WHY WE HAVE NO REAL CHOICE EXCEPT TO LIMIT THE POWER OF GOVERNMENT

When our nation was created, the Federal Government was small. Even state and local governments were relatively small. Then, because our government seemed to work well, citizens gave our government more to do, starting with our local governments. Thus, local governments took over the responsibility for the education of children. Good idea? Then why don’t most people know the answers to these simple questions?

1. What makes it moral to have a government? What makes taxing people different from stealing from them? When does government become an immoral activity?
2. Why is the dollar worth anything? When we don’t back our money with gold or silver or anything else, why do merchants accept our money when we buy goods and services?
3. How are the moral standards that most Americans still practice different from the moral standards of our ancestors practiced 2000 years ago? Why do they differ?
4. What is the difference between a democracy and a republic?
5. What is a hypothesis? When do we have scientific proof for a hypothesis?

None of the questions above are especially complex. Yet most people never give these questions much thought.

1. Traditionally, we would look for the answer to the first question in the Declaration of Independence (Declaration of Independence: A Transcription | National Archives).
2. The second question relates to the fact we have fiat money (Fiat Money Definition (investopedia.com)). The fiat that make the dollar worth something is the requirement to pay our taxes with dollars.
3. Why that third question? What happened 2,000 years ago? Christianity began to spread. Christians believed in loving their neighbors because God created all of us in His image. The ancient Pagans believed and today’s new Pagans believe no such thing (see WHO IS THIS MAN? by JOHN ORTBERG — PART 7 – Citizen Tom).
4. The fourth question relates to our Constitution. When they ratified our Constitution, the generations that founded this nation deliberately created a republic (see THE ADVANTAGE OF A REPUBLIC OVER A DEMOCRACY – Citizen Tom). Why? They understood something about their own wickedness (see Jeremiah 17:9-10 below). Because the founding generations understood their own limitations, they understood that in a pure democracy the majority would abuse the rights of the minority. So, they chose a republican form of government, a form of government that limits the prerogatives of the majority and protects the rights of the minority.

Jeremiah 17:9-10 New American Standard Bible

“The heart is more deceitful than all else

And is desperately sick;

Who can understand it?

I, the Lord, search the heart,

I test the mind,

To give to each person according to his ways,

According to the results of his deeds.

5. The fifth question stems from the observation that we have scientific hypotheses that for political reasons their proponents insist we must accept as facts. These include: the Theory of Evolution, the Big Bang Theory, and the potency of green house gases with respect to Global Warming. Yet the scientific method (Scientific Method, Measurements and the | Encyclopedia.com) requires us to experimentally test and verify a hypothesis before we accept it as scientifically proven. That has not been done with respect to any of these theories. We cannot test these theories experimentally.

So, how do those questions relate to the title this post? We have people, supposedly smart and generous souls, who constantly campaign spend government money to solve various problems, but we don’t have the capacity or the discipline to do all the things we would like to do, especially when it involves other people’s money. For example, to end poverty, supposedly we should have a guaranteed minimum income. We have already tried something similar with Social Security and Medicare. So it is that half of the Federal Government’s budget is spent on these programs. One can only guess at the financial disaster that would result if we put the entire labor force on welfare.

Would a guaranteed minimum income discourage people from working? In time, it would.

If we ever implemented such a thing as a guaranteed minimum income, we would in an ideal world give everyone just enough money to live on. However, the sob stories would not stop. What else would government be called upon to guarantee? We already have education. Medical care? Housing? Utilities? Food? Clothing? Transportation? Vacation?

Since at any given time there is only so much money to go around, as people’s minimum guaranteed income increased, many of the benefits of not working would disappear (just like Social Security). Nevertheless, the “not working constituency” would demand increased benefits, and the taxes to pay for all this nonsense would grow so high the people with jobs paying for these programs would wonder why they bother to work.

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” —House of Commons, 22 October 1945.

“Socialism is the philosophy of failure…” – Winston Churchill – The Churchill Project – Hillsdale College