February 10, 2014
By: Kelly Diamond, Publisher
The detrimental effects of Obamacare on the U.S. economy are myriad. The Congressional Budget Office was initially conservative on their estimations of long term effects of the bill, mainly because they were given strict parameters by which to make their predictions. But with the liberty to make new estimations based on three large factors, the devil can be exposed for what he is in the details:
“(1) Obamacare’s employer mandate, which will discourage hiring and reduce wages offered by employers; (2) Obamacare’s $1 trillion in tax increases, which will discourage work and depress economic growth; and (3) the law’s $2 trillion in subsidies for low-income individuals, which will discourage many from remaining in the labor force.” (Source: Forbes.com)
The fact that GWP finds ways to capitalize on negative economic circumstances certainly doesn’t mean we endorse policies that create these circumstances. So it is rather shocking to see the White House excited about a reduced labor force. That Jay Carney could be so glib about a reduced labor force, knowing full well that entails a reduced tax base, was not a play I expected:
“Over the longer run, CBO finds that because of this law, individuals will be empowered to make choices about their own lives and livelihoods, like retiring on time rather than working into their elderly years or choosing to spend more time with their families. At the beginning of this year, we noted that as part of this new day in health care, Americans would no longer be trapped in a job just to provide coverage for their families, and would have the opportunity to pursue their dreams.” White House Press Secretary, Jay Carney when asked about the projected loss of 2.5 million jobs by 2020 due to Obamacare.
While I’m NO fan of taxation, if your business model relies on stealing a percentage of the fruits of your laborers (as is obviously the case for all governments), then shrinking that population makes no sense.
It would be like a dentist promoting a sure-fire cavity prevention policy. It would be like a doctor telling you to exercise and eat a diet rich in vegetables and fruit rather than prescribing medications. It just makes no business sense. If you’re in the business of cavities and sickness, you don’t want people being well. And if you’re in the business of stealing money from producers, you don’t want people NOT producing.
The claims of the Obamacare opposition is that this act redistributes wealth. Perhaps to some extent this is true. There most certainly is a redistribution of the burden. Young, healthy individuals are paying higher premiums. Poorer people, regardless of health conditions, are paying lower premiums. Middle class families are actually considering DIVORCE just to afford care since the alternative is to pay onerous premiums that could very well amount to over 15% of the their incomes. There is no incentive to earn enough to afford the higher premiums, is there?
But worse than redistribution is the abject destruction of wealth altogether. Encouraging people to NOT produce? Incentivizing it even?!
How does such a program sustain itself with such a dismal long term projection?
The obvious and often repeated answer is: it doesn’t. That was never the point. The point was to ultimately get to a single-payer system by framing “Capitalism” for the failure of the Affordable Care Act.
How does that work though? While we are laying the groundwork for Nationalized Healthcare, every country with Nationalized Healthcare is moving toward a private system. How exactly can they expect to sell it? Sweden, the U.K., and even Canada are revisiting the virtues of socialized medicine.
Then there are the advocates for Obamacare who admit reforms are necessary given the unfortunate toll the bill in its current form takes on the poor and middle class. But look at all the “reforms” happening under Executive Order as opposed through the proper legislative process. Dodging the actual process to properly reform a law indicates that the problems with the ACA go deeper than just some quick fixes.
This also assumes that Obamacare is happening in a vacuum. That nothing else is poisoning the U.S. economy except the ACA. Alas, no. Our monetary policies are burning the wick from the other end. While they fund wars both abroad and domestically, and while they tax the crap out of the constituency through the ACA, they are also engaging in some precarious monetary activity. Printing, investing in volatile emerging markets, and keeping the interest rates low is not going to lead to anything good.
Burdening younger and future generations with not just debt and unpaid liabilities at birth in the tens of thousands of dollars range, BUT growing the education bubble at exponential rates by feeding the college debt beast. Availing money through student loan programs and inflating the cost of higher education… while selling the false hope that at the end of their graduation procession lies a job that will provide them a return on investment.
The collapse will be coming from all directions. The flaws and folly of Obamacare is only ONE wall in the house of cards being propped up by nothing more than faith and imagination of loyal patriots. This goes well beyond partisan politics because let’s face it, both parties are responsible for this mess we are in. That we got here in a matter of 230 years is a testament to power corrupting, absolute, power corrupting absolutely, and the ruthless efficiency at which corruption operates.
A Warning
My late father was almost entirely dependent upon government. He was in the Air Force. Then he was a police officer. Then a public school teacher. He relied on a pension program that is currently bankrupting the state of California to support his retirement along with a private 403b. He complained about how his pension disqualified him from collecting Social Security! And his Medicare benefits footed the bill for nearly $60,000 per year in medical treatments for over 20 years.
There is no talking to someone who is so dependent upon government that their very life depends on its existence. This summation of my dad’s life should upset you terribly. Not because he died. We all are heading that way. It should upset you that he represents EVERYONE who is for sale! EVERYONE who will sell out and get on board the welfare train if offered the right amount. EVERYONE who is totally unconcerned with how the money was procured or who had to sacrifice for them to collect it. EVERYONE who will put their LIVES into the hands of known violent criminals for their own short-term gain. EVERYONE who feels entitled to indenture future generations for their own personal benefit.
Do you want to know what is shredding the moral fabric of our nation? I can assure you it’s not two men getting married! It’s the entitlement mentality. And subsequently the deep seated dependency individuals are developing on government.
Ever play the game “6 Degrees of Kevin Bacon”? The object of the game is to find a cinematic connection between any actor and Kevin Bacon in less than six points. Well, we have a game right now going on called “3 Degrees of Government”. You will be hard pressed to find a private enterprise that doesn’t rely on government.
Metal Fabrications? What percentage of their business is in some way tied to defense?
Auto industry? Bailouts, fleet sales to government entities.
Lawyers? Really?
CPAs? Taxes.
Investors? Government manipulations through the Fed.
Banks? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!
Higher Education? Federal Student Loan programs. Government funding.
Grocery stores? WIC/SNAP and other Food Stamp related programs.
Doctors? How many accept Medicare and Medicaid patients?
Insurance? Government mandates to purchase.
Telcom? Verizon, Apple, AT&T, Google, are all NSA compliant to stay in business.
Every birth that takes place in a hospital… every marriage sanctioned by the state… your social security number… your birth certificate… Who owns you?
See! Even our “private sector” isn’t really all that private… and they are being propped up by government in some way.
I’m not trying to scare you like the Ghost of Christmas Future. This IS happening right now. Are your eggs resting in a basket that relies on government to continue to provide for you? If so, you are very vulnerable. Does the government hold the future of your life, your family, your business in its hands?
The slow and painful death of the small family farm should be a warning to us all in what happens when we chase government handouts. Can you totally escape government? No. Can you minimize your connection to government? You bet! Can you reduce or mitigate the risks posed by the U.S. government on your holdings? Absolutely.
Maintain control over yourself, your assets, your EVERYTHING!!! Consider this a personal labyrinth. There is a way to navigate the obstacles… at least for now. And you’re in the maze whether you like it or not. Take the advice. Listen to those who have learned the ropes. Don’t risk when you don’t have to.
19 Responses
Look, when someone says government has a role, or that societies have benefited from governmental undertakings, it is not a counter argument to say “what about the light bulb?” When someone says governments have improved the human condition, it’s not a counter argument to say, “But things aren’t perfect.” I didn’t say that ONLY government produces benefits (I said the opposite, actually) and I didn’t say governments have made things perfect, so I’m going to have to ignore much of what you wrote, including your additional straw men, because I don’t have the interest necessary to correct the shortcomings in your reasoning first or arguing in support of something I never said.
As to why you don’t remove yourself from a life where you reap the benefits of the parasites, you answer by asking where in the U.S. you can live without being taxed. That completely avoids the question, which was why don’t YOU live YOUR life in a manner that doesn’t make you a hypocrite for taking from people who you think don’t deserve compensation for their contributions to your life? I’m not asking if you can get the conditions you feel you deserve in exchange, I’m asking why you don’t stop benefiting from/depending on the work product of people for whom you have such contempt.
Furthermore, I found it interesting that you “answer” was to ask “where in the U.S” you could live without property taxes. Why must you stay in the U.S.? It seems to me that, if one were truly interested in avoiding the hypocrisy of benefiting from the parasites, all options would be on the table. Nonetheless, if you feel that you must escape property taxes before you can align your life with your rhetoric, my understanding is that The Canadian wilderness, Malta, hey, wait a minute… isn’t this YOUR area of expertise? Surely you must know where you can escape property taxes? What compels you to stay here and take from the parasites? Maybe, just maybe, you, at some level, actually appreciate and rely on the benefits created by “parasites.”
But my argument against government isn’t that “government isn’t perfect”. My argument is that government isn’t necessary. Isn’t misrepresenting my arguments and then calling them strawmen essentially making a strawman argument in itself?
You are totally dodging the private sector similes I listed. If I impose my services on you and you benefit, am I right to compel you to pay me? Answer that question. If you didn’t ask me to mow your lawn, and I do it anyway, can I force you to pay me for it? If I sell cars, and draft a contract in your name, am I justified in billing you for the car? Why can’t I do this as a private citizen, but it is right for a government to do it? Why are you a victim if I do it to you as a private citizen, but you would be an ingrate if I did it to you as a government?
Your are inconsistent in your reasoning. You are making allowances for criminal behavior perpetrated by a government that you would never tolerate from a private citizen or company! If you aren’t, then address this point.
I’m not avoiding the question of why I don’t live as though I’m “not a hypocrite”. I’m not a hypocrite. You still haven’t provided a solution to how to avoid the government monopolies. IF I have a choice, I take it. I absolutely do my level best to NOT engage the US government. I have no other means of getting to a grocery store other than using government roads. I have no means of flying anywhere without the FAA meddling. I can’t listen to the radio because of the FCC. I can’t eat store bought foods because the FDA regulates it. I can’t drink from a tap because the city owns the water. What the hell do you suggest I do to avoid using things that the government interferes in? I can’t even go to a restaurant that isn’t inspected by a Health Inspector or licensed by the state. So if I’m truly meant to avoid all things that the government touches, I can’t live on earth.
I’m saying they are all unnecessary. You can’t prove their necessity. You simply take it on faith that government has improved society because whereas we didn’t have all these cool gadgets before, now we do and we did so with a government. I mean, do wet sidewalks cause rain too? You haven’t made a case for causation at all. In fact, I think you are begging the question. (I.e. building an argument on flawed premises and using those premises as proof that your argument is right).
Again, hypocrisy indicates that I have a choice and deliberately opt to abandon my principles. That’s not the case. I see no other private sector choice. I don’t even see much of an international choice to avoid these same circumstances. Sending myself into exile is a wrongheaded solution to your perceptions of hypocrisy.
There are a few reason why I asked “why in the US”.
1. Why should I leave? I simply want to opt out. Why can’t I remain in this geography and opt out of the system? It’s like if you’re at a bar, and someone becomes belligerent. Why should all the peaceful patrons have to leave?
You keep insisting that this option exists for me, but you can’t even tell me where this magical place is! The reality is, I can’t opt out, can I?
2. I would actually love to leave the US. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for it. But that doesn’t address the issue of me still having to deal with a government. Switching up the school yard bully doesn’t get rid of my bully problem, now does it? Moreover, leaving the US requires a considerable amount of capital. And then the feds take a cut of your holdings when you do leave. The parasite takes a huge chunk out of you when you decide to opt out. Just ask the likes of Tina Turner.
You presume incorrectly sir. It’s not that the US offers any particular benefit. And NO, there is no where that I can go that doesn’t have a government I have to ultimately cow-tow to. GWP’s area of expertise is wealth and asset protection. We have affiliates who help with the expatriation process to countries that aren’t AS BAD as the US. Not the same as NOT having a government altogether.
You’ve got me there. It’s not your logic that needs to be addressed (although that is certainly vulnerable, because you don’t live in a cave and aren’t completely self-educated, you’ve taken aplenty from the parasites — hell, you’re using this government created internet and, I have little doubt, take every day from the efforts of people for whom you have nothing but contempt* , which one might say makes you hypocritical); no it’s your soul I fear needs attention and that’s beyond what I can tackle in blog comments. So, yes, you win.
* 911 is at your disposal for fire and police protection or medical emergency; you drive on public roads in cars made safer by government regulation with gasoline made safer by government regulation; use a phone that doesn’t fry your brain because of the efforts of government, read and write because some government parasite educated you; fly safely because government parasites inspect airplanes and pilot records; you don’t get randomly jumped and beaten or robbed because parasites in government catch, try and jail those who would, and on and on and on… The point being that your contempt relies on an unrealistic view of just how much you benefit from the work of parasites or, if you do recognize this and still maintain your contempt… well, that will just have to speak for itself.
Aaaah, yes. The government takes a monopoly on certain services which then makes me a hypocrite for not operating outside that monopoly? That is your argument. You ascribe a tremendous amount of benefits to government that really only exist in theory, not in reality.
Riddle me this: Let’s say a young child takes a vow of chastity. They commit themselves to NOT having sexual relations with anyone until they are married. One day they are raped. They were unable to fend off their assailant so they were forced to have sex. Would you say this child has broken their vow of chastity? They did, after all, have sexual relations with someone outside the context of marriage, right?
The fact that I was FORCED to attend public schools is not an example of hypocrisy any more than the above example. Having my principles forcibly violated by my parents or government does NOT make me a hypocrite. It makes me a victim.
Government has a monopoly on roads, and they have it because of force. So if I don’t find a way around their monopoly, I’m a hypocrite? Hypocrisy implies that I had the choice to be principled, but didn’t. What choice is there to government funded roads? Running through the backyards of my neighbors? Jumping from rooftop to rooftop?
The government hasn’t made my consumer products safer. Businesses wouldn’t stay in business if they sold stuff that exploded and fried their customers. Come on!
http://www.policymic.com/articles/19113/liberal-lies-why-government-regulation-makes-us-less-safe-not-more
http://www.creators.com/opinion/john-stossel/hazardous-safety-regulation.html
Government regulations are really means of keeping smaller competitors out of the market by fortifying the barrier to entry. That’s what toy manufacturers did. If government regulations made things safer, then why are cigarettes filled with MORE poison NOW than they were when it was just tobacco and paper?
I was taught to read by my mom and dad before I entered school. I was reading and writing before kindergarten which is why I skipped kindergarten in the first place. So I am actually proof that you don’t need schools to learn to read and write.
Planes are safer because of government? Prove it. What has government done?
If pilots are screened so well by government, why are so many of them flying drunk? Most of them can’t even fly a plane manually!
And I don’t feel safer flying now that the TSA has patted down granny and stolen a 6 year old’s snow globe at a check point.
If cars and planes are are all held to the same minimum government standard, what the government really prevented was improvement and innovation… and what it really protected was mediocrity.
There are still robbers and rapists and murderers out there. In fact, many are cops! I wonder how many people cops have caught that are actually guilty! Remember the purge of people exonerated after DNA testing proved the innocence of several inmates that were serving sentences for crimes they did NOT commit?
Matter of fact, if there weren’t such restrictions on gun possession in most states, I wouldn’t need the police. I could defend myself. Lower violent crime is attributable NOT to the police but to the leniency in gun regulations. That’s why New Hampshire has negligible violent crime compared to places like Washington DC or Chicago.
How many innocent people per year are killed or harmed by COPS each year? FIVE HUNDRED INNOCENT AMERICANS DIE EACH YEAR from cops according to the Department of Justice.
I don’t think I owe any real debt of thanks to cops who persecute victimless crimes. I mean, I don’t feel safer knowing someone who had pot is now doing some ridiculous sentence. I don’t feel safer knowing that someone is doing time for downloading and sharing their music list. I don’t feel safer knowing that someone somewhere paid a fine for driving faster than the posted speed limit.
Again, I think your claims of me being a hypocrite because I’m forced to pay for and often use government services is feeble at best. And the benefits you ascribe to government services are myopic in scope when you consider the damages also tied to those same providers of services. My claim isn’t that we don’t need to be educated, or that we don’t need roads, or that we don’t need peace officers… we do. I do. My claim is that we don’t need a centralized entity to monopolize those services and pay for them by forcing the constituency into one socialized service. We can have choices. We can have competition. And we can get those services ourselves privately.
If the government didn’t provide these things, we would find a way to get them some other way. And it would be more cost efficient.
“That is your argument. ”
No, that is your straw man.
Move the goal post to talk about why, with the government’s “monopoly,” you are forced to avail yourself of the labors of others as you like — that still fails to address the moral vacuum of your views.
People educated you, work to provide safety, infrastructure and societal advancements for you. You avail yourself of their work product with contempt for what they provide to you and you justify that contempt by pointing to society’s imperfections and your naivete.
Societies have, in the past, left people to “find a way” to procure things like justice, fire protection, safe food, safe travel and a better quality of life nn their own through “competition.” The results were feudal and barbaric. You might think product safety would sort itself out through competition, but that is ignorant of history — for centuries it did not. We tried living in your “utopia” and societies realized, rightly, that every man for himself had its shortcomings; that the death and misery delivered to people waiting for some elusive market force to correct some brutal condition or poisoning environment was backwards.
A lot of people, including me, want government to allow plenty of room for free enterprise, private initiative and individual freedom. We could use a hand. It doesn’t come, unfortunately, from people who make ridiculous arguments that government has no role and who, like petulant spoiled children, spit venom at people from whom they reap benefit because they “have no choice.”
You have a choice. Stop using/participating in things made possible by organized society. Nothing is stopping you from buying a plot of land and building a life on it with no benefit from “parasites.” You won’t do it, not because it’s impossible, but because you wouldn’t like it. You’d rather participate in the modern life created, in part, by the parasites while lying to yourself that you have no choice. Rather than appreciate what the toil of other people have provided you, you blame them for not allowing your return to the dark ages.
Okay, so the government monopoly is a strawman? How so?
I’m moving the goal posts, because despite the fact that I am compelled to avail myself to these services I never asked for, the real issue at hand isn’t that I’m forced to comply, but the moral vacuum of holding such a perspective. Do I have that right?
People do things for me that I never asked for, forced me to pay for that, and I’m just being a Debbie Downer by pointing out all the flaws.
Okay, well, if I come to your house and mow your lawn without you consenting to it, and then force you to pay me regularly for the service, can I also call you an ingrate if you balk? I will take your dogs and walk them, and demand more money. I will water your plants, and demand even more. I will essentially force myself and my services upon you and demand payment. If you don’t pay me, I will put you in a cage. If you resist me, I will shoot you. I will hold you up, and demand a percentage of your wages, and tell you tales of how I will help homeless people and the elderly… how I will defend you… and you will pay. Right?
The vacuum isn’t my morality. The vacuum is the cognitive dissonance at play here. Because if I were to do what the government does as a private citizen, I would be deemed a criminal. You are carving out a special exception for people acting as a “government” and tolerating actions and behaviors you would never tolerate from a private citizen or a private gang of bandits.
How is the police any different from the mafia? They threaten me with violence if I don’t pay them for their services, but once I pay them their take, they will defend me from the OTHER would-be criminals. And I’m the naive one?
When and where was this feudal and barbaric time you speak of? And how did a government resolve it exactly? How did they resolve and/or prevent it rather than supplant and replace it? How do you explain the peaceful coexistence of tribes? How do you explain the peaceful existence and efficient quality work of the Amish?
So, historically, man (i.e. mankind) has proven to be flawed. We are inherently lazy to fix that which should be righted or corrected. Therefore, we put these same men in a position of centralized power, and all of a sudden, multiple wrongs made a right and we saved ourselves from our own propensity to destroy ourselves. Is this your account of history? I think I’m going to need more specific accounts of how and when this happened. Because this makes no sense whatsoever.
You want the government to give you room for things you like… like free enterprise, private initiative and individual freedom. Have you gotten your utopia then? Has the government given you these things in its benevolence? Why would it? You created and support a government so that you can ask it for permission to have these things? Why?
So freedom doesn’t come from people (ostensibly like ME) who believe government has no functional role in society. Or people who are vitriolic toward those who impose themselves upon me against my will. So freedom doesn’t come from people who want to be left alone and want to leave people alone. Freedom comes from people like you, who think people like me should be controlled by people you pick for me?
That YOU think I’ve benefited from them in some way, doesn’t really excuse the imposition, does it? If a BMW dealer dropped off a car in my lot, registered it in my name, and then held me accountable for paying for it, would that be an ethical way to do businesses? I mean, I do benefit from the car. But I didn’t ask for it either. What if your local grocery just dropped off bags of groceries at your house and billed you for them. You didn’t ask for them, but they demand payment. You benefit from the food right? If you balk, you’re just being childish and ungrateful right?
This is the social contract argument you are making. By virtue of being here, I consent to that which the government does to and for me. No ACTUAL contract for services rendered. How on earth is it that anyone could consent to something by virtue of existing? If I happen to be standing somewhere and someone happens to throw a can of corn at me and hits my head, did I consent to being hit just by virtue of being there?
The logic fails. Because once you change out the variables it sounds preposterous every time. Take everything the government does, and replace it with a private entity, and you have crime. Taxation becomes theft. Arrests become kidnapping. Traffic citations become extortion. Intellectual honesty starts with linguistic honesty. Can you demonstrate how taxation is NOT theft? Can you provide me with a difference between them OTHER than who perpetrates the act?
“Nothing is stopping you from buying a plot of land and building a life on it with no benefit from “parasites.””
Really? So there is a place in the US in which I would be immune from property taxes? I would be immune from state inspections on how I construct my property? I wouldn’t need a building permit… or a permit to add plumbing or electricity? I can access utilities provided by a private vendor? I have a choice NOT to pay taxes? I have a choice NOT to use the roads because there will be private roads somewhere available to choose from?
You REALLY believe that it was because of government that we’ve advanced technologically? History absolutely does NOT bear that out at all! Government didn’t invent the light bulb. Didn’t invent the telephone. And your claims that they invented the internet is preposterous. Individuals developed the groundwork for computers to talk to each other and never took it past that point. A private entity discovered the information superhighway and took it to the heights it’s at now. Anyone who actually knows something about IT knows that the claim that government invented the internet is a bogus claim.
That you refuse to give credit to the private citizens responsible for all our progress is outrageous to say the very least! Private roads and rail were built by private investors. Americas first coast to coast highway, the Lincoln Highway, was built in 1912 by Carl Graham Fisher (president of Pres-to-Lite, manufacturer of carbide lamps, and also founder of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway).
Tell me again how we need the government to build the roads?
Steve Jobs? Bill Gates? The Wright Brothers? Henry Ford? Alexander Graham Bell? Nikola Tesla? Thomas Edison? Albert Einstein? A bunch of nobodies without the good old government huh? Government distorted the markets and created the need for regulations… but mainly on themselves and the adverse effects of their involvement. I don’t find flaws with society. I find flaws with large central governments who historically tend to become over bloated, corrupt, and wildly out of control. You know, like Rome.
You keep insisting the government fills needs. Not it doesn’t. It caters to entitled voters. Which was my original point, and still stands. The market fills needs… government prevents the efficient delivery of said needs. If you want, I can list countless times where private charities and businesses have tried to help in times of crisis, and the government has prevented it from happening. Innovators came to the mat with their inventions during the BP spill to offer ways to clean up the mess. Couldn’t get through the red tape. Couldn’t get there to help. Government prevented that.
Private entities have tried to feed the homeless, and some righteous government entity stops it because the meals aren’t coming from a commercial inspected kitchen. Better that homeless people dumpster dive, I guess huh?
Little kids have tried their hand at entrepreneurship, and have had their little lemonade stands shut down. Their cupcake businesses shut down. No actual complaints of poison or damages. Just shut them down because they didn’t have the proper licenses!
I don’t feel like I’ve benefited from that. Have you benefited from the prevention of private enterprise helping people?
Your logic is really bad, no, it is actually nearly nonexistent. To begin with, it is base on all sorts of invalid assumptions, so numerous and tangled that I would have to write an article longer than yours just to unintangle them. Secondly, your actual deductive processes (you know, as in “logical deductions”), as well as, your inferences (you know, as in “inferential reasoning”) are so poorly done that it becomes clear you either flunked or never took a college logic class. Last, and as the cliche goes, but not least, your totally cynical view of government in our country is extremely misleading, and seems to imply (here comes deductive logic) that there should be no government functions, at all, even though I’m certain you didn’t actually believe that. But you did imply it. You also implied, though I know you didn’t mean this either, there should be no military and no military pensions or even a VA, no police force or police pensions (which would then further imply no laws, therefore, no courts system, therefore no judges, and so on and so on), no schools (or, at the very least, they should all be private), no fire departments other than volunteer, and probably without equipment, since there should be no taxes levied by those now nonexsistent evil governments. Although i am not sure, I think your reference to all of us dying, eventually, was intended to tell us you did not mean to disparage your father’s memory, but that logic didn’t work either. Moreover, from what you wrote, one could deduce no need for the greater part of the United States Constitution; I deduced that you would keep those portions that imparted individual liberties. In fact, I wouldst be infer that you are a Libertarian, except that I don’t know enough about the party to be comfortable doing so.
Do you see the hole you begin to dig for yourself when you ignore real logic, both deductive and inferential? (Though it’s not clear you know the difference.)
Simply taking forever to declare me illogical is not actually an argument which proves I’m being illogical. Telling me how tedious it would be to explain my lack of logic doesn’t excuse you from the burden of proof either.
I know a little logic. Like strawman fallacy… ad hominem… you seem fairly familiar with them too as you are applying them here. Attacking my character doesn’t attack the points made. Calling me a logic flunky and self-absorbed is all ad hom.
I apologize for the ambiguity, but I’m happy to set the record straight: I am 100% anti-government. I am personally an anarcho-capitalist, but am panarchic in my world view in that I believe people are free to organize as they so choose. However, they are equally free to disassociate from any social organization. I tolerate the notion of people opting for a central government, but I do not feel obliged to participate in said system and believe I have a right to secede from such a system. That I am forced to comply and participate is in itself immoral.
Government functions is an oxymoron. Government doesn’t function. Everything the government does now can easily be done privately without central control and bureaucracies. You don’t need to know who will pick the cotton to know that slavery is wrong. And you don’t need to know who will build the roads to know that centralized power is wrong.
So, yes, I oppose a standing military. But so does our Constitution. We were only supposed to have a reserve army and a standing Navy. But I opposed a standing military in general and believe it should be both voluntary and and reserve. It should only be employed against those who invade our territory, and never preemptively.
Yes, I opposed government jobs in general. So that would mean I oppose government pensions and benefits as well.
Yes, I oppose the police. I believe there are other ways to administer private security that serves ONLY as a peace-keeping and dispute resolution role in society, rather than an instigator of violence and imposer of force.
Yes, I oppose the courts. I don’t believe courts are necessary at all. Dispute Resolution Organizations and mediators can be far more effective. Even the involvement of counselors/therapists on how best to handle certain circumstances more effectively.
You can have laws without rulers. I don’t need a government to tell me not to steal or murder. And those who wish to steal and murder do so regardless of what the law says and usually hiding behind a badge or governmental mask. The corruption in the police forces around the US aren’t just a few bad apples. Willful ignorance of the police state we are in is no excuse.
No schools! Damn right! Schools are not a place for learning, they are a place for indoctrination. I would say that if every school just disappeared right now, learning would increase 100 fold. They are totally unnatural in ever way. You really should look into men named John Taylor Gatto and Alfie Kohn. They have one thing to offer someone like yourself: perspective. Homeschooling, community based learning, unschooling, and sure private institutions if that’s what you want.
Fire departments could be volunteer which is still largely the case in places like Texas and New Hampshire. But they could also be funded by insurance companies. If I buy homeowners insurance, a portion of my premiums could fund local fire fighting equipment and maintenance. Same goes for private security. There is an app called PeaceKeepers. Basically people sign up to be part of a network, if you need help, you press a button and someone who is part of the network comes to your aid (totally volunteer) and helps you. You should also look into a company in Detroit called The Threat Management Center of Detroit. Their tactics are FAR more civil than the police, they are privately funded by businesses, and that profit allows them to offer their services for free to the poorer areas. Look into that. You might learn something new!
No, my reference to all of us eventually dying was to cool the jets of those who would find more tragedy in someone’s father dying than the overriding example he represented: Cradle to Grave Nanny Statist.
The Constitution is a slave document. Ever wonder why so many who signed the Declaration of Independence refused to sign the Constitution? “I smell a rat in Philadelphia” is what Patrick Henry said of it. George Mason refused. John Taylor of Caroline wrote letter upon letter about his dismay with the Constitution. The Constitution is a useless document since it was powerless to prevent the nonsense we have now… alternatively it allowed for this to happen. George Washington was nothing more than a despot staging a military coup on the Articles of Confederation. Why were the doors and shutters closed during the Constitutional convention? Why were the doors guarded by Washington’s men? Why was NO ONE allowed to come or go? Founding Fathers my ass… more like Founding Lawyers.
I’ve not dug a hole at all, sir. It would appear that you were able to logically deduce exactly what I was driving at all along. There is nothing illogical about wanting to be free from rulers. That you cannot personally comprehend such a scenario is not sufficient evidence to declare it illogical.
While I agree that we shouldn’t be upholding this idea of entitlement, I think the biggest problem in moving away from entitlement, is that since we have all paid into the programs, and paid into the government, we feel entitled in receiving at least some of that money back.
I’m 26, I pay all my taxes into social security and federal, which funds welfare, medicaid/medicare, and I would like to *believe* that I’m going to see some of that money again.
While I understand this most likely won’t happen, I think my generation is the generation that needs to get this taxation reduced and remove social security before we’re paying into it!
I totally get that! We’re told we will get our money back or that we will get certain things if we pay in and that’s how the programs are sold to us. But we can’t opt in or out once it’s passed. I think there is a way to taper off from entitlements. But the structure of Social Security is nothing more than a classic Ponzi Scheme. It relies on the productive to pay for its recipients now. The reality is, you aren’t paying in so you can see a return on your investment later like a 401k. You are paying in for someone who is currently retired… and crossing your fingers that your grandchildren will pay in to take care of you.
It’s a horrible scheme. I think at this point, counting your losses and cutting the program is all we can really hope for if anything at all. I certainly am not relying on it later in life LOL
For your information, nationalized healthcare countries such as sweden, finland, norway, france, etc are not at all moving towrd a private heathcare, this is absolutely preposterous as these countries lead the world in healthcare and healthcare quality, services and medications. These countries , and most other nationalized healthcare countries, just laugh at the USA and their so called healthcare system. It only benefits drug companies and politicians and everyone knows it.
I agree about the obamacare fsilures, however, to say that other countries are changing their nationalized system, it is just hogwash and you shouldn’t be doing the fox news lie-many-times-and-people-will-believe-you tactics, thsnk you.
Ironically I live in N. Europe and have traveled extensively in Norway and Finland as well as the Baltics. I’ve seen an uprising of private care with my own eyes.
Sweden: http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba369
UK and Costa Rica: http://news.co.cr/us-moves-towards-socialized-health-care-costa-rica-uk-move-away/9249/
Canada: http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0228/p07s02-woam.html
I’ll just leave these articles here for your review. I can offer more on other countries as well if you prefer not to do the simple google search yourself. I just put in “*Country Name* moves toward private healthcare” and up cropped the articles. Anyway, while the US system of healthcare has morphed into a fascistic pile of crony corporatism, it’s current state offers no argument for or against a free market solution to healthcare. While I will point and laugh at our healthcare system and how it has swiftly deteriorated into a political tool, there aren’t many artifacts of a truly free market system in place to call the US system “free market” or “private”. It’s anything but that. So everyone is right to criticize it.
I read your articles regularly, sometimes you make reasoned arguments and sometimes less so; but I have completely different opinion of you today as a result of this post. Equating your late father who, as an airman, policeman and school teacher, dedicated his professional life in service to others to a “sell out” is despicable.
Your father earned what he expected and he deserved it.
I wonder what he would say of the opinions of his self-absorbed daughter. Will you tell us exactly what you have done to earn your wealth that you think entitles you to more of what you earned than that sell out your father? Have you provided some value to your fellow man, to society or to civilization that you can convince us is makes you more deserving than your dad? What, in your mind, makes you more “entitled” to what you desire to keep than what your dad was to procure his “entitlements”? I’m curious and look forward to your response.
Oh Kelly, looks like we have another retired policeman response. I’ll let you provide your own response.
However, from my opinion as it relates to this article, the career military or policeman is nothing more than a parasite sucking the lifeblood out of the productive capacity of its benefactors. They only survive through loose monetary policies and taxation which is directly a theft of wealth from the producers.
There are free market solutions for security services, most govts just choose not to take them as they are politically unpopular and do not allow for the centralization of power.
You write as if I kept my sentiments a secret from the man. I assure you, I’ve told him to his face exactly what I think of his career choices. And he was as defensive as you are. I’m not self-absorbed for calling my dad’s career choices sell-out tactics. One has nothing to do with the other!
I’ve had several jobs, but in a past life, I was in marketing. I worked for various private ad agencies on private corporate business accounts. I never touched a government account. The money I earned was voluntarily given by private sector consumers… not stolen from them. I deserved to keep every single penny I earned… alas I didn’t get to. I had it stolen and garnished from my check every two weeks so that people like my dad could go bully peaceful people on the streets or brainwash young children or blow up brown people half way around the world.
My dad didn’t earn anything. He extorted people for fifteen years. He harassed people in their homes for no other reason than “possessing a plant”. He broke down doors to innocent people’s homes. He shit on people’s day for no other reason than going faster than the posted speed limit (How did HE manage to catch up to them? Oh yeah, he had to go FASTER than them. So two people speeding is better than one, right? And issuing a piece of paper obligating that person to take time out of their private sector job to pay for it will what? Make us all safer? Show me the logical correlation between tickets and safety… there isn’t any. It’s just revenue generation. Nothing more.).
I have absolutely provide value to my fellow man! I don’t shake them down! I don’t kill people on the other side of the planet! I don’t steal from them! I don’t break into people’s homes! I’m not a licensed crook like my dad was! When I taught, I did so privately, for people who solicited my help and paid me directly. When I help people, I don’t act like the school yard bully to help them reconcile their disputes. I have privately tutored. I have offered mutual aid to those in need ranging from full families to single moms about to be evicted from their homes. I NEVER declared my charitable giving. I have volunteered my own resources to countless needy people… never once needing the nanny state to come in and tell me what the “right thing to do is”. I didn’t need to be paid for my service. Nor do I need a memorial in my name. Or a parade in my honor. I just do it. I produce.
Everything I have done has been paid for LEGITIMATELY. I never took a tax dollar other than MY OWN MONEY BACK. I’ve never been on welfare. My dad has ONLY been on welfare his entire life. He’s not entitled to OTHER people’s money. He mortgaged my children’s future. My inheritance from him and his generation is this mess right here. My children’s inheritance from him is even WORSE!
I don’t need to steal to earn a living. I’m entitled to my own money. I don’t bankrupt people to stay alive. I don’t bankrupt full cities to retire. Yeah, the fruits of my private sector work are ONE HUNDRED PERCENT MINE TO KEEP. I worked for it. I deserve to keep it. My dad didn’t work. He didn’t even think for himself. He did was he was told… he was “just doing his job” like a good little braindead soldier. If he was told to break into a house, he broke in. If he was told to drag a person in, he did. If he was told to entrap people by exploiting their state of mind and ignorance of the law, he did. If he was told to meet a quota, he did. Never questioning the hand that feeds. I’ve quit jobs for ethical reasons. I stand on my principles, and would sooner live out of a box before I ever stole from anyone.
Yeah, I am far more deserving than my dad. He took far more than he ever put in. And he knew it. His justification was simply that he was entitled. What would he say to all this? He couldn’t say a word because he knew I was right… and that pissed him off.
Rationalizing theft and bully tactics both domestically and internationally is cognitive dissonance at it’s absolute finest. And thinking there is some virtue in being a public school teacher is a broken sentiment considering how tragic the US education system is.
Wow. I don’t think I can respond without sounding mean, so I’m going to step away now. But, I encourage you to keep thinking about things. You’ve got some holes to fill.
If you can’t address the flaws in my arguments without resorting to a series of logical fallacies, then perhaps it is you with the holes to fill. How does a man who claims to hold the logical high ground forfeit with his reason being, “All I got is ad hominem!”?