Despite the historic evils of socialism, Democrats are
proposing an evolving agenda of Medicare for all, free college tuition, higher
taxes, guaranteed basic income, abortion on demand, Green energy and most
recently payment of reparations for the injustices of slavery past. I ask the
rank and file, the politician and the bureaucrat: Where's the injustices of
slavery. I ask the rank and file, the politician and the bureaucrat: Where's
the money coming from? Therein lies the problem. Do we rob Peter to pay Paul?
In other words, do we take something away from one person to pay another,
leaving the former at a disadvantage; expressed in a different way, discharging
one debt only to incur another. That's problematic is it not?
Even as we look at America’s own romance with socialism, we can see little success. Has not our efforts in America's five-decade war on poverty, as well-intentioned as it may have been, has been a complete failure? After trillions of dollars in taxpayers’ expenditures on the War on Poverty, destitution not only persists, it has become a flourishing line of work. What investors/stakeholders would allow a CEO to disburse money without the expectation of attaining a profit? As the happening now, frontline AOC, Tlaib, Omar, Pressley type socialist/leftist wave makes its way to the halls of Congress, I, like many Americans fear that we may return to the doomed, if selfless, efforts of LBJ’s Great Society, when throwing taxpayers money at social programs made us feel virtuous and with any luck guaranteed election/re-election to Washington’s political Swamp. A wide-ranging shift in thinking must occur. Success must be measured not by the amount of taxpayer’s money thrown at poverty resolutions, but by the results. In other words, how many people are escaping poverty as a result of an initiated program. Today’s Democrats, like Millennials have yet to differentiate equality and equity. Here lies the Conundrum. The difference between equity and quality is quite clear, but those who are not aware of the shades or nuances of the English language often fail to distinguish the variance between these two words. The difference is not great but is based upon the fact that not everyone has been created equally by our creator and has requirements different from others. Are not some people born with high IQ’s while other’s flounder at the lower end of the intelligence scale? Are not some people tall while others are vertically challenged? Are not some people overweight, while others maintain current height and weight standards? Do you expect all of them to eat the same quantity and quality of food? Therein rests the difference between equity and equality.
Is it not past time that we as conservatives begin to combat utopian socialism, welfarism and neo-Marxism? We must target and oppose today’s trendy left politicos who espouse radical collectivist political views. Contrary to academia, history, both recent and past tell us that socialism is not about justice, it's not about equality, it's not about lifting-up the poor and downtrodden. It's about one thing only: Power for the ruling class. And, the more power they get, the more they thirst for. They want to run health care, run transportation and finance, run energy, education, run everything including marriage and religion. They want the power to decide who wins and who loses, who's up and who's down, what's true and what's untrue, and even who lives and who dies. Today’s Democrats want to rewrite our nation’s history and eliminate the parts they disagree with.
Is there a danger with propagating socialism? Is socialism sensible? Does it even resonate with America’s working or middle class? Facts are facts, this being so, socialism may sound reasonable, but it never works. As often than not it comes with the promise of free healthcare, free education, more and better jobs for all. Some advocates have the best of intents: to reduce poverty by evening the playing field. But there are basically no long-lasting instances of it working to lessen poverty. Contrary to those who advocate socialism as a means to an end, it generally increases poverty to all citizens in all walks of life but those whose hands wield the power. Data tells us that Baby Boomers and Generation X (I, being one) are far more cynical of socialism. Generations preceding Millennials have seen enough to recognize socialism for what it is and where it eventually leads. Both Baby Boomers and Generation X have experienced the benefits of Capitalism. Think about it. Has capitalism not unlocked more doors of opportunity for society than it has closed? The problem with millennials and Generation Z isn’t that they’re budding socialists or collectivists, but that they’re idealistic enough to fall into the trap of believing people like Bernie Sanders, AOC, Pocahontas...Essentially, young people have been duped by the deluded of generations past, acceding to their ignorance.
Even as we look at America’s own romance with socialism, we can see little success. Has not our efforts in America's five-decade war on poverty, as well-intentioned as it may have been, has been a complete failure? After trillions of dollars in taxpayers’ expenditures on the War on Poverty, destitution not only persists, it has become a flourishing line of work. What investors/stakeholders would allow a CEO to disburse money without the expectation of attaining a profit? As the happening now, frontline AOC, Tlaib, Omar, Pressley type socialist/leftist wave makes its way to the halls of Congress, I, like many Americans fear that we may return to the doomed, if selfless, efforts of LBJ’s Great Society, when throwing taxpayers money at social programs made us feel virtuous and with any luck guaranteed election/re-election to Washington’s political Swamp. A wide-ranging shift in thinking must occur. Success must be measured not by the amount of taxpayer’s money thrown at poverty resolutions, but by the results. In other words, how many people are escaping poverty as a result of an initiated program. Today’s Democrats, like Millennials have yet to differentiate equality and equity. Here lies the Conundrum. The difference between equity and quality is quite clear, but those who are not aware of the shades or nuances of the English language often fail to distinguish the variance between these two words. The difference is not great but is based upon the fact that not everyone has been created equally by our creator and has requirements different from others. Are not some people born with high IQ’s while other’s flounder at the lower end of the intelligence scale? Are not some people tall while others are vertically challenged? Are not some people overweight, while others maintain current height and weight standards? Do you expect all of them to eat the same quantity and quality of food? Therein rests the difference between equity and equality.
Is it not past time that we as conservatives begin to combat utopian socialism, welfarism and neo-Marxism? We must target and oppose today’s trendy left politicos who espouse radical collectivist political views. Contrary to academia, history, both recent and past tell us that socialism is not about justice, it's not about equality, it's not about lifting-up the poor and downtrodden. It's about one thing only: Power for the ruling class. And, the more power they get, the more they thirst for. They want to run health care, run transportation and finance, run energy, education, run everything including marriage and religion. They want the power to decide who wins and who loses, who's up and who's down, what's true and what's untrue, and even who lives and who dies. Today’s Democrats want to rewrite our nation’s history and eliminate the parts they disagree with.
Is there a danger with propagating socialism? Is socialism sensible? Does it even resonate with America’s working or middle class? Facts are facts, this being so, socialism may sound reasonable, but it never works. As often than not it comes with the promise of free healthcare, free education, more and better jobs for all. Some advocates have the best of intents: to reduce poverty by evening the playing field. But there are basically no long-lasting instances of it working to lessen poverty. Contrary to those who advocate socialism as a means to an end, it generally increases poverty to all citizens in all walks of life but those whose hands wield the power. Data tells us that Baby Boomers and Generation X (I, being one) are far more cynical of socialism. Generations preceding Millennials have seen enough to recognize socialism for what it is and where it eventually leads. Both Baby Boomers and Generation X have experienced the benefits of Capitalism. Think about it. Has capitalism not unlocked more doors of opportunity for society than it has closed? The problem with millennials and Generation Z isn’t that they’re budding socialists or collectivists, but that they’re idealistic enough to fall into the trap of believing people like Bernie Sanders, AOC, Pocahontas...Essentially, young people have been duped by the deluded of generations past, acceding to their ignorance.
No comments:
Post a Comment