Here are some definitions of Big Government from a few online dictionaries.

“Government perceived as being excessively big-spending and attempting to control too many aspects of people’s lives.” MSN Encarta

“Government that seems to have too much control over people’s lives.” Macmillan

“Any government wielding excessive control over its citizens or interfering with their lives.” Dictionary.com

You see the themes – control, interference, wasteful, big-spending.

That’s true, of course, but we’d like to be a little more specific and thought-provoking in our definition.

Big Government, in its most raw form, is a group of individuals that through coercion turns human beings into either beasts of burden or perpetual children.

It is that group which preaches entitlement over responsibility, dependency over self-sufficiency.  It purports that people are incapable of caring for themselves through free and voluntary choices, and therefore must be coerced into “doing the right thing.” It prevents human beings from being fully actualized, keeps them in a form of subjection and – in its most extreme form – slavery.

Does it do this deliberately and willfully?  Not in the beginning.  Isabel Paterson, in her book The God of the Machine, said:

“Most of the harm in the world is done by good people, and not by accident, lapse, or omission. It is the result of their deliberate actions, long persevered in, which they hold to be motivated by high ideals toward virtuous ends… …[W]hen millions are slaughtered, when torture is practiced, starvation enforced, oppression made a policy, as at present over a large part of the world, and as it has often been in the past, it must be at the behest of very many good people, and even by their direct action, for what they consider a worthy object.”

Even the alleviation of suffering, so long as it is done through plundering third parties, will result in more total suffering induced than ever relieved.  The total amount of suffering in the world cannot be reduced by forcing one group of human beings to relieve it in the way the tyrant desires.  The tyrant’s coercion makes more of mankind miserable, turns them away from productive endeavors.  In its extreme forms, Big Government paradoxically kills innocents in order to save lives.

Seen in this way, Big Government can either be a Tyrant or a Nanny, or a combination of both.  Either it enslaves you and coercively makes you work on its behalf, or it “protects” you from yourself, restricting your freedom while promising to care for your every need, in exchange for your agreement to keep it in power.

Either way, it treats you as either an animal to be burdened, or a scolded child to be suckled forever at its teat.

How you are treated often depends on whether or not you are willing to keep the ruling cadre in power.  If you do, you may lose your freedom but win the privilege of being coddled.  If you don’t, you may lose your freedom and be burdened.

So Big Government divides people into two groups: one group is the animals burdened with the task of producing the mothers milk forever; the other is that group which forever – or so it’s promised – drinks the mothers milk.

Now, in pointing this out, we’re not talking about any specific group that is favored by government and eats from the labor of others, we’re talking about all such group, from bailed out banks and companies, to subsidized farmers, to protected unions, to groups that benefit from tariffs, to the ever-growing unproductive government bureaucracy; in short, any form of corporate or public dependency program.

One of the central features of Big Government is that it encourages bad behavior in order to remain in power.  It bails out those who have made bad decisions in order to gain their support.

The individuals that comprise Big Government, of course, play god, determining which group of human beings will be the beasts of burden, and which will be the bailed out, dependent children.

Over time, people learn that it does not pay to behave responsibly.  In fact, the consequences for poor judgment will be so lessened as to have no moral authority over behavior.  People learn that they can live life however irresponsibly they want and some one else will be forced to pick up the tab … that is, until there’s no one left with any money or productive resources.

At that point, the system collapses soviet-style.  The beasts of burden decide that it’s easier to be suckled infants and then there are no longer enough producers to support the dependents.

One interesting phenomenon that we have noticed over the past decades is how Americans have behaved regarding debt and savings, and how the past decisions they made are now affecting them.

Look at what has happened in the U.S. over the last few decades.

This first graph shows the U.S. Savings rate (what percentage of their incomes Americans saved) over the past 50 years.

Notice that, for whatever reason, over the last 30 years people have been putting less and less money away for a rainy day.

Now, look at this graph of household debt as a percentage of disposable income over the last 30 years.

Despite saving less money, people are using more borrowed money to support their lifestyles, especially over the last decade.

Low savings rate + high and increasing debt load = people living beyond their means

At some point, the gig is up.

Now, look at this graph of the number of food stamp recipients over the last decade.  In the decades prior to 2000, the number of food-stamp recipients had been trending down.

So here’s the questions:

Are these events merely correlated or is there an element of causation?  That is, do government bailout promises encourage people to not take responsibility for their own lives, to prepare for “unforeseen” – yet predictable – misfortunes in the future?

Understand that we’re not arguing for or against this particular social program, just merely asking questions about whether or not Government Dependency Programs create Moral Hazard.

What do you think?  Do government handout programs enable bad behavior?

Does the knowledge that someone will be there to give you food, coupled with the knowledge that the government has the capacity to forever force someone else to pay for your livelihood, make you take less responsibility for your own well being, live on borrowed money, not save for a rainy day?

By asking these questions, of course we’re not advocating for letting the hungry starve.  We advocate for the support of voluntary charities, and lots of it, and we believe that each of us has a personal responsibility to responsibly care for the poor among us in ways that do not create dependency and thereby rob recipients of their dignity.

If you reward bad behavior, you’ll get more of it.  If you punish responsible behavior, you’ll get less of it.

Big Government must be opposed.  If we don’t oppose it immediately, over time in its most extreme forms it reduces people to animals or infants.

As Cato’s Letter #38 taught:

“What is government, but a trust … which ought to be bounded with many and strong restraints, because power renders men wanton, insolent to others, and fond of themselves.”

So what can you do? 

Sign up for our RSS feed and become a fan of our Facebook Page. We’ll continually send you information about how you can help keep government in its place.

Then, Join DownsizeDC.org and participate in it’s campaigns.  It takes less than five minutes per day, and you just participate in the campaigns you like.  In our opinion, it is the best project around for reducing the size and scope of Big Government.

originally published May 21, 2010.

Competition is a by-product.  It’s not something desirable in itself – it’s just what happens when other desirable things happen.

Competition comes about when three conditions hold.

1. People are free to serve others.  That is, they are free to provide labor on behalf of other people, to make others lives better.  This condition contains the converse – that people are also free to receive service from others, without intervention/prevention from others.

2. People are free to exchange services with one another in ways that mutually benefit them.

3. People are free to decide between any number of servers/services offered the one that they prefer and feel will most benefit them.

When these conditions hold, what you have is groups of people working for the opportunity to serve one another and offering more and more in exchange for the privilege of being chosen to give the service.  In return for the service, they also receive service (or goods, usually in the form of money) in return.

When people who offer the same service make themselves available simultaneously, the person receiving service has the choice to choose the provider they believe will serve them best.  The two service providers will each work and improve to be able to provide the service.  The net result is that the person served will be able to exchange, perhaps, fewer services in return than may have been necessary.  This is a benefit to the receiver – it means he has that much more service to exchange later for additional services he otherwise might not have been able to “purchase”.

Competition is nothing more than the result of allowing people to freely serve one another and allowing those served the freedom to choose those servers/services that they feel will best serve them.

Any effort to reduce “competition” must NECESSARILY do one or more of the following to the three conditions.

1. Take away people’s freedom to serve one another; that is, to disallow or prohibit service
2. Take away people’s freedom to voluntarily trade service with each other
3. Take away people’s freedom to choose between providers of services and instead mandate that if they want the service at all they must use just one provider (which they did not choose).

People who want to do away with free markets or competition are really just people who want to eliminate service, freedom, prosperity, and choice.

Nice people!

Liberalism is, at heart, an impossible promise.   A promise that in aggregate the peoples of the world can consume more than they produce, that there is “such thing as a free lunch”.   Its ideal – the welfare state – is just as big a failure as it’s nasty and brutish father, Communism, and – just like Communism – always ends in tears.  A snippet:

Lacking a limiting principle, progressivism cannot say how big the welfare state should be but must always say that it should be bigger than it currently is. Furthermore, by making a welfare state a fountain of rights requisite for democracy, progressives in effect declare that democratic deliberation about the legitimacy of the welfare state is illegitimate.

“By blackening the skies with crisscrossing dollars,” Voegeli says, the welfare state encourages people “to believe an impossibility: that every household can be a net importer of the wealth redistributed by the government.” But the welfare state’s problem, today becoming vivid, is socialism’s problem, as Margaret Thatcher defined it: Socialist governments “always run out of other people’s money.”

The whole thing is pure gold.  Perfect reading for impressionable co-workers and employees.  Print it out and share it.

Please subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Facebook group.

There were many lessons learned (not least of which that there’s no such thing as a “pro-life” Democrat, Harry Reid and Bart Stupak taught us this), but this is what we learned most:

In the battle for the hearts and minds of Americans, we won.  When this vote was finally taken, only 35% of American’s wanted it.  One in five Democrats voted against it.

And we defeated the “public option” and that was the most vital part of the battle.  In the end, what these so-called progressives got was a massive handout to insurance companies and a crazy plan based on the already-failing Romney-care in Massachusetts whose entire substance is pointing a gun at people and demanding that they buy insurance.  (By the way, don’t forget in 2012 that Romney was no friend on this health-debate, even penning an op-ed in USA today advocating for a plan very similar to the one just passed.)

The way forward will be multi-faceted, but never forget, in the battle for the hearts and minds of America, we defeated them.  Unfortunately, their power and corruption were too much to overcome, this round.

Make no mistake, overcoming this will be very difficult – but keep in mind that NJ and VA kicked out their Democrat Governers, Ted Kennedy’s seat was lost to a person whose primary platform was anti-healthcare, and the Democrats who voted for this are headed for a slaughter in 2010.

What we have going for us right now is that the full program does not take effect for four years.  In that time, this legislation will be bombarded and attacked non-stop.

The place that this legislation will be best challenged is not in the federal executive and legislative branches (at least not initially).  It will be challenged in court on constitutional grounds (where our case is very strong), and it will be challenged by the states themselves (particularly by pissed-off Attorneys General who may just have the numbers to push a constitutional convention if necessary – it’s more possible than you think since this Bill assuredly bankrupts states which are already on the verge of insovency).

Do not lose hope.  The fight was worth it.  The momentum is still with us, and these Democrats will rue this day which will live in infamy.

Cry your tears tonight if you must, but get some good sleep and let your heart be at peace – then wake up tomorrow and sharpen your knives.  We’re going right back at them.

How can the president claim such things?

Well, he can’t.

That is, not if he knows how to do math (or tell the truth).

The big problem is that all of his claims count 10 years of taxes but only 6 years of spending.

Paul Ryan, in last week’s health care summit, exposed this lie (and others) by doing the math for the president.  He pointed out that the real cost over ten years is $2.3 trillion – and even that is on the “low” side since lots of people will want the “now-free” health care and lots of businesses will drop coverage.

The President claimed that costs are $100 billion per year, but he’s not telling the truth (or can he just not do math?).  The truth is that costs increase each year.  And bringing down the deficit?  No, it won’t.  Deficits are going to be at least $460 billion over the first 10 years.  The ten after that?  $1.4 trillion.

Watch Paul Ryan take the president to Math (and Truth) school.

Please subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Facebook group to stand with other small business people against Big Government.

By: Kitty Werthmann

What I am about to tell you is something you’ve probably never heard or will ever read in history books.

I believe that I am an eyewitness to history.  I cannot tell you that Hitler took Austria by tanks and guns; it would distort history.  We elected him by a landslide – 98% of the vote..  I’ve never read that in any American publications.  Everyone thinks that Hitler just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force.

In 1938, Austria was in deep Depression.  Nearly one-third of our workforce was unemployed.  We had 25% inflation and 25% bank loan interest rates.

Farmers and business people were declaring bankruptcy daily.  Young people were going from house to house begging for food.  Not that they didn’t want to work; there simply weren’t any jobs.  My mother was a Christian woman and believed in helping people in need.  Every day we cooked a big kettle of soup and baked bread to feed those poor, hungry people – about 30 daily.

The Communist Party and the National Socialist Party were fighting each other.  Blocks and blocks of cities like Vienna , Linz , and Graz were destroyed.  The people became desperate and petitioned the government to let them decide what kind of government they wanted.

We looked to our neighbor on the north, Germany , where Hitler had been in power since 1933.  We had been told that they didn’t have unemployment or crime, and they had a high standard of living.  Nothing was ever said about persecution of any group — Jewish or otherwise.  We were led to believe that everyone was happy.  We wanted the same way of life in Austria We were promised that a vote for Hitler would mean the end of unemployment and help for the family.  Hitler also said that businesses would be assisted, and farmers would get their farms back.  Ninety-eight percent of the population voted to annex Austria to Germany and have Hitler for our ruler.

We were overjoyed, and for three days we danced in the streets and had candlelight parades.  The new government opened up big field kitchens and everyone was fed.

After the election, German officials were appointed, and like a miracle, we suddenly had law and order.  Three or four weeks later, everyone was employed.  The government made sure that a lot of work was created through the Public Work Service.

Hitler decided we should have equal rights for women.  Before this, it was a custom that married Austrian women did not work outside the home.  An able-bodied husband would be looked down on if he couldn’t support his family.  Many women in the teaching profession were elated that they could retain the jobs they previously had been required to give up for marriage.

Hitler Targets Education – Eliminates Religious Instruction for Children:

Our education was nationalized.  I attended a very good public school.  The population was predominantly Catholic, so we had religion in our schools. The day we elected Hitler (March 13, 1938), I walked into my schoolroom to find the crucifix replaced by Hitler’s picture hanging next to a Nazi flag. Our teacher, a very devout woman, stood up and told the class we wouldn’t pray or have religion anymore.  Instead, we sang “Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles,” and had physical education.

Sunday became National Youth Day with compulsory attendance.  Parents were not pleased about the sudden change in curriculum.  They were told that if they did not send us, they would receive a stiff letter of warning the first time.  The second time they would be fined the equivalent of $300, and the third time they would be subject to jail.  The first two hours consisted of political indoctrination.  The rest of the day we had sports.  As time went along, we loved it.  Oh, we had so much fun and got our sports equipment free.  We would go home and gleefully tell our parents about the wonderful time we had.

My mother was very unhappy.  When the next term started, she took me out of public school and put me in a convent.  I told her she couldn’t do that and she told me that someday when I grew up, I would be grateful.  There was a very good curriculum, but hardly any fun – no sports, and no political indoctrination.  I hated it at first but felt I could tolerate it.  Every once in a while, on holidays, I went home.  I would go back to my old friends and ask what was going on and what they were doing.  Their loose lifestyle was very alarming to me.  They lived without religion.  By that time unwed mothers were glorified for having a baby for Hitler.  It seemed strange to me that our society changed so suddenly.  As time went along, I realized what a great deed my mother did so that I wasn’t exposed to that kind of humanistic philosophy.

Equal Rights Hits Home:

In 1939, the war started and a food bank was established.  All food was rationed and could only be purchased using food stamps.  At the same time, a full-employment law was passed which meant if you didn’t work, you didn’t get a ration card, and if you didn’t have a card, you starved to death. Women who stayed home to raise their families didn’t have any marketable skills and often had to take jobs more suited for men.

Soon after this, the draft was implemented.  It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps.  During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys.  They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps.  After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines.  When I go back to Austria to visit my family and friends, most of these women are emotional cripples because they just were not equipped to handle the horrors of combat.  Three months before I turned 18, I was severely injured in an air raid attack.  I nearly had a leg amputated, so I was spared having to go into the labor corps and into military service.

Hitler Restructured the Family Through Daycare:

When the mothers had to go out into the work force, the government immediately established child care centers.  You could take your children ages 4 weeks to school age and leave them there around-the-clock, 7 days a week, under the total care of the government.  The state raised a whole generation of children..  There were no motherly women to take care of the children, just people highly trained in child psychology.  By this time, no one talked about equal rights.  We knew we had been had.

Health Care and Small Business Suffer Under Government Controls:

Before Hitler, we had very good medical care. Many American doctors trained at the University of Vienna .  After Hitler, health care was socialized, free for everyone.  Doctors were salaried by the government.  The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything. When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full.  If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn.  There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine.  Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries.

As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80% of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household.  We had big programs for families.  All day care and education were free.  High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized.  Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing.

We had another agency designed to monitor business.  My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables.  Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners.  Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar.  He couldn’t meet all the demands.  Soon, he went out of business.  If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control.

We had consumer protection.  We were told how to shop and what to buy.  Free enterprise was essentially abolished.  We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers.  The agents would go to the farms, count the live-stock, then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it.

“Mercy Killing” Redefined:

In 1944, I was a student teacher in a small village in the Alps .  The villagers were surrounded by mountain passes which, in the winter, were closed off with snow, causing people to be isolated.  So people intermarried and offspring were sometimes retarded.  When I arrived, I was told there were 15 mentally retarded adults, but they were all useful and did good manual work.  I knew one, named Vincent, very well.  He was a janitor of the school.  One day I looked out the window and saw Vincent and others getting into a van.  I asked my superior where they were going.  She said to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade, and to read and write.  The families were required to sign papers with a little clause that they could not visit for 6 months.  They were told visits would interfere with the program and might cause homesickness.

As time passed, letters started to dribble back saying these people died a natural, merciful death.  The villagers were not fooled.  We suspected what was happening.  Those people left in excellent physical health and all died within 6 months.  We called this euthanasia.

The Final Steps – Gun Laws:

Next came gun registration.. People were getting injured by guns.  Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns.  Most citizens were law abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms.  Not long after-wards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns.  The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily.

No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away.  We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up.

Totalitarianism didn’t come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria . Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath.  Instead, we had creeping gradualism.  Now, our only weapons were broom handles.  The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.

After World War II, Russian troops occupied Austria .  Women were raped, preteen to elderly.  The press never wrote about this either.  When the Soviets left in 1955, they took everything that they could, dismantling whole factories in the process.  They sawed down whole orchards of fruit, and what they couldn’t destroy, they burned.  We called it The Burned Earth. Most of the population barricaded themselves in their houses.  Women hid in their cellars for 6 weeks as the troops mobilized.  Those who couldn’t, paid the price.  There is a monument in Vienna today, dedicated to those women who were massacred by the Russians.  This is an eye witness account.

“It’s true..those of us who sailed past the Statue of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity.

America Truly is the Greatest Country in the World. Don’t Let Freedom Slip Away

“After America , There is No Place to Go”

Dr.  Barry Jacobs is a Reproductive Endocrinologist, practicing in Carrollton, Texas, a northern suburb of Dallas. He completed his residency training in obstetrics and gynecology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, and remained at that institution to become its first fellow once Baylor achieved accreditation for an advanced training program in Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. Dr. Jacobs has served on the faculty of several medical schools and was director of Reproductive Endocrinology at Texas Tech Health Science Center in Amarillo. Currently, in addition to his clinical activities caring for infertile patients and those with recurrent pregnancy loss, he is Chairman of the IVF committee at Baylor Medical Center in Carrollton.

Page 22 of the HC Bill:  Mandates that the Govt will audit books of all employers that self-insure!!

Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill:   THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.

Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!!

Page 42 of HC Bill:  The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC benefits for you. You have no choice!

Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non-US citizens, illegal or otherwise.

Page 58 HC Bill:  Govt will have real-time access to individuals’ finances & a ‘National ID Health card’ will be issued!

Page 59 HC Bill lines 21-24:  Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for elective funds transfer.

Page 65 Sec 164: Is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in unions & community organizations: (ACORN).

Page 84 Sec 203 HC bill: Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private HC plans in the ‘Exchange.’

Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill:  Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans–The Govt will ration your health care!

Page 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill: Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services. (Translation: illegal aliens.)

Page 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18: The Govt will use groups (i.e. ACORN & Americorps) to sign up individuals for Govt HC plan.

Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans. (AARP members – your health care WILL be rationed!)

Page 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill:  Medicaid eligible individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. ( No choice..)

Page 12 4 lines 24-25 HC: No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No “judicial review” against Govt monopoly.

Page 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill: Doctors/American Medical Association – The Govt will tell YOU what salary you can make.

Page 145 Line 15-17: An Employer MUST auto-enroll employees into public option plan. (NO choice!)

Page 126 Lines 22-25: Employers MUST pay for HC for part-time employees AND their families.  (Employees shouldn’t get excited about this as employers will be forced to reduce its work force, benefits, and wages/salaries to cover such a huge expense.)

Page 149 Lines 16-24: ANY Employer with payroll 401k & above who does not provide public option will pay 8% tax on all payroll!  (See the last comment in parenthesis.)

Page 150 Lines 9-13:A business with payroll between $251K & $401K who doesn’t provide public option will pay 2-6% tax on all payroll.

Page 167 Lines 18-23: ANY individual who doesn’t have acceptable HC according to Govt will be taxed 2.5% of income..

Page 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill: Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay.)

Page 195 HC Bill: Officers & employees of the GOVT HC Admin..  will have access to ALL Americans’ finances and personal records.

Page 203 Line 14-15 HC: “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax.”  (Yes, it really says that!)

Page 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill: Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid Seniors.  (Low-income and the poor are affected.)

Page 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill: Doctors: It doesn’t matter what specialty you have trained yourself in — you will all be paid the same! (Just TRY to tell me that’s not Socialism!)

Page 253 Line 10-18: The Govt sets the value of a doctor’s time, profession, judgment, etc.  (Literally — the value of humans.)

Page 265 Sec 1131: The Govt mandates and controls productivity for “private” HC industries.

Page 268 Sec 1141: The federal Govt regulates the rental and purchase of power driven wheelchairs.

Page 272 SEC. 1145: TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS – Cancer patients – welcome to rationing!

Page 280 Sec 1151: The Govt will penalize hospitals for whatever the Govt deems preventable (i.e… re-admissions).

Page 298 Lines 9-11: Doctors: If you treat a patient during initial admission that results in a re-admission — the Govt will penalize you.

Page 317 L 13-20: PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. (The Govt tells doctors what and how much they can own!)

Page 317-318 lines 21-25, 1-3: PROHIBITION on expansion. (The Govt is mandating that hospitals cannot expand.) Page 321 2-13: Hospitals have the opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input is required.  (Can you say ACORN?)

Page 335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339: The Govt mandates establishment of 2 outcome-based measures. (HC the way they want — rationing.)

Page 341 Lines 3-9: The Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc..  (Forcing people into the Govt plan)

Page 354 Sec 1177: The Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of ’special needs people!’   Unbelievable!

Page 379 Sec 1191: The Govt creates more bureaucracy via a “Tele-Health Advisory Committee.”  (Can you say HC by phone?)

Page 425 Lines 4-12: The Govt mandates “Advance-Care Planning Consult.”  (Think senior citizens end-of-life patients.)

Page 425 Lines 17-19: The Govt will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc.  (And it’s mandatory!)

Page 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3: The Govt provides an “approved” list of end-of-life resources; guiding you in death. (Also called ‘assisted suicide.’)

Page 427 Lines 15-24: The Govt mandates a program for orders on “end-of-life.”  (The Govt has a say in how your life ends!)

Page 429 Lines 1-9: An “advanced-care planning consultant” will be used frequently as a patient’s health deteriorates.

Page 429 Lines 10-12: An “advanced care consultation” may include an ORDER for end-of-life plans.  (AN ORDER TO DIE FROM THE GOVERNMENT?!?)

Page 429 Lines 13-25: The GOVT will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order.  (I wouldn’t want to stand before God after getting paid for THAT job!)

Page 430 Lines 11-15: The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end-of-life!  (Again — no choice!)

Page 469: Community-Based Home Medical Services = Non-Profit Organizations. (Hello?  ACORN Medical Services here!?!)

Page 489 Sec 1308: The Govt will cover marriage and family therapy.  (Which means Govt will insert itself into your marriage even.)

Page 494-498: Govt will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, and rationing those services.

Here is the link to the .pdf of the bill that accompanied Dr. Frazer’s letter to Bayh which he forwarded along …

http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

Be alarmed!  This so called “health care reform” is actually a bid to remove the Constitution as our governing law and establish rule by fiat.  Hitler, Stalin and Mao would be proud.

Again, please share this article with everyone you know.  We must get the word out.

–

Dr. Barry Jacobs is a Reproductive Endocrinologist, practicing in Carrollton, Texas, a northern suburb of Dallas. He completed his residency training in obstetrics and gynecology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, and remained at that institution to become its first fellow once Baylor achieved accreditation for an advanced training program in Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. Dr. Jacobs has served on the faculty of several medical schools and was director of Reproductive Endocrinology at Texas Tech Health Science Center in Amarillo. Currently, in addition to his clinical activities caring for infertile patients and those with recurrent pregnancy loss, he is Chairman of the IVF committee at Baylor Medical Center in Carrollton.

He then recounted to us how Arizona came to find itself in this predicament.

At bottom, the cause is a fatal flaw within the state’s Medicaid program.  How that fatal flaw came about is the key lesson that we must not forget during the national health care debate.

The flaw was a Trojan Horse that once entered into Arizona law ensured an economic crisis years down the road, and that day has now arrived.

Some nefarious lies were told to the Arizona electorate that misled them in 2000 into voting for something other than what they thought they were.

Does this sound like any tactics you’ve seen employed by Big Government recently?

In Arizona, the state Medicaid program is known as The Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS, pronounced “Access”).  As a Medicaid program, it is a joint-expense program between the State of Arizona and the Federal Government, by way of its Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).
In 1998 Arizona, along with 46 other states, agreed to settle a lawsuit it had filed against the tobacco industry.  The tobacco manufacturers agreed to pay each state a part of the total $206 billion settlement.  The payments were to be made to the states over 25 years, a portion paid each year.

Arizona’s share was at the time estimated to be $3.2 billion, with adjustments for inflation and with a provision to lower payments if the number of cigarettes sold in the US dropped over that time.  Each state was permitted to spend its settlement money in whatever way it saw fit.

Enter Proposition 204.  The proposition was proposed to “Set into law the method of disbursing and spending the approximately $3.2 billion the state anticipated to collect as part of the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement. Targets for the funds include education aimed at the prevention of tobacco use among minors as well as health care.” (emphasis SBABG)

So what you had was this chunk of money coming in, and a proposal to use it to prevent tabacco use among minors and help out with public health care.  Well, who doesn’t want to help kids not to smoke, right?  And if there’s “free money” coming in, heck, we can use it to help provide health care, too, right?

This is what was sold to the public.  A claim that it the proposition was to just use tobacco settlement monies to fund children’s and health programs.

But the actual language of the proposition was far different from what was sold to the public.

The proposition actually changed who was eligible for AHCCCS by broadening the eligibility threshold  from 34% of the poverty level to 100% of the poverty level. And it stipulated that if the tobacco money was not sufficient to cover this increase in spending that the spending increase would have to be covered by general funds and no limitations on enrollment could be made.  Straight from the horses mouth.

That part in bold, just 17 words, tacked onto the end of a paragraph, snuck into a proposition 2 pages, 24 paragraphs, 65 sentences, 836 words long, just 2% of the language in the proposition, was the Trojan Horse.

The taxpayers had no idea that language meant they were on the hook for this program for any amount not covered by the tobacco settlement. They had no idea they had just massively expanded taxpayer exposure to an “all-in” program with no caps on enrollment up to 100% of the poverty line.  And because AHCCCS is a first-dollar program, it meant that all tax revenue went first to meet all AHCCCS needs, and then whatever was leftover would go to the budgets of other programs, like, say, education, police, fire, etc.

And to add insult to injury, the provision allowed persons with incomes above the poverty line to spend down their income on medical bills to qualify for coverage.  Perverse incentives, anyone?

Fast forward to 2009.  What have been the consequences?

If you have a modicum of common sense, what happened was about what you’d expect.  More people went on AHCCCS and more money per person on AHCCCS was spent.  By 2003 Arizona had more people on AHCCCS than they had in public education!

From 2001 to 2003 alone AHCCCS payments increased from $200 million to $1.2 billion – a 500% increase. You’ll remember that the entire tobacco settlement, over 25 years, was only $2 billion more than that!  Gulp.  In three years they gobbled up nearly 40% of the settlement funds.

In 2009 alone the amount spent on AHCCCS is projected to be $1.5 billion.  The tobacco funds are long gone.

Before going on to more carnage, let’s just point out again that AHCCCS is an acronym standing for “Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System.”  You have to love the ironies embedded in Big Government misnomers.

Cost containment.  To be fair, Arizona is a growing state and its population increases regularly, therefore the number of the poor in the state has increased, as well.

However, by 2006 real (adjusted for inflation) per capita spending increased 46% by 2006! (see the graph below, created by the Goldwater Institute).

By 2006 AHCCCS accounted for 22% of ALL state expenditures.  Today, in 2009, 20% of Arizonans are dependent on a health care program that was originally intended for only the poorest of the poor.

And there’s another kick in the teeth. The $3.2 billion is turning out to be less than that amount, because smoking has decreased.

Finally, the end game has arrived.  Barring a miracle, AZ will likely pull a California and begin handing out IOUs at some point this year.  Of course, AZ could always sell the state capitol building and kick the can further down the road.

And all of this because of the unintended consequences brought about by little Trojan Horse snuck into a proposition.

Now, why is this important to the current health care debate?

That there are unintended consequences of giving out free health care that will make costs rise for everyone?  Check.  But that’s no Trojan Horse.  That’s right in the bill and has been well documented by the Congressional Budget Office.

That health care will be rationed and choice reduced?  Check.  But that’s no Trojan Horse, either.  That’s also right in the bill and is being well documented.

Is it that the program doesn’t bode well for the nation or the rest of the states since, “As Arizona Goes, So Goes the Nation?” Well, of course that’s true, but that’s no Trojan Horse.

The Trojan Horse is something called “The Public Plan.”  The Public Plan is a proposal being put forth in the Health Care Plan (HR 3200) which establishes a government-run insurance provider.

The government is telling us that the purpose of this provider is to keep the private insurers honest, to lower costs, and to make health insurance more competitive.

But that’s a lie.  Not only doesn’t it do those things, saying that the purpose of the plan is to achieve those objectives is an effort to obscure it’s real purpose.

Its real purpose it to lay the groundwork for the creation of what’s called a “single payer” program.  That is code for a government-run, socialist, health care system, where the government makes all payments for all health care procedures and therefore, sets pricing, determines care, and determines coverage for all citizens.

Don’t believe it?  Just have a listen to the President and his advisers.  When they thought we weren’t watching, they stated very clearly that their intention with The Public Plan was to reduce choice and competition.

Of course, they are out in full force, trying to spread disinformation, and telling you that they’ve said no such things as you just observed.

And they will tell you that they want an open debate, but they don’t. And they will tell you they’re being transparent, but they’re not.

And they will tell you that their plan will save money, but it won’t. And it will be more expensive than even the Congressional Budget Office’s worst predictions.

You can add that spending to the already projected Budget Deficits:

And let’s not forget the deficits that Social Security and Medicare are already on target to hit over the coming century (A Cumulative Deficit of $83 Trillion by 2080).  Tack the expenses of this plan on top of these.

Public opposition is building against the Health Care Plan and the Public Option particularly. Only 32% of Americans support Single Payer while 57% Oppose it.

Now, watch out. The Senate knows that the public is against single payer, and they know that the public is becoming increasingly informed that the road to single payer is through the public plan, so they’re preparing to introduce a public plan by another name.  They’re calling the plan a  co-op plan. The co-op is Health Care’s version of a Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae.  One Senator warned that it will:

You know this is the case when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid concurs and says:

So don’t be deceived.  It’s the same old Trojan Horse the Public Plan is  They’ll lie about it now.  And in a few short years we’ll have a real mess on our hands.

Learn from Arizona.  Don’t be deceived by what’s being sold you.  Read the fine print in the bills, listen to the past statements of the people who are lying to you now.  Be forewarned.

Reject the entire Health Care Bill as it currently stands, and particularly the Public Plan and its brother-in-arms the Co-Op Plan.  It’s the Trojan Horse of Single Payer.

Please visit DownsizeDC.org and use their free service to send your Representatives a message.

We’re always interested in your hearing from you in the comments below.  If you have any “Trojan Horse” stories of your own, please also share them.

Hey, while you’re here, please subscribe to our RSS feed and our newsletter, and join our Facebook group.

SBABG.org

There are two big fat lies going around. (UPDATE: a third lie added to the end of the post.)

One is a lie by omission.

One is a lie by distortion.

First, the lie by omission.  Politicians claims that 46 million Americans are “uninsured”.  What they imply is that these people want to be insured or qualify for insurance, or otherwise couldn’t get it if they wanted it.

Here’s the truth, the data the politicians leave out.

Of the 46 million:

• 10 million are ILLEGAL ALIENS (they are only “Americans” in the loosest sense, and to include them in these numbers is misleading).
• 8 million are young and won’t buy it b/c they are healthy and don’t want to pay for it or use it
• 10 million make more than 75,000 per year and STILL WONT BUY for whatever reason they have
• 9.4 million are between jobs and are classified as “temporarily” uninsured, but for the sake of putting the “rosiest” picture on the Big Government argument, we won’t deduct these people from the numbers.

See here for our citations for the above numbers.

So, that leaves 18 million people (or 9 million if you deduct temporaries), or 6% (3% if you deduct temporaries) of Americans – there are 300Million of us – who are “legitimately” not insured.

And you know what?  Many of those 3-6% qualify for Medicaid.

So it’s likely  less than 3-6% of Americans who legitimately don’t have access to health insurance coverage.

So, for less than 6% of Americans, we’re going to throw out the health care system that is the envy of the civilized world?  A system that  93.6% of Americans reported being “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their physician services.

Someone just sent me this political cartoon from an Investors Business Daily Editorial that visually sums up what was expressed above. (this insertion is an update to the original post)

This is about a power grab and socialism pure and simple.  The problems in our health care system are all ones that can be solved by introducing competition into the health care market.

And that leads into the second lie, the lie by distortion.

Proponents of socialized health care (and this is what the health care proposal IS, socialism), claim that “the free market has failed.”

The lie is that health care is a free market. That completely distorts the reality of the situation.

There are 133,000 pages of health care regulation in the U.S. Federal Register.  If that were a book, it would be a book 44 feet thick!  It would weigh 1330 lbs, more than a half a ton!

That’s the bureaucracy that health care providers wade through and the regulatory burden that providers and insurance companies have to deal with, and that raises costs significantly.  And then there are the regulations on Insurance companies that restrict where and how they can sell insurance.  Does that sound like a free market to you?  One expert estimates that in it amounts to a $169 Billion annual tax.  No wonder health care is expensive.  You’ve seen doctors’ offices.  They employ many people whose sole job is handle the reams of government paperwork they have to file, and some doctors are turning to new systems that allow them to see less patients, but have adverse consequences in other areas of health care.  The remarkable thing is that it’s not more expensive!

How we got there is an interesting story all in itself.  Medical Boards bear much blame for Nationalizing Health Care.  The AMA helped to “Cartelize” medicine, reducing the supply of health care all while government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid increase it (all of which leads to longer wait times, reduction is services, etc.)

If you can believe it, about half of all US health care costs are already government funded, according to the OECD. (note that link resolves to OECD spreadsheet and is an excel file).  When 3rd party taxpayers pick up the tab for much of health care, that’s not a free market.

So, we don’t have a true free market and people who make claims that “the free market has failed” are making false claims.  The “market” that has “failed” (and if by failure you mean “provides the best health care in the world”) is one that has had to fight against massive government intrusion and inefficiency.  Cost increases have been due to many factors, largely self-inflicted by the government and the industry itself.   When you combine supply shortages at the same demand has been increasing due to government picking up the tab for services (when one is picking up the tab for one’s services, there is a tendency to save on costs, to shop, to look at differing options), you have a recipe for cost increases.  (And then tack on skyrocketing malpractice insurance costs because  of runaway jury awards that award not just actual damages, but also punitive ones . . .)

Imagine what a truly free health care market would be like!  As good as our services are, they could be better, cheaper, and more timely.

Want to read about more lies and broken promises related to Health Care (or ObamaCare, as it’s increasingly being called)?

Here’s a great roundup of myths surrounding the US Health System.

The New York Post has a whole roundup of broken Health Care promises.  This is perhaps the best article I’ve seen on the issue.

There’s a great blog run by a small business owner called The Coyote Blog: Dispatches from a Small Business that I’d encourage you to follow for great insights about how the proposed Health Plan will affect small businesses.  Some recent highlights include:

• My Greatest Fear on the Health Care Bill
• More on the Health Care Bills
• Follow up on Preventive Care
• Perhaps the Most Egregious Statement of the Health Care Debate

Again, keep up the fight.  Join the DownsizeDC.org campaign and it is, I believe, the easiest,  most effective way for citizens to pressure their representatives on this issue.

UPDATE: We’re adding a third lie, since this one is getting a lot of play today.  Supporters of government run health care are claiming that the a World Health Organization report says that the US has only the 37th best health care out of 121 countries.  It’s a bogus report. The biggest variable in the report on “quality of health care” has nothing to do with quality of delivery or timeliness of delivery, it has to do with whether the government pays for it. It’s a worthless report.  So, the most important factor used to measure the quality of health care treatments has to do with whether or not someone else picks up the tab?  It’s nonsense.

The WHO report already been debunked and you can read the debunking it here.

Please subscribe to our RSS feed and our newsletter, and join our Facebook group.

*Note: Wording at the beginning of the article changed on Aug 21  from “It has been established that” to “We have argued that” on the suggestion of a reader.

1. It takes away freedom and choice from hundreds of millions of Americans

I’d like to be able to choose my doctor, to choose whether or not I want health insurance, what amount I’ll pay for it, what my deductible will be.  I’d like to be free to determine the care I’ll receive, and not have a group of bureaucrats standing between me and my doctor.  But all that will soon end if the Administration gets its way.

You know how President Obama is telling you, “You get to keep your private health insurance?” Well, he’s only telling you half the truth.  The whole truth is that if you lose or leave your insurance plan, or if ever want to switch plans or change your employer, you cannot have private insurance and instead MUST go on the government plan. That means you get what the government decides to provide you, when they decide you merit it, and you have no choice.  How’s that for hope and change!

2. It’s expensive, bureaucratically bloated, and it won’t work.

In fact, costs will go up by a trillion dollars.  Isn’t the whole reason for taking on health care reform is because Americans believe health care is too expensive, not because they think we should impose socialist universal coverage?  Well, how can you increase costs by a trillion and look us in the eye and keep a straight face . . . this isn’t about health care costs, never has been.  It’s a about control.  And we all know our taxes will be going up to pay for this grand socialist experiment.  Oh, except for the Unions.

Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are all headed toward bankruptcy, and we’re introducing yet another unsustainable entitlement program?  It’s like approaching a cliff in your car and hitting the gas pedal instead of the brake!

Check out how the bureaucracy will look under Obamacare.  Can you find the “Doctor” and “Patient” in there?

3.  It doesn’t require politicians to go on the plan, only the people they govern.

The health plan stinks so bad the politicians are giving themselves exemptions so that they don’t have to use it, but instead get to opt-out, while the rest of us don’t get this choice. (link updated)

I have no comment on this.  I’m just speechless.  When a cook won’t eat his own cooking, run from the restaurant.  The food might kill you, but it most certainly will put you in danger.  Same with this health care plan.

UPDATE: oh yeah, and it exempts Unions, too.

4. It funds controversial procedures that many Americans deem immoral and coerces all taxpayers to pick up the tab.

Right now, it’s set to fund abortions with tax dollars. Of all the things tax dollars shouldn’t fund, it shouldn’t fund these.  More than half the country opposes the legality of abortions and finds it to be wrong – and then to require them to take their hard earned dollars to pay for others to have abortions?  It’s just wrong.

5. It punishes small businesses.

Small businesses that don’t currently provide health care get an 8% penalty tax taken from their earnings.  Shelly Roche explains more about this in the clip below and more about why small businesses are set to take the brunt of the pain from this plan.

This is wrong and we’re going to stop it.

I’ve written my congressional representatives and explained that I oppose government run health care because

• it robs us of our freedoms
• it’s expensive and we can’t afford it
• it’s bloated
• it won’t work
• it exempts politicians
• it funds procedures I oppose on moral grounds
• it punishes small businesses

You can take action, too.  Write your congressional rep by using DownsizeDC.org’s tool to quickly get a letter sent (free) to your representative. And then sign Grassfire’s Petition which will be delivered within the next 48 hours.

Send this blog post to everyone you know.  Do something, anything, because you make a difference!

If US health care really is sick, then the government must think the cure is to kill the patient!  We can’t let that happen.

Image originally posted at PoliGazette

UPDATE: Be sure to check out our follow up post to this one: The Two Biggest, Fattest Lies in the Health Care Reform Debate.

UPDATE:  I have an exit questions to discuss in the comments.  Big Government keeps asserting that health care is a “right.”  Is health care a right?  A right is something that is owed you, that you are free to partake of.  You have the right to free speech, for example, if others owe you the space and freedom to speak, and you are free to speak if you choose.

Some people distinguish between claim rights and liberty rights – claim rights being something you have the right to take, and liberty rights being something you have a right to do.   Big Government says that Health Care is a Claim right (not a Liberty Right), something you ought to be free to HAVE (claim right)  not just something you ought to be free to PURSUE (liberty right).   In fact, under the current proposal the government is taking away your personal liberty right – preventing you from being able to pursue the health care you may individually want – in order to provide every one with a (now more limited) claim right.  They trade choice, freedom and quality for less-choice and less quality, but more “equal” distribution of health outcomes.

Note some key things here – the importance of “Others” in the provision of a right.  So, is health care a right?  Because if it is, then someone has the Obligation and Responsibility to provide the “right” so that you can be freely allowed to partake of it.  That’s another way of saying that someone has the can be forced (obligated) to give you what “rightfully” belongs to you.  Health care is provided only by oneself to oneself, or to oneself by other people.  When government speaks of a health care right, they are speaking of care provided to one citizens by way of another citizen.  So, who are these other citizens who have the obligation to provide health care?  How are they identified?  How will they be coerced?  Is the person who “provides” the health care the one who delivers the service?  Or is it the person who pays for the service?

Our take?  Health care is not a right.  It is one of many goods and services that free peoples can choose to provide to others if others are willing to trade for it.   No one should be coerced into forced labor providing any service – and that means indirectly, too; no one citizen should be forced to hand over a % of the fruits of her labors to pay the people who are providing and consuming the service.

Human beings are mortal.  They die.  We all will die.  It is a given that we’ll all suffer from poor health at some point in our lives and to varying degrees.  Our longevity will in part be determined by our body’s ability to maintain systems in optimal operative condition.  We have an obligation to OUR SELVES to care for our own bodies.  If we want others to help us maintain and repair our biological system, we have no right to coerce them to do it.  We can either learn that service ourselves, and provide ourselves with our own care, or learn to provide a service of value to others so that we can trade with them (and make them better off) in exchange for their service.

Please subscribe to our RSS feed and our newsletter, and join our Facebook group.

]]> http://www.sbabg.org/2009/07/20/the-government-health-care-plan-is-sick-and-its-bad-for-small-business/feed/ 26 http://www.sbabg.org/2009/06/25/be-warned-the-administration-and-congress-are-trying-to-destroy-private-sector-competition-for-health-insurance/ http://www.sbabg.org/2009/06/25/be-warned-the-administration-and-congress-are-trying-to-destroy-private-sector-competition-for-health-insurance/#comments Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:54:56 +0000 admin http://www.sbabg.org/2009/06/25/be-warned-the-administration-and-congress-are-trying-to-destroy-private-sector-competition-for-health-insurance/ Watch the video.  The agenda is clear.  Now, what can we as small business owners and employees do about it?

The Public Plan Deception – It’s Not About Choice

Please subscribe to our RSS feed and our newsletter, and join our Facebook group.

When we hear this from people, we have to be prepared to respond with logical correction.  This wrongheaded thinking – that centralized state control “cures” welfare whereas capitalism causes it – is sometimes found in our workplaces and communities and needs correction.

In fact, in response to the last blog post someone replied, “Capitalism is the only system that has welfare. Not Communism or National Socialism. Only Capitalism. This is because the freer market as we are now seeing, deliberately creates a larger pool of unemployed to keep the wages down. As this drives down wages, more people become dependent on welfare through top ups.”

Aside from the “interesting” logic in this piece, (hey, why not deliberately fire EVERYONE [what's 10% unemployment, let's go for 100%!]  that will really get the wages down and that way we can hire them back and then fire them again and keep doing it forever!!!), let’s just take a look at this claim that Communism and National Socialism are systems that “don’t have welfare”.

Could it be that Communist and National Socialist systems are welfare? Group member and commenter Jack Foster says yes and gives us all some sound arguments and logic to add to our mental store.

Here’s his comment in its entirety:

“Communism is a theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property whether you work or not. It other words, the whole system is a Welfare System.

National Socialism is a vague and ambiguous political term that typically refers to Nazism.

Socialism is an economic system characterized by the state ownership of the mean of production and distribution. In other words and put simply, the government is the only employer. If you are out of work, it is the government’s responsibility to provide you with work since they are the only employer. That makes this whole system a variation of the Welfare System.

Capitalism is an “economic system” characterized by the privately owned means of production and distribution. Development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market. In other words, compensation is relative to a work’s value and usefulness to someone else.

In truth, capitalism is not an “economic system,” but the natural economic order of our world. When two children—who have no knowledge of economic systems—decide to trade baseball cards on the playground, they do so under capitalism’s inherently understood rules. Each card has a perceived value dependant on its scarcity and usefulness. A trade is not performed until both sides agree to the price. That is capitalism.

Capitalism even has a method by which the poor and downtrodden can be lifted and supported. Through charities, one can pool their monies to help those in need. If that charity loses the public good graces (through scandal, misappropriations of funds, high overhead costs, or inappropriate recipients), its funds will dry up. It will eventually fail and a new charity will emerge to take its place. This is the self correcting ability that underlies the whole of capitalism.

The Welfare System (the idiom) is not really related to any economic system. It is a wholly own subsidiary of the government. The Welfare System relies on the government to take from those that “have” and give to those that “have not.” The governments top down approach lacks the self correction of the capitalist charities and quickly evolves into the aforementioned stories of fraud and abuse.

The lack of self correction is not the only problem within the Welfare System. Firstly, it strives to replaces the goodness of the individual with the false goodness of the government. Whereas an individual may have morality, the government does not (and should not.) After convincing its governed of its “goodness,” the government will then muscles charities out of the market by unfairly regulating them and then drying up their funds.

Secondly, the government mandates the taking of funds from the wealth creator for the government’s coronated “welfare recipients.” The wealth creator cannot control who receives these funds. As such, these funds are directed to those with the strongest government lobby, not to those in the greatest need or to those that have more compelling goals.

Thirdly, the government agency, who distributes these funds, neither knows nor cares who receives them. For it, the measure of its worth is not in whom they help, but in how much distribute. This model is fraught with fraud, for the bureaucrat will feel no pain (though job loss, reduce authority or decrease of funds) when these frauds are discovered. This notion will always lead to the aforementioned inefficiencies. 25% distribution of fund is appalling but inherent.

Fourthly, the welfare system is a faceless entity that engenders a sense of entitlement. Many think that because it is their government handing out “free” money, they are entitled to it. After all, they are apart of the governed. Eventually, this will lead to the thought that they must “get these free funds before someone else takes it from them.” But what they refuse to acknowledge is that those fund do not come from the government—for the government can only gain money by first taking it—and that money is most unsurely not free.

The statement, “We are from the government and we are here to help you.” should send a shiver down every spine of freedom loving citizen, for the government will only help those that will give it more power; and the Welfare System is it biggest tool.”

Thank you, Jack, for your astute contribution.

Please subscribe to our RSS feed and our newsletter, and join our Facebook group.