Call it socialism, call it wealth redistribution, call it welfare, call it “we just want to spread it around a little, we think it’s better for everyone that way”, its evil.

Allow me to digress just a bit with several examples and I’ll circle back and show you why I believe it’s not just bad, it’s evil.

Keep this phrase in mind: “Every time someone gets something for nothing, someone else had to get nothing for something.”

Example 1: Taxes

In a graduated income tax system such as ours, the highest earners and producers pay the highest rate, while the lowest earners pay the lowest rate. And the non-producers often pay less than nothing as they actually receive payment from the collected taxes. This is commonly known as welfare, where people do not earn, yet still receive.

In this example, the welfare recipient gets something for nothing, while the top earner (you could even argue the mid-range earner also) pays for them, essentially getting nothing for something.

Who loses?

Hold that thought, let’s continue.

Example 2: Labor Unions

In a typical Labor union the workers of a company have united together to become a single body, the union.And all contracts, payment and otherwise, are negotiated with the entire body, instead of the individual worker. This claims the union, gives the worker greater bargaining power when it comes to negotiating said contracts.

Here’s what else it does: It gives the worker higher wages (and benefits) than they could get on their own and scheduled pay raises not based on merit but on union membership - something for nothing. And the Company itself, by not getting higher producers for the higher wages and compensation, has now gotten nothing for something.

Who loses?

Don’t answer yet, there’s more

Example 3: Children’s “self esteem” classes

Many public, and even private, schools have instituted programs to help the kids build self esteem. They do things like give each kid a prize for “effort” regardless of how qualified the effort actually is. The sports teams give everyone a trophy so the losers don’t get their “self esteem” hurt. They are careful not to reward the high-achieving kids too gratuitously for fear of hurting the other kids “self esteem”. It all makes sense, they don’t want kids who under achieve to feel bad.

Here’s what really happens: the kids who didn’t win, but still got trophies – the kids who crammed a sloppy half-effort entry to the science fair but still got a prize for “effort” – the kids who are told they’re doing a great job as to not hurt their feelings – all they really got was, you guessed it: something for nothing - accolades, prizes, trophy, even grades – all unearned.

Who got nothing for something? The team that won, the kids that achieve and get a silent grade as to not upset the others; all get unrewarded, maybe even unappreciated, effort.

Who loses?

I know I know, hang in there we’re almost done

Example 4: Friendship

This is a real example, from a real person, in a real school.

A girl, 12, we’ll call her Girl A, told Girl B: “I just don’t want to be friends with you, we have nothing in common…etc.” Well Girl B went home, told her parents, who called the school, next day teacher says to Girl A: “you have to be friends with Girl B”.

So hurray right? Girl B is now accepted and has a friend? Wrong.

Something for nothing, a friend she didn’t “earn”

Girl B now gets nothing for her something, she now has to endure hanging out with someone she really doesn’t like. (Although this is likely the most real life-preparing experience she’ll have while in school)

I ask again: Who loses?

Now, finally, let’s summarize.

In example 4, who loses? Girl A, who has to hang out with a girl she doesn’t like? Nope. Sure she has to endure a hardship, but who really loses?

Girl B.

Why? Because Girl B is being told, and shown that she doesn’t need to earn friends, or even make friends, that they’ll be made for her. She gets to live with the realization that because she couldn’t make her own friends, one had to be given to her.

Who loses in example 3? The achieving kids who don’t get the recognition they deserve? No again.

It’s the kids who get the praise and rewards they didn’t deserve that lose. They are being taught that they are worthy and deserving of such rewards without earning them. How prepared for life will they be with that lesson?

How about example 2? Sure the union wages and compensation hurt the company’s bottom line (ahem, GM?) but is that the real loser – nope.

Each union member who is told “you can’t get a raise, or earn this salary on your own, you need us to do it for you” loses big time. Because that’s exactly what they believe, they learn that they can’t earn such a raise themselves, and thus never will.

Finally, in example one, the high producer and wage earner, who is penalized at a greater rate of taxation for his achievement – is he the loser? Not even close. He’s used to overcoming obstacles and facing challenges, he’ll find a way to deal with the taxation.

The welfare recipient however, may never learn how to care for himself. He’s been convinced that, for one reason or another, he can’t. Or that someone else won’t let him.

All of these examples are one form of Socialism, here’s why they are all evil:

- Girl B could have made friends on her own, but she may never know. She expects someone else to do it for her. Her desire to make friends has been taken.

- All those kids who were “taught” self esteem could have earned it themselves, if only given the chance. But by giving it to them, you take their ability to earn it. You’ve literally stolen their entire future potential right out of them.

- Each worker could have actually earned his own pay raise, he could have learned to work harder, maybe even get more education and climb the ladder. But by telling he can’t , or doesn’t need to, you’ve stolen that potential from him.

- By paying someone to not work, you’re stealing their very motive engine. You’re buying their soul one cent at a time, purchasing their life, and enslaving them.

And that, my friends, is why Socialism, in any form, is evil.

DMobile Philosophy, Values socialism

Flat tax.  aka “Fiar tax” - where it’s a simple x% and everyone pays the same percentage of income tax.  Or the idea of a national sales tax - so tax becomes comsumption based instead of income based.

Both of these are great ideas and definitely make much more sense than our current system.  [We can argue that later, it's not the point of this short article]

Here’s why it’ll never happen:

Taxes; specifically, the right of congress to levy taxes, or even more specifically the right of congress to change how they levy taxes.

They can control how much you pay in taxes.  And they can adjust that amount (up or down) simply by saying “aye”.

How much power does that give them?

All the power in the world.

It literally gives them puppet strings attached to every single producer in America.  To use a Rand-like metaphor, it’s as if congress has a throttle control attached directly to YOUR motive engine.

In the recent 2008 electin, ALL the candidates included campaign promisses stating what they would do with taxes.  Obama promised to lower them for some, and raise them for others.  McCain promised the exact same thing, only for different groups.

They BOTH were essentially buying votes with the tax rate as currency.

A flat, fair, consumption (whatever you want to call it) tax would take that power away from Congress.  No longer would they hold such influence over American producers.  No longer would the rich fear retribution from them, no longer would the poor expect concessions from them.  The power of Congress would be greatly reduced with such a tax.

Political candidates, of all parties, could no longer use “tax breaks” as a campaign item.  What would they have left to talk about?  Sure would be nice to find out.

How could class warfare exist if we all paid the same % of our earnings?  If we all payed taxes based on what we bought, how then could a poor apartment dweller claim “unfair” against a wealthy multi-house owner?

These are just a few of the results (or as I like to call them: benefits) of a flat or consumption based tax system.  And they are the exact reasons why it will never be passed.

Very few in power are willing to legislate a reduction in that power.

DMobile Economic, Values congress, Economic, Taxes

I was watching an interview with Tony Danza on the Mike Huckabee show, (Please note, I am not a big fan of either) and Mike asked Tony about the stimulus bill.  His answer, very similar to answers I get from non-cons (a non-conservative, i.e.: moderate or liberal), was this: “I don’t necessarily think, you know, intellectually, that it’s the best plan, but I really want it to work.  Can’t we all just stop the bickering and get behind it?”

What exactly was he trying to say? That even though it’s the wrong plan that if we all “want” it to work it’ll be ok?

If you hire me to fix your car, and I put peanut butter in the transmission and replace some key engine parts with legos then tell you “well the other mechanics and I really want this plan to work, can’t you just get behind it?”  Is that going to make your car run?

Which brings us to:

Fundamental liberal thought flaw #1: “Wanting something to work, regardless of its actual merits, will somehow make it work” and this subsequent extrapolation: “Questioning the merits of something will likely cause it to fail, while massive public support of something will definitely cause it to succeed”

Also repeated by Mr. Danza, as well as countless media outlets, is how hard it is for a new president in his first 30 days, and how Mr. Obama didn’t ask for this recession, he inherited the greatest challenge of any modern president.

So…we should be forgiving and “cut him some slack” because it’s really, really hard to be president?  Um, no.  When you’re the President; you need to find a way to deal with it.

Again, if I’m fixing your car and I break something instead of fix it and my coworker comes to you and says “look, we just hired him and you know how hard the first month at a new job can be.  And besides, your car problem is a really hard one; he didn’t ask for it, you just showed up and expected it to be fixed.” Are you going to accept that answer?  I doubt it.  So why should we accept that answer about the President?  Unless you ascribe to Fundamental liberal thought flaw #2.

Fundamental liberal thought flaw #2: “The higher the difficulty of something, the more acceptable it is to give an excuse for failure, based on that difficulty”. There are examples of this all though society: “but it’s hard to get a better job”, “but it’s hard to pay my bills”, “but its hard to pay a full price mortgage”, “but it’s hard to start a business”, “but it’s hard to stay married” and more, which leads to this summarization: “If something is hard, that alone is reason enough for failing or not even trying”

We could go on and name many more, and we will, later.

DMobile Philosophy, Values Liberal, Progressive

Van Helsing over at RightWingNews hit the nail on the head with this one, here’s a clip:

Say Group A works hard and has created $1 trillion in wealth out of nothing. Group B smokes crack and watches Oprah, and doesn’t create any wealth at all. It receives food stamps, welfare, subsidized housing, et cetera, ad nauseam, but say Group B has no more wealth than it creates. If Chairman Zero wants to spread the wealth around so that both groups have the same amount, he doesn’t have to take half a $trillion from Group A. All he needs to do is give Group B $1 trillion dollars that doesn’t exist in the form of mortgage bailouts and stimulus packages.

Since the money doesn’t exist, the government will have to print it. Instead of $1 trillion dollars, there is now $2 trillion that represents $1 trillion of actual wealth. By making money worth half as much, Obama has effectively seized half of what Group A worked to create.

DMobile Economic, Values Bailout, coup, marxism, Obama, redistrubution, socialism

Many people these days are calling for higher taxes on the upper income earners to help offset the growing social needs of the citizenry. They feel that “the rich” need to pay their “fair share”, and it’s up to Congress to soak them for all they’re worth. Nevermind that the upper 5% of income earners shoulder 39% of the total tax revenue, as long as they still have a penny left over at the end of the year, someone needs to take it away from them. But let’s think about what this REALLY does.

Bill Gates earns, approximately, $2 billion annually. Let’s say we jack up his tax rate by an extra 10%. A $200M tax increase on Bill Gates means an extra $0.61 to each American, ASSUMING zero administrative cost of redistributing the wealth. With and extra 61 cents, most people will super-size a happy meal or buy a lottery ticket, or do something frivolous. With that extra $200M, Bill Gates could start a new hospital, employing 1,000 people, and adding billions of dollars to the economy in the form of created wealth - wealth from which he, too, could profit, if he runs his investment well.

Instead of working to increase the taxes on the rich, if we’re so concerned that they’re not paying their shares, why not mandate that they invest that money in startup firms that create jobs and help the community. (Like hospitals, private schools, and so forth.) The competition from all these forced-investment properties will drive the prices of the services that they offer down, which will be good for consumers. They’ll create new jobs. The money won’t disappear into some government tar pit. And they might even end up turning a profit for the erstwhile taxpayer - something his taxes would never have done. We mandate that they invest, say, 5% of their net income each year to funding startups, and we’ll start to see an explosion of wealth and new business like we’ve never seen. Observing Europe, we can see that increased government intervention leads to economic stagnation and double-digit unemployment. Let’s see what happens when we empower millions of Americans to start their own businesses each year.

If the people trying to take the money from the rich were really, honestly, trying to do something abuot poverty and equality, this is what they’d be proposing. However, it’s all about stealing from the productive to increase the size and bloat of the government.

[editor's note:  Thanks Mike.  We love hearing from you and thank you for you contributions and support]

About Vegas Mike:  Mike is a fantastic American with a great love of liberty and freedom.  While we often cringe at his radical ideas for proposed implementation, we completely agree with his ideals of limited government, personal liberty, and free trade.

DMobile Economic, Values Capitalism, Libertarian, Taxes

In 2006 we were told by Nancy Pelosi and the new Democratic controlled Congress that they would get things done. They would work with Republicans for the good of the nation. They would end corruption once and for all. They would be transparent and work for the people. None of that took place and as a matter of fact it was the exact opposite. More corruption came out of the Democratic Party after 2006 than in recent years. Congress did nothing except name a bunch of Post Offices after a known KKK member and lion of the Democratic Party - Robert Byrd. The “Do-Nothing Congress” is amply named. And since 2006 our nation has gone straight down the toilet. I’m not blaming only Democrats. Republicans sold out their COnservative beliefs and spent, spent, spent, like their name was Bill Clinton. Bad move. Regardless this Congress has done NOTHING to bring the nation together. NOTHING.

Now comes Barack Obama. Straight from the heavens above! He promises to end corruption. He promises to be bi-partisan. He promises that no lobbyists will be in his cabinet. So what happens? He appoints lobbyists, he has members of his team resigning in disgrace because they are tax cheats, they put out this stimulus bill that will not stimulate ANYTHING and refuse to take in Republican ideas on it. They won so too bad for the Repubilcans! Way to be bi-partisan.

Does anyone care that the White House has taken the Census away from the Commerce Dept and moved it to the White House? Anyone even understand why they would do this? They are trying to change the electoral map! This is an outrage! Senator Gregg is going to be confirmed to be Sec. of Commerce and he’s a Republican so the White House takes away one of his most important jobs. This is a disgrace.

Is anyone aware of the wasteful spending in this new stimulus bill that is supposed create jobs and save the economy. They talk about creating these jobs in construction to fix bridges, roads and other infrastructure…wonderful. Those jobs wont last. When the job is done, you are laid off. Those are not permanant jobs. One of the items in the bill is an 88 million dollar plan to construct new schools in Milwaukee when there are 15 vacant schools already!!! WTF?!?

$150 million dollars to livestock insurance to cover honeybees and fresh fish??? Thats stimulus? That creates jobs for the middle class and lower class? This will help the economy? The worst thing is that Obama is walking around LYING to everyone and saying there is no pork and earmarks in this bill when there IS. How dare these people lie to us. They are stealing our money and telling us one thing while doing another. And the people walk around like zombies saying “OOOO Baaaaaa Maaaaa, OOOOO Baaaaaa MAAAAAA” WAKE UP ZOMBIES! They say this is an emergency and if we dont take action now then we will be up shits creek! Well than why are they loading up all this pork into the bill? Its like Al Gore saying the planet is dying and then adds to its death while asking the rest of us to stop. WTF is going on here???

$350 + million for education on sexually transmitted diseases. Great idea…how does that create jobs? How does this help the economy?

$650 million for coupons to help people switch to digital tv?!??!?! WTF?

$150 million for renovations to the Smithsonian. WTF!?!?!?

$70 million to help people to stop smoking. Great intentions but how does this help the economy?

Thats just a few of the items in the bill! This bill is almost $900 BILLION DOLLARS of guess who’s money? OURS! Not the Governments. Obama’s admin already has proven they dont pay taxes.

They say they are going to give tax cuts to everyone. Well what about the people who do not pay taxes? They will get a check in the mail for absolutely nothing. What is that? Sounds like WELFARE to me.

They cry about the deficit we are in but they want to spend their way out of it. How is that possible? The government needs to STOP SPENDING.

Oh and to top it all off, the Obama admin is going to cut Defense Spending by at least 10% and as much as 25%. We are in the middle of a war against terror. China and Russia are developing their weapons. Obama is taking apart ours. He is AGAINST the missile defense system that would prevent a missile from hitting a city in our nation. WTF?!?!!

To top it off they rushed this bill through and did not give anyone a chance to read it first! Its high time that the people of this nation know what is going into these bills before they are signed into law. It is unacceptable that these elected officials can insert nonsense into a bill without anyone knowing what was done.

Ok…let me stop….enough is enough. You get the point…or do you? I know a few of you do. But most of you dont. Obama lied. People were duped. I thought it would have taken a few years to expose this radical group of individuals who are taking over this country but as Charles Krauthamer said it only took a couple of weeks.

Obama has failed us already.

mzev44 Economic, Patriotism, Policies, Political, Values

http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stories/94282/nyu-students-protest-lack-of-disclosure/Default.aspx

These young people, who have been trained by their hippie bleeding heart liberal parents, have barracaided themselves in the school cafeteria here in NYC. They are demanding the University to give up information about the finances the school has including the salaries of the Professors! They also want more scholarships for people from Gaza.

Here is a simple solution:

Tear gas, cops in riot gear, and permanent expulsion from school….after a month or 2 in jail.

Losers.

mzev44 Patriotism, Political, Values

Welcome to the Bizarro Universe, also known as present day America.

Forget what you thought you knew, we already live in a world where high achievement is ridiculed and mediocrity is rewarded.

We live in a land where many think we can spend our way out of debt.

And don’t forget, in mortgage land we plan to reward the irresponsible as well.

Now finally, a renewed effort to punish the responsible In a letter to Michelle Malkin from one of her readers:

I want to share this story with you, and you may share it with your readers if you wish. I ask only that my name be left out.

5 years ago while we were in the middle of putting an addition on our home - the final step in our remodeling - my wife was forced to leave her job on long term disability due to very serious back issues. She had been having back problems - including two surgeries prior to this so when she began her job at a nearby university we purchased disability insurance. Even with the insurance, we lost 40% of her income. We went from things being a little tight but comfortably manageable to mortgaged over our heads instantly. For five years we have managed to bootstrap our way from month to month by drawing down savings to cover whatever we were short on the mortgage and putting any extra that came our way back into the savings account.

After four more surgeries and little relief it is quite clear that my wife will not be returning to work, and the savings well is nearly dry.

We recently contacted our mortgage lender, WAMU/JP Morgan and outlined the situation for them. Explaining that while we had never been even a minute late, in about five to six months we would likely be unable to make a payment. We weren’t looking to get out of our debt, but to hopefully restructure it to take some of the pressure off, and hopefully keep our home. We thought we were doing the right thing by being proactive. We thought they would be happy to work with us before we defaulted.

We thought wrong.

They took all of our financial information to review, but the person we were working with explained that they really didn’t have anything in place to help people like us.

Repeat: “they didn’t have anything in place to help people like us”  That’s right, nothing in place to help actual responsible people who want, and are willing to work, to do the right thing.

He recommended that we stop paying the loan because once we were in default it would be easier for them to work with us. I have to admit that I thought about the benefit of saving a couple of months worth of our mortgage. I thought about it for about ten seconds. Then I sat down and took another look at what we squeeze out of our budget. Just tightening the belt further would buy us a month or two. So I started taking on extra work on the side.

They actually told them to STOP PAYING THE LOAN because they could only help them if in default.

translation: “sorry but you currently qualify as a producer with some semblance of ambition and personal responsibility and therefore don’t qualify for our socialist program”

Seriously, how far have we come that we can’t/won’t help someone who is actually working but needs help, but we can help someone once they pass the fail threshold?  That’s the equivilent of not offering any preventative medicine saying “come back when you’re really sick and we can treat you”.

Read the author’s last line below:

I don’t know if we will be able to restructure our loan, but I [am] damn certain we will never miss a payment. You can count me proudly among the chumps.

 This is someone I would gladly help to pay their mortgage.

DMobile Economic, Values

Here’s my personal Top 3 list of groups that you’d expect them to vote conservative yet seem to vote predominantly liberal.  Now of course there are exceptions to all of these, and I didn’t exactly do a scientific study, it’s really just an observation, but enough of the disclaimer – onward:

3.  Punk Rockers.

What’s the whole message of Punk Rock anyway?  DIY!  We don’t need your F***ing help, we’ll do it ourselves.  Sounds like liberty and free market economics to me.  Know how many 70s punks are now business owners, executives, and well over the $65,000 per year mark? Lots.  I think the whole Punk=Liberal thing really stems from the “Moral Majority” attacks from the 80s & Nancy Regan etc.  However PMRC and music censorship efforts have almost always been driven from the left.  I would bet that most punks really are Libertarian, if they took the time to think about it.  Oh, and for a group that prides itself on not following the crowd or doing the popular thing – there sure were a lot of Obama votes there…

2.  Blacks.

Yup, I said it.  Now I know how historic the election of Barrack Obama was so I’ll leave that out.  Let’s just talk in general.  Most blacks are church goers and live by at least somewhat Christian standards, want equal treatment regardless of race, voted in droves against gay marriage, believe in a strong national defense and personal liberty.  Yet the numbers there are staggering in favor of liberal candidates.  I understand this is a result of blacks creating a common community to stand vs. early racism and I can certainly respect that but I think the Liberal politicians are now merely exploiting that by pretending to offer escape from racism and unequal treatment, while actually perpetuating it.  Isn’t it time to think as an individual?

1.  Jews.

This one baffles me the most.  One would think that after the holocaust Jews would be in strong support of the 2^nd amendment and the average Jewish family would want to own as many guns as possible.  Also, if Jews are so industrious and wealth-magnets like the stereotype would lead us to believe, wouldn’t that also land them on the free market, low income tax side of an election?  Still, year after year, somewhere around 85% of Jews vote democrat.  Why?  Best I can figure it’s because someone, somewhere, at sometime projected that extreme right wing = fascist.  Now I’m not sure how you connect the dots and get from free market, individual liberty and low taxes over to white supremacy, secret police and kill the Jews, but someone did, and apparently it keeps them voting democrat every year.

PS I generally don’t apologize so I wont.  I’m not trying to offend anyone with this post, in fact, I identify with two of these groups, can you guess which ones?

DMobile Patriotism, Values

Ha! It’s that time of year again, time to [long drippy Christmas stuff edited].

One of my favorite things to do this time of year is go to a store, fight the crowds, etc just to have the guy, or gal, tell me “Happy Holidays” with their pasted on holiday smile.  And I respond with a resounding “Merry Christmas to you too!”, to which most of the time I get a relieved sounding “merry Christmas”.

That aside, here’s the point of this article:  December 25th is Christmas, whether you are a Christian, Jew, Atheist, Jedi, Muslim, or Martian.  You don’t have to celebrate it, you don’t even have to believe it, but December 25th is Christmas.  Just like December 26th is Boxing Day.  Now I don’t celebrate that, and unless you live in Canada or some parts of the UK you don’t either, but that doesn’t change the fact that Dec 26th is Boxing Day and December 25th is Christmas.

So, I repeat: 

December 25th is freakin Christmas!

Get over it

DMobile Personel, Values Christmas, common sense, political correctness