fiscal insanity...

[moralist]

(CNSNews.com) - In the six months that have passed since then-retiring House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell cut a budget deal with President Barack Obama that suspended the legal limit on the federal debt until March 15, 2017...

...the federal debt has increased by more than $1 trillion.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/6-months-budget-deal-debt-more-1-trillion

[Backlighting]

You ain't seen nothing yet...if Hillary becomes POTUS.  ---J

[moralist]

I see this fiscal insanity driven from the bottom up and not the top down. 

You have a weak dependent unproductive population that expects to be given "free" benefits and services... so the government does it's best to answer their selfish childish demands... because peoples NEED of government is what enables government to CONTROL them.

 

If you don't need the government... it can't control you.

 

Greg

[Guyau]

.

 

Promises and Price Tags

 

[BaalChatzaf]

On 5/4/2016 at 11:36 AM, moralist said:

I see this fiscal insanity driven from the bottom up and not the top down. 

You have a weak dependent unproductive population that expects to be given "free" benefits and services... so the government does it's best to answer their selfish childish demands... because peoples NEED of government is what enables government to CONTROL them.

 

If you don't need the government... it can't control you.

 

Greg

Try driving on the public highways without a license or registration number.  Let us know how far you get before you see red and blue lights flashing behind while you drive. 

[moralist]

1 hour ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Try driving on the public highways without a license or registration number.  Let us know how far you get before you see red and blue lights flashing behind while you drive. 

You're definitely the end product excreted by your government education system, Bob. That's why you try to defend the system you feed off of by taking things to absurd absolutes. I'm talking about government transfer of wealth benefits programs like education, insurance, healthcare, food, housing, jobs, and loans... not about basic infrastructure like roads.

America has become a nation of leeches.

Greg

[BaalChatzaf]

3 hours ago, moralist said:

You're definitely the end product excreted by your government education system, Bob. That's why you try to defend the system you feed off of by taking things to absurd absolutes. I'm talking about government transfer of wealth benefits programs like education, insurance, healthcare, food, housing, jobs, and loans... not about basic infrastructure like roads.

America has become a nation of leeches.

Greg

Asshole.  I am stating a fact. If you drive around without the right documents you will be fined or arrested.  You need the government to get the documents necessary to drive around in peace.   I accept the fact that the government is in charge.  I don't like it, but I am outgunned.  Do you think you can beat a well armed government?  if so,  how?

[turkeyfoot]

12 hours ago, Guyau said:

.

 

Promises and Price Tags

 

I enjoyed the article. 

[Brant Gaede]

3 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Asshole.  I am stating a fact. If you drive around without the right documents you will be fined or arrested.  You need the government to get the documents necessary to drive around in peace.   I accept the fact that the government is in charge.  I don't like it, but I am outgunned.  Do you think you can beat a well armed government?  if so,  how?

Peace. You'll find it in a cemetery.

An American can beat the government in today's America. Those documents are trivial. That you brought them up isn't.

--Brant

[Brant Gaede]

8 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Try driving on the public highways without a license or registration number.  Let us know how far you get before you see red and blue lights flashing behind while you drive. 

I know someone who did 5000 miles without getting caught. One one way and one round trip.

--Brant

don't drive at night if you want to try this; the cop/driver ratio is much more favorable to the cop

[BaalChatzaf]

52 minutes ago, Brant Gaede said:

I know someone who did 5000 miles without getting caught. One one way and one round trip.

--Brant

don't drive at night if you want to try this; the cop/driver ratio is much more favorable to the cop

and then he drove one more mile.  What happened?

[Brant Gaede]

9 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

and then he drove one more mile.  What happened?

Dad took the T-Bird away.

--not me

 

[moralist]

8 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Asshole.  I am stating a fact. If you drive around without the right documents you will be fined or arrested.

Your government education has made you dumb as a rock, Bob. It's either that or being dumb as a rock qualified you to be educated by your government.

While I'm talking about the American value of being free of the need for your liberal government transfer of wealth programs... you're talking about needing a stupid driver's license!

That's a total disconnect between what I said and what you said in response to what I said.

 

Greg

[Jonathan]

Man, it's so entertaining watching Apey not getting it.

J

[BaalChatzaf]

15 hours ago, moralist said:

Your government education has made you dumb as a rock, Bob. It's either that or being dumb as a rock qualified you to be educated by your government.

While I'm talking about the American value of being free of the need for your liberal government transfer of wealth programs... you're talking about needing a stupid driver's license!

That's a total disconnect between what I said and what you said in response to what I said.

 

Greg

As usual I took what you said literally.  Literally I am right. And literally you are  not terribly bright.  You say false things and expect people to regard them as true.  I stick to facts.  What do you stick to?  Do you think you can drive legally without a government?  And face it,  the government controls the roads.

[SteveWolfer]

On ‎5‎/‎4‎/‎2016 at 8:36 AM, moralist said:

If you don't need the government... it can't control you.

Actually, it can control you whether you 'need the government' or not - it has that capacity.  It regulates nearly every aspect of our lives.  To avoid today's government would require an almost full time job researching how to not run afoul of it and it would require circumscribing your life very severely to, in effect, stay hidden.  Who's for living far out in woods, off the grid, fearing the arrival of some authority to tell you what you are doing that is illegal?

 

What people "need" from government is the protection of their individual rights.  Beyond that a free market would take care of any needs.  BUT, we don't have a very free market, so people end up using things like government-provided roads, schools, etc. 

 

It isn't this 'need' that is satisfied by something government does that is the root problem.  These government supplied 'needs' grow in proportion to the size of government  because that very growth preempted the free market from fulfilling the needs.  The needs aren't the root problem.  The root problem is ignorance on the part of a significant portion of the population as to what a proper government should be and what individual rights are.  First comes ignorance, then comes big government, then comes the 'needs.'  If you don't understand that the horse goes in front of the cart, you'll not get them moving.

 

A 'weak dependent unproductive population' is the product of large government and of the political ignorance that let the government grow so large.  Yes, the fiscal insanity is driven, ultimately, from the bottom up, but not like you say.  It is that ignorance at the bottom that put those at the top in place and allowed them to do what they've done. 

 

Ideas (and ignorance of the right ideas) come first.  Then come the actions and these have seen the unrelenting, progressive's growth of government.... creating and encouraging dependence as they go.  This isn't some quasi-benevolent scheme where a group of people at the top said, "Wow, look at all these people who expect free stuff.  Let's immediately grow ourselves a giant government and provide them."

 

You got the "childish" part right.  Political ignorance always finds itself stuck in some sort of collectivist paradigm where there will be elites (and/or thugs) to control the subjects/children.  It isn't just a certain kind of philosophy leading to a certain kind of politics, but also leading to matching psychological patterns.

[BaalChatzaf]

2 hours ago, SteveWolfer said:

Actually, it can control you whether you 'need the government' or not - it has that capacity.  It regulates nearly every aspect of our lives.  To avoid today's government would require an almost full time job researching how to not run afoul of it and it would require circumscribing your life very severely to, in effect, stay hidden.  Who's for living far out in woods, off the grid, fearing the arrival of some authority to tell you what you are doing that is illegal?

 

What people "need" from government is the protection of their individual rights.  Beyond that a free market would take care of any needs.  BUT, we don't have a very free market, so people end up using things like government-provided roads, schools, etc. 

 

It isn't this 'need' that is satisfied by something government does that is the root problem.  These government supplied 'needs' grow in proportion to the size of government  because that very growth preempted the free market from fulfilling the needs.  The needs aren't the root problem.  The root problem is ignorance on the part of a significant portion of the population as to what a proper government should be and what individual rights are.  First comes ignorance, then comes big government, then comes the 'needs.'  If you don't understand that the horse goes in front of the cart, you'll not get them moving.

 

A 'weak dependent unproductive population' is the product of large government and of the political ignorance that let the government grow so large.  Yes, the fiscal insanity is driven, ultimately, from the bottom up, but not like you say.  It is that ignorance at the bottom that put those at the top in place and allowed them to do what they've done. 

 

Ideas (and ignorance of the right ideas) come first.  Then come the actions and these have seen the unrelenting, progressive's growth of government.... creating and encouraging dependence as they go.  This isn't some quasi-benevolent scheme where a group of people at the top said, "Wow, look at all these people who expect free stuff.  Let's immediately grow ourselves a giant government and provide them."

 

You got the "childish" part right.  Political ignorance always finds itself stuck in some sort of collectivist paradigm where there will be elites (and/or thugs) to control the subjects/children.  It isn't just a certain kind of philosophy leading to a certain kind of politics, but also leading to matching psychological patterns.

That sad truth is that the government now has the drop on us.  We poor suffering bastards are outgunned. 

[jts]

34 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

That sad truth is that the government now has the drop on us.  We poor suffering bastards are outgunned. 

I'm not sure about that. Maybe the grasshoppers are terrified shitless that the ants might figure out that they outnumber the grasshoppers a hundred to one.

 

[Brant Gaede]

3 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

That sad truth is that the government now has the drop on us.  We poor suffering bastards are outgunned. 

WTF!?

Please--go post on Objectivist Dying.

--Brant

no balls no freedom ("Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose"--but you're free, damnit, only you aren't; you gave up on it so finis: so all that crap about "Don't fuck with the Jews" excludes you? ["Tell me it ain't so, Joe"])

Please, Bob, go out with your guns blazing (bet you're good for 20 more years of that!)

[Jules Troy]

Holy shit!  Hi Steve!!

[moralist]

8 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

As usual I took what you said literally. 

Bob, a drivers license is not the same thing as being dependent on cashing government benefits checks.  But your liberal government taught you that it is to make you feel comfortable in your dependence.

Greg

[moralist]

4 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

That sad truth is that the government now has the drop on us.  We poor suffering bastards are outgunned. 

Poor baby.

 

Bob, you're the poor suffering bastard because your liberal government educated you to be one. It's your own damned fault you chose to become a bootlicking lackey.

Sanction of the victim.

 

Greg

[SteveWolfer]

Hi Jules :-)

----------

I do think they have us "outgunned" but what 'we' are lacking is the understanding of individual rights and a gut level feeling for individualism. 

The founding fathers understood the proper political principles and most people then had that gut level sense of individualism.  They were too close to the history of carving an existence out of a wilderness not too.  Then there was the push to move West (as a child I met people who homesteaded, tough old ranchers, a trapper, even a train robber, and shook hands with people who knew Tom Horn - that old west was just a  few generations ago when you grew up in Wyoming when I did.)  Most of the good and the bad rested upon an informal individualism.  Passing generations, a distance from the land, a massive increase in the safety net of national wealth, changes in culture and matching changes in our psychology have stripped away that sense of individualism because it wasn't formally locked down with enough people holding it explicitly.

The grasshoppers do know that they are outnumbered by the ants... And there is a reason that they get so passionate about gun control (and it ain't compassion - it's fear).  But those who are smart are frightened of the ants learning that they have rights and that the grasshoppers are supposed to work for them.  In the antebellum South it was illegal to teach slaves to read.  They are much slicker today in keeping the wage-slaves stupid - just make sure that the schools don't teach anything a progressive would find offensive.

 

[moralist]

7 hours ago, SteveWolfer said:

Actually, it can control you whether you 'need the government' or not - it has that capacity.  It regulates nearly every aspect of our lives. 

Of course you're speaking for yourself so I understand that holds true for you.

If a person chooses to drive on the right side of the road, it is not because of coercive force of law or that the government controls their life...

...but rather because it is in their own best interests to do so.

Greg

[SteveWolfer]

8 minutes ago, moralist said:

Of course you're speaking for yourself

No.  I was speaking of the nature of government.  All government, by their nature have only the capacity to prohibit (backed by threat of force), confiscate (backed by the threat of force) and the capacity to direct force (as with police or military actions).

This is an observation based upon the distinct difference between choice (free of the coercive effects of force or the threat of force) and force.  Choice and force, like oil and water.  But the line between them shouldn't be understood as so distinct that one couldn't choose to violate a law... thinking that way would be dropping context.  There are laws that should you "choose" to violate the law you will open yourself to that government force.  The government 'controls' society, as best as it can, for better or for worse, by laws which are backed by force. 

If anyone truly believed that government only controlled those who chose to be controlled, or that those being controlled believed that they were acting in their own best interests will find it hard to explain millions that governments have killed.  Or, another argument: If all control were within the individual, then the practical difference between a horrific tyranny and small government that respected individual rights would be nil.

A person can choose to violate a given law, but that puts them in the context of government force and that is where their future choices may be severely restricted (controlled).

p.s., I'll take this opportunity to shamelessly plug my latest book on Amazon.com since I'm able to explain this position with greater clarity in the book than I can with a post or two:  Wolfer's Primer on The Nature of Government