December 07, 2006
Our Socialist Pearl Harbor
At this moment 65 years ago, over four hundred aircraft on six Japanese aircraft carriers were being prepped for an attack on Pearl Harbor. It was the first time a naval force of that strength was used to attack fixed, land-based installations and ships at anchor. Every American knows how successful the attack was, not just because of the lives and ships lost, but because of the blow it leveled against our society. We were asleep and unprepared. We had let the vastness of two oceans lull us into a false sense of security. And we were racists---the glasses-wearing, buck-toothed Japs might attack us, but we’d whip ‘em in short order because, well, we’re Americans. And Americans are winners.
We did win, but the cost was enormous. In the end, the United States was made a superpower, both in material wealth and influence. There are those who contend that we did not seek the role; others say it was exactly what those in power wanted. Either way, the last half of the 20th century can rightly be seen as a time of American dominance. Yes, the Soviets had their influence, but while they had missiles and ships and tanks, they did not have Coke, Levi’s and General Motors.
Those of us born in the United States after 1945 have known nothing but incredible wealth and prosperity. Many see this as a permanent state, as if the lifestyle we enjoy is not supported by forces that must be fed in order to continue. It is not bedrock we live on, but a sort of mud which we must constantly shovel out of the way lest it bury us. Unlike some others who have no faith in future generations, I believe there will always be people willing to shovel the mud. What I fear, what I can not shake, is my thought that the roof is falling in on us.
I will not bore you with the worn-out comparisons between the Roman Empire and 21st century America. We are complacent, but we have been complacent before. We are arrogant, but we have always been arrogant. We have been involved in endless brush fire wars since the early years of the 20th century. There is, indeed, nothing new under the sun.
Except for this one thing: as a society, we have never danced so closely with socialism as we are today. To this nation’s founders, government was a necessary evil that needed to be watch, pruned and, if necessary, pulled out by the roots. Government needs to exist because there are tasks that must be done but which can not be efficiently or profitably done by private enterprise. National defense is a good example: unless you want to turn the military into a bunch of marauding pirates, they will never make money.
Somewhere along the road, our federal government stopped being about basics and started being a bloated nanny. One can make the argument that the Civil War saw the growth of the federal tit; I tend to think that the change came during the Great Depression when FDR created a giant bureaucracy with the intention of turning tax money into prosperity. The bloat continued through the early 60’s, when LBJ’s Great Society programs meant more and more federal money would be handed out---some to the genuinely poor, some to those who quickly figured out how to game the system. Dependence was quickly created, not on family, but on the invisible man in Washington. It was all done in the name of compassion.
And that’s how things remain today: money given equals compassion shown. There was a time when Republicans (who were mainly conservatives) and some Democrats stood in the way of wasteful spending. This seems to no longer be the case. The surpluses of the Clinton years were mainly smoke and mirrors and were more aberration than a result of policy. Today, only a few voices in the political wilderness are calling for spending cuts; instead, the arguments center on where to spend the money, not if it should be spent at all.
Is our national debt going to ruin us? Probably not, but I’m not an economist. The biggest threat is the society this spending has created: a world in which so many safety nets exist that most people have no idea that there is a hard, cold ground underneath. Most of the world lives on that ground, struggling to put one foot in front of the other. The thought that we, too, could live that way one day because of what we have become seems fanciful, but it is very real.
Look at the example of Europe. Most of the western half of the continent exists as a socialist conglomerate with long vacations, national healthcare and rot at the center. Leftists here point at Europe as the future when in fact Europe has no future if it continues on its present path. Within 100 years, the continent will be a Muslim enclave and all the government spending in the world will not save traditional European civilization. The cries of “What happened?” will be drowned out by the call to prayer.
Our fate will be different, but no less tragic, if we do not take harsh decisions, the same ones our grandfathers made in the years after Pearl Harbor. We are not much for harshness now and those who promote severe decisions are seen as crackpots, militarists or fascists. Barry Goldwater’s famous quote, “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice” will never be heard coming from this President’s lips. But it is exactly that kind of tough talk and action that is needed if we are to give to our grandchildren the lives we now have.
Posted by Matthew at December 7, 2006 11:47 AMTrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.opaquelucidity.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/938
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Our Socialist Pearl Harbor:
» akoya pearl sets from akoya pearl sets
It is for sure that securing correct material on this matter can be difficult. [Read More]
» \'bankruptcy\' from \'bankruptcy\'
[Read More]
» pearl necklaces from pearl necklaces
Almost all stories you locate have all you\'re searching for. [Read More]
Excellent Post.
"The biggest threat is the society this spending has created: a world in which so many safety nets exist that most people have no idea that there is a hard, cold ground underneath." Amen to that.
I am a national debt fanatic. $8.5 Trillion and counting scares the crap out of me. There will come a time (and it will be soon) that we will have to choose between bankruptcy and cutting services. If you can follow rudimentary math, anyone can see that the national debt graph is an exponential curve. The old excuse of % of GDP (which now stands at a staggering 65%), or deficit spending got us out of WW2, is like a drug addict somehow claiming that he needs the crack in order to survive.
The recent excuse has been "But ... we are in a war". OK, then ACT like it!. The WW2 generation sacrificed at home to support a war overseas. There were supply rations, war bonds, heck even production factories converted to make arms. Your favorite bridge over your backyard pond needs repair? Your favorite social program needs funding? Tough.. we are at war. Sure WW2 led to deficit spending but ss soon as the war was over the % of Debt to GDP constantly came down. Why? People from the president down to the farmer on the hill SAVED MONEY. Till we hit 1980. Then all heck broke loose.
This is INSANITY - as defined by Einstein. Repeating the same process year after year expecting a different result. In today's economy we CANNOT spend ourselves out of debt like we did after WW2. Japan tried it for 10 years and broke the bank. Their debt hit >150% of GDP before they stopped.
The current generation (self included) has no concept of sacrifice. We want our trillion dollar overseas war and our bridges to nowhere at the same time. We expect it and demand it of our govt. - like it is somehow our birthright. And then we blame our politicians for our greed. Note to all - your politicians will give you EXACTLY what you want. Mixing metaphors again but drug dealers don't give a frap about your health.
You wan't change? Begin at home. Eliminate your household debt. Then go to your lil' town council meetings and work on theirs. Then vote people into congress that will make the tough choices. Cutting taxes by increasing the debt at the same time is NOT conservatism.
/End Rant
Posted by: Hash![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.opaquelucidity.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 7, 2006 04:13 PM
Thanks, Hash. Your comments about the sacrifice during WW2 remind me of what happened soon after 9/11. What was the message? SPEND!!! It was healthy for the economy in the short term, but I have to wonder what it did for personal debt.
Posted by: Matt_D at December 7, 2006 05:15 PM
Great post Matt. I see things in people's houses that I know they can't afford. I can go for a walk around my block and about 75 percent of the houses are sporting huge flat screen TVs. People are in so much debt they can't pay it off and they wouldn't think of maybe getting a second job or of letting go of some creature comforts in order to pay it down. They figure they'll die in debt and it will be someone else's problem.
Great comments Hash. You & Matt always say "it" so well.
Posted by: David at December 7, 2006 09:19 PM
I'm getting frustrated at how society in general does not see debt as bad. Because of this, prices start soaring on cars and especially homes, where people buy the biggest house for which they can "qualify." The amount of house that I can AFFORD is a dump because of the inflation!
Posted by: Matt at December 8, 2006 08:36 AM
Matt, I believe this posting was one of your very best. I can tell you placed a lot of thought into composing it. I really appreciate the transitions from one thought to the next developing into the overall point. That’s a difficult task, at least for me and I always take note when I see someone doing it right.
At first, I was going to respond with a post describing my mutual disgust of many American’s sense of entitlements. I had several anecdotal cases which I believed highlighted the abuses of tax payers and materialistic gains at the expense of others. But, it seems my fellow bloggers have beaten me to this punch.
I read your posting again and took better notice of the following:
>>Our fate will be different, but no less tragic, if we do not take harsh decisions…
I decided to start a small list of “harsh decisions” that might foster a higher degree of individual accountability among our fellow citizens and reduce the size of government. Or, maybe just incite a small riot. :-) I readily admit some of these have faults, might be offensive and appear outwardly as callous. Bear in mind, these are “harsh decisions” and are not intended for the faint of heart. Nor is this list by any means exhaustive and I would therefore welcome any additional “harsh decisions” contributed by others.
So, without any further introduction and in no particular order:
(1) Upon exiting any penitentiary, all former incarcerated individuals will be issued a tax lien. The lien will be paid via garnishing of wages in order to compensate the good citizens who footed the bill for their 3 meals a day and a roof over their head.
(2) All welfare recipients should be limited to a maximum of 12 months consecutive benefits and 3 years total over a lifetime. Stop providing benefits for having children out of wedlock.
(3) Anyone under the age of 50 years old should have the option to invest their social security as they see fit. Anyone under the age of 30 should never be entitled to any social security retirement benefits.
(4) Plea bargaining should be outlawed as a practice in criminal court.
(5) Texas should be the example of capital punishment to be emulated by the other 49 states.
(6) Prisoners should be forced to wear pink at all times and participate in chain gangs.
(7) The entire tax code should be tossed and replaced with a single federal sales tax. A half percentage discount to anyone who has zero debt liability.
(8) Except in extreme cases and voted upon nationally, federal dollars should not be used for local programs. If you want your own bridge or duck pond, then raise the money among your local citizens.
(9) Repeal the McCain – Feingold bill and give back my 1st amendment rights.
(10) Child pedophilia should be eligible for the death penalty.
(11) Cancel all farm subsidies.
(12) Deport all illegal immigrants.
(13) Prosecute CEO’s whose companies utilize illegal immigrants.
(14) Personal bankruptcy filings should be limited to once per individual.
(15) Divorces should not be eligible for ‘no fault’ proceedings.
(16) In civil court, plaintiffs failing to win a verdict in their favor should automatically be forced to compensate the defendant for all legal expenses incurred.
As Hash said, /End Rant.
at December 8, 2006 11:49 AM
Well written, Travis. Number 16 is my favorite.
Posted by: Matt_D at December 8, 2006 12:05 PM
Nice ones Travis.
My addition:
(17) Public Service should be just that - Public Service. Max. 2 years term, minimum compensation for food + housing. Like Jury Duty. Work 80 days out of the year - rest of the year go back home to being farmers, factory workers or car salesman like our forefathers used to do. NO CAREER Politicians. 75% or so fire departments in this nation are composed of volunteers. I don't see what these so called "lawmakers" do on a day to day basis is any more important. Thats what being a public servant should be about.
(18) Corollary - Wages and compensation for politicians + pay hikes should be voted on at a local/state/federal level. For kicks, this vote should be held 1 week after tax day. :-)
at December 8, 2006 12:55 PM
"Anyone under the age of 30 should never be entitled to any social security retirement benefits."
I don't think this one needs to be put into law. It'll happen anyway.
Posted by: Matt at December 8, 2006 02:28 PM
This is your best post yet Matt, I've sent it to my family and friends, under your name of course.
Posted by: Dave Schieber at December 8, 2006 11:02 PMThanks, Dave. That means a lot to me.
Posted by: Matt_D at December 8, 2006 11:10 PM
It's well written Matt. There are bigger problems facing the US though.
As for Travis’s list:
(1) So now an undereducated, unemployed criminal has to re-enter society in the negative. IF he can find a job at all, his pay, which will be very low, will be docked. Hmm, I wonder if he might resort to … something he already knows … perhaps … crime. Brilliant. You’re basically insuring that ex-cons will never reform.
(2) Welfare is abused, there’s no question, but there are legitimate cases where people can’t work and don’t have family to support them. What are you going to do with those cases, let them freeze on the street? The very fact you’re American, not homeless, and on-line means that you’re part of a very privileged segment of the global population, and you have the audacity to complain because some poor mentally ill person has food and shelter at society’s expense.
(3) Yeah, let’s all put our SS money in the next Enron.
(4) Do you have any idea how many people would be in prison? The US already has the highest percentage of inmates of any other country on earth, and you want to double or triple that? Umm, that’s going to increase federal and state spending.
(5) I’m not opposed to capital punishment, but Texas is a police state and wouldn’t want any other states to emulate it.
(6) You’re talking about slavery. That’s part of what made America great in the first place, perhaps it’s time we brought it back, right?
(7) Really? No deductions for business expenses? No deductions for mortgage interest? So much for an entrepreneurial, ownership society.
(10) First, pedophilia is by definition about children, so “child pedophilia” is redundant. Ok, so if an 18 year old gropes a 15 year old at a party, he should die? You’re utopia is really taking shape.
(12) Do you mean all at once? That would cost a colossal amount, and would wreck or severely damage many businesses, agriculture in particular. Furthermore, what are you going to do with the children of these illegals, who are legal because they were born here?
at December 9, 2006 11:40 AM
"Yeah, let’s all put our SS money in the next Enron."
That's a gross over-simplification. If you look at the NYSE during ANY decade of the 20th century, the overall outcome is one of growth. Enron was an aberration, not the rule.
Currently, there is no "lockbox" in which all our SS money is sitting, waiting for our retirement. The money goes into a general fund and can be used for anything. In the meantime, a giant pile of IOUs is sitting somewhere, and these must be paid.
So, with that in mind, investing our SS taxes into private enterprise is a bad idea in comparison?
Posted by: Matt_D at December 9, 2006 12:26 PM
Nmexpat,
>>” (1) So now an undereducated, unemployed criminal has to re-enter society in the negative. IF he can find a job at all, his pay, which will be very low, will be docked. Hmm, I wonder if he might resort to … something he already knows … perhaps … crime. Brilliant. You’re basically insuring that ex-cons will never reform.”
Taking a sympathetic view of a criminal’s plight of re-assimilation is a thinly veiled red herring in my opinion. It ignores the fundamental element of personal accountability. My list began with the premise that many people exploit the government, which is often too willing to shield individuals from the harsh realities of responsibility and the natural consequences of personal decisions. The ownership of reforming one’s self from a life of criminality does not rest upon anyone other than the criminal himself. “You’re basically insuring that ex-cons will never reform.” I beg to differ this particular point. I am not culpable of another man’s demise whose choice of violating law was his and not mine. If he finds himself re-entering society in the “negative” and returns to violating laws, this is a lesson for him to learn and perhaps at the prospect of accumulating further debt in the form of tax liens he might more carefully weigh the decision to return to a life of crime.
>>”(2) Welfare is abused, there’s no question, but there are legitimate cases where people can’t work and don’t have family to support them. What are you going to do with those cases, let them freeze on the street? The very fact you’re American, not homeless, and on-line means that you’re part of a very privileged segment of the global population, and you have the audacity to complain because some poor mentally ill person has food and shelter at society’s expense. “
Pardon my oversight of not distinguishing between the minority “mentally ill” and the considerable majority of generational welfare recipients who are merely lazy. “…you have the audacity to complain because some poor mentally ill person has food and shelter at society’s expense.” Is this really an effective debate technique for you? Claiming someone has stated something where many witnesses can easily determine for themselves this was never implied or could be easily inferred. If it alleviates your concern, my remarks regarding welfare were intended for the abundant masses of people who are receiving our tax dollars and their qualification for such charity is nothing more than apathy and laziness.
>>”(3) Yeah, let’s all put our SS money in the next Enron.”
See Matt’s response above. I might add: only the naïve investor would suggest or believe that investing in a singular stock is wise. Some research on mutual funds might be warranted.
>>”(4) Do you have any idea how many people would be in prison? The US already has the highest percentage of inmates of any other country on earth, and you want to double or triple that? Umm, that’s going to increase federal and state spending.”
Do you have any idea how many people have avoided the equitable application of justice to their crime? Bartering of punishment does nothing but trivialize the process of justice. It reasonably concludes that personal liability is something to forfeit, exchange or bargain away if in possession of the desired knowledge of other crimes. It exonerates the guilty in the vein of judicial expediency and absolves and diminishes individuals of wrongdoing. As for the increase of federal and state spending, please see #1 above.
>>”(5) I’m not opposed to capital punishment, but Texas is a police state and wouldn’t want any other states to emulate it.”
I am happy for you.
>>”(6) You’re talking about slavery. That’s part of what made America great in the first place, perhaps it’s time we brought it back, right?”
Yet another hyperbole disguised as a legitimate rebuttal. I am not sure which is the greater offense: your willingness to exaggerate and misconstrue another man’s words or your utilizing the tragic history of slavery as bantering points in a discussion. Either way, if you are incapable of distinguishing between incarcerated individuals whom have committed crimes working in a chain gang and slavery, then I find myself at a loss of words that could effectively communicate your distasteful tactic.
>>”(7) Really? No deductions for business expenses? No deductions for mortgage interest? So much for an entrepreneurial, ownership society.”
The concept in providing a discount to those who have zero debt liability is: to reward those who have been responsible and present less of a burden on society by not having debt.
>>”(10) First, pedophilia is by definition about children, so “child pedophilia” is redundant. Ok, so if an 18 year old gropes a 15 year old at a party, he should die? You’re utopia is really taking shape.”
I appreciate the correction regarding “child pedophilia” being redundant. But to answer your question, I would imagine that some common sense clause could be included to protect the merely stupid versus the true pedophile.
>>”(12) Do you mean all at once? That would cost a colossal amount, and would wreck or severely damage many businesses, agriculture in particular. Furthermore, what are you going to do with the children of these illegals, who are legal because they were born here?”
Why should I concern myself with the health of a business that actively participates in illegal activity? Some how, I don’t believe the sky would fall. Perhaps all the former welfare recipients could finally find a job. You seem pre-occupied with guarding the welfare of those who transgress the law. What about the fair-minded small business owner who refuses to break the law and competes against businesses (that you want to protect) that make a mockery of our law? As for the children, I think it’s important for a child to live with their parents wherever that might be.
Sorry for such a long post everyone. If you managed to read this far, thanks for your time.
at December 9, 2006 02:18 PM
It's certainly a gross over-simplification, but you make those all the time, so I thought it was fair game ;-)
It's true -- the NYSE has had a stellar run, but that doesn't mean that there's not a hardcore reckoning coming. In the grand scheme of things, 100 years is nothing, and in the meanwhile China and India are rising fast, the the EU, despite what you think, is a force to be reconed with.
I know there are problems with SS, but I don't think privatization is a panacea, and I think it's good for a society to have -- at the very least -- a bare-bones safety net for the people that need it. That's the trick though; having a cushion for the people that genuinely need it while not letting the system become a cash-cow for the lazy.
Posted by: nmexpat at December 9, 2006 02:21 PM
"It's certainly a gross over-simplification, but you make those all the time, so I thought it was fair game ;-)"
And you are welcome to call them that when you perceive they exist.
Posted by: Matt_D at December 9, 2006 08:33 PM