Morality101.net

Morality is Liberty without Force

Browsing Posts tagged morality101

It’s wonderful to be able to address a group of people who are conservative thinkers! This group can accomplish a lot if we don’t hang ourselves. One thing I love about conservatives is that they know what they think and aren’t wishy-washy. That said, if we want to succeed in pursuing the agenda of taking back America, we must take tender care of each other. With conservatives that shouldn’t be difficult. Not all conservatives agree on everything, and it is those areas that can, if we allow it to, stand in the way of unity.

RELIGION
I would suggest we keep it toned down a bit. Those of us who believe cannot be harmed by those who do not, and we are not about to harm others. Religion is NOT an issue we must all agree on, even in a candidate.

ABORTION
Related to religion. Some see it as evil. Some see it as a privacy issue. Some see it as amoral and/or murder. Some see no harm in it. If you are like me, your feelings are strong and you won’t give up those feelings. BUT we must not allow our differences in this issue to separate us from our goal. We each retain our beliefs, but we don’t really need to attack each other, right?

WAR
Another area of disagreement. Not every candidate is going to satisfy all of us – can we not agree that if we see the candidate as a decent, honest person with integrity, we can tolerate him as an official? Vote the way you wish, but maybe we can refrain from bashing each other in the head as we go along? ;-)

MIDDLE EAST
Ditto the above

FREEDOM, LIBERTY
Do we all agree on the definitions? Do we not all want total freedom? We have to be careful on this one if one looks at abortion. The “my body is mine” thing? Some feel the unborn baby’s body is his, not his mother’s. For me personally this one is a really sticky one as I understand where the other side comes from, but disagree. We must think about HOW we disagree publicly and still maintain unity.

I am sure there are other hot button issues you can, and hopefully will provide. My suggestions are just that – suggestions. I am open to everyone’s suggestions.

I write this because I am pretty sure that’s how we lose honest elections: we allow single issues to rule our senses, whereas we possibly would all be better off if we CONSERVATIVES could coalesce instead of divide ourselves.

Please let me know what you think?

VN:F [1.8.4_1055]
Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

By ROBERT J. SAMUELSON Posted 09/29/2009 06:11 PM ET

What’s driving the great health debate of 2009 is not a popular clamor for universal insurance.

“Many Americans are balking again at the prospect of health care reform,” writes pollster Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center.

A new Wall Street Journal poll found 41% of respondents opposed to President Obama’s proposals and 39% in favor (the rest were undecided). The underlying driver is politicians’ psychological quest for glory.

<Read full story>

You’re the First to Know

Dear Friend,

Well, it looks like you have made a difference.

Based upon the unbelievable support that I have receieved from 10,000 supporters like you, I have decided to throw my hat into the ring to challenge Chris Dodd for the honor of representing the state of Connecticut in the United States Senate. I will announce my candidacy on MSNBC’s Morning Joe show on Thursday, September 17 at 8:15am eastern time. Sorry for the short notice, but its important to honor commitments and keep these things under raps until the day the news breaks.

At this time last year I could not have imagined that that I would be making such an announcement today. I had never intended to become a candidate for public office. But these are extraordinary times. Our economy is falling apart in front of our eyes and Washington seems intent on making the wheels come off even faster. At a time when we desperately need adult supervison, the economically illiterate are running the show. As I love my country, it now seems clear that I must  try to do something to help. The emotional and material support I have received from across the country has made the decision much easier.

So today it begins. As I’m sure you are aware, the rules in politics bear only scant resemblance to those which govern polite society. As a result, I am wading into strange waters, and I’m sure strange things will happen. But I promise to maintain my composure and give it my best shot. Based on the support that I have received thus far, I fully expect to be facing down Chris Dodd in the general election just 14 months from now.

As my campaign takes flight, I appreciate the patience and trust that you have shown. To commit time and money to a long shot candidate for high office is a hard choice. I hope to repay that trust with a first class campaign.

I look forward to your feedback and your continued support.

Thanks again,

Peter Schiff


You are receiving this email because you opted in at www.schiffforsenate.com to receive updates, or have made a donation to the campaign.

Unsubscribe striker@morality101.net from this list

Our mailing address is:

Schiff Exploratory Committee

P.O. Box 1134

Weston, CT 06883

Add us to your address book

Copyright (C) 2009 Schiff Exploratory Committee All rights reserved.

GaryNorth

“NO QUESTIONS, SIR!” by Gary North, at http://garynorth.com

Date 9/10/2009


I will now make an assertion:

You have no major questions about the economy, unemployment, retirement, inflation, deflation, depression, the possible collapse of the dollar, real estate, or gold.

Am I wrong? Then call my bluff. Send me a question. I’ll answer it.

If you are asking a career decision question, I will need the following information:

Your age Your location Your occupation Your retirement date Your #1 goal in life Deadline date

Then ask your question. Send you question (25 words or fewer) to this address:

garynorth@garynorth.com

Put the word “QUESTION” in the subject box.

I will answer all of them in future issues of this newsletter.

Back in 2005, I offered this service. For a year, I answered questions every other issue. This helped me find out what topics my readers were interested in. Well, a few of my readers, anyway. One-tenth of one percent of my mailing list sent a question. Yes, one out of 1,000.

Nobody else had any questions.

People do not ask questions. There are three main reasons for this.

1. They are the blind being led into a ditch by the blind.

2. They know the answers, and they don’t want to have them confirmed.

3. They just don’t care.

A SHAKY TRESTLE

Our problem is procrastination. Most of our lives are routine. We do not get too far away from a comfortable routine. Most of the time this routine works.

Some people call this being in a rut. Others call it staying on track. Sometimes the trestle is wobbling.

I have no objection to routines. My routine keeps me on track in my rut. But part of my routine is to look down the tracks to see if there is anything out of the ordinary.

Today, the economy is out of the ordinary. The trestle almost collapsed a year ago.

The question is: Will it collapse next time? Also, when might this next time be?

There are signs that the trestle is missing pillars. Every Friday afternoon, after the stock market closes, the FDIC closes five more banks. Investors shrug it off. “No problem.” Then, the next Friday, five more banks get closed. How long can this go on? Not much longer. The number of closings will increase. A man whose firm buys busted banks says that he expects 1,000 banks to close. (http://www.cnbc.com/id/32581463) “No problem.”

Then there is unemployment. Every month, the number of jobs declines by 200,000 or more. The rate of unemployment jumps. Investors immediately buy more shares. Why? Because they see unemployment as a cost-cutting tactic. Therefore, “corporate earnings will go up soon.” They don’t think that an S&P price-earnings ratio of 129 (August 31) is a danger signal. It has never been this high before. It has never reached 50 before. “No problem.” They think that profits will rise to bring the P/E back to something like 15, which would be a buy-and- hold signal.

Then there is the Federal deficit. It will end up on September 30 in the range of $1.6 trillion. The administration has offered an estimate of $9 trillion between now and 2019, meaning $900 billion a year.

Social Security is officially expected to go into the red in 2017. One Congressman thinks this could happen before the next Presidential election. He is on the House Committee for Financial Services.

http://GaryNorth.com/snip/886.htm

When this happens, the Social Security Trust Fund will have to cash in some of its Treasury bonds in order to get money to send to people on the rolls. The Treasury will have to sell enough debt to the public (including the Federal Reserve System) to cover these transactions.

In 2008, Medicare’s Hospital Trust Fund went negative. It received less money from Medicare taxes than it spent. Thus, it had to sell its nonmarketable Treasury bonds back to the Treasury. Its press release admitted that the program was negative, but it spoke of the Trust Fund as solvent. It is solvent legally. It has government-issued IOU’s in it. But not for long.

The Trustees report that Medicare’s Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund will become insolvent earlier in 2019 than reported last year. HI expenditure growth is estimated to average 7.4 percent each year over the next 10 years, a higher rate than either Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or Consumer Price Index (CPI) growth. This year the HI Trust Fund will spend more than its income, and from 2009 through 2017, about $342 billion will need to be transferred from the Federal treasury to cover beneficiaries’ hospital insurance costs.

That’s a nice, precise figure: $342 billion. The key words are these: “will need to be transferred from the Federal treasury.”

From the empty Federal Treasury.

“We need to act quickly and effectively to address Medicare’s fiscal health, including enacting the steps proposed in the President’s budget, which would postpone the insolvency date of the Part A trust fund for ten years,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt. “Congress should also act immediately on the smart changes put forward by the Administration after last year’s funding warning, which would allow the program to be modernized and transformed.”

http://GaryNorth.com/snip/887.htm

I love this phrase: “Congress should also act immediately.”

Congress did nothing except run up the general deficit by another $750 billion (minimum) in October. Then it did it again this spring.

The Medicare hospital insurance program is bankrupt, but nobody in government except Ron Paul uses this word to describe government programs.

CALM IN THE EYE OF THE HURRICANE

Most people know little or none of this. They go through their daily routines. They are oblivious. The government has deliberately disguised these matters. The average citizen thinks that someone at the top has a solution. He cannot conceive of the possibility that experts who run the system are making things up as they go along.

Most of the time the system lumbers along. But then, once in a while — such as a year ago — the system grinds to a halt. Then the response is the same: create money and increase the Federal deficit. The average guy thinks this will solve the problem at no cost to him.

It feels like no cost, but the debt level rises. This year, the Federal deficit has added another $17,000 per household. No one seemed to care. Few even noticed.

http://GaryNorth.com/snip/888.htm

As we watch these things going on around us, and when we perceive that those around us perceive none of this, we remain calm. The calm serenity of those around us calms us, as well. We see the trestle ahead. We see the engine disappear from sight. We suspect what is going to happen to us if we don’t get off the train. But no one around us is moving toward the exit. No one even seems to notice.

The problem is, the trestle has wobbled before. It has looked as though the engine has disappeared, but it always reappears on the far side of the trestle. So, we assume that this time it will not go over the edge into the blackness below.

But there are lots of trestles between here and our final destination.

We are calmed by the calm of those around us. They seem to know what they are doing. Yet they didn’t know a year ago. Henry Paulson was frantic. He nationalized the mortgage market on his own authority exactly one year ago. The markets remained calm. Within weeks, the bailouts of the big banks began. Goldman Sach’s rival, Lehman Brothers Holdings, went bust over a weekend. Merrill Lynch was swallowed by Bank of America.

The underlying causes of the problem, namely, toxic assets, have not gone away. There are lots more of them ahead of us: Alt-A mortgages (liars’ loans), option ARMs (folks too poor even to lie loans), and commercial real estate.

The re-sets will hit families that will not be able to qualify for loans. There are no more liar loans available. Lending standards have tightened over the last year and a half. The loans that were easy to get in 2007 and earlier are now ancient history. The re-sets will mean busted loans. They will end. Some of them will not be replaced. No one knows how many.

The lending agencies will not be able to hide these re-set loans. They die on schedule. They must be replaced. They will not be replaced. The lenders will have expired loans on their books.

The lenders have been playing “let’s pretend” with bad loans. They have not reported these loans as being in default. They have pretended that there is hope to get the owners paying again. A re-set mortgage does not offer wiggle room. Unless the regulators change the rules, these loans will have to be written down as soon as the re-set date arrives.

Example: my son-on-law bought a new home in a nice neighborhood. He bought a bank-foreclosed house in a bank- foreclosed development. It was $100,000 less expensive than a few months before. The houses sold fast because the bank priced the houses to sell. Recently, his next-door neighbor lost his job. He moved back to northern Illinois to get a seasonal job. His wife and family stayed behind. Now she has been laid off. This is not a poor neighborhood. It is middle class.

Unemployment climbs relentlessly. This is having fall-out effects on housing. The summer season for selling houses ended in late August. The reports on home sales will turn negative as the percentage of foreclosure sales increases in relation to total sales.

Yet people in the know are calm. The average Joe is calm until the guy across the street loses his job.

THE IMPLICATIONS

Have you sat down with a pencil and paper to outline your situation?

If you were in the market for a new mortgage, what could you present to the lender to prove that you are a low-risk debtor?

If you were in the market for a new job, how much wiggle room would your finances allow you?

Where are you vulnerable? Your job?

Where is your employer vulnerable?

People assume that corporate management knows what it is doing. Then they are amazed when they are told that their services are no longer needed.

Managers don’t warn people whose jobs are at risk. They hold out hope that a turnaround is imminent. They want to believe that it really is imminent. They don’t want to lose anyone because of a premature warning to him that his job is coming to an end. So, they don’t tell a targeted employee until there is just no wiggle room remaining.

Are you seeing this at your firm? Is there a drip- drip-drip phenomenon going on, the way it is with insolvent banks? If there is, what have you done to see to it that your job is safe? Anything new? If not, you should assume that your job is not safe.

What about your company’s market? Is it stabilizing? Talk to someone in sales. That’s where the first signs of recovery will occur.

Here is a strategy you can quietly use to assess your firm’s line of credit. Which bank is its main lender? You need to know. Once you know, check what the bank is paying on time deposits. If it’s 2% or higher, the bank is probably in trouble. It is offering rates way above the federal funds rate of 0.15% that the Federal Reserve is paying on excess reserves. It is buying time at a loss.

That bank is a candidate for an FDIC take-over. The problem then will be this: a new set of managers will be in charge of rolling over old loans. They will examine every business loan on the dead banks’ books. Your firm may be at risk along with the bank that supplies the credit.

The looming decline of commercial real estate threatens local banks. A recent “Wall Street Journal” article shows why.

In contrast to home loans — the majority of which were made by only 10 or so giant institutions — thousands of small and regional banks loaded up on commercial property debt. As a result, commercial real estate troubles would be even more widespread among the financial system than the housing woes. At the present, more than 3,000 banks and savings institutions have more than 300% of their risk-based capital in commercial real-estate loans.

http://GaryNorth.com/snip/889.htm

When these loans go bad, this will force more of these banks out of business. It will be crunch time for local lines of credit.

CONCLUSIONS

Does any of this raise some questions in your mind?

Have you thought through your answers?

If not, why not?

Questions can be asked here of Morality101 via Comment, or

to Author, garynorth@garynorth.com (subject: Questions)

CNSNews.com – Chief Treasury Economist Says White House Economic Forecast is ‘Smoother’ than Can Be Expected in Reality.

(entire article reposted here – please comment!)

Alan B. Krueger, U.S. Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy


Tuesday, September 08, 2009
By Matt Cover
(CNSNews.com) – Alan Krueger, assistant secretary for economic policy and chief economist at the Treasury Department, told reporters that the economic projections used by the White House–which foresee a decade of uninterrupted economic growth ahead–are “smoother” than what can be expected in reality.

Even with this smoother-than-reality economic forecast, the administration is predicting that the federal government will run up an additional $905 billion in deficit spending over the next decade, almost doubling the national debt.

Krueger, speaking to reporters at a Friday briefing, said that while the administration’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth forecasts were largely in line with private estimates, numerous factors could affect and alter those estimates.

“It’s the nature of forecasting that forecasts typically are smoother than the realizations,” he said. “Your hope is that the ups and downs balance out and, on average, are on the forecasted path.”

What Krueger did not mention is that, while the administration’s projections are close to those of private economists, known as the Blue Chip Consensus, those private forecasts only extend through 2010, while the White House’s extend through 2019.

When asked by CNSNews.com if the fragility of the administration’s projections meant higher budget deficits in the future, Krueger said that deficits were inevitable during bad economic times.

“Deficits are inevitable when you’re trying to recover from such a steep recession,” he said.

Krueger also said that, because of that steep recession, it was impossible for the administration to produce a balanced budget in the short term, saying such an idea was not “advisable” for Obama.

“In fact, it wouldn’t be advisable to have a balanced budget at this point or anything close to a balanced budget at this point,” he said.

In the longer run, however, Krueger said that the administration planned to put the budget back on a path toward fiscal responsibility, saying that the country relies far too much on borrowing and not enough on public investment.

“One has to draw a distinction between the short run and the long run,” he said. “Certainly in the longer run the administration plans to put the budget on a path that’s fiscally responsible.”

“In the U.S., I think that we rely too much on borrowing and short-term consumption at the expense of longer-run investment, public infrastructure,” he said. “The president has said that it’s very important that when we emerge from this recession that we build a stronger foundation, one that’s less susceptible to these kinds of boom-and-bust cycles.”

However, the Obama administration’s projected budgets rely on what Krueger criticizes: borrowing to finance short-term consumption.

For example, the Obama administration projects that, as a result of its 2010 budget, the federal government will run a cumulative deficit of $9.05 trillion by the year 2019. In total, the government plans to spend $43 trillion during the next decade while taking in only $34 trillion in tax revenue.

In no year between now and 2019 does the administration plan to balance the budget. In fact, the smallest single-year deficit Obama plans to incur is $739 billion in 2015, after which time the deficit will begin climbing again until it hits nearly $1 trillion ($917 billion) in 2019.

However, Krueger claimed that it was a “very important” part of Obama’s budget to move the country toward “responsible budgeting” and a “more sustainable” path.

“That’s why it’s very important, in the administration’s budget, that we make the critical investments in human capital and physical infrastructure, responsible budgeting, health care reform, clean energy, to move the U.S. to a more sustainable economic path,” he said.

Dean160x

After many years of thinking that I had a pretty good grasp of the English language and definitions, and observing that we have come to never really knowing what people mean when they describe themselves as liberal, conservative, libertarian, republican, democrat, socialist, marxist, etc etc, this morning I became sidetracked with definitions.  So here goes!:

Google search return for “define:liberal”

Definitions of liberal on the Web:

broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; “a broad political stance”; “generous and broad sympathies”; “a liberal newspaper”; “tolerant …

  • having political or social views favoring reform and progress
  • tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
  • a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties
  • big: given or giving freely; “was a big tipper”; “the bounteous goodness of God”; “bountiful compliments”; “a freehanded host”; “a handsome allowance”; “Saturday’s child is loving and giving”; “a liberal backer of the arts”; “a munificent gift”; “her fond and openhanded grandfather”
  • a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets
  • free: not literal; “a loose interpretation of what she had been told”; “a free translation of the poem”
    wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
  • Liberalism is a broad class of political philosophies that considers individual liberty and equality to be the most important political goals.
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_(politics)
  • The Liberal magazine is a quarterly literary and political publication “devoted to promoting liberalism around the world”. …
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Liberal
  • The Liberal Party was one of the two major British political parties from the mid 19th century until the rise of the Labour Party in the 1920s …
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_(UK)
  • One with liberal views, supporting individual liberty (see Wikipedia on Liberalism for a description of the various and diverging trends of …
    en.wiktionary.org/wiki/liberal
  • Of or relating to the Liberal party, its membership, or its platform, policy, or viewpoint; Liberal Party; A member or supporter of a Liberal Party; A member or supporter of the Liberal Pary of Canada, or its predecessors, or provincial equivalents, or their predecessors; A Liberal Democrat …
    en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Liberal
  • liberally – freely in a nonliteral manner; “he embellished his stories liberally”
  • liberally – in a generous manner; “he gave liberally to several charities”
    wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
  • liberalness – liberality: an inclination to favor progress and individual freedom
    wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Okay, my take on this is that there is no longer any concensus on the definition of “liberal”.  In particular the definitions from Princeton, supposedly an ‘intellectual elite”, which gives us a clear view of at least one which is responsible for doublespeak:

“favoring reform and progress… not bound by authoritarianism… favors laissez-faire and self-regulating markets…”

Reading Princeton’s definitions is a virtual oxymoron, isn’t it?  Today’s “liberals” are largely seen as the Democrats, who are increasingly seeking their versions of progress and reform in totally totalitarian fashion, increasing regulations which serve to impede laissez-faire and free markets, attempting to redefine liberty as “civil liberties”,

Of course I could go on and on, but people, if you consider Princeton as intellectual elite, you join Princeton in being dumber than an overused and worn-out cardboard box.  There is nothing elite about corrupting definitions into doublespeak.

Anyway, we still don’t know what Liberal really means, do we?

Below is copy/paste email correspondence with Digg regarding my recent banning:

Hi from Digg.com.

We have unbanned your account. Please note, however, that your account will remain under review, and any violation of Digg’s Terms of Use (http://digg.com/tou) may result in a permanent ban of your account.

For more information, please see Digg’s FAQ section (http://digg.com/faq) and the Community Guidelines (http://digg.com/guidelines).

Thank you,

Digg Support

Dean Striker wrote:

I disagree that my actions were spam.  I was referring to my own website, to specific articles I had written which were most relevant to the numerous flood of healthcare “diatribe” spamming Digg these days.  As to “spam”, my website does not even carry advertising as Digg does, which is truly spam, although I certainly understand the financial needs to do so.
I know Digg is liberal/collectivist, and I am hardly alone in seeing and reporting how is destroying our country with both force and bankruptcy, and while you may opine my writings as diabribe, they are most certainly not that.  There was no call for you do to resort to such low-life terminology.

In well over a year, I never personally abuse anyone, nor swear, and I normally will not become involved in the many long personal truly diatribal and useless flaming comments which run way off subject.
The person who “reported” me posted that he/she would do so, and it was that digger who was irrelevant and in no way responding to what I had written.

That said, I did re-read your community guidelines and will try to be somewhat more restrained in my activities.  I hope you will restore my good standing, but it’s your show.

Dean Striker

Digg Support wrote:

Thanks for getting in touch with us at Digg.com regarding your account.

Your account was reported to us for abusive activity in comments. Specifically, for spamming the same diatribe nearly a dozen times. [emphasis is mine]

We are willing to unban your account if you agree to comment responsibly. Additionally, please peruse the Community Guidelines (http://digg.com/guidelines), which we encourage users to follow in order to create a positive, friendly and respectful online community.

Please don’t hesitate to contact us should you have any further questions.

Thanks,

- Digg Support Team

Striker wrote:
———————————————————————-

Login: Striker101
Name: Dean Striker
———————————————————————-
Your account is invalid If you have any questions, please contact support@digg.com. for Striker101

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This was triggered by comment by

http://digg.com/users/danj484

Exact same post, including poster’s website, on another article. Buried and reported as spam.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now here is my post(s) which yes I posted to several articles about “healthcare”, to several articles as they appeared in “Upcoming”.  Most had slight differences.
People, battling with the trivial details will result only in modified Force.

Fact:  ANY forced scheme serves only to diminish and destroy Liberty.
Fact:  Every regulation, every tax is theft by Force denying your Mind and your Right to Life.

If you grasp the moral foundation of Liberty it is clear and simple.  Many seem to prefer spending the rest of life arguing on Digg and anywhere else — that is an excercise in futility!

We have reached the crossroad of constitutional crisis — there is no turning back.  It is time to identify our friends of Liberty and our foes of Force.

READ my http://morality101.net/blog/morality/ — plus read header pages /Force/ and /Sacrifice/.  If that makes clear sense to you, for gosh sake register, comment, post and take action!

Then come back here on Digg — American Citizens only — comment and vote simply…  ‘Liberty’ or ‘Force’.  Digg up or digg  down, who cares?  No comment, no count

.

And for the many who won’t bother, here is an exceprt from my Morality webpage, which is the essence of my moral foundation:
  • Your life belongs only to YOU, which means… it does NOT belong to anyone else.
  • Who has the right to your life? Only YOU!
  • Who has the right to control or manipulate your Life? Only YOU!
  • Who determines the level of quality of your Life? Only YOU!
  • Who then is Responsible for your Life?  Hmmm, would that be YOU?
  • Further, you are also responsible for the family which you have chosen, but no others.
  • And in return your family is equally responsible for you.You may Choose to assume responsibility for others whom you value, but…
  • The extent and longevity of responsibility for those others is strictly your Personal Choice.

Nuff said!

Where is Liberty?

Where is Liberty?

Given that every instance of collectivism…

Requires the Force of Government to initiate, regulate and administer; and

Eliiminates all rights of all individuals to determine and act in whatever they perceive as being in their individual best interest, and steals from the citizens whatever monies government, not the individual, deems necessary and appropriate, and

Eliminates the natural benefits of competition and choices always best provided by a truly free market, and

Sacrifices and removes all individual alternatives and incentives toward maximizing one’s life, then

Insist on an answer to this one Question:

How does this enhance or preserve our natural rights to
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness?

The above was my reply to a TownHall post in Digg this morning, listing 10 questions to ask those who are pushing for, in this instance, Obamacare.  The questions were great, designed to show any collectivist all the fallacies in this ruse but, as usual, missed the main point.

I have become simply exhausted and exasperated with every debate over so-called health-care or any other collectivist program deteriorating into a debate over

  • whether it’s fascism or socialism or communism or….,  and
  • The pro’s and con’s of each and every item in a 14-pound 1,500-page new proposal which is intended to distract everyone from the real truth, which is that…
  • every word within such “debate” is naught but a different approach to enacting still another, still more, intrusion upon our liberty.
  • This is exactly the same distraction as the “numbers game” of yore, which was ‘don’t address the issue, instead, declare that a challenged number renders the entire point void.

For many moons now, I have been writing about Morality, and more lately expanding to discussion of the Force and Sacrifice, as these are the basis of all governments, which have nothing to “give” except that which they steal from their citizens.  This morality is not about some high-faluting worship of some lord or allah.  It is simply our natural rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

This is clear and concise in our Declaration of Independence, yet so dispised and distorted and shredded within our Constitution.  Over these 230 years, the collectivist / communist set have diligently set out to subvert these basic principles into a pity-pity society in which moral free market capitalism is said to be the villan, and that individual heights are to be subordinated to some nebulous “greater good”, productivity and self-reliance are less important than sloth, and the supreme “moral” value is to sacrifice one’s own life to anyone from anywhere merely because they hold out their hands and say “oh, pity me”.

According to the collectivists, each man, having his own mind and the unique human characteristic of being able to THINK, is now somehow to be denied that treasured characteristic and his mind deferred to any unknown other, who cannot prove and is not required to prove any superiority of Mind over You, the individual.

The brainless immoral collectivist “ethic” has now gained the foothold sought for at least the last century, and has set America on it’s long winding path to economic and moral devastation.  America is leading the path to worldwide self-destruction, to such extent that we must question now whether humanity can survive.

You wonder why life has become poorer and holds little but nonsense and drudgery?  You wonder why “Atlas Shrugged”?  Well, at least we’ve got you wondering — the rest us up to You!

Principled Perspectives.

A is A, and Socialism by any Other Name…

that Obamacare isn’t socialism ignores socialism’s essential nature. Technical definitions aside, socialism is a form of collectivism, the doctrine that holds that the standard of value is the group, to which the individual is subordinate and can be sacrificed on any group whim, as represented by the state. Communism, Nazism, welfare statism, fascism, democracy, and socialism are all manifestations of collectivism. The sacrifice of individual rights under a statist regime is the political essence of collectivism, and that is exactly the nature of Obama’s health care plan.

But to advocate socialism openly and honestly is and always has been a loser in America. After the tyranny, wars, and unprecedented mass murder wrought by the socialist regimes of Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Red China, and the many smaller variants of the 20th century, socialism is dead as an intellectual force. That is why the champions of socialized medicine run from the socialist label as from the plague.

As the great Aristotle said; A is A. And socialism is socialism. We are headed toward totalitarian socialism in America, and have been for the past century. Under Obama, the trend is accelerating. But he is an empty suit, simply cashing in on the trend…the collectivists preferred method of American socialization…the back door of fascism. Step by step, through programs such as the Veterans Administration, Medicare, a myriad of government controls and taxes, etc., total government control of medicine (and, in fact, the entire economy) is and has been advancing in America…long before Bush-Obama socialism appeared on the American scene.

The fascist method was explained by a former leader of a major Western nation some time ago:

“The party is all-embracing…” said Adolf Hitler upon taking power, “Each activity and each need of the individual will thereby be regulated by the party as the representative of the general good…This is Socialism- not such trifles as the private possession of the means of production. Of what importance is that if I range men firmly within a discipline they cannot escape. Let them own land or factories as much as they please. The decisive factor is that the State, through the party, is supreme over all, regardless of whether they are owners or workers…Our Socialism goes far deeper…[the people] have entered a new relation…What are ownership and income to that? Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings.” (From Herman Rauschning’s The Voice of Destruction, as quoted in The Ominous Parallels, by Leonard Peikoff, page 231-232.)

We will maintain our illusion of privacy, while the state, through the medical bureaucracy, exercises total control over the medical and business decisions of patients, insurers, and providers alike. Doctors won’t be technical employees of the state (the communist brand of collectivism), at least not initially. But, fascism is socialism…and so is Obamacare…whether Mr. Schwalb, President Obama, or Bill O’Reilly want to call it that or not. Obamacare will “range men firmly within a [health care] discipline they cannot escape.” The medical bureaucracy will be “all-embracing”, and the people will be socialized…sooner (if the democrats have their way) or later (if the current GOP has its way).

The only antipode to collectivism/socialism is individualism/free market capitalism…the system based upon America’s founding principles of unalienable individual rights and textconstitution republican government…long absent from American health care.

continue reading…

This is #3 in a series of upcoming articles resting upon our root page “Morality“, which clearly shows how everything must rest upon a moral foundation  Having found the plateau of morality, everything built atop a solid foundation become crystal clear.  Moral philosophy is not complicated, nor does it demand a lifetime of contemplation and argument.

We supposedly have the Right to Life, yet today we observe campaigns for Sacrifice at every turn.  Every incident of involuntary Sacrifice steals something from your natural right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.  So consider today the “virtue” (or not) of sacrifice.

A voluntary sacrifice to support someone within your circle of family/friends is not sacrifice.  You have chosen to help those within your “circle”, your family, friends and business associates who hold value toward the enhancement of your personal life.  These are all those certain persons who are deserving, important and valuable to you in some substantial way.  This is not true of unknowns whom exist somewhere in outer space.  Again, helping those within your circle is not sacrifice, because these are individuals of some positive value to you,your ideals and your life.  You trust that those within your circle will reciprocate in some appropriate way and will assist when you yourself need their support.

Some of the false “virtue of sacrifice” came from religion, but today we are seeing a deluge of calls for sacrifice.  These come, not from religion, but from those who would and do claim that you have some nebulous obligation to support unknown causes for unknown people in unknown places, whether those be towns, counties, states or even other countries. Those are people about whom you know nothing about their value as human beings,

Such blind sacrifices to the unknown are never voluntary.  The concept of Sacrifice “for the greater good” cannot survive by the grace of charity.  Rather, the proponents of such shams con you with guilt-trips into handing them the privilege of using the Force of governments.  Governments are the tool used to tax/steal your money/property (Your Life) to redistribute to unknown others whose only “virtue” is being poor and/or incompetent and/or irresponsible, much too often by their own choice. You forgo your right to decide for yourself who is deserving, and how much you will “contribute” to their welfare.  You are expected to cede your mind and  your decisions to some again-unknown politician or bureaucrat whom you pay to represent you but who cannot and does not.  Remember that representative is also representing your enemies — those who would deny your Right to Life..

Because using such Force is immoral and illegal in the real world, where you have recourse against acts of force, government’s are created and improvised as necessary to become the “tool” used to make your choices for you.  They steal via taxation your very own money, in order to further the cause and objective of those whom you have unwittingly hired to impose   immoral sacrifice upon yourself.  Most of us cannot afford this, and even if we could, are we not still entitled to choice?

Morality does it for me, but we will be needed many more to understand if humanity is to come out of the ongoing collapse.