Category: Politics

For All Those Who Think Cutting Government Expenditures Would Be Bad

When it comes to the debate about the debt there seems to be two camps; the people who say we must increase taxes (the people who are wrong) and those who say we must cut government expenditures (the people who are right). What’s funny about this debate is that those who claim we can’t cut the amount government is spending without killing all the puppies and kittens in the country don’t realize one crucial fact, which Ron Paul brings up:

Federal revenues for 2012 likely will amount to about $2.2 trillion, an amount roughly equal to the 2004 federal budget. To balance the 2012 budget, Congress simply needs to adopt 2004 spending levels. Was the federal government really too small just 8 years ago?

Did every puppy and kitten die in 2004? No, so clearly reducing our spending to levels found nearly six years ago won’t cause the end of this country. Think about that for a second, we can balance the country’s budget but simply returning to the same spending level we had six years ago. It’s that simple. Why are we even having this huge show on Capitol Hill when the answer is that fucking simple? Oh yeah, because the show isn’t about what will best serve the American people, it’s about political maneuvering and ensuring blame for the poor economic conditions is placed on the other party.

My Thoughts on Raising the Debt Ceiling

I don’t think I’ve talked any about the current “debate” over whether or not the government should raise the debt ceiling. The reason I haven’t talked about it is the same reason I put the word debate in quotations, I don’t view this as a debate at all but simply political theater. You know damn well that the government will raise the debt ceiling, they’re too addicted to unlimited money not to.

If you’ve been reading this site for very long it’s probably obvious that I oppose raising the debt ceiling because it would hopefully force some semblance of a balanced budget. Overall though I find it rather absurd that the government has the power to raise it’s own credit limit.

Right now our government is like an 18 year-old kid who just received a credit card. As many 18 year-old kids have no concept of managing money our hypothetical kid goes out on a giant spending spree and maxes out the card’s $1,000 limit (number arbitrarily selected). Keeping with our government is the kid analogy, through some stupid mishap in the contract the kid was allowed to raise his credit limit whenever he wants. Instead of trying to pay off the $1,000 that he owes the kid decides he’ll just raise his credit limit by another $1,000 worry about paying the money back later. He keeps doing this through the years and eventually ends up with a debt of $100,000 dollars which he has no hope of every paying back.

That’s where our government is, they have a multi-trillion dollar debt that they can’t hope to pay back so they’re not worried about it. Nobody has called us on our debt yet (and most of it his held domestically anyways) so why worry about it? But the fact of the matter is our government is insolvent and could never payback the debt if needed. I would love to see some attempt of fiscal responsibility by leaving the debt ceiling firmly where it is but I know it won’t happen, it’ll get raise now and again next year and again the year after that.

The entire “debate” is political theater with the Republicans trying to pander to the fiscally responsible and the Democrats pandering to those who want free shit. Both parties fully intend to continue giving free shit but they want to be able to point at the other party and blame them for the increasing debt/lack of free shit.

EDIT: 2011-08-01 6:07: I wrote this power last night before going to bed and this morning saw that the cronies on Capitol Hill reached a “deal” to raise the debt ceiling. I could have deleted this power as it hadn’t been published yet but I’m leaving here because I like demonstrating when I’m right; it boosts my ego.

We Need More of This

What if there was an election and nobody ran? That’s what happened in the small North Carolina town of Tar Heel:

In the North Carolina town of Tar Heel, residents won’t have to worry about Big Government. It’s looking like No Government.

Nobody’s on the ballot for November elections, a county elections official told CNN Monday.

“The town had two weeks to file and no one stepped up to the plate,” said Cynthia Shaw, director of the Bladen County board of elections.

Granted this happened in a very small town but I’d love to see such things occur in large cities and even whole congressional districts. With very few exceptions those running for political seats aren’t doing it because they want to represent the people, they do it because they want power to wield of people. It would be nice to see people no longer jockeying for power or being willing to play the political game. As you can see by watching any major debate those outside of the political faction who want to control the everyday lives of American citizens are shut out by those inside. Politics is nothing but a giant play for power and we’re the ones who are getting fucked.

I wouldn’t feel bad at all if my congressional district had no “representation” at either the state of federal level. Why? Because having nobody willing to run would make the statement that there isn’t anybody in the district who wants to have power over others. On top of that anybody who would actually represent me is never going to get a voice in government bodies run almost entirely by statists, so what the hell do I care?

The Debt Ceiling Shouldn’t Be About Elections

John McCain, like almost every other politician on the planet, is a piece of shit who cares only about maintaining or increasing the power he has over people. I’m always proud of the fact that I didn’t vote for him or Obama because they’re basically one in the same. McCain recently came out and railed on the tea party (whatever the Hell that means anymore) for opposing raising the debt ceiling. His reason demonstrates that he sees the argument as nothing more than a power play:

Sen. John McCain on Wednesday took on conservatives reluctant to raise the national debt ceiling, calling them “tea party hobbits” and saying that if they reject the House Republican plan, they will help reelect President Obama.

There you have it, McCain’s only concern is whether or not Obama gets re-elected. You now what the sad truth is? That’s the only concern most of the politicians have over this debate. But the debate isn’t about whether or not Obama gets re-elected, it’s about the fact that the United States is spending so much money that we’ll never be able to pay it back.

In terms of normal people like you and me (OK I admit I hardly qualify as normal) this would be like racking up your credit card bill and then demanding a higher credit limit. Sure the bank may extend the amount of debt you can put on that card for a while but eventually they’re going to catch on and demand that you pay them back. If you can’t pay them back your option becomes defaulting on your credit in the form of bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is where the United States is heading folks and we’re only going to get further in over our heads unless we stop extending the government’s credit limit.

Instead of being concerned over this fact the politicians are only concerned with power. The Republicans want more which means they have their eyes on the presidency while the Democrats want to maintain the presidential power they currently hold. Neither party gives two shits about you and me.

City of Gould Looking to Ban Free Speech

Sometimes you read a story headline and you think, “No way that’s correct.” That’s what I thought when I read the title of this article but after reading the actual story I found it factually correct. The city of Gould, AK is looking to basically ban the freedom of speech within city limits:

Gould, Arkansas, is a small town of about 850 people. If the city council has its way, those 850 people will be barred from gathering together to discuss city matters without approval from the city government.

[…]

Last Monday, the council voted to ban groups from gathering or forming without city approval.

Sonja Farley, a member of the Gould City Council, said that no matter the group, if anyone meets to discuss the city, that meeting must be approved by the city.

“You can’t just come in here, get with four people and decide to start an organization,” Farley said, adding, “You will go through your city council with legal documentation and get approval.”

That’s certainly interesting because I’m pretty sure that violates an often ignored piece of the United States Constitution we refer to as the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Yeah the city’s ruling certainly does violate that particular piece of literature that our country is supposedly founded on. If you’re unfortunate enough to live in Gould it would be in your best interest to tell the city council to go fuck itself and continue gathering in groups. When a law is unjust there is absolutely no reason anybody should comply with it and any law other than those against harming others or the property of others is unjust.

Another funny thing about this story is the city’s name, Gould. Gould is also slang for the tyrannical protectionist race in Stargate SG-1, the Goa’uld. How fitting that a city banning the freedom of assembly should be named after a race of aliens bent on enslaving the human race.

Maybe It’s Time to Look at Spending Cuts

“Tax the rich!” That’s a quote you often hear from people who want the government to provide them everything and also lack a basic understanding of liberty and economics. Every time there is a government deficit in this country the statists scream that we need to tax the rich. Of course they never define nor justify their definition of rich so one is usually lead to believe it means anybody who makes $1.00 more than the screaming statist.

For others the definition of rich is $250,000.00 a year which I never really understood because somebody making that money certainly isn’t rich by my definition (no fancy boat, no private jet, no mansion on beach front property, etc.). Here’s the problem, even if we enact a 100% income tax on everybody making $250,000.00 or more a year it won’t clear up the federal government’s huge deficit:

This year, Congress will spend $3.7 trillion dollars. That turns out to be about $10 billion per day. Can we prey upon the rich to cough up the money? According to IRS statistics, roughly 2 percent of U.S. households have an income of $250,000 and above. By the way, $250,000 per year hardly qualifies one as being rich. It’s not even yacht and Lear jet money. All told, households earning $250,000 and above account for 25 percent, or $1.97 trillion, of the nearly $8 trillion of total household income. If Congress imposed a 100 percent tax, taking all earnings above $250,000 per year, it would yield the princely sum of $1.4 trillion. That would keep the government running for 141 days, but there’s a problem because there are 224 more days left in the year.

Now somebody with a lack of economic sense would come out and say we should tax the corporations (on top of the “rich”). Guess what? It won’t work either:

How about corporate profits to fill the gap? Fortune 500 companies earn nearly $400 billion in profits. Since leftists think profits are little less than theft and greed, Congress might confiscate these ill-gotten gains so that they can be returned to their rightful owners. Taking corporate profits would keep the government running for another 40 days, but that along with confiscating all income above $250,000 would only get us to the end of June. Congress must search elsewhere.

Taxing the “rich” isn’t going to get us out of the mess our government has created. The only option we have is to reduce our spending and that will require politically inconvenient cuts such as military, Medicare, Medicade, and Social Security. We certainly can’t afford to implement Obama’s Health Insurance Company Enrichment Act so that will have to be tossed out as well.

We literally have no other options available to us. We can’t fix this problem with taxation which leads us to look elsewhere and the only other place to look is spending. The United States government is like an idiot teenage kid (as opposed to an intelligent one) who gets his first credit card and don’t realize that money put onto that card will have to be paid back. Eventually they get in over their heads and apply for another credit card to continue their insane spending habits instead of looking at the real problem, their spending, and correcting it.

Hit Them Where it Hurts

Some interesting news has finally developed as a result of the state government shutdown. This news perfectly demonstrates the folly of allowing the state to interfere with the free market. It seems that many bars in Minnesota are running out of beer because they were unable to renew their alcohol purchasing licenses before the shutdown:

Hundreds of bars, restaurants and stores across Minnesota are running out of beer and alcohol and others may soon run out of cigarettes — a subtle and largely unforeseen consequence of a state government shutdown.

In the days leading up to the shutdown, thousands of outlets scrambled to renew their state-issued liquor purchasing cards. Many of them did not make it.

Now, with no end in sight to the shutdown, they face a summer of fast-dwindling alcohol supplies and a bottom line that looks increasingly bleak.

This is how you hurt somebody, take away their fun and entertainment. I highly doubt that the state didn’t realize a possibility such as this could occur. In their eyes taking away peoples’ liquor would be the perfect argument for the need of the state, and many people will believe it. In actuality this is the perfect argument against allowing the state to regulate every industry on the fucking planet.

I’ve talked about the dangers of having government hold a monopoly control on anything in the past and this situation demonstrates that. I believe this is only one real option here; liquor stores need to go out and just buy the alcohol they need to continue doing business.

This is known as civil disobedience and we as Americans should practice this artform far more often. Just think about it, if every bar in Minnesota just said, “Fuck it!” and purchased alcohol without a license (either from current distributors or liquor stores as private individuals if the distributors won’t play ball) what could the state do? If the state decided to enforce their liquor license laws during the shutdown the court system would be overloaded with bar owners who could make a very valid case about how not buying that liquor would destroy their business and thus their livelihood. It would be difficult, I believe, to get juries to find these bar owners guilty as most people understand there are times you have to do what you have to do in order to survive.

Another side-effect of enforcing the license requirement in such a scenario is the fact it would likely cost far more to collect the fines than the state would make on the fines. There are numerous ways you can take a simple $30.00 fine and cost the state thousands to collect it. It would make little monetary sense for the state to prosecute the bars that purchased alcohol without a valid license.

If ever bar simply ignored the liquor purchasing license requirement the only real option the state would have is to “forgive” the “transgression.” Whether or not the state chose “forgiveness” or prosecution the people of Minnesota would have a good demonstration of how meaningless these licensing laws are.

When the state makes your life hard or impossible then it’s time to make the state irrelevant. Requiring bars to purchase a license in order to purchase liquor server no purpose other than filling the state’s coffers with pilfered money. Minnesota, nay the United States, ill needs government bureaucrats looting productive private businesses. We the people should be willing to say, “Enough is enough!” Fuck those bean counting pencil-necked bureaucrats, they do nothing for us and much to harm us.

Oh Hell

My only response to the news I’m about to present is FUCK! Congressman Ron Paul has stated he wont run for re-election in 2012.

The reason I’m dismayed by this news is because Ron Paul is the only person on Capitol Hill that I respect (I’m slowing developing hearty respect for his kid, Rand, but it will take far more time for him to prove himself). Combining this with the fact that I don’t believe he’ll get the Republican nomination (the Republican party plays too many games in order to keep him off the presidential ticket) and I’m afraid the only good politician will be out of Washington come next election cycle.

Although Dr. Paul has been unable to turn the tide of government tyranny he at last presented a voice for the liberty movement. Without him at the Capitol debating the wrong of imperialism, the need to return to sound money, and the need for liberty as a whole the American people are left with nothing but authoritarian scum who wish nothing more than to rule us with an iron fist.

By Thor in Valhalla I hope I’m wrong about him not getting the nomination.

I Like This Idea, It Should Be Expanded

Although I’ve heard little talk about it I’ve found an interesting bill that I believe promotes a good idea. The H.R. 2411, The Reduce America’s Debt Now Act of 2011, would put a new entry on W-4 forms that would allow employees to voluntarily deduct portions of their paycheck to pay off the national debt.

What I like about this act is the fact it’s voluntary. In fact I like this idea so much I think it should be expanded to the point where all taxation is made voluntary. Do you think the government is doing a good jobs at spending your hard-earned money? Great, you can fork over money to them in order to continue receiving their services. Do you believe the government has done a horrible job at spending your hard-earned money? Great, you can take your money and buy services from a private provider.

I also hope this bill passes because I have an ulterior motive. I’ve mentioned that my circle of friends includes people who always say they would happily pay more taxes. When I point them to the address they can send their checks to I never hear them talk about all the money they voluntarily sent the government. Putting this on the W-4 form would make it easier for my friends to be hypocrites and to me that’s funny.

Data Retention Law Will Backfire

There is legislation being proposed that would require Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to retain data on what IP addresses have been assigned to whom for 18 months. Unfortunately for the government such data retention laws have been controversial so they’ve had to exploit the children loophole by naming the legislation, “The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011.”

Ars Technica has a very good opinion piece posted about how this legislation will backfire. Instead of using home connections to download illicit data people will simply go elsewhere.

There is no shortage of open wireless access points. Instead of downloading illicit data from a home connection you can connect to your neighbor’s wireless network, a businesses wireless network, or through an anonymizing service such as the Tor network. The legislation is entirely pointless and only puts a data storage burdun on ISPs.

The government simply wants access to information the public doesn’t believe access should be granted to. Just like every other time this situation occurs the government simply abuses the children loophope and then looks at any opposing their bill and acuses them of supporting child pornography. It’s kind of like naming the PATRIOT Act what it is then accusing anybody who opposes it to not being a patriot.