Within the so called Great Society of the United States, there appears to be an overwhelming ignorance of the tough grid lock plaguing the solutions to what is being called the "fiscal cliff". Perhaps most Americans want to ignore the inevitable fact that every great empire seems to collapse, contributing to the static history of the world. Or maybe the Young Hegelians of our day see this as the synthesis of greater things to come. But who is to say really?
Let's focus on what a fiscal cliff actually means. The U.S. government spends more then they are taking in. To ease some of the burdens on the middle class, President Bush instituted tax breaks that would ensure a strong middle class. However, as most Americans are probably experiencing, these tax breaks did little to no help in the long term crippling effects of a powerful, centralized government that does more harm than good. The tax breaks are set to expire at the beginning of the year. The House, Senate, and Executive offices are working together to form solutions. But, as should be apparent by now, their solutions never solve any real problems. Instead, plan on seeing the exacerbating effects in the coming years.
By no way do I assume that perfection is possible, but by no way do I believe that government alleviates most of these imperfections. In fact, as the growing central government as proven, more government equals more problems. Today's world is infested with intricacies, tangling control, and the occasional loophole that is surpassed to exploit the riches of others. If there was ever a more greedy nation, it is not the industrialized era that gave rise to many great technologies. Instead, today's world, filled with politicians who know how to live your life better than you do.
What makes the matter even more worse is that citizens are either neglecting the issue or concerning themselves with new ways of legalizing marijuana. Not that legalized illicit substances is a bad thing, in regards to political theory, but now is not the time to worry about social issues that are finite and overtly irritating to the public (leading to constant divisions). There is only one issue worth discussing, that is the economy. If the economy cripples and this country collapses internally, then there will be no more social issues to discuss. So the pragmatic view seems to be absolutely applicable to the situation.
Furthermore, what should be said of the current rage for social issues? Plan and simple, these clearly are means of distractions. The United States government can do a lot more good (well, in their eyes they are doing good, or maybe they are evil at heart) if the American public is preoccupied by nonsense. At this point I should put my tin foil hat on and start speaking of the conspiracies. More than likely though, whether they are pushed through public messages or emails, government officials savor the moment when the constituents do not pay attention nor hold them accountable. Yes, politicians love when they can just "work" without someone peering over their shoulder. I mean don't we all love such a work environment? I know there is nothing more stressful then when your boss looks over your shoulder constantly. Politicians, however, are to be ones that accept that responsibility and stress.
The point of the matter is this: constituents, you know the burden of government...now is the time to stop their madness by your willingness to hold them accountable. If there has ever been a time in history where commutative justice has been abused, that time is now. To fix the fiscal cliff, remove the gridlock between the two parties, and seek a proper solution, citizens need to consider a non-empirical solution. Sorry my friends, but the stats are controlled by the government, they're easily manipulated. Therefore, hold them accountable.
Get rid of the distractions, its time for people to make a change and move forward, not some politician.
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
The Next Bubble to Burst
I suppose its hard to avoid these peculiar facts. http://www.ijreview.com/2012/06/7856-8-numbers-obamas-administration-doesnt-want-you-to-see/
It appears there are some regressive tendencies in the Obama economy. First of which, and it should be on every politicians agenda, the student loan debt. There is no doubt that federal student loan debt has gone up under Obama. The underlying fact then remains, either school tuition is going up under this economy or family income is decreasing. For some its both!
Let's face it though, Romney's "business side of things" is exactly what the Obama administration is hammering out in its attack ads. He drove the state of Massachusetts in debt and implemented a failure of a socialized medicine system Looks like our situation is not gonna find an inoculating cure.
Momentarily, on student loans. This is the next bubble to burst. If the amount of student loan debt keeps going up while employment is impossible for these students, the debt is going to lay on the tax payers which will dig a recession of sorts. Yes, another recession. Who will pay back the debt! Well the cronies in Washington will just keep printing paper to ensure that they can pay it, "Loan Forgiveness". Let's be honest, a Loan has an objective moral value buried in it. A loan you can pay back. Its a duty of a person to pay back a loan. Loan Forgiveness is just a political tool, an oxymoron for the students, to gain power.
So, since its becoming impossible for many to pay back their loans, let's just wait for the bubble to burst.
It appears there are some regressive tendencies in the Obama economy. First of which, and it should be on every politicians agenda, the student loan debt. There is no doubt that federal student loan debt has gone up under Obama. The underlying fact then remains, either school tuition is going up under this economy or family income is decreasing. For some its both!
Let's face it though, Romney's "business side of things" is exactly what the Obama administration is hammering out in its attack ads. He drove the state of Massachusetts in debt and implemented a failure of a socialized medicine system Looks like our situation is not gonna find an inoculating cure.
Momentarily, on student loans. This is the next bubble to burst. If the amount of student loan debt keeps going up while employment is impossible for these students, the debt is going to lay on the tax payers which will dig a recession of sorts. Yes, another recession. Who will pay back the debt! Well the cronies in Washington will just keep printing paper to ensure that they can pay it, "Loan Forgiveness". Let's be honest, a Loan has an objective moral value buried in it. A loan you can pay back. Its a duty of a person to pay back a loan. Loan Forgiveness is just a political tool, an oxymoron for the students, to gain power.
So, since its becoming impossible for many to pay back their loans, let's just wait for the bubble to burst.
Saturday, June 9, 2012
Political/Moral Argument for God's Existence
A huge amount of my contemplation, research, and analysis of current events is being devoted to what I call the Political Argument for God's Existence. This, of course, sounds a bit obscure or perhaps silly. Rest assure, I believe there is a quite a MORAL argument to be made for God's existence through the eyes of a political thinker. Let me try to illustrate briefly the tenants of this argument, as it I believe it supports or supplements all current moral arguments for God's existence.
Premise (1): Political Philosophy is and has been synonymous with Moral Philosophy
Premise (2): All people understand totalitarian regimes to be an immoral form of government
Premise (3): Totalitarianism being seen as immoral is an objective ethical claim
Conclusion: Therefore, a higher being or government of sorts exists to create this ethical claim and to observe above all human institutions.
So far this is what I am developing. Some of this may dive into Montesquieu's balance of power theory (as also developed by St. Thomas Aquinas). What else could balance the forces? How can we observe a non-corrupt form of government if one does not objectively exist within the mind of an intelligent being. If there were no intelligent being to prescribe moral actions as moral, then any form of government is permissible.
I know first off that naturalists will attempt to illustrate how a free, democratic-republican government allows for the prolong existence of our species; or in other words, a specific form of government helps the human species to better itself.
Yet, this does not appear to be a satisfying answer. An objective value still exists. As Dr. David Bagget of Liberty University describes in his book Good God, evolutionary biologists and other atheists still have to acknowledge a sort of imbedded moral prescription that does not come from nature itself. If the principle itself did arise from nature, or from human beings coming to know through nature, it is still not a duty placed on human beings. But wait a second, these are duties the all accept. And that is also an enormous attribute of my argument. Governments constructing themselves to establish a sustaining society MUST not do so in a totalitarian way. For totalitarian governments are not GOOD for people. These are moral claims that people cling to and purport in their political philosophies. If they were not of an objective orientation then they would not be duties at all, but rather forms of government we choose to accept or don't. However, this is not the case, which leaves me asking where did this proper form of government come from. More on this matter in the coming months.
Premise (1): Political Philosophy is and has been synonymous with Moral Philosophy
Premise (2): All people understand totalitarian regimes to be an immoral form of government
Premise (3): Totalitarianism being seen as immoral is an objective ethical claim
Conclusion: Therefore, a higher being or government of sorts exists to create this ethical claim and to observe above all human institutions.
So far this is what I am developing. Some of this may dive into Montesquieu's balance of power theory (as also developed by St. Thomas Aquinas). What else could balance the forces? How can we observe a non-corrupt form of government if one does not objectively exist within the mind of an intelligent being. If there were no intelligent being to prescribe moral actions as moral, then any form of government is permissible.
I know first off that naturalists will attempt to illustrate how a free, democratic-republican government allows for the prolong existence of our species; or in other words, a specific form of government helps the human species to better itself.
Yet, this does not appear to be a satisfying answer. An objective value still exists. As Dr. David Bagget of Liberty University describes in his book Good God, evolutionary biologists and other atheists still have to acknowledge a sort of imbedded moral prescription that does not come from nature itself. If the principle itself did arise from nature, or from human beings coming to know through nature, it is still not a duty placed on human beings. But wait a second, these are duties the all accept. And that is also an enormous attribute of my argument. Governments constructing themselves to establish a sustaining society MUST not do so in a totalitarian way. For totalitarian governments are not GOOD for people. These are moral claims that people cling to and purport in their political philosophies. If they were not of an objective orientation then they would not be duties at all, but rather forms of government we choose to accept or don't. However, this is not the case, which leaves me asking where did this proper form of government come from. More on this matter in the coming months.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)