll simply be wasting your time reading any further.

So, beginning with the premise that both Liberals and Conservatives wish to make the world a better place we must be able to focus our discussion on specifics ; too often these types of debates splinter off into vague generalities that neither further the cause of the debate nor help to keep ones blood pressure down.

What does it mean to make the world a better place? Better than what? Can the world be better, yet imperfect? Or, must we strive for Utopia?

I would like to suggest, first, that Utopia is not an achievable goal and second that we should set as our goal to make the world as best a place to live as we can, given the limitations of humanity.

So if you are unable to agree with my second premise stating that Utopia is unachievable, you may as well click on to your next link right now.

So if you’re still reading, I can assume you want to make the world better than it is currently, but you accept the limitations of economic, religious, geographic and cultural pressures which limit the ability to achieve a perfect solution.

If we agree no solution will ever be perfect, then we can begin to focus our attention on those solutions that provide the most benefit for the largest number of people. Let’s restate that in a political context; we want our governments to provide solutions that result in positive benefits for the largest number of people; realizing that not every program will benefit every person.

Now, let’s take a look at a global problem that has plagued mankind throughout recorded history; poverty. Let’s define poverty as that level at which a person is regularly, but not necessarily always, living without the basic necessities of life, such as: food, water, clothing, and shelter. As a side note, if you believe that cell phones, cable TV, or Internet access are “basic necessities” I can show you to the door right now.

So were looking to find a solution to the global problem of poverty as defined in the above paragraph. Where should we look first; how about those countries where poverty is less of a problem? It doesn’t make sense to look to Northern Africa or Afghanistan for solutions to poverty. It makes sense to look at those societies who have had the best results and model our solutions after them.

America was founded on the basic principal that mankind, given a collectively protected environment and left unburdened by the taxes required by a Monarchy, could flourish and thrive; capable of only the limits of their imaginations! Somewhere along the way America lost sight of its founding principles. The idea of collective security, originally intended as a physical security from foreign armies, mutated into the idea of collective social welfare programs. Let’s take a look at the results of those programs.

Statistically, minorities, who’ve traditional voted Democrat, continue to show the highest level of poverty when compared to Whites.
www.americanprogress.org

In North America the majority of the poor live in urban areas.
www.ucl.ac.uk

Urban areas vote for Democrat while more rural areas tend to vote Republican:
www.washingtonpost.com

So, we have poor folks living in close quarters in our urban centers and the majority of them vote to perpetuate the social programs promised them by Democrats. Yet as we’ve seen, the very programs they continue to vote for over and over have failed to make their lives better; they are still poor and living in crappy housing developments.

On the other hand, you have areas of the country with Republican leadership where job creation is high, unemployment lower and relative quality of life is much higher than seen in Democrat controlled areas.
www.bls.gov

So, if the goal is to provide the largest number of people with the best opportunity to be happy, doesn’t it make sense to follow conservative fiscal and social ideas; ideas that have been historically proven to be superior over socialist ideas?

You can choose to make America great again. In 2012 you’re going to have a distinct, black and white choice between SOCIALISM and CONSERVATISM, doesn’t matter who the ultimate GOP candidate is, the Obama administration’s strict adherence to Keynesian economic policies of TAX and SPEND have failed and they’ve expressed nothing but a deeper commitment to more of the same.

Solo Ride To Nowhere In Particular

It’s oddly chilly this August morning at 5:00 AM, in California’s Central San Joaquin Valley where the average high temperature for this time of year is in the mid 90’s. The faint glow of sunrise is still an hour away and it’s hard to see-- through my sunglasses--the minefield of debris that clutters the bike lane on the road ahead of me. I struggle to get comfortable in the saddle and settle into today’s ride. It’s an odd combination, sunglasses and headlights, but given today’s route, which will cover five thousand feet of climbing at a maximum elevation of just over 3400 feet, including a 3 mile pitch at 9%, the idea of saving weight, today especially, appeals to me, so my regular glasses would have to stay behind along with my jacket.

The morning air is still and it is cold, what breeze there was created only from the pace I set for myself—and that only by feel. It’s to dark to read my cycling computer and the lack of feedback is strangely annoying, but probably for the best, I don’t need to know how fast (or slow) I’m going, only that I’m pushing a comfortable pace as I warm up along the relatively flat roads towards the climbs to come, but warm is not something I’ll be for a few more hours.

Sheri’s Road House is located at the intersection of two fairly well traveled roads,  just a few miles from a local Indian Casino; an ideal location for a tiny mountain bar with a convince store and gas station to boot.  Motorcycle and hot-rod clubs used to frequent the place on weekends and parking was often at a premium.

 

Sheri’s was the epitome of the American Road House; pool tables, live music, beer on tap, and even a small dance floor for those who, perhaps, had taken advantage of the happy hour specials! But Sheri’s, it seems, has fallen victim to the times and the doors were closed a few months ago. I can only hope someone eventually buys the place and revives this local icon; someone always has, it's the American spirit to do so! At least the gas station and mini-mart are still open.

I had hoped to see other cyclists here this morning, trying to beat the August heat, but there was not a soul in sight.  My body expects to stop—Sheri’s is one of the area’s common regrouping points—and normally I would, but this morning I’m on a schedule; others will be waiting in North Fork and I don’t want to be late!  I had told my wife I’d keep her updated on my progress so I needed to stop, at least long enough to send a text, but the short climb just beyond Sheri’s was one I’d rather knock out first, then I could take a short break.

5:45AM. My first text of the day to my wife read: “Just past Sheri’s and on schedule”.  

The silhouette of the Sierras began to take form as the first light of dawn peeked out over the jagged horizon.  My headlight now made less difference as the ground around its bright white spot began to come into view.  Hazards on the road, not seen over the past hour, became easier to avoid as I could now see a bit farther ahead and in the distance a coyote crossed the road, headed to where ever it is coyote’s go so early in the morning. 

It’s quiet out here, all I can hear is the sound of my chain spinning along with the sound of my breathing, and they are in unison.  The coyote stopped and turned a curious eye my direction; he must have been wondering where I was going so early in the morning.

In the distance I could see Table Mountain, a plateau range that runs alongside of the San Joaquin River as it meanders its way down to Millerton Lake.

 

Growing up, Table Mountain was literally my back yard.  My parent’s property line borders the fence with the cattle range on the mountain; I’ve hiked nearly every inch of the place.  I’m amazed, now that I’m older, what little appreciation I had as a boy for the beauty of the valley this place over looks.

In the distance I could just make out the mountain peak known as Squaw Leap, it seemed so far away, yet it marked the beginning of the hardest part of today’s ride and I realized I had a lot of riding ahead of me and most of it upwards.

“Good morning, how are you doing?”

I was slightly startled, but pleasantly surprised, to see there was at least one other human being on this barren road.

“I’m tired” I replied, as he passed me like I was standing still.

The thought crossed my mind to try and grab his wheel and see if I could catch a tow for a short while. That thought often crosses my mind, normally just after I hear “On your left!”

“On your left” is one of those phrases that can evoke joy or pain and often both depending on who’s uttering it! I’ve noticed, lately, as my fitness level has increased and my body weight has decreased, I’m finding more opportunities to say those words rather than hear them.

But I was quickly reminded of the day's goal, Powerhouse, and I settled into my “comfortable pace as I watched him ride away.

The lone rider slowly grew smaller as the distance between us increased, this was the first real climb of the day—the climb to Marshall Station, 6% at worst and a relatively short two miles—and I knew I’d need every bit of energy for the climbs to come.  I never got his name, never exchanged more than two or three words with the man, but I felt we were connected somehow; the road it would seem can do that, and I was glad to know I was not the only one on this road to nowhere in particular.

6:11AM. I texted my wife an update: “Leaving Marshal Station, all trains on time!”

Marshal Station is a mystery to me; it’s been there for ages, attested to by its adobe wall construction and rusting corrugated steel roofing, complete with lead window paned windows and the remaining hitching post outside the front door.

It served as a stage coach stop in the early 1800’s and was the site of a post office in the early 1900’s.  I used to pass by here on the 45 minute bus ride to school every week day for 12 years. 

Numerous small businesses have called this old building home over the years—currently it is a Mexican food joint, but it’s literally smack dab in the middle of nowhere, a victim of the waning lumber industry that used to bring more traffic along this road so many years ago.  Why anyone would try to run a business from here now is beyond me, but if you’re ever in the area, I hear they make a mean Chimichanga!  

  

A quick sip of (insert gratuitous ad for your favorite replenishment beverage here) and a bite of granola bar and it was onward and upward to Prather.  

The stretch of road between Marshall Station and the small town of Prather holds bitter memories for me and each time I pass I say a short prayer and remember my brother who died in an automobile crash here years ago.  I miss you bro!  But no time to stop for ceremony, not today, the climb to Prather awaits and it’s the first one to get me out of my seat; it’s a short pitch but my guess is its 9-10% and that scares me a bit because the 9 percent grade to come goes on for miles and this climb is hurting more than I expected!

6:32AM. I texted my wife once again, “Made Prather right on time!”

I ran inside the gas station for a quick spot of caffeine; my favorite source, the nectar of life, Diet Pepsi!

The grey light of dawn illuminated the parking lot and I deemed the wait for the sunrise a worthy distraction from the pain in my thighs—72 miles and over four thousand feet of climbing the day before were beginning to take their toll. I had a few minutes to kill and the rest was needed, the sun was about to rise and I couldn’t help but pause for the photo opportunity!

The sunrise is amazingly predictable; they say you can even set your clock by it! For eons it has come each and every day even though throughout history rulers and clergy have told the masses there was at least some chance that it may not, unless they conform. As I watched the sun rise over the mountains, I couldn’t help but think to myself what an amazingly spiritual thing it was.  I suppose those who never find God in their lives, rarely if ever are up in time to experience it. I’ve felt the same thing next to the ocean, as well as when standing on top of mountains; it is there, it’s real, but is it God? Only you can answer that for yourself.

7:03AM. I send my wife what I assume will be my final text before I reach North Fork: “Auberry. No more txts until I see you.”

“Until I see you” was in reference to the fact that my wife and son would be following behind later in the morning in my truck; an insurance policy; sometimes the spirit is willing but the legs are weak.

I graduated from Auberry Elementary in June of 1980. Jimmy Carter was about to lose the Presidency of the United States to an actor from California. That actor went on to become one of the greatest Presidents in US History!

The buildings are still in good shape, but the grounds are lacking; weeds growing in the tall grass where I used to play soccer and baseball.  The school was shut down at the end of the last school year because the area lacks enough children to keep it open.  Not long after I graduated, the local mill was closed; primarily due to the tree hugger lobby and the over regulation of the logging industry that eventually killed the number one employer in town. I fear Auberry shares the same fate as Marshall Station, and will soon become an historical landmark, a ghost town, on this road to nowhere in particular.

This is reposted here from an email I received (Author is listed below)

Dear  American liberals, leftists, social progressives,  socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et  al:

We have stuck together since the  late 1950's for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.

  Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our  own way.

Here is a model separation  agreement:

   Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective  representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate  tastes.

  We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. We'll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and you can go with wind, solar and biodiesel. You  can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell.

You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them.

  We'll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have  your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, homeless, homeboys, hippies, druggies and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and  give you NBC and Hollywood .

   You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security.

   We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N. but we will no longer be paying the bill.

   We'll keep the SUV's, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.

    You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors. We'll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We'll keep "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" and "The National Anthem."

     I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute "Imagine", "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing", "Kum Ba Ya" or "We Are the World".
  We'll practice trickle down economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.

   Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag.
  Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriot.  In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you answer which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.

                    Sincerely,
                    John J. Wall
                    Law Student and an American

     P. S. Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin Sheen, Barbara Streisand, and Jane Fonda with you.

     P. S. S. And you won't have to press 1 for English when you call our country.

More Liberal Whining and Lies!

Axelrod is on CNN right now whining about the money groups, like The Chamber of Commerce, are spending on political adds for Republicans.  He claims he wants a law that will reveal the source for ALL politcal donations.  But does he?  Do the Democrats really want the country to know about the millions of dollars they receive from communist organizations?  Of course not!  So why the ploy?  Because they know there will NEVER be such a law, so they can get up on CNN and whine about campaign finance and paint the Rebulicans as Wall Street Fat Cats when IN FACT the Democrats are the ones living in one of 12 houses, flying around the world in private jets and drinking tons of liquor on the American tax payers dime!  The CNN anchor pointed out to Mr. Axelrod that CNN's own research reveals that Democrats have out spent Republicans in this election cycle.  YOU ARE BEING LIED TO AMERICA!  Vote for conservatives in November!

The Well Dressed Wolves; Makers of Fine Woolen Clothing!

As the story goes, a group of otherwise self-serving, hedonistic, high school boys made the ultimate sacrifice for their “special needs” teammate by handing him the ball in a 47 to 0 football game while the opposing team ( who was winning 47-0 and had previously agreed to the shtick) stood by and cheered as the electric wheelchair bound youth literally “drove” the ball across the goal line to make the score 47-6; apparently fulfilling his “lifelong dream” of “playing” varsity football.


This story is of course meant to warm the heart and I’m sure most of you will disagree with my take on this one; but I’m used to that by now.

I think it’s great they “tried” to “do the right thing”, unfortunately I think they failed. Sure, this boy felt good for a few fleeting moments and he’ll always have this memory, but if the coaches and players REALLY wanted to make a statement, really make his touchdown “count”, why didn’t they let the boy return the opening kickoff? This was the “top-ranked” team in this league, after all; was there ever any real doubt they were going to win? The question begs to be answered, what did they sacrifice? The answer is ZERO, NADA, NOTHING! All they did was stand around patting themselves on the back for being such great human beings!

Another question is why was this one player singled out to be allowed to score unimpeded? Was it his “life-long dream” to score in a varsity football game, or did he long to be treated as an equal? Did he actually “play” football? I’m sure there were a number of boys on that team who’ve never scored a touchdown, simply because they lack the level of skill, compared to the other boys on the team, to be played, by their coach, in enough games and situations that it would be likely they could score. Every year boys all over the country sit on the side lines of high school football games as second or third string players in positions that can score ( QB,RB,WR etc. opposed to linemen who rarely if ever score points), but are never put in the game long enough and in enough situations to make a score likely; so why this boy; because he’s in a wheelchair? Who decided that the wheelchair was the defining "limiting" factor that allowed this player special treatment?  Was it not enough that the third string wide reciever suffers from Asthma and thus could never complete with the first string WR who was also the school's 100 meters track and field champion 3 years in a row?  Does anyone really think this disabled child fulfilled his dream of “playing” varsity football? No, this was not the ultimate moment that will forever change this boy’s life; after all, he woke up the next day still in need of his wheelchair. What this was was a group of people taking advantage of a disabled high school student to make themselves feel better about their own lives.  By the way, I wonder how many who cheered in that stadium that night had illegally parked in a handicapped spot?

Unfortunately, I must confess, had I been one of the coaches (or players), I’d have likely made the same decision to allow this to occur; and for the same reasons, it would have made me feel like ‘I’ had done or been a part of something special!

What we need today, is less people patting themselves on the back and more people rolling up their sleeves and doing the tough work it will take to return our country to greatness! One of the most devastating impacts socialists have had on our country is the idea that everyone is guaranteed equal outcomes in life; THEY ARE NOT! Ribbons and metals for “participants” serve only to dilute the value of the awards given to those who earned them. The creator, from whom all ‘inalienable’ rights flow, created us each as individuals with special talents, and in some cases limitations, to be used for His purpose and for as many day’s He has granted us. Trying to deny the fact that there are weak and strong among us is the same as trying to deny gravity and then jumping off of a cliff; both end with similar results!

Socialism claims, as a goal, to make the weak strong, but in fact they always take from the strong, handicapping them in some way ( taxes, regulation, asking them to stand idly by while a member of the opposing team “rolls” by them to score a touchdown) and thus make them weaker; giving the illusion that the weak have magically become stronger; it’s all a lie, smoke and mirrors, designed to deceive while those powerful few continue to oppress all those subjected to their pathetic ideals; both weak and strong!

I’m pleased by the joy this event must have brought this young man and I can, in the end, applaud the effort made by the other young men involved in this story. All I ask is that when we read of such happy moments we never forget we are under attack and the enemy is winning the battle SLOWLY, step by step, one heartwarming story after another and he comes as the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing!

"Life"-style?

Here is a typical liberal argument: “That guy over there was caught in the very act of the behavior he claims to denounce; a behavior we, as liberals, enjoy and promote as normal. He’s a hypocrite!” Therefore, the very behavior he denounces should be accepted by society as normal behavior!”


Example—

Conservative Premise: adultery is wrong.

Situation: a pastor (known for denouncing sexual deviance) of some mega church is caught in adultery.

Liberal conclusion: all conservatives are hypocrites so adultery must be acceptable behavior.

We must stand up to liberals backwards thought processes; they simply lack the capacity for reason!

With regards to the issue of gay and lesbian lifestyles, we find that over the past 60 years, the communist party in America has set as a goal to promote “alternative lifestyles” in an effort to undermine the strength of our union by tearing at the base element of our society; the American family.

Why would they do that? Because they know that if they can corner our children in communist schools, alienate them from their parents, that brainwashing them into accepting total subservience to a central government will be much easier; they just had to be willing to wait long enough for such a plan to take hold. It has taken hold America!

“Alternative LIFE styles!?” When was the last time two men created life (or two women for that matter); as I recall from my public school education, life is begun via the process of an egg being fertilized by a sperm; and as we learned in 6th grade, the female of our species carries all the eggs. It’s not hard to draw the conclusion, then, that in order for our species (all species really) to procreate and thus survive, it requires a partnership between the female and male of said species. Promoting unions between same sex partners is not an “acceptable LIFEsytle”, it is an obvious deviance from nature and natures ways!

It’s time to stand up America! Stand up or be trampled over by a minority activist group whose only goal is to force their deviance to be “accepted”! We can reject the homosexual lifestyle and the false messages they preach, while we accept the individual’s right to live free of harassment. I can work side by side with a gay man, play a round of golf with him, invite him over for a beer and to watch the game, but when I do, I expect he will abide by my standards of decency; not the other way around! The first time he shows up to my football party wearing nothing but a boa and a G-string, he’ll no longer be welcome in my home. Someone must stand up and say NO! Not in my home.  Not on my streets.  Not in my town! Not in my state, not in my country!

The Demise of Personal Responsibility in America

Last night, my son brought home a stack of paper work for me to fill out; paperwork from his Jr. High School. That’s right, he goes to school and I get to do the homework! OK, it’s not the paperwork, per se, that has me hacked off, it was the content.


First of all, it turns out that five of the “forms” I had to fill out, were all from one teacher for a single class! One form went on about class conduct and behavior while another pointed out that the computer equipment is expensive and that the students, by signing the form (as if before they signed the form no such responsibility existed), agreed to treat it with respect.

Really, I need to sign a form that says I understand that my child is responsible for any physical damage he causes to school property? Has our society degenerated so, that we must sign legal documents stating we have a personal responsibility to take care of expensive equipment entrusted to our care?

When I was in school (oh man did I just write that?) the principal still had a paddle that he, boldly, hung on the wall directly behind his desk; and he used it regularly! We didn’t need our parents to fill out stacks of paperwork describing our “personal responsibilities” for public property; WE KNEW OUR PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITIES and if we forgot the paddle was a great reminder!

I remember when this BS all started, for me it was 6th grade (1978), the program was called “The Positive Reinforcement” plan ( or something like that, come on it’s been a few years). The plan called for each student to be tracked all year with regard to behavior and if you had not received any “cards” ( of varying colors ) you could participate in the “positive reinforcement” which was to be something like a dance, a field trip or some other “whole school” activity. This lasted one year. At the end of my 6th grade year, all the “eligible” students were treated to a movie in the Gym (The Nutty Professor staring Jerry Lewis; it was in black and white!). My 7th grade year, the decision was made to keep the negative aspects of “The Positive Reinforcement” plan -- the colored cards that were handed out when you got in trouble—and do away with the “costly” positive reinforcement ( the cheesy movie ), now that is liberal thinking and policy at its finest, bait and switch!

I recall a 7th grade teacher who used to love to wax nostalgic for the days when the school could leave playground equipment out on the playground overnight and on weekends so that children could use it after school; those days were gone even back in the 70’s. He used to tell a story about how, at the beginning of every year, he would take a .50 cent piece and drop it next to one of the desks and NOBODY would pick it up, and if they did, they’d bring it to him to see if he knew who had lost it; the lesson being that each child knew it did not belong to them and would naturally figure that the owner would, sooner or later, discover it missing and come to claim it. By 1979  those days were LONG GONE. I have to admit, had I found a .50 piece laying on the floor, I’d a picked it up and turned it in too, only I’d a turned it in at the snack bar in exchange for a candy bar!

What have we become? We now live in a society that is so “sue happy” that our own public schools ( schools and equipment we pay for with our taxes) must send home reams of paperwork for students and parents to spell out their exact responsibilities with regard to personal behavior and respect for others and their property. I think it’s time for some parents to get involved well before their children start school! It’s time to return to our Christian heritage and start teaching our children about the founding principles that made this country the greatest the world has ever seen. At the very least, imagine the number of trees we’ll save!

Considering Katie’s Krops

I came across the story of a young lady named Katie Stagliano. Katie found that she had a talent for growing cabbage; a 40 pounder started her on her journey.

You can read more about this remarkable young lady on her website here: http://www.katieskrops.com/

Please don’t get me wrong, this is a feel good story about a well-intentioned little girl who’s just trying to make a difference; and for that I applaud her. I’m afraid she simply needs to refocus her energy into pursuits that can make a lasting difference.

Katie found that growing vegetables in her backyard could help to feed a lot of people in her community. So Katie founded a non-profit organization and now oversees six gardens in her neighborhood; all of which grow vegetables that are then donated to local soup kitchens.

As you can imagine, Katie has been featured on a number of news shows; including CNN. But as I read her website I realized there is a bit of a problem with her organization’s stated goal:

“My dream is that there are no hungry people.
I may only be 11 but I know I can do it.”

The question is, can she? The answer is of course she cannot!

Katie, like so many before her, has failed to see the flaw in the nobility of her quest. Katie’s “plan”, thus far, has been to plant a number of small gardens around her community and get others to do the same. Consider this from her website:

“If people (I hope lots of kids too) could grow even one vegetable
plant and donate the harvest to a local soup kitchen we could make
a huge difference in the fight against hunger.”

Fast forward to a world where every family, in every town, around the globe, grew their own garden and donated the harvest to their local soup kitchen; what would happen? Sooner or later they would realize that they no longer needed to buy their own vegetables from the local market and could begin saving money by growing for their own consumption. What affect would that have on the local market, its employee’s, and the farmers who make their living growing vegetables to supply the market? Sooner or later, these farmers would find other uses for their land, like condominiums or strip malls. Now, the food that “normal” families used to supplement their home grown garden would no longer be available. They would realize that to survive they would have to begin devoting more time to their garden. Eventually, we would become an agrarian society and join Ma and Pa Ingalls back on the prairie!

I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking “what a jerk this guy is! She’s just a little girl trying to help feed a couple of homeless people”, but you are wrong! While she may not know it, she represents one of the most dangerous political theologies known to man; socialism! If her dream was realized and everyone had a garden in their backyard, hunger would survive. You see, the dirty little secret, no one is telling Katie, is our planet has an abundance of food; enough food is thrown away every day to feed entire countries. Plane loads of food are dropped over third world countries on a daily basis; ship loads of food arrive daily in ports all over the third world from “faith based” organizations and where does this food end up; in the hands of the powerful few socialists or communists who claim to know what best to do with it; they claim to know what’s best for the people! And what is always best “for the people” is that the food stays in the hands of the powerful and while they entertain at lavish parties for their comrades, the masses go to sleep hungry!

Socialism has failed “the people” every time it’s been tried.

Now, instead of spending her time in a garden growing free food for people who have no means to buy food, clothing or shelter, what if Katie spent her time focused on building a business that could support 100 employees and started a campaign to get other, like minded, caring, individuals to do the same? What if she lobbied congress for business friendly policies that promoted small businesses that hire people in good paying jobs? What if instead of the socialist ideal of giving free food to people (who then become dependant slaves to those who enable them) she embraced the concept of self-reliance and the power of the individual to take control of their own pursuit of happiness?

Jesus told his disciples that they would always have the poor with them; and I am not saying we shouldn’t help those in need, what I am saying is we should not be helping those in need to stay needy; dependent upon a daily handout.  We need to teach them to fish!

The answer to the problem has always been freedom to fail as many times as it takes one to succeed!

The Socialist Myth of a Classless Society

One of the primary goals of Socialism is a “classless”, one world, society. We will assume, for the moment, that by “classless” they do not mean tacky or lacking couth; though those points could be argued. We will assume by “classless” the socialist means a state in which all members of society are treated equally with regard specifically to socio-economic status.

The socialists desire to set up a single government to rule all peoples of the world. Thus, in the socialist, utopian & “classless” society everyone is the same, accept of course for those who are in power. The socialist claim, by centralizing control over the world’s resources; under the control of a single government, that the living conditions of the peoples of the world will be better than they are now. Ask yourself, are the living conditions, for the people currently living under socialist or communist regimes, actually better than those living under Democratic Republics? If so, why do we have an “illegal immigration” problem? Why would anyone want to come to a place, so unfair, such as America?

The question that must be answered is how can there be a “classless” society when there remains a “ruling class” and a “ruled class”? In every Socialist or Communist society, there have always been at least two classes; those who rule and those who are ruled. It is also quite clear that those in the ruling class live in opulent splendor while those in the ruled class can barely make ends meet. So what the socialists mean by “classless”, to coin a new word, must be “bi-classfull”.

Once Obama and other socialist like him, has realized his dream of making the world a “bi-classfull” society, which class do you think he will be in and which one do you think you will be in? Does he not now live in “opulent splendor”? How are you doing making “ends meet?”

By contrast, a Democratic Republic is a system in which no one rules; it is the law that rules. The people elect representatives to create laws that represent their best interest; and agree to live by those laws. The problem with the US today is, a rouge group of “ruling class” socialist who’ve taken over our system and in direct opposition to the will of the people, are creating laws that consolidate power in the hands of a few “ruling class” individuals who live in opulence and preach social equality to those who can barely make the minimum monthly payments on their credit cards.

In November 2010, you can take back your right to rule your own life; but only if you engage in the conflict and make, painfully, sure you are voting for an individual with conservative values who believes in the principals set for in our Declaration of Independence; that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Tell the socialists you can pursue happiness just fine on your own thank you!

Is It Time To Repeal Federal Income Tax Withholding?

Charlotte Twight has done an outstanding job of chronicling the history of US Federal Income Tax Withholding here: http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj14n3-1.html .

Read that article, then, you decide; is it time to do away with Federal Income Tax Withholding?

My answer should be painfully obvious to anyone who has read this blog.

The primary purpose of withholding is to mask the amount of taxes individuals must pay. It is one thing to see the gross amount on your paycheck and only be able to deposit the net into your checking account; it’s quite another experience to write a check from your checking account at the end of the year. In the first example, you just got paid and you’re glad the government let you keep some of your earnings. Most Americans don’t even consider their gross as what they earn, if you ask them how much they make, they’ll tell you their net! In the second example, you’ve kept all your earnings for the entire year. Your bank account has money left over at the end of the month; you “owned” that money in your mind; it was there for you to spend if you so choose; but you didn’t. Now you must “spend” that money on the Social Welfare Programs the Federal Government has developed for "you". You now must write a check for, in most middle income families, tens of thousands of dollars.

It’s not hard to see why the Federal Government (State’s as well) would want a withholding system. They sell it on the grounds of convenience; why should you be burdened with writing a huge check each year?. It’s much better for you to give them your money each month, let them keep it all year at zero interest, then, if they determine they took too much, they “might” send it back to you. California, for example, has in the recent past, issued IOU’s to tax payers who “over paid” their taxes due to in accurate withholding by the government! Do you really want to be forced to “invest” your money in a venture that is quite likely to go bankrupt in the next few years?

The Federal Government is, currently, over 13 TRILLION dollars in debt; and adding to that debt at a rate of 1.2 TRILLION per year; they must borrow 41 cents out of every dollar they spend. How long, do you suppose, will it be before the Fed’s must begin issuing IOU’s?

The time has come America for revolution! And the weapon of choice will be your ability to keep what you earn!

How do Taxes work for you?

Imagine the entire US Gross Domestic Product is a whopping $10.00 (don’t laugh it may happen).

Now imagine a game where every time the $10.00 changed hands the government took away $1.00.

We start with person number one who has the $10.00.
This person buys a shirt for $10.00.
The government takes $1.00 from the transaction.

Now person two has the $9.00 he got for his shirt and wants to buy a new shirt of his own. So he finds person three who agrees to sell him his shirt for $9.00.
The government takes $1.00 from the transaction.

Now person three has $8.00 and is in need of a shirt.
He finds person four who agrees to part with his shirt for $8.00
Of course the government want’s their cut from this transaction too and takes $1.00.

Now person four has $7.00.

This progresses until you get to person number 9 who will have $2.00 to buy a shirt and finds the last person on earth willing to sell a shirt for $2.00. The Feds show up and take their $1.00, as the Feds always do.

Now person number ten has an interesting dilemma on his hands. He has no shirt but needs to find someone who will give him a shirt for $1.00. But who will pay the $1.00 to the feds on this transaction? Person number ten has a dollar, but that dollar is worthless to him and the question is, where is the other $9.00?

Freedom: the sleeping giant

Television, video games, Internet Social Networks and even, to some extent, hand held communication devices; what do they all have in common? They keep you sleeping!

A veil has been pulled over your eyes and you are asleep; numbed into a dream world designed to distract you from reality. The media, in all its forms: movies, so called “news”, and print publications, all sing an incessant lullaby and you slumber. Your politicians pour a perpetual glass of warm milk; feeding you your daily portion of propaganda and you dream.

It’s time to wake up America!

WAKE UP!

The “sleeping giant” once, not so long ago, arose and conquered the world; only to be put to sleep again under the weight of its own success. But the giant is getting restless and it’s, once again, time to awaken. The giant’s name is not America, it is freedom!

Freedom is the underlying concept that makes America the greatest nation on earth and it is freedom that has fallen asleep and must be awakened.

The “progressives”, a mask or facade for socialism, are at war with the constitution of The United States. They are at war with freedom! They realized decades ago that “activism” against "the man" wouldn’t work; they had to become “the man” if they were to take down “the man”. So they began a concerted effort to infiltrate the system from all angles. They would become teachers, school administrators, school board members, city councilmen, mayors, state senators, governors, federal representatives and yes even President of The United States.

These "progressives" understood that they would need to control information, so they took over the news organizations, magazines and Hollywood and today they seek to control information on the Internet and radio. Their goal was complete saturation of the system with socialist ideals. The name of this new form of “activism” was “organizing”.

Every movement needs its Moses, its Genesis and for the organizer, Saul Alinsky is their Moses; his book “Rules for Radicals”, their bible. In an effort to “know your enemy”, you should read that book! But if you do not want to buy the book, simply Google “Saul Alinsky” and you will find plenty to read about this man and those who followed his teachings all the way to the White House and beyond! Yes beyond the White House, you see their fight is not with America alone, their goal is a one world order; ordered by them!

These new organizers realized they could not win overnight and thus set out to achieve their long term objectives with short term victories each compounded one upon the other; a technique known as “The Dialectic Process.” See a great explanation of this process here: http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/brainwashing/dialectic.htm, others have called it “The Overton Window”. The basic idea is to create conflict based on some goal you wish to achieve and then strive for compromise with your opponent. You argue for 100% movement in your direction, and then settle for 10% (the percentage is irrelevant as long as it is greater than zero) in the name of compromise. Your opponent believes they too have won as they can claim the 90% as their victory. But this new position, now 10% closer to your real goal, becomes the starting point for the next conflict; you then repeat the process over and over until the other side has compromised their way to 100% of your goal.

This concept is not new; our founders knew this was a problem “I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations.” -- James Madison

Ask yourself if this does not describe the past 60 years in America? Did Americans stand for the killing of innocent, unborn, babies in the 50’s? Today, your Federal Tax dollars go to pay for state funded abortions (http://americaswatchtower.com/2010/07/18/obamacare-maryland-to-offer-federally-funded-abortions/)! Did parents simply assume promiscuity from their teenagers? Today, your tax dollars are distributing to and teaching kindergarteners how to use condoms (http://www.parentdish.com/2010/06/24/massachusetts-elementary-school-to-distribute-condoms-to-student/ )! Would a family go to see a movie that contained nudity and vulgarity of every kind? Did music contain the types of lyrics that are now “normal”? Were children allowed to pray in our schools? How did these things change? Slowly!

The myriad shapes of government, humans have devised to limit the otherwise limitless bounds of self-interest; can be summarized into five forms: Totalitarianism, Oligarchy, Republic, Democracy, and Anarchy. For a great video that describes these forms of government, a video that should be required viewing by our 6th grade students and above, can be found here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DioQooFIcgE .

Totalitarianism or Monarchy (Dictatorship) is the rule of a single individual over all. This form of governance is rare as more often than not, the “supreme ruler” will have a close group of subordinates who are delegated power over sectors of the society. For example, Kings have Dukes who, in the times of Kings, held power over smaller plots of land but remained subject under the Kings authority. Thus the King did not govern the entire land directly, but rather, through the local officials he appointed. This form of governance more closely resembles our next form Oligarchy and therefore true totalitarian forms of government rarely exist.

In an Oligarchy, power is held by a small group of people who oversee every aspect of society. In this form of government, the group will more often than not put forward a single individual as the “leader”. The titles vary but could include: President, Czar, King or even Supreme Leader. This handful of people dictates to the masses every aspect of their lives, from education to employment and commerce to science and even religion. Oligarchy is the most common form of government found today.

Democracy is a form of government where the people are said to govern themselves. This is a form of mob rule. If 50% + 1 of the people can be convinced of a policy or action then their will is imposed on the remaining 50% -1 of the people. Once the 50% + 1 realize that they can vote themselves programs that take from the minority and give to the majority, they will continue to do so until the minority revolts. This leads to Anarchy which ultimately (as we will see in a moment) leads to Dictatorship and then Oligarchy.

A Republic, the form of government our founders concluded was the best hope for the protection of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, is a representative form of government. The people elect representatives to vote for laws that reflect their own beliefs and desires. The law is the ruler of the land, not any one person or group.

Anarchy is actually the absence of rule or law. In an anarchist state, everyone does as they see fit. This type of system has never lasted long and always ends in the peoples call for order or rules. The power void is usually filled by a dictator, a single individual who ceases the moment and grabs power for himself. Because it is nearly impossible for any one individual to achieve this alone, the dictatorship devolves into an Oligarchy and thus Anarchy is not a viable, sustainable form of government.

So for the socialist “organizer”, anarchy becomes the goal. If the organizer can create sufficient chaos, so as to resemble anarchy, they need only wait for the people to demand order. They can then step into the ensuing power vacuum and restore an order remade in the image of their socialist ideals.

America, you were conned into voting into power one such organizer! If you don’t, or simply won’t believe me have a look at his personal website:http://www.blogger.com/www.barackobama.com . On the front page you will see the premise of this man’s work, he is “organizing for America”.

Barack Hussein Obama is an organizer (euphemism for socialist)! His goal is the absolute destruction of the American way of life or as he put it “ to fundamentally change America”. His plan of action is to nationalize every sector of our economy including education, healthcare and energy and to destroy its ability to sustain the way of life you and I have come to expect. He will increase spending and the size of government so that the government will collapses under its own weight. Once the economy begins to crumble it’s not hard to envision the chaos (anarchy) that would inevitably ensue. Once anarchy rears its ugly head the people will soon demand a “new world order”. The organizer, Barack Hussein Obama , will not allow such well scripted emergencies go to waste!

You must wake up America, before it’s too late!

Could the State of California be artificially inflating the cost of a gallon of gasoline to increase its sales tax revenues?

What’s one thing nearly every Californian buys on a regular basis? Gasoline! I just paid $3.15 per gallon to fill up my truck. I was running very low and due to the cap placed on my ATM card at the pumps I can’t even buy enough gas to fill my tank; it stops me at $75.00!

Now, if the state needed to raise its tax revenue without “seeming” to raise taxes how could it do that? Well, how about this? Raise the cost of gasoline and thus the percentage that goes to sales tax will increase.

How do you get Californians to pay $3.15 a gallon when the other states are paying as low as $2.44? Simple, charge them $4.25 for a short period of time then drop the price back down to your actual target $3.00 per gallon!

So why do you suppose we pay sales tax in the form of a percentage of the cost of the sale? Now you know!

The Innate Autonomy of the Human Spirit

Will Roche writes at www.marxist.com that volumes could be written about capitalisms inadequacies and attempts to address a number of them in this (http://socialist.org.nz/content/view/87/1/) article.

I offer the following in response.

Unemployment, Mr. Roche contends is “… a permanent feature of capitalism…” he further states that “…every man women and child would be two grand better off if we eliminated unemployment…” how does Mr. Roche suggest we eliminate unemployment? Simple, “the best alternative is for working people to take control over their workplaces, for major industries to be nationalized, and for the economy to be planned by workers’ and community councils, along with a socialist government”.

The result, says Mr. Roche “…full employment with decent wages…”

What?

First of all, what good is an extra two grand if the goal is 100% equality? If we all have 100 dollars or 1 million what is the difference if the government is providing for all needs. Certainly Mr. Roche does not wish to contend that Socialism leaves room for “wants”? For if anyone “wants” then his needs are not being met; which of course would be an admission of the failure of socialism.

Second, how can working people take control over their workplaces if they have surrendered that control to the socialist government?

Third, how can an economy be “planned by workers” if again, those workers have given up all rights to the socialist government?

And finally, if, by taking this course of government, there existed, even the most minuscule possibility of successfully achieving 100% employment, would it not stand to reason that those societies, who have tried socialism in the past, would have not, so miserably, failed?

There are plenty of homeless who choose to be homeless. So in Mr. Roche’s Utopian (albeit Orwellian) society of ZERO unemployment, not only would those who do not, now, choose to work be forced to do so, but the government would decide who works in what positions and how much they make for that work. In other words, there is ZERO incentive to excel; zero freedom.

If the government places me in my employment, what need have I to go to school? And if I do go to school, what need have I to learn; the government will “give” me a job no matter what I do. If there is no incentive to excel, from where will innovation come? What will propel society forward into new areas of science, medicne, art or exploration?

What Mr. Roche, most notably, forgets to take into account is the innate autonomy of the human spirit! Imagine, for just a brief and frightening moment that the entire world had fallen under the control of a single, one world, government that controlled all employment, resources, distribution and price for all goods or services said government deemed necessary. Does Mr. Roche claim to believe that nowhere in the world would there arise, even a single individual who would ask the question “Why can’t I be more?”

The fact is, socialism has been tried, many times in history, and each time it has ended in the same, failed, state of oligarchy; a system run by a few, wealthy, individuals who control everything! This is the very state of existence Mr. Roche claims to want to avoid.

When this central government finally has full control over the entire world economy, do you believe that those who are “in control” will find it “in the best interest of the State” that their salaries be the same as those who have been “chosen” to clean toilets? Will those, “chosen in the best interest of the state” to be fry cooks at fast food restaurants, be paid the same salary as those who will be our doctors? Of course not! But what will keep the one chosen for mediocrity from aspiring to greatness? The answer to that question, each and every time it has been asked of a socialist dictatorship, has been a bullet to the back of the head.

Of this, then, we can be assured, socialism will not prevail as a system of worldwide governance and we rest our hope in the, God given, blessing of the human spirit of freedom!

Jesus said “you will always have the poor with you and you can help them whenever you want to.” Mark 14:7/Matt. 26:11. What did he know? He knew that unemployment is not the result of capitalism or any other form of manmade government; there would always be those who, for whatever reason, could not take care of themselves and that no system of governance would ever change that fact as long as we remain in this fallen world.

Am I my brothers keeper? And if so, how long must I pay for him to continue to be unemployed?

President Obama, today, gave a speech (See full text of speech here: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/obama-speeches/speech/336/) in which he claims “…we… have another responsibility: to offer emergency assistance to people who desperately need it, to Americans who've been laid off in this recession. We've got a responsibility to help them make ends meet and support their families…".

The question is do “WE” have such responsibilities? The answer is absolutely NOT!

“We the people” is a euphemism for "your taxes". We the people (your taxes) were never meant for helping someone else support their family; that’s THEIR job. My job is to support MY family, your job is to support your family! The governments “job” (in other words We the people’s taxes) is to provide for a secure atmosphere for commerce, trade and economic stability through sound fiscal policies, fair trade practices, between states and with other countries, and to provide a military capable of defending our interests, here and abroad so that we can support our families!

You may ask “but what of our “moral obligation to our fellow man?” my answer to that is “WE” (collectively) have no moral obligation to “OUR” fellow man; there is only “MY” (individual) obligation to “MY” neighbor!

You see, Mr. Obama’s premise is based on something called “collective salvation”
(http://www.capitalism.org/faq/collectivism.htm). He believes that there can be no “individual salvation” and therefore it is perfectly correct to force all of us (we the people) into his theology of collective salvation!

The Bible, I read, say’s to ME, feed the hungry. It does NOT demand that I give my money to Cesar and let him feed the hungry! You see, it’s not just about the hungry being fed, that can be done financially, which takes no real time commitment on my part, no, it’s ME caring enough to do the feeding, that is the work of actually getting out there and handing my brother a piece of bread! It’s about relationship one with another and relationships take time commitments. As Margaret Thatcher put it “the problem with socialism is that eventually, you run out of other people’s money!” True benevolence is most certainly not about forcing everyone to take care of everyone else through tax an spend social programs.

Ask yourself these questions:

1. How long should a person be able to collect a un-employment check?
Answer: until his benefits run out.

2. How long should his benefits last?
Answer: that depends on how long he has worked, and how much he has contributed to the pool of money (that the currently employed continue to contribute too) that makes up the unemployment benefits pool.

3. How much money is currently in that pool?
Answer: apparently ZERO or congress would not be voting to try and “extend” coverage.

4. Where do they draw the line? What about recent college graduates who’ve been unable to find their first job; do “WE” have an obligation to support them too? Of course NOT!

5. How long does Mr. Obama expect that WE should support the unemployed?
Answer: until his destructive policies have crippled our economy so that more of us are on un-employment than are not; at which point, obviously, the entire system comes crashing down under its own weight and the socialists who are supporting his agenda can step in to the ensuing power vacuum and rule as an oligarchy. It’s been done before; it’s what Hitler did to take power in Germany prior to WWII.