MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Government’

How To Spy on the Government

Posted by M. C. on September 24, 2022

By Allan Stevo

As part of the activism that my team and I do, I like to follow public records laws and the latest activity happening around public records. 

This is especially necessary now that I am running Project Accountability, a group of 70 folks who have signed up to help hold their local public health officials accountable for the crimes committed in 2020 and beyond. 

So much information can be learned by just asking. 

Just Ask 

In a recent newspaper story, I saw that the City of Palm Springs, California has been trying for months to get records related to a school in nearby Palm Desert named College of the Desert. The school said it would provide records two weeks after the upcoming election. The city did not find that acceptable and is now suing the school over the matter. 

Someone involved in the matter obviously wants to have more information before the upcoming elections about someone else involved in the matter. Perhaps that person even wants to hold the other accountable. Elections are good at doing that. It might be a bunch of political shenanigans, or it might be an earnest effort at holding a misguided band of fellows accountable. The distinction is not relevant to my purposes, for in either example, both you and I are able to gather knowledge and to steel ourselves for the battles in our own lives. 

I was eager to have a look at the original records request and the legal documents from the City of Palm Springs. I could poke around courthouse websites to see if any data existed, and I could poke around on other online databases. Such searches can be time-consuming and take a great deal of effort. They do not always promise to be fruitful. Admittedly, that particular search is likely to be fruitful since there are only two courthouses that this lawsuit would take place in — the country courthouse or possibly, but not likely, in the nearest federal courthouse. 

Rather than search court records, I sometimes try a different approach. An Andrew Jared was mentioned as counsel for the City of Palm

Springs in this matter, making this a particularly useful time to employ this alternate method. 

The Way That I Asked 

Here’s what I did: 

1.) Find the attorney involved. 

Don’t just use Google for this, try a better method, which will find you the attorney’s contact information more reliably than any common search engine.

2.) Go to the search function of the state bar association, and find the phone number and email for that attorney. 

Every state has a bar association. You may even end up with a private cell phone number from this search. 

3.) Contact the attorney asking if he would kindly send you the court documents you are looking for. 

Truthfully, that attorney doesn’t even owe you a response, but a lot of attorneys will respond to a properly phrased request. 

With that article naming Andrew Jared as counsel for the City of Palm Springs, I gave him a call, left him a message, and sent him an email. If I had had his cell phone number from the search, I would have text messaged him too. 

I also took it a little further. 

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Government

Posted by M. C. on September 19, 2022

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

What Has Government Done to Our Universities?

Posted by M. C. on September 7, 2022

by David Brady

The real spike in prices was primarily due to government guaranteed student loans. The government’s Federal Family Education Loan program guaranteed that if a loan from a private lender or Sallie Mae defaulted the government would take over the loan and pay the loss. This guarantee ended in 2010, but the consequences were in these lenders giving out more student loans than they ordinarily would.

The natural incentive is for the government to send money to those most likely to justify the actions of the government. Harvard University is the recipient of over $1.9 billion in grants from the National Institute of Health and one is for pushing ideas of “Transforming Transgender Care.” 

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/what-has-government-done-to-our-universities/

Joe Biden has stoked more fire into the debate over higher education. The president unveiled a plan to forgive $10,000 of student debt for those making $125,000 a year or less, or $20,000 if that borrower was a recipient of a Pell Grant. While one can argue about the economic or moral implications of the decision, the question that many seem to have missed is: why is a college education so expensive? Is it even worth it? What has the government done to our higher education system?

In the United States, there is over $1.75 trillion in student loan debt with an average of $28,950 plus interest for each borrower. What made college so expensive? That is a gross combination of issues, including how students pay for their college education.

2013 12 06 collegecosts thumb
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Buffer

Traditionally a college education was paid for either by a family saving up for a child to seek a higher education, or the young adult working almost full time alongside their education to pay it off. That is no longer the case amongst Americans. Rather than alternatives such as entrepreneurship, apprenticeship, or simply requiring a GED or high school diploma, almost half the jobs in the United States now demand some form of college education according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The cultural demand for a college education certainly could have driven up costs, but almost 570% almost seems impossible.

The real spike in prices was primarily due to government guaranteed student loans. The government’s Federal Family Education Loan program guaranteed that if a loan from a private lender or Sallie Mae defaulted the government would take over the loan and pay the loss. This guarantee ended in 2010, but the consequences were in these lenders giving out more student loans than they ordinarily would. Borrowers who would be unable to get a loan for the career they seek out were less of a risk to these lenders, and those banks were willing to give out more loans to students. The subsequent result was rising prices. If loans are being given out so easily, then colleges can afford to raise prices as students will simply take out more loans.

Title II of the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009 (Subtitles A & B) demolished the Federal Family Education Loan Program and directed the Department of Education to issue loans directly to students. This misuse of loans has resulted in much the same issues and costs described above. Students choose majors that provide no real skills for actual jobs and waste years of their young lives while progressive ideology spreads.

Progressive ideology runs rampant in universities for to two reasons: heavy government investment and the embrace of ESG in their financiers. Between student aid, grants, and contracts the United States government has sent $149 billion to colleges and universities. The natural incentive is for the government to send money to those most likely to justify the actions of the government. Harvard University is the recipient of over $1.9 billion in grants from the National Institute of Health and one is for pushing ideas of “Transforming Transgender Care.” Harvard benefits from:

“…Tax privileges conferred by the federal government have helped institutions like Harvard build extraordinarily large endowments. So-called private colleges have willingly forfeited some of their independence to federal bureaucrats in order to keep the federal bounty coming.”

All the while, Harvard continues to promote progressive philosophy like Critical Race Theory that can be found explicitly in their law program and their website.

Universities and their endowment funds have even gone so far as to embrace ESG as part of their priorities. ESG—short for environmental, social, and governance—is a credit rating by large investment firms for businesses and companies based upon those three factors. ESG has become weaponized by progressives against companies that appear disfavorable to them. For example, Tesla, an electric car company, remains in the 58th Percentile, while Exxon, an oil company, is in the 38th. Clearly these have little to do with actual environmentalism and far more with what upsets the progressive dogma and ideology. Such schools as the University of California, Georgetown, Harvard, and Oxford have embraced ESG, and along with it the “social” governance scores that push a progressive agenda. ESG is used by the largest corporate firms in the world such as BlackRock, which manages around $10 trillion. Their CEO Larry Funk has intimate connections with the Federal Reserve Chairman.

A combination of government investment in loans as well as grants by progressive dogma has resulted in not only a more expensive higher education but also a progressive indoctrination camp. Students leave college with largely useless degrees, a thorough brainwashing, and tens of thousands in debt.

Government and ESG has our universities.

About David Brady

David Brady is an At-Large and Social Media Contributor for the Libertarian Party of Minnesota and host of The Road to Providence Podcast on YouTube & Odysee. Follow him on Twitter @realDavidBJr.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Out of Control Government and Isaiah’s Job

Posted by M. C. on September 3, 2022

by Richard M. Ebeling

The reader may have noticed that I have given greater emphasis to levels of government spending than to amounts taxed or borrowed, per se. The reason being that it is government spending that represents the amount of private production siphoned off and out of the direct hands of the private producers and income earners of the society. This is how much the government plunders from the people of the country, regardless of whether the production and income that is transferred into the hands of those in political power has been done by taxation or borrowing.

It is very difficult to be a classical liberal or libertarian and not experience bouts of disappointment, frustration, and outright pessimism. The world around us seems to be going to hell in a handbasket. Government continues to grow and, apparently, is out of control.The greater the political power by government in the society, the more social power is diminished; that is, individual freedom is reduced and “the state” grows with its legitimized use of force over people’s lives.
[Click to Tweet]

For example, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released its semiannual Budget and Economic Outlook, 2022-2032 in late May 2022. The CBO expects that when the federal government’s current fiscal year ends on September 30, 2022, Uncle Sam will have spent $5.874 trillion. Tax revenues from all sources will be $4.890 trillion, leaving a budget deficit for the fiscal year of $1.036 trillion. Total national debt held by the public will come in at $24.173 trillion, while the gross national debt (which includes Treasury securities held by other government agencies) will be more than $30.621 trillion.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is expected to equal $24.694 trillion in 2022. So, this means that federal spending will 23.8 percent of GDP, while taxes will absorb 19.6 percent of GDP. The more than $1 trillion deficit will amount to 4.2 percent of GDP.

Bigger government in the years ahead 

Things do not get better looking over the coming decade, the CBO anticipates. In 2032, federal expenditures are expected to total $8.469 trillion, for a 51.8 percent increase over 2022. Federal taxes are projected to amount to $6.662 trillion in 2032, or a 36.2 percent increase over a decade earlier. The budget deficit is predicted to be $2.252 trillion in 2032, representing a 217 percent increase over the deficit in 2022. Gross Domestic Product will be $36.680 in 2032, says the CBO, and will be 48.5 percent larger than in 2022.

The government’s share of the GDP pie, in other words, will be increasing noticeably faster than the national economy is projected to grow over the next 10 years. Also, the share of government borrowing to simply pay the interest on the existing accumulated national debt will be increasing as well. In fiscal 2022, the federal government will borrow $1.036 trillion, as we saw. Out of this, nearly $400 billion will be used to pay interest owed on the national debt, or about 39 percent of total borrowing. In 2032, when the deficit is expected to be $2.253 trillion, $1.193 trillion will be used just to pay interest on the, then, accumulated national debt, or 52 percent of all government borrowing in that year. So more than half of all the money the federal government will have to borrow 10 years from now will be used just to stay current on the interest payments due from all the earlier decades of annual deficit spending.

Of course, all of this has to be taken with a grain of salt. Ten years ago, the CBO did not anticipate the great economic contraction of 2020 caused by the federal and state government’s draconian response to the coronavirus crisis, that commanded the shutdown and lockdown of much of the U.S. economy for several months. And just two or three years ago, the CBO was still projecting that price inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price Index, would still be rising at a “modest” 2 percent a year in 2022.

Entitlement programs are heading for disaster

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

How the Government Exacerbates Cancer

Posted by M. C. on August 6, 2022

by Walter E. Block

We must give the Devil his due. But the state insists upon its own agenda; it “cancels” researchers who adopt alternative plans; it threatens the medical licenses of physicians who pursue and recommend non-centrally planned medications, as in the case of COVID-19. It engages in affirmative action in both the private and so-called public sector which results in people less qualified occupying their laboratories in the first place.

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/how-the-government-exacerbates-cancer/

This essay is dedicated to the memory of Witold Kwaśnicki, a Polish libertarian who recently passed away at the tender age of seventy. He died from pancreatic cancer. He expired not in a matter of years after diagnosis, nor even months. Rather, he succumbed in a matter of mere weeks. What a horrible disease that is.

I am now 80 years old. I full well realize that no one gets out of this alive; that my life expectancy is not what it was ten, twenty or thirty years ago. How do I come to grips with the prospects of my not too distant demise? How do keep my chin up?

I do so in two ways. First, I resolve to make each and every day, hour, minute (even second if I can) count. I try to enjoy myself all the livelong day (to a great degree through writing and speaking out in behalf of liberty). Yes, of course, everyone has chores. No life is a full bowl of cherries. But I do my best to appreciate whatever time I have left as much as possible. I have been doing this for decades.

The second way I try to achieve happiness in the face of inevitable death is try to understand its cause, such as from cancer. Why, then, do we now suffer from this dread disease? Surely, in 500 years this ailment will go the way of smallpox, polio, tetanus, hepatitis B, hepatitis A, rubella, hib, measles, whooping cough (pertussis), pneumococcal disease, rotavirus, mumps, chickenpox, diphtheria and others —which we have either eradicated entirely, or pretty much wrestled to the ground, so that they no longer constitute death sentences. Why are we still beset by cancer, and other such killers?

The only answer that satisfies me is that this is the fault of the government.

How so? First, they take some 50% of the goods and services we all produce. This impoverishes us. We are now half as wealthy as we would be without this malevolent institution seizing our hard-earned property. Murray Rothbard, Mr. Libertarian, maintains that a more accurate GDP calculation would subtract the government’s “contribution,” not add it to what emanates from the private sector. But matters are even worse.1

For what do the statists do with “their” share of our earnings? With their regulations, prohibitions, and compulsions they further reduce our economic power. As a rough estimate, we are now down to 33% of where we would otherwise be, without this pernicious institutional arrangement. Let us consider but one regulation that directly impinges on the search for medical cures. When and if a breakthrough occurs, government will limit profits; it will quell “profiteering” and price “gouging.” It will insist upon lowered drug prices. It is due to this threat that firms in this industry will have less of an incentive to do the necessary research than would otherwise be the case.

What does this have to do with death by cancer, heart attacks, kidney disease and other such debilitations? According to that old adage, “Wealthier is healthier,” the richer we are, other things equal, the more able we will be to rid ourselves of these medical scourges.

We must of course acknowledge that government does spend money not only on direct attempts to find cures for these horrid diseases, but also indirectly, through pure research. We must give the Devil his due. But the state insists upon its own agenda; it “cancels” researchers who adopt alternative plans; it threatens the medical licenses of physicians who pursue and recommend non-centrally planned medications, as in the case of COVID-19. It engages in affirmative action in both the private and so-called public sector which results in people less qualified occupying their laboratories in the first place.

We cannot claim that if the populace were three times as well-to-do as it is at present—in the absence of intrusive government—that all of this would go into basic or medical research. But more of it likely would. And we would be closer to quelling these diseases that plague mankind.

If government would get off the neck of the economy, we cannot be sure that under free enterprise cancer would be overcome. Perhaps, instead, it might be heart disease, strokes, lung disease, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, tuberculosis, cirrhosis.

A tried and true aphorism is that “To know, is to forgive.” I turn this around just a little bit. What keeps me going is, instead, “To know, is to obviate the pain that comes when we contemplate needless, premature deaths from tragedies such as pancreatic cancer.” Understanding the real cause of such abominations—government—makes it seem less of a threat, less terrible.

About Walter E. Block

Dr. Walter Block is the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair in Economics at Loyola University and a senior fellow at the Mises Institute.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Government “Stimulus” Schemes Fail Because Demand Does Not Create Supply

Posted by M. C. on July 28, 2022

Hence, supply drives demand, not the other way around. Increases in government spending result in the diversion of savings from the wealth-generating private sector to the government, thereby undermining the wealth generating process. Likewise, monetary pumping sets in motion the wealth diversion from wealth generators toward the holders of pumped money.

https://mises.org/wire/government-stimulus-schemes-fail-because-demand-does-not-create-supply

Frank Shostak

By popular thinking, the key driver of economic growth is the increase in total demand for goods and services. It is also held that overall output increases by a multiple of the increase in expenditure by government, consumers and businesses.

It is not surprising, then, that most commentators believe that through fiscal and monetary stimulus, government can prevent the US economy falling into a recession. For instance, increasing government spending and central bank monetary pumping will strengthen the production of goods and services.

It follows then that by means of increases in government spending and central bank monetary pumping the authorities can grow the economy. This means that demand creates supply. However, is it the case?

Why Does Supply Precede Demand?

In the free market economy, wealth generators do not produce everything for their own consumption. Part of their production is used to exchange for the produce of other producers. Hence, production precedes consumption, with something exchanged for something else. This also means that an increase in the production of goods and services sets in motion an increase in the demand for goods and services.

According to David Ricardo:

No man produces but with a view to consume or sell, and he never sells but with an intention to purchase some other commodity, which may be immediately useful to him, or which may contribute to future production. By producing, then, he necessarily becomes either the consumer of his own goods, or the purchaser and consumer of the goods of some other person.

Note that one’s demand is constrained by one’s ability to produce goods, and the more goods that an individual can produce the more goods he can demand. If a population of five individuals produces ten potatoes and five tomatoes—this is all that they can demand and consume. The only way to raise the ability to consume more is to raise their ability to produce more.

On this James Mill wrote:

When goods are carried to market what is wanted is somebody to buy. But to buy, one must have the wherewithal to pay. It is obviously therefore the collective means of payment which exist in the whole nation constitute the entire market of the nation. But wherein consist the collective means of payment of the whole nation? Do they not consist in its annual produce, in the annual revenue of the general mass of inhabitants? But if a nation’s power of purchasing is exactly measured by its annual produce, as it undoubtedly is; the more you increase the annual produce, the more by that very act you extend the national market, the power of purchasing and the actual purchases of the nation…. Thus it appears that the demand of a nation is always equal to the produce of a nation. This indeed must be so; for what is the demand of a nation? The demand of a nation is exactly its power of purchasing. But what is its power of purchasing? The extent undoubtedly of its annual produce. The extent of its demand therefore and the extent of its supply are always exactly commensurate.

Expanding Pool of Savings Is the Key to Economic Growth

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Society Is a Blessing, but Government Is Evil

Posted by M. C. on July 26, 2022

Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. The trade of governing has always been monopolized by the most ignorant and the most rascally individuals of mankind.

https://mises.org/library/society-blessing-government-evil

Thomas Paine

A great part of that order which reigns among mankind is not the effect of government. It had its origin in the principles of society, and the natural constitution of man. It existed prior to government, and would exist if the formality of government was abolished. The mutual dependence and reciprocal interest which man has in man and all the parts of a civilized community upon each other create that great chain of connection which holds it together.

The landholder, the farmer, the manufacturer, the merchant, the tradesman, and every occupation prospers by the aid which each receives from the other, and from the whole. Common interest regulates their concerns, and forms their laws; and the laws which common usage ordains, have a greater influence than the laws of government. In fine, society performs for itself almost everything that is ascribed to government.

To understand the nature and quantity of government proper for man it is necessary to attend to his character. As nature created him for social life, she fitted him for the station she intended. In all cases she made his natural wants greater than his individual powers. No one man is capable, without the aid of society, of supplying his own wants; and those wants acting upon every individual impel the whole of them into society, as naturally as gravitation acts to a center.

But she has gone further. She has not only forced man into society by a diversity of wants, which the reciprocal aid of social affections, which, though not necessary to his existence, are essential to his happiness. There is no period in life when this love for society ceases to act. It begins and ends with our being.

If we examine, with attention, into the composition and constitution of man, the diversity of talents in different men for reciprocally accommodating the wants of each other, his propensity to society, and consequently to preserve the advantages resulting from it, we shall easily discover that a great part of what is called government is mere imposition.

Government is no further necessary than to supply the few cases to which society and civilization are not conveniently competent; and instances are not wanting to show that everything which government can usefully add thereto, has been performed by the common consent of society, without government.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Why Keep a Government That Fails Us?

Posted by M. C. on July 21, 2022

By Andrew P. Napolitano

In a free country, the government needs permission to do everything. In America today, we all need the government’s permission to do anything, even to defend ourselves. Ayn Rand called this an inversion. Ludwig von Mises famously described government as the negation of liberty, and Murray Rothbard called it the monopoly of force in a given geographic area with no presumption of moral propriety.

The failure of law enforcement at all levels — local, state and federal — to protect 19 children who were slaughtered by a madman in Uvalde, Texas, in May has raised serious questions about the role of police in our once-free society. Admittedly, the Uvalde case was extreme, as 376 armed police officers did little or nothing to stop the slaughter perpetrated by one madman. There was no command and control; the decisions made on the scene were chaotic and farcical; and the essence of what law enforcement did was to shield itself from harm, rather than stop the harm.

The killer in Uvalde began his rampage by shooting randomly at the school building from a parking lot across the street as he walked toward the school. He apparently entered through a door that officials presumed was locked. It wasn’t. The police themselves waited 44 minutes to obtain a key to this unlocked door, which none of them even tried to open. The commanding officer at the scene was not in electronic communication with his team, his dispatcher or the 24 other police agencies present.

The Texas Legislature condemned the police response; and now heartbroken parents are left without a remedy. This is so because the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the government and its agents have no duty to interfere with crimes that are in progress and no general duty to protect innocents. Under this line of cases, collectively called the DeShaney doctrine, the police can physically observe a bank robbery, a rape or a murder, and lawfully do nothing.

Joshua DeShaney was a 4-year-old boy who had been repeatedly abused and irreparably brain damaged by his own father whose behavior was well-known to the local government. When the mother sued the government for failure to protect Joshua, the Supreme Court ruled that the government enjoys the common law privilege of allocating its resources with impunity. Stated differently, the government decides whom it will protect and whom it will let be. Not surprisingly, the DeShaney doctrine compels the government only to protect itself and those it has confined.

There is nothing in the Constitution that compels the DeShaney doctrine. It is just big government protecting itself. There are many selfless police throughout the country who would courageously interfere to stop violent crime because they have the ability to stop it and because it is always right to save innocent human life.

In Texas, where it is lawful for anyone over 18 to purchase and openly carry a handgun, it is unlawful to carry one in a school. Local school officials can request exemptions from this law from state officials, and those exemptions have been given to all 137 Texas school districts that requested them. Of course, in none of the districts where teachers and staff are armed have there been any killings.

Just this week, in Greenwood, Indiana, before the police arrived, a 22-year-old civilian shot and killed a shooter who had begun a killing rampage in a shopping mall. Had Indiana not recognized the right to carry a firearm, we might have had another Uvalde or Buffalo, New York, slaughter on our hands.

The problem here is too much government, a Progressive goal going back to the beginnings of the Nanny State 125 years ago, when cities and towns started government monopolies on law enforcement and schools, and taxed everyone in their jurisdictions for the so-called services these entities provided, whether the taxpayer received the services or not. Unfortunately, it takes a tragedy like Uvalde before folks recognize that America is no longer a free country.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

If Government Can Take from One Group, It Can and Will Take from Everyone

Posted by M. C. on July 19, 2022

If a thief steals your money, you have every right to complain, and he’ll go to prison. But if the state does the same thing, then only a sociopath would complain, because the state is providing you and your neighbors with all kinds of “free” stuff. Only a self-responsible person and the enlightened minority understand that government can only give what it has stolen before. Most of the citizens still believe in the nanny-state myth and in free lunches.

https://mises.org/wire/if-government-can-take-one-group-it-can-and-will-take-everyone

Claudio Grass

It wouldn’t be an exaggeration to argue that private property rights, as understood by classic liberal thinkers, by those who embrace Austrian economic theory, and by all members of an enlightened society, are not only the cornerstone, but also the last defense of human civilization and the Western way of life in particular. Nothing stands a chance without this premise. No prosperity can ever come about or even be maintained, none of the civil liberties and human freedoms we so often take for granted these days, no innovation in business, technology or science.

The respect of the individual’s property is at the heart of most of our freedoms, and when the state or any other central authority crosses this big red line, it causes a massive domino effect. This erosion of liberty might be slow, but it certainly is steady, and most citizens only realize the risks they’re facing only when it’s too late to do anything about it.

A Relentless Campaign

States’ incursion into their citizens’ lives, businesses, savings, and fundamental human liberties, like free speech, is certainly nothing new. In fact, it is a concerted campaign that has been going on arguably since the first form of centralized government emerged. Even without the (rather safe) assumption that megalomania and a pathological thirst for power and control over other people were the core motivation behind this, there have always been those among us that think they what’s best for others and are only too eager to “help” and “save” them. However, this push toward centralization has seen a significant acceleration over the past couple of decades.

After mostly unelected European Union bureaucrats and technocrats consolidated power in Europe and state powers were eroded in favor of federal authorities and countless agencies in the United States, the needle really moved, and although nothing happened from one day to the next, this shift certainly set the West on the path of more and more centralization. Toxic ideologies and misanthropic worldviews, like those promoted by the Frankfurt school and their long march through the institutions, were of considerable help along the way.

Window-dressing state control and massive wealth redistribution policies as “welfare” and promoting them as citizens’ “duty” to “give back” aided in disguising what was really taking place. Property rights became conditional.

If a thief steals your money, you have every right to complain, and he’ll go to prison. But if the state does the same thing, then only a sociopath would complain, because the state is providing you and your neighbors with all kinds of “free” stuff. Only a self-responsible person and the enlightened minority understand that government can only give what it has stolen before. Most of the citizens still believe in the nanny-state myth and in free lunches.

The concept of “free” and of “public goods” in particular appears to have stuck more than anything else. Especially in Europe and in much of the Commonwealth, there is to this day not only a clear understanding, but an expectation in the minds of most citizens that things like education and healthcare are and must always be “free.” Hardly anyone stops and questions what this means, and how services that obviously cost incredible amounts of money can be free.

Every time there’s an election around the corner, the incumbent governments start throwing all kinds of subsidies and extra welfare benefits from helicopters. The recipients of these checks, even when they are taxpayers themselves, still perceive these payments as government assistance, as though their prime minister or president and all their cabinet members had simply reached into their own pockets given gifts, out of the kindness of their hearts.

Of course, once wealth redistribution became established as the norm, it also became much easier to push a much more aggressive agenda. Once again, with the aforementioned ideological and political “packaging,” a fierce hatred started to take root, dividing our societies in extremely dangerous ways, but also really expediting the concentration of power in the hands of the few. We have seen a huge escalation of this in the last twenty-five years.

The “rich,” the “1 percent,” the “privileged” and the “greedy capitalists” are all terms that attempted to describe some largely mythical group of people that had their boots on the throats of everybody else. At first, it was just money that made some people instantly evil and thereby justified using state force to dispossess them. However, this soon expanded to success in general. Just being better than one’s peers, working harder, cultivating a particular talent, it all became reason enough for anyone to become a member of that hated group.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Reform of Current Government

Posted by M. C. on June 28, 2022

is like removing half a cancer and hoping it will not grow back

https://www.panarchy.org/rozeff/panarchist.html

Why I Am a Panarchist

(2009)

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »