The Choice

To meet our expenses over the last 4 years, we have borrowed 6 trillion dollars including 2 billion dollars a day from China. The total debt 4 years ago was 10 trillion. It's now 16 trillion. This isn't good, we can't continue this without going bankrupt. Unemployment remains at over 8% and over the last 4 years the number of people receiving social services has increased over 50%. If we go bankrupt, no one will receive social services.

Option 1)  President Obama says if we maintain the policies established over the last 4 years, the economy will eventually recover. People are hurting, so more social services are needed and this will cost more. We have to increase taxes to cover 1 trillion a year and the cost of additional social services. To increase tax revenues taxes should be increased on the "rich". Since what is meant by "rich" is not defined, we will have to wait and see how low on the income level we will have to go to raise the required revenues. Furthermore, he has not delivered a budget or signed one the entire time he has been in office. There are no set policies defined, so this is tantamount to saying if we continue to drift aimlessly and borrow lots of money, things will get better.

Option 2)  We have to decrease taxes on the middle class to increase jobs which will decrease the need for social services. Giving money to the unemployed is like giving a man a fish. Using the money to create jobs is like teaching a man how to fish. Like any business or family, we have to cut back. If we can't afford something, we can't have it no matter how much we may want it. Borrowing it from China is deceptive, cannot continue and dangerous to our national security.

In some ways, money is very similar to energy. Energy cannot be created or destroyed. When energy is used to lift a heavy object, the energy is transformed to another form of energy known as kinetic energy. The kinetic energy in water that has been lifted to a higher elevation can be used to generate electricity as it passes through turbines built into dams.

Most exchanges of money cause something to be produced. We work (produce things, which can be a service) in hopes of getting money for our work, and others produce hoping we will give the money we received for our efforts to them to get what they have produced. Taxes and social services inhibit this process and result in less production, less jobs and less prosperity.

Government is like the overhead expenses we all deal with. It is necessary, but we should try to minimize it. The exchange of money going to the government as taxes does not always result in a consumable item being produced or a desired service being rendered. Often, it finds it's way into the pockets of the power hungry in an exchange that does not produce anything of value. When the government gives that money to the unemployed, individuals receive money without producing. This is an inefficient use of money. Though it may be necessary for a short term, it needs to be addressed correctly to reduce the inefficiency.

As a people, we can't consume more than what we produce. There is no such thing as a right to have things except in misconception. We can redistribute what is available and ensure all are equally deprived, but it is better to take advantage of unused resources (the unemployed), reduce the inefficiency in overhead (government) and make more available, so all who work can receive more abundantly.

The choice is, do we encourage inefficient productivity and divide the meager amount produced equally, or do we encourage efficiency to produce more so there is more available to be shared. It's true that this will result in some having more than others, but this process has created the most affluent nation on earth with the largest middle class in history. Even the poor in our country are considered wealthy by the truly poor in other countries, and the poor in other countries do not have realistic opportunities for self advancement. We take this for granted.

The promise to divide things equally is empty. No nation in history has eliminated the poor or the wealthy. Redistribution has always taken from one group and made another group rich. The cost of the empty dream has always been freedom.

Unions require company employees to belong to the unions. Employees/union members, are required to pay dues in order to work. Theoretically, the unions are supposed to benefit the workers, but studies show their benefits are no greater than non-union work places. It can be argued that the non-union companies have to pay higher wages to get employees who would otherwise work at unionized companies. This may be true. While the debate is focused on this issue, it is overlooked that the union leaders are made wealthy. They are making many times more than the union members and they are using the union members money to fund candidates the member may not support. They use the members dues to gain power and enrich themselves, while the member has additional requirements to live by.., less freedom.

When the government sets out to ensure equal distribution, it does so by taking from those who have worked to improve their circumstance; equal distribution is a policy that guarantees that no one can excel.., except those managing the distribution.

This November there will be an election and we will make the choice. The choice is the empty promise of something for nothing.., but freedom, or the opportunity to work for prosperity.