tagged w/ Liberty
-
This post, the problem... next post, the solution.
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5474/s-p-downgrades-us-treasuries-dow-gets-pummeled-problem/
Last week was a bad one for Wall Street. The DOW got pummeled by over 500 points, Standard and Poor’s downgraded the rating on US treasuries, and now no one is quite sure what will happen. Now this is only the tip of the iceberg that many of us have been talking about for almost a year now, but I highly doubt most people even seem to understand the implications involved. Not being satisfied with third hand reports, I downloaded Standard and Poor’s report, and began to see just how messed up things really are.
First of all, the report often makes three assumptions to prevent further downgrading of debt. The first is that the bush tax cuts are removed (or rather allowed to lapse) in 2013. The second is that government spending slows down even more then the new so called budget deal. The third is that the fed raises interest rates. Unfortunately the main body of the report focuses on these things happening to bring forward a ‘best case scenario’. Unfortunately, neither can happen at this point.
To start with, congress didn’t have the backbone to cut spending before. Sure they slowed down the amount of spending taking a savings off of the proposed deal, but it was not nearly enough to meet the bond rating agencies wishes. This happened for two reasons. The first was that the immediate effect of a meaningful cut in deficit spending would mean that many people would not get the government hand outs they were promised – something no one wants to do on a good day – let alone so close to an election. The second was an equal method of political suicide – decreasing tax cuts to increase revenue enough to meet the promised expenditures. This will not change in the future either, so S&P’s idea that it is possible is naïve at best.
As to raising the interest rate, the SP report is very skewed within itself. It states that a plus would be to have the fed incur a loose money policy in a time of monetary tightening (their words not mine). This is foolish because by enacting another round of QEx, the easy money allowed to maintain what the SP sees as a good monetary policy during tight times, will mean an insane amount of money being injected into the bank balance books – on top of the QE2 which has still yet to take full effect as the bankers keep raking it in. Contrary to popular belief, the banks are not only tying up more money than all of the private corporations combined, but and even worse is that government has even more money tied up in promised payouts. This is something Standard and Poor’s did not address in their report.
What I take issue with the most is Standard and Poor’s inferences. It takes into account the slower than expected GDP growth and the increased debt burden. However instead of urging the government to reign in its spending, it encourages it, and follows through with a hint that we need to raise taxes. This is their biggest mistake of all.
What the SP either is forgetting or deliberately leaving out, is that many of our economic woes are from taxes – both corporate and private alike. If these taxes where ever raised to meet government expenditures, then the rate would be far higher than it is now – almost double; and that still would not cover everything. In addition, many businesses have moved their bases of operations overseas just to make it affordable to operate. Should taxes be raised yet again, then even more will go overseas – this creating an even bigger drop in job loss. Less jobs here is less tax revenue, thus making the idea of raising taxes undoable right out of the gate.
However damaging this news is to our bond holders (especially in the future when it gets downgraded again, which will happens as democrats will promise more spending as republicans sign off on it without allowing taxes to go up), it is still pretty petty compared to the much larger issues that will be adding fuel to this fire.
You see as government is able to fund less and less through bond sales, it will need money to cover the difference. QE1 and 2 have already aided in this effort, but still fell drastically short. In addition, the money has not gone to any productive source, but rather into government and big bank balance sheets so that they can keep the toxic assets on their books in an effort to maintain their high prices. This of course is very foolish, and has already allowed money to leak into the private sector allowing the prices to rise across the board. Once QE2 begins to finish piddling out over the next 3-4 months, QE3 will be enacted, and it.................
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5474/s-p-downgrades-us-treasuries-dow-gets-pummeled-problem/This post, the problem... next post, the solution.... more
-
-
-
In a society where property rights are undermined by legal plunder in the name of equality and safety, it is of no small wonder why people have taken leave of their senses. For freedom to work, people must be entitled to use what they have rightfully earned as they see fit. This is an idea that is highly misunderstood, and even demonized as society continues to allow itself to be governed by fear and ignorance for some misplaced sense of security and prosperity.
First of all, freedom to earn is needed for the individual themselves to prosper. If an individual is failing in a certain area, they receive no meaningful benefit by having their resulting downturn subsidized. Doing so only encourages them to continue failing instead of trying another route, and dependency is not a measure of success. Subsidizing failure grants the false sense of success where none exists. However if an individual is succeeding, then it means that they have figured out something that they can do that is appreciated by enough people to grant them a better means of living. It also means that they need no subsidies.
Second, if an individual who succeeds is forced to give a portion of their earnings to pay for a failure, then they have less means to help those who they know will truly benefit from it. In the middle class, success is not measured by mansions or boats, but rather a steady flow of income, a roof over their heads, food on the table, and the occasional splurge. Yet they have succeeded nonetheless. It then stands to reason that though they have made enough to get by fairly comfortably; they have little means to support the failures of anyone else. If forced to do so, they are then made poor as their ability to maintain what they worked so hard to obtain is taken from them. Therefore in order to maintain freedom (keeping in mind the previous point), a person must be allowed to keep what they earn to use as they see fit.
Finally you have the property aspect. Property is nothing more than a measure of success in a particular arena. If someone is a janitor their whole lives, then chances are they will live a humble existence with little property. If a person is an engineer of sorts, then chances are they will live a fairly middle class existence – their property increasing over time as their experience and ideas bring more value to the companies they choose to work for. If you are a financial wizard who is sensible and maintains a good relationship with your clients, then you can live far more comfortably, however you also have more to lose as you have far less room for error. In the end you have a choice of what path to take, and therefore your own ability to bring enough value to society to obtain the level of property you want. This is the very essence of merit which is the pillar of any free society. The more value you bring to society, the more you earn, and the more property you may acquire.
The essence of a good investment then comes in terms of time, money, and effort. You can give two people a million dollars. One may blow it in under a year and find themselves poor again, and at the expense of your million. The other will save, come up with a good business idea, and use the funds to start a successful business. A wise investor uses money that they earned to benefit society by granting x amount to produce something that society will value. This does come with risk which is why investments are never made lightly. However if their investment was sound, then they reap the rewards by getting their money back with either interest or a portion of the new business.
Unfortunately we live in a society that sees things a different way. Let’s start with the legal side.
The law recognizes natural rights only in terms of living, breathing, and eating. It views property as an acquired item which I can find no fault with. However it then goes on to claim the right to your acquired property by saying that it is a privilege the state grants you to use your acquired property as it is not something you were born into this world with. In some cases the state does not bother to regulate your acquired property as an item it grants you the privilege to use. This is both hypocritical and misguiding to the individuals understanding of both property, and the regulation thereof.
The state does not regulate the jewelry you own, nor does it regulate the books you buy – yet. Therefore most people think of privileged property as only being the things not necessary for life in general. This is why the ones dependant on government handouts and subsidies (even if only as a perceived benefit ) feel that the rich should have to give more to them, and why it is the states job to make it happen. After all, it is perceived that the rich have all this money and property that is not regulated (as are other items understood by the common man), therefore they must be cheating the poor and have no real right to the ‘ill-gotten’ gains.
This of course of nonsense, and here is why it is also hypocritical.
Let’s start with something that even many poor people have on some level – cars. The state considers a car to be acquired property, and therefore sees itself as having control over it. Because the state has the overall control over the car, you are privileged to use it as long as you meet the mandates placed upon its use by the state. Failure to meet these mandates results in the state revoking your rights to use your own property, and all too often lead to its confiscation or neglect. Oh, and this is not because you are driving on the ‘state owned roads’. You pay for gas and its taxes, so you paid for the roads making them yours – not the states.
Because these mandates are made on the poor and rich alike, it is seen as a social norm, and therefore rarely an object of inequality in reference to cars. But by failing to apply the same legal controls on jewelry, fine clothes, and other luxury items, there is a both a disconnect and a contradiction in the freedom to ones justly acquired property. This problem is created because of two reasons.
The first is that the state believes its number one duty is to control it subjects…err, I mean citizens. Cars are needed to get one from point a to point b in the most expedient manner. Guns are needed to ensure one’s own defense. Electricity and running water is needed to provide some comfort enjoyed by all classes of people, rich and poor. Food is needed just to live. By controlling these most basic of things, the state effectively controls everyone. As always the states reasoning for this is that people cannot be trusted to uses these most basic of things in a non destructive manner, and certainly not in a fair manner. We will cover the prior first.
In the name of safety, we have the DHS, DMV, DoD, NSA, CIA, FBI, DOT, DOA, DOJ, SEC, a host of local law enforcement agencies, and over 20 other entities to make sure the subjects behave themselves. To fund all of these protective measures that everyone swears is necessary to the survival of a civilized society, costs a boatload of money. Money that is paid for by the government issuance of debt, and taxes. I am no fan of Ben Franklin, but boy did he call this one...............(continued below)...
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5459/freedom-property-and-capitol-why-is-the-law-stealing-them/In a society where property rights are undermined by legal plunder in the name of... more
-
-
Guantanamo Bay continues to wreck lives, despite President Obama's pledge to shut the notorious prison. RT spoke to one former prisoner, Murat Kurnaz, who says the US has not issued even a simple apology for his years of torment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYxtm1jfatoGuantanamo Bay continues to wreck lives, despite President Obama's pledge to shut... more
-
-
-
After watching Bernanke’s testimony this weekend to the various oversight boards, it become even more clear that the economies fate is sealed.
For starters, Bernanke made it abundantly clear to everyone on the board that would listen, that to not raise the debt ceiling would be irresponsible. He emphasized that if the debt ceiling was not raised, that the government would default on some of its obligations which would in turn lead to a massively degraded bond rating from Standard and Poor’s etc. Several of the democrats on the board had a field day upon hearing this, and proceeded to go on and on about how those who voted against an increase in the debt ceiling were obviously ignorant of the effects of not doing so – mainly those like Pat Toomey.
There is an interesting point that was never discussed that I think it irresponsible of the board to avoid. In a way, Bernanke was right (mark your calendar folks). Our bond rating will decrease minus new cash flow into the treasury due to unfunded debts in the short term. You see Toomey made some great points, yet unfortunately overlooked the massive amounts of carryover debt from last year’s spending (see http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5403/the-irrelevance-of-the-debt-ceiling/ ). Minus all that rollover debt, Toomey would have been correct. Yet the debt is there, and is impossible to meet when coupled with the new debt added on by this year’s expenditures.
Yet what Bernanke failed to mention that only one board member even bothered to address, is the even greater long term damage that would be caused should the government actually take on the new debt. Bernanke gave the shortest answer of the whole night – ‘it’s possible’. This was a very telling moment, and it was made even worse given what Bernanke would say to the next board inquiry.
He was then asked if the Fed would be able to buy any of the resulting new bonds needed to fund a raise in the debt ceiling -he gave no solid answer, but rather two hypothetical’s. Instead of taking this as Bernanke having no clue, the board seemed to appreciate the two vague answers. At this point, we need to remember that Bernanke does not see the buying of US Treasuries as a furthering of debt of the US treasury to the FED, despite the fact that it’s precisely what it is. Treasury issues bonds, the FED buys them to provide short term liquidity to the Treasury, and the Treasury pays them back with interest when the call date comes – or defaults.
So did Bernanke tell the senator that they were not willing to purchase any more US Treasuries so that the government could avoid a major tax increase? Nope. Here’s why.
The FED though not a government entity, needs the government to exist – without the US governments sponsorship (being its largest customer as a board) – the FED would be worth very little. They know that the only way they can maintain this codependency is to continue buying debt that the US government is responsible for paying them (not my idea – blame the overzealous morons who believe that money is the key to solving the ills of the world).
In this particular case, the FED knows that if the debt ceiling is not raised, and the Treasury not allowed to create more debt, that the government will not be able to meet both this years and last year’s interest on the debt to the point where the bond rating will not take a hit. This is why Bernanke came out and said that they are closely looking toward enacting QE3 – it will simply print the money the government needs on the books to meet this debt obligation (ie the interest on the past due bonds, and the interest on the upcoming ones). Minus this new money, the government would have no means to meet these and still pay all of its obligations at the same time.
Since 2008, unemployment is still high – very high. Sure we had a short term drop due to the injection of over 600 billion dollars, and a short rally in the stock market when gas prices dropped due to a temporary release of oil reserves, but when you talking about a multi-trillion dollar economy, that’s just a drop in the bucket, and far from sustainable. The truth is that for all the new regulatory bodies made, for all the trillions of dollars in various stimulus packages spent, and despite the many promises made by both the republicans and democrats, our economy is far worse off than it would have been minus any government or FED action at all.
QE2’s effects have yet to hit full swing as the money is still making its way into the private sector, but that really doesn’t matter because it will not go to any of the poor directly, or even those who would use the money to employ them – no, it’s going to government so that they can continue to provide ‘aid’ to those who have been victimized by the evil private sector, and continue to pay off the large federalized institutions and their buddies who caused the problem to begin with. Well, I take that back, a large amount went to paying off the major banks which over extended their lending in the first place.
Now there is no conspiracy here, nor is there some big plot to secretly bring down the US. The people elected Obama, Obama appointed Bernanke. Had the people taken two seconds of their time to check the facts already out there before voting, this would not have happened. Instead they called those who opposed Obama a racist – that or say that he was better than McCain, despite their remarkable voting similarities while in office. A democracy works when the people are educated – it fails when their indoctrinated. Sorry for the tangent, back to the main point.
During the inquiry, Bernanke was asked about the danger of inflation which he claimed to be minor. Yet if you look at the money supply added by the fed and injected into various institutions, the number is alarmingly high. We often are told that inflation is measured in prices – that is wrong though as prices are a lagging indicator – not the actual occurrence of it. The truth is that if inflation were nothing to worry about, then prices would have had to come down somewhere else because the money would not be available to maintain the price range across the board. After all, supply side economics only goes so far. However prices have stayed high (and even gone up), and yet the people are not earning more than they were before. Therefore, we know the money is out there, and now must ask where it went to.
Simply put, the left loves to blame the big evil companies for holding almost 1.6 trillion in their pockets. Even if it were as simple as all that, they fail to mention the 1.75 (up from 1.1 trillion in 2007) trillion + small businesses expend each year meeting regulatory requirements of the government. They also fail to mention the 2.2 trillion collected in taxes. In short, the 1.6 trillion the companies use to help maintain flexibility and provide for worst case scenarios is nothing compared to the 3.9 taken up by the government and its mandat...After watching Bernanke’s testimony this weekend to the various oversight... more
-
-
-
Using his law enforcement experience and data drawn from the FBI's behavioral analysis unit, Jim Kouri has collected a series of personality traits common to a couple of professions.
Kouri, who's a vice president of the National Assn. of Chiefs of Police, has assembled traits such as superficial charm, an exaggerated sense of self-worth, glibness, lying, lack of remorse and manipulation of others.
These traits, Kouri points out in his analysis, are common to psychopathic serial killers.
But -- and here's the part that may spark some controversy and defensive discussion -- these traits are also common to American politicians. (Maybe you already suspected.)
Yup. Violent homicide aside, our elected officials often show many of the exact same character traits as criminal nut-jobs, who run from police but not for office.
Kouri notes that these criminals are psychologically capable of committing their dirty deeds free of any concern for social, moral or legal consequences and with absolutely no remorse.
"This allows them to do what they want, whenever they want," he wrote. "Ironically, these same traits exist in men and women who are drawn to high-profile and powerful positions in society including political officeholders."
Good grief! And we not only voted for these people, we're paying their salaries and entrusting them to spend our national treasure in wise ways.
We don't know Kouri that well. He may be trying to manipulate all of us with his glib provocative pronouncements. On the other hand ...
He adds:
"While many political leaders will deny the assessment regarding their similarities with serial killers and other career criminals, it is part of a psychopathic profile that may be used in assessing the behaviors of many officials and lawmakers at all levels of government."
-- Andrew Malcolm
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/06/politicians-and-serial-killers.htmlUsing his law enforcement experience and data drawn from the FBI's behavioral... more
-
-
In my last article “Why The Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Removed From Schools”, I got a lot of feedback saying what a crock it was, and that somehow it was a statement against America herself. Many seemed to get the idea that the article was about how I am so disappointed in America that I believed that the Pledge of Allegiance to it should be removed. Though I believe the pledge of allegiance should be removed, it is not because I hate America as so many seemed to believe.
The first and most common argument was that the Pledge of Allegiance to our country was a good thing because it taught kids and adults alike to take pride in our nation. I will address this one first as the revolution was not fought to create a new nation or empire, but rather to free themselves from the one they already had.
1 – The creation of America was not the dream of the common man at the time, or by many of the so called founders. On the contrary, most people just wanted to live their lives without the interference or burden of government regulation or taxes with no perceived benefit. They knew that should a nation be created, that what little taxes and regulation they did have would grow in kind. They even feared that should it happen, there would not have been a point to the revolution (see Radicalism of the American Revolution by Tom S Wood, and Glorious Cause by Robert Middlekauf).
2 – At the end of the revolution (and with the newly found freedom), the middle class began to flourish, the abolitionist movement grew rapidly, the States made great strides in paying off war debt, and advocating women’s rights. Of course the States in those days were nothing as we have today. There were very few governing bodies, and thus few laws to govern the people. This suited them just fine.
3 – Yet the federalists in congress realized that if things continued in that manner, then their wishes for a glorious empire would not be realized. So after years of haggling and hot debating, the Constitution was drafted. To those like Jefferson, it was to limit the government so that the people could continue to flourish. To those like Hamilton, it was a means to build a new nation. The end result was a small federal government that the people at the time paid little mind to as it had no real power to affect them in any real way.
4 – Hamiltons efforts at granting the new federal government more power were virtually ineffective until he was made Secretary of treasury. Being a sharp minded individual, he used his knowledge of debt based economics to appeal to the states to buy their debt, and thus alleviate the burden from the states. Many of the people saw no need for this and petitioned their elected leaders to just let it be. However once in the audience of Hamilton, they were unable to make solid arguments against his proposed system. So Hamilton simultaneously increased the debt (by a wide margin), used the funds to build an army that he could control, and used the army to support the federalist system.
5 – Adams then signed the Alien and Sedition Acts rendering Jefferson (or anyone else for that matter) unable to speak out without being thrown into prison. This however did not prevent Jefferson from making his thoughts on the subject known at a later date. At this point, the federal government now had the control that Hamilton wanted.
So far I am seeing nothing here at all to be proud of. In addition to breaking the Constitution almost before the ink was even dry, Hamilton paved the way for holding the people to the law, but not the government. Because Hamilton’s system endures today, people seem to see it as something to be proud of despite its lies and law breaking ways. After all, they live well, so the ends justified the means.
To many on the comment string, this was a good thing. They believe that without the Federal Government, and strong state governments, that society would be in chaos, and that we would still be in the stone age. I find this hard to address as such commenter’s belay their ignorance of the cycles of nations, empires, and civility as a whole. It also tells me that not one of them ever bothered to read any real literature on what happened immediately following the war, to the creation of the powerful federal government we know today. So far all its led to is a bunch of people being proud of lying cheating politicians who they refuse to even do their research on before declaring their pride in it, but I digress.
1 – To build an empire you need to expand. During the age where land ownership was highly prized and hotly debated, this was problematic at best. The French owned much of the middle land and the land to the north, the Spanish held what is now Texas and California. They held it somewhat loosely having figured out that the best way to deal with the native Indians was to do so peacefully and as rarely as possible. Seeing an opportunity, the Louisiana Purchase (and a few other land deals) were made, and the land was acquired so that the rapidly growing population would have a place to settle. It needs to be kept in mind that there was a major difference between what the colonists thought of the new land, and what the natives and other countries did. To the colonist, it was as simple as buying the land and making it produce. Not so for the natives.
2 – When the French sold the land to Federal government (paid with debt and taxes from the people, who by the way were made to pay for it yet again if they hoped to by it), they washed their hands of the mess and moved out for the most part. The natives on the other hand had lived there their whole lives, and did not expect the land prospectors to just move in and try to settle it. To be blunt, it was a mess. Between the friction and the less then favorable land conditions, it turned out to be a major cost burden to the Fed as not to many buyers wanted it at the price offered (sound familiar?). The federal government that people praise so much, then pulled another trick.
3 – They claimed that the natives were uncivilized, and that is why there was so much friction. They claimed that they were not ready to become civilized, and that instead of learning peaceful methods of interaction, that force should be used to remove them – after all, they were not viewed as the rightful owners of the land. This added even more cost because soldiers had to be called in to accomplish this task.
So up to this point, the federal government had not only lied and cheated, but swindled the people. It sold them land whenever possible that it used their money to buy in the first place, and then left them to deal with the upset natives. Then when the beleaguered settlers called for help, the federal system added taxes and debt to cover that cost as well. And still somehow, many people who claim to be knowledgeable ,comment on how great the federal government is; that without it, chaos would reign.
Now I can do this all night, but will end with one last example of how our countries founding is nothing to be proud of. Its actions set the standard for the expansion of its empirical interests rendering the republic irrelevant.
In his memoirs, Grant said “Generally, the officers of the army were indifferent whether the annexation was consummated or not; but not so all of them. For myself, I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day regard the war, which resulted, as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation. It was an instance of a republic following the bad example of European monarchies, in not con...
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5393/follow-up-why-the-pledge-of-allegiance-should-be-removed-from-schools/In my last article “Why The Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Removed From... more
-
-
The pledge of Allegiance was written by a socialist by the name of Francis Bellamy in 1892. The original gesture to be made was a Hail Hitler like salute (it’s actually where Hitler and Mussolini got it) – and this is why we now use the hand over the heart instead. The best part is that it all began as a sales campaign to help sell magazine subscriptions – selling flags to schools to increase visibility. The pledge was later added to aid in the process, and has been in place since. The original pledge was “”I pledge allegiance to my Flag and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all“”
It has children pledging allegiance to an entity they know nothing about making it the most powerful indoctrination tool ever devised in our nation. Following this – children learn summed up history of our nations founding, and little more from there on in. This does them a great dishonor because the only thing they have to correlate this bit of knowledge to, is the world as it is today. Given the lack of in-depth knowledge covering the creation of the US, and how it came about, this makes such times and events appear as meaningless in today’s world.
First of all, republics are not by nature unified nations – that comes later when a Republic decides to expand its interest to become an Empire – something many of the founders including Jefferson stood very much against. In fact we did not even have a truly unified nation until the end of the civil war. However up to that point, our nation committed many acts in complete disregard to the intent of the original revolution. We gained expansion by War – war is economically damaging (unless your a Keynes sympathizer – in which case there is nothing i can do for you), politically chaotic, and socially damaging. Those who believed that a limited republic was as far as the new nation should go knew this all to well having seen it throughout history over and over again.
Second, by teaching the kids that we are a united country in spite of the fact that is not what were trying to be when we broke from England, it teaches them that centralization is a good thing. This wrong is only eclipsed by the fact that they are pledging allegiance to it. Funny how when religious sects do this they are called cults, yet when government does it, it is called law.
Finally, children are taught that the law is the law, and they must obey it. At such a young age, they have little knowledge or experience to tell them whether it is a just reasonable law or not.So it comes about that indoctrination begins when children say a pledge to something when they are still learning how to read and write properly. I am truly sad that so many people see this as correct and justifiable. That’s like forcing someone to swear an oath, telling them that it is for a good cause, and yet enacting a myriad of evils paid for by their labor and never being honest with them about it. Come to think of it – that’s precisely what it is.
Indoctrination – to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments; to imbue with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of view, or principle. By very definition, our children are indoctrinated before they are taught anything.
It is sad and utterly pathetic that we employ such nonsense on our children. Bastiat and Jefferson alike warned of this, and yet modern society in all its wisdom continues to ignore such warnings. They never tell the kids about them – and blithely continue on to inflict one social evil upon another in the name of their more ‘enlightened’ teachings. As a result, many people haven’t the faintest clue on why the economy is getting hammered, why we have ongoing wars in nearly every corner of the globe, and why poverty at home continues to rise with the price of everyday goods. In addition it is almost impossible to argue such points, for the masses have been indoctrinated since they learned to read, and can’t bear the idea that there is more out there then what they are told. Indeed, many argue that the old antiquated ideas of those like Spooner, Jefferson, or Bastiat are just that, and that the new way is far more enlightened and rosy.
It is things like this that have caused our empires creation. It is also because of things like this, that its collapse is ensured.
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5390/why-the-pledge-of-allegiance-should-be-removed-from-the-schools/The pledge of Allegiance was written by a socialist by the name of Francis Bellamy in... more
-
-
by David Shirk on July 4, 2011 in Uncategorized { edit }
July 4th, 1776. A divided continental congress was forced to unite in a cry for independence against England when a handful of the bunch told England that they were through. Subsidies, high taxes, the imprisonment of political renegades, and the favoritism showed by those in power to their favorite producers had gone to far. The declaration was recieved with a myriad or responses, some in shock, others in wounded pride. The sum of the resulting confusion and chaos cannot be crammed into a mere short article so I will spare everyone the history lesson.
In the end, many people died for many different reasons. Some felt it was their duty, some thier wellbeing, and others for a crack at a name for themselves. In the end, a high death toll, an economical disaster, and a fractured idea of what to do next plagued the newly free people. In spite of the odds, the people got back onto their feet, and began to rebuid and regroup.
Less then a decade after the fighting ceased, all of that would come to nothing. Ideas of grandeur began to seep into the heads of the politically powerful. The idea that America needed to become an Empire became the driving factor into the minds of those that held the power, and the rest as they say, is history.
So here we are, celebrating the 235 year old demopublic. The conditions of today are no different that those found in 1776 – high taxes, corpatism, subsidies, iron clad rule, and enough regultation to make a drill sergeant cringe. Of course its not all bad – never was, and until the breaking point is reached, nor will it be. There is a plus side to America’s paciveness to its government, and that is the acknowledgement that violent revolutions only replace one tyrant with another. In point of fact, violent revolutions often bring forward the most misguided, and in the midst of the confusion, grants them power.
Personally I hate the idea that i find myself questioning things to the level that i do. Ignorance in many cases was bliss as it aloud me the simple minded belief that we were doing well as a country, and that we just hit a bump in the road. History is a very disturbing wake up call.
I say we stop this pattern. Nations come and go, and the US is no different having already proved herself more then apt to inheret the ideals of failing societies the world over. The truth is that the colonial experiment was hijacked by the American Experiment – ripped from the hands of the people and turned over to the hands of politicians and bureaucrats.
You see long before the Stars and Stripes, there was liberty, and i have become all to aware of the difference between the two. Many of our so called ‘leaders’ follow in the foosteps in their predecessors. Arrogantly assuming that a law bent on the futile notion of solving the foibles of the human condition was a possible task, they have enacted law upon law on themselves until liberty has become no more then a fleeting vision.
I would like to remind people on this day of where we came from and what made us. After 235 years, its time we grew up, and rid ourselves of the notion that socialism, and statist mindsets are the keys to ‘civilized living’. These are nothing more then theives shaking right hands with you and robbing you with their left. The truth is that no Nation nor Empire can ever exist in pusruance with the ideals of liberty – for that is something that can only truly be had and maintained by the individual.
So lets have a revolution. Screw the state and the horse it rode in on. Its power is great only because it carries the threat and use of force. Yet the people hold a far greated power – one that never ceases to rise against the odds and overcome, and that is the power of individuals truly united upon the foundations of human rights. Violence is not the answer and will solve nothing. You cannot force your fellow man to your views – thats the states job. So be better then that – set an example. Show them by example that civilization needs no force to exist save that used in true defense. Educate yourselves and never stop, for in the end, it will yeild far more benefit then gold.
In the immortal words of Frederic Bastiat “Away, then, with quacks and organizers! Away with their rings, and their chains, and their hooks, and their pincers! Away with their artificial methods! Away with their social laboratories, their governmental whims, their centralization, their tariffs, their universities, their State religions, their inflationary or monopolizing banks, their limitations, their restrictions, their moralizations, and their equalization by taxation! And now, after having vainly inflicted upon the social body so many systems, let them end where they ought to have begun—reject all systems, and try liberty” – The Law.
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5368/independence-day-time-for-history-to-repeat-itself/by David Shirk on July 4, 2011 in Uncategorized { edit }
July 4th, 1776. A divided... more
-
-
On the stealth agenda of the 44th Pres USA to put the "State" in control and management of the people.On the stealth agenda of the 44th Pres USA to put the "State" in control and... more
-
-
Tweet
This is a teaser to an article i wrote on Examiner.com"
"Proverbs 23:7a, "As a person thinketh in their heart, so are they." http://bit.ly/lOnOzU
On Twitter.com, there is an atmosphere of constructive intellectual exchange that challenges and causes each of us to think about why we believe what we believe. The internet represents a similar component of technological advance as Movable Type did to the First Enlightenment* (1650AD-1800AD). Twitter.com, Facebook.com and MySpace.com are analogous the coffeehouses and debating clubs of First Enlightenment. Through these electronic forums, Information and Ideas are being freely exchanged at a rate too fast for most governments to adapt to (for the purpose of maintaining their own power and the status quo)
One of my fellow Citizens and Patriots, responding to one of my “tweets” suggested that a split was occurring amongst WE THE PEOPLE in general and, in particular, those of us who take a greater interest in Liberty, Freedom and Politics.
My fellow citizen and cohort described this perceived split as "Libertarian" vs "Conservative". Before I say more, I thank my said cohort for bouncing their ideas off from me, so I would be inspired to reflect upon what causes me to believe what I believe in this regard. I hope that each of you are enlightened by our exchange of ideas...."
Continue reading on Examiner.com Strap on your thinking caps if you love Freedom - Locke vs Hobbes - Minneapolis Independent | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-minneapolis/strap-on-your-thinking-caps-if-you-love-freedom-locke-vs-hobbes#ixzz1QQHPGWNR
Thank you for taking the time to read and reflect upon what i have written.
I write this article with the same intentions as Thomas Paine http://ushistory.org/paine. I seek no leadership role. I seek only to help the American People find their own way using their own “Common Sense” http://amzn.to/kbRuar
Those were my thoughts.
In Liberty,
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
http://twitter.com/dmashak
TellMyPolitician
Bookmark and Share
Don Mashak's Page - Song of Truth Foundation
DON MASHAK'S CHALLENGE TO ALL USA POLITICAL PARTIES!
Don Mashak's Page - Smart Girl Politics
don mashak // Current TV
Don Mashak - Examiner.com
Don Mashak on asamom As A Mom
Leviathan - Hobbes (Oxford World's Classics)
The Social Contract from Hobbes to Rawls
Two Treatises of Government - John Locke
Critique of Practical Reason - Kant
--------------------------------------------------------------Tweet
This is a teaser to an article i wrote on Examiner.com"... more
-
-
Watch this Video with an Eagles eye, listen intently-see what's ahead if we don't wake upWatch this Video with an Eagles eye, listen intently-see what's ahead if we... more
-
-
Out of the depths of photographer Hayley Murphy’s psyche spills out somecolorful goo, in the shape of a Martianpainting a Statue of Liberty with choco-late, and an Islamic rebel strapped witha machine gun, devouring a table of sweets. Murphy captures images that pop into her head, that stew in her sub-conscious as she sleeps and dreams, and glues these mental clues together, bring-ing life to what her unconscious brainis trying to tell her, which results ininsanely-colorful photographic riddlesthat never stop producing questions,or giving answers. With the rawness of Hans Bellmer, the famboyance of DavidLa Chapelle and the confusion-inducinggenius of David Lynch, she wrestles hermind-blips in front of the lens to seewhat the puzzle looks like once all the pieces are in place. Here’s a look intohow her mind rolls.... http://www.makeahistory.com/index.php/section-table/42975-hayley-murphy-statue-of-liberty-with-chocolateOut of the depths of photographer Hayley Murphy’s psyche spills out somecolorful... more
-
-
worrg
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
's-Election-set-to-go-off-with-a-WhimperTwo years ago, it threatened to trigger a wave of dissent that would reverberate around the Middle East and beyond.
Hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, took to the streets of Tehran and other Iranian cities to protest the reelection of President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, a poll that opponents claimed was rigged.
Yet on June 12, with much of the region in a state of revolutionary ferment, the second anniversary of Iran's bitterly disputed presidential election is likely to pass off as little more than a footnote.'s-Election-set-to-go-off-with-a-WhimperTwo years ago, it threatened to trigger a... more
-
-
Talk of efforts to create a North American Union has been derided by the elite — politicians, talking heads and the mainstream media — as conspiracy-theory nuttery. But a leaked United States diplomatic cable proves the leaders of the U.S., Canada and Mexico have been working to create a borderless North America, similar to the European Union, since at least 2005.
The cable, leaked by WikiLeaks and reported on by the Canadian National Post, said: “An incremental and pragmatic package of tasks for a new North American Initiative (NAI) will likely gain the most support among Canadian policymakers. The economic payoff of the prospective North American initiative … is available, but its size and timing are unpredictable, so it should not be oversold.”
In the cable, U.S. diplomats focused on a number of key areas to move forward with continental integration, including a possible common currency, labor markets, international trade and the borders of the three countries, according to the article.
Diplomats were negotiating how to handle professional-licensing laws and work-permit systems between the three countries, which would make it easier for people to move from one country to the other.
The Administration of President Barack Obama is currently in discussions with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper about creating the first step of the process by laying the groundwork for a stronger perimeter-security arrangement, intelligence sharing and trade deals, the paper reported.
Globalists pushing for a one-world government are taking an incremental approach to achieve their goal by combining countries into larger entities. They believe this will make it easier to combine larger regions into a single whole later on.
Questions about the possibility of a union of the countries have been met with disdain and denials by Administrations past and present. But these cables prove they were lying while trying to cover up the fact that they were negotiating away America in secret.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/06/02/leaked-u-s-cable-lays-out-north-american-%E2%80%98integration%E2%80%99-strategy/Talk of efforts to create a North American Union has been derided by the elite —... more
-
-
This programme advises visitors and residents in the UK on how to behave appropriately in Britain. The message is, we are incapable of either tolerating people’s irksome behaviours or of speaking to people ourselves. Warning: this programme contains rude noises, toilet humour and bad images.This programme advises visitors and residents in the UK on how to behave appropriately... more
-
-
Persian Female Warriors. iran before the arab invasion Persian women had hight ranks in Persian society and were treated as goddesses before the Arab invasion and imposition of the dark, backward, and pernicious Arab ideology of Islam upon Persia which destroyed our liberty, form of government, system of Federalism, Equal Rights, Freedom of speech, Freedom of religion and Democracy and replaced those ideals and systems with a backward, central brutal government, discrimination and slaveryPersian Female Warriors. iran before the arab invasion Persian women had hight ranks... more
-
-
by David Shirk on May 25, 2011 in Philosophy
I was surprised to see some of the comments that I did on my last article – Thoughts of a Middling American Part 1 (http://current.com/1m4umkc ). I wonder if many of the readers even know where the term Middling came from. Empire of Liberty has a good few chapters on it – good book. That having been said, here is part two, and the answer to some of the comments.
“seems to me that you have made a whole lot of assumptions in your post.”
You do not seem to have read the entire article as I will now address.
“You said that any law that seeks to limit human behavior will fail. Well, I think the law that limits murder is a pretty good law, and yes it fails”
Murder is hardly normal human behavior – you then say “Isn’t the law there so people who do commit murder can be prosecuted for same?” And yet one need not go very far to see the very same law throwing people into prison or giving them life in prison (having been convicted of murder) – when the evidence was largely lacking – in addition, many have even had their innocence proven after the sentence has already been carried out. However I still see your point and consider it no less valid despite my opposing view on the matter – however how many laws do we have on the books in regards to murder as oppose to tax laws etc? Or if you believe that taxes are fully justified, then how about laws regarding trade, business transactions, ethics, civil rights etc? such laws have in the past benefitted some people, yet on the same token, cost far more to have to cut back as a result. Bastiat explained it far better than I ever could, and if you believe yourself to be smarter then he is in the grand scheme of things, then I would like to see you refute his points. Start with his short work – The Law.
“Funny, I find that we are being ruled more by the minority (large corporations) than by the majority (the people).” – We are ruled by the minority true – but does not the ‘majority’ as society calls it, elect the minority into office to ‘lead’ them? If so, then I stand by my corollary – “Even within the majority lies a major upset in belief systems. So how can a people honestly believe that whatever the majority on the whole agrees on will be beneficial to all? It cannot, and the notion people have that what works for them will work for me is offensive at best.”
“I guess you think that if a person has an “ivy league” education that they are some how not fit to hold office. Perhaps you would rather they not be educated at all.” – Trite. However consider this – if our leaders are so intelligent, then how is that after 230 years, we have become that which we fought against in the initial revolution? The truth is that there are libraries, seminars, bookstores, and a wealth of information online as well as discussion boards. Or even places to discuss ideas online. Besides, whether one has a degree or not is irrelevant – I could give you several essays and seminars written by a guy who holds a PhD and a masters degree, but because he disagree with your Phd and masters guy, it does not matter. This is why I listen to both, read the source material, watch for reactions, and judge for myself.
I have seen more attacks on the post then I have anything rebutting them – most are directed at the source not the content. Sad really.
Funny how the guy who did 10 years of law enforcement (and thus knows of which he speaks) was voted down simply for agreeing with me – most likely by those who never served themselves. Once again – kinda sad…I served 10 years in the army and am proficient in small team tactics. I would bet my bottom dollar that if I started posting these tactics on this forum, that they too would be voted down and have one sided comments thrown at them by those who never had any training or military studies at all. It seems that is what makes for intelligent talk on this forum.
More people argue the number of views then the content. I would laugh, but it’s really not funny. The truth is that I find it sick that people would rather argue about software bugs and rankings then actually debate on a comment based forum on the content of the article…oh well.
“since we have not spoken with these individuals personally, or seen any of their test scores, or IQ scores (altho IQ tests are no longer as popular as they once were) aren’t we actually engaging in the author’s style of ‘assumption’?” No you are not. If you catch someone in the act of murdering someone else, would you believe them if they were to finish killing, and then tell you that they didn’t do it? I judge off of actions taken – not by what the guys say. The more open your eyes are, and the more facts you gather to add context and depth, the more you reason and the less you assume.
“ I rather think that as finite humans we will engage in ‘assuming’ because on some level we must assume before we can prove or disprove a hypothesis (or assumption).”” We all make assumptions sometimes. I am certainly no exception. However I would never petition for a law based off of an ignorant assumption either. In addition – I know what I know, and what works for me – and would never try to impose my way of doing things onto you. I understand that you also know what you know, and like me – are sometimes forced into a position where you must assume. However there is nothing more dangerous than setting a policy or long term action based on assumption.
“I had a college instructor who always gave essay tests, but he stated at the outset of his class that you didn’t need to parrot back what he said was the correct answer, you merely needed to argue ‘your’ answer successfully — that is how we learn.” – Sounds like you had a good professor.
Okay – that’s enough of that; time for something completely different.
In martial arts, you try to keep yourself on guard and not present your opponent with an opening. If you overextend yourself or get off balance, you create an expanded target area that your opponent will take advantage of. National defense is no different – the more you expand your area of occupation, the more you open yourself up to attack.
If you see an injustice being visited upon someone else, and want to do something about it – then feel free. Just be aware that you don’t know the offender, or their capabilities. Also be aware of your surrounding and other potential threats to you should you choose to interfere, lest you to become a victim. The same goes for our foreign policy on ‘getting the bad guy’. Unfortunately we never bothered to learn the nature of what we attack before doing so hence the many ‘foreign interventions’ we have made – some over 60 years old – that we are still tied up in today.
It is noble to help someone else when you can. It is stupid if you try to help them and impoverish yourself in the process, for then someone will have to help you as well – the cycle never ends.
Someone who works for something themselves is far less likely to take it for granted, and far more likely to use the proceeds in a meaningful manner.
Do not attribute to malice what is done in ignorance. Wars start this way.
I have read entirely too many books not of the main stream. This is frustrating because few people read the books I read. Oprah sells more books than Allistair Horne, Wood, or Rothbard. People love commentary off of current events – people hate studying the history behind them.
We live in a snapshot society where the only reality that seems to matter is what is currently being felt or experienced. I cannot think of to many things more damaging to a people then the adoption of this mindset. When age old wisdom is replaced with common knowledge, the people doom the....
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5233/thoughts-of-a-middling-american-part-2/by David Shirk on May 25, 2011 in Philosophy
I was surprised to see some of the... more
-
