Taxes, Tenure and Entitlement
In their initial school year it's doubtful that first graders would select government dependent as a career over the dream of being a fire fighter, or actor, doctor, cowboy or astronaut.
School administrators don't engage speakers to promote welfare dependency on Career Day. And have you ever seen a booth at a Job Fair reserved for spouting the advantages and benefits of not working?
Yet, entire wings of government buildings are dedicated to administering welfare. The bureaucracy manning these offices competes head-on with private enterprise for growth dollars. Their jobs, like their clients, are totally subsidized by taxes generated by private enterprise.
The only tangible difference between the bureaucrats dedicated to the growth of welfare and their equally insatiable customers is union membership and ID badges. Of course, the parasites with the ID badges have one big advantage.
They pay themselves and swell their ranks first. Their clients only get the crumbs that are left over. In a nutshell, this explains the core inefficiency of any government controlled program.
Of course, the size of subsistence payments is carefully monitored. The payments must be high enough to guarantee brand loyalty and low enough to assure dependency. It's the same formula used to attract bureaucrats and retain their allegiance.
Unlike the folks in private enterprise, the success and life style of bureaucrats are not determined by ingenuity, productivity and marketing skills. Their economic growth is determined solely and exclusively by the outcome of elections. They prosper when taxes are raised.
Bureaucrats regard tax cuts like farmers regard drought. That's why the majority of them always vote for the candidate who espouses the need for higher taxes. Taxes pay their salaries and fund their marvelous retirement, vacation and medical benefits.
For decades the Democrats and Republicans have worked diligently to build government bureaucracy. The Republicans addressed the strategy in terms of compassion, while the Democrats created the right of equal outcome. Together they managed to give government workers numerical superiority over the workers in private enterprise.
The rapid growth of government finally caught the attention of the taxpayers. When they discovered the average annual wage of bureaucrats was about $20,000 higher than comparable posts in the private sector they became testy, especially with unemployment over 10%.
Now put the outcome of the recent Massachusetts senate race in the context of the exponential growth of government. Don't be deceived. Ninety-five percent of the bureaucrats and welfare recipients who voted, checked the Coakley box. The superior numbers of government workers and their welfare constituency got beat by turnout.
The Republicans may have benefited, but they didn't win. Both parties suffered a devastating defeat. Working Americans are taking back control of the country from government one elected post at a time. They see the relationship between higher taxes and loss of freedom. They now recognize the enemy; they are called incumbents.
Any politician who proposes higher taxes on anyone or anything to improve employment has his or her head stuck in a dark place, and the floors in Congress aren't covered in sand. The winners in 2010 will address deficit reductions through spending cuts and demand tax cuts to stimulate job creation. The rest will join Coakley.
School administrators don't engage speakers to promote welfare dependency on Career Day. And have you ever seen a booth at a Job Fair reserved for spouting the advantages and benefits of not working?
Yet, entire wings of government buildings are dedicated to administering welfare. The bureaucracy manning these offices competes head-on with private enterprise for growth dollars. Their jobs, like their clients, are totally subsidized by taxes generated by private enterprise.
The only tangible difference between the bureaucrats dedicated to the growth of welfare and their equally insatiable customers is union membership and ID badges. Of course, the parasites with the ID badges have one big advantage.
They pay themselves and swell their ranks first. Their clients only get the crumbs that are left over. In a nutshell, this explains the core inefficiency of any government controlled program.
Of course, the size of subsistence payments is carefully monitored. The payments must be high enough to guarantee brand loyalty and low enough to assure dependency. It's the same formula used to attract bureaucrats and retain their allegiance.
Unlike the folks in private enterprise, the success and life style of bureaucrats are not determined by ingenuity, productivity and marketing skills. Their economic growth is determined solely and exclusively by the outcome of elections. They prosper when taxes are raised.
Bureaucrats regard tax cuts like farmers regard drought. That's why the majority of them always vote for the candidate who espouses the need for higher taxes. Taxes pay their salaries and fund their marvelous retirement, vacation and medical benefits.
For decades the Democrats and Republicans have worked diligently to build government bureaucracy. The Republicans addressed the strategy in terms of compassion, while the Democrats created the right of equal outcome. Together they managed to give government workers numerical superiority over the workers in private enterprise.
The rapid growth of government finally caught the attention of the taxpayers. When they discovered the average annual wage of bureaucrats was about $20,000 higher than comparable posts in the private sector they became testy, especially with unemployment over 10%.
Now put the outcome of the recent Massachusetts senate race in the context of the exponential growth of government. Don't be deceived. Ninety-five percent of the bureaucrats and welfare recipients who voted, checked the Coakley box. The superior numbers of government workers and their welfare constituency got beat by turnout.
The Republicans may have benefited, but they didn't win. Both parties suffered a devastating defeat. Working Americans are taking back control of the country from government one elected post at a time. They see the relationship between higher taxes and loss of freedom. They now recognize the enemy; they are called incumbents.
Any politician who proposes higher taxes on anyone or anything to improve employment has his or her head stuck in a dark place, and the floors in Congress aren't covered in sand. The winners in 2010 will address deficit reductions through spending cuts and demand tax cuts to stimulate job creation. The rest will join Coakley.
posted by David at
8:15 AM
<< Home