Tuesday, March 03, 2009

It Was True Then, It's True Now.

From KK:

"You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The Government cannot give to anybody anything that the Government does not first take from somebody else.

When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is surely the end of any nation's future."

This quote is getting a lot of circulation these days, and quite a few people are attributing it to Abe Lincoln, mostly because it sounds like something he'd say, and they can then use the quote to beat up on Dear Leader...It was actually penned by Dr. Adrian Rodgers in 1931...
No matter who wrote it, it is painfully accurate...

The plan Urkel is advancing asks that American who use the resources of this great nation for their personal benefit pay the costs of entitlements, bailouts and pork-laden stimulus.
This is unreasonable to me.
A man works hard to build a business, hires other to help him and pays them for their effort, then all of them are penalized (taxed) in order to provide for someone who is NOT putting forth an effort to provide for themselves.

If you own a business and need healthy, educated, competent workers, you pay for them.
That is how it works.
If you help foster that business, it grows- more people are hired, more revenue hits the streets.
If you cause a revenue drain, however good intentioned, people are laid off and/or businesses shut down.
Now more people are out of work (collecting unemployment),
and tax revenue goes away.

Now... I'll grant you the Urkel has some good book learnin', but he and his cronies are all career politicians. They have no idea what it's like to grow a business from scratch, what its like to agonize over meeting payroll, to tread that delicate line between overstaffing and overworking loyal employees.

His community organizing skills were all about how to suck entitlements from the Government and distribute it to the people who screamed and shouted most...
"Me me me! Mine mine mine!"

Now it's time to spread the wealth?


I have no problem with taxes FOR APPROPRIATE USES... Real uses, not entitlements, not pork, not bridges to nowhere, and definitely not for growing the already obscenely huge Federal Government.

Perhaps some Constant Readers will remember this rant from awhile back...
I don’t want to hear about how the government can’t operate on only a 15% tax rate. In fact, I’m sick and tired of hearing about the government needing this and that.
I need transportation- I get a car I can afford based on my paycheck and expenses.
I can't go to my boss and say:
"Hey Jim. I've decided after careful consideration and research that the best, safest car I can get is a GasSucker Utility Vehicle Mk II, so I need a big fat raise to get one. And I'll need even more because I need to buy more gas to run the big bastard."
Guess what he'd tell me?

Like all the rest of us, it’s time Congress learned to live within its means—and the only reason I suggested a 15% tax rate instead of a 10% tax rate is because things like interstate highways and carrier groups are Good Things. No deficits except in times of national crisis—and we get to decide what constitutes a crisis, not Congress.
Personally, however, I’d go for a flat 20% until we get the deficit down, and then step it down through 15% until we get a reserve, then down to 10%, IF we can ge it down to 10% - I won’t swear we CAN. There ARE two things I’d give a tax break to - Education (REAL Education, not this BS we get now) and BASIC SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH, on ALL FRONTS - the real push-the-frontiers-back stuff. None of this pseudo-science stuff either, like ‘do carrots scream when we cut the tops off before steaming them’.
I might be persuaded to entertain the notion for sole federal funding by sales tax. If you wanted to pay less tax, don’t buy as much.
BUT sure as hell I don’t trust those bastards to introduce a national sales tax and simultaneously drop income tax. What would most likely happen is that we’d be stuck with TWO ways to tax us, and neither would ever be repealed.

Military spending?
Want to fight a war- Sell bonds, just like you used to have to do in the old days. When the war becomes unpopular, then Johnny’ll have to come marching home.

Privatize NASA. End of story.

Don’t get me started on Social Security. That sucker should be taken out to the pond and have it's head held under until it stops kicking.
Privatize it, now.
If the assholes in Congress and White House policy wonks are unable to figure it out, ask Chile to send some of their folks here as consultants.

And speaking of foreigners: end all this foreign aid bullshit, Right Fucking NOW, starting with the United Nations.
We’re heading for a financial crisis in this country, and this is no time to be hosting cocktail parties with taxpayer money. Lending or giving money (especially to your enemies) when you yourself are in debt is the height of stupidity. It’s as true for nations as it is for individuals. The west does not win friends when we throw our money at the socialists and savages of the third world. They just take the money, laugh and see us as weak and deluded, further strengthening their will to destroy us.
Sorry, folks...
Watching the Dow in it's death spiral and seeing that my 401K and what little investments I had are now down to less than 40% of what they were a year ago, and then hear that it's my responsibility to help unemployed mother-of-5 Tonisha stay in her $200,000 home and put gas in her Escalade... Well... it kinda rubs a sore spot I have.

Another item that was appended on KK's email with the quote from Lincoln/Rogers...

“The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of somebody else's money.”
From the Iron Lady... Margaret Thacher.

So true... But you can't sell that to a Democrat. They just twist it around and tell you that that's what Bush was doing for the last 8 years- leveraging the present by spending our kids and grandkids money.
Yeah... That'd be your congress spending all that money... Democrats and Republicans alike.
At some point you are going to have to take a US Government class and learn that just because you don't like the President, the House and Senate have to shoulder a lot of the blame.
(I know, you get a warm and fuzzy feeling when you can give into those Anti-Bush feelings.
Supress those emotional outbursts and look at the REAL cause.)

Oh well... Enough of this. I think I'll go buy a case of .223 at the Gun Shop.
It will hold more value than the equivalent of Citi stock.
Hell, once Urkel and Holder start pushing through AWB 2.0, my rifles might just as well be made of gold; the price on those is going to skyrocket even more.



Linda W. said...

And a socialist said this back in 1944 - how very true.

Norman Mattoon Thomas (November 20, 1884 - December 19, 1968) was a leading American socialist, pacifist, and six-time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America.
The Socialist Party candidate for President of the US, Norman Thomas, said this in a 1944 speech:

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

He went on to say: "I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democrat Party has adopted our platform."

Annie in SC said...

A friend of mine posted this on his blog. It was written in 1787. No matter how many wise people shout it from the rooftops, we never learn.

"At about the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in the year 1787, Alexander Tyler (a Scottish history
professor at The University of Edinborough) had this to say about 'The Fall of The Athenian Republic' some 2,000 years prior.

'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always
followed by a dictatorship.'

'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the
beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From Bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.'"