Well they finally did it. The Congress was able to get together and disagree enough to put out a bill that nobody likes! Kinda sounds counter-productive, doesn't it? I have to admit that defining the "current" argument in Washington these days is just about impossible, what with the 'he said/she said' bickering going back and forth and the multitude of pundits declaring what is "really important" in the current debate.
After all was signed and finished, the reporting states that there was really no reduction in spending, but in fact, the government would spend 2% more next year than this year and 4% more the following year! The bottom line: no one in Washington has enough nerve to address government spending. Our elected officials are simply pandering to the masses with their so-called stands on either spread the wealth and tax the rich or no more spending and cut the taxes. It really doesn't matter which side you agree with, because you didn't get either in this compromise.
What would happen if individuals handled their finances like this? The result is obvious: bankruptcy! Real people have one option - pay your bills or else. Why should the government have a different set of options? Afterall, our debtors want to be paid. The people we've promised money to want to be paid. If we've promised to pay them, then pay them we must (especially if it's simply a matter of printing more money). But we must stop the spending (and thereby the matter of printing more money).
We don't need higher taxes. We need to stop the spending. That means programs will get reduced or totally cut out. That is not a good platform for a politician to run on but it is the right platform. The debate in congress should be about what programs get cut back and how far, not how much more we can bring in.
In a normal household where both people are working, the decision on how to fix the finances always starts at the same place - stop spending. It's really not that difficult to decide. It's painful to implement and that is where the problem starts. Americans are whiners! They don't like pain or sacrifice, but both are part of the antidote to the snakebite of rampant overspending. You either take the anti-venom or die. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Thursday, June 23, 2011
The "New Society" - sans oil
I firmly believe that our love affair with oil and all the so-called progress that it brought in the wake of the industrial revolution, is coming to an end in the next 40 years. This does not make me sad, suicidal, anti-American or anything else, except, maybe: aware. And that is what I want for America today. That is what I want for my children and my grandchildren and my great-grandchildren. Starting now, I want people to be aware of where society is heading and to start think-tanks that will help put solutions in front of the citizens of this country.
What am I talking about? If you read my last article you know that I believe the publicly-available oil will be gone in approximately 40 years or less. As the worlds population continues to increase exponentially and the demand on oil rises with it, cheap oil (if there is any of it left) will evaporate from the pumps. The price of gasoline and diesel will necessarily escalate to the point that only the extremely wealthy and governments will have access to it. That means automobiles for the masses will dwindle to a few. Public transportation will be the major mode of moving about and everything that depended upon oil will skyrocket in price, or no longer be available. This paradigm change requires a completely new way of viewing our future.
No longer can we think in terms of oil always being available; it is a physical impossibility. The media would have you believe that is not the case, but as usual they are lying. We need to to rethink how we will live in the post-industrial world. I don't think it's a Mad Max scenario we're moving towards, but I do believe the new world will favor the agrarian world of the 16th and 17th century. For some of you, this scenario will be impossible to embrace. Unfortunately, you will be in the group that was least prepared for the inevitable.
Let me stop here for a moment and let my faith speak. I absolutely believe in the coming return of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and the renewing of everything in him. This is not my eschatology working itself in a peak-oil vision. I do not advocate violence, nor believe that it will serve any purpose. Trying to overthrow the governments as Greece is doing is of no value.
For starters, this will happen in steps. We won't wake up one morning to the announcement that gas is 20.00 a gallon. The change will be incremental. What will be deceiving is that the media and our government will not be warning us of the forthcoming crash - they will be telling us that it is just another price blip in oil. They'll say don't worry, it's going to get better. The rhetoric will continue as it has since the debacle started in 2008.
People will advocate alternative sources of energy, reducing energy usage, saving the whales and hugging some more trees. While all of these things are good, they are only temporary. The loss of abundant cheap petroleum, and eventually coal, will radically alter the way we are able to live. To put off preparations for a drastically changed future society because we believe that drilling for oil in Alaska or the discovery of some alternative power source will save us is just burying our heads in the sand. Glenn Beck, who I enjoy listening to, is talking about diminishing oil supplies and how that will affect us, but he is still not pushing as hard as I think we need to for a new paradigm.
Almost everything that makes our lives what we are used to, is made, produced or delivered, through oil. Whatever alternative energy resource we come up with won't replace petroleum in the manufacturing of the stuff that our lives are filled with today.
I'm going to continue writing in this series as I get new ideas, but my goal for now is to get you thinking about what society might look like sans (without) oil. God bless.
What am I talking about? If you read my last article you know that I believe the publicly-available oil will be gone in approximately 40 years or less. As the worlds population continues to increase exponentially and the demand on oil rises with it, cheap oil (if there is any of it left) will evaporate from the pumps. The price of gasoline and diesel will necessarily escalate to the point that only the extremely wealthy and governments will have access to it. That means automobiles for the masses will dwindle to a few. Public transportation will be the major mode of moving about and everything that depended upon oil will skyrocket in price, or no longer be available. This paradigm change requires a completely new way of viewing our future.
No longer can we think in terms of oil always being available; it is a physical impossibility. The media would have you believe that is not the case, but as usual they are lying. We need to to rethink how we will live in the post-industrial world. I don't think it's a Mad Max scenario we're moving towards, but I do believe the new world will favor the agrarian world of the 16th and 17th century. For some of you, this scenario will be impossible to embrace. Unfortunately, you will be in the group that was least prepared for the inevitable.
Let me stop here for a moment and let my faith speak. I absolutely believe in the coming return of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and the renewing of everything in him. This is not my eschatology working itself in a peak-oil vision. I do not advocate violence, nor believe that it will serve any purpose. Trying to overthrow the governments as Greece is doing is of no value.
For starters, this will happen in steps. We won't wake up one morning to the announcement that gas is 20.00 a gallon. The change will be incremental. What will be deceiving is that the media and our government will not be warning us of the forthcoming crash - they will be telling us that it is just another price blip in oil. They'll say don't worry, it's going to get better. The rhetoric will continue as it has since the debacle started in 2008.
People will advocate alternative sources of energy, reducing energy usage, saving the whales and hugging some more trees. While all of these things are good, they are only temporary. The loss of abundant cheap petroleum, and eventually coal, will radically alter the way we are able to live. To put off preparations for a drastically changed future society because we believe that drilling for oil in Alaska or the discovery of some alternative power source will save us is just burying our heads in the sand. Glenn Beck, who I enjoy listening to, is talking about diminishing oil supplies and how that will affect us, but he is still not pushing as hard as I think we need to for a new paradigm.
Almost everything that makes our lives what we are used to, is made, produced or delivered, through oil. Whatever alternative energy resource we come up with won't replace petroleum in the manufacturing of the stuff that our lives are filled with today.
I'm going to continue writing in this series as I get new ideas, but my goal for now is to get you thinking about what society might look like sans (without) oil. God bless.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Are you buying gold to give to the government?
Most of us today do not remember that in 1933, FDR signed an Executive order (actually 2) that prohibited individuals from hoarding gold and also made it a crime to transfer gold holdings to a foreign country to avoid turning your gold over to the government.
Even though it sounds outlandish, what would keep that from happening again today? Nothing. FDR declared a national banking emergency and confiscated the public's gold holdings. We are definitely moving into the greatest banking crisis in history and gold sales are at record levels. This would be right up our government's alley.
Considering that a great deal of the wealth of middle-class America has already been robbed (through inflation, devalued housing and investment fraud), the current scare that has many individuals spending what available cash they have on gold, seems to be the right path for the government to complete the destruction of the middle class. They will wait until we've spent the rest of our "loose cash" on gold or silver and then just take it under the pretense of a national emergency.
As ludicrous as this may seem, I ask you to analyze this possibility through the eyes of history. 1933 is a time when the government is struggling to hold the economy together and FDR showed that whatever was in the best interest of the country (read: rich folks) was what he intended to do.
Why, just 17 years before that the government allowed the institution of the Federal Income Tax which transferred the burden of supporting the politician's various spending proposals and borrowing endeavors, from the corporations to the general public. They also set up the Federal Reserve System which allowed the government to control the value of money in our country for the purpose of keeping the rich, rich. (If you don't believe that, please review the current bailout scenario where only the "money" was bailed out; those that were too big to fail.)
Just thought I would jot these notes down as the possibility of yet another robbery of the American citizenry was underway.
Even though it sounds outlandish, what would keep that from happening again today? Nothing. FDR declared a national banking emergency and confiscated the public's gold holdings. We are definitely moving into the greatest banking crisis in history and gold sales are at record levels. This would be right up our government's alley.
Considering that a great deal of the wealth of middle-class America has already been robbed (through inflation, devalued housing and investment fraud), the current scare that has many individuals spending what available cash they have on gold, seems to be the right path for the government to complete the destruction of the middle class. They will wait until we've spent the rest of our "loose cash" on gold or silver and then just take it under the pretense of a national emergency.
As ludicrous as this may seem, I ask you to analyze this possibility through the eyes of history. 1933 is a time when the government is struggling to hold the economy together and FDR showed that whatever was in the best interest of the country (read: rich folks) was what he intended to do.
Why, just 17 years before that the government allowed the institution of the Federal Income Tax which transferred the burden of supporting the politician's various spending proposals and borrowing endeavors, from the corporations to the general public. They also set up the Federal Reserve System which allowed the government to control the value of money in our country for the purpose of keeping the rich, rich. (If you don't believe that, please review the current bailout scenario where only the "money" was bailed out; those that were too big to fail.)
Just thought I would jot these notes down as the possibility of yet another robbery of the American citizenry was underway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)