Food for Thought
3 posters
Page 1 of 1
Food for Thought
http://www.house.gov/htbin/blog_inc?BLOG,tx14_paul,blog,999,All,Item%20not%20found,ID=080825_2350,TEMPLATE=postingdetail.shtml
Freedom is Golden
Freedom is Golden
As the Olympics wind down, I am amazed at how things change every four years. Many Americans were glued to their televisions to watch the excitement from Beijing, and also heard announcers wax nostalgic with memories of times when the Soviet Union was the USA's biggest competitor for Olympic gold. There was a time when it was unthinkable that a government as powerful as that of the Soviet government was also its weakness, as no country, no economic system can remain strong under the crushing burden that is central planning.
Central Planning is sold to a hopeful people as a way to solve societal problems, to right wrongs, and bring about perfect justice and equality. Central Planning promises you everything you are entitled to. As a bonus, goods and services produced by others are added to the list of commodities that everyone has a "right" to. Suddenly everyone is entitled to healthcare, housing, education, food, et cetera. It might sound nice that the state will magically provide all these wonderful things, but these rosy promises mask a dehumanizing, ugly reality. The other side of these entitlements is that now the doctor, the builder, the teacher, the farmer are slaves to the all-powerful state. No longer do they serve patients, students, or customers. They work in complete obedience to the state, their only customer.
Central planning will tell you that you are entitled to many things. Liberty tells you that you are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; to whatever you earn, and nothing that you don't. While it may seem harsh to some, we must look to basic economic truths and to history to see which model is cruel and which model is kind.
The truth is that central planning cannot provide for economic success like freedom can. Central planning makes promises it cannot possibly keep. We live in a world of unlimited wants and limited resources. If you put a massive and powerful government in charge of distributing those resources, it is not a surprise that government and those in bed with government are first in line for those resources. The poor and the middle class – the most hopeful and trusting – are hurt the most, as the state always underestimates their needs and overestimates their ability to pay taxes and absorb inflation.
The Soviet Union's collapse is a dramatic example of the failure of central planning. Americans celebrated this collapse, not only because it meant less competition for Olympic gold, but it provided hope that with the end of the Cold War, our policy makers could drastically reduce overseas commitments and out of control military budgets. Most especially, we celebrated because with the collapse of Soviet communism it was apparent that liberty, not central planning, is stronger. Freedom empowers the individual. Central planning dehumanizes the masses. There may always be a struggle for power and government, but for this reason, freedom will always win out in the end. And as we celebrate the accomplishments of our individual athletes in Beijing this year, we must continue to go for the gold here at home, and keep the flames of liberty burning bright.
Re: Food for Thought
Socialism/Communism has shown throughout history to be a colossal failure yet there are still those who believe it can and will work. I am amazed that the naiveté of otherwise smart individuals.
Aaron- Number of posts : 9841
Age : 58
Location : Putnam County for now
Registration date : 2007-12-28
Re: Food for Thought
As the Olympics wind down, I am amazed at how things change every four years. Many Americans were glued to their televisions to watch the excitement from Beijing, and also heard announcers wax nostalgic with memories of times when the Soviet Union was the USA's biggest competitor for Olympic gold. There was a time when it was unthinkable that a government as powerful as that of the Soviet government was also its weakness, as no country, no economic system can remain strong under the crushing burden that is central planning.
The good Mr. Paul might like what the Greens say about decentralization- as it beats anything Democrats and Republicans currently have forth:
5. DECENTRALIZATION
Centralization of wealth and power contributes to social and economic injustice, environmental destruction, and militarization. Therefore, we support a restructuring of social, political and economic institutions away from a system which is controlled by and mostly benefits the powerful few, to a democratic, less bureaucratic system. Decision-making should, as much as possible, remain at the individual and local level, while assuring that civil rights are protected for all citizens.
6. COMMUNITY-BASED ECONOMICS AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE
We recognize it is essential to create a vibrant and sustainable economic system, one that can create jobs and provide a decent standard of living for all people while maintaining a healthy ecological balance. A successful economic system will offer meaningful work with dignity, while paying a “living wage” which reflects the real value of a person’s work.
Local communities must look to economic development that assures protection of the environment and workers’ rights; broad citizen participation in planning; and enhancement of our “quality of life.” We support independently owned and operated companies which are socially responsible, as well as co-operatives and public enterprises that distribute resources and control to more people through democratic participation.
http://www.gp.org/tenkey.shtml#dec
ziggy- Moderator
- Number of posts : 5731
Location : Jackson County, WV
Registration date : 2007-12-28
Re: Food for Thought
Ziggy,
I would never read Dr. Paul's mind. What I say to you now are my thoughts and mine alone.
The devil is in the details. I'm very curious to learn precisely how the Green Party proposes to meet some of its very admirable goals. Would the Green Party replace the burdens of centralized government with more localized burdens?
While I believe that in some cases local government would be more responsive to the needs and desires of individual communities than the centralized federal government or the various state governments, there is the risk they too will place unfair burdens on business and industry. What you may find is the communities willing to be the most lax with environmental issues and labor laws would be the very communities where all the jobs head.
If big federal government intrusion is being traded for big local government intrusion, is that preserving our liberty? Some things look really good on paper, Zig.
I would never read Dr. Paul's mind. What I say to you now are my thoughts and mine alone.
The devil is in the details. I'm very curious to learn precisely how the Green Party proposes to meet some of its very admirable goals. Would the Green Party replace the burdens of centralized government with more localized burdens?
While I believe that in some cases local government would be more responsive to the needs and desires of individual communities than the centralized federal government or the various state governments, there is the risk they too will place unfair burdens on business and industry. What you may find is the communities willing to be the most lax with environmental issues and labor laws would be the very communities where all the jobs head.
If big federal government intrusion is being traded for big local government intrusion, is that preserving our liberty? Some things look really good on paper, Zig.
Re: Food for Thought
Here is an article I found on the topic. It's a very good read.
Why Socialism Failed
By Mark J. Perry
Socialism is the Big Lie of the twentieth century. While it promised prosperity, equality, and security, it delivered poverty, misery, and tyranny. Equality was achieved only in the sense that everyone was equal in his or her misery.
In the same way that a Ponzi scheme or chain letter initially succeeds but eventually collapses, socialism may show early signs of success. But any accomplishments quickly fade as the fundamental deficiencies of central planning emerge. It is the initial illusion of success that gives government intervention its pernicious, seductive appeal. In the long run, socialism has always proven to be a formula for tyranny and misery.
A pyramid scheme is ultimately unsustainable because it is based on faulty principles. Likewise, collectivism is unsustainable in the long run because it is a flawed theory. Socialism does not work because it is not consistent with fundamental principles of human behavior. The failure of socialism in countries around the world can be traced to one critical defect: it is a system that ignores incentives.
In a capitalist economy, incentives are of the utmost importance. Market prices, the profit-and-loss system of accounting, and private property rights provide an efficient, interrelated system of incentives to guide and direct economic behavior. Capitalism is based on the theory that incentives matter!
Under socialism, incentives either play a minimal role or are ignored totally. A centrally planned economy without market prices or profits, where property is owned by the state, is a system without an effective incentive mechanism to direct economic activity. By failing to emphasize incentives, socialism is a theory inconsistent with human nature and is therefore doomed to fail. Socialism is based on the theory that incentives don't matter!
more here
Aaron- Number of posts : 9841
Age : 58
Location : Putnam County for now
Registration date : 2007-12-28
Similar topics
» A little food for thought
» Here's A little more food for thought.
» Food for thought.
» Just a thought
» OH, WOW, I never thought about that.
» Here's A little more food for thought.
» Food for thought.
» Just a thought
» OH, WOW, I never thought about that.
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum