This is my first video I have uploaded onto YouTube. It was a lot of fun making it and a lot more fun seeing this come to fruition. I have plans to create many more videos as a way to share my thoughts more quickly and reserve writing time for other projects that I am hoping to have done in the near future. Thanks so much everyone.
Sunday, June 26, 2011
Friday, June 10, 2011
Thorn in the side of Kansas
My apologizes to everyone for being away for so long. My computer had a virus and I had to take it into a shop to get it fixed. 6 whole days I had been away from my computer and I literally thought I was going to die of withdrawals from the net. LOL! I survived. I guess. HAHA! There was so much I wanted to write about and I was determined that as soon as I got back on I was going to address an issue I have with one of Kansas state legislators and something he said back in May.
On May 13th, Pete DeGraaf said in a state congressional proceeding that women should buy abortion only supplemental insurance in case they get raped. He then went on to compare that to having a spare tire in the back of his car in case of a flat tire. When asked to apologize for this, he refused saying that he would if women weren't so predisposed to killing babies.
Now before anyone hops all over me and tries to tell me what a great man Pete DeGraaf is and what a good man of God he is, listen first. This is exactly the kind of thing Democrats will get Republicans for and will use this to their benefit in the next election. I am doing the Republican party a favor in pointing out where they may be wrong to give them a chance to make corrections where corrections are needed. Also, I am very sick and tired of people who claim they are conservative based on how religious they are. Conservatism has nothing to do with religion. Which religion a person has is a personal issue. I don't care what religion a person has. What I care about is if they are willing to adhere to the US Constitution and will defend individual rights which is what conservatism is really all about.
Regarding to what Pete DeGraaf said this is what I got to say;
Whether we agree that abortion is murder or not is besides the point. The point here is that raping a woman is a direct violation of her individual rights. She should not have to have abortion only supplemental insurance to pay for the rapist's choice to violate her. We should make the rapist pay for the abortion should the woman so chose to have one. If he doesn't like it, then he should keep his pants zipped.
There is a huge difference in comparing a rape to a tire going flat. One is a violation of individual rights, the other is not. A woman should not have to go around wondering if she's going to get raped today. Everyone has a right to be secure in their own person. That's why we have police as a function of the government along with armed forces and courts. We pay taxes to pay for police because it is a way to protect individual rights and bring criminals to courts where they can be tried and judged according to the laws. So, if we're going to say that women should buy abortion only supplemental insurance for in case she gets raped, then we should tell everyone to pay for insurance to cover police services in case they are robbed, beaten or even worse, murdered because we're going to make victims pay to have their individual rights restored and that's how we're going to be. If the person is too poor to buy such things, well too bad, individual rights belong to only those who can afford them. Obviously that would be wrong.
You know, I can understand that people slip up sometimes and I know I do too. It's just often times, it's during these slip ups that you truly find out what a person is all about. (Especially if that particular person doesn't apologize and admit any wrong doing later such as the case with DeGraaf.) Any person doing some background research on DeGraaf would find that he is an associate pastor of a local community church and is against abortion even in the case of rape. I think it is great that people can choose their own religion or not to chose one as we do have freedom of religion. I care less for those who use government as a means to force their religious views upon everyone else especially when it violates other's rights. If we are going to have politicians who base their decisions for everyone on what their personal religion says, then why don't we just write everyone up a cheap ticket to heaven and call ourselves good and give each other a pat on the back because our laws says we're going to follow a certain religion. Wouldn't that be considered as a theocracy? Something similar to Islam but just with a different religion that we're all so familiar with?
Women, just like men, plan their lives and have goals to achieve happiness in their lives. It's part of their right to pursue happiness. Yet, when we tout that women shouldn't be allowed to abort a fetus after a rape, we're telling her that her right to pursue happiness can be limited by some idiot who decides to rape her and force a baby on her. She then, has to change her plans and prepare to have a baby she never wanted or planned for. Even if she was to put the baby up for adoption, she still has to take 10 months out of her life to devote to the pregnancy, not to mention the possible mental issues that could scar her for the rest of her life because her individual rights are actually limited and is beneath that of the dick head who raped her and the child who was conceived by rape. If this is the case, then what we will find is that men will then think that if they want to have a baby, then all they have to do is to rape a woman because she will be forced to have the baby. Never mind the challenge of having the woman fall in love with him and then make a commitment to each other to start a family together.
I would echo Barry Goldwater in saying that abortion is simply not a conservative issue. It is a religious issue and I don't see why an individual quite simply couldn't make that decision for themselves rather than making a collectivist decision for everyone and deciding that one choice is good for everyone. That's a collectivist way of thinking and is certainly not what our US Constitution is all about. You can disagree with me and that's your choice. But like I said, don't force your religion upon everyone else. Keep your theocracy at home. I am capable of planning my life as I see fit and deciding for myself what I believe in and don't need government to do that for me.
Siska DeYoung.
On May 13th, Pete DeGraaf said in a state congressional proceeding that women should buy abortion only supplemental insurance in case they get raped. He then went on to compare that to having a spare tire in the back of his car in case of a flat tire. When asked to apologize for this, he refused saying that he would if women weren't so predisposed to killing babies.
Now before anyone hops all over me and tries to tell me what a great man Pete DeGraaf is and what a good man of God he is, listen first. This is exactly the kind of thing Democrats will get Republicans for and will use this to their benefit in the next election. I am doing the Republican party a favor in pointing out where they may be wrong to give them a chance to make corrections where corrections are needed. Also, I am very sick and tired of people who claim they are conservative based on how religious they are. Conservatism has nothing to do with religion. Which religion a person has is a personal issue. I don't care what religion a person has. What I care about is if they are willing to adhere to the US Constitution and will defend individual rights which is what conservatism is really all about.
Regarding to what Pete DeGraaf said this is what I got to say;
Whether we agree that abortion is murder or not is besides the point. The point here is that raping a woman is a direct violation of her individual rights. She should not have to have abortion only supplemental insurance to pay for the rapist's choice to violate her. We should make the rapist pay for the abortion should the woman so chose to have one. If he doesn't like it, then he should keep his pants zipped.
There is a huge difference in comparing a rape to a tire going flat. One is a violation of individual rights, the other is not. A woman should not have to go around wondering if she's going to get raped today. Everyone has a right to be secure in their own person. That's why we have police as a function of the government along with armed forces and courts. We pay taxes to pay for police because it is a way to protect individual rights and bring criminals to courts where they can be tried and judged according to the laws. So, if we're going to say that women should buy abortion only supplemental insurance for in case she gets raped, then we should tell everyone to pay for insurance to cover police services in case they are robbed, beaten or even worse, murdered because we're going to make victims pay to have their individual rights restored and that's how we're going to be. If the person is too poor to buy such things, well too bad, individual rights belong to only those who can afford them. Obviously that would be wrong.
You know, I can understand that people slip up sometimes and I know I do too. It's just often times, it's during these slip ups that you truly find out what a person is all about. (Especially if that particular person doesn't apologize and admit any wrong doing later such as the case with DeGraaf.) Any person doing some background research on DeGraaf would find that he is an associate pastor of a local community church and is against abortion even in the case of rape. I think it is great that people can choose their own religion or not to chose one as we do have freedom of religion. I care less for those who use government as a means to force their religious views upon everyone else especially when it violates other's rights. If we are going to have politicians who base their decisions for everyone on what their personal religion says, then why don't we just write everyone up a cheap ticket to heaven and call ourselves good and give each other a pat on the back because our laws says we're going to follow a certain religion. Wouldn't that be considered as a theocracy? Something similar to Islam but just with a different religion that we're all so familiar with?
Women, just like men, plan their lives and have goals to achieve happiness in their lives. It's part of their right to pursue happiness. Yet, when we tout that women shouldn't be allowed to abort a fetus after a rape, we're telling her that her right to pursue happiness can be limited by some idiot who decides to rape her and force a baby on her. She then, has to change her plans and prepare to have a baby she never wanted or planned for. Even if she was to put the baby up for adoption, she still has to take 10 months out of her life to devote to the pregnancy, not to mention the possible mental issues that could scar her for the rest of her life because her individual rights are actually limited and is beneath that of the dick head who raped her and the child who was conceived by rape. If this is the case, then what we will find is that men will then think that if they want to have a baby, then all they have to do is to rape a woman because she will be forced to have the baby. Never mind the challenge of having the woman fall in love with him and then make a commitment to each other to start a family together.
I would echo Barry Goldwater in saying that abortion is simply not a conservative issue. It is a religious issue and I don't see why an individual quite simply couldn't make that decision for themselves rather than making a collectivist decision for everyone and deciding that one choice is good for everyone. That's a collectivist way of thinking and is certainly not what our US Constitution is all about. You can disagree with me and that's your choice. But like I said, don't force your religion upon everyone else. Keep your theocracy at home. I am capable of planning my life as I see fit and deciding for myself what I believe in and don't need government to do that for me.
Siska DeYoung.
Monday, May 30, 2011
Happy Memorial Day!
I would like to take this moment to remember all the veterans who have served and all the soldiers now serving. You're not forgotten and surely are very well appreciated. You fight for the same freedoms our founding fathers fought for so that generations of mankind to come may enjoy the only lasting light on earth; a nation of freemen. America will forever thank those who serve as soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. We love you and keep you in our prayers.
Siska DeYoung
Siska DeYoung
Sunday, May 29, 2011
No Joke! Obamaphone
Over 2 months ago I had received an email from a friend who told me about an "Obama-phone." At first I thought, "No way! Come on. That's got to be a joke." The email started out with a story about this lady who was in line at a check out stand of a grocery store. She over heard this guy in front of her talking about his "Obama-phone." and that he was able to get it for free with free minutes to do whatever he wanted with it. The lady was shocked and asked him how he got it. He explained that since he gets food stamps, lives in government housing, gets cash every month, and is on Medicaid, he qualified to get a free phone. The lady was in shock because here she was paying her own rent, utilities, phone, food, transportation, and her own cell phone.
I went online to see if the email sent to me was true or if it was a hoax. As most of you already know, there are a lot of emails circulating stories that seem to be true but are actually unfounded. The sad thing about these untrue stories is that even the most outrageous thing could be true. Well, turned out that something as outlandish as the "Obama-phone" was true. But it wasn't until one day, I was working at one of my client's home and she received in the mail, information on a Government Assisted Cellular Service.
I went online to see if the email sent to me was true or if it was a hoax. As most of you already know, there are a lot of emails circulating stories that seem to be true but are actually unfounded. The sad thing about these untrue stories is that even the most outrageous thing could be true. Well, turned out that something as outlandish as the "Obama-phone" was true. But it wasn't until one day, I was working at one of my client's home and she received in the mail, information on a Government Assisted Cellular Service.
Then it really struck me that hey, this is really true. You can get a free cell phone from the government with free minutes. Then I thought, "When does it end?" Seriously! Just look at the list of government assistance a person can get just on this letter alone! And it doesn't even account for everything that is available. But on this letter you can see food stamps, Medicaid, supplemental security income (aka SSI), federal public housing assistance (aka section 8), the national free lunch program, temporary assistance to needy families (TANF), and low income home energy assistance programs. WOW! What the heck am I doing working when all of my needs can be taken care of by the government!? Now, I can even get a free cell phone and not work for it. Gee, ain't that great, we have destroyed any and all incentive for man to work. I'm sure that what's next is that we can get free fuel-efficient cars from the government. After all, they're willing to pay for the gas in welfare recipients' cars.
The problem with all this is the myth that there are such things as "free lunches" or that cradle-to-grave welfare programs do no harm to our nation. The fact is that a welfare state is harmful to us financially, and morally, and as well reduces our individual freedoms.
Our nations debt ceiling has been reached this year and yet at the last townhall meeting I attended, the main topic was not the debt crisis as it should have been but it was keeping entitlement programs in place such as Social Security and Medicare. Of course, what politician would want to give the generation who fought WWII the boot. No one does of course. Everyone appreciates what our grandparents did for us in that war. There's no argument there. The argument is does that generation wish to leave a legacy of debt for their generations to come as a way for us to thank them for their service?
As Barry Goldwater would put it, there are plenty of politicians who promise to go to bat for lower taxes and in the same breath vote for the very spending projects that make tax cuts impossible. We demand for government to spend money on us and yet we don't want to see our tax rates go up. So, the problem is not so much that politicians aren't listening to their constituents. They are listening and that is part of the problem. So, when it comes time to do anything about entitlement programs that are not working or are straining the economy, politicians are hesitant to do anything about them. They are also hesitant about raising taxes as that's another way to end a politician's career. So to find a way to pay for the cradle to grave social state, they print money. Printing money has been a popular way of governments throughout history to pay for welfare and war without actually raising taxes on citizens. Thing of it is that inflation IS a form of tax. Whenever your currency is inflated, you pay more at the check stand or at the pump. The thing about inflation is that you don't get to vote on it but you do have to pay it and hence you're still paying for the entitlement programs.
A point that never gets discussed about welfare programs is the demoralizing aspect of it. Welfare is what I consider to be as a double edge sword. First it takes from the worker in the form of taxes, be it hidden or not. The worker's incentive to want to produce, innovate, or create is destroyed as they will inherently have nothing to look forward to. Instead, you have producers who see what kind of welfare being made available to the recipients and become disheartened that the un-producer is being rewarded for taking a handout from the government. Second, the welfare recipient mortgages himself to the government in return for the benefits and the government then gives or withholds benefits as they see fit. The welfare recipient also lose their sense of responsibility to themselves and their families as they transform from an individual of dignity, self-reliance spiritual being into a dependent animal creature without his knowing it.
Barry Goldwater said, "I am unaware of any moral virtue that is attached to my decision to confiscate the earnings of X and give them to Y." Should a person approve of a welfare program, why is it that he can't contribute that money to private charities? To force everyone to pay into any welfare programs forces individuals to work against themselves. But when we instead allow for individuals to chose for themselves what private charitable organizations they wish to contribute, then their individual rights are preserved and the recipient is then uplifted as they become aware that the charity is the product of the humanitarian impulses of the giver, not the due of the receiver.
In short, let us remember that the material and spiritual sides of man are intertwined. For the State to assume the responsibility of one without intruding the essential nature of the other is impossible. In the face of sounding religious, I would like to say the following. That is, as a nation as a whole, we have lost faith. No, not faith in that there is a God. But faith that we are capable beings, that God can provide. We hear so much more often now than before from family, friends, and even members of church to simply go and get what you need from the government. We have lost that faith that we don't need to turn to government for our material needs and have hence lost our spirituality and our ability to think for ourselves. If we take from a man the personal responsibility for caring for his material needs, we take from him also the will and the opportunity to be free.
Siska DeYoung
Monday, May 23, 2011
Hold That Thought on Herman Cain....
Herman Cain is a great business guy, a speaker at Tea Party rallies, a black American (NO I refuse to say African-American, we're Americans and that's it!), and has some leadership qualities. He would symbolize to the world that the Republican Party is not a racist group and the Tea Parties don't care about the color of the skin. Herman Cain represents himself to the world as a defender of the free market system and as a voice for the Tea Party.
Hold it right there. Before we begin sounding the trumpets to herald in a hero, let's do some research on the guy and see what he's really like. Times past we've been let down after we have elected a person in to find out that what he said and suppose to have symbolized was untrue. I think also, that we really do need to stop looking at the color of the skin because this really is not the time to try and prove anything to the world about us not being racists. The racist tag that has been attached to the Republican Party is simply the Democrats having done a great job of playing the race card and spreading the fallacious idea that Republicans are racist. A quick overview of the history of the Democratic Party would confirm that the opposite is in fact true.We know who we are and we know we are not basing our thoughts or actions just because someone is of a different shade of color. We should base our thoughts of a person by what they have done in the past, what they have said, and what they stand for. So, let's move pass this racism thing and see what history of this man tells us.
A short biography on Herman Cain; After completing a master's degree in computer science from Purdue University, Cain left the navy department and started working for the Coca-Cola company as a business analyst. He later went on to work for the Philsbury Company and went all the way up to Vice President, and then went on to manage over 400 stores for Burger King. He was so successful with Burger King that Philsbury decided to bring Cain back and placed him as CEO of Godfather's Pizza. Cain is well known for this position with Godfather's Pizza and while he was CEO, he took a stand against then President Clinton's universal healthcare plan. During this time as CEO of Godfather's Pizza, however, Cain was a member of the board of directors of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City in 1992 and was later the chairman of the board 1995-1996 after which he resigned to become active in national politics. http://www.think-it-inc.com/HermanCain.htm ; http://www.horatioalger.org/members_info.cfm?memberid=CAI96
Cain got his first taste in national politics while he was serving as CEO for Godfather's Pizza. Cain started getting by starting a radio show called The Herman Cain Show on an Atlanta radio station. He also worked for Fox News as a commentator and was a syndicate writer in a local newspaper. Cain later went on to start the Herminator's Intelligent Thinkers Movement, HITM, with hopes to have 100,000 activists in every congressional district. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Cain
In 1996, Cain was a senior advisor for Dole's then campaign for Presidency and later went on to attempt a campaign and get nominated for Senate on the Republican ticket. Neither of these attempts were successful. http://www.rlc2011.com/speakers_list/herman-cain/, http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A58347-2004Jul17
While Cain was running for Senate, his opponent, Mac Collins, accused Cain of being a moderate because Cain supported affirmative action. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A58347-2004Jul17 The only response Cain could offer to Collins' accusation was that he was conservative in that he was more pro-life than Collins was. Cain was against abortion even in the case of rape and incest. He based his conservatism on how far more religious he was than the other candidates. He attempted to discredit Isakson by saying that Isakson approved of abortion for the case of rape, incest and medical needs. Besides the fact that Cain dodged the accusation of supporting affirmative action, it's as if he based his "conservatism" by how religious he is and not by facts, preserving individual rights and his adherence to the US Constitution. Needless to say, Isakson was the one who won the nomination to the Republican ticket.
Since 2010, Cain became a popular speaker for Tea Party rallies and attended over 40 such rallies. He called himself a "dark horse candidate" and a leader for the Tea Party rallies. Well, note to Herman Cain, the Tea Party rallies were never about giving politicians power; they were about giving the power back to the people where it rightfully belongs. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1969/12/herman-cain-the-gop-wild-card/8367/
Herman Cain does have some good positions to offer as a candidate for the Republican Party. He supports policies that will lower regulations, lower taxes, and reduce, albeit slightly, government intrusion in the economy. He supports returning the gold standard in spite of having been a chairman of the Federal Reserve in Kansas City. Cain also favors supporting off shore drilling and even wants to allow drilling in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He also wants to allow the free markets take reign of advancements in alternative energy sources instead of having the government dictate who will be the economic winners and losers. Cain favors repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, because he believes that the free market should be the largest provider of health care, not the government. He is also in support of Israel's right to defend itself and make their own decisions in what they think is best for them. Cain supports Israel as our ally and the only one that we have in the most dangerous part of the world.
In principle all these positions are great but nevertheless the amount of deregulation he supports is still miniscule and will by no means make America an economically friendly nation. He also hasn’t advocated any substantial spending cuts anywhere in the government or privatizing any government programs. Cain is at best (!) in favor of implementing socialism albeit at a slower pace than Obama and the left.
Herman Cain says he supports lowering taxes but is in favor of a Fair Tax of 23%. I like the idea of Fair Tax but a low one. At 23% Fair Tax, we can expect to pay 23 cents for every dollar we spend. That adds up! Just imagine going to the store to buy $100 worth of groceries and add another $23 to that bill. Do you think you can handle that? Don't forget that you also have to pay a state and local sales tax on top of that. Besides that, why only lower the corporate tax from 35% to 25%? Why not just lower it to 0%? Corporations are being forcedto ship jobs overseas because they have to compete in a global economy and in order to do that they have to go for the cheapest labor available. So, why not make it economically feasible for corporations to have jobs here in America and make a profit?
Herman Cain claims to be fiscally conservative but if that is true, then why was he in support of Troubled Asset Relief Program, TARP? Cain saw TARP as a way for the taxpayer to invest while saving a troubled asset. When asked about his support of TARP, he said he had no regrets as he said, "I studied the situation. I have no trouble with the idea; I had trouble with the implementation, picking winners and losers." (http://004eeb5.netsolhost.com/hc133.htm ; http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/267029/introducing-herman-cain-robert-costa?page=7 ) How does one pass something like TARP without picking the winners and losers? If that is the stand he takes on it, then we might as well have given bailouts to ALL companies in a given market and consider them all losers.
Forget anything about correcting, let alone get rid of, what is wrong with our welfare system and Social Security. Herman Cain is only in favor of streamlining these government entitlement programs. (http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/rep_bios.php?rep_id=98516477&category=views&id=20110508174238) And well, when you streamline government, you only streamline government power to coerce violations of your individual rights. There's a reason for checks and balances in government and it's meant to act as a way to restrict government; not to restrict the individual.
But the worse political stand that I see from Herman Cain is his position on Iran. His idea of "dealing" with Iran is a diplomatic approach to nuclear disarmament.( http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/rep_bios.php?rep_id=98516477&category=views&id=20110509171147) Either Cain is naive about Iran, or that he really doesn't know much about what's going on in the Middle East. They have made it clear many times over that their intent is to wipe Israel from the map and kill all the Jews. There really is no deal-making with them to give up their quest.
Bottom line; Herman Cain is not the capitalist he claims to be. He is more of a corporatist or fascist. You cannot be a capitalist if you are in favor of government welfare, keeping government Social Security, in favor of bailouts and stimulus from government and you certainly cannot be a capitalist if you support affirmative action. To be a capitalist means to know, understand and protect individual rights; none of which describes Herman Cain. Just as well, a true capitalist would never support the Federal Reserve as he has done because a free market capitalist system would never tolerate a concentration of power in one bank that causes for the mess we are in. One bank that controls other banks, dictates what interest rates we can charge and how much other banks are allowed to make. That is not capitalism. For a bit of “trivia”, according to Yaron Brook of the Ayn Rand Institute, during the Gilded Age of America, from the Civil War to the World War, America experienced the greatest economical growth than any other time in America history and we didn’t have a Federal Reserve Bank or any kind of central bank.
Should Cain ever become president, we will still continue to have a debt crisis because he refuses to attack the very reason how we got here, he'll tank the economy further if the Democrats haven't done the job already, and then at the end of his presidency you'll hear people say it's because capitalism failed. Truth is capitalism didn't fail. We don't have capitalism and Cain is not the capitalist people think he is. He favors giving corporations a break and yet still wants to keep welfare and Social Security. We will have a mixed economy with elements of socialism, elements of free markets with lots of government intrusions.
I would beware of Herman Cain and do the research yourself. He’s another wolf in sheep’s clothes.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
CONGRATULATIONS United States! 14.367 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT!!!
Yep! You read the title right. Our national debt is over 14.36 trillion dollars by the time you read this. Oh wait, make that 14.37, no that's 14.38..... It's ridiculous. Just guess a number. Or just check out www.usdebtclock.org and see for yourself.
You might be asking why is 14.3 trillion a special number to focus on. Well, that was our nation's debt ceiling anything after that is anybody's guess. The thing is that we have reached the debt ceiling before in 1985,1995, and 2002. So, while Timothy Geithner maybe scare mongering congress into raising the debt ceiling and Bohner falling for Geithner's tacktic, let's take a look at what history has to say.
Each time we reached the debt ceiling, payments to Social Security were still made on time, Medicare and Medicaid were still fully operational, no interest payments were missed and the economic Armageddon, Geithner claims would happen, never materialized. The world economy never tanked.
Now, I'm not saying those things couldn't happen. They could, but it would be up to Timothy Geithner if he allows them to happen. Geithner has tremendous discretion over how, when and which government bills get paid because after all he is the Secretary of the Treasury.
This time however, our national debt ceiling is placed at 98% of our nation's Gross Domestic Product; much higher than it has ever been. Gross Domestic Product is basically all final finished products and services made within the borders of our nation. The GDP often acts as a collateral for the nation's debt. Sort of like when you buy a house. The mortgage company keeps the title of the house as collateral in exchange for you to have money to buy the house. When you fail to make your payments, or when you breach the contract with the mortgage company, they simply take your house and try to recover the money owed to them by selling it. At least that's the way it's suppose to work. So long as the national debt is under the value of the GDP, we're solvent. We could declare default and our creditors would come in and take the GDP up to how much is owed them.
With all the scaremongering in Washington D.C., I imagine the Republican party will cave in spite of outrage from the American people. They'll raise that debt ceiling without any change in spending habits which is what we ought to be doing. Why do I say that? Because the Republican party has not been showing much leadership lately. Sure, they came up with the Path to Prosperity while the Democrats are paralyzed by their altruism and twitted their thumbs. But the Democrats know that they still control the Senate and the White House, plus, Presidential elections are coming up and they want to make good on all their entitlement programs they promised during their campaigns. The Path to Prosperity really does nothing to attack the reason why we got into this debt crisis to begin with which are the entitlement programs. Despite what you may have heard from the Democrats accusing the Republican party of trying to give grandma the boot, the Republican's plan has no intention of getting rid of entitlement programs but rather just "fix" them so that they last longer. More like kicking the can down the road and putting off our own "Greek" debt crisis.
Last year this time, we were discussing how Greece found themselves with a debt crisis and a debt ratio being well over 120% of their GDP. The CATO Institute did an extensive study in the Greek debt crisis to find out what was the cause of this debt crisis and found some rather startling things. One was that 1 out of 4 workers in Greece was a public sector worker. That's 25% of the population of Greece on the public payroll, not to mention the outrageous benefits some of these public sector workers receive that included giving children of deceased workers full benefits including paychecks that would have other wise been earned. Now, I'm not saying that we're that bad off but we certainly are that close. The Kansas Watchdog Group found that in the state of Kansas, 1 out of 5 citizens are a government employee and in the state of Georgia, we find government employees making 6 figure incomes.
I'm not opposed to people making as much money as they can, but when it comes to public jobs that are paid for by the taxpayer, then it's a different story as it is a from of legalized stealing and certainly suggests that government can do whatever it wants with other people's money. Higher wages in government jobs also destroys man's incentive to innovate and produce in the private sector jobs because then everyone's aspiration is to work for the government and take control over others while destroying individual rights.
The solution to our problems is not the prolonging of entitlement benefits while cutting here and there. Keeping the entitlement benefits will only worsen the problems we face down the road. It has been typical of government to underestimate the cost of entitlement benefits because they fail to learn that people have a tendency to take advantage of welfare programs and government has the natural tendency to use welfare as a means to become absolutist and then we find ourselves right back where we are now with another debt crisis.
Also, another thing is that should we raise the debt ceiling, even just one last time, it does nothing to end the crisis but instead worsens the problem. As I said, we have hit the debt ceiling 3 times in the past already and all because of government's out-of-control spending. It's said that government is spending like a drunken sailor but the difference between the government and the drunken sailor is that when the drunken sailor runs out of money, they stop spending. Government on the other hand continues to spend like they've got money growing on trees. What with a printing press in their hands, and Keynesian economics ruling the show, their solution is to simply print more money which leads to inflation. Then we wonder why the price of food, gas, and other commodities are higher than they were just a few months ago.
We have got to make real government cuts and make the sacrifices needed to reverse the tide of this debt plague. 38 billion dollars didn't even scratch the surface of what's needed; especially since the government added 57 billion dollars in spending. The Republican party had a good start when they wanted 100 billion dollars in spending cuts and even that was not enough to save this nation from the debt crisis. Apparently, as I went to the townhall meeting with Mike Pompeo, he explained that the majority of calls he gets are from people who tell him that spending cuts are good, buuuuuut..... and they would tell him what they don't want cut such as water treatment projects, Social Security, Medicare, education, food assistance... and it goes on. It sounded to me just the exact source of the problem. Altruism.
The problem in America can be found in one sentence and that is, "America is Great, because America is Good." Everytime we find a problem that we think needs to be fixed, we run to the government. When we see homelessness, poor, and need for medical care, we run to the government. When we see a need such as clean water, affordable housing, and even gas for cars, we run to the government. We make demands that taxpayers pay for things they don't use regardless if they agree to it or not or if they even use the program. Heaven forbid that we should ever look to ourselves to solve our problems. And now this. The great fall of a once morally good nation is caused because people are more worried about having their 3 meals a day rather than worry about having a nation of individual rights in the next day. They trade a higher value for a lower value much like how Esau traded his birth right for a mess of pottage in the Old Testament of the Holy Bible.
What are we going to do folks? Are we Americans or are we the new United Soviet States of America? That's where we're heading if we don't stop the out of control spending in government and make the sacrifices needed to ensure that this nation will endure for many more generations to come.
Siska DeYoung
www.cato.org
www.usdebtclock.org
www.gao.gov
You might be asking why is 14.3 trillion a special number to focus on. Well, that was our nation's debt ceiling anything after that is anybody's guess. The thing is that we have reached the debt ceiling before in 1985,1995, and 2002. So, while Timothy Geithner maybe scare mongering congress into raising the debt ceiling and Bohner falling for Geithner's tacktic, let's take a look at what history has to say.
Each time we reached the debt ceiling, payments to Social Security were still made on time, Medicare and Medicaid were still fully operational, no interest payments were missed and the economic Armageddon, Geithner claims would happen, never materialized. The world economy never tanked.
Now, I'm not saying those things couldn't happen. They could, but it would be up to Timothy Geithner if he allows them to happen. Geithner has tremendous discretion over how, when and which government bills get paid because after all he is the Secretary of the Treasury.
This time however, our national debt ceiling is placed at 98% of our nation's Gross Domestic Product; much higher than it has ever been. Gross Domestic Product is basically all final finished products and services made within the borders of our nation. The GDP often acts as a collateral for the nation's debt. Sort of like when you buy a house. The mortgage company keeps the title of the house as collateral in exchange for you to have money to buy the house. When you fail to make your payments, or when you breach the contract with the mortgage company, they simply take your house and try to recover the money owed to them by selling it. At least that's the way it's suppose to work. So long as the national debt is under the value of the GDP, we're solvent. We could declare default and our creditors would come in and take the GDP up to how much is owed them.
With all the scaremongering in Washington D.C., I imagine the Republican party will cave in spite of outrage from the American people. They'll raise that debt ceiling without any change in spending habits which is what we ought to be doing. Why do I say that? Because the Republican party has not been showing much leadership lately. Sure, they came up with the Path to Prosperity while the Democrats are paralyzed by their altruism and twitted their thumbs. But the Democrats know that they still control the Senate and the White House, plus, Presidential elections are coming up and they want to make good on all their entitlement programs they promised during their campaigns. The Path to Prosperity really does nothing to attack the reason why we got into this debt crisis to begin with which are the entitlement programs. Despite what you may have heard from the Democrats accusing the Republican party of trying to give grandma the boot, the Republican's plan has no intention of getting rid of entitlement programs but rather just "fix" them so that they last longer. More like kicking the can down the road and putting off our own "Greek" debt crisis.
Last year this time, we were discussing how Greece found themselves with a debt crisis and a debt ratio being well over 120% of their GDP. The CATO Institute did an extensive study in the Greek debt crisis to find out what was the cause of this debt crisis and found some rather startling things. One was that 1 out of 4 workers in Greece was a public sector worker. That's 25% of the population of Greece on the public payroll, not to mention the outrageous benefits some of these public sector workers receive that included giving children of deceased workers full benefits including paychecks that would have other wise been earned. Now, I'm not saying that we're that bad off but we certainly are that close. The Kansas Watchdog Group found that in the state of Kansas, 1 out of 5 citizens are a government employee and in the state of Georgia, we find government employees making 6 figure incomes.
I'm not opposed to people making as much money as they can, but when it comes to public jobs that are paid for by the taxpayer, then it's a different story as it is a from of legalized stealing and certainly suggests that government can do whatever it wants with other people's money. Higher wages in government jobs also destroys man's incentive to innovate and produce in the private sector jobs because then everyone's aspiration is to work for the government and take control over others while destroying individual rights.
The solution to our problems is not the prolonging of entitlement benefits while cutting here and there. Keeping the entitlement benefits will only worsen the problems we face down the road. It has been typical of government to underestimate the cost of entitlement benefits because they fail to learn that people have a tendency to take advantage of welfare programs and government has the natural tendency to use welfare as a means to become absolutist and then we find ourselves right back where we are now with another debt crisis.
Also, another thing is that should we raise the debt ceiling, even just one last time, it does nothing to end the crisis but instead worsens the problem. As I said, we have hit the debt ceiling 3 times in the past already and all because of government's out-of-control spending. It's said that government is spending like a drunken sailor but the difference between the government and the drunken sailor is that when the drunken sailor runs out of money, they stop spending. Government on the other hand continues to spend like they've got money growing on trees. What with a printing press in their hands, and Keynesian economics ruling the show, their solution is to simply print more money which leads to inflation. Then we wonder why the price of food, gas, and other commodities are higher than they were just a few months ago.
We have got to make real government cuts and make the sacrifices needed to reverse the tide of this debt plague. 38 billion dollars didn't even scratch the surface of what's needed; especially since the government added 57 billion dollars in spending. The Republican party had a good start when they wanted 100 billion dollars in spending cuts and even that was not enough to save this nation from the debt crisis. Apparently, as I went to the townhall meeting with Mike Pompeo, he explained that the majority of calls he gets are from people who tell him that spending cuts are good, buuuuuut..... and they would tell him what they don't want cut such as water treatment projects, Social Security, Medicare, education, food assistance... and it goes on. It sounded to me just the exact source of the problem. Altruism.
The problem in America can be found in one sentence and that is, "America is Great, because America is Good." Everytime we find a problem that we think needs to be fixed, we run to the government. When we see homelessness, poor, and need for medical care, we run to the government. When we see a need such as clean water, affordable housing, and even gas for cars, we run to the government. We make demands that taxpayers pay for things they don't use regardless if they agree to it or not or if they even use the program. Heaven forbid that we should ever look to ourselves to solve our problems. And now this. The great fall of a once morally good nation is caused because people are more worried about having their 3 meals a day rather than worry about having a nation of individual rights in the next day. They trade a higher value for a lower value much like how Esau traded his birth right for a mess of pottage in the Old Testament of the Holy Bible.
What are we going to do folks? Are we Americans or are we the new United Soviet States of America? That's where we're heading if we don't stop the out of control spending in government and make the sacrifices needed to ensure that this nation will endure for many more generations to come.
Siska DeYoung
www.cato.org
www.usdebtclock.org
www.gao.gov
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Restoring Courage
Last summer Glenn Beck had Restoring Honor in Washington D.C. This summer in August, he is planning Restoring Courage in Jerusalem and give people of all faiths the opportunity to show their support for Israel and to stand for good. I support Israel and support her right to exist and defend herself. Israel is the only democracy in the middle east and is the only nation there that recognizes individual rights. If there is ever a time when we should stand with Israel, it is now. Arab countries surrounding this tiny Jewish nation wishes to wipe Israel clean off the map and see to the extinction of Jewish people everywhere. Please listen to Glenn Beck's invitation and consider weather you can go or not. If not, then perhaps we can do something here in the US to show we're with Israel. Who knows? Maybe if I contact Glenn Beck, I can make arrangements to have a satellite broadcast of the meeting in Kansas City, MO for those who who can't make it to Jerusalem but would like to show their support to Israel.
http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/05/16/coming-this-summer-restoring-courage-in-israel/
http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/05/16/coming-this-summer-restoring-courage-in-israel/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)