Where is the Equity?

ImageWhen I say “Where is the equity” I am questioning the ever increasing number of those in poverty, the “poor”, while the obscenely wealthy just keep getting more obscenely wealthy. Sometimes it totally eludes me that people seem to be so terrified of “socialism” they cannot see the gap between rich and poor is not increasing because there are people producing more opportunities for production and employment, but because their wealth is being manufactured by printing worthless money, increasing the national debt, while making the low income pay for it, and bringing more illegal immigrants into the country to compete for already scarce jobs. The United States is producing substantially more unskilled part-time jobs than full-time skilled jobs.

There is compelling psychological research which scientifically measures the changes in behavior subsequent to wealth disparities. The more wealth people have, the more more likely they are to embrace more pernicious behaviors. They are more likely to cheat, accept something for nothing, take from others, disregard the feelings of others, feel superior and ‘entitled’ to their blessings while viewing the less fortunate as inferior and deserving of their misfortunes. Of course there are the affluent who discredit the sources of this research with absolutely no evidence to falsify the material presented in these studies. http://www.econedlink.org/interactives/index.php?iid=282

Most honest people acknowledge there are people with genuine needs for charitable assistance. However, they seem to disregard these genuine needs when they stereotype anyone and everyone who receives any type of charitable assistance. The facts are that 80% of charitable contributions come from the lowest 20% of income. Difficult as it may be for some to believe, most of the charitable contributions come from people who qualify for charitable contributions themselves. Perhaps they are more acutely aware of the profound difficulties associated with poverty; or perhaps those who are more affluent and can afford to be more generous may be more like the scientific studies have determined. Regardless of the merit of government assistance and methodology in computing poverty, the United States has established a long-standing pattern of electing representatives who love to spend other people’s money in their altruistic efforts to assist the most vulnerable element of society. If there are so many people who resent the government providing these funds (while corporate welfare and tax privilege is ignored) then they should elect people who will gradually shift this type of funding from the government to private resources rather than arbitrarily voting to terminate these services without providing alternatives. Cutting off funding for people who depend upon those funds is no different (other than humanitarian factors) than terminating workers without notice or to feed and care for a pet, and then leave them locked in a house with no food, expecting the pet to find some alternative means of caring and feeding itself.Image

It is also an unfortunate fact which anyone who has ever worked with homelessness and poverty can attest to, that government charity is established in such a fashion as to keep people receiving government assistance. Instead of maximizing the dedication of resources to determining how to avoid poverty or elevate those in poverty into self reliance, bureaucrats establish COC (Continuum of Care) criteria which will keep people in poverty. If bureaucrats won the war on poverty they would be out of work. The fundamental priority of government workers seems to be more focused upon job security than solving the problems they are hired to solve. Once again, job security trumps altruism.

Solutions? Absolutely!

1. Elect people who will ween government dependency to private charitable resources.
2. Quit using tax-payer funds (other people’s money) to subsidize ‘good intentions’.
3. Stop passing laws which grant special privileges to legislators.
4. Stop using tax-payer funds to interfere in the free market by granting those with the greatest wealth the greatest privilege and political leverage.
5. Let the free market forces of supply and demand determine which business enterprises will fail or prosper.
6. Enforce the laws which have already been passed and were NOT discretionary.
7. Quit deferring government and corporate costs for incompetence and imprudence to the taxpayer.
8. Restore traditional ‘core values’ of our Constitutional Republic.

Advertisements

Minions of the Aristazzi Strike Back

ImageI have formulated and presented a hypothesis on this personal blog and several groups in the social media. The hypothesis presented is concerning the definition, behavior, and characteristics of an elite class of people I have called the “Aristazzi”. The Aristazzi are “the obscenely wealthy elite who employ their wealth, in the United States and elsewhere, to manipulate and control government to their own self-gratification and hedonism.” As with all scientific hypotheses, it must be capable of being falsified (proven or disproven); to retain the element of ‘falsifiability’. I welcome evidence to disprove the premises of my hypothesis, but sometimes the arguments of a hypothesis are not contradicted or denied, but the person presenting the arguments. I have referred to such attacks as ‘putting personalities before principles’. The following is a summation of the misguided, misleading, unethical, and unscholarly approach to debate and deliberation known as “argumentum ad hominem”:

Attacking the Person
(argumentum ad hominem)

Definition:

The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the person’s character, nationality or religion may be attacked. Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be attacked by association, or by the company he keeps.

Image

There are three major forms of Attacking the Person:

  • Ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion, the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.
  • Ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an assertion the author points to the relationship between the person making the assertion and the person’s circumstances.
  • Ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the person notes that a person does not practise what he preaches.

Examples:

  • You may argue that God doesn’t exist, but you are just a fat idiot. (ad hominem abusive)
  • We should discount what Steve Forbes says about cutting taxes because he stands to benefit from a lower tax rate. (ad hominem circumstantial)
  • We should disregard Fred’s argument because he is just angry about the fact that defendant once cheated him out of $100. (ad homineImagem circumstantial)
  • You say I should give up alcohol, but you haven’t been sober for more than a year yourself. (ad hominem tu quoque)
  • You claim that Mr. Jones is innocent, but why should anyone listen to you? You are a Mormon after all. (ad hominem circumstantial)

Proof:

Identify the attack and show that the character or circumstances of the person has nothing to do with the truth or falsity of the proposition being defended.

References:

Barker: 166, Cedarblom and Paulsen: 155, Copi and Cohen: 97, Davis: 80

http://www.goodart.org/attack.htm

The Fundamental Battle to Preserve Fiscal Solvency

ImageIt is essential to begin by affirmation of the fact that wealth (capital or material) like most everything else, in moderation is not inherently evil. Only when an attribute or material item is abused does it become an evil. The unique quality of wealth is that the greater the acquisition of wealth, the greater the capacity to produce harm by abuse. The Jekyll Island summit in 1910, with the JP Morgan/Rockefeller class formulated the architecture of the Federal Reserve Act (passed by Democrats). The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 established all United States monetary and debt control in the hands of the wealthy. This led to the Stock Market crash of 1929 and the subsequent Great Depression. The manipulations of the Federal Reserve Board, creating money/wealth out of thin air, without the gold to give it stability and value, provided the opportunity for the Marxists during the Roosevelt administration to firmly entrench themselves in the Democratic ImageParty while the Republicans became the party advocating the carte blanche endorsement of the #Aristazzi usurpation of government control with wealth and business interests. A major backlash to the fiscal opportunism fostered by the Federal Reserve Act, was the enactment of the Glass-Steagall Act which mandated banks must be either investment or commercial.

Between then and the repeal of Glass-Steagall (by another democratic administration) in 1999, the US went off the gold standard and allowed the Federal Reserve total discretion in interest rates, printing of money, reserves required by banks, etc.. After passage of Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act investment and commercial banks were again allowed to merge, becoming the #TBTF financial behemoths we know today, and laying the foundation for the cavalier and careless CDO’s, derivatives, CDS’s, and Hedge Funds whose improvident risk-taking produced the Great Recession.Image

The common denominator throughout all the catastrophic fiscal machinations has been the greed and self-interest characterized by the obscenely wealthy (#Aristazzi) working through both major parties to achieve their short-sighted gains. The unfortunate component of government intervention in the distribution of wealth (capital or otherwise) has been that those with the least wealth and political leverage suffer most while the obscenely wealthy laugh all the way to the banks they own.

Then, the minions of the #Aristazzi produce their lame opinions to justify the erosion of the middle class and unchecked decrease in the mean income. Not to mention the pompous arrogance of the #Aristazzi who apparently believe they retain a divine right to their economic superiority. These charlatans, demagogues, and mental degenerates cannot provide factual rebuttals to the historical evidence, so they rely u

Image

pon the play book of “Rules for Radicals”; RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure

 point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They wa

nt to create anger and fear.)

The Hijacking Liberals: How Edward Bernays and the FDR Democrats Befuddled the Republicans

Classical “Liberal” ideology, still recognized everywhere but the United States, was hijacked by Democrats in the 20th Century when they re-invented themselves as “Liberals” after taking control of our academic institutions. Republicans, who embodied the TRUE “Liberal” ideology have been shaking their heads trying to figure out what happened ever since. “Classical liberalism is a political ideology, a branch of liberalism which advocates civil liberties and political freedom with limited government under the rule of law and emphasizes economic freedom.” Still staggering with trying to figure out how everything we stand for and believe in is embodied in a word which we can no longer apply to our principles and values because it has been embraced by those whose ideology and values are the polar opposite…just as the word “gay” has come to represent something completely different than it’s classic definition. Still reeling with cognitive dissonance produced when psychology is married to sociology and politics? Welcome to the wonderful world of Edward Barnays and contemporary propaganda! We’ve come a LONG way since Stalin first applied the concept as a viable means of exercising government control of the proletariate by means of the media!   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

Rendezvous With Destiny

ImageI’ve always enjoyed Ronald Reagan’s stirring faith in America and its core values. Such dedication, duty, and loyalty cannot stem from demagogues and charlatans, but only from a sincere belief in preserving the principles he speaks of. I particularly appreciate his remark that we have “a rendezvous with destiny. We’ll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we’ll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.” For many of us, we were born into the legacy our forefathers fought and died for. For others, freedom and sovereignty of the people are merely words upon paper or electronic images upon a computer screen and have no particular relevance. Perhaps such is the case because of conditioning to accept government by the moneyed elite in Washington, D.C.. It is sad to witness the degeneration of our culture into one which labors under false-flag deceptions and derives its moral and spiritual direction from partisan or political elite. To be ruled and allow others to make our decisions is easier than taking a stand for liberty and righteousness.

I know, from experience, the constant battle to avoid being drawn into diversionary quagmires by detractors who attempt to shift the focus of our battle from the true enemy of our Constitutional Republic. It is an enemy which contrives to delegate or abdicate our moral, spiritual, and political power to self-govern into the hands of the moneyed elite who run this country. With their endowment of wealth to they carry out their sinister agenda of self-interest through elitist federalism in Washington. We all know in our hearts that we are not oppressed by poverty but by obscene wealth which daily drives more Americans into the powerlessness of poverty; both economic and spiritual. Though there are opportunists who will sell their souls to ensure their own well-being and security, like the sell-outs to the Nazis in conquered nations of Europe and even the miserable deprivation of the Concentration Camps; for the sole purpose of gaining a slight advantage over those who have even less.

If the publication of truthful books will still be permitted in the post-Obama dystopia, I’m certain they will describe how we answered or ignored our “rendezvous with destiny”. They may tell of how some attempted to speak out against the agents of socialism disguised as advocates of dispensing carte blanche power to the super-rich aristocracy whose agenda was to drive everyone else into the bondage of poverty. Reagan spoke of the insidiousness of the Washington agenda to concentrate more and more power and property into the hands of fewer and fewer by confiscating private farms. Now the same principles are being applied to concentrate more and more residential property and business into the hands of fewer and fewer. Those who do not heed the lessons of the past will be doomed to repeat its errors. Those who preach complacency and conformity are the minions of those who will make slaves of us all! Heed the prophecies of the Scriptures and Ronald Reagan – don’t take my word for it.