Monday, February 8, 2010
The Tea Party Movement
I am really liking the things I am hearing from the tea party movement. I like the ideas of smaller government, more states rights, lower taxes, greater individual liberties. I like that they are saying that the issues should be explored without attacking other people because that has no place in what the tea party is about. I like that Sarah Palin said that the Constitution provides the best road map towards a more perfect union. The United States Federal government is so far away from the intents of the the original founders of our country, and I believe that is why our country is such a wreck! I do believe that. We must stick to the Constitution and Bill of Rights. That is the only way our country can be saved from the problems that now exist and the problems that will surely surface as we go more in debt to run this country. I am staying tuned to see what the Tea Party says and does. I hope you will too.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Addendum
I would like to add to my last post. There are several problems with the huge budget that the President is proposing. One of the priceless gifts we have as a nation is that we are "free." When anyone or when a nation goes in to debt, they quickly become not free. They are no longer free because they are beholden to the ones who hold the debt. In this way, we are becoming less and less a free people as our obligations add up.
In another vein, the projects and things that the budget is proposed to be used for fall short of the inalienable rights of "the preservation of life and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." I read of the pork that is included in every bill proposed by Congress and I know that it has nothing to do with inalienable rights. As much as people want it to be, health care is not an inalienable right. As glad as we are to have federal help for some things, as often as not they fall into the pork category and not in the inalienable right category. If we want to be free and happy, we have to be free of debt. We also need to provide for ourselves. People who rely on the government and others for handouts and assistance do not have happiness. They might think that they do, but ask them what happiness is after they have had a chance to succeed at providing for themselves and they will give you a different definition of happiness. Benjamin Franklin put it this way:
I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.
Could I suggest that we lead or drive the poor out of poverty rather that leaving them to wallow in it?
In another vein, the projects and things that the budget is proposed to be used for fall short of the inalienable rights of "the preservation of life and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." I read of the pork that is included in every bill proposed by Congress and I know that it has nothing to do with inalienable rights. As much as people want it to be, health care is not an inalienable right. As glad as we are to have federal help for some things, as often as not they fall into the pork category and not in the inalienable right category. If we want to be free and happy, we have to be free of debt. We also need to provide for ourselves. People who rely on the government and others for handouts and assistance do not have happiness. They might think that they do, but ask them what happiness is after they have had a chance to succeed at providing for themselves and they will give you a different definition of happiness. Benjamin Franklin put it this way:
I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.
~Benjamin Franklin, On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor, November 1766
Could I suggest that we lead or drive the poor out of poverty rather that leaving them to wallow in it?
The New Budget
I am fit to be tied with the news of a proposed budget for the United States. I would like to insert this section from a Wall Street Journal article the day after the budget was released:
"One rule of budget reporting is to watch what the politicians are spending this year, not the frugality they promise down the road. By that measure, the budget that President Obama released yesterday for fiscal 2011 is one of the greatest spend-while-you-can documents in American history.
We now know why the White House leaked word of a three-year spending freeze on a few domestic accounts before this extravaganza was released. No one would have noticed such a slushy promise amid this glacier of spending. The budget reveals that overall federal outlays will reach $3.72 trillion in fiscal 2010, and keep rising to $3.834 trillion in 2011.
In the "out years" in mid-decade, the White House promises that spending will fall all the way back to 23% of GDP. Even if you choose to believe such a political prediction, that still means Mr. Obama is proposing a new and more or less permanently higher plateau of federal spending.
And here you thought the "stimulus" was supposed to be temporary."
Everyone should be running to the phone or their computer and complaining to every one of their senators and representatives. Not only is spending going up, but the deficit is not being paid off--it is getting bigger! What is this country coming to? Who voted for this guy? Are you glad that you did? Does anyone think that we won't have to pay for this? Do you realize that your taxes are going up?
"Not happy, Bob, not happy..."
"One rule of budget reporting is to watch what the politicians are spending this year, not the frugality they promise down the road. By that measure, the budget that President Obama released yesterday for fiscal 2011 is one of the greatest spend-while-you-can documents in American history.
We now know why the White House leaked word of a three-year spending freeze on a few domestic accounts before this extravaganza was released. No one would have noticed such a slushy promise amid this glacier of spending. The budget reveals that overall federal outlays will reach $3.72 trillion in fiscal 2010, and keep rising to $3.834 trillion in 2011.
In the "out years" in mid-decade, the White House promises that spending will fall all the way back to 23% of GDP. Even if you choose to believe such a political prediction, that still means Mr. Obama is proposing a new and more or less permanently higher plateau of federal spending.
And here you thought the "stimulus" was supposed to be temporary."
Everyone should be running to the phone or their computer and complaining to every one of their senators and representatives. Not only is spending going up, but the deficit is not being paid off--it is getting bigger! What is this country coming to? Who voted for this guy? Are you glad that you did? Does anyone think that we won't have to pay for this? Do you realize that your taxes are going up?
"Not happy, Bob, not happy..."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
