Our goverment is driving middle Americans into anarcho-capitalism.
We have two parties, both ignorant of the needs of the vast American
middle class. One of them (Republican) asks big corporations how they
can use the tax dollars of middle Americans to help them, and just maybe
along the way get them to employ poor people who don't pay taxes. The
other (Democrat) asks poor people who don't pay taxes how best they
might hand them the taxpayers money.
Nobody is asking the question FDR did. Mister American taxpayer: how
can I use your tax dollars to serve you paying the poor to do it?
It's all about payment for services rendered. If I pay you money, you
provide me with a service. This is the case in private industry, and it
-should be the case- in government. Franklin Delano Roosevelt
understood that when he created the Tennessee Valley Authority to bring
electricity to rural parts of the country, and when he put people to
work on flood control projects, swamp drainage, fire-fighting, road
building, etc. These programs provided average, middle class taxpayers
with services they didn't have before - and also provided work and a
hard-earned paycheck to (and tax revenue from) the poor.
FDR's successors in the Democrat and Republican parties alike have lost
sight of the notion of payment for services rendered. They've turned
the programs FDR designed into overweight bureaucracies that seldom
provide the services to people that were originally intended, and never
do so in an effecient manner. And worse, they've established
communistic programs like welfare whose function is to dole out money
and expect nothing in return.
It's no wonder that many have completely lost faith in the US
government. I say so even though I do hold out hope....
This is Don's view of the world, in a nutshell. He's in it for himself
and noone else; don't let him try to fool you about it.
And keep it for record if he accuses me of lying about him when I bring
it up later.
You hit the bull's eye there.
If you work legally, you pay taxes. If you only make $15K a year, you pay
The more money you make, the more tax writeoffs you usually get to claim -
therefore, it seems to me that there is an inverse relationship between
one's salary, and the actual percentage of that salary that gets taken out
When I worked for the gov.t (quit back in '91 but I suspect things haven;t
changed much), people making decent salaries (enough to buy a nice, large
house) would take trips to the stock room, pick up a few bits for the
office and then take a whole armlod of stuff to bring home - i.e., steal.
Pens, paper, staplers, colored pencils and markers, post-its, folders,
floppy disks, printer paper, and etc. and so on and so forth.
It was just dusgusting. An ordering system was finally put in place
because of the thousands of $$ lost to theft - which made it very difficult
to get actual needed office supplies (quotas and so on). But theives will
always find ways around any system - it's the honest people who always end
up bearing the brunt of rules and regulations. Honest people don't need to
be scrutinized - and dishonest people always find ways to continue being
I don't. I assume we'll end up with a theocracy that will finish the
destruction of the middle class, and take the nation into some weird sort
of peasant:aristocracy type of class system.
**IF** something better happens, it will be a pleasant surprise. But as
the saying goes, Even if you hope for the best, always prepare for the
I've considered moving to Australia...
It's funny the article cites current day Somalia and an obscure period
in medieval Iceland as two 'working' examples.
Jesting aside, it's a nice idea, but it can't work, or at least not for
very long. The system is best suited for an agricultural population,
but even with that base it would more than likely devolve into a feudal
state/clan state, etc. As some people, groups or companies acquire more
wealth and the ability to purchase 'power' and control a larger, if not
exclusive, range of services, (particularly a company with private
militia AND insurance) you've substituted 'public state' for 'private
It's a natural course for businesses/competitors to merge (or buy out)
and get bigger. Microsoft is a classic example, in only 20 years.
There's also the problem that it's highly unlikely you'd ever convert 6
billion people to the system, meaning you'd have one nation operating
like this, while most others retain governments. Which means you leave
yourself open to invasions, either armed or unarmed (by massive
immigration or by economic buy out).
Without knowing many details of history, I recall a number of Europe's
colonial ventures where run by private companies. I gather the colonists
were not much better off than indentured labour. The companies controlled
all supplies and any use of local resources [ land and all .] Those that
didn't follow their companies regulation faced the consequence of either
execution,corporal punishment, imprisonment or being turned out in the
wilderness with no means. Thus they had 'private rule' and were not anywhere
as free as the citizens at home.
Although constitutional, democratic and other governments suffer from
corruption and abuse, I do feel they at least offer a starting point for us
to achieve just society. This is surely preferrable to the old 'might is
right' rule, where the toughest buggers do whatever they want at the expense
of any they manage to abuse. I say once the social darwinist types
experience this themselves, that they'll lose their enthusiasm for 'survival
of the fitest' as a social virtue.
Sure, one can choose to be free by going off into isolation from society and
making ones own rules. [Yet space is limited and people are mobile, so
sooner or later one would have to manage some form of interaction...if only
as crude as roaring and beating your chest ;)] But bear in mind that
everything you take with you is a product of 100 or 1,000 or 10,000 or
100,000 years of social developement: self-cosciousness, conceptions,
language, mores, common sense, technique and technology.
You may choose to take as much information, equipment and materials as you
have the means to buy and transport, yet can you replace them as they are
used up? Bear in mind that that life will be limited by the relatively
insignificant means of the invidual. You may be free of society, but there's
still physics, geology, climate, ecology and biology, until the day you die
:\ It will be up to you to do without or replace what societies have
provided by specialized labour and economic exchange: food, clothing,
shelter, medicine etc. [ just these basic material needs should keep you
spinning, 25 hours a day! :}] and everything else. Well... G*d speed.
As the world faces an uncertain future, with political
instabillity,population escalation, resource depletion, climate change...
what are the likely scenarios one must face and what are our choices? At
this point it seems unlikely that a sufficient number will take conscious
action to change the behaviours that are leading us down this road. So...
how, where and to what degree will individuals co-operate to survive, to
preserve our shared achievements and to progress in the face of mounting
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.