When welfare replaces individual incentive
When government redistribution of wealth replaces individual initiative, a society inevitably declines.
Government never creates wealth. It can only levy taxes under varying names, taking money from wealth creators and giving it to non-value-adding members of society. Welfare replaces individual incentive. The easier it is to make ends meet using welfare, the less motivation there is to work for a living.
This idleness leads to crime, mischief, and other socially unproductive activities, which replace productive work for that segment of the population. Since a large and growing part of American society now depends on government handouts, those people are highly motivated to vote for whichever candidates favor more and more welfare spending (wealth redistribution).
As a result, government grows larger and larger to serve its dependent constituency. This requires still more revenue—from taxation on the wealth creating part of the country. Jobs that pay little (or no) more than welfare are unattractive, thus people prefer to remain unemployed, living off the many forms of government welfare.
This results in a lack of personal economic responsibility and leads to greater demands for rights, (and of course, government payments) few or none of which have been earned, but all of which are similar to the rights that have been earned by wealth creators. Very quickly the motivation to work for a living declines and is ultimately destroyed—and the moral fiber of society is destroyed with it.
What was just described is the situation in the USA, one which has dramatically worsened in the 6-plus years since Barack Obama took office. This dependency trend had started long before Obama, but during Bill Clinton’s second term, a serious effort was made to tie welfare to the requirement to work in order to receive it (known as “workfare“).
However, subsequent liberal actions dramatically undermined this approach. In recent years, the Obama administration successfully attacked and neutralized “workfare,” and in doing so, it essentially “bought” a huge voting bloc of Americans, who are dependent on the many, lucrative forms of welfare. Look at the immense economic incentives to NOT WORK in many states.
This steady decline in American society continues to grow. Congress is paralyzed, and does nothing; the House is rendered helpless by Harry Reid’s blocking activities in the Senate, and the Senate chooses to do nothing at all.
Over the “Harry Reid years,” about 300 Bills have been sent to the Senate by the House, but none of them have made their way to committee, debate, amendment or votes. This prevents Democratic Senators from the need to vote on any bill that might be inconvenient or detrimental to their reelection campaigns. It also protects the president from voting on (or vetoing) any bill that isn’t to his liking.
It is only a matter of time until the dependent underclass that is living off the wealth producing segment of American society, grows large enough to dominate national elections. Worse yet, these groups are uninformed/ill-informed or misinformed voting blocs. Many of the voters are illiterate, and too many are of questionable legitimacy/citizenship or voting rights.
The only way to reverse this deadly trend is by voting for new people in control of the Congress in 2014 elections, and elect Republican majorities in both the Senate and the House. Even this will only slow the growth of the Obama welfare-state (being extended by a steady stream of presidential executive orders). Unless something is done, soon these self-interested, welfare-dependent voting blocs will create insurmountable numbers in presidential elections.
That is how welfare replaces individual initiative. Soon a larger portion of American society will live off the government, than the proportion that actually works to earn a living and create wealth.
How to fix this is simple but not easy. Vote for the “right candidates” in 2014! Get the wrong-headed people out of Congress—especially the Senate, and replace them with people who embrace “The American Way”—personal responsibility, economic self-reliance, a strong work ethic, and pride instead of an entitlement mentality.
When the “American Way” becomes dominant, elected officials will still have a tough job to reverse the current decline, but it can be done. Only then will the economy grow and create good jobs in larger numbers, and return the concept of working for a living to being fashionable and desirable. However, someone must WANT to work in those jobs—and be willing to work for a living.
The crucial question is not how many Americans WILL work in the future; it is how many Americans have the WILL to work?
The only hope is that this trend reverses before welfare completely replaces individual incentive.
Hollywood heavyweight actor Jon Voight wrote a column in the Hollywood Reporter chastising his fellow actors for signing their names to an anti-Israeli open letter.In the letter, actors including Penelope Cruz, Javier Bardem and Pedro Almodovar condemned Israeli actions in the Gaza Strip as “genocide” and called upon the European Union to condemn the military operation.Voight responded: I am heartsick that people like Penelope Cruz and Javier Bardem could incite anti-Semitism all over the world and are oblivious to the damage they have caused.They are obviously ignorant of the whole story of Israel’s birth, when in 1948 the Jewish people were offered by the UN a portion of the land originally set aside for them in 1921, and the Arab Palestinians were offered the other half. The Arabs rejected the offer, and the Jews accepted, only to be attacked by five surrounding Arab countries committed to driving them into the sea. But the Israelis won. The Arabs tried it again in 1967, and again in 1973, launching a sneak attack on the holiest Jewish holiday. Each time the Jews prevailed but not without great loss of life. And when Israel was not fighting a major war, it was defending itself against terrorist campaigns.And yet Israel has always labored for a peaceful relation with its Arab neighbors. It voluntarily returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt in return for peace, and gave the Palestinians all of Gaza as a peace gesture. What was the response? The Palestinians elected Hamas, a terrorist organization, and they immediately began firing thousands of rockets into Israel.You have been able to become famous and have all your monetary gains because you are in a democratic country: America. Do you think you would have been able to accomplish this in Iran, Syria, Lebanon, et cetera? You had a great responsibility to use your celebrity for good. Instead, you have defamed the only democratic country of goodwill in the Middle East: Israel.You should hang your heads in shame. You should all come forth with deep regrets for what you did, and ask forgiveness from the suffering people in Israel.
TO WHICH I SAY, "AMEN!"
While Obama vacations, plays golf and attends fundraisers, nobody is "tending the store"--the United States of America is like a driverless, sometimes runaway and sometimes stalled car, which is going in aimless circles.
Barack Obama is openly contemptuous and disrespectful of Congress. The House majority (GOP) openly dislikes him, distrusts him and having tried and failed, now refuses to work with him. Why? Because Obama earned this reaction by his unwillingness to discuss, compromise and/or even negotiate in good faith.
Meanwhile, Obama's accusations of obstructionism in the Congress are wrong; they are distort ions at best, lies at worst. The real obstruction in Congress is Senate leader Harry Reid. Under Reid's control, the Senate has ignored and blocked some 300 bills from the House allowing none (not a few--NONE) of them to even be considered, debated, or amended. Reid's motives appear to be clear: avoid any chance that his fellow Democrats in the Senate, or the president might have to actually vote (take a public position) on anything even remotely counter to the wishes of their core, liberal constituents.
Fixing America, at its core, requires the GOP to retake control of the Senate in Nov. 2014. This would at least get the legislative process moving until Obama's veto stops it again. Then it would be indisputable who and where the obstruction was.
In Feb. 2014, Townhall published the results of a Gallup poll in which 72% of Americans viewed "Big Government" as more harmful than "Big Labor" or "Big Business." To get on with fixing America, at least 6-7 key areas require urgent action. Once the Supreme Court is finished striking down Obama's most egregious and illegal (unconstitutional) over-reaches, here's the to-do list:
Is thus a daunting list? Sure. But choosing groups of the 3 best & brightest of our elected official from Congress, aided by the 2-3 best experts, solutions can, and will be devised. Then Congress must act, bi partisan, in both houses, and the president must either lead or get out of the way. Nothing is more important than fixing America!
Government ignorance and a conspiracy of fools
America has a lot of problems. The sad irony is that the misguided efforts to fix problems are launched by government leaders who fail to understand the unintended consequences of their actions. At times it seems like government ignorance and a conspiracy of fools are the moving forces in Washington, D.C.
The president is just at the top of the list, but he’s far from the only one at fault. Consider one recent example: the National Labor Relations Board’s [NLRB] crusade against employers in hopes of favoring unions, which (theoretically) are their allies in trying to regulate job security into existence. This has about as much hope of success as an anti-gravity machine.
First the NLRB is stuffed with Obama pro-union activists in illegal recess appointments. When the Supreme Court says those appointments were illegal (unconstitutional), rather than appoint an NLRB with any semblance of ideologically balanced members, reload and plunge on. Restock the NLRB with a new group of fools who choose to go after a whole class of employers—750,000 franchise operators—with a preposterous legal invention that they are “joint-employers.” Only by stretching that term beyond the bounds of credulity can that ruling stand. But there it is.
Eight million US jobs, and three-quarters of a million franchised businesses would be adversely affected if such a ruling moves from the proposal stage to enactment. Unions see this as a chance to attract huge numbers of potential new members, most of them coming from the lowest wage tier of the employment spectrum. Is that a wise move or resoundingly dumb? Considering the president’s chest-thumping about job creation, when the vast majority of the net jobs created each month are part-time, temporary and low wage, perhaps it is his version of a wise move. At least he will have more union voters on his party’s side—or will he? When employers face disincentives for employing people, they hire less, cut more and employ fewer people. Didn’t Obamacare prove that strongly enough?
If that example is not enough consider the growing trend toward “inversion”—the name for US companies that morph into headquarters in foreign companies via merger or acquisition, all to escape a fault-filled tax code. The US tax code has more loopholes than a house riddled with termites. Why else would a nominal tax rate of 35% (the reason for the inversion end-run) turn into an actual collected tax rate of closer to 10%?
Even Obama poster-boy Warren Buffet sees the foolishness in this charade—and is astute enough to play the game—for now. Fix the tax code. Deal with the fact that when the government provides tax incentives for American companies to keep offshore earnings abroad, they will do so. When it provides sizable fiscal reasons to enhance earnings by paying lower US taxes based on vestigial corporate headquarters located outside the US, that’s what will happen.
The behavior rewarded will be the behavior repeated—that is a fundamental truth.
Somehow, this fact is ignored over and over. Raise capital gains tax rates and government revenue falls; lower those same tax rates, and amazingly (to many Keynesian liberals), government revenue actually increases—substantially. Amazing!
This is not theory. History has proven it. But somehow this government ignorance and a conspiracy of fools find it impossible to see (and believe) what is right before their very eyes.
How much further down this misguided path must the US go before someone, some group, some electorate, calls a halt to this foolishness? It appears that the answer is further than where the country is now. Perhaps during the 2014 and 2016 elections, the truth will emerge and prevail. One can only hope so.