Government is a lot like junk food. Junk food is technically food and an option when you are hungry. The problem is that when you are hungry it is usually a bad idea to satiate that hunger with potato chips and candy. As adults we understand that junk food does not satiate our needs and will typically lead us to having an upset stomach. Worse than replacing a meal with junk food is making junk food a part of your diet. As poorly a substitute as junk food is in the short term, the long term effects of having junk food as a part of a person’s diet are far more damaging. Instead of supporting life, which is the basic purpose of food, junk food actually will damage life.
Now that is not to say that junk food is always bad. Junk food has a designed purpose and it serves that purpose well. Junk food is there for a snack. It is there for people to enjoy occasionally and with moderation. Ice cream is good for desert. A candy bar is a good snack when you have sweet tooth. Some potato chips are a good addition to a well made sandwich.
There is a perfectly good purpose for junk food and junk food is amazing when used for that intended purpose. It is when we stray from that intended purpose that we begin to harm ourselves. The important thing is that we understand that it is our responsibility as junk food eaters to eat it right. It is not the junk food’s fault if we lack the will power to resist the temptation of a tasty treat, and if we find ourselves obese from too much junk food then we must accept the difficulties of regaining our health.
Government is just like junk food. Government has a purpose, and it suits that purpose very well. We even have instructions as to what is the purpose of government. We as a people find ourselves at fault when we begin to overindulge in government. Much like junk food is always tasty, the idea of passing off our responsibilities and problems to a faceless institution seems to be quite provocative. But much as junk food fails to satiate our hunger, government will fail to adequately address our responsibilities and problems. If as a nation we begin to use government in ways outside its purpose then we will find ourselves quite unhealthy as a people.
- The Banker
Showing posts with label United States. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United States. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Lessons from our Founders
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
There are a couple of big points that need to be remembered by the American people.
First, all men are created equal. We have the right idea about equality when it comes to race, gender, and ethnicity. However when it comes to equality based on socioeconomic status, EPIC FAIL. If the US Government were to pass legislation that determined that women had to pay more in taxes than men or that Hispanics had to pay more in taxes than everyone else, there would rightfully be massive protests and outrage. Yet our government has determined that it is acceptable to enforce discriminatory tax policies against wealthy Americans. The justification is that they only make up 5% of Americans. I just wanted to make sure I understand this logic. It is okay to discriminate as long as you discriminate against the minority, in this case the wealthy. Ask yourself this simple question, does the government have to right to discriminate against the minority for the benefit of the majority? The fact that all men are created equal would answer the question in the negative.
Second, we have the right to pursue happiness, but we do not have the right to happiness. The lesson of this is that we have the right to equality of opportunity and not the equality of outcome. People do not have a right to a job. People do not have a right to a standard of living. People do not have a right to homeownership. People have the right to pursue those things. People have the right to live, the right to be free, and the right to use the combination of those two rights to pursue whatever makes them happy as long as it does not conflict to another person's right to live or be free. No one has the right to be happy only the right to try to be happy. That being said, no one has the right to any certain level of income, they only have the right to use their life, freedom, and opportunities to make as much income as they can within the law. If that means that executives make far more than laborers, then that is fine, there is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is the government robbing the executives from their right to pursue happiness even when the pursuit of that happiness does not interfere with anybody else's rights.
Third, the government derives its power from Americans. Americans do not derive our power from the government. In the political food chain, Americans are at the top of the pecking order. We must not forget that. We do have the ability to stop the government from doing the things that we do not want them to do. We can protest. We can remove them from office by popular vote. In 2010, we are re-electing THE ENTIRE CONGRESS. If the government will not obey the will of the governed, then we replace the government, piece by piece, through peaceful elections. It is the great thing about being an American.
One final point,
...whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.
-The Banker
There are a couple of big points that need to be remembered by the American people.
First, all men are created equal. We have the right idea about equality when it comes to race, gender, and ethnicity. However when it comes to equality based on socioeconomic status, EPIC FAIL. If the US Government were to pass legislation that determined that women had to pay more in taxes than men or that Hispanics had to pay more in taxes than everyone else, there would rightfully be massive protests and outrage. Yet our government has determined that it is acceptable to enforce discriminatory tax policies against wealthy Americans. The justification is that they only make up 5% of Americans. I just wanted to make sure I understand this logic. It is okay to discriminate as long as you discriminate against the minority, in this case the wealthy. Ask yourself this simple question, does the government have to right to discriminate against the minority for the benefit of the majority? The fact that all men are created equal would answer the question in the negative.
Second, we have the right to pursue happiness, but we do not have the right to happiness. The lesson of this is that we have the right to equality of opportunity and not the equality of outcome. People do not have a right to a job. People do not have a right to a standard of living. People do not have a right to homeownership. People have the right to pursue those things. People have the right to live, the right to be free, and the right to use the combination of those two rights to pursue whatever makes them happy as long as it does not conflict to another person's right to live or be free. No one has the right to be happy only the right to try to be happy. That being said, no one has the right to any certain level of income, they only have the right to use their life, freedom, and opportunities to make as much income as they can within the law. If that means that executives make far more than laborers, then that is fine, there is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is the government robbing the executives from their right to pursue happiness even when the pursuit of that happiness does not interfere with anybody else's rights.
Third, the government derives its power from Americans. Americans do not derive our power from the government. In the political food chain, Americans are at the top of the pecking order. We must not forget that. We do have the ability to stop the government from doing the things that we do not want them to do. We can protest. We can remove them from office by popular vote. In 2010, we are re-electing THE ENTIRE CONGRESS. If the government will not obey the will of the governed, then we replace the government, piece by piece, through peaceful elections. It is the great thing about being an American.
One final point,
...whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.
-The Banker
Friday, February 20, 2009
It's simple, Stupid
With everyone rushing to determine what is the best thing to do to stimulate the economy, I decided it is a good time to offer my advice to individuals. There is a lot of conflicting ideas about what the average American should do once they start receiving that extra $12 a week.
The answer is simple. Americans need to live responsibly. Americans need to save money and make sound investments. Americans need to live at their means, possibly below them for a while - depending on their current state of debt.
In addition, the last thing that the average American needs to do is increase their consumption spending, unless the individual as the means and the desire to increase the spending.
It is outrageous that we have a government that is trying to manipulate Americans into increasing their consumer spending. It is reckless, irresponsible, and incredibly short sighted. The fact that the tax credit in the stimulus package that Americans are getting is divided up to promote spending instead of given in lump sum (which would promote saving and debt reduction) is a clear example of the selfishness of those in power.
To be clear, the government wants an increase in consumption spending because it makes the economy look better now. Consumption spending does not fix the root cause of the economic problem nor does it promote long term economic growth. Our "leaders" are only after consumption spending because it looks good in the short term and ultimately, their only concern is the short term. There are elections coming up in 2010 and 2012. Those people that are currently in power merely want to inflate the economy long enough to get re-elected.
The alternate, which is Americans saving and investing instead of spending, would lead to long term economic growth but would most likely cause short term loss. Some industries would suffer if luxury spending tightens even further and that is unfortunate. The important thing is that while a few would suffer, the great majority of Americans would be much better off.
On a national level, the savings and investment would lead to a growing economy that is more stable. Private investment equals growth because private investors invest money in places where they have a high expectation of return.
On a personal level, the average American would be in a great financial position with more money saved, more money invested, and with less debt. To boot, once individuals reach a point where they have lower debt with more money saved and invested, they will start to increase their spending. Only this spending is done at a sustainable level.
The great thing about a capitalistic economy is that if everyone acts in their own best interest in a legal way, then the economy does well as a whole. It is only in a socialistic society where individuals are asked to sacrifice their own interests for the good of the society as a whole....
-The Banker
The answer is simple. Americans need to live responsibly. Americans need to save money and make sound investments. Americans need to live at their means, possibly below them for a while - depending on their current state of debt.
In addition, the last thing that the average American needs to do is increase their consumption spending, unless the individual as the means and the desire to increase the spending.
It is outrageous that we have a government that is trying to manipulate Americans into increasing their consumer spending. It is reckless, irresponsible, and incredibly short sighted. The fact that the tax credit in the stimulus package that Americans are getting is divided up to promote spending instead of given in lump sum (which would promote saving and debt reduction) is a clear example of the selfishness of those in power.
To be clear, the government wants an increase in consumption spending because it makes the economy look better now. Consumption spending does not fix the root cause of the economic problem nor does it promote long term economic growth. Our "leaders" are only after consumption spending because it looks good in the short term and ultimately, their only concern is the short term. There are elections coming up in 2010 and 2012. Those people that are currently in power merely want to inflate the economy long enough to get re-elected.
The alternate, which is Americans saving and investing instead of spending, would lead to long term economic growth but would most likely cause short term loss. Some industries would suffer if luxury spending tightens even further and that is unfortunate. The important thing is that while a few would suffer, the great majority of Americans would be much better off.
On a national level, the savings and investment would lead to a growing economy that is more stable. Private investment equals growth because private investors invest money in places where they have a high expectation of return.
On a personal level, the average American would be in a great financial position with more money saved, more money invested, and with less debt. To boot, once individuals reach a point where they have lower debt with more money saved and invested, they will start to increase their spending. Only this spending is done at a sustainable level.
The great thing about a capitalistic economy is that if everyone acts in their own best interest in a legal way, then the economy does well as a whole. It is only in a socialistic society where individuals are asked to sacrifice their own interests for the good of the society as a whole....
-The Banker
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
