It is all theatre: we are supposed to believe things will not get done, people will go without, bad things happen when the government shuts down. If we actually shut something down, we'd save some money. But that is not what happens.
The Washington Mall is closed, but all costs associated with it, including the employees there, continue. The employees ostensibly have no job, but in fact they will be paid. The "non-essential" employees will get their pay, they just get a few days or a few weeks paid vacation.
What we can expect, is those who are called essential will find this unfair, and they will need either more paid vacation or some sort of compensation in their paycheck.
Where the people actually want something from the Feds, like a park, that they shut down. Wars will continue. Vacations for "non-essential.." Hmmm... "non-essential..." makes one think...
There is only one crisis in government, that moment when, say Wu Sangui opened the gates at the Shanhai Pass. Now that's a crisis, when the people chose anarchy over chaos.
We are in a long slow slide down and out, elections cannot matter, the "new leaders" are just as venal as the old "new leaders." The Romney/Obamacare crisis is designed to fail and bring us single payer medical care, and then total control over our lives. The bad guys will win that one, because the only workable alternative is to deregulate medicine in USA, which will not happen. No one is calling for that, or no more than 2 or 3 dozen people in the country.
Free $#!^. It's why democracies do not work.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
The Washington Mall is closed, but all costs associated with it, including the employees there, continue. The employees ostensibly have no job, but in fact they will be paid. The "non-essential" employees will get their pay, they just get a few days or a few weeks paid vacation.
What we can expect, is those who are called essential will find this unfair, and they will need either more paid vacation or some sort of compensation in their paycheck.
Where the people actually want something from the Feds, like a park, that they shut down. Wars will continue. Vacations for "non-essential.." Hmmm... "non-essential..." makes one think...
There is only one crisis in government, that moment when, say Wu Sangui opened the gates at the Shanhai Pass. Now that's a crisis, when the people chose anarchy over chaos.
We are in a long slow slide down and out, elections cannot matter, the "new leaders" are just as venal as the old "new leaders." The Romney/Obamacare crisis is designed to fail and bring us single payer medical care, and then total control over our lives. The bad guys will win that one, because the only workable alternative is to deregulate medicine in USA, which will not happen. No one is calling for that, or no more than 2 or 3 dozen people in the country.
Free $#!^. It's why democracies do not work.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
4 comments:
This person asserts that government can work:
http://mythfighter.com
"Free Money Plan for Prosperity"
We all like a system that works for us. But in all cases of all government policies, there are winners and losers. The fellow is only arguing for a system in which he wins, and others lose. Why read someone who advocates for his benefit and other's detriment?
I don't understand what you're saying: With this guy's plan, who would lose and who would win? The government is neutral. It looks like everybody would benefit.
Also, say we scrap the federal government and then have an "anarchist" type government - with no centralized governing authority, from what I understand. How would society prevent other stronger people or interest groups from asserting themselves and getting power? Can you give an example of a country that has this anarchist paradigm in effect or close to it?
It is not possible to have a neutral government. In his plan, I would lose. With government involved in currency I am not free to contract in what currency I prefer. Study Austrian economics, and learn.
We have government and we now have stronger people and interest groups taking over. We live in your worst fear. In anarchy, you are the cop.
Anarchy means no country, so to ask for an example of a country that has an anarchist paradigm is an internal contradiction. Research and you'll find dozens of examples of anarchy in history, some lasting hundreds of years, and its blessings, including in the bible.
If you want a continuum of relative freedom, you can put north Korea on one end, Hong Kong on the other, with USA heading toward North Korea.
Post a Comment