Watched one of my favorite movies on TNT last night; Gladiator. Gave me a great idea on how to solve the economic crisis we are in. I think the romans were on to something although they put the wrong people in the arena. We will learn a lesson from history and not repeat their mistake.
First let's build a big coliseum(create jobs, right?) and wire it so that what ever goes on in it can be transmitted all over the country. (pay per view?)
Then, WE THE PEOPLE, go get the people who created this mess and put em all in gladiator school for a week. That would include all the fed owners and employees, the I.R.S., all of congress except one lone representative from Texas, all of the white house and cabinet members and the treasury dept, including good old hank paulson, ceo's of goldman sachs, j.p. morgan, citi group and bank of america. I'm sure there are a few more we can add to the "games" also.
So let them practice for a week with, swords, spears, knives, maces, clubs, etc and put em in the arena. We could give them incentive to fight hard and put on a good show for us by stating that we will let the 100 survivors go free.
Let em fight it out and entertain us as payback for all the theft and harm they have perpetrated on us until there are 100 left.
Then we open up on them with machine guns right when they think they have won their freedom.
They won't be surprised. After all they never tell the truth so they shouldn't expect us to either.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Friday, October 23, 2009
Liberal or conservative?
Who cares. They are two peas in a pod. Both "camps" advocate the use of force to further their agenda.
Liberals say they are for the "little guy" and the "common man". They work for the common mans good and for social justice. They advocate using government funds to help the poor, the disadvantaged, the needy, the handicapped. They just want to right the wrongs brought about by birth and make everybody equal. At least that is the drivel they spew out to justify their theft.
And conservatives . . . what are they for? Well, less government, lower taxes, less government regulation and of course spreading democracy around the world by force. Pretty noble right?
Less regulation and lower taxes mean what? Still in favor of taxes and regulation, right? And how are those taxes collected and how are those regulations enforced? From the barrel of a gun, right? What is so conservative about that? Rob me to give to somebody else or to buy tanks, missiles, aircraft carriers and nuclear weapons. How does that make me free? I was still robbed at gunpoint and threatened with death if I didn't comply.
Anybody who supports theft by government and the initiation of force by government regardless of the label they choose to wear are brigands, robbers, thieves and murderers. Liberal, conservative, democrat, republican or whatever, all like government and the theft it advocates and the force it initiates.
Force is legitimate and moral only in self defense.
There is a better way and it is time people woke up. Anarcho-capitalism has much better solutions to dealing with life's many needs and varying situations without resorting to the use of force. Free market solutions can solve any problem or provide any service without resorting to theft and force.
We don't need corrupt bullying police, unfair and unjust courts, lying, self-serving scumbag politicians and standing armies always needing a conflict to justify their existence and bloated budgets to provide for our needs.
Ebay operates just fine without any of those. Think about it. Every good or service you need, want or require can be provided by the private sector without the need for government to corrupt the process and raise the cost of everything.
Liberals say they are for the "little guy" and the "common man". They work for the common mans good and for social justice. They advocate using government funds to help the poor, the disadvantaged, the needy, the handicapped. They just want to right the wrongs brought about by birth and make everybody equal. At least that is the drivel they spew out to justify their theft.
And conservatives . . . what are they for? Well, less government, lower taxes, less government regulation and of course spreading democracy around the world by force. Pretty noble right?
Less regulation and lower taxes mean what? Still in favor of taxes and regulation, right? And how are those taxes collected and how are those regulations enforced? From the barrel of a gun, right? What is so conservative about that? Rob me to give to somebody else or to buy tanks, missiles, aircraft carriers and nuclear weapons. How does that make me free? I was still robbed at gunpoint and threatened with death if I didn't comply.
Anybody who supports theft by government and the initiation of force by government regardless of the label they choose to wear are brigands, robbers, thieves and murderers. Liberal, conservative, democrat, republican or whatever, all like government and the theft it advocates and the force it initiates.
Force is legitimate and moral only in self defense.
There is a better way and it is time people woke up. Anarcho-capitalism has much better solutions to dealing with life's many needs and varying situations without resorting to the use of force. Free market solutions can solve any problem or provide any service without resorting to theft and force.
We don't need corrupt bullying police, unfair and unjust courts, lying, self-serving scumbag politicians and standing armies always needing a conflict to justify their existence and bloated budgets to provide for our needs.
Ebay operates just fine without any of those. Think about it. Every good or service you need, want or require can be provided by the private sector without the need for government to corrupt the process and raise the cost of everything.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Auto sales crash
Adjusted September Sales vs. Estimates
- GM sales fell 47 percent compared to the 44 percent decline projected by analysts.
- Ford sales fell 8.9 percent compared to the 5 percent decline projected by analysts.
- Chrysler sales fell 8.9 percent, matching the average analyst estimates.
- Nissan sales fell 11 percent compared to the 7.1 percent decline projected by analysts.
- Honda sales fell 23 percent, compared to the 13 percent decline projected by analysts.
- Toyota sales fell 16 percent compared to the 13 percent decline projected by analysts.
- Hyundai bucked the industry slide with a 27 percent increase.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Time to kill the monster.
I was born in 1964 when federal governments expenditures were about $118 billion dollars. At that time the federal debt was about 316 billion dollars. The population of the country was about 192 million. Today(9/29/09) we have a population of 304 million or an increase of roughly 50%. So what is our budget and our debt?
Our debt is over 12 trillion, not counting the huge liabilities of social security and medicare/medicaid(over 50 trillion). Our budget is now over 3.6 trillion. So let's do some math:
1964 budget was roughly $614 per American and the debt was about $1654 per American.
2009 budget is roughly $11,842 per American and the debt is about $39,473 per American. (2016 update- 2015 budget was 3.8 trillion and national debt is 19.2 trillion!)
That is one heck of an increase. A 50% rise in the population has led to over a 1900% increase in the budget and an increase in the debt of almost 2400%.
Now who has been in power over those 45 years? Only two parties- the rethuglicans and the demorats. Both have controlled the entire government during that period and the results of their control are clear. Neither party has done anything to limit the scope and size of government. The budget has skyrocketed on a percentage basis as has the debt and the deficit. Clearly any talk of reducing government has been a complete and total lie. Instead, both gangs have steadily, methodically and consistently grown government regardless of all their rhetoric.
I wonder how many Americans thought government was to small and that they were under-taxed in 1964?
Voting has not made any difference in containing the beast or reducing its appetite. Only way to kill this two-headed beast is to stop voting for it and to starve it by cutting off it's main source of funding: taxation, the fed and the treasury. END the fed.
Our debt is over 12 trillion, not counting the huge liabilities of social security and medicare/medicaid(over 50 trillion). Our budget is now over 3.6 trillion. So let's do some math:
1964 budget was roughly $614 per American and the debt was about $1654 per American.
2009 budget is roughly $11,842 per American and the debt is about $39,473 per American. (2016 update- 2015 budget was 3.8 trillion and national debt is 19.2 trillion!)
That is one heck of an increase. A 50% rise in the population has led to over a 1900% increase in the budget and an increase in the debt of almost 2400%.
Now who has been in power over those 45 years? Only two parties- the rethuglicans and the demorats. Both have controlled the entire government during that period and the results of their control are clear. Neither party has done anything to limit the scope and size of government. The budget has skyrocketed on a percentage basis as has the debt and the deficit. Clearly any talk of reducing government has been a complete and total lie. Instead, both gangs have steadily, methodically and consistently grown government regardless of all their rhetoric.
I wonder how many Americans thought government was to small and that they were under-taxed in 1964?
Voting has not made any difference in containing the beast or reducing its appetite. Only way to kill this two-headed beast is to stop voting for it and to starve it by cutting off it's main source of funding: taxation, the fed and the treasury. END the fed.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
IRA seizure?
What is the risk of the federal gov't seizing our IRA's? I have thought a lot about this and think the risk is there but not sure how high it is. First of all, is there any talk of doing this by the thugs in charge? Yes. Argentina did it.
Really at this point should we put anything past the thugs who think they own us and exist to serve them and who rob us every day of our property?
So how would they do it?
Probably just take whatever the balance is on the day of seizure and give out equity in the social security ponzi scheme in return. Or maybe some newly issued gov't bonds which won't be able to be sold until a certain date. Or maybe nothing. Just say they had to bail out the system, it is our duty to sacrifice and it would be for our own good anyway and since we are to stupid to understand how complicated the issue is just take it and shut up.
I for one am taking this risk seriously and taking steps to hedge against it.
I trust no one in government and believe none of their lies. As a side issue how much food and water do you have on hand, just in case?
Really at this point should we put anything past the thugs who think they own us and exist to serve them and who rob us every day of our property?
So how would they do it?
Probably just take whatever the balance is on the day of seizure and give out equity in the social security ponzi scheme in return. Or maybe some newly issued gov't bonds which won't be able to be sold until a certain date. Or maybe nothing. Just say they had to bail out the system, it is our duty to sacrifice and it would be for our own good anyway and since we are to stupid to understand how complicated the issue is just take it and shut up.
I for one am taking this risk seriously and taking steps to hedge against it.
I trust no one in government and believe none of their lies. As a side issue how much food and water do you have on hand, just in case?
Friday, August 28, 2009
Do you support violence?
This is a legitimate question and one you should think about before answering it. Are you a moral person? Do you condone theft? Do you support the initiation of violence against others? Please read this: Force.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Health Care Simplified
The reason we have a health care "crisis" in this country is very simple. There are way to many players in a very simple transaction dramatically increasing the costs for all. The reason there are so many people involved in what should be a very simple transaction is government interference and a lack of personal responsibility.
Lets break this down into the basics.
I don't feel very well. I have had a pain in my abdominal area for several days and I am getting worried it is something serious. So I call up a doctor I choose and make an appointment. So far so good, right? No need for any government interference at all. So I get an appointment and am told the doctor will charge me $125 to examine me. I figure it is worth the $125 to find out what is wrong and if it is serious. I need some advice, the doctor offers his advice to me for $125 and I accept. We now have entered into a contractual agreement. We both are getting what we regard as fair value for the exchange of time for money.
The next day I get examined, a diagnosis is made and treatment prescribed.
I pay the doctor the $125 and follow his prescription and soon feel better.
Why would there need to be any other people involved in this transaction? Any other people involved would only serve to jack up the price I pay and reduce what the doctor earns. This is a private transaction between two individuals- nothing more. This is no different from him having a bicycle to sell that I want to buy. Or me selling him my advice on how to plant a garden.
That is all healthcare is. I don't have a right to the doctors services unless I agree to pay the price he wants to receive in exchange for it. And vice versa.
Just because I am sick or in pain, he is under no obligation to give me advice or treat me unless I pay his fee, or he chooses to treat me for free. I didn't pay for his education, his office, his tools, etc therefore I have no right to claim anything from him I cannot afford to pay his price for. That is it- end of story.
If you think healthcare is a right you are owed because for whatever ridiculous reason you have you are a thief. Thats right- a thief. And you believe in slavery. And ultimately murder. Think that is a stretch? Follow this:
If you think you have a right to something you didn't earn that must be taken from another you are a thief. Plain and simple. Doesn't matter what that something might be. Doesn't matter how life-sustaining that might be. If you didn't earn it or pay for it in some way, or be given it freely by its owner if you take it you are a thief.
If you think a doctor owes you his knowledge and services when you can't pay the price he offers them at you believe in slavery. You think that doctor is your slave and has to give you something for less than he values it at.
Now if you take this one step further and demand you get his labor for less than he wants to sell it for, you must employ force. Force ultimately leads to murder when the forced party rightfully resists.
Lets break this down into the basics.
I don't feel very well. I have had a pain in my abdominal area for several days and I am getting worried it is something serious. So I call up a doctor I choose and make an appointment. So far so good, right? No need for any government interference at all. So I get an appointment and am told the doctor will charge me $125 to examine me. I figure it is worth the $125 to find out what is wrong and if it is serious. I need some advice, the doctor offers his advice to me for $125 and I accept. We now have entered into a contractual agreement. We both are getting what we regard as fair value for the exchange of time for money.
The next day I get examined, a diagnosis is made and treatment prescribed.
I pay the doctor the $125 and follow his prescription and soon feel better.
Why would there need to be any other people involved in this transaction? Any other people involved would only serve to jack up the price I pay and reduce what the doctor earns. This is a private transaction between two individuals- nothing more. This is no different from him having a bicycle to sell that I want to buy. Or me selling him my advice on how to plant a garden.
That is all healthcare is. I don't have a right to the doctors services unless I agree to pay the price he wants to receive in exchange for it. And vice versa.
Just because I am sick or in pain, he is under no obligation to give me advice or treat me unless I pay his fee, or he chooses to treat me for free. I didn't pay for his education, his office, his tools, etc therefore I have no right to claim anything from him I cannot afford to pay his price for. That is it- end of story.
If you think healthcare is a right you are owed because for whatever ridiculous reason you have you are a thief. Thats right- a thief. And you believe in slavery. And ultimately murder. Think that is a stretch? Follow this:
If you think you have a right to something you didn't earn that must be taken from another you are a thief. Plain and simple. Doesn't matter what that something might be. Doesn't matter how life-sustaining that might be. If you didn't earn it or pay for it in some way, or be given it freely by its owner if you take it you are a thief.
If you think a doctor owes you his knowledge and services when you can't pay the price he offers them at you believe in slavery. You think that doctor is your slave and has to give you something for less than he values it at.
Now if you take this one step further and demand you get his labor for less than he wants to sell it for, you must employ force. Force ultimately leads to murder when the forced party rightfully resists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)