Posts Tagged ‘big government’

How much of my money doesn’t belong to me? How much of the money I earn with my own two hands should be used to fund someone else’s retirement? Or their health care? Or anything for anyone, without my approval?

Has anyone who advocates for any government welfare program ever considered that maybe, just maybe, people would be more charitable if they got to keep more of their money? I bring home $490 out of my check every week. I send $110 every week to the government under the agreement that that money will help pay for the defense of this country, my health care when I’m old, and my retirement.

Instead, that money is used for unconstitutional nation building, other people’s health care, and other people’s retirement. Social Security trust fund? Doesn’t exist. A doctor that accepts Medicare or Medicaid? Fewer every day. Defending the country? Sure, if you count wars against countries which have done nothing to us and assassinating American citizens without a trial defending our country.

The plain truth is that anyone, including the government, that claims a stake on my money without my having voluntarily given it, is claiming a stake on a piece of your life. That equates to slavery. 

Every man is free to pursue his own selfish ends so long as he doesn’t infringe on or impede the right of someone else to do the same.

Advertisements

On Twitter today, white house press secretary Robert Gibbs (@PressSec) answered some questions from the twitterverse. One question was raised about the recent Bush-era tax cut extension congress recently passed. The question: “Why does your admin continue to lie that tax cuts cost $$$? You can’t spend money you don’t have.”

The tax cut extension recently passed by congress, which also contained an extension of unemployment benefits, is expected to add over $800 billion to the deficit, which is what Secretary Gibbs refers to in his reply: “Regardless of your views, you have to admit extending tax cuts above $250k adds to the deficit”.

Actually extending cuts above $250k is only a small piece of the $800+B pie. And, Mr. Secretary, if the government wouldn’t spend more than it takes in, the cuts wouldn’t add one red cent to the deficit. 

Consider your household budget. When planning your budget for the next month, do you plan to spend more than you earn? Or, if you see that you’re on track to do just that, do you cut unnecessary spending? Well, from personal experience, I cut unnecessary spending.

So what could government stop/cut funding for in order to “pay” for these tax cuts? First, stop funding the war on drugs. Criminalizing an activity that harms only the user puts all the power in the hands of gangs & drug lords. Am I saying it’s ok to do drugs? Of course not. But I do believe each individual should be allowed to decide what to put into his/her own body.

We could also close many of the military bases we have in over 160 countries. Why do we task ourselves with the responsibility of defending nations that can defend themselves? Countries like Japan, South Korea, Germany, just to name a few. 

There are many other cuts that could be made, but you get my drift. The fact is, thanks to the tax cut extension, there will be over $800B that will be able to be spent/invested/saved which will better help to jump start the economy more than the ill-advised trio of stimuli (which started with Bush 43).

Any questions? Class dismissed.

I’m reading Leonard Peikoff’s (executor of Ayn Rand’s estate) introduction to We The Living, & I have to disagree with him on one point: he says America was the result of, among other things, the West’s ridicule of Christianity. To my knowledge, the colonies were a pretty religious lot, as were the founders. 

To treat religion as the enemy is the wrong approach. I am a Christian. I believe in helping others. I believe in being charitable. I don’t believe, however, that it should be up to the government to direct our dollars to charities at their discretion.

Randians & religious peoples of all flavors can find a common ground: my money is mine to do with as I see fit, not for you to forcibly take from me and do with as you see fit.

Government should go back to it’s beginnings and do what it was meant to do: keep us safe, while the courts do what they were meant to do & protect the law from government.

When did it become wrong to believe in individual people and right to believe in collectivist governments?

I know many people don’t like Ayn Rand or her philosophy (which was partly too difficult for even her to live by), but she had the right idea: keep governments out of private business. That’s the way the country was run for a long time.

Cut to today. Now we have big corporations (not all, but some), lobbyists, & special interests that have politicians in their back pockets. Case in point: the NRA. They recently pledged support for a campaign finance reform bill after being awarded exemption from the new rules through a provision they authored (see my previous post: Special Interest & The Government).

Google & Verizon recently published what they believe should be the guidelines for regulating the internet…rules that would hinder their competitors. Even the FCC, which is in favor of internet regulation, came out against these guidelines, as did a huge swath of the internet community.

This may seem like a rant against business, but it’s not. It’s a rant against government & businesses getting too cozy. When the government picks the winners, the populace loses. Look at the current “Summer of Recovery”: 9.5% unemployment, 131,000 net jobs lost last month (though the private sector has decreasingly added jobs every month this year), GDP growth that gets revised downward more often than not, etc. And this is after the trillions of taxpayer dollars that were pumped into certain companies, banks, and government departments to stop the downward economic spiral.

So where’s the recovery? Most major downturns are followed by quick recoveries. Look at the depression of 1920-1921: tax cuts, spending cuts, and some other noninterventionist policies paved the way for the roaring 20s. By contrast, the Great Depression lasted over a decade despite (because of) government interference, and unemployment didn’t see a sharp decline until America got into WWII & the draft was instituted.

Empirical evidence shows the less government interferes, the faster & more sustainable the recovery. Governments picking winners & losers means everybody loses.

Got off on a tangent there. You’ll see that happens a lot. Anyway, my point is that anybody that believes in giving power to the individual to do what he wants, with the caveat that he harms no one other than himself, is now considered an extremist.

Belief that we are free to live our lives our way, again- harming no one other than ourselves, instead of the government proclaiming how we should live is a crackpot. Not giving us control over our own bodies, what goes in our bodies, what happens in our bedroom, who we take to our bedroom (consensually and both being of legal age), how we spend our money, what we buy…these are a few examples of how government interferes with our lives. And we’re crazy because we want to take responsibility for our own lives & not have that responsibility taken away by government?

Then call me crazy.

liberty

Usually I’m opposed to new firearm legislation, but I like these laws going through in Utah, Montana, and Texas. Hopefully the rest of the country will follow suit. Basically what the law says is that, in Montana for example, any gun and ammo made in Montana which is kept in Montana, never crosses state lines, is exempt from federal regulations. The guns and ammo would be stamped “Made in Montana”.

This is just the small picture. The big picture is that these laws are sure to be tested in court. And if the courts uphold these laws, the states will start getting their intrastate commerce rights back. Rights which were taken away in 1942 in the Supreme Court case Wickard v. Filburn.

In that case, a farmer set aside one acre of his wheat crop (which was in excess of the marketing quota for his farm) for personal use. He set aside some which he fed to his livestock, and the rest of that one acre was for he and his family. I can’t explain it that well because I’m just learning about it, but you can read about it if you go here.

My point is that these laws aren’t just about guns. They’re about something I like to call states rights. If something is made in your state and never leaves your state, why should the federal government have any say-so in how it’s regulated? Then people will argue that we’ll have to stop receiving federal money for schools, roads, etc. Fine. Let the states handle it. Look at the state of our education system. It’s appalling and the government (state and federal) fund it. In a 2006 study, eighth grade private school average reading scores were 18.1 points higher than the average public school reading scores. Average private school math scores were 12.3 points higher. Sure wish I could’ve gone to a private school. I mean, I’m already smart. Just imagine how much smarter I could be.

Colin Powell said Americans want more government. I vehemently disagree with that and recent news stories (if you know where to look) will prove his wrongness (see, if I had gone to private school I would know that “wrongness” isn’t a word). From the number of tea parties to state rights laws, it appears that Americans want less government.

(I hope the guys at teapartyus.com don’t mind me using their pic at the top of this post)